Before meeting Normunds Kamergrauzis, I learned that he is also responsible for the theology lectures held in Stockholm Cathedral, which anyone with a deeper interest in faith and theology can attend. The lectures take place within the Cathedral Academy. Just a couple of hours before our scheduled interview, the first lecture of this semester took place, on the theme of “Free Will.” The hall was full of listeners. The average age of those interested was around 50 to 70, yet I also noticed a few teenagers and young people. After the lecture, people gathered in line at the book table, where you could buy a recently published book edited by our compatriot Normunds Kamergrauzis.
We met in Normunds’s office – a spacious room on whose walls hang large portraits of the Cathedral’s pastors and in which antiquity mingles with Swedish minimalism.
Normunds Kamergrauzis was born in Latvia, studied journalism and obtained a bachelor’s degree in theology, and was ordained as a pastor in the Lutheran church. For his doctoral studies he went to Uppsala University in Sweden, where he also decided to stay. Pastor Normunds Kamergrauzis currently lives in Stockholm, does scholarly work at Uppsala University and is the theologian of Stockholm Cathedral. Aļesja Lavrinoviča, editor of the LLSTA website, talks with Normunds Kamergrauzis.
What paths brought you to Sweden?
As my studies at the Faculty of Theology of the University of Latvia were drawing to a close, I began thinking about continuing with research. That was in 1993. I am from the first graduating class of the restored Faculty of Theology. At that time the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Latvia had good relations with the Church of Sweden. The Church of Sweden offered two scholarships to each Baltic state, and one of the doctoral scholarships went to [Pastor] Ivo Grantiņš, the other to me. That is how we both ended up at Uppsala University. I was interested in systematic theology. Ivo Grantiņš was interested in liturgy. I stayed in Sweden. At that time it was possible to obtain scholarships in both Germany and America.
I had a great interest in ethics, and in Sweden, at Uppsala University, I largely continued what I had begun in Latvia. During my studies in Riga, I lived in the home of Professor Visvaldis Varnesis Klīve. Klīve himself had in his time defended a master’s thesis under Reinhold Niebuhr, and he talked a great deal about Reinhold Niebuhr, as well as the tradition of Christian realism. That aroused great interest in me. Arriving in Uppsala, I took up Christian realism, and it became the basis of my research.
When I had finished my studies, after defending my dissertation I had two options – to stay at the Faculty of Theology of Uppsala University or to return to Latvia. Such an invitation was extended to me and to Normunds Titāns, who had finished his studies in America. Normunds Titāns returned to Latvia, but I stayed. I became a member of the teaching staff at the Faculty of Theology in Uppsala.
Tell us about your time as a student at the restored Faculty of Theology. Several women also enrolled there who wanted to become pastors. Were there no conflicts? Was there no pointing to gender roles?
I think that all those matters became topical in the church much later, not in our time. We were idealists. The Soviet order was collapsing, there was a rebirth, a renewal, the Awakening. No one had time to think about gender. What was happening around us swept everyone up.
A very interesting observation, which I have heard someone make about women in the Latvian church, is this: in that time of oppression and darkness, women were looked upon as sustainers, saviors; no one had any great objection to women’s ordination when Archbishop Matulis carried it out. At that time the greatest satisfaction was that any women even thought of taking that path of ministry at all. But then, when everything began to stabilize, when the oppression had passed and the time of first love was over, then the question [of the role of women] became topical.
I do not remember it being particularly discussed during my studies. Perhaps in certain circles, but life did not revolve around it. It is important to point out that yes, in the Faculty of Theology there were women who wanted to become pastors, but there were also women who simply wanted to study theology. There were also women who did not want to become pastors, but the church itself wanted to ordain them.
You are a pastor at the Cathedral and you are also the Cathedral’s theologian. What do your duties involve? What is the Cathedral Academy, and what happens there?
I serve in the Church of Sweden and I am the Cathedral theologian. This includes responsibility for the development of theological thought. Why does all this take place in the Cathedral? It is connected with the fact that in the church’s tradition the cathedral is the place where the bishop’s chair is located. And the bishop’s chair is the place from which one teaches. In the Stockholm context, the teaching takes place in the Cathedral Academy. The people who come to it are mostly academically educated, but theology is not their specialty. They are interested in philosophy and theology – the big questions. My contribution in this regard has been to compile and shape the program of the Cathedral Academy in such a way that one can build one’s philosophical-theological thinking like a house, starting with the foundations, laying brick upon brick and building a house so that it holds together and is a whole.
Judging by today, the demand is great. A hall full of people (in the photo: a lecture at the Cathedral Academy).
The phenomenon in all of this is that here is Stockholm’s old town and today is Sunday. In the old town today you can do many other things, but the people whom existential questions interest are here. And they are mostly not even people from the church, but from the city. In fact, all the development of theological thought takes place here, in the cathedral.
