Show Summary Details

Page of

PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, RELIGION (religion.oxfordre.com). (c) Oxford University Press USA, 2016. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited. Please see applicable Privacy Policy and Legal Notice (for details see Privacy Policy).

date: 28 April 2017

Martin Luther in Sweden

Summary and Keywords

In the Swedish history of Christian thought there are various interpretations of the Reformation and of Martin Luther and his work. In the 17th century, Luther predominately stood out as an instrument of God’s providence. In the 18th century, among the pietists, he was regarded as a fellow believer, in the 19th century as a hero of history, and in the 20th century during the Swedish so-called Luther Renaissance as a prophet and an interpreter of the Gospel. This does not necessarily mean that the interpretations of Luther merely reflect the various thought patterns of different epochs, that whatever is said about Luther is inevitably captured by the spirit of the time. The serious study of Luther’s writings could also lead to contradictions with common thought patterns and presuppositions. One could say that Luther’s writings have worked as “classics,” not merely confirming the status quo but also generating new patterns of thought and deed, making him something rather different than just a name, a symbol, or a flag, which sometimes have been assumed. And one can only hope that his writings will continue to work in the same way in years to come. Anyway the reception of the Lutheran heritage in Sweden is well worth studying since it in some ways differs from the reception in other Evangelic countries.

Keywords: Martin Luther, reception, Reformation, Luther Renaissance, Swedish history

When describing Luther’s impact on Sweden through the centuries, a primary problem is to decide what sources there are for analyzing this. One obvious source of knowledge, that tells us specifically about the understanding of Luther and the Reformation at different times, is the Reformation jubilees—primarily those that were celebrated in memory of the birth of the Reformation on October 31, 1517. In the evangelical world, jubilee celebrations have been held every hundredth year, starting in 1617. (One could say that the practice was started even earlier, at the hands of Luther himself. In a letter to Amsdorf in 1527, i.e., ten years after the event at the Castle Church, Luther tells how he celebrated “the trampling out of indulgencies” by drinking a glass of beer.) This source, the jubilees, is, however problematic. People certainly tend to exaggerate at such occasions. Nevertheless, we can expect to discover a lot about Luther in the official speeches. Still, we will have to consider who was invited to speak and who was not. This material therefore requires another, parallel source for our investigation, namely the reception of Luther in the popular movements and other circles at the time. A chronological journey exposes the ways Luther has been received in Sweden.

The Reformation Jubilee 1621

In 1617, every Protestant country celebrated the Reformation with speeches, dramas, services, and sermons. There was, however, one exception: Sweden. The first Swedish Reformation jubilee was celebrated in 1621 in honor of Gustav Vasa who in January 1521 successfully began to liberate the nation both in spiritual and temporal matters, that is, from the papacy and from the Danish supremacy. Gustav Vasa is regarded as both reformator et salvator. The biblical texts for the services were chosen to develop this theme of dual liberation. They all stemmed from the Old Testament and dealt with sufferings and rescue of the people of Israel and the reformation of Jehoshaphat in politics and liturgy.1

In order to understand this jubilee, we must consider the contemporary situation.2 It fell shortly before Sweden’s entry into the Thirty Years War. Relations with neighboring countries, especially Poland, were extremely strained. In this light, one might easily interpret the jubilee as pure political propaganda. However, we have to keep in mind that we are dealing with a time more unknown and alien to us than is customarily supposed. Their distinction between religion and politics was different from our own. To understand that age we have to identify some of its self-evident presuppositions. The use of the Old Testament thinking is a case in point. It was regarded, first, not as a book of laws, but as a book of history, God’s history with the people of Israel—indeed, also with God’s people of the present day. As such it tells about God’s providence, and this seems to be one of the more influential self-evident presuppositions of the 17th century.

