a. Harjunpää, an able assistant to Lehtonen’s pro-Anglican work Apart from writing his Encyclical Letter, 1945, Archbishop Lehtonen pre-pared for his new office by obtaining a suitable archiepiscopal staff. Some time in late May 1945 he wrote to the Finnish Seamen’s Pastor in London, the Rev. Toivo Harjunpää, and offered him the position as his Chaplain.
This was an innovation for the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland: it had not been the practice of Lehtonen’s predecessors to call their secretar-ies chaplains in the English way. However, this was what Lehtonen had in mind, as ‘Chaplain’ was the term he and Harjunpää used of the position in English.207
After careful thought, prayer and consultation with his wife and inti-mate friends, Harjunpää decided to accept the offer, which he understood as a great honour and a sign of appreciation for the work he had done in England. Harjunpää’s reply reveals the extent of his acclimatization to Eng-lish culture. Perhaps for security reasons, as there still existed a formal state of war between the countries, he wrote in near perfect English:
I cannot deny it, my Lord Archbishop, that there is much in your proposal which appeals to me, and it has in fact had a great and altogether wholesome psychological - or should I say pastoral effect on me. I begin to gain more confidence that with God’s help and with your fatherly advice and encouragement I might still be able to make my own humble contribution to the Church at home, which I love so deeply.
And should it be so that I can best serve the Church by coming home, I must take it as God’s gracious will; and besides, ought not a priest feel himself under the obliga-tion of canonical obedience in relaobliga-tion to his bishop.
Your personality, Most Reverend Father, has always had an inspiring effect upon me, and I can assure that nothing could be dearer to me than to work as your chaplain in so close a contact with you. I also feel this, if anything would enable me to carry into effect some of my cherished religious-ecclesiastical ideals and visions, which, I think, you would share with me.0
Harjunpää’s excellent English, indicating as it did the sort of things he had learned from the Church of England, was a sign of the extent to which his time in England had influenced him: his language was extraordinarily high church for a Finnish Lutheran cleric in the 1940s. Whenever he could,
0 KA AL 29 Harjunpää to Lehtonen 6.6.1945.
0 KA AL 29 Harjunpää to Lehtonen 6.6.1945.
Harjunpää chose the more catholic terms. He constantly referred to himself as ‘priest’, when most Finnish Lutheran clergy would have chosen ‘pastor’
as a more suitable description of their ministry. Harjunpää also addressed Lehtonen as ‘Most Reverend Father in God’, ‘Lord Archbishop’, ‘My dear Archbishop’ and ‘Most Reverend Father’.209 Even if this was common for Anglican clergy, it would have unsettled most of Archbishop Lehtonen’s episcopal colleagues in Finland. In this respect Archbishop Lehtonen seems exceptional, for he indeed shared his Chaplain’s “cherished religious-eccle-siastical ideals and visions”, which included a ‘higher’ understanding of the Church and its ministry than was then common in the Finnish Church.
Ideals and visions aside, Harjunpää was grateful that his future position would enable him “to retain and foster further contacts with the friends and representatives of the Anglican and other foreign churches, which thing I personally value greatly.”210 He had made many friends during his years in England. Harjunpää already knew something of the Chaplain’s duties, as some of his friends had served in such a position:
I meet fairly often Canon Don, D.D., now the Sub-Dean of Westminster Abbey, who was the chaplain of the late Archbishop Temple. He is the chairman of theo-logical study group, the member of which I am. I know also the present chaplains of the Archbishop of Canterbury, and best of all the Rev. Synge, who was Dr. Fisher’s chaplain, when he was the Bishop of London. Synge - now the vicar of a West-London Church - and I are very dear friends. I have therefore had good opportuni-ties to become more closely acquainted with the chaplain duopportuni-ties in the Anglican Church.
Harjunpää’s friends were distinguished churchmen. Canon Alan Don was a Scotsman from Dundee, liturgically moderate and open to ecumenism, whereas the Rev. F.C. Synge was a devout and liberal evangelical church-man and a New Testament scholar.212 Again, what might have been seen as strikingly high church in Finnish Lutheranism was generally mainstream in English Anglicanism.
Besides the Church of England men, Harjunpää had also made friends with the Rev. John R. Temple, D.D., a Methodist minister, who was one
0 KA AL 29 Harjunpää to Lehtonen 6.6.1945. Ripatti 1990 describes the tone of Har-junpää’s letter as solemn. While that may partly be true, it misses HarHar-junpää’s closeness with and affection towards Lehtonen.
