“Born Again”: A Portrait and Analysis of the Doctrine of Regeneration within Evangelical Protestantism [1 ed.] 9783666604577, 9783525604571

Citation preview

Stephen James Hamilton

“Born Again”

 A Portrait and Analysis of the Doctrine of Regeneration within Evangelical Protestantism

Research in Contemporary Religion

Edited by Hans-Günter Heimbrock, Stefanie Knauss, Jens Kreinath Daria Pezzoli-Olgiati, Hans-Joachim Sander und Trygve Wyller In co-operation with Hanan Alexander (Haifa), Carla Danani (Macerata), Wanda Deifelt (Decorah), Siebren Miedema (Amsterdam), Bonnie J. Miller-McLemore (Nashville), Garbi Schmidt (Roskilde), Claire Wolfteich (Boston) Volume 23

Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht

Stephen James Hamilton

“Born Again”: A Portrait and Analysis of the Doctrine of Regeneration within Evangelical Protestantism

Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht

Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data available online: http://dnb.d-nb.de. ISSN 2197-1145 ISBN 978-3-666-60457-7

You can find alternative editions of this book and additional material on our Website: www.v-r.de  2017, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Theaterstraße 13, D-37073 Gçttingen/ Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht LLC, Bristol, CT, U.S.A. www.v-r.de All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without prior written permission from the publisher. Typesetting by Konrad Triltsch GmbH, Ochsenfurt.

Contents Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

13

1

. . . .

15 15 16 19

. .

19

. .

20

. . . . . .

21 22 26

. . . .

. . . .

26 27 30 33

. .

39 39

. . . . .

39 39 44 46 46

.

48

. . .

51 51 56

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 Field of Inquiry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1.1 Cultural overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1.2 New birth, theologically understood . . . . . . . 1.1.2.1 Being “born again” as an experience of presence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1.2.2 The tension between doctrine and experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1.2.3 The threefold structure of the theological grammar of being “born again” . . . . . 1.1.3 The state of research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1.4 The purpose of this study . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1.4.1 Regeneration as a “theological phenomenon” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1.4.2 Presence and tacit knowledge . . . . . . 1.2 Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3 Subjecs and Structure of this Study . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . .

Part I: The Theological Tradition of “Born-Again” Christianity 2

A Cultural, Exegetical, and Historical-Theological Overview of the Doctrine of Regeneration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 “Born again”, “new birth” and “rebirth”: a short clarification and background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.1 New Testament sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.2 Old Testament sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3 New birth and sacramental presence . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.1 Catholicism and Orthodoxy . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.2 Luther: Baptismal regeneration in Protestant theology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4 The separation of regeneration from baptism in Protestant theology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4.1 Anabaptist theology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4.2 Reformed Theology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

6

Contents

2.4.3

3

4

The Dawn of Puritanism and Pietism . . . . . . . . 2.4.3.1 Puritanism: The doctrine of preparatory grace and the conversion narrative . . . . . 2.4.3.2 German Pietism and proto-Pietism: the legacy of Johann Arndt . . . . . . . . . . . .

Baptismal Regeneration or Transformation of the Soul? The Tensions in Philipp Jakob Spener’s Theology of Regeneration . . . 3.1 Historical and Cultural Context: the Pia Desideria . . . . . . 3.2 Spener’s Theology of New Birth: An Introduction and Short Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2.1 The three-fold event of regeneration . . . . . . . . . 3.2.2 Spener’s rejection of Predestination and espousal of baptismal regeneration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3 Spener’s Threefold-division of New Birth: An Analysis . . . 3.3.1 The “new being” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3.2 The “igniting” of faith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3.3 Justification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3.4 Being born again: “renewal” as the continuation of regeneration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4 Spener on Sacraments and Faith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4.1 The sacraments and the presence of faith . . . . . . 3.4.2 The presence of faith as the unity of baptismal and non-baptismal regeneration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4.3 Spener and Luther: baptism, new birth, and faith . . 3.5 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5.1 Being born again as an experience of presence . . . 3.5.2 Contrast to Puritanism and Anabaptism . . . . . . . 3.5.3 Scripture and Ecclesiology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5.4 The tension between doctrine and experience . . . . Jonathan Edwards: The Born Again Experience Under the Authority of Scripture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1 Edwards’ Theological Background and Cultural Context . . . 4.1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1.2 Edwards’ youth, conversion, and subsequent career . 4.2 The Born Again Experience: Conversion . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2.2 “Born Again” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2.3 “A Divine and Supernatural Light”: regeneration as spiritual illumination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3 Guiding Theological Concepts in Edwards’ Theology of Regeneration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

60 60 65 70 70 74 74 76 77 78 80 82 83 85 85 87 89 93 93 95 97 99 100 100 100 102 104 104 105 108 112 112

7

Contents

4.3.2 Light . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3.3 “Sense” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3.4 Infusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Experiences from the Revival Front . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4.1 The beginnings of the Great Awakening . . . . . 4.4.2 “Distinguishing marks” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4.2.1 “Negative signs” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4.2.2 “Positive evidences” . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.5.1 Phenomenology of religious experience and the certainty of regeneration . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.5.2 Free will and predestination . . . . . . . . . . . 4.5.3 Preparationism and the importance of narrative 4.5.4 Church, community, and the sacraments . . . . . 4.5.5 Revivalism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

112 116 118 120 120 124 125 126 127

. . . . .

. . . . .

127 128 130 130 131

Schleiermacher on New Birth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1.1 Modernity and subjectivity . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1.2 Schleiermacher’s early life and theology . . . . . 5.2 Theological Background to Schleiermacher’s Theology of Regeneration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2.1 Zinzendorf and Moravian theology . . . . . . . . 5.2.2 Schleiermacher’s “God-consciousness” . . . . . 5.3 New Birth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3.2 Conversion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3.3 Justification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3.4 Sanctification: the continuance of regeneration . 5.3.5 The Church as fellowship of the regenerate and locus of the Holy Spirit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4.1 Regeneration as an experience of presence . . . 5.4.2 The universality of religion and the specificity of Christian regeneration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4.3 The importance of certainty . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4.4 Scripture and doctrine . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . .

. . . .

133 133 133 135

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

137 137 140 142 142 144 146 148

Charles Finney: New Birth as Decision . . . . 6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1.1 Finney’s conversion experience 6.1.2 Finney’s theology . . . . . . .

. . . .

4.4

4.5

5

6

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . 150 . . 151 . . 151 . . 153 . . 153 . . 155 . . . .

158 158 158 163

8

Contents

6.2

6.3

6.4

Finney on Regeneration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2.1 Introduction: activity vs. passivity, “moral” vs. “physical” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2.2 What regeneration is not . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2.2.1 A feeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2.2.2 A “taste” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2.2.3 The result of a necessary morphology of conversion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2.3 Regeneration as moral sensibility . . . . . . . . . . 6.2.4 Regeneration and sanctification as presence of the Holy Spirit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2.5 Holiness and social reform . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2.6 Evangelism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.3.1 Freedom of the will . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.3.2 “Moral” vs. “physical” change . . . . . . . . . . . 6.3.3 The reformation of the role of narrative . . . . . . 6.3.4 The authority of scripture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.3.5 Ecstasy and transcendence . . . . . . . . . . . . . Postscript: Finneyism and American Evangelicalism . . . .

. 166 . . . .

166 168 168 169

. 170 . 171 . . . . . . . . . .

173 174 175 177 177 178 179 181 182 182

Part II: Regeneration in Contemporary Evangelical Discourse in North America 7

New Birth as an Experience of Presence . . . . . . . . . . 7.1 The Three-fold Structure of New Birth . . . . . . . 7.1.1 Presence of changed internal faculties . . . 7.1.2 Presence of God . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1.3 Change in divine status . . . . . . . . . . . 7.2 Theological Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.2.1 Importance of the moment of regeneration 7.2.2 The role of free will . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.2.3 The conversion process . . . . . . . . . . . 7.2.4 Relation to scripture and doctrine . . . . . 7.2.5 Friendship and the church community . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

189 189 189 190 191 192 193 195 197 198 199

8

Charles Colson’s “Born Again” . . . . . . . . . . 8.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.2 The Story of Charles Colson . . . . . . . . 8.2.1 Early life and political involvement 8.2.2 Colson’s conversion . . . . . . . . 8.3 Post-conversion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.3.1 Brotherhood . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.3.2 Politics and the press . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

201 201 201 201 203 204 204 205

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

9

Contents

8.4

9

8.3.3 Trial and imprisonment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Theological Analysis of Colson’s Conversion . . . . . . . . . 8.4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.4.2 New birth as “decision for Christ”: a moment of free will . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.4.3 Mystical presence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.4.4 New being . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.4.5 Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.4.6 Importance of narrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Brian “Head” Welch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.2 The Story of Brian “Head” Welch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.2.1 Early life . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.2.2 Korn and conversion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.3 Conversion Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.3.1 Conversion and aftermath . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.3.2 Additional experiences of divine presence . . . . . 9.3.2.1 Baptism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.3.2.2 Speaking in tongues . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.3.2.3 Forces of darkness . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.4 Theological Analysis of Welch’s Testimony . . . . . . . . . 9.4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.4.2 Presence of God . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.4.2.1 God’s presence as the overcoming of false presence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.4.2.2 Hearing God’s voice . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.4.2.3 Prayer and ecstatic experience . . . . . . . 9.4.3 A new “self”: a work in progress . . . . . . . . . . 9.4.4 Justification and Adoption . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.4.5 Decision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.4.6 Scripture and doctrine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.4.7 Friendship and ecclesiology . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10 Christianity Today Testimonies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.2 “My Train Wreck Conversion,” by Rosaria Champagne Butterfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.2.1 Butterfield’s narrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.2.2 Analysis of Butterfield’s conversion . . . . . . 10.3 “The Atheist’s Dilemma,” by Jordan Monge . . . . . . . 10.3.1 Monge’s narrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.3.2 Analysis of Monge’s narrative . . . . . . . . . .

206 209 209 210 211 212 213 213

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

215 215 216 216 217 218 218 221 221 222 222 223 223 224

. . . . . . . .

224 225 226 227 228 230 231 232

. . . 234 . . . 234 . . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

236 236 238 241 241 242

10

Contents

10.4 10.5 10.6 10.7 10.8

10.9 10.10

10.11 10.12 10.13

“Antidote Poison,” by Ravi Zacharias . . . . . . . . . . . 10.4.1 Zacharias’ narrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.4.2 Analysis of Zacharias’ narrative . . . . . . . . . “Forgiving Iran,” by John Majid (as told by Kate Harris) 10.5.1 Majid’s narrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.5.2 Analysis of John Majid’s narrative . . . . . . . . “The Golden Fish,” by Erich Metaxas . . . . . . . . . . . 10.6.1 Metaxas’ narrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.6.2 Analysis of Metaxas’ narrative . . . . . . . . . . “My Crash Course on Jesus,” by Casey Cease . . . . . . . 10.7.1 Cease’s narrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.7.2 Analysis of Cease’s narrative . . . . . . . . . . . “Forgiving the Man Who Murdered Mom,” by Everett L. Worthington, Jr. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.8.1 Worthington’s narrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.8.2 Analysis of Worthington’s narrative . . . . . . . “Saved by U2 and an Audible Voice,” by Travis Reed . . . 10.9.1 Reed’s narrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.9.2 Analysis of Reed’s narrative . . . . . . . . . . . . “Fox News’ Highly Reluctant Jesus Follower,” by Kirsten Powers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.10.1 Powers’ narrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.10.2 Analysis of Powers’ narrative . . . . . . . . . . . “How I Escaped the Mormon Temple,” by Lynn Wilder . 10.11.1 Wilder’s narrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.11.2 Analysis of Wilder’s narrative . . . . . . . . . . . “Christ Called Me Off the Minaret,” by Nabeel Qureshi . 10.12.1 Qureshi’s narrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.12.2 Analysis of Qureshi’s narrative . . . . . . . . . . “Pro Football Was My God,” by Derwin Gray . . . . . . . 10.13.1 Gray’s narrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.13.2 Analysis of Gray’s narrative . . . . . . . . . . . .

11 Summary Analysis of Christianity Today “Testimonies” . 11.1 Presence of God . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.1.1 Metaphor and descriptive language . . . 11.1.2 Illuminiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.1.3 Visions and dreams . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.1.4 Gifts of the Spirit and ecstatic experience 11.1.5 The rationalist exception . . . . . . . . . 11.2 Presence of Changed State . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.2.1 Language of the new being . . . . . . . . 11.2.2 Overcoming substance abuse . . . . . . . 11.2.3 From negative to positive attitude . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . .

245 245 246 248 248 250 253 253 255 257 257 258

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

261 261 263 266 266 267

. . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . .

270 270 272 275 275 277 281 281 283 286 286 288

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

291 291 291 292 293 293 294 295 295 295 295

11

Contents

11.3

11.4

11.5

11.6

11.7

11.8

11.2.4 Freedom to moral obedience . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.2.5 The exception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Change in Divine Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.3.1 Atonement and forgiveness of sins through Christ’s crucifixion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.3.2 Eternal life . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.3.3 Adoption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.3.4 The exception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Importance of Moment of Regeneration . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.4.1 Moment as dramatic and/or central event in narrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.4.2 Identification of extended period . . . . . . . . . . . 11.4.3 Exceptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Role of Free Will . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.5.1 “Decision” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.5.2 Rejection of language of “decision” . . . . . . . . . . 11.5.3 Ambiguity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Patterns of Conversion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.6.1 Journey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.6.2 Crisis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.6.3 Other, mixed forms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.6.4 False conversions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Bible and Doctrine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.7.1 The Bible as book . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.7.2 Biblical passages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.7.3 Implicit biblical and doctrinal literacy . . . . . . . . Friendship and the Church Community . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.8.1 Friendship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.8.2 Worship attendance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.8.3 Bible study groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.8.4 Criticism of the church as institution . . . . . . . .