The teaching consists of three elements – first, providing basic knowledge on questions of philosophy and theology; second, creating an awareness of what the Faculty of Philosophy and Theology in Sweden is occupied with and what is being researched; third, fostering the opportunity to develop one’s own thinking. It is interesting that these questions interest not so much pastors as people who are not theologians or philosophers.
You are also the editor of the recently published book “The Weeping God, the Bewildered Human: on the view of the human being, the philosophy of life and the Christian faith” (2017).[1] Is the book the result of discussions about faith?
When the Cathedral Academy was founded in 2014, my idea was to build it like a house, starting with the foundation bricks. We began with the big question: “Can we understand ourselves?” So we began to think: what is a human being, what are his moral possibilities, what are a human being’s moral limitations, and what to do with all that we have and all that we lack? The book is about the view of the human being, the philosophy of life and the Christian faith. After we had clarified these anthropological[2] questions, we arrived at the realization that, regardless of everything, every person has their own philosophy of life. Next we examined the possible philosophies of life and how one can look at life. Then we came to a few of the challenges of the Reformation and thought about original sin, the doctrine of justification, and about how to see Luther’s legacy in today’s context. Out of these seminars the book “The Weeping God and the Bewildered Human” took shape.
Why a “weeping” God?
In the title one can hear something of the tradition of Christian realism. Jesus wept when he entered Jerusalem. The “weeping” God is largely connected with God’s view – when God looks at a human being’s life, He almost always has a reason to weep, because the bewildered human being struggles with his life and cannot cope with it. The thought: that your life has not been what I would wish it to be.
The bewildered human being does not understand what that life is supposed to be. Perhaps he does understand, but cannot bring it about.
And does the book guide a person toward faith?
The book is about a human being’s moral possibilities, about the Christian faith. It leads into the next stage – into the big questions of tradition, justice and death. That will be the next anthology, which I am working on at the moment.
What are people like in Sweden? Is Sweden as secular as they say? Is there faith here?
I think that the story of Sweden’s great secularization is a myth. I do not think it has any deep basis. I really do not think that people in Sweden are secular. But every nation has its own language, its own way of expression, for talking about religious matters. If Sweden were secular, then the Cathedral would not be full every Sunday. It is Swedes who sit there, because all the services are held in Swedish. On the other hand, I wonder, are there secular people at all? It is hard to imagine. Even if a person cannot put into words or formulate his spiritual life, every person has one. There is no person who has no spiritual life at all. Another question is about the manner and forms of expression. And that can be debated. But in these debates one must be very careful.
In Latvia and the Eastern countries there is a kind of self-preservation: we are the “authentic Christians,” then there are those Western “liberal Christians,” and further on there are those “secular apostates” in Scandinavia, who do not believe in God and in their liturgy do not want to acknowledge God in the masculine gender. Such a view prevails among us.
Those are very crude classifications, but I have heard it. I know that people think that way. In my opinion, we often occupy ourselves with things that we should not, in principle, occupy ourselves with. The question is not about how to put something into boxes. The big question is what Jesus himself also says clearly: “By their fruits you shall know them.”[3] It is worth talking about the fruits. But to qualify people and to set oneself up as the one who qualifies is, in my opinion, very great arrogance, which is by no means a Christian virtue.
I have a question about your research, in which you describe solidarity.[4] The question, of course, moves toward the exclusion of women from church offices. To what extent can solidarity be applied not only to society or political processes, but to the church itself?
I think it can be applied fully. It can be applied to any situation in which at least two people are involved. Solidarity, as I present it, we can speak of from the point of view of justice. My argument is that we have rather fragmentary knowledge and fragmentary insights for us to claim the last word. Solidarity in this sense means that, in order for something to happen and for everything to happen fairly and inclusively, we must be in solidarity with those people who have no opportunity to defend their own cause. The idea is not about whether the other side is right or has the final truth. Probably not. No one has that.
My view is that, in order for us to arrive at anything, all those who take part in the debate must be given equal rights to represent their view. And with those who do not have this opportunity, you must be in solidarity and keep them afloat, because without their insights into justice we will not arrive at justice. That does not mean that they have any privileged knowledge. Yet no human experience is so insignificant that it should not be represented.
If exclusion is based on the authority of the Bible, how is that to be assessed?
There are very different views on the authority of the Bible. For us to move forward on this question, we should at the outset ensure that these different views obtain an equal opportunity and are represented. When the different views and the truth of each side are represented, only then can one go further. You cannot make a morally good decision if you confine the whole moral world within your own conceptions. Other conceptions also exist, and we have very limited insight into them.
In the same way, one can speak of the interpretation of a text. There are different interpretations. To say that this is correct because I think so… That is a question of power, it is not a theological question. It is a question of conduct. In my opinion.
How do you assess, from the aspect of Christian ethics, the LELB’s decision to exclude women from the possibility of being ordained as pastors?