0 KA AL 29 Harjunpää to Lehtonen 6.6.1945.
KA AL 29 Harjunpää to Lehtonen 6.6.1945.
Carpenter 1991, 115, 131, 246-249.
of the driving forces of the British and Foreign Bible Society (BFBS). Har-junpää thought it worth mentioning to Lehtonen, as the Archbishop had indicated that the Chaplain’s position might be connected either with the Finnish Bible Society in Turku or with a diocesan chaplaincy.213 It appears that Harjunpää was more interested in the Bible Society than he was in an ill-defined diocesan position, which might have involved anything and everything. Eventually, the latter was closer to what he got, as the Bible So-ciety work was never incorporated into the Chaplain’s office.
Harjunpää’s general tone ensured that the listing of his friends did not appear merely as a casual dropping of famous names in order to impress;
on the contrary, his letter was replete with humility and an awareness of his limitations.214 In any case, Harjunpää never listed all of his “intimate friends” in the Church of England, even though some of them served in high positions. One of them was certainly Canon Douglas of the CFR with whom Harjunpää conversed before making his decision and who tried to arrange an audience with Archbishop Fisher for Harjunpää:
Finland – On Saturday Pastor Harjunpaa saw me and we had a long talk about things. He tells me in confidence he has been approached by Archbishop Lehtonen about becoming his Chaplain and also the Director of the Finnish Bible Society.
Harjunpaa has been a tower of strength while he has been in England (seven years) in church relations and taking into consideration the Agreement existing between the Church of England and the Church of Finland would his Grace be able to spare a few minutes to see Harjunpaa and to give him his views on the question of accept-ing such an appointment. I think, if there is no interference from Russia, that such a link at this juncture would be of immense importance.
It must have been exceptional for a foreign clergyman to seek career advice from the Archbishop of Canterbury, but Harjunpää can hardly be seen as an ordinary Seaman’s Pastor. This was confirmed by the fact that the audi-ence was granted.216
Douglas treated Harjunpää as if he were a member of the Anglican clergy. Their correspondence reveals a close affinity; it seems, indeed, that
KA AL 29 Harjunpää to Lehtonen 6.6.1945.
KA AL 29 Harjunpää to Lehtonen 6.6.1945.
LPL CFR LR file 28 Finland 1945. Note to the Archb. s.d.
LPL CFR LR file 30/1 Harjunpää to Douglas July 1945.
they were family friends.217 Before leaving for Finland, Harjunpää thanked Douglas for all his help and great kindness, and wrote that he would miss him as “a dear and trusted friend and a wise counsellor very greatly indeed.
your help and advice has enabled me to survive through all hardships, and look forward to a time when the cordial relations between the Church of England and the Church of Finland will grow even stronger.”218 Harjunpää rejoiced that his new post would give him “a very good opportunity to fos-ter further these relations which are so dear to me personally.”219
Besides mentioning the good relations between the churches, there was something Harjunpää wanted, namely “to pay a short farewell visit to his Grace” the Archbishop of Canterbury before his departure. Harjunpää had already met Fisher, and was very grateful to Douglas, who had organised the meeting.220 In the event, Harjunpää got both his meeting with the Arch-bishop and a farewell party, organised by the Church of England. On both occasions, he was told that the Church of England wanted to welcome a successor for Harjunpää as soon as possible, as Harjunpää later emphasized to the readers of Kotimaa.221
Evidently, Harjunpää knew how to use his good contacts with Church of England dignitaries; his personal relations were based on more than mere ecumenical politeness. On his departure, Douglas wrote to him:
My very dear Friend,
That you are called home, does not surprise me. Who could better serve your dear Church and Nation? You have made such a world of friends here in London and know and understand us so well. Myself from our first meeting five years ago I was drawn to you and I foresaw that you would work your best to create and strengthen that solidarity of our Churches - never mind their formal reunion - which is my heart’s desire. As time went on and the dark shadows came, I learnt to know your loving loyal heart and more and more I came to love you as a very dear friend. I shall miss you very greatly but I shall rejoice to be sure that over there in your beloved
LPL CFR LR file 30/1 Farewell letter in Return of Pastor T.Harjunpää to Finland July 1945, Douglas to Harjunpää 7.7.1945.