296 296 297 297 298 298 298 299 299 299 300 300 300 301 301 302 302 303 303 303 304 304 305 306 306 306 307 307 308

Part III: Concluding Analysis 12 Summary and Final Theological Reflections . . . . . . . 12.1 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.2 Presence and Tacit Knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . 12.2.1 Mediation and the sacraments . . . . . . 12.2.2 Christianity as “knowing how” fostered in community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.2.3 Mysticism and metaphor . . . . . . . . . 12.3 Theological Reflections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

311 311 313 313

. . . . . . 315 . . . . . . 316 . . . . . . 317

12

Contents

13 Concluding Reflections on the Present Cultural and Political Situation in the USA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.2 Preliminary Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.3 Regeneration as Personal Conversion: Trust in the Sanctified Self . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.3.1 Solidarity through the shared theological experience of transformation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.3.2 Regeneration and sanctification as catalysts for moral purity: two views . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.4 The Bible as Authority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.5 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

320 320 321 323 323 325 328 331

Works Cited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 332 Index of Subjects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343 Index of Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347

Preface The following book was originally written as a dissertation under the title The Theological Grammar of Being “Born Again”: A Portrait and Analysis for the graduate research group (German: Graduiertenkolleg) “Presence and Tacit Knowledge” at the Friedrich-Alexander University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, sponsored by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG), of which I was a participant from April 2012 until March 2015. The dissertation was submitted immediately following the end of my three-year stipend and defended on the 20th of July of the same year. Certain minor changes have been made to the manuscript (most importantly, a final small chapter), but the document is largely as it was when it was submitted in April 2015. There are quite a few individuals who deserve thanks for their role in helping make this book possible. I am grateful to the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) for making my research possible with a generous stipend as well as contributing to the publication fees of this book. Moreover, without participation in the Graduiertenkolleg, the existence of this book is barely imaginable. I am thankful to Professors Dr. Heike Paul, Dr. Clemens Kauffmann, and Dr. Antje Kley for their leadership of the Graduiertenkolleg; to Dr. Katharina Gerund, Dr. Christoph Ernst, and Dr. Juliane Engel for their efforts as mediators between the professorial circle and the doctoral students; and to all the others whose organization and participation helped make the group possible. I am especially thankful to my fellow doctoral students for the stimulating conversation and companionship. Particularly Christine Lehr, Monika Sauter, and Florian Tatschner were the sources of many helpful conversations on my research project. My Doktorvater, Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Schoberth, deserves particular thanks. He was the quintessential supervisor, knowing exactly when it was necessary to give me guidance, and when it was necessary to let me grapple with my ideas on my own. Without his encouragement and guidance, I would have never undertaken this research project in the first place. In addition, I am greatly thankful to my second advisor, Prof. Dr. Andreas Nehring, for his assistance, and also for the pleasure of being able to teach on English-language theology together with him. Other professors were also of invaluable help along the way: Prof. Dr. Jan Stievermann at the University of Heidelberg, for helping me better grasp the theology of Jonathan Edwards and of Puritanism in general; Prof. Dr. Alasdair Heron (†) at the University of Erlangen for the conversations on Calvin and Calvinism; Professors Dr. Glenn Jonas, Dr. Adam English, and Dr. Dean Martin, all of whom had previously mentored me at my proud alma mater,

14

Preface

Campbell University, for taking the time to reconnect and discuss my research; and Professors Dr. Edsell Burge and Dr. Jeff Bach and at the Young Center for Anabaptist and Pietist Studies, Elizabethtown College, for their wonderful hospitality and fascinating conversations. I wish my stay could have been longer. I would also like to thank those at Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht who made this publication possible: Prof. Dr. Hans-Günter Heimbrock for allowing this book the great honor of being published in what is an intellectually stimulating and important series, Research in Contemporary Religion (RCR), and Moritz Reissing for all the legwork he put into helping see the final product published. Stephan Mikusch deserves his own paragraph. He helped with the formatting and correction of the manuscript, and just as importantly, patiently explained it all to me along the way. I would like to thank the Staedtler Foundation for their decision to award this dissertation the Promotionspreis in 2016. I would also like to thank the Vereinigte Evangelisch-Lutherische Kirche Deutschlands (VELKD) and the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Christlicher Kirchen in Deutschland (ACK), for their stipend to assist with the publication costs of this book. My parents, John and Melany Hamilton, played a special role in the emergence and development of this research project. Not only did they discuss my research and reflections on a nearly weekly basis: they planted the seeds for my love of theology in the first place. Moreover, they have provided the example for one of the fundamental insights of this book: that theology is never separable from how one’s life is lived. And finally, it is worth mentioning that I am not even the best theologian under my own roof: my wife, Dr. Nadine Hamilton, has been a constant source of support and encouragement – intellectually, emotionally, and spiritually. I therefore dedicate this monograph to her and to our first child, who is expected to be born around the same time as this book’s printing.

1 Introduction 1.1 Field of Inquiry The object of this study, as its title indicates, is a particular theological grammar: that of being “born again” in evangelical1 Christianity, which has been formative for North American culture for over 300 years and continues to be influential today. Still, it is a subject which despite its cultural importance has been largely neglected by mainstream theological scholarship. This is doubtless at least partially due to the fact that the term “born-again Christianity” has connotations which cause the majority of academia unease: images of dramatic conversion experiences, of a bold religious fervor, of evangelists pleading for listeners to “accept Jesus into their hearts,” and, of course, of certain forms of conservative political activism which on many university campuses subsist only in the shadows. Yet it is not merely cultural bias which has contributed to such paucity of interest in Christian new birth: at a more basic level, the phenomenon of being “born again” is one which appears to have its locus in the private confines of the individual subject as a form of immediate presence, which would appear to at least partially shield it from scholarly scrutiny. If we are to take seriously the language of those who count themselves within this tradition, then new birth is something that is consciously experienced, frequently through a memorable conversion and followed by the conviction that one is now a different person, embraced by the presence of a God with whom the born-again Christian has a “personal relationship.” But what can systematic theology possibly say about such a seemingly private religious experience? Many would assume that it cannot say anything directly: instead, it can only watch from the sideline, offering religious individuals advice on questions of doctrine, or perhaps giving an opinion as to whether such a “born-again” experience is necessary at all. However, it is the argument of this present study that the role of systematic theology is, as a matter of fact, essential to understanding the phenomenon of being “born 1 The term “evangelicalism” is a notoriously broad concept which has taken on different meanings in its history. Perhaps one of the clearest, and best, definitions of what the term implies today (and began to imply 300 years ago) is found in David Bebbington’s Evangelicalism in Modern Britain: A History from the 1730s to the 1980s, 2–3: “There have been four qualities,” writes Bebbington, “that have been special marks of Evangelical religion: conversionism, the belief that lives need to be changed; activism, the expression of the gospel in effort; biblicism, a particular regard for the Bible; and what may be called crucicentrism, a stress on the sacrifice of Christ on the cross. Together they form a quadrilateral of priorities that is the basis of Evangelicalism.”

16

Introduction

again” as a whole, due to its ability to provide an exploration of the theological structure and implications – or, in other words, the “theo-logic” – of the language of those who themselves claim to have had such an experience. This is the intellectual task which this book will undertake in the following pages, by presenting a “portrait” of a complex phenomenon in which personal experience and theological conviction are inextricably tied together.

1.1.1 Cultural overview Although the theological concept itself has been essential to evangelical Christianity since its inception, the term “born again” began to sink into modern mainstream American culture’s vocabulary in the second half of the 20th century, due in large part to the success of revivalist preacher Billy Graham’s evangelistic “crusades,” which consisted of large Christian worship services held for mass audiences, often numbering in the thousands, in nontraditional venues such as concert halls and sports stadiums. Some of these were even broadcast on live television, for instance in 1957 when the American Broadcasting Company (ABC) televised his crusades live from Madison Square Garden in New York City for 17 consecutive Saturday evenings,2 which played a significant role in introducing innumerable North Americans to evangelical Christianity. At the center-point of each service was Graham’s sermon, which generally ended with an “altar call,” or invitation to members of the audience come forward and make a public spiritual commitment to Jesus Christ in order to become truly “born again” – a term which implied that the Christian faith would no longer be located on the peripheries of their daily lives, but instead that they would have a “personal relationship” with Jesus Christ. It was the year 1976, nearly twenty years later, which Newsweek magazine declared to be the “year of the evangelical,” based on the continuing influence of Graham, along with two prominent figures from the contemporary political landscape: Charles Colson, author of the autobiography Born Again, whose involvement in the scandal-ridden and ultimately incriminated administration of President Richard Nixon was followed by a dramatic conversion experience; and the then-presidential candidate (and soon to become president) Jimmy Carter, whose own reference to himself as a “born-again Christian” had apparently caught a large contingent of the secular American press off guard.3 Although evangelical Christianity, particularly in its fundamentalist forms, had always been associated with cultural conservatism, 2 For a short and informative history of evangelical Christianity on radio and television, including Graham’s rise to prominence, cf. William Martin, “Giving the Winds a Mighty Voice.” 3 For a short and helpful summary of this development, cf. Martin Marty, “The Years of the Evangelicals.”

Field of Inquiry

17

it is worth noting that at this time the term had fewer connotations of rightwing politics than it would soon receive4: despite his stringent antiCommunism and general cultural conservatism, Graham typically shied away from political controversy and developed close friendships with American presidents from both parties5; moreover, Carter was a Democrat, and often quite left-leaning in many of views. Even Colson, a life-long Republican who never lost his appreciation for Nixon (and who later on in his life became ever more the culture warrior), emphasized continually in his spiritual autobiography that his conversion experience enabled him to transcend the bitterness of partisan politics, which included having a rival Democratic politician as one of his closest spiritual mentors. As politically opinionated as he was, Colson did not envision a form of “born-again” Christianity which would be associated with a narrow political platform; indeed, a fundamental hope of his conversion narrative (to be examined later in this study) was that “born-again” Christianity could contribute to future political healing. However, by the early 1980s the term “born again” had already for many shifted into a moniker for a religiously motivated political interest group, the so-called Religious Right (or “Moral Majority,” as they referred to themselves), which was characterized by its staunch support for socially conservative policies, free-market economics, emphasis on patriotic zeal, and an often hawkish attitude towards foreign military intervention; also not to be overlooked is the fact that its adherents were overwhelmingly Caucasian.6 The popularity of “televangelism” throughout the 1980s, characterized by controversial figures such as Jim Bakker, Jerry Falwell, and Pat Robertson (who would run for president as a Republican in 1988), only furthered the impression that being a “born-again” Christian meant being a de facto member of the Republican Right.7 As a result, for many onlookers “bornagain” Christianity began to be seen not only as describing a personal religious experience but also a social entity – a “movement which has discernable historical roots and which is held together by a relentless quest for membership in the ‘kingdom of God’” – to cite the theologian Eric Gritsch, 4 For an extended reflection on the question of whether “born-again” types of Christianity are more conducive to a certain type of political ideology, cf. the final chapter of this book. 5 Cf. Grant Wacker, America’s Pastor: “The evangelist’s close relationship with American presidents was probably unique in U.S. history,” writes Wacker. “Graham knew all eleven from Truman to George W. Bush, enjoyed friendships with all except Truman, and very close friendships with Johnson, Nixon, Reagan, and George H.W. Bush.” Graham’s slide into American partisan politics, according to Wacker, began and ended with Nixon, whose fall from grace led to Graham’s conscious “decision to avoid partisanship of any kind, Republican or Democrat,” which included even distancing himself from the rhetoric of the “Christian Right” as well as, later on, his own son Franklin’s critical comments towards Islam. (Ibid.: 22; 18–19) Cf. also David Aikman: Billy Graham: His Life and Influence, particularly chapters 8–10. 6 Cf. Gary R. Pettey, “Bibles, Ballots, and Beatific Vision.” 7 Cf. Ibid.: 201–204.

18

Introduction

who coined the term “born-againism” to draw attention to the fact that, at least in North American culture, the phrase “born again” had begun to refer more to this specific group of people than to any general theological doctrine.8 Perceptions to the contrary, however, the religious experience of being “born again” has never been a cultural phenomenon limited to politically conservative whites. The African-American Christian tradition, for instance, has a long history of cooperation with the wider evangelical culture, including conversion narratives, dating back to the time of the Revolutionary War,9 and the language of new birth continues to be frequently found in AfricanAmerican gospel music and devotion.10 Furthermore, Pentecostalism, which is known to often have the most dramatic conversions, is also one of the most (if not the most) ethnically diverse forms of Christianity both in North America and abroad.11 And although a correlation between white “born-again” Christians and political conservatism in the United States is indisputable, it is hardly absolute.12 The ability of this phenomenon to transcend ethnic and class boundaries can be easily observed in the virtually limitless quantity of internet conversion narratives, for example a recent series entitled “I am Second,” whose representatives range from the ranks of television stars, professional athletes, and supermodels to former prostitutes, drug-addicts, and orphans.13 Hence, it would be a mistake for theologians – particularly theologians in Europe, where this book is being written – to treat being “born 8 Eric W. Gritsch, Born-Againism: 9. Gritsch’s close association of “born-again” Christianity with a certain form of conservative politics in taken up in the final chapter of this book. 9 Cf. Noll, This Rise of Evangelicalism: 172–77, 222–23, 228; Hindmarsh, The Evangelical Conversion Narrative: 329–33. 10 Cf. Glenn Hinson’s recent study, Fire in My Bones: Transcendence and the Holy Spirit in African American Gospel. In his chapter “Experiencing the Holy,” Hinson characterizes the perspective of a contemporary African-American congretion he was studying: “The awesome experience of the holy clearly grounds reality for sanctified believers. In like manner, talk about this experience – whether conveyed through song, sermon, testimony, or simple conversion – grounds sanctified discourse. References to ‘feeling the Spirit,’ to being ‘born again’ … suffuse all talk of faith, tacitly testifying to the lived centrality of holy encounter…. For once the saints have felt the holy touch, they know it. With this knowing comes the awareness that all other born-again believers have shared the experience” (Ibid.: 16, 18). 11 Cf. David D. Daniels, III, “North American Pentecostalism”: 73–74. Daniels sees the anti-denominational and anti-hierarchical impulses within much of Pentecostalism as contributing to this strong racial and ethnic diversity. For an overview of the manifold forms of Pentecostalism which are presently flourishing on the South American, African, and Asian continents, cf. Robeck, Yong (eds.), The Cambridge Companion to Pentecostalism: 112–173. 12 According to a study by the Pew Research Center (“Election 2012 Post Mortem: White Evangelicals and Support for Romney”), 73 % of “which evangelical Protestants” voted for Republican John McCain in 2008, which 26 % voted for Obama. In 2012, according to the survey, 79 % voted for the Republican Romney while only 20 % voted for Obama. 94 % of all those categorized under “Black Protestant/Other Christian” voted for Obama in 2008, and 95 % in 2012. Cf. also Luhrmann, When God Talks Back: 13–15. 13 Summaries of some (but not all) of these autobiographical conversion narratives can be found in Doug Bender and Dave Sterret, I am Second: Real Stories, Changing Lives.

