The possibilities for Church of Sweden vicars to manage their parishes in change were explored in 2000. The results indicated that vicars had a low capacity for initiating and implementing organizational change. The aim of this investigation is to assess whether vicars have a managerial style that differ from other groups of civil servants. Using tested instruments, 240 Swedish vicars (response rate 64%), 300 school principals (66%) and 64 social insurance officers (95%) were asked about their leadership style, decision-making style, motivation profile and perceived operational demands. The vicars stand out as a special group of managers with a strong relationshiporientation. Headmasters and social officers are similar to each other in behaviour. The results are explained by that pastoral work is founded on relations, the pastoral training of the vicars and the «weight of history». A contributory cause may be that many priests are perceived as having a «helping approach» to leadership.
This article proposes that a sociology of friendship may be used to explain the state of the evangelical church under postmodern conditions. Earlier studies on friendship have been coupled with a number of qualitative interviews made with members of three local congregations in Sweden. The findings include that a variety of friendships are developed and maintained in church. These, however, need to be coupled with other friendships in order to make church life meaningful. The most important parameter in this effort is that of sameness and diversity.
This study examines how the hope for peace in the Middle East is articulated in Swedish Christian Zionist movements, both publicly and in private interviews with leaders and speakers. The article shows that Swedish Christian Zionist movements’ public lectures and sermons rarely address political issues as peace. However, they do reiterate favorable images of Jews and occasionally negative images of Muslims and Arabs. It is apparent in interviews that these leaders and speakers are pessimistic regarding peace in the Middle East. For them, it is not attainable, and, in some cases, it is described as transcendent. In some interviews, Islam, Muslims, and Arabs–in some cases specific Muslim actors–are depicted as inferior, violent, and obstacles to peace. The favorable images of Jews reoccur, and they are instrumentalized, albeit infrequently. Lastly, Christians are repeatedly discouraged to support peace, since it might be false, or to demand Israeli territorial concessions.