LPL CFR LR file 30/1 Farewell letter in Return of Pastor T.Harjunpää to Finland July 1945.
LPL CFR LR file 30/1 Farewell letter in Return of Pastor T.Harjunpää to Finland July 1945.
0 LPL CFR LR file 30/1 Farewell letter in Return of Pastor T.Harjunpää to Finland July 1945.
Kmaa 59/10.8.1945 Englannin kirkon suhde Suomeen koko sodan ajan läheinen.
Finland you will be doing a greater work than you can do here. That at my age I shall be able to visit you in Helsinki is unlikely but if God give me that happiness, I know that you will welcome me.
When you see him give my humble greeting to Archbishop Lehtonen and tell him how in these dark days I have hoped and prayed and worked for Finland and that my dearest wish is to know that the shadows are lifted from your Church and Na-tion.
Douglas’ letter not only indicated his deep affection for Harjunpää, but revealed his worries concerning the Church of Finland, the Finnish state and its situation in the world. While acknowledging the importance of the link Harjunpää could provide with the Finnish, he had already expressed to Archbishop Fisher his fears concerning the Soviet attitude towards any deepening of the Church of England’s relations with the Finnish Church.223 Clearly, Douglas did not foresee a bright future for Finland.
Where ecumenism was concerned, it is clear that the ‘formal reunion’ of the two churches was the final goal of the CFR under Douglas’ and Bishop Headlam’s leadership. Archbishop Lehtonen was aware of this: Douglas had written to him that he had been working in the best interests of Finland during the dark days of the war. There is little doubt that the shadows to which Douglas referred in his letter to Harjunpää were cast by the growing political influence of the Soviet Union.
Harjunpää’s departure constituted something of a problem for the Finn-ish Seamen’s Church. Just as the ArchbFinn-ishop’s offer reached Harjunpää, he also received a letter from the Rev. Daniel Orädd, Director of the Finnish Seamen’s Mission Society, inviting him and his family to spend a two month holiday in Finland at the Society’s expense. Lehtonen advised Harjunpää not to inform Orädd about his proposal, which suggestion he followed.224
Eventually, Orädd learned about Harjunpää’s new post from a news-paper. The Society was most unhappy with the way the Archbishop had handled the situation. They were faced with the urgent need to appoint a new Pastor for London, while Harjunpää was unable to see in his succes-sor. On his return to Finland, Harjunpää gave the board of the Society an account of his work in London during the war years, for which he received
LPL CFR LR file 30/1 Douglas to Harjunpää 7.7.1945.
LPL CFR LR file 28 Finland 1945. Note to the Archb. s.d.
KA AL 29 Harjunpää to Lehtonen 6.6.1945.
great thanks and appreciation. The board also decided to appoint a new Pastor as soon as possible.225
Harjunpää arrived in Finland at the beginning of August 1945 to as-sume his duties as Archbishop’s Chaplain.226 He was widely interviewed by the Finnish church newspapers.227 His return made the front page of the main church newspaper Kotimaa.228 The focus of these interviews was natu-rally the Finnish Seamen’s Mission, but Harjunpää also shared many of his experiences of English church life, and emphasized the close relations with the Church of England throughout the war, which had enabled him to con-tinue his work and to contribute articles about Finland to various English newspapers. According to Kotimaa, Harjunpää’s work had greatly assisted the cause of his church.229
At a time when there was a psychological need for good news in Finland Harjunpää’s return received much positive interest, presenting him with an opportunity to give Finnish readers a positive introduction to Anglicanism.
Harjunpää’s second interview in Herättäjä concentrated on the ecclesiasti-cal situation in England. Herättäjä thought this to be of particular interest, since there was a general ignorance of such matters in Finland, which none-theless had enjoyed great sympathy in English church circles in recent years in spite of the war.230 Herättäjä’s views reflected a commonly held Finnish assumption based on the activities of a handful of faithful English friends, which had received an attention beyond their true significance in Finland.
Harjunpää explained the ecumenical context of the churches in Eng-land, but concentrated on the Church of EngEng-land, which was a church with a high view of episcopacy. This meant that the Church of England would not enter into communion with a church that did not have the
KA AL 29 Harjunpää to Lehtonen 6.6.1945; Kansanaho 1983, 266-267; Ripatti 1990, 175.
Kansanaho 1983, 266; Ripatti 1990, 174-175.