Field of Inquiry

19

again” as a phenomenon relegated to the fringe of American culture. On the contrary, it is at its very center, and can be found in the testimonies of the sports stars on television as well as the co-worker in one’s office. 1.1.2 New birth, theologically understood 1.1.2.1 Being “born again” as an experience of presence As a result of these developments, the Christian concept of new birth, whether referred to as being “born again,” “reborn,” “saved,” or with the more traditional theological terminology of regeneration (and ensuing sanctification), has solidified its place in the North American cultural consciousness.14 However, to truly understand the logic of this phenomenon it is necessary to go beyond Graham, Carter, and the array of conversion stories in popular media – as well as, thankfully, the petulant political landscape of the United States – and to beginnings of German Pietism and Anglo-American Puritanism in the 17th century, as well as the Radical Reformation of the 16th century. It is among these traditions that one finds the theological beginnings of what Susan Durden O’Brien has referred to as a “transatlantic evangelical consciousness” that came to fruition during the awakening movements of the 18th century.15 It is also among such traditions that one finds the theological uncoupling of the doctrine of regeneration from the sacrament of baptism, which had previously been assumed to be the locus of Christian new birth throughout the majority of Christian history, in favor of an understanding of the event of being born again as primarily an inward experience of the soul. Theologically, this disassociation represents a critical fork in the road, as now the attention of the Christian is no longer primarily directed towards an outward event (i. e. baptism), but instead the self: one’s behaviors, dispositions, thoughts, feelings, as well as mystical encounters with the divine. In short, among this broad evangelical tradition, reflection on new birth becomes a largely phenomenological undertaking. It is this conception of regeneration which will be considered in the present study: a conception which is the legacy of a wide-ranging collection of theological traditions, generally included under the umbrella-term “evangelicalism,”16 which have flourished in the centuries following the Reformation and which show no signs of diminishing. The question which this present study attempts to answer is the following: What is meant, theologically, when evangelical Christians claim to have been 14 The language of being “born again” can be said to describe not only what in traditional theological terminology has been called regeneration – from the Latin regeneratio, which literally means to be reborn – but also the ensuing sanctification, a term used by theologians to describe the life of the convert, seen as a process of becoming holy, after the moment of regeneration. 15 Cf. Susan Durden O’Brien, “A Transatlantic Community of Saints.” 16 Cf. footnote 1.

20

Introduction

“born again”? As a starting point, it is important to note that those from within this broad tradition generally understand the doctrine of regeneration primarily as the experience of having been regenerated.17 Being born again is therefore an experience of presence: as a divinely initiated personal experience, marked by a radical change of heart – frequently inaugurated by a dramatic conversion experience, but not necessarily so – which continues throughout the life of the believer. This experience of profound personal change and connectedness to God (of a “personal relationship” as many describe it) is typically viewed by such evangelicals as essential to what it means to be a Christian, as the boundary marker between true faith and the mere external repetition of religious practices. Thus Jesus’ words to Nicodemus in John 3:7, “You must be born again,”18 are interpreted within this tradition as an injunction, warning that only those who have this experience will “see the kingdom of God” (3:3), while those who lack such an experience are not to be viewed as completely within the Christian fold.

1.1.2.2 The tension between doctrine and experience Because Christian new birth describes not only an experience but also something which God requires and acknowledges, this entails that it is simultaneously a subjective experience of presence as well as a fixed objective doctrine, a change of heart as well as a change in divine status initiated by God. It is, writes Wolfgang Schoberth, “on the one hand the subjective experience of faith,” and “on the other God’s act [Handeln],19 which antecedes all subjective piety.”20 Following this insight, the goal of this study is to display how the tension between the experience of presence, on the one hand, and the exposition of doctrine on the other results in a kind of creative theological reciprocity. Indeed, it is exactly this reciprocity between doctrine and 17 The language of being “born again” can thus be said to describe not only what in traditional theological terminology has been called regeneration – from the Latin regeneratio, which literally means rebirth – but also the ensuing sanctification, a term used by theologians to describe the ensuing lifelong process of becoming holy after the moment of regeneration. 18 Here I cite the translation given by New International Version, which echoes the King James Version (“Ye must be born again”). As the now antiquated “Ye” of the KJV makes clear, the “you” is in plural in the Greek. The New Revised Standard Version, which is the translation used in this book unless otherwise noted, translates the passage slightly differently, which will be discussed in the first chapter. 19 All translations of German texts, unless otherwise noted, are my own. 20 Wolfgang Schoberth, “Zur neuen Welt kommen: Überlegungen zur theologischen Logik der Metaphor ‘Wiedergeburt’”: 149–50. As Schoberth observes, this interdependence between the language of subjective experience and traditional dogmatic language about God creates a deep tension, therefore it is an important function of the metaphor “new birth” [Wiedergeburt] to remind modern theologians that as much as they would like to separate and “isolate” these two elements, they cannot.

Field of Inquiry

21

experience which makes the subject of regeneration so intellectually interesting as well as challenging, for it implies that the language used to depict this experience will inevitably be a complex, inseparable mix of both phenomenological description and theological interpretation. Moreover, among laity this negotiation between the experience of presence and the interpretation of doctrine generally takes place on a tacit level, thus those who engage in reflection on their own experience of being “born again” may not necessarily be conscious of how much theologizing there are actually doing. One prominent example of such implicit theology, which will be discussed later in more detail, is the frequent reference by American evangelicals to having made a “decision for Christ.” The assumption that such a decision inaugurates one’s life as a Christian – indeed, the assumption that one can truly make such a decision at all – would have been fervently denounced by the earliest Puritan settlers as a grave heresy, since it explicitly contradicts traditional Calvinist conceptions of divine sovereignty and human free will. Other theological traditions would later come to the defense of such “decisionist” language, but it is ultimately a theological debate that cannot be completely settled through analyses of personal religious experience (although, interestingly, the debate is rarely waged without reference to experience). 1.1.2.3 The threefold structure of the theological grammar of being “born again” Despite such important theological divergences, however, it is the argument of this book that there is widespread implicit agreement among “born-again” Christians as to the general theological structure of the experience of regeneration, which can be summarized in three points. Firstly, as the metaphor of new birth suggests, it is the experience of radical change of one’s own person, a change which the subject could not have brought about through his or her own effort. Secondly, not only does a subjective change take effect, but also a change of one’s status before God, which results in a fundamental change in identity: one is justified, “saved,” and now, in the fullest sense of the word, a Christian. And finally, as a bridge between these two realms of immanence and transcendence, of subjective experience and God’s act, the born-again believer experiences an additional kind of presence: the immediate, mystical, and ultimately indescribable presence of God himself (which is typically identified as the Holy Spirit). In theological terms, therefore, being “born again” refers to conversion, to justification (in the sense of “forensic justification,” i. e. of being declared righteous by God), and finally to the indwelling – or unio mystica – of God in the heart of the believer. All three of these phenomena are typically viewed as happening at more or less the same instant and continuing into the future (in the state of “sanctification”).

22

Introduction

Obviously, it is not my argument that this basic structure can be found in every evangelical conversion narrative or theological explication of new birth, but instead that this basic three-fold theological conception of regeneration provides a helpful template – a theoretical starting point, so to speak – for understanding the evangelical Christian doctrine of being “born again,” which includes countless conversion narratives (or “personal testimonies”) as well as evangelistic calls for conversion, and spans a wide range of confessional and cultural traditions.

1.1.3 The state of research As stated previously, the insight that “new birth” and “born again” are terms that refer not only to an immediate experience of the individual but also to a transcendent act of God, and hence to normative theological claims, brings attention to the fact that the discourse on Christian new birth, whether in a theological text or an autobiographical narrative, will inevitably be a mix of personal experience and interpretation of theological doctrine. Scholarship, however, has traditionally avoided this reciprocity by separating the elements of theology and experience, and instead compartmentalized the two, assigning to non-theological disciplines the task of investigating “religious experience,” while assuming that the subtleties of doctrine are largely irrelevant to understanding this experience and instead belong to the domain of dogmatic theology. Such theoretical division has resulted not only in blatantly reductionist efforts to explain religious conversion experiences as the results of psychological neuroses, or social hysteria, or religious brainwashing, but has also placed limitations on studies of the highest quality.21 Recently, however, non-theological scholarship on religious experience, including Christian conversion, has increasingly recognized that theology cannot be bracketed off from a robust scholarly understanding of religious phenomena. It is not a coincidence, for instance, that Buddhist monks generally do not have visions of the Virgin Mary,22 or that American evangelicals do not report 21 Take the example of William James, whose classic study Varieties of Religious Experience is often complementary towards conversion experiences, yet deficient in its understanding of the theological convictions of those who have them, resulting in evaluations often marked by a surprising shallowness. Concerning the propensity for conversion experiences among Methodists, for instance, James writes that this practice “follows, if not the healthier-minded, yet on the whole the profounder spiritual instinct” (Varieties of Religious Experience: 203). The psychological category of “spiritual instinct” is clearly not helpful here, for the term “instinct” ignores the fact that such experiences have a specific theological content. Moreover, they are not merely the result of psychological desires but clearly have been (perhaps only tacitly) learned and practiced within a specific community. Thus truly understanding the Methodist conversion experience entails understanding the logic of the Methodist theology of conversion; only in conjunction with this can such a “spiritual instinct” be understood. 22 I am indebted to Wolfgang Schoberth for this memorable illustration.

Field of Inquiry

23

having experienced Nirvana. And neither is it the case, as non-theological scholars of conversion have increasingly been forced to confront, that those Christians who describe having undergone a radical conversion first had an amorphous, non-theological “religious” experience, which was only afterwards interpreted as having been an encounter with the God of Jesus Christ. On the contrary, it is nearly always the case that deeply held theological convictions are interwoven into the very fabric of religious experience.23 This draws attention to the necessity of understanding the “born-again” experience as one which is clearly perceived theologically, and not merely interpreted after the fact (although retroactive theological reflection does indeed play a significant role). Thus Lewis Rambo, perhaps the most well-known anthropologist of religious conversion, emphasizes the indispensability of theological knowledge for anthropology, psychology, and sociology of religion: “Theology occupies a central place in understanding conversion processes. Whatever one’s opinions concerning the validity and value of theology, theology often plays a pivotal role in shaping experience and expectations regarding conversion. Moreover, theology constitutes part of the ‘DNA’ of the conversion process for people existing within a particular religious tradition. Not all conversions are seen in the same way because the theology that informs the psyche and culture of the person going through conversion is deeply embedded in the structures that serve as the foundation, infrastructure, and motivation of the conversion experience itself.”24

Rambo follows these “holistic” guidelines in his classic study Understanding Religious Conversion, in an attempt to understand, from the perspective of cultural anthropology, the different types of religious conversion and what makes them so attractive to so many people. Rambo’s work is thus not primarily an exercise in causal explanation, but in thick description, since “conversion is a complex, multifaceted process involving personal, cultural, social, and religious dimensions.”25 23 T.M. Luhrmann, writing from a non-theological perspective, refers to this as “perceptual bias”: “Buddhists have visions of Buddha, and Hindus have visions of Krishna” (When God Talks Back: 221). 24 Lewis R. Rambo, “Anthropology and the Study of Conversion,” in Buckser and Glazier, ed., The Anthropology of Religious Conversion: 214–15. Cf. Rambo, Understanding Religious Conversion, in which he lays out his “holistic” approach to understanding conversion experiences, which includes the “cultural, social, personal, and religious components,” which he views as a specific advantage of anthropology in comparison to other disciplines: “In the past, scholars have tended to give undue weight to their own discipline’s point of view, even when open to the influence of other factors. Thus, the psychologist tends to focus primarily on the isolated individual who is converting; the sociologist tends to see conversion as the result of forces shaped and mobilized by social institutions and mechanisms; and the religious person emphasizes the dominant influence of God and minimizes the impact of other factors. Anthropologists have been the least likely to be limited by one narrow perspective. As a holistic human science, anthropology may serve as a model to those of us immersed in our more parochial disciplines, which demand loyalty to one point of view of emphasize only a particular dimension” (Ibid.: 8). 25 Ibid.: 165.

24

Introduction

This methodologically holistic perspective has been recently demonstrated in T.M. Luhrmann’s groundbreaking study When God Talks Back, a book of both extraordinary empathy as well as theoretical acumen, which focuses in particular on the Vineyard Church and its members’ frequent claims to hear God “talk” to them. Luhrmann’s study operates under the assumption “Godconcepts and spirit-concepts are not neutral” but instead, writes the psychological anthropologist, that “they have great power for those for whom they are real.”26 Therefore Luhrmann, though she herself makes no claim to be a Christian believer, goes to great lengths to understand the theological underpinnings of the evangelical practice of “hearing” God. Although previous researchers in her field had speculated that such “hearing” is the expression of irrationalism or mental instability (and perhaps even schizophrenia), Luhrmann quickly realized that such paradigms were inadequate. Instead, from her field work Luhrmann comes to the conclusion that “hearing God’s voice is a complex process,” a “skill” which even entails something like “a new theory of mind” among members of the Vineyard Church.27 This “skill” begins with conversion, and is then developed through socialization in the church community’s theological vision. Yet while non-theologians such as Rambo and Luhrmann have accepted the inextricability of religious experience and theological belief, those within the walls of theology faculties have still largely assumed that theological reflection on Christian new birth entails merely the examination and evaluation of a doctrine, first through a genealogical sketch of the doctrine’s development over the centuries, highlighted by the opinions of certain notable theological minds, and then topped off by the author’s own prescriptive dogmatic critique. In the following study, therefore, I attempt to bridge this methodological gap between non-theological, empirical analyses and systematic theology. While it is the argument of this study that such a methodology is ultimately incomplete, it is obviously still very necessary and has already been done with skill. In particular, Peter Toon’s Born Again: A Biblical and Theological Study of Regeneration, a learned and accessible volume which traces different theologies of regeneration from the Church Fathers to the Reformation to Billy Graham and modern evangelism, has been an indispensible resource for this present study. Toon’s primary concern is to provide a broad historical-theological introduction to the doctrine of regeneration, but he acknowledges that the impetus for his book (which was first published in 1987) is the cultural phenomenon of North American “bornagain Christianity” in the 1970s and 80s, which was confusing to many of his fellow 26 Luhrmann, When God Talks Back: 266. 27 Ibid.: 60, 40. Other non-theological studies which have been helpful for my research are Peter Stromberg, Language and Self-Transformation: A Study of the Christian Conversion Narrative; Bernd Ulmer, “Konversionserzählungen als rekonstruktive Gattung”; and particularly Charles L. Cohen, God’s Caress: The Psychology of Puritan Religious Experience.