In Haffenreffer’s Compendium doctrinae coelestis, published by the Swedish archbishop Petrus Kenicius as early as 1612, this concept of God’s providence is thoroughly developed. It sheds light upon all the texts used at the jubilee. The history of the previous century is interpreted as the story of God’s care (cura) for the Swedish nation and his guidance (gubernatio) of the people. Gustav Vasa is described as God’s chosen instrument, by which God turned misery into prosperity. The same goes for the present king, Gustaf Adolf. In developing the wonderful ways in which God has governed the nation, a terminology is used that is familiar to us from Luther’s commentary on Psalm 101, where Luther speaks about God’s Wundermänner (viri heroici).3 Gustav Vasa stands out as such a vir heroicus, inspired by God (afflatu dei) and led by God’s angel.

Interestingly enough, hardly anything is said about Luther in the Swedish jubilee. The major speech, by Olof Laurelius, bears the Delphian title Suecia gnothi seauton (Sweden know thyself), and Laurelius reminds the audience not to be too curious about how the Reformation is celebrated elsewhere, for example, in Germany.4 Curiosity is often condemned in the Scriptures, he adds. This speech, as well as the jubilee as a whole, certainly demonstrates the attitude of a growing political superpower.

The striking Swedish distance to Luther as a person goes for the whole 17th century. His personal authority is toned down, and, when spoken of, he can also be criticized. To mention one example, even Luther’s “Small Catechism” had its shortcomings according to the bishop of Strängnäs, Laurentius Paulinus Gothus.5 The sole authority in the Church is the Word of God, brought into the light of day through the Reformation. That is the norm to be used in examining all writings, even Luther’s—a truly Lutheran standpoint. Furthermore, the Swedish theologians certainly were doing what Luther did, very often with his writings as models, as, for example, when the Bible was translated into Swedish or new hymns written for a Swedish hymnal. The catechetical work is worth mentioning in particular. Luther had repeatedly argued already in his theses on indulgences that Docendi sunt christiani (Christians are to be taught), and this urgent request was certainly followed in Sweden, where an educational program was organized intended for each and everyone in all households.6 The pastors were obliged to keep records of the improvement of each member of the household based on recurrent visits. As a result of the catechization in the 17th and the 18th centuries, the ability to read and write gradually rose to a higher level than in many other countries, such as, for example, France. This certainly had vast consequences for both church and society. The aim of the educational program was no doubt uniformity in religion as well as politics, but at the same time it made it possible also for critical voices to be heard. Thus, Luther and his tradition can be invoked as a stalwart for Swedish culture as well as its opponent.

In summarizing the results from this first stage of the chronology, we must draw the conclusion that Luther was certainly not merely a slogan, a symbol, a flag. He was, on the contrary, very influential in shaping the Swedish Church of the 16th and 17th centuries. He was, so to speak, very much present in his absence. This goes not just for the jubilee, but for the whole period. It can be noticed already in the works by the Swedish reformer Olavus Petri, who once had studied under Luther in Wittenberg. He was a true follower of Luther. At the same time, one looks almost in vain for Luther’s name in Olavus’s works. Only on two occasions does Olavus speaks about Luther by name. In both cases, he is defending Luther, who is accused of being a rebel by the Danish Carmelite monk Paulus Heliae. The absence of references to Luther is, however, not as strange as it looks. Quoting Luther was hardly an argument in a time when the testimony of the Scriptures and the Fathers was the main thing, and everything “new” tended to be synonymous with “false.” Finally, it must be pointed out that the vocabulary used by the Swedes in describing Gustav Vasa as the instrument of God’s providence corresponds to the one applied to Luther at the jubilees on the Continent. Obviously, it was characteristic of the period, founded in the contemporary patterns of thought.

The Reformation Jubilee 1721

In 1721, the Swedes celebrated their second jubilee, still not in tune with the rest of the evangelical world. It was hardly a time for celebration. The fortunes of the Great Northern War (1700–1721) had taken a downturn with the defeat at Poltava and the surrender at Perevolotjna. Sweden was in a state of decline, and Russia was growing into the new, great superpower of northern Europe.