I am largely surprised that the question of women’s ordination has been so central! I think there are questions that are much more essential to the church, which ought to be addressed and dealt with. The fact that, within a single church, a decision once adopted is revoked, especially on this question, is such an unprecedented case that many people shrug their shoulders at it.
On the other hand, I must also acknowledge that every church has the possibility and the right to define its own theological views. Yet it is hard to see how a ban on women’s ordination could be defined or defended within the Lutheran tradition. In the context of the Catholic Church this question is almost not topical, because it is a tradition that by its very nature does not ask this kind of question. The premises of the Catholic Church’s tradition do not favor women’s ordination. At the same time, in the Evangelical Lutheran tradition it is extremely hard to see what reason there could be not to ordain women, because in the Evangelical Lutheran tradition we speak of the universal priesthood, and this is not a question of gender analysis. It is a question of church order.
Yes?
But consider, if there is a universal priesthood, then every Christian is in essence a priest. Those who hold the office are specially chosen people for a special task. But if all belong to the universal priesthood, then the question also concerns everyone. Then the question is a universal one. It is no longer a question of gender. In the theology of the Roman Catholic Church there is an entirely different view of the priesthood than in the Evangelical Lutheran tradition.
Whether or not to ordain women is a question of tradition. In the Catholic Church there is no basis for speaking of women’s ordination in the present context, but in the Evangelical Lutheran tradition there is no basis for forbidding it.
How then is such a phenomenon to be understood in the context of the Lutheran tradition in Latvia?
Visually, if you look at what is happening in the Latvian church… The Latvian church’s views on the Evangelical Lutheran tradition are very ambiguous.
I found a book in which you were in dialogue with feminist researchers (The Ethics of Feminism: Possibilities and Limitations). In your view, is there any point of contact between Christian ethics and the ethics of feminism?
The ethics of feminism is no longer as topical as it was when I contributed to the book. To speak of the ethics of feminism is quite complicated; it is easier to speak of a feminist perspective. What do I mean by that? In building a well-founded ethical system, questions must also be asked from a feminist perspective. It is a perspective, not an ethics existing in its own right. A perspective, in its best form of expression, asks questions about gender, power and the good life. Similarly, for example, we can also speak of liberation theology. It is better to speak of a perspective from the side of the poor, because in building any theology one must see how it looks from their side. Here we return to the question of solidarity. Solidarity (as I use the word) is a matter of consciously working so that all perspectives are represented, without giving anyone any epistemological[5] advantage of knowledge. Only when you see what the whole thing revolves around can you begin to take it up. Without a doubt, the feminist perspective in the way I have described it is an extremely important aspect.
Is there any field you are planning to research in Christian ethics or another subfield of systematic theology?
I have ideas. At the moment my work absorbs me and leaves little time for writing. I would like to write a book, “Ethics: Sources and Content.” It would be an accessible and easy-to-read book about my subject. It would not even be a textbook. I would like to write it as a book that, on reading it, would give a person an idea of what ethics is.
Judging by your dissertation and book, there is in Christianity a resource for ethics.
I think there is great basis for speaking of Christian ethics. From Jesus’ revelation in history we know so much that we may form an idea of what the good life is, and that we may find the motivation to live that good life. But Christian ethics is largely intended for Christians. In ethics generally there are many universal things that exist in various traditions, but in each tradition there is something unique. In Christian ethics too there is, and it is connected with Jesus himself. If you think about Jesus’ ethical provocations, then it is very hard to see the meaning in his ethical provocations if you do not believe the very story of Jesus.
Perhaps you have some wish or proposal for the Association of Latvian Lutheran Women Theologians?
The most important thing one can do is to think. In the process of thinking, one must accept that there may be mistakes somewhere. The more we are able to look at ourselves with criticism, the more we are able to see beyond ourselves. That is how we grow. I try to think this way myself, and that is what I would like to share with others as well. I think it is worth trying.
[1] The title of the book in Swedish: En gråtande Gud och den förvirrade människan: om människosyn, livsåskådning och kristen tro. Normunds Kamergrauzis (ed). Stockholm: Verbum, 2017.
[2] Anthropology – the study of the human being.
[3] Mt 7:16.
[4] The title of the book is “The Persistence of Christian Realism.” In the book, Kamergrauzis cites solidarity as the basis for a model of Christian engagement in the public sphere. Within solidarity itself there are resources to bind oneself to the so-called solidarity of the shaken or the shaken person – with those who are excluded from participation in the interpretation of justice and the distribution of power. The Persistence of Christian Realism: A Study of the Social Ethics of Ronald H. Preston. Normunds Kamergrauzis (Uppsala Studies in Social Ethics, 27), Uppsala: 2001, 145.
[5] Epistemology – the theory of knowledge and cognition, of how people know what they know.