Field of Inquiry

25

Europeans. Toon, an Anglican priest of an evangelical bent, has a unique perspective on the matter, and offers one of the more insightful, non-polemical critiques of modern evangelical “born-again” Christianity, which concludes with Toon developing his own articulation of the doctrine of regeneration.28 American theologian Eric Gritsch, in his 1982 publication Born-Againism: Perspectives on a Movement, is very much aware of the history of the doctrine of regeneration, but unlike Toon associates the term “born again” primarily with a cultural-theological “movement” arising from the influences of Christian apocalypticism, American Protestant Fundamentalism, and Charismatic and Pentecostal forms of Christianity. Politically, he identifies “born-againism” with the Religious Right. Gritsch, a Lutheran, is forthright concerning his rejection of “bornagainism’s” understanding of the doctrine of regeneration: “born-again” Christians, according to Gritsch, understand the doctrine as referring primarily to a subjective experience and completely separate it from the sacrament of baptism, whereas a proper theological understanding of regeneration focuses not on a personal experience but instead on the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and views the sacrament of (infant) baptism as inseparably linked to this event.29 The bulk of his book offers a critical analysis of the different theological traditions which inform the born-again “movement,” and is not without its polemical flourishes. In addition to these two books, one article30 deserves particular mention: Bill Leonard’s “Getting Saved in America: Conversion Event in a Pluralistic Culture.” While it covers much of the same ground as Toon and Gritsch’s study, it also devotes itself more specifically to the history of American evangelical Christianity, particularly revivalism in the Baptist context. Leonard focuses on the evolution of dogmatic conceptions of conversion in America, beginning with the Puritan understanding of conversion as a process directed by God’s sovereign grace, and which can be represented in a “morphology,” then to more rationalistic, “Arminian” 19th-century strands of revivalism which emphasized human free will and developed “techniques” for bringing about a quick conversion; and finally to his own Southern Baptist tradition, which he ultimately criticizes as “confusing” the two theologically contradictory perspectives on conversion found in Puritanism and 19th-century 28 Cf. Peter Toon, Born Again: 185–89. 29 Cf. Eric W. Gritsch, Born Againism: 92–94. 30 Many other articles were of assistance in my research. The primary German language texts used are the following: Wolfgang Schoberth, “Zur neuen Welt kommen. Überlegungen zur theologischen Logik der Metapher ,Wiedergeburt‘”; Marco Hofheinz, “Wiedergeburt? Erwägungen zur dogmatischen Revision eines diskreditierten Begriffs”; also worth mentioning is the entry by Wilhelm Peter Schneemelcher, et al., on “Wiedergeburt” in the Theologische Realenzyklopädie, as well as Paul Althaus, “Die Bekehrung in reformatorischer und pietistischer Sicht,” and Gerhard Maier, “Gottes Heilstat und die Bekehrung des Sünders im Pietismus und im Zeugnis der Schrift.” Other English texts include William Loyd Allen, “Being born again – and again, and again,” who comes to conclusions very similar to Leonard’s essay, and Jerald C. Brauer, “Conversion: From Puritanism to Revivalism,” whose research was used by Leonard to build his argument. In addition to these articles, Jürgen Moltmann’s chapter on the doctrine of regeneration in his book Der Geist des Lebens (pp. 158–174) was of great assistance.

26

Introduction

revivalism, and in consequence having become “torn between conversion as a nurturing process and as dramatic event.”31 Leonard’s thesis is particularly important for the present study in its methodology: Leonard observes how a modern evangelical tradition – in this case Southern Baptist Christianity – has negotiated and fused different, even contradictory streams of theological reflection on the doctrine of regeneration. In other words, he draws attention to the inherent theological flexibility of the evangelical conception of being “born again.” While Leonard has documented this flexibility on the level of larger theological traditions and focuses on one particular theological strand, my own study attempts to go one step further and reveal how, particularly in today’s theological pluralistic context, such a methodology can even be applied on a case-by-case basis.

1.1.4 The purpose of this study 1.1.4.1 Regeneration as a “theological phenomenon” While the present study is indebted to previous theological accounts of the dogmatics behind “born-again” Christianity, it attempts to understand Christian new birth not merely as a doctrine, but as the result of interdependence between doctrine and experience. This is because when “born-again” Christians describe and reflect upon their experience, they are not simply speaking of a doctrine to which they adhere, but also an experience which they see as having fundamentally changed and continuing to guide them.32 In light of such an intense experience of presence, theological discussions on the mere concept of regeneration, particularly among those 31 Leonard, “Getting Saved in America”: 123. Modern Southern Baptists, according to Leonard, “retained much of the terminology of Calvinism – election, predestination, depravity – yet increasingly defined those terms in decidedly Arminian directions. Rejecting four of the classic five points of Calvinism, they retained a doctrine of perseverance of the saints but popularized it with a slogan which became a watchword, ‘once saved, always saved.’ Thus they utilized a hyperArminian conversion event which placed salvation almost entirely in the hands of the sinner and his or her free will, but cut it off from the process of sanctification by making it a once and for all event. They retained Calvinist perseverance but separated it from the salvation process as infused by sovereign grace…. Thus for many Southern Baptists the language of Calvinism and the theology of Arminianism are united in the transaction of conversionistic individualism. Conversion is less a process of experience with grace than an event which satisfies a salvific requirement” (Ibid.: 124). 32 However, simply having the term “experience” as a foundational, explanatory category, as has been the traditional method of liberal theology, is equally guilty of the methodological “isolation” that Schoberth sees as so typical of modern theology, as it attempts to dissolve the exact interdependency of experience and doctrine which is so important for understanding the experience in the first place. Note also that this study leaves the concept of experience intentionally broad. This is because its point is not to argue what is or is not an “experience” (or “religion”), but instead to draw attention to and explore the formative nature of theological convictions.

Field of Inquiry

27

critical voices which seek to retrieve the doctrine’s baptismal significance, will have little relevance for how most Christians understand, as well as practice, their faith. How, then, can theological reflection take the interdependency between doctrine and experience more seriously? As a first step, I argue that it means incorporating an existential facet into one’s theological analysis in addition to exegesis, historical theology, and dogmatics, by understanding the “born again” experience as a kind of theological phenomenon in itself, and not merely an after-the-fact interpretation of religious experience. In other words, the grammar of “born-again” Christianity not only interpretive, but also formative. Methodologically, this change in perspective requires the explication of exactly what, theologically, is being claimed in descriptions of Christian new birth, in a way which relates its grammar – or “theo-logic” – to its wider confessional, cultural, and historical context while also acknowledging that these contexts are constantly being renegotiated and transcended. In other words, it requires thinking the doctrine of regeneration “dynamically” as opposed to “statically” (if I may be allowed to rehabilitate one of theology’s most abused clich s). Such a methodology requires a particular humility on the part of the theologian, one that is descriptive before it is prescriptive, as he or she can no longer assume to completely understand even the most typical conversion narrative before carefully analyzing it. Hence the first step is not to critique, or even “explain,” but to simply to understand; only afterwards can the theologian attempt to generalize and systematize the various theologies of regeneration, as well as make prescriptive judgments. 1.1.4.2 Presence and tacit knowledge The insight that theology and experience are involved in a dynamic, interdependent relationship is one with implications that span beyond systematic theology, therefore this book also offers the opportunity for this discipline to enter into constructive interdisciplinary dialogue with other fields of study. The idea for this book was first conceived within such a context: within an interdisciplinary graduate research group (what in Germany is called a Graduiertenkolleg) dedicated to exploring the relationship between the concepts of “presence” and “tacit knowledge.” The fundamental assumption of this research group is that experiences of presence (understood as either temporal or spatial immediacy) are in a reciprocal relationship with various forms of (often unarticulated) knowledge. The phrase “experience of presence,” which will be used throughout this study to describe Christian new birth, is a nod to the work of literary theorist Hans Ulrich Gumbrecht, who believes that the humanities’ obsession with questions of “meaning” (in German, Sinn) has led to the neglect of another equally important dimension of human experience, that of presence. Gumbrecht is not primarily interested

28

Introduction

in religious experience but instead in the aesthetic (although he does indeed consider certain religious experiences, which he views as being closely related to the aesthetic), which he describes as “an oscillation (and sometimes as an interference) between ‘presence effects’ and meaning effects.”33 This “oscillation” can be observed, for example, in the experience of soaking in the beauty (or shock, or disarray, etc.) of a painting while simultaneously attempting to deduce its meaning, or of being swept away in the intensity of a song while also paying attention to its lyrics. Poetry, according to Gumbrecht, can be seen as “perhaps the most powerful example of the simultaneity of presence effects and meaning effects,” in that no purely meaning-based understanding – “even the most institutional dominance of the hermeneutic disposition” – can ignore the essentialness of presence effects (rhyme, alliteration, verse, etc.) to poetry’s creation and enjoyment. This is why, argues Gumbrecht, overly hermeneutic literary criticism of poetry is inescapably boring.34 It is not difficult to see how Gumbrecht’s interest in the fundamental tension (or “oscillation”) between “presence effects” and “meaning effects” relates to this present study, for just as in Gumbrecht’s example of poetry, being “born again” is a concept in which both “presence effects” and “meaning effects” are inextricably tied together. This is seen in the metaphor of new birth itself: on the one hand, it describes a personal experience of new life, filled with hope and spiritual vigor; on the other, it is a normative doctrine, based on specific biblical texts and taught as being the result of Christ’s death and resurrection. It is the argument of this study that these two components of regeneration, personal experience and normative doctrine, lead to a productive “oscillation” similar to Gumbrecht’s theory of poetry. Yet most Christians, particularly non-theologians, are not necessarily aware of the complexity of this interplay, in the same sense that most people cannot list and explain the grammatical rules that they follow, or how they are able to ride a bicycle, or why they enjoy one type of music over another. It is the case, in other words, that much of what is theologically interesting about “born-again” Christianity takes place on the tacit level. Tacit knowledge names neither a theory nor a particular phenomenon, but instead is an umbrella-term referring the manifold forms of knowledge that human beings possess, yet are often unable to articulate; this has been most famously summarized in philosopher Michael Polanyi’s dictum that “we know more than we can tell.”35 Given the expressed conviction 33 Hans Ulrich Gumbrecht, Production of Presence: 2. 34 “The intuition, in contrast, that instead of being subordinated to meaning, poetic forms might find themselves in a situation of tension, in a structural form of oscillation with the dimension of meaning, turned out to be another promising starting point toward a general reconceptualization of the relationship between effects of meaning and effects of presence” (Ibid.: 18). 35 Michael Polanyi, The Tacit Dimension: 4. Cf. also Harry Collins, Tacit and Explicit Knowledge. A small number of studies have been published on the subject of tacit knowledge theory and Christian theology. Cf. R.T. Allen, Transcendence and Immanence in the Philosophy of Michael

Field of Inquiry

29

of this study that theological concepts are not neutral, it is not difficult to see how the specific subject of Christian new birth would be of interest to the broader study of presence and tacit knowledge: for born-again Christians, experiences of presence (for instance, of the conversion moment, or the presence of God, or the presence of a changed state) are perceived and reflected upon with the aid of a rich theological vocabulary. This vocabulary, just like any other, has a grammar; and just like any other grammar, one must not be able to explicitly articulate its rules in order to understand and follow it. Far more important is that one can show that he or she has learned it. In this context, the theologian acts first and foremost as a kind of grammarian, articulating and explicating the characteristics and (often implicit) rules of this vocabulary. The present study can therefore be understood as belonging to a certain tradition of theological reflection known as post-liberalism (also sometimes referred to as the “Yale school”), a school of thought which views theological language as only properly understood when situated within a larger context of Christian narrative and practice which allows its “grammar” to become clear. Following the philosophy of Ludwig Wittgenstein, one of post-liberalism’s most significant intellectual influences, theologians within this tradition show what theological language means by focusing on how it is used. This approach is demonstrated in George Lindbeck’s The Nature of Doctrine, a work of stunning originality devoted to the practical aim of improving ecumenical dialogue with the insight that theological doctrines are complex, multifaceted concepts: doctrines are not merely propositions about God (although they often entail these), nor are they simply “expressions” of human religious experience, but are instead “communally authoritative rules of discourse, attitude, and action.” Lindbeck therefore calls for a “cultural-linguistic” approach to theological analysis, which seeks to contextualize theological statements within the practices and “language games” that give them sense.36 A similar theological program has been undertaken by Dietrich Ritschl, a German theologian and psychoanalyst who uses the term “implicit axioms” to describe the grammatical, pre-linguistic “steering devices” which are “behind” theological language.37 Ritschl is primarily interested in the implicit axioms which guide dogmatic texts (which he identifies as a Polanyi and Christian Theism; William H. Poteat, The Primacy of Persons and the Language of Culture; Thomas F. Torrance, ed. Belief in Science and in Christian Life: The Relevance of Michael Polanyi’s Thought for Christian Faith and Life. In Torrance’s anthology, John C. Puddefoot’s essay, “Indwelling: Formal and Non-Formal Elements in Faith and Life,” was particularly helpful for this present study. 36 Lindbeck, The Nature of Doctrine: 20. The influence of Wittgenstein on Lindbeck’s theory is palpable, which Lindbeck acknowledges in various passages. Cf. Ibid.: 20–21, 33, 38–39, 107. Cf. also Wittgenstein, Philosophische Untersuchungen, as well as Über Gewißheit. For a Catholic perspective on Wittgenstein’s lessons for contemporary theology, cf. Fergus Kerr, Theology After Wittgenstein. 37 Ritschl, Bildersprache und Argumente: 111. For an explanation of how Ritschl’s theory of implicit axioms is informed by psychoanalysis, see the chapter “Regulative Sentences: Axioms for Steering Theological Expression,” in Ibid.: 100–110.

30

Introduction

kind of “tacit knowledge”38), the explication of which he believes, like Lindbeck, will allow for more productive ecumenical dialogue among professional theologians.39 The present study adds a significant twist to this methodology, in that it focuses not only on the “implicit steering” behind “regulative statements,” i. e. doctrines as examined by academic theology, but also on how doctrines themselves become implicit regulative steering devices in the Christian’s perception of his or her own religious experience – in this case, in the experience of being “born again.”