The jubilee differed little from the previous one. Gustav Vasa was still in focus, although Luther was mentioned more often. One of the speeches was given by David Nehrman Ehrenstråhle, the one who introduced the idea of natural law into Sweden. What a man with such a background had to say about Luther and the Reformation is unfortunately not known to us, since his manuscript was lost in a fire some years afterward.

Outside the jubilee, however, Luther’s person was stirring considerable interest in some circles, not least among the Swedish officers in the Siberian prison camps.7 Why? The reason is Luther’s role within the early pietistic movement, which was spread among the prisoners of war as well as among middle-class citizens in Stockholm. The voices of the pietists were certainly not heard at the jubilee, and their writings were not published, but there are nevertheless many manuscripts available for study. These often refer to Luther. One might suspect, of course, that they use all these references to defend themselves against the accusation of being heterodox. This claim, however, is not totally convincing. Luther seems to be very important to the pietistic self-understanding. They recognize in him, not primarily a Wundermann, an instrument of God’s providence, but a fellow believer, someone who has, like them, experienced a transforming rebirth. That is how they interpret Luther’s discovery of the Gospel. And speaking of faith, they constantly refer to the exposure of faith in Luther’s preface to Romans:

Faith … is a divine work in us which changes us and makes us to be born anew of God, John 1. It kills the old Adam and makes us altogether different men, in heart and spirit and mind and powers; and it brings with it the Holy Spirit. O it is a living, busy, active, mighty thing, this faith.8

The pietists were thoroughly eclectic in their study of Luther, but they seem to be quite convinced of his authority. It was, however, the same authority assigned to Philipp Jacob Spener, August Hermann Francke, or anyone else having experienced the same transforming power of the grace of God. This is the authority of one who is born again. He or she has knowledge of the heart and is therefore capable of a right application of the word of God, unlike many of the ordained ministers, who, in their view, live a carnal life and paid only lip service to God.

How do we summarize this period? The most striking thing is that references to Luther are common and enthusiastic. This is something new in Sweden, and it comes with pietism. Moreover, when the pietists refer to Luther, they focus not only on his teaching but also on his person or his personal inner life, simply because these things were inseparable according to their understanding. So Luther was certainly not just a name or a symbol to them. On the contrary, focusing on his spiritual breakthrough and his teaching on a living faith, they certainly looked upon him as one of their own, as a 16th-century proto-pietist. This concentration on the inner life, on the individual and his or her experience, is typical, not just for the pietists, but for the approaching time of modernity and the birth of the modern ego.

The Reformation Jubilee 1817

In 1817, there was the third Reformation jubilee—finally celebrated by the Swedes at the same time as everywhere else in the evangelical world, thanks to pressure from the Norwegians, among others. Unity among the evangelical nations was regarded as essential at the time of the Napoleonic wars. The Swedish archbishop Andreas Lindblom hesitated, noting that Sweden usually celebrated the anniversary of the Diet of Worms. Obviously, the archbishop was not aware of the real reason for the Swedish deviation. His misunderstanding is, however, explicable. The ideas of the Enlightenment had long since penetrated society, and from that perspective the Diet of Worms stood out as the major event of the Reformation. After all, that was the occasion when Luther referred to his conscience and demanded arguments from the Scriptures and reason.

The form of this 19th-century jubilee was intended to overwhelm: it featured cannon shots, illuminated buildings, splendid processions, sumptuous banquets, and impressive services. It was truly the century of jubilees, reflecting the Romantic reaction against the sententious attitude of the Enlightenment. Romanticism brings with it historical consciousness: things belong together and do not appear out of the blue. At the same time, Romanticism focused on the great personalities in history. How do these seemingly contradictory elements correspond? Consider one of the most prominent speakers at the University of Lund, Esaias Tegnér, who later on became bishop in Växjö:

They say that a great man makes his epoch, and they are right as long as they don’t understand something preposterous thereby. God is the only one who creates something out of nothing. A great man, even the greatest, is inevitably a son of his epoch; but he is the eldest son, he is the bailiff of his epoch. The age is his and he administers his estate according to his own judgment. The scattered elements are there, but not yet clarified and in chaotic battle with each other. He is uniting them and bringing them to order, directing them to a common goal; he is acting on his time, leading and binding together, in one word: educating. This is his greatness; this is his strange, creative ability.9

Nothing really indicates that Tegnér had ever studied Luther, at least not closely. Nevertheless, he was obviously able to give a magnificent portrayal of the reformer. Luther became a hero, but he was preceded by others like Wycliffe and Hus, forerunners of the Reformation. These two very different elements are equally stressed. The two features, typical of Romanticism, are brought together: the outstanding and the continuity. Both can be found in the catechisms of the time, which were normally extended with a short introductory chapter on the history of Christianity, from Adam and Eve to the time of the Reformation, focusing especially on great personalities, like Constantine, Luther, and Gustav Vasa, the heroes of history.10

In the university at Uppsala the situation was different. The most prominent speaker, Erik Gustaf Geijer, had studied Luther’s writings thoroughly. In his speech, he explores Luther’s emphasis on the living word (viva vox), the word as kerygma or address. This obviously played a major role in Geijer’s own thinking, not least in the development of his “I-Thou philosophy.” In this respect, Geijer’s interpretation of Luther was not typical for, but rather ahead, of the present time.

In the northern parts of Sweden, there was at the same time an awakening among lay people, inspired by the reading of Luther, especially the “Lectures on Galatians” from 1535 and the Hauspostille. They even called themselves Luther readers.11 This movement dissociated itself from pietistic legalism, as well as the rationalism of the Enlightenment (which was widespread among the pastors), stressing justification as the gift of God’s unconditional grace through faith. This movement of Luther readers has been regarded as a forerunner of the great popular movements of the late 19th and early 20th century: revivalism, the temperance movement, and the working-class movement.

It is obvious from this glimpse of Luther in Sweden at the beginning of the 19th century that those who had actually read Luther were able to say things both unfamiliar and new to the epoch, whereas others were fated to reflect in their speeches the epoch’s favorite ideas.

The Reformation Jubilee 1917

In 1917 the fourth jubilee was celebrated. Already two decades earlier, the so-called Luther renaissance had begun in Sweden due to the work of two outstanding theologians, Nathan Söderblom and Einar Billing. Later on, the former became archbishop in Uppsala and the latter bishop in Västerås. They shared a common problem caused by the historic critical Bible research, especially Julius Wellhausens’s Prolegomena zur Geschichte Israels. Söderblom describes the shocking effects of this work:

On what ground does the certitude of Christianity rest, the demands of Christ, the truth of doctrine, the legitimacy of the Church? For our generation, the answer was, whether explicit or not: “The foundation is the infallibility of the Holy Book.” When at that time we started to study first the Old Testament and then the New Testament, we were facing an absurd dilemma. The assertion that biblical statements have prophetic universality and truth for all times did not hold good. During these years, even Uppsala was reached by the investigations of the pentateuchal criticism. It caused tremendous turmoil.12

In his description of their struggle with the fundamental questions of the history and nature of the Bible, Söderblom refers to Luther’s words about angustiae et terrores conscientiae. But Luther did not only give the accurate description of the situation they were in; he also provided them with a way out helping them to move the question of the truth of Christianity from the very book and the very letter to God’s living revelation in history, fulfilled in Jesus Christ and perpetuated in every human soul endowed with grace. Luther helped them to find a path between petrified Lutheran orthodoxy and water-downed liberal theology and to discover what they understood as the main theme of the Bible and church history, namely, a God who acts and is deeply involved and reveals himself in history. No one has, in their view, elaborated this fundamental theme more profoundly than Luther. As a matter of fact, Luther is himself part of this history, a prophet in his time.

