Church of Norway

The Church of Norway is presented as an institution with a double position in the book: its practices are described by one musician as comparatively liberal, yet Christian culture remains a deep national inheritance. The church’s response to arsons attributed to Satanists was immediate condemnation, while the aftermath was felt most strongly in particular congregations rather than as a nationwide religious revival.

Institutional Character

In an interview, Ihsahn described the Church of Norway as far from strict, pointing to women serving as bishops and priests and to the presence of homosexual priests and same-sex marriages. His account appears as a participant’s characterization of the institution, rather than a systematic description of its doctrine. It nevertheless complicates the assumption that the black metal scene’s hostility arose simply as a reaction against an especially restrictive church.

The book also distinguishes formal religious practice from Christianity’s broader cultural presence. Pål Mathiesen describes Norway as having a deep Christian culture, while suggesting that belief in religious rituals is comparatively weak for many people. In this account, the church belongs to a society whose Christian inheritance can remain meaningful even when regular religious life is limited.

Satanism and the Church’s Response

The book sets the church’s public response against a black metal milieu that treated Satan as real and understood the world through an enduring struggle between good and evil. This differed from the symbolic or archetypal interpretation associated with international groups such as the Church of Satan. The contrast helps explain why the arsons were received not only as criminal acts but also as a direct religious challenge.

The Church of Norway was described as shocked by the arsons and unprepared for them. Once Satanists were identified as perpetrators, bishops condemned the acts and spoke of the Devil as an active presence seeking new followers. Their response placed the fires within a Christian account of evil; it did not treat them as merely a dispute over music or youth style.

That response also met a wider institutional reluctance to discuss Satan and Hell. Jacob Jervell, a retired theology professor and minister in the Church of Norway, regretted that organized Christianity in Norway was often unwilling to address such uncomfortable subjects. The book sets this reserve beside the black metal scene’s forceful use of precisely those religious terms, making the church’s silence part of the cultural contrast.

Congregations and Local Aftermath

The consequences for the church were uneven. Mathiesen reports that congregations affected by fires and subsequent rebuilding attracted substantial renewed interest from people in their communities, including people considering having their children baptized despite not ordinarily attending church. The rebuilding process therefore brought a localized increase in engagement with congregational life.

That renewed attention did not, in his assessment, amount to a national conversion to Christianity. He distinguishes the heightened interest around particular damaged and rebuilt churches from any broader change in Norwegian religious belief. The fires could strengthen the visibility and community role of individual congregations without transforming the country’s overall religious practice.

Cultural Significance

The Church of Norway consequently occupies more than one role in the account: it is a comparatively liberal institution as described by a scene participant, a bearer of a Christian culture that remains socially significant, and the religious body whose local communities were directly affected by anti-Christian violence. Its response supplied a theological interpretation of the attacks, while the rebuilding of churches produced a practical, community-level consequence. The distinction between local renewal and national religious change keeps the church’s aftermath in proportion: the arsons disturbed congregations and intensified attention, but the evidence does not show that they made Norway broadly more religious.