1.2 Method As previously stated, the great methodological temptation is to simply gloss over the reciprocity of theology and experience – and therefore of presence and tacit knowledge – and instead merely focus on either the experiential or the doctrinal side of Christian new birth at the expense of ignoring the other. From the perspective of non-theological disciplines, this may entail bracketing or “explaining away” the theological convictions of converts in order to understand their experience from the perspective of psychology, anthropology, religious studies, etc. From the side of the theologian, it might mean assuming that to properly understand the phenomena of being “born again” theologically, all that is needed is a discussion on the development of a doctrine, or of one particular theologian’s reflections on it, then followed by a dogmatic critique. Hence the typical theological method is genealogical and prescriptive, as opposed to the generally descriptive (yet often inherently critical) nature of non-theological research. The problem with all of these methods, however, is that their attempts to bracket the “religious” from the theological, or doctrine from experience, hinder a fuller understanding of the phenomena they are studying. This book seeks to overcome these traditional demarcations from the perspective of theology, using a variety of different methodological tools. The first methodological step of this study is to provide a general introduction to the doctrine of regeneration, with a particular eye to its development within the general tradition that understands being born again as an experience of presence, which includes Anabaptist, Puritan, and Pietist currents, among others. This task, which is undertaken in the next chapter, entails short exegeses of relevant scriptural texts, both in the Old and New Testaments, as 38 Ibid.: 108. 39 Cf. Ibid.: 121–23. “It remains to be said that the search for implicit axioms, however, does not relativize the differences between Christian traditions but, on the contrary, allows the enjoyment of the plurality of articulations. Taking seriously the function of implicit axioms behind finally formulated texts can open the way to the recognition that certain doctrines strange to my tradition may indeed be the expression of implicit axioms that are also operative in my own tradition” (121).

Method

31

well as a historical overview of the doctrine’s development, including other theological perspectives. All in all, the purpose of this chapter is to provide an adequate theoretical backdrop to the work undertaken in the bulk of the book. The second step is hermeneutical: to analyze different theologies of regeneration from within this general evangelical tradition – namely, that tradition which associates the doctrine of regeneration with an experience of presence – by identifying theological similarities while also highlighting the divergences. The selection of theologies for this step entails an inevitable judgment call on the part of the author, given that there are hundreds of theologians who have written on regeneration as an experience of presence, and good arguments could be made for many of them to be included in this study. Obviously, including all the relevant theologians in one book is not possible, so I have chosen four thinkers whom I believe represent theologies of regeneration which can be safely placed within this broad tradition, and whose theological reflections on the subject are all significant for understanding contemporary expressions of “born-again” Christianity. All four of the theologians selected represent different epochs within evangelical theology as a transatlantic phenomenon, and all diverge from each other significantly on issues of doctrine. This historical and theological diversity is intentional: the theologians selected for this study are to be seen as coordinates on a map, which is intended to trace a theological topography of “born-again” Christianity. The inevitable incompleteness of this map, however, is one of the main reasons I have referred to my study as a “portrait,” for a perfect depiction would contain far more than four thinkers (and would thus be beyond the scope of one book); and other theologians, when posed with the same task, may not necessarily choose the exact same four individuals. Indeed, it is a hope that this study will inspire further reflection and “portraits” from others. The third methodological step is to trace a general, basic theological structure of the understanding of regeneration in light of the previously examined theologies of regeneration, as well as other texts. As will be later argued, I do indeed believe that there is such a structure, and that it is threefold: firstly, as the metaphor of being “born again” implies, the convert feels that he or she has experienced a profound, qualitative change in nature which cannot be brought about by one’s own efforts; secondly, in addition to this experience of subjective change there is an additional presence, more difficult to describe, of God; and thirdly, in addition to these two experiences of presence there is a change in divine status, which is not an experience of presence at all, and which has been expressed in classical Protestant theology with the concepts of forensic justification and adoption. The claim here is certainly not that there is a universal theological “essence” of the born-again experience, as if every evangelical who claims to be born again inevitably makes reference to these three elements; however, the vast majority of evangelicals, past and present, do indeed make reference to these, and there

32

Introduction

are enough family resemblances among the various conversion narratives and theological treatises to make it quite sensible to speak of a fundamental theological structure. The fourth step is the development of a catalogue of criteria,40 or theological “topography,” with which the theological grammar of conversion narratives can be made more visible. Examples of such criteria include the role of free will, the importance of the conversion moment, whether or not one can lose the grace of new birth, as well as the question of which biblical texts serve as a primary reference. Thus whereas the third step focuses on unity in the tradition of “born again” Christianity, the fourth step highlights its radical theological plurality – a plurality which is the direct result of the creative tension between doctrine and experience. While it has sometimes been helpful, particularly within historical theology, to use general typologies of regeneration (such as “Puritan” and “Pietist,” “Calvinist” and “Arminian,” or “Baptist” and “Methodist”), it became clear early on in the research for this book that such typologies would be inadequate for understanding contemporary evangelicalism, whose conversion narratives vary from person to person. Instead, a theological topography, and not a typology, is necessary for this study: one which surveys the various theological concepts, both implicit and explicit, which characterize the landscape of evangelical Christianity, noting their variations as well as structural relationships. The fifth and final step in the present study is to apply these criteria to contemporary conversion narratives of non-theologians, i. e. laity, noting both when specific theological doctrines are mentioned explicitly, while also seeking to trace the “implicit axioms” (to borrow a helpful phrase from Dietrich Ritschl) within such narratives. Because the concept of being “born again” in modern Protestantism is dynamic, conversion narratives provide indispensable insight into how the doctrine actually functions within the life of believers in their encounters with new situations. It would not be much of a stretch to say that no two conversion narratives are completely theologically alike. This abrupt shift from theological “high culture” to popular conversion narratives will perhaps strike some readers as particularly jarring, and it is bound to be controversial. However, I believe it is necessary, for it allows the theological insights from the first section – particularly the argument concerning a basic theological structure of the born-again experience, as well as the theological plurality found within its theological topography – to be tested for their contemporary relevance. More fundamentally, this method encourages theologians to do something which they normally do not do: to take seriously the texts of non-theologians as theological texts. Although such an undertaking might at first glance seem odd, or perhaps even a waste of time for academics, I believe it is a necessary 40 Here I am using the term “criterion” in the sense of a characteristic mark or trait, and not in the sense of a reason used for making a judgment or decision.

Subjecs and Structure of this Study

33

result of the insight that theology and experience are in an independent relationship. Once again, the fact that this study is a “portrait” becomes clear in this final section: there are countless conversion narratives in contemporary evangelicalism, in comparison to which this book’s selection is truly minscule, yet I have attempted to assure that my selection represents a wide range not only theologically, but also in terms of age, gender, class, and culture.41

1.3 Subjecs and Structure of this Study This book is composed of three main parts. Part 1 is divided into two main sections: chapter 1, which provides a brief historical-theological sketch of the doctrine of regeneration, with particular attention given to different theologies of new birth within the Protestant tradition; and chapters 2–5, which comprise four detailed theological analyses of thinkers whose understanding of regeneration can be placed within the tradition that sees regeneration as an experience of presence: Philipp Jakob Spener, Friedrich Schleiermacher, Jonathan Edwards, and Charles Grandison Finney. All four of these theologians wrote extensively, and in great detail, on the experience of new birth, drawing from a long theological tradition of metaphors as well as developing new terminologies in order to express the radical change that they saw as essential to Christian existence. And importantly, all four were pastors, therefore their reflections did not take place in an intellectual vacuum but instead are characterized by involved theological observation of and concern for their congregants’, as well as their own, spiritual flourishing. Although all four view being born again as an experience of presence, they often differ significantly in their respective theologies, with deep questions arising from the tension between their inherited theological traditions and their own personal experience. For Spener, a significant tension is seen in his attempt to reconcile the classic Lutheran doctrine of infant baptismal regeneration, which Spener sees as clearly attested by scripture, with what he sees as the obvious need for many adults to become born again again. Edwards, an orthodox Calvinist dedicated to the task of defining and describing the “religious affections,” felt that the traditional Puritan phenomenology of the preparatory steps necessary for true conversion did not completely fit his own experience; and later, as a leading preacher and theologian of the first Great 41 However, in this study I have stayed within the context of North American evangelical Christianity, which includes the stories of immigrants as well as those from ethnic backgrounds. The attempt to include the conversion stories of South American Pentecostals, for instance, or the manifold forms of evangelicalism on the African continent, seemed to this author to be too wide a net for the present study. In any case, such research is urgently necessary for theological reflection, and it is my hope that the insights of this book can prove to be germane to such undertakings.

34

Introduction

Awakening, he was confronted with new, often radical forms of the conversion experience which he attempted to judge in light of scripture. Like Edwards, Schleiermacher is deeply concerned with providing a rich descriptive account of religious experience, and draws from the wells of both Moravian piety and Reformed dogmatics in order to understand Christian new birth as the miraculous burgeoning of the “God consciousness.” And for the evangelist Finney, who was deeply influenced by both 19th-century “common-sense” rationalism as well as revivalist Christianity, the supernatural nature of regeneration must be brought into dialogue with a steadfast insistence on the integrity of human free will: the experience of being born again is therefore seen by Finney as being based on a rational “decision,” after which the convert can expect to experience supernatural expressions of grace. As is to be expected, in all of these examples it is neither the case that their respective theologies of regeneration are the after-the-fact result of reflection on a pure, pre-theological religious experience, nor is it the case that their preconceived theological beliefs “constructed” their experience. Instead, in each example the relation of doctrine to experience is one of complex interaction. Because of this complexity, it is usually difficult to distinguish between the experience of being born again itself and subsequent theological reflection by the convert. With this in mind, it is not the goal of this book to separate a “pure” or “original” conversion experience from its later interpretation. Instead, it is to focus on the perception of this event, which will be shown to be a fundamentally theological perception – as seen in the fact that during an evangelical conversion experience, as mystical as it may be, the convert views him- or herself as being confronted by a very specific form of transcendence, namely the God of Jesus Christ. Because the language of Christian new birth is an inextricable mix of personal experience and theological statements, every “born-again” Christian must inevitably engage in theological reflection, guided by (often implicit) theological beliefs, yet also often allowing their experience to alter how they interpret these same beliefs (which include, most importantly, interpretations of scripture). Every Christian in this tradition is, therefore, a theologian (albeit in a non-academic sense), hence the argument of this study that it is a worthwhile endeavor to read common conversion narratives theologically. It has sometimes been the case that external pressure to conform one’s narrative to a particular theological structure overwhelms the personal elements, as can be seen, for instance, in the conversion narratives of less-educated Puritans in 17th and 18th-century New England, who were required to present a theologically acceptable narrative in order to receive full church membership.42 However, contemporary evangelical culture is marked by a radical plurality of traditions and theologies which makes any unreflective unanimity far more difficult. Even two conversion stories which 42 Cf. Morgan, Visible Saints: 61–63.

Subjecs and Structure of this Study

35

appear to have similar narrative structures may differ radically in their implicit theologies. “Part II” of this study begins by developing a catalogue of criteria, or “topography of the doctrine of regeneration,” based on my analyses of Spener, Edwards, Schleiermacher, and Finney, in order to analyze contemporary conversion narratives. For this study, I have chosen two book-length narratives, Charles Colson’s multi-million bestseller Born Again and rock star and recovering drug addict Brian “Head” Welch’s recent autobiography Save Me from Myself, as well as a number of shorter “testimonies” taken from the established and well-respected evangelical magazine Christianity Today. Although a different genre, it is the argument of this study that autobiographical conversion narratives contain the same theological themes found in systematic reflection on regeneration; in the case of narratives, however, they are often implicit and need to be drawn out, which requires a careful reading by the theologian in his or her role as “grammarian.” Many readers will perhaps be surprised at how little criticism is directed towards the theological convictions espoused in these narratives. However, the point of this study is not to develop “the right theology of regeneration and sanctification” – not because the author of this study views such theological convictions as unimportant or relative, but because he believes that taking such convictions seriously means taking the time to understand them on their own terms. Therefore, as much as I may disagree with certain theological opinions expressed by some “born-again” Christians, or be suspicious of certain extraordinary conversion narratives, my goal is not to add one more voice to the litany of their theological critics (or evangelistic celebrators), but instead to give them a voice, through a patient analysis of the tacit theological grammar (or “theo-logic”) which is present in even the most basic testimony. The third and final section consists of two smaller chapters: first, one providing a theological summary of this book’s results, and then one in which I consider the topic of contemporary evangelicalism in America and its relationship to politics and culture. This final chapter offers an appropriate coda to the work as a whole by returning to one of the primary impetuses behind its research: the question, frequently posed by Europeans (but certainly not exclusively) as to why evangelicalism in North America appears to have taken on a specific political identity, and whether the belief of “bornagain” Christianity that regeneration is a personal experience is somehow conducive to these political and cultural beliefs. Once again, these sections contain only a small portion of the author’s own theological opinions. I consider the critical task of constructive dogmatics, as well as cultural and political criticism, to be of utmost importance to theology’s role as a discipline of the church, yet it has been largely omitted in this study due to the author’s conviction that theologians have generally spent far more time developing opinions on the doctrine of regeneration than they have actually attempting to understand its surprising theological complexity. Only with a firm grasp of

36

Introduction

this complexity can theologians make responsible prescriptive judgments. Ultimately, then, my lack of dogmatic critique will hopefully be seen as an invitation for others, not only from evangelical traditions but also those which affirm baptismal regeneration, to “fill in the blank” with their own insights. If any actually choose to do so after reading this book, it would be the most flattering compliment its author could possibly receive.