Even Wellhausen, who once had caused so much turmoil, could now be used to develop and strengthen Söderblom’s and Billing’s dynamic perspective on history. After all, Wellhausen gave priority to the prophetic element in the Pentateuch and he transformed the role of the prophet. Instead of being a watchman, raised above his time looking into a distant future, the prophet became a real human being chosen by God and heavily involved in everything going on in his own time. Looking back, Billing says that he truly regrets that he could not stay calm when reading Wellhausen’s book in his youth.13

Furthermore, Söderblom and Billing interpreted Luther’s theological thinking as a unity with one common center (purposefully contrary to Ritschl’s ellipse with its two focal points). In his booklet Our Calling (1907), Billing describes this in an almost poetic way:

Whoever knows Luther, even but partially, knows that his various thoughts do not lie alongside each other, like pearls on a string, held together only by common authority or perchance by a line of logical argument, but that they all, as tightly as the petals of a rosebud, adhere to a common center, and radiate out like the rays of the sun from one glowing core, namely the gospel of the forgiveness of sins.14

This understanding of the unity in Luther’s theology had obvious consequences for the methodology of Swedish Luther research during the next fifty years: to understand Luther’s thoughts on any particular question, one must relate them to the center of his theology, the gospel of unconditional grace. In this systematic perspective, history is seen in a new light, Billing claims. Thus, when Gustaf Aulén writes his book on Luther’s ecclesiology (1912) or Gustaf Wingren on Luther’s doctrine of vocation (1952), they view their task in the same way. Each wants to place Luther’s understanding of Church or vocation within the unity of Luther’s theology by relating it to the center.

The study of Luther was certainly not an end in itself for Söderblom and Billing. He was not their main interest, but rather “the catcher in the rye,” helping them to discover what Christianity is all about, or, using their own terminology: the distinctive character of Christianity. This was their focal point, and this goes also for the next generation of Swedish Luther scholars. Anders Nygren, representing the so-called Lundensian theology, has given a characterization of Swedish Luther research very much to the point:

It is not because of Luther that the research is interested in him; it is not primarily to find out how he incidentally thought in one or the other question that theology turns to him, but it is done because, and in so far as, he can help us to a deeper understanding of the Gospel.15

Therefore, it is not surprising that Swedish Luther scholars (in contrast to their colleagues on the continent) did not devote their lives to writing only about Luther. Their treatises on Luther were often followed by biblical commentaries or works on biblical theology. Anders Nygren wrote a commentary on Romans and Ragnar Bring wrote one on Galatians.

In this perspective, one might say that the highlight of the jubilee 1917 was not what was said about Luther in the speeches by the vice-chancellor or the archbishop, but the handing over of a new translation of the Bible to his Majesty the King. This Swedish translation of the Bible was—unlike the previous ones—made not from the Luther Bible but from the original texts in Hebrew and Greek. This was looked upon, not as a deviation from Luther by the Swedish scholars, but if anything as a truly “Lutheran” accomplishment. After all, they had only done what Luther once did himself together with his friends. So we are reminded once again—even in the midst of the Luther renaissance—of the particular Swedish “distance” to Luther.

Almost every one of the Swedish Luther scholars of the 20th century was heavily involved in ecumenical work. In particular, this was true for Nathan Söderblom, the convener of the great Life and Work conference in Stockholm 1925. That a focus on the reformer yielded church unity might sound strange, but in their view Luther was ecumenically useful as the outstanding interpreter of the Gospel for the whole Church. He is certainly not “owned” by the Lutherans. This point was stressed so much that Luther almost broke away from history, as though he was without any significant forerunners or followers. Historically, he stood at the point where the Church was divided. Theologically, he—or rather his interpretation of the Gospel—will be found where the lines once again converge.