Kmaa 59/10.8.1945 Englannin kirkon suhde Suomeen koko sodan ajan lähei-nen; Hjä 32/10.8.1945 Englannissa sai suomalainen pappi sota-aika vapaasti toimia; Hjä 33/17.8.1945 Anglikaaninen kirkko ja voimakkaat vapaakirkot vaalivat Englannissa us-konnollista elämää; Fsb 29/23.8.1945 Vår sjömansmission i England fick verka fritt under krigsåren.
Kmaa 59/10.8.1945 Englannin kirkon suhde Suomeen koko sodan ajan läheinen.
Kmaa 59/10.8.1945 Englannin kirkon suhde Suomeen koko sodan ajan läheinen.
0 Hjä 33/17.8.1945 Anglikaaninen kirkko ja voimakkaat vapaakirkot vaalivat Englan-nissa uskonnollista elämää.
toric episcopate. However, Harjunpää continued, it was also a reformed church, whose “official confession”, the 39 Articles, had brought it close to the Finnish Church, as it had been greatly influenced by the Lutheran Augsburg Confession. It was therefore natural that the Church of England had endeavoured to create close relations with the Finnish Church.231
Harjunpää’s picture was simplistic and a little disingenuous: the 39 Articles did not have as central role in Anglicanism as the Augsburg Confes-sion did in Lutheranism; and the 39 Articles were influenced not only by Lutheran, but also Reformed, theology.232 It may be that restricted space did not allow him to go sufficiently deeply into Anglicanism to do it justice.
That being said, he was further restricted by his Finnish readers’ ignorance:
there was very little to build on. They knew about the Augsburg Confes-sion, but it is likely, for example, that a description of the development and position of the Book of Common Prayer in English church history would have been lost on them.
However, a simple introduction to the catholic and reformed heritage of the Anglican doctrinal tradition afforded Harjunpää the opportunity to continue with a description of his own experiences in the light of the agree-ment the Church of England and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Fin-land had signed some ten years before:
During the war, I was able to experience myself the great value that the Anglicans give to the agreement which was achieved between our Churches before the war.
This has enabled me to participate frequently in the Holy Sacrament of the Altar in this Church, where the value of the sacrament is understood more richly and deeply than in many other churches. The agreement has also made it possible for our pastors to be welcomed as guests in Anglican pulpits. What an extraordinary opportunity and challenge is thus opening for us to proclaim the message of sin and grace in the Anglican world, where with some exceptions this message does not shine with the same clarity as in our midst. The Anglicans also desire to have closer theological contacts with the [other] Nordic Churches and this I would consider highly desirable.
Hjä 33/17.8.1945 Anglikaaninen kirkko ja voimakkaat vapaakirkot vaalivat Englan-nissa uskonnollista elämää.
The Porvoo Common Statement 1992, III:29; Toon 1999, 144-148; Gady & Webber 2001, 27-28.
Hjä 33/17.8.1945 Anglikaaninen kirkko ja voimakkaat vapaakirkot vaalivat Englan-nissa uskonnollista elämää.
Harjunpää’s account reveals much of his understanding of the differences between Lutherans and Anglicans, and how he wished to present those dif-ferences to the Finnish public. He painted a traditional picture of Angli-can-Lutheran relations, in which Anglicans placed a greater emphasis on the Eucharist, while Lutherans placed a greater emphasis on preaching the word. His Finnish readers could thus be proud of their great inheritance, and Harjunpää was able to introduce the idea that there was something they could give to ‘the Anglican world’ in the “closer theological contacts”
he wished to encourage.
Harjunpää’s broad ecumenical interest emerges in his attempt to ex-plain the recent ecumenical developments between the Anglican, Roman Catholic and Free Churches in England. He drew comparisons between the English Free Churches and the revival movements in the Finnish Lutheran Church: for both, the laity had an important role, and both similarly nur-tured individual piety. Harjunpää considered that religious life in England was in general more cheerful and practical than in Finland. New methods were adapted to quickly, and missionary work was generally and strongly supported, especially in the Free Churches. Of the Free Churches, Harjun-pää considered the Methodists to be closest to Finnish Lutheranism.234 The picture Harjunpää painted of English church life was positive and extended beyond the Church of England. The interview suggests that Harjunpää had been infected with something of the enthusiasm of English religious life during the years he had spent in its midst.
All in all Harjunpää’s return received much interest in Finland,
All in all Harjunpää’s return received much interest in Finland,