Part I: The Theological Tradition of “Born-Again” Christianity

2 A Cultural, Exegetical, and Historical-Theological Overview of the Doctrine of Regeneration 2.1 Introduction As popular as the “born-again” understanding of the doctrine of regeneration is, particularly in North America, it is crucial to understand that the conception of new birth primarily in reference to a personal conversion experience is, historically speaking, the minority position. The following chapter seeks to outline the theological background which leads up to the modern conception of being born again, beginning with the biblical passages most frequently cited in theologies of regeneration, moving on to a short overview of how early and medieval Christianity understood the doctrine, and ending with three modern theological traditions – Anabaptism, Lutheranism, and Calvinism – which have been influential in the formation of modern “born again” Christianity.1

2.2 “Born again”, “new birth” and “rebirth”: a short clarification and background 2.2.1 New Testament sources Before focusing on the specific conception of regeneration as an experience, which is found primarily in modern evangelical Protestantism, it is important to give an overview of the biblical origins of the term, as well as its development in Christian thought.2 In the New Testament, the concept itself is used sparsely, although many other related ones can be found. A few Greek words can be translated as “new birth” or “to be born again,” namely paliggenesia, found in Matthew 19:28 and Titus 3:5; the verb anagennao, found in 1 Peter 1:3 and 1:23; and genne¯the¯nai ano¯then, found in the third chapter of John’s gospel. The following is a short overview of each of these passages, the intention of which is not to provide a thorough and up-to-date 1 To be clear, the purpose of this chapter is not to provide a complete historical genealogy, but instead the “background” for the “portrait” to be developed in the remainder of the book. 2 For an excellent overview of the term’s origins and development in Christian thought, as well as an insightful critique of modern “born-againism,” cf. Peter Toon’s Born Again: A Biblical and Theological Study of Regeneration.

40

Overview of the Doctrine of Regeneration

exegesis, but instead to highlight how these texts have (and have not) been understood by “born again” Christians. John 3:1–6 The third chapter of John’s gospel is typically seen as the starting point for any exegetical discussion of new birth, since here, and only here, is the subject of being “born again” dealt with for its own sake.3 I cite verses 1–6 in full: “Now there was a Pharisee named Nicodemus, a leader of the Jews. 2 He came to Jesus by night and said to him, ‘Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God; for no one can do these signs that you do apart from the presence of God.’ 3 Jesus answered him, ‘Very truly, I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God without being born from above [1±m l¶ tir cemmgh0 %myhem].’ 4 Nicodemus said to him, ‘How can anyone be born after having grown old? Can one enter a second time into the mother’s womb and be born?’ 5 Jesus answered, ‘Very truly, I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God without being born of water and Spirit [1±m l¶ tir cemmgh0 1n vdator ja· pme¼lator]. 6 What is born of the flesh is flesh, and what is born of the Spirit is spirit.’”4

The term genne¯the¯nai ano¯then, here rendered “born from above,” actually has four possibilities for its translation: “born again” or “born from above,” as well as “begotten again” or “begotten from above.”5 (It is important to note that “born again” is the translation in the 1611 Authorized Version of the Bible, better known as the King James Bible, a book which has had immeasurable impact on English-speaking culture.) The reason for the different alternatives of translation in John 3 is found in the two words themselves: the Greek verb gennao¯ can mean both “to give birth to” – i. e. the role of the mother – as well as “to beget,” which refers to the act of the man giving his seed; in addition, the preposition ano¯then can mean both “from above” and “again.” While a slight majority of scholars seems to see “from above” as the more probable meaning, the debate will most likely be interminable, and it cannot be ruled out that the author of John’s Gospel could have intended both meanings.6 Moreover, not to be overlooked is the phrase, “of water and spirit.” For many (perhaps even most) contemporary evangelicals, these words are a mere theological afterthought – a metaphorical flourish meant to describe the 3 This insight was gained from Hans Asmussen’s essay “Die Bedeutung der Taufe für die Wiedergeburt.” 4 All citations, unless otherwise noted, are taken from the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible. Greek citations are taken from the 28th edition of the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece. 5 Cf. Toon, Born Again: 27. 6 Although Toon, himself not a New Testament scholar, believes that “this talk of new birth is authentic teaching from Jesus himself” (Ibid.: 29), a problem is that, according to Raymond Brown, “we know of no Hebrew or Aramaic word of similar meaning which would have this spatial and temporal ambiguity” (Gospel According to John, I–XII: 130).

“Born again”, “new birth” and “rebirth”

41

experience of conversion and the spiritual cleansing generated by the presence of the Holy Spirit. The emphasis, for them, is instead on the first part of the sentence: one must be born again. In contrast, a virtual unanimity of ancient and medieval theologians saw in this phrase a reference to the sacrament of baptism, hence placing the emphasis on this second half of the sentence: baptism truly is new birth. It should not be surprising, then, that historically this passage has been used as one of the two primary proof-texts for baptismal regeneration. Titus 3:5 This passage, which along with John 3:5 has been frequently cited to support the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, is the only direct reference made to regeneration in a Pauline or pseudo-Pauline epistle. Like the third chapter of John, the event new birth is connected to water, while also being mentioned alongside something called “renewal” (anakaino¯sis): “He saved us, not because of any works of righteousness that we had done, but according to his mercy, through the water of rebirth and renewal [di± koutqoO pakiccemes¸ar ja· !majaim¾seyr] by the Holy Spirit.” Other possibilities for translation include “washing of rebirth” (NIV) or, in the German Lutherbibel, “das Bad der Wiedergeburt.” Modern scholars are divided as to whether this “washing” refers to baptism,7 but in modern evangelicalism the “washing” in this verse is generally seen as a metaphor representing, like John 3:5, the cathartic experience of conversion. Matthew 19:28 The Matthew verse, which contains the same Greek root as Titus 3:5, is an anomaly in that it refers not to the new birth of human beings but to that of the whole world. The following statement is attributed to Jesus: “Truly I tell you, at the renewal off all things [1m t0 pakiccemes¸ô], when the Son of Man is seated on the throne of his glory, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” While German translations typically use Wiedergeburt in this verse (literally, “new birth” or “regeneration”), the NRSV, NIVand most modern English translations do not use “new birth” or “regeneration” as a translation, preferring instead “renewal.” Interestingly, the King James Bible renders en te¯ paliggenesia “in the regeneration,” thus remaining closer to the Greek text. This non-personal, creation-based understanding of new birth is often referred to as “cosmic regeneration,” and can be found in the thought of Origen, for instance, who writes in his commentary on Matthew 15 of “the regeneration, a new birth, 7 James D. G. Dunn comments that the Greek noun loutron, or “washing,” “may refer to spiritual cleansing (cf. 2:14) or to baptism or to both (cf. Eph. 5:26)” (“Titus”: 887). According to George Knight, the term “is used here as a metaphor for spiritual cleansing,” not baptism (The Pastoral Epistles: 342).

42

Overview of the Doctrine of Regeneration

when the new heaven and the new earth are established for those who renew themselves, and a New Testament with its chalice is given.”8 This understanding of regeneration has often been forgotten in Protestant theology, most notably among its conversionist strains, but has been rediscovered by certain theologians in recent times, most notably Jürgen Moltmann, who has sought to understand the doctrine of cosmic regeneration in conjunction with modern experiential understandings of new birth (particularly the experience of the presence of Holy Spirit).9 I Peter 1:3, 23 The first chapter of 1 Peter is significant in that it contains two references to new birth, proclaiming that God (the Father) “has regenerated us”10 [!macemm¶sar Bl÷r] “into a living through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead” (v. 3)11 and that all Christians “have been born anew [!macecemmgl´moi], not of perishable but of imperishable seed, through the living and enduring word of God” (v. 23), both based on a verb, anagenna¯o, whose only appearance in the New Testament is here. A significant amount of scholarly exegesis sees the references to regeneration in verses 1:3 and 1:23 as logically connected to the exposition of baptism in 3:21–22: “And baptism, which this prefigured, now saves you—not as a removal of dirt from the body, but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers made subject to him.”12

Two images in the first chapter of 1 Peter will become particularly important for later theologies of regeneration within Puritan, Pietist, and later evangelical traditions. The first is the reference in verses 4–5 to “an 8 Cited in Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture (NT Ib): 104. 9 Cf. the chapter “Die Wiedergeburt zum Leben” in Jürgen Moltmann, Der Geist des Lebens: 157–74. Cf. also Marco Hofheinz, “Wiedergeburt? Erwägungen zur dogmatischen Revision eines diskreditierten Begriffs.” 10 This is my own rendering, since the NRSV version (“has given us a new birth“) strays from the Greek grammar in order to make the passage more readable in English. 11 Unless otherwise noted, all English citations are taken from the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible. 12 Elliot, (1 Peter: 332–33), Brox (Der erste Petrusbrief: 61–62), as well as Moltmann (Geist des Lebens: 160) all see the passage as clearly referring to baptism. Bartlett, however, is more ambiguous concerning the connection between this verse and baptism, and focuses primarily on the change of life in the believer: “If the references to new birth in 1 Peter go back to a baptismal homily or liturgy, then here word and rite come together as signs of the new life in Christ. Christians are born anew through the ceremony of baptism, but it is the Word that brings them to that new birth” (“I Peter”: 260). Achtemeier, on the other hand, doubts the connection to baptism: “In sum, virtually all the similarities [of 1 Peter1:3–6 to other New Testament descriptions of baptism] belong to the central core of Christian conviction and vocabulary, as do the key differences, indicating mutually independent formations of Christian truth rather than mutual dependence on a common source” (1 Peter: 93).

“Born again”, “new birth” and “rebirth”

43

inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you, who are being protected by the power of God through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.” As David Bartlett notes, there is a certain “legal” element to this passage, “almost as if believers had a divine safety deposit box.”13 In this sense the passage can be seen as anticipating later doctrines of “forensic justification,” in which the believer is declared righteous and given a new status, as if by divine verdict, based on the atoning work of Christ. The second important image is that of the “seed” in verse 23 (which is followed immediately by an abridged quotation of Isaiah 40:6–8). The imagery of the seed encourages Christians to think of their new birth as a process of growth, thus anticipating the doctrine of “sanctification,” which describes the process of growing in the Christian life (literally: being made holy) which takes place after one has been born again. Parallel concepts in the New Testament Although these are the only examples of the concept of new birth in the Bible, it would be a mistake to think that these are the only verses that apply to the subject. Harnack, for instance, goes as far as to classify eight primary categories of biblical concepts relating to new birth: childhood, newness, adoption, friendship and “citizenship” with Jesus/God, new creation (both of humanity and the earth), sensing the Spirit, a new perception of truth, and being in the image of God. While the exegetical particularities of Harnack’s study are often dated, his general typology proves extremely helpful for the examination of theologies within the evangelical tradition and conversion narratives in particular.14

There are very similar concepts, such as “born of God,” which appears in John 1:12–1315, James 1:1816, as well as in multiple places in the book of 1 John,17 which also frequently uses the phrase “children of God” as well.18 The book of 1 John is particularly influential among those who stress regeneration as a change in one’s moral behavior, since it is also this book which states that “those who have been born of God [b cecemmgl´mor 1j toO heoO] do not sin” (3:9) – a passage which has been frequently cited (along with Matt. 5:4819) by 13 Bartlett, Ibid.: 250. 14 Cf. Adolf von Harnack, Die Terminologie der Wiedergeburt (which is published together with Der Kirchengeschichtliche Ertrag der Exegetischen Arbeiten des Origenes). 15 “But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God, who were born [1cemm¶hgsam], not of blood or of the will of the flesh or of the will of man, but of God.” 16 “In fulfillment of his own purpose he gave us birth by the word of truth [!pej¼gsem Bl÷r kºc\ !kghe¸ar], so that we would become a kind of first fruits of his creatures.” 17 Cf. 1 John 3:9, 5:4. Cf. 1 Peter 1:14 18 Cf. 1 John 3, as well as John 1:12. 19 “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.”

44

Overview of the Doctrine of Regeneration

“holiness” traditions, beginning with John Wesley’s teachings on “Christian perfection.”20 In Pauline and pseudo-Pauline texts, many similar concepts arise, such as “new being” (Eph. 4:24; Col. 3:10) and the image of being adopted as God’s children, which is found in Rom. 8:9–17, Gal. 3:26 and 4:4–7, and Eph. 1:5, as well as the concept of “new creation” found in 2 Corinthians 5:17: “So if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation [jaimµ jt¸sir]: everything old has passed away; see, everything has become new!” Paul’s injunction in Romans 12:2 to be “transformed by the renewing of your minds” [letaloqvoOshe t0 !majaim¾sei toO moºr] can also be grouped along with phrases analogous to new birth. 2.2.2 Old Testament sources The biblical passages cited in direct reference to regeneration are taken overwhelmingly from the New Testament. However, a small number of Old Testament passages also play a significant role in the history of theological reflection on new birth as an experience of presence. Psalm 51 Psalm 51, with its often-cited line, “Create in me a clean heart, O God, and put a new and right spirit within me” (v. 10), has often been understood as pertaining to being born again, particularly by Protestants who view regeneration primarily as an experience, as opposed to the sacramental view. The 51st Psalm has also often been an important point of contention concerning the theological question of whether it is possible to lose one’s regeneration. This Psalm, it should be remembered, is attributed to King David, who although being anointed as God’s chosen king21 fell into deep sin when he slept with Bathsheba and then subsequently arranged to have her husband Uriah killed in battle.22 Therefore, many have posed the question whether David is asking to be born again when he asks God to give him “a new and right spirit.” Was David, due to his own transgressions, completely in a fallen state? Those who affirm the doctrine of Predestination have generally asserted that while he himself perhaps no longer felt God’s presence, David had not fallen from grace,23 while others, most notably Philipp Jacob Spener, 20 21 22 23

Cf. John Wesley, A Plain Account of Christian Perfection: 16. Cf. 1 Samuel 16. Cf. 2 Samuel 11. According to John Calvin’s Commentary on the Psalms: “The words of this verse imply that the Spirit had not altogether been taken away from him, however much his gifts had been temporarily obscured. Indeed, it is evident that he could not be altogether divested of his former excellencies, for he seems to have discharged his duties as a king with credit, to have conscientiously observed the ordinances of religion, and to have regulated his conduct by the divine law. Upon one point he had fallen into a deadly lethargy, but he was not given over to a reprobate

“Born again”, “new birth” and “rebirth”

45

have appealed to the wording of this Psalm as evidence that new birth can indeed be lost.24 Jeremiah The prophetic tradition has also been seen as a source for theological reflection on regeneration. Jeremiah, when prophesying on the “new covenant,” proclaims that God declares, “I will put my law within them, and I will write in on their hearts” (31:33), and “I will give them one heart and one way” (32:39). The communal element of these statements is not to be ignored, but this has not prevented interpreters from applying these passages to the subject of individual renewal within a devotional context. Jeremiah’s phrase “circumcision of the heart” (9:26) has also been seen as pertaining to regeneration. Ezekiel The metaphor of being given a new heart is even stronger in Ezekiel, whose prophecy in 11:19–20 is frequently cited in texts on new birth: “I will give them one heart, and put a new spirit within them; I will remove the heart of stone from their flesh and give them a heart of flesh, so that they may follow my statutes and keep my ordinances and obey them. Then they shall be my people, and I will be their God.”