This explains the motto of the Luther renaissance: “Forward to Luther!” It meant to everyone involved nothing less than “Forward to the Gospel.” It also explains why Söderblom was eager to talk about Luther’s universal significance or use the concept of evangelical catholicity, as he did, for example, during his American journey in 1923.16

Luther interpretations outside church and academy were also in abundance at this time. They appeared less in any particular popular movement as they had before, but rather emerged in Swedish culture through novelists like August Strindberg. In September 1903, he completed his play The Nightingale of Wittenberg. It was long after his Inferno crisis, but in a year when his third, very short and stormy marriage to the famous actress Harriet Bosse was dissolved. At this time, Strindberg had become very impressed by Martin Luther, above all by young man Luther. He felt they were soulmates. Strindberg saw in Luther a man, just like himself, who stood alone. In a key line in the play, Martin cries: “Alone! … So much the better! Almighty, living God! Now You and I stand alone!”17 Strindberg talked about this drama as “the strongest and most youthful that I have written! No doubts as in Master Olof, no scruples, no women around your neck, no parents standing in the way, no compromising with friends.”18 Strindberg’s play was intended for a German audience. It was, however, performed in Stockholm in January on the year of the jubilee, but it did not last long. The play closed after the eighth show.

At the same time and in the same city, even though not at the theater but in prison and condemned for high treason, Ivan Oljelund, with a background in the working-class movement, studied Luther, became a Christian, and wrote a play on Luther, Doctor Biblicus. This play, just like Strindberg’s, is concentrated on Luther as a young man, alone in his anxiety (Anfectungen). Oljelund, however, had a deeper sense for Luther’s theology. He recognized himself in Luther, but Luther did not help him because of some steadfast faith of his. On the contrary: “Luther did not cheat, he did not always believe, he couldn’t. This was his honesty! An honest faith—with doubts. Therefore, he could also console.”19

Both Strindberg’s and Oljelund’s perspective on Luther is individualistic, and this was certainly typical for the time. It characterizes the speech by the vice chancellor at the jubilee, as well as the writings of Lydia Wahlström, who was the head of the student union of women and deeply involved in the cause of women’s liberation.20 She was influenced by Geijer, Söderblom, and Luther, especially by his treatise On the Freedom of a Christian. In her view of Christianity, there was not really room for Church, sacrament, or ministry. One of her later books carries the significant title Kristen på egen hand (Christian on your own). This was perhaps in line with continental interpretations of Luther, but it ran quite contrary to how he was interpreted in the Swedish Luther renaissance, as, for example, by Söderblom, who looked upon the historically given Church, with its sacraments and its ministry, as the self-evident frame of a Christian life. In short: you are a Christian not on your own, but in a communion.

The Luther renaissance dominated Swedish theology for more than half a century. A vast number of theses on various aspects of Luther’s theology were published. The most renowned scholar was Gustaf Wingren. He had his background in the Lundensian theology, which, however, did not stop him from delivering severe criticism against his former teachers, notably Anders Nygren.21 Wingren claimed that Nygren’s philosophical presuppositions prevented him from giving an adequate and truly Lutheran description of the Gospel. According to Wingren, the Gospel is not—whether in Luther’s time or ours—the answer to a philosophically raised question, but the answer to fundamental questions that people wrestle with in their everyday life, questions of guilt and forgiveness, sin and holiness, wrath and mercy, and so on.

To describe such situations, Wingren often drew on novels, such as those by Lars Ahlin. Besides being a novelist in the proletarian tradition, Ahlin was a very conscious and learned Lutheran theologian outside the academic world. He received influences from the Lundensian theology, but he was also critical of it. His criticism was similar to Wingren’s—it was in fact raised even earlier. His novels are unfortunately little known outside of Scandinavia. They are truly helpful in “recapturing” the great symbols of Christian faith, by showing how they “work” in everyday life. A quotation from his first novel, Tåbb med manifestet (Tåbb with the Manifesto), could serve as a suitable summary of Ahlin’s literary project as well as a proposal of a remaining task for the future. On his roving from place to place, the unemployed Tåbb meets the artist Staffan, who begins to tell him about Luther:

Lately it has come to my mind, Tåbb, that our secularized culture needs a Luther, who, within the framework of our present conditions, is able to create some kind of Lutheranism. We have to find peace in the midst of turmoil, honesty in the midst of untruthfulness, life in the midst of death, beauty in the midst of ugliness.22

This anticipatory note for the certain kind of future marks the end of this chronology of Luther’s reception in Sweden’s intellectual history from the 17th to the 20th century. Luther has been encountered as an instrument of God’s providence, as a fellow believer, as a hero of history, and as a prophet and interpreter of the Gospel. Obviously, Luther has (to date) never been, just a name, a symbol, or a slogan, which unfortunately has sometimes been assumed.23 The serious study of his writings, at universities as well as within popular religious movements, seems to have worked in different, even opposite ways, both confirming and challenging current patterns of thought and deed. Nothing prevents his future reception from continuing the past, polyvalent and multidirectional one.

Review of the Literature

The article is based on my treatise on the history of the Luther reception in Sweden: Luther i Sverige: Svenska Lutherbilder under fyra sekler from 2015. So far, it is the only major work on this topic, originally published in 1994 and in an enlarged edition in 2015. There are, however, a number of investigations not only in Swedish but also in other languages by scholars focusing on the Swedish reception of Luther’s theology by a specific person, by a group of people, or in a certain time, not the least in the so-called Swedish Luther renaissance in the first half of the 20th century. Many of the relevant primary sources are handwritten manuscripts, especially texts on Luther’s theology by members of popular movements in the periphery or outside the established Church. The printed texts from the earliest jubilees in the 17th and 18th centuries are predominantly in Latin.

Further Reading

Anderson, Mary Elizabeth. Gustaf Wingren and the Swedish Luther Renaissance. New York: Peter Lang, 2006.Find this resource:

Aurelius, Carl Axel. Luther i Sverige: Svenska Lutherbilder under fyra sekler. Skellefteå: Artos & Norma bokförlag, 2015.Find this resource:

Carlson, Edgar. “The Interpretation of Luther in Modern Swedish Theology.” PhD diss., University of Chicago, 1944.Find this resource:

Holmgren, John. “Norrlandsläseriet: Studier till dess förhistoria och historia fram till år 1830.” PhD diss., University of Lund, Stockholm 1948.Find this resource:

Lange, Dietz. “Eine andere Luther-Renaissance.” In Luthers Erben, Studien zur Rezeptionsgeschichte der reformatorischen Theologie Luthers, Festschrift für Jörg Baur zum 75. Geburtstag. Edited by Notger Slenczka and Walter Sparn, 245. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005.Find this resource:

Lindroth, Hjalmar. Lutherrenässansen i nyare svensk teologi. Stockholm: Svenska kyrkans Diakonistyrelses bokförlag, 1941.Find this resource:

Notes:

(1.) Laurentius Paulinus Gothus, Analysis sacrorum textuum in Festo jubilaei Gustaviano (Stockholm, 1621).

(2.) For an overall description, see Ingun Montgomery, ed., Sveriges kyrkohistoria, 4. Enhetskyrkans tid (Trelleborg: Verbum, 2002).

(3.) Martin Luther, Psalm 101, LW 13:158; WA 51:210.

(4.) M. Olaus Laurelius, Oratio jubilaea (Uppsala, 1622).

(5.) Stig Lindholm, Catechismi förfriemelse: Studier till catechismus-undervisningen i Svenska kyrkan 1593–1646 (Lund: Håkan Ohlssons Boktryckeri, 1949).

(6.) Hilding Pleijel, Katekesen som svensk folkbok (Malmö: Nya Litografen, 1942). Furthermore: Alphabeta Varia—Orality, Reading and Writing in the History of Literacy, Festschrift in Honour of Egil Johansson on the Occasion of his 65th Birthday, March 24, 1998 (Umeå: Department of Religious Studies at Umeå University, 1998).

