Tag: Pietism

The Pietist Story: Part Two

So just what is Pietism? Is it the fount of all heresy within Protestantism due to it’s overemphasis on individual connection with God rather than sound doctrine? Some Protestant theologians and historians certainly think so. Is it a spirituality type that produces Christians who are “so heavenly minded they are no earthly good.” Once more, some Protestant theologians and historians certainly think so. Are such characterizations really accurate?

In my judgement, they are not.

Indeed, if my study of Church History over the last five years has taught me anything it is that Pietism is often deeply misunderstood. Despite how important this movement is to the development of Protestantism, many Christians have little knowledge or understanding of it. Thus, it has often become the punching bag of heresy-hunters.

So once again, what is Pietism? I would suggest that this term can be understood in two distinct but intimately interrelated ways. First, Pietism is a historical movement that was born during the early 1600s. Beginning in the Netherlands and flourishing in Germany, the movement emphasized Bible study in private and in small groups, personal connection to God, a life of holiness, charity amongst Christians of different denominations, church renewal, and social concern for the poor.

Second, Pietism is a distinct ethos that lives on in Christianity to this day. While Pietism as a discernible historical movement has probably run its course, its ethos very much continues. Christians who embrace the Pietist ethos will value many of the same things that the Pietists of old did. Some prominent Christian theologians who I think are good representations of the Pietist ethos would be Stanley Grenz, Roger Olson, and Donald Bloesch. Billy Graham displayed many Pietist tendencies, though I doubt he ever called himself a Pietist. I think the founder of my denomination A.B. Simpson displayed some Pietist tendencies (this is not surprising as he voraciously read and appreciated many Pietist authors).

Now some scholars would argue that my definition of Pietism as a historical movement is too narrow. Indeed, scholars such as Justin A. Davis and F. Ernest Stoeffler (perhaps the most important 20th century historian of Pietism) use Pietism as an umbrella term that covers a whole host of European church renewal movements in the 1500s, 1600s, and 1700s. These scholars would see Jansenism, Quietism, Puritanism, Quakerism, and many smaller renewal movements as various “species” of Pietism. However, I wonder if using the term “Pietism” in this way is somewhat artificial and stretches the term to its very breaking point. However, I will grant that many of these movements display at least some aspects of the Pietist ethos (and perhaps that is what these scholars are really trying to say).

Thus, the story of Pietism that I will tell will primarily focus on Pietism as it developed in the Netherlands and Germany and how it eventually became a worldwide movement. I will also look at how its ethos continues to this day. God Bless!

The Pietist Story: Part One

Greetings readers, it has been some time since I posted to this blog. However, I have hardly stopped writing. In fact I am writing more than ever before as I am currently in the process of writing my doctoral dissertation. Despite the heavy load of doctoral work I have no intentions of abandoning this blog. In fact, my research has motivated me to write all the more. After much prayer and reflection, I have decided to write a series on “Pietism” which has been my primary research focus over the last 3 years. For those unfamiliar with Pietism, this movement is perhaps the most significant renewal movement to ever be born out of Protestant Christianity. Despite this, many Christians are largely unaware of it.

Pietism was a Protestant Renewal movement that thrived within German Lutheranism during the 1600s and 1700s. Although many Pietists were Lutherans, the movement also included many Reformed and Anglican Christians as well. Pietists emphasized the study of scripture in private and in small groups. They also deeply valued the spiritual life and one’s personal connection to God. Furthermore, while most Pietists valued the orthodox Christian tradition, they emphasized that right doctrine alone did not make one an authentic Christian. Rather, a holy and transformed life was needed as well.

Why do I feel called to write this series on Pietism? First, I feel called to write this series because I am absolutely passionate about Church history and renewal movements in particular. I believe that learning about our past is an essential spiritual exercise for the Christian. By learning about our history we are introduced the great spiritual masters and minds of the Church. We are introduced to perspectives that challenge and convict us. Perspectives that deliver us from the “tyranny of the present.”

Furthermore, as a an Evangelical Christian of a Wesleyan-Holiness bent, I recognize that I am an inheritor of the Pietist tradition and that it has shaped my own traditions quite substantially. Indeed, the movement started by the Wesleys, Jonathan Edwards, and George Whitfield (which we have come to call Evangelicalism) is essentially a fusion of Puritanism and Pietism with a strong emphasis on revival. Thus, I write on Pietism to understand my own heritage better. I hope that other Evangelical Christians will read this series and come to understand their heritage better as well.

Finally, I write this series on Pietism because I believe the Pietists have much to teach us. Wracked by scandal, denominational strife, and accommodation to the worst aspects of American culture, the Evangelical church in America is in desperate need of renewal. The Pietists were faced with similar challenges in the churches of their day too. However, with time and effort (and I think the help of Almighty God) they managed to infuse their churches with renewed life and vigor. Perhaps its time we take a page from their playbook.