Ezekiel 36:25, which uses very similar language to the previous passage, even includes imagery of water which sounds strikingly similar to Christian baptismal theology: “I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses.” A third passage in Ezekiel which has been applied to the Christian theology of regeneration is the prophet’s vision of the “valley of dry bones” in the 37th chapter:

mind; and it is scarcely conceivable that the rebuke of Nathan the prophet should have operated so easily and so suddenly in arousing him, had there been no latent spark of godliness still remaining in his soul. He prays, it is true, that his spirit may be renewed, but this must be understood with a limitation. The truth on which we are now insisting is an important one, as many learned men have been inconsiderately drawn into the opinion that the elect, by falling into mortal sin, may lose the Spirit altogether, and be alienated from God. The contrary is clearly declared by Peter, who tells us that the word by which we are born again is an incorruptible seed, (1 Peter 1:23;) and John is equally explicit in informing us that the elect are preserved from falling away altogether, (1 John 3:9.) However much they may appear for a time to have been cast off by God, it is afterwards seen that grace must have been alive in their breast, even during that interval when it seemed to be extinct” (Commentaries, vol. 5: 299–300). 24 Cf. Spener, Der hochwichtige Articul von der Wiedergeburt: 144. The fact that King David was also a political leader should also not be overlooked. In Chapter 12, I argue that the theological debate on King David’s regeneration has implications to how evangelicals (particularly in the United States) approach the task of supporting “born-again” politicians and leaders.

46

Overview of the Doctrine of Regeneration

“The hand of the Lord came upon me, and he brought me out by the spirit of the Lord and set me down in the middle of a valley; it was full of bones. 2 He led me all around them; there were very many lying in the valley, and they were very dry. 3 He said to me, ‘Mortal, can these bones live?’ I answered, ‘O Lord God, you know.’ 4 Then he said to me, ‘Prophesy to these bones, and say to them: O dry bones, hear the word of the Lord. 5 Thus says the Lord God to these bones: I will cause breath to enter you, and you shall live. 6 I will lay sinews on you, and will cause flesh to come upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and you shall live; and you shall know that I am the Lord.’”

After this message from God, the dry bones famously began to “rattle” and then come together, receiving sinews, flesh, skin, and finally even breath. Peter Toon believes that Ezekiel’s vision “was obviously on Jesus’ mind when he spoke to Nicodemus.”25 Important to note is the fact that neither Jeremiah’s nor Ezekiel’s prophecies of a “new heart” or “a new spirit” are in any way individualistic; instead, they are directed towards Israel as a people.

2.3 New birth and sacramental presence 2.3.1 Catholicism and Orthodoxy The subject of my analysis is not primarily exegetical, however, but dogmatic: to examine a particular conception of new birth in modern Protestant theology. Broadly speaking, one can speak of two general ways of theologically positioning the concept of new birth, in baptism and in conversion, although certain theologians have attempted to incorporate both (see next chapter). Prior to the rise of Protestantism, regeneration was virtually entirely linked to the sacrament of baptism,26 meaning the category “new birth” was in itself not of fundamental theological importance, but instead always considered within the context of baptismal theology. One does not find entire chapters or meditations – not to speak of entire books – on the topic among the works of the Cappadocians, Augustine, or Thomas Aquinas, for example; what one 25 Toon: 59. 26 Cf. Peter Toon’s chapter “Patristic and Medieval Interpretations” in Ibid.: 71–72: “In examining how the doctrine of inward regeneration was interpreted in the period from the second to the fifteenth centuries, we must be mentally prepared to encounter an approach and context very different from contemporary Western Protestantism. In particular, we have to be prepared for the fact that virtually all discussion of the new birth is in the context of the rite of baptism.” The Theologische Realenzyklopädie comes to the same conclusion: “Im Anschluß an die Deutung der Taufe als Wiedergeburt nach Joh 3,3.5 und Tit 3,5 wurde in der Alten Kirche und im Mittelalter – abgesehen von einzelnen mystischen Tendenzen – ein sakramentales Verständnis der Wiedergeburt maßgeblich.” (Friederike Nüssel, TRE, “Wiedergeburt”: III.1)

New birth and sacramental presence

47

finds instead are frequent meditations on baptism, in which the term “new birth” finds its role. An overview of the Church Fathers makes this point abundantly clear. According to the early apologist Justin Martyr, for instance, those who are baptized “obtain in the water the remission of sins formerly committed” and become “born again.”27 Tertullian, the first major theologian to write in Latin, writes that the phrase “born again of water and Spirit” in John 3:5 “has tied faith to the necessity of baptism.”28 Chrysostom, the early Archbishop of Constantinople whose thought is central to the Orthodox tradition, sees this same verse as justification for the tripartite baptismal formula.29 And Theodore of Mopsuestia, also heavily influential in Orthodox theology, writes that Christians experience resurrection “typologically through baptism: we are born again in an image of the resurrection, that is, of a new state [of being].”30 Ambrose of Milan writes that one “is regenerated by water and the Holy Spirit,”31 and the Venerable Bede, writing two and a half centuries later in England, connects the “sacred font by which we have been born again” to Christ’s passion. “For just as the Lord, during the time of his incarceration,” writes Bede, “redeemed us all on a single occasion by the shedding of his blood, so we must now in our time become partakers of that regeneration by being born again through baptism.”32 These are just a few examples out of many. The doctrine of baptismal regeneration also appears in Augustine’s Confessions, a text often revered by evangelicals, and whose eighth chapter describes his conversion in way which has served as an inspiration to the modern conversion narrative.33 In this theological memoir, however, the concept of “regeneration” does not appear until the ninth chapter, when Augustine comments on his friend Alypius “joining me in being reborn in (God)” [renasci in te mecum] in baptism.34 Interestingly, Augustine does not elaborate any further on this moment of “being reborn”: while his conversion was an intense, deeply personal experience, the event he associates with new birth – the sacrament of baptism – clearly is not. Thus despite his literary ingenuity and psychological perceptiveness, Augustine’s basic understanding of regeneration does not veer from the standard theological position of his time. This interpretation’s hegemony continued through the Middle Ages. Thomas Aquinas, whose theology of the sacraments has become foundational for Roman Catholic theology, emphasizes the role of baptism in cleansing original sin, the result of which he identifies as the new birth. Citing John 3:5 (“Unless a man be born again 27 28 29 30 31 32 33

First Apology, 61, cited in Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture (NT, IVa): 109. On Baptism, 13, cited in Ibid.: 112. Homilies on the Gospel of John (25.2), cited in Ibid.: 113. Commentary on John 2.3.3, cited in Ibid.: 110. Cited in Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture (NT, IX): 304. Cited in Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture (NT, XI): 81. There is a long history of referencing Augustine’s conversion in Puritan conversion narratives. Cf. Watkins, The Puritan Experience: 56–61, 136. 34 Cf. Augustine, Confessions: 9.6.14.

48

Overview of the Doctrine of Regeneration

of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God”), Thomas justifies infant baptism on the grounds of baptismal regeneration: “Consequently it became necessary to baptize children, that, as in birth they incurred damnation through Adam so in a second birth they might obtain salvation through Christ.”35 The Catholic Catechism retains this interpretation today, stating: “Baptism not only purifies from all sins, but also makes the neophyte ‘a new creature,’ an adopted son of God, who has become a ‘partaker of the divine nature,’ member of Christ and coheir with him, and a temple of the Holy Spirit.”36 Whether the recipient feels anything during this process is clearly beside the point, as the effectuality lies in the sacrament itself and not in stirrings of the heart.

2.3.2 Luther: Baptismal regeneration in Protestant theology It would be a mistake to characterize these various ancient and medieval theologies of the sacraments as “magical” or superstitious: for every orthodox thinker of Christianity’s first century-and-a-half, it was ultimately the gracious act of God’s Holy Spirit which is responsible for the regeneration of baptism, and not any substance or formula in the priest’s possession. However, this does not mean that the sacraments were not often perceived superstitiously by many laity (and, admittedly, many clergy). From its beginnings, Protestantism was driven by the desire to cleanse theological reflection and ecclesial practice of all such elements which its adherents viewed as superstitious, leading to a strong emphasis on the sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper being mysteries are primarily pro me – “for me,”37 to use the famous phrase of Martin Luther. Luther, however, still did not equate new birth with the advent of a personal faith experience, as many Protestants would later do, but steadfastly affirmed the traditional doctrine of baptismal regeneration, albeit with some reforms.38 In Luther’s Small Catechism, for instance, he makes clear that when a child is 35 Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica: Tertia Pars, Question 68, Art. 9 36 II.2.1, Art 1.7, 1265. The text is available online at: www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM. 37 As Hans-Joachim Iwand, and later Oswald Bayer, have pointed out, the Lutheran conception of pro me has often been “misused” by neo-Protestant theology to refer to a certain private, existential certainty concerning the Christian faith – in other words, faith as a self-reflexive category – which in turn becomes a methodological principle in itself. Cf. Hans Joachim Iwand, “Wider den Missbrauch des pro me als methodisches Prinzip in der Theologie“: 120–124; Bayer, Martin Luthers Theologie: 120–121. This misunderstanding, or “misuse,” of Luther’s doctrine of faith as being pro me is of central importance to my own thesis, in that it clarifies how regeneration could be so easily separated from the doctrine of baptism, even within Lutheran theology. 38 In contrast to late Medieval theology, for instance, which emphasized the sacrament’s cleansing of original sin, Luther saw regeneration as the primary grace of baptism, which serves as a source of daily strength for the individual Christian. Cf. Toon: 103.

New birth and sacramental presence

49

baptized in the name of the Trinity it is ultimately not the priest speaking the words but Christ himself39 (the same holds for the Lord’s Supper); this is a classically “sacramentalist” perspective, insofar as the act of baptism is not merely a “symbol” but carries with it a value which not only is (at least partially) independent of the mental state of its recipient, but even of its earthly administrator. Consequently, although the sacraments are “for me,” for Luther they are not dependent on me for their worth. To make this point clearer, Luther gives the example of someone who is baptized and takes the sacraments in jest, lying to the priest about the seriousness of his Christian commitments, who then later on experiences true conversion. Does this individual, asks Luther, need to be baptized again? Certainly not, he replies: the problem does not lie in the baptism, which has always been sacramentally effectual; the problem instead was that the individual lacks faith, since simply allowing water to be poured over oneself does not mean that one has made use of the grace.40 Still, the grace of baptism, which is the grace of regeneration, was always there for the taking. When considering the role of baptism and new birth in Reformation theology, particularly Luther’s, it is important to remember that reflection on this subject took place in a context in which virtually all his European contemporaries had been baptized in infancy. Hence Luther and other Reformers did not see themselves primarily as missionaries to pagans, but instead akin to Old Testament prophets calling those around them to return to the obedience to which they themselves, through their baptism, had already been called – a concern displayed in the fact that all the major Reformers (yet not the so-called Anabaptists) affirmed a clear continuity between baptism and ritual circumcision. It is also important to remember that for the major Reformers (though not for the Anabaptists) a Roman Catholic baptism was still a valid baptism, since the validity of a baptism was dependent not upon the person administering it but instead upon the proper (Trinitarian) formula.

It is crucial to notice that the term “faith” in this case does not refer merely to an inward state, but primarily to the acceptance of an object, which is in this case the sacrament of baptism. As Oswald Bayer states, for Luther there is no “absolute,” self-reflexive faith: “Instead, it is related to a foundation, a goal, a subject matter; only objective [gegenständlicher] faith is faith.”41 Believing in the sacrament of baptism and believing in Jesus Christ is for Luther the same thing. This understanding of faith allows Luther to be unwavering in his connecting the doctrine of regeneration to infant baptism, since the existence of faith is not a precondition for the sacrament’s validity (assuming such to be 39 Cf. Die Bekenntnisschriften der evangelisch-luthrischen Kirche: 693. 40 Cf. Luthers Werke, WA 30, I: 216, 26–29. Cf. also Jonathan Trigg, Baptism in the Theology of Martin Luther: 82. 41 Bayer, Luthers Theologie: 151.

50

Overview of the Doctrine of Regeneration

the case would be to put the cart before the horse). On the contrary: one’s baptism is a true baptism even if the individual first accepts its grace later in life; hence the “faith” of which Luther speaks includes faith in the power of the baptism itself.42 Therefore even if an adult were to get baptized and not really “mean it,” according to Luther the sacramental act is still valid, since Christ himself proclaimed new birth through it.43 Baptism, as the “bath of rebirth,” merely needs to be accepted by faith now. And for Luther, this is what it means, concretely, to affirm that the sacrament of baptism is a sacrament pro me. As a result of this view of baptism and regeneration, Luther is largely uninterested in identifying a “moment” of new birth, as the truly important moment is that of baptism. Moreover, he does not view baptism as merely a past event, but instead as something to be continuously recollected and meditated upon as part of the daily Christian life; Christian existence, according to Luther, is “nothing other than a daily baptism,”44 and “practice in baptism” [uben an der Taufe].45 When I “live in repentance” – a term which for Luther represents a daily activity and not a one-time event – I do this “in baptism.”46 Baptism “remains forever” [bleibt … immerdar stehen] even if one falls away from faith, which is why Luther could famously advise those who are burdened by “sin and bad conscience” to find hope in the power of the sacrament, reminding themselves, ich bin dennoch getauft: “Nevertheless, I am baptized.”47 From this perspective, the promise of new birth received in baptism is intended to be an abiding comfort in the daily life of the Christian. That the father of Protestantism would give such pastoral advice ought to give pause to modern Protestants, particularly evangelicals, considering that Luther’s counsel to recall one’s baptism in times of spiritual distress is arguably the functional equivalent of the evangelical inclination to find solace in the memory of a conversion moment in which one was “saved.” Hence baptismal regeneration, for Luther, is not merely a past event; instead, it is primarily viewed as something which aids the believer in the present life and not something to assist him or her entering into the next. To quote Jonathan Trigg’s insightful summary: “The need for new birth continues to stand, not behind the individual Christian at the beginning of his pilgrimage, but before him. He does not stand in need of the grace of

42 Cf. Luthers Werke, WA 30, I: 218–20. Cf. also Trigg, Baptism in the Theology of Martin Luther: 83. 43 Thus the “question as to whether an individual’s baptism has been truly received (and thus has been truly effective in terms of salvation and true Christian identity),” writes Jonathan Trigg, “cannot be answered by reference merely to the moment of administration. It is a question which has to be asked, and answered, at all times” (Baptism in the Theology of Martin Luther: 79). 44 Bekenntnisschriften: 704. 45 Ibid.: 699. 46 Ibid.: 706. 47 Ibid.: 699–700.