(7.) The pietistic awakening among the prisoners of war is thoroughly described by a contemporary witness, Curt Friedrich von Wreech, Wahrhaffte und Umständliche Historie von denen Schwedischen Gefangenen in Russland und Sibirien (Sarrau, 1728). See also Hilding Pleijel, Der schwedische Pietismus in seinen Beziehungen zu Deutschland (Lund: Lunds Universitets Årsskrift. N.f., 1935); and Alf Åberg, Fångars elände: Karolinerna i Ryssland 1700–1723 (Lund: Natur och Kultur, 1991).

(8.) Martin Luther, “Preface to the Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans” (1546 [1522]), LW 35:370; WA DB 7:10; Martin Schmidt, “Luthers Vorrede zum Römerbrief im Pietismus,” in Vierhundertfünfzig Jahre lutherische Reformation 1517–1967, Festschrift für Franz Lau zum 60. Geburtstag (Berlin: Evang. Verlag-Anst., 1967), 309ff.

(9.) Esaias Tegnér, Samlade Skrifter, vol. 5 (Stockholm: C. E. Fritze, 1948), 8, my translation.

(10.) Einar Lilja, Den svenska katekestraditionen mellan Svebilius och Lindblom (Lund: Svenska kyrkans diakonistyrelses bokförlag, 1947); and Dick Helander, Den Lindblomska Katekesen (Lund: Svenska kyrkans diakonistyrelses bokförlag, 1947).

(11.) John Holmgren, Norrlandsläseriet: Studier till dess förhistoria och historia fram till år 1830 (Stockholm: Svenska kyrkans diakonistyrelses bokförlag, 1948).

(12.) Nathan Söderblom, “Minnen från åttio- och nittiotalen,” in Upsala Kristliga Studentförbund 1901–1926 (Uppsala: Sveriges kristliga studentrörelses förlag, 1926), 15f., my translation.

(13.) Einar Billing, Herdabrev till prästerskapet i Västerås stift (1920) (Stockholm: Diakonistyrelsens Bokförlag, 1962), 48, my translation.

(14.) Einar Billing, Our Calling (1907) (Rock Island, IL: Augustana: Fortress Press, 1951), 7.

(15.) Anders Nygren, “Die Lutherforschung in Skandinavien,” in Gott ist am Werk: Festschrift für Hanns Lilje zum 60. Geburtstag, eds. H. Brunotte and E. Ruppel (Hamburg: Furche, 1959), 18f., my translation.

(16.) Nathan Söderblom, “Martin Luther’s Universal Significance,” The Lutheran 6.11 (December 13, 1923); and “Evangelic Catholicity,” The Lutheran Church Review, 1 (January 1924).

(17.) August Strindberg, Näktergalen i Wittenberg (Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1988), 108, my translation.

(18.) August Strindbergs brev, 14, 1901—mars 1904, ed. Torsten Eklund, Stockholm, 4901. D. 15 Nov. 1903, 309f.

(19.) Ivan Oljelund, Avfällingen (LTs förlag, 1958), 198, my translation.

(20.) Maria Södling, “En alternativ teologi: Personlighet, frihet och ansvar hos Lydia Wahlström,” in Sällskapet: Tro och vetande i 1900-talets Sverige, ed. Susanne Olsson, 166ff. (Stockholm: Molin & Sorgenfrei Förlag, 2013); and Birgitta Rengmyr Lövgren, Personlighetens sakrament: Lydia Wahlströms författarskap och tänkande i religiösa och kyrkliga frågor 1900–1925 (UppsalaLiber Tryck, 1982).

(21.) Gustaf Wingren, Teologiens metodfråga (Malmö: C.W. Gleerup, 1954).

(22.) Lars Ahlin, Tåbb med manifestet, Historien om hur Tåbbs livsstil växte fram (1943) (Lund: Alba, 1987), 17, my translation.

(23.) P. G. Lindhardt, “Luther und Skandinavien,” in Luther und die Theologie der Gegenwart: Referate und Berichte des Fünften Internationalen Kongreses für Lutherfosrchung, eds. Leif Grane and Bernhard Lohse (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1980), 144.