I hope you enjoy reading this series as much I look forward to writing it. God Bless!

John Wesley: Pietist Theologian

John Wesley has been quoted as saying that doctrine is but a “slender part” of true religion. judging by this statement, especially in isolation, one might assume that Wesley was a doctrinal indifferentist. However, upon further investigation we find that this could not be further from the truth. Wesley was hardly indifferent when it came to the task of articulating Christian doctrine.  We see this in his numerous tracts and sermons that deal with lofty concepts of Christian theology such as the Trinity, the person of Christ, the means of grace, original sin, prevenient grace and so forth.

To understand this statement of Wesley’s, we must understand him as in many ways a “Pietist theologian.” John Wesley was strongly influenced by Pietist thought through the writings of Johan Arndt as well as by the Moravians whom he met on his voyage to Savannah and with whom he spent much time with in England and Germany. The Pietists communicated to Wesley, through both personal correspondence and in their writings, that the Christian life did not consist solely of affirming certain theological propositions, heartfelt relationship with Jesus of Nazareth was necessary for a robust Christian life as well. Christianity consisted of both illumination and transformation. That is, transformation of the individual who though once isolated and alienated from God could now enjoy deep fellowship with God, who could grow into real, scriptural holiness and truly be more like Jesus!

Wesley understood this reality all too well. Prior to his “Aldersgate” experience, Wesley was more than ready to affirm the doctrines affirmed in the Apostles’ and Nicene Creeds. Wesley had plenty of good theology and yet his spiritual life was empty, he had no real relationship with Jesus, he had not yet come to recognize Christ as his “personal” Savior. Wesley could affirm many truths about Christ but only when he had a vital relationship with Christ did he finally experience spiritual peace.

I think the experience of Wesley, and the other Pietists, provide us with valuable lessons for today. Good theology is important no doubt, and without good theology we will not have good spirituality. However, rational assent to scriptural truths (though extremely important) is not the whole of the Christian life, it is but a part. Our task as Christians today is to balance the rational and relational aspects of the Christian life. If we drop but one we will have a truncated and perhaps even counterfeit Christianity. With the guidance of the Holy Spirit and the Scriptures I am convinced that we can balance these two aspects of the Christian faith quite well and present a robust version of the Christian faith that speaks well to both the head, and the heart.

Why Pietism?

Recently I published an article on my blog about the renewal movement called “Pietism” that grew out of German Lutheranism in the 1600s and 1700s. Lately I have been immersing myself in the writings of the great leaders of the Pietist movement such as Philipp Jakob Spener and August Herman Franke. Furthermore, I have been reading the work of modern scholars of the Pietist movement such as Roger Olson, Dale Brown, F. Ernest Stoeffler, and Christian Collins-Winn. With so much of my time being spent on this study, and with it being the subject of my doctoral dissertation, my wife understandably asked me “why are you so interested in studying Pietism?”

Pietism in not a well-known term amongst Evangelical Christians even though it might be the most influential renewal movement of the Protestant tradition. Pietism as a movement emphasized the necessity of conversion, the importance of individual as well as small group Bible Study, and that authentic, vibrant Christian faith was more than just mental assent to core Christian doctrines. The Pietists firmly believed that Christianity was a “heart” religion and not just a “head” religion. The Pietists were also people of great social concern. Something of a rallying cry of theirs was that they existed for “God’s glory and their neighbor’s good.”

Pietism as an ethos has influenced Lutheranism as well as the Anabaptist movement in Christianity. Indeed, the Church of the Brethren in the United States has been especially influenced by Pietism. The Evangelical Covenant Church (one of the fastest growing Protestant denominations in the United States) is a distinctly Pietistic denomination. John and Charles Wesley were profoundly influenced by the Moravians who were a Pietistic people. It is hard to find a Protestant tradition that has not been touched by the Pietist ethos. It is remarkable that it is so little known when it’s influence has been so wide.

“Why am I studying Pietism?” I study Pietism in part because it brought revival to German Lutheranism when it was desperately needed. Mainstream German Lutheranism in the 1600s and 1700s had become stale and arid. The Pietists did much to revive German Lutheranism. The Pietists cared for thousands of orphans, printed millions of Bibles, and sent out many effective missionaries all over the world. The idea that they lived for “God’s glory and their neighbor’s good” was more than just a slogan, it was a way of life.

I also study Pietism for greater self-understanding. Pietist emphases have deeply influenced Evangelicalism and I want to know more about this trans-denominational movement that has deeply shaped what I believe and how I live my life. Finally, I believe Pietism may contain valuable insights for renewal in Evangelicalism today. The Evangelical Church in the United States needs renewal. We need to mobilize for the 21st century and reach the one-third of the world that still has not heard the Gospel. Who better to draw inspiration from than the Pietists? Pietistic Lutherans were some of the first to send missionaries to the native peoples of Greenland and Canada. Pietists missionaries were the first people to translate the Bible into Tamil. A language spoken by many people in India.

In short, I believe that the Pietists can show Evangelicals what it truly means to live a life for “God’s glory and our neighbor’s good.” Is there a more authentically Christian way of life than this? Is any other kind of life even worth living?

On Pietists and Preaching

Recently I have been doing a tremendous amount of research on the Christian renewal movement known as Pietism. Pietism was a church renewal movement that grew out of German Lutheranism during the 1600s and 1700s. The German Pietists were convinced that the church would only experience broad renewal when both the clergy and the laity more deeply engrossed themselves in the Holy Scriptures and moved beyond a mere “head knowledge” of the Christian faith into a Christian faith of the “heart”

Pietism as an ethos deeply influenced the Anabaptist, Moravian, and Methodist movements. Indeed, even today, Pietism’s influence can be felt in modern Evangelicalism even if it is rarely acknowledged or recognized.

Perhaps the greatest manifesto of early Pietism was a book entitled Pia Desideria or “Pious Desires” by Philipp Jakob Spener. Spener was a Lutheran clergyman who, though devoted to the Lutheran Church, nevertheless found that his native church was severely lacking in many areas. Interestingly, a problem that Spener found especially troubling within his native church was the poor state of the clergy.

It was not that the clergy were poorly educated. Indeed, the average Lutheran clergyman had received rigorous training in Biblical languages, systematic theology, and logical reasoning, yet for all this training and knowledge, the preaching of many a Lutheran clergyman during Spener’s day was dull and ineffective.

Sermons had become highly academic affairs where pastors would wax eloquent over the most minor of theological matters. They would often lapse into long soliloquys in foreign languages the common people little hope of understanding. Sermons were often seen as opportunities for the pastor to show off their rhetorical prowess with little thought given to whether the sermon would be of any practical value to the laity. Sermons were primarily informational and rarely transformational.

Whenever I read church history, I read with an eye to discover wisdom for the modern church. There is “nothing new under the sun” and a careful reading of the church’s past can give us insight for how to deal with the problems of the present. As a preacher myself, I have often found Spener’s critique of poor quality preaching rather convicting. It has led me to ask questions such as “How does the preaching of the modern Evangelical church compare with that of the Lutheran church of Spener’s day ?” “Do I repeat many of the errors of Spener’s day when I get behind the pulpit?”

I must confess that I too have been guilty of simply wanting to show off what I know when I preach. I study hard and work diligently at being a competent speaker. I am proud of my work ethic and I am passionate about teaching theology. Sometimes pride creeps in. I’m convinced that when this happens, I am not as effective as I could be. It becomes about me rather than pointing people to Jesus Christ. This is never good.

Furthermore, I have personally experienced preaching that was seemingly just about dispensing information to the congregation. It was like listening to a seminary lecture only far less interesting. Worse still, I have experienced preachers that were warped with pride by their intelligence, education, and rhetorical prowess. I remember one in particular who would not cease reminding everyone that he had four degrees including one from a prestigious research university. Fellow preachers, if we are guilty of this sin of pride in our education and abilities then we need to repent. We have an important job to do. Jesus Christ must be proclaimed! We can’t get in the way.

Now, I do not want anyone to think that I am teaching against seminary education or intellectually engaging preaching. I believe very strongly in both of these things and frequently in Evangelicalism we have the very opposite problem. Preaching in many Evangelical churches is often an emotionally charged spectacle, yet simultaneously a doctrinal mess with little to no good content. Indeed, an anti-intellectual strain runs deeply within Evangelical preaching and it negatively affects our witness. This is not the kind of preaching I am advocating for.

Spener and the Pietists thought that preaching was vitally important. If revival and renewal were to take place in their time, better preaching was required. As preachers we must daily seek to preach more effectively by presenting sermons that while thoughtful and theologically sound, are also deeply practical. We need to preach sermons that provide for our people practical instruction in righteousness. We need sermons that point people to Jesus rather than our prowess and abilities. We need to be conscious of where our people are spiritually and intellectually so that we can gradually and carefully grow them into mature and theologically informed Christians.

I understand that this balancing act of the informational and the practical will not always be easy, but it is something we must strive for. I want my preaching to be effective and powerful, I want it to be transformational. When my eulogy is spoken, I want it to be said that my preaching pointed people to Jesus Christ rather than my abilities.