The separation of regeneration from baptism in Protestant theology

51

penance, or that of confirmation – he stands in need of the prima gratia of baptism. That is the only sort of grace there is.”48

Such a theology of baptism and regeneration is profound, yet also deeply counterintuitive to the modern mind, therefore it is safe to say that Luther’s theology of baptism and regeneration is the minority position among Protestants today. Indeed, the idea of telling someone in a crisis of faith to find assurance in his or her infant baptism would be seen by most contemporary Protestants as baffling at best, superstitious at worst. However, baptismal regeneration is a position still held today by many Lutherans, as well as Anglicans. “Baptismal regeneration,” writes contemporary Lutheran theologian Robert Jenson, “has been the conventional label for what is affirmed or denied by those who say baptism is or is not an event of grace and not only a word about grace.”49 In other words, for those who affirm baptismal regeneration, that the sacrament is more than a “symbol” for another internal event; instead, the elements themselves are part of what constitutes the grace of being born again.

2.4 The separation of regeneration from baptism in Protestant theology 2.4.1 Anabaptist theology The object of this investigation, however, is a view of regeneration which deliberately undercuts the traditional logic of sacramental presence in, and which – certainly not coincidentally – developed contemporaneously with the conception of the modern, autonomous individual (to which Charles Taylor has recently referred as “the buffered self”50). It was the Anabaptist movement51 which first radically separated the concept of new birth from the sacrament of baptism, locating regeneration instead in the subjective change of the individual and, consequently, viewing baptism primarily in terms of its symbolic meaning and communal function. Baptism in this tradition has been generally conceived as an external affirmation of a prior internal event, the 48 Trigg: 80. 49 From Jenson’s chapter on Baptism in: Braaten, Carl E.; Jenson, Roberth W., eds., Christian Dogmatics: 323. 50 Cf. Taylor, A Secular Age: 37–42. 51 The term “Anabaptist” refers not to a single tradition but instead to a host of different Christian groups in the 16th century who rejected infant baptism in favor of “believers’ baptism,” i. e. the delaying of the sacrament until after a confession of faith. The term “Anabaptist” was originally an epithet, since theologically there can only be one possible baptism. Cf. George H. Williams, George H. The Radical Reformation; William Estep, The Anabaptist Story.

52

Overview of the Doctrine of Regeneration

dawning of faith, and has its value in reference to this event. The Schleitheim Confession, Anabaptism’s earliest confessional document, makes this point clear: “Baptism shall be given to all those who have been taught repentance and change of life, who believe in truth that their sins have been taken away by Jesus Christ, and … who desire to walk in the resurrection of Jesus Christ and desire to be buried with Him in death so that they may be resurrected with Him, and who in such an understanding [meynung] request and call for baptism of their own record.”52

This theology of baptism and regeneration marks a complete reversal of the logic found in Luther,53 who saw as a necessary element of personal faith the internal acceptance of the previous, external sacrament. For the Anabaptist tradition, in contrast, there would be no “return to baptism” as there was for Luther, since faith in an external ritual is no substitute for faith in the Christian message itself. Therefore, while the practice of infant baptism is logical within Luther’s theology, seen from this perspective it is senseless and presumptuous, since one cannot assume which child will later have faith and which will not. (Many Anabaptists were consequently compelled to posit an “age of understanding” in order to determine when the psychological maturity which is essential to true faith, and necessary for the administration of baptism, is first possible.54) Any baptism which does not follow the event and open proclamation of personal faith is invalid, hence the (originally deprecatory) label Anabaptists or Wiedertäufer – “re-baptizers” – due to the fact that they required all those who had already been baptized as infants to be baptized again. If the efficacy of the sacrament of baptism hinges on the existence of a faith already present in the recipient, then it is the dawn of this faith, and not the baptism, which signifies regeneration. Although the Anabaptists accepted the sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper and viewed baptism as an 52 Translated and cited by Harold S. Bender, “Walking in the Resurrection”: 96. The original German text, along with annotations, commentary, and a modern German translation, can be found in Urs B. Leu, Das Schleitheimer Bekenntnis 1527. According to Balthasar Hubmaier, the influential Anabaptist theologian in Southern Germany, baptism is “nothing other than a public confession and testimony of internal faith and commitment by which the person also testifies outwardly and declares before everyone that he is a sinner” (Balthasar Hubmaier, Theologian of Anabaptism: 100). 53 In the words of Harold Bender, one of the most influential Anabaptist theologians of the twentieth century, “There was a substantial difference in the understanding of faith [between Luther and Anabaptism]. Luther’s emphasis was on faith as acceptance of God’s offer for forgiveness and salvation, whereas the Anabaptists understood faith as a dynamic response to God’s approach; this response opened the life to the transforming grace of God, which resulted in obedience and discipleship; faith and obedience were as inseparable as regeneration and discipleship. Faith of this sort inevitably produces fruit” (Bender, “Walking in the Resurrection”: 104). 54 Cf. The Complete Writings of Menno Simons: 92.

The separation of regeneration from baptism in Protestant theology

53

essential part of the life of a true Christian, any theological emphasis on sacramental presence, for instance in the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, was viewed as a superstitious hindrance. Thus Menno Simons, a representative of Dutch Anabaptist movement and from whom the Mennonite tradition derives its name, admonishes his readers: “You imagine, moreover, that you were born again in your baptism, and that you received the Holy Ghost. Faithful reader, reflect that if it had so happened to you as you say, you would have to acknowledge that your regeneration took place without the hearing of the Word, without the faith and knowledge of Christ, and without all ordinary knowledge and understanding.”55

Not baptism, but “faith” and “knowledge of Christ” through the “hearing of the Word” are the essential elements of true regeneration. Menno Simons devoted two published sermons to the topic of being born again, “The Spiritual Resurrection” in c. 1536 and “The New Birth” in c. 1537,56 which reveal the importance of the doctrine for early Anabaptism. In the first sermon, Menno describes being born again as a kind of “resurrection,”57 asserting that theologically one can speak of two resurrections and not merely one: the bodily one that takes place on the Day of Judgment, but also a prior “spiritual resurrection from sin and death to a new life and a change of heart.”58 The one who receives new birth has a new “disposition” corresponding to being “begotten” by Jesus Christ,59 which is the result of a “seed” which has been planted in their hearts – an obvious reference to the Parable of the Sower in the Synoptic Gospels. This “seed of the divine Word,” writes Menno, “changes and renews the whole man, that is, from the carnal to the spiritual, the earthly to the heavenly.”60 Obbe Philips, one of the very first Dutch Anabaptists and the mentor of Menno Simons,61 also characterizes regeneration as an inward metamorphosis: “This rebirth does not take place outwardly, but in the understanding, mind, and heart of man. It is in the understanding and the mind that man learns to know the eternal love and gracious God in Christ Jesus who is the eternal image of the Father 55 Ibid.: 97. 56 Cf. Ibid.: 52–62; 88–102. 57 The imagery of dying to sin and being resurrected (cf. Romans 6:2) was commonly used by early Anabaptists, both in the north and the south, to describe regeneration. Cf. Bender, “Walking in the Resurrection”: 97. 58 The Complete Writings of Menno Simons: 53. 59 Ibid.: 55, 56. 60 Ibid.: 57. 61 Obbe Philips was one of the founder members of Dutch Anabaptism, and is responsible for the ordination of both Dirk Philips (his brother) as well as Menno Simons. Dutch Anabaptists were even referred to as “Obbenites” during this early period. Obbe, however, later fell away from the movement, the exact reasons for which are unknown. Cf. Schowalter, Paul and Nanne van der Zijpp: “Obbe Philips (ca. 1500–1568).”

54

Overview of the Doctrine of Regeneration

(2 Cor. 4:4; Col. 1:15) and the brightness of the divine being (Heb. 1:3). It is thus in the heart that man loves this same almighty and living God, fears, honors, and believes in him, trusts in his promise, which cannot take place without the power of the Holy Spirit, who must inflame the heart with divine power which must also give faith, fear with love, hope, and all good virtues of God.”62

This passage, though written in the sixteenth century, is still paradigmatic for how most contemporary “conversionist” theological movements understand the theological concept of new birth. This can be elucidated in four main points. Firstly, a key element of the change that takes place during rebirth, according to this perspective, is a psychological event in the mind of each believer, seen here in the use of such terms as “understanding,” “mind,” and “know.” The “minds” of the regenerate, writes Menno, “are like the minds of Christ.”63 It is therefore not hard to see Anabaptists rejected the doctrine of infant baptism, since an infant cannot exercise all the mental capacities needed to be born again. Secondly, the internal change of new birth does not merely constitute an intellectual change but also a transformation of one’s moral orientation and overall demeanor, as signified by the term “heart.” “We recognize as true Christian faith,” wrote the influential South German Anabaptist Pilgram Marpeck, “only such a faith through which the Holy Spirit and the love of God came into the heart, and which is active, powerful, and operative in all outward obedience and commanded works.”64 Drawing on biblical tradition, Obbe Philips uses the concept of heart to signify internal, non-intellectual processes such as believing, loving, trusting, etc., which are inevitably reflected in one’s outward behavior. Thirdly, Obbe views God’s Holy Spirit as directly present during and after regeneration, bestowing a “divine power” to the human recipient. Here, his language is marked by the use of metaphor, seen in the figures “inflaming” and “brightness,” which attempts to describe a presence (“the power of the Holy Spirit”) which is by definition indescribable. The figures of fire and light will become staple metaphors in subsequent theological discourse on regeneration; they portray the suddenness of new birth – like a fire or a bright flash, there was a time when it was not, and then suddenly it was – as well as its overwhelming intensity. This ties into the fourth and final point: that Obbe, like nearly all who proclaimed the new birth after him, sees the change wrought in new birth as containing a profoundly passive element, acknowledging that the new birth is ultimately dependent upon the power of the Holy Spirit and hence is to be attributed to God’s grace; in other words, one cannot regenerate oneself. The theology of baptismal regeneration also sees new birth as passive, but this passivity was grounded in the grace – and presence – of the 62 Cited in Toon: 106. 63 Menno: 93. 64 Translated and cited by Bender, “Walking in the Resurrection”: 101.

The separation of regeneration from baptism in Protestant theology

55

sacrament, whereas from the 16th-century Anabaptist perspective, the passivity is something primarily experienced inwardly in the soul. Despite these clear resemblances, however, later evangelical discourse on regeneration has seldom been directly influenced by Anabaptist thought,65 and Anabaptism itself experienced a historical deemphasizing of the personal conversion experience. There are various theories as to why this is the case. Mennonite theologian Myron Augsburger sees this as a natural spiritual decline, stating that already after the first generation of Anabaptists, “there was a loss of the original witness of personal experience with Christ, a formalizing of their faith and a loss of evangelistic fervor.”66 A.J. Klassen points to the historical reality that Anabaptists often faced strong political pressure not to evangelize, for instance the Prussian Mennonites under the rule of Catherine the Great.67 S.F. Pannabecker takes the opposite view concerning historical persecutions: namely, that they were conducive to dramatic conversion experiences, and it was first after persecutions settled that Anabaptists become more spiritually comfortable, and hence less concerned with personal conversion.68 There is also the fact that many Anabaptist groups became isolated, ethnic communities, an event which according to George Brunk can easily replace “the depth of personal religious commitment … with ethnic identity and cultural forms.”69 An additional factor is the fact that most Anabaptist traditions, from the very beginning, were far less individualistic than their Puritan, Pietist, and revivalist counterparts. Although they clearly had a conversionist conception of the new birth, neither early Dutch Anabaptism, to which Menno Simons and the Philips brothers belonged, nor the South German and Swiss Anabaptist movements displayed much interest in narrating such events. Instead, they were far more interested in the ecclesiological consequences of regeneration. As Menno writes concerning the regenerate: “These are the spiritual bride of Christ, His holy church, His spiritual body, flesh of His flesh, and bone of His bone. These have come to the heavenly Jerusalem, the city of the living God, which came down from heaven. These have 65 Conversely, however, many Anabaptist groups, and in particular Mennonites, have periodically “shown considerable openness to renewal influences such as Pietism, the revival and holiness movements, and, most recently, the charismatic movement” (Brunk, Pannabecker: “Conversion”). 66 Myron S. Augsburger, “Conversion in Anabaptist Thought”: 253. Cf. Edinger, “Conversion in Anabaptist and Mennonite History”: 21. 67 “Church membership almost came to be taken for granted, and was no longer based on an actual conscious religious experience and commitment. It was largely based on being born a Mennonite, and thus became co-extensive with society.” A.J. Klassen, Mennonite Confessions of Faith: Historical Roots and Comparative Analysis (M.Th. dissertation, Union College of British Columbia, 1965), 33. Cited in Edinger: 21. 68 Cf. Brunk, Pannabecker, “Conversion.” 69 Ibid. Brunk continues: “Even where religious experience is deeply felt, there is less of a sense of sudden change than of a gradual nurturing of spirituality. The individual is formed by the community to such an extent that a personal spiritual identity can be missing or weak. Thus the meaning of conversion can be modified or lost altogether.”

56

Overview of the Doctrine of Regeneration

come to an innumerable company of angels, to the assembly of the church of the firstborn which are written in heaven, and to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant. They are fellow citizens in the household of God.”70 It is noteworthy that in contrast to later “born again” theologians, Menno uses primarily communal, and not individual, language. “They” are now members of a “household” – a term which for Menno refers not primarily to an abstract compilation of those whose hearts have been changed, but the concrete persecuted community to which he belonged. Furthermore, there has often been a sneaking suspicion among many Anabaptists that popular evangelical revival movements have placed too great a distinction between the original conversion experience and the subsequent Christian life, and hence between faith and obedience, and justification and sanctification; this has in turn contributed to what has often been their historical coolness towards the broader evangelical movement.71 Particularly the Protestant doctrine of forensic justification, which theorizes justification as the conferral of an abstract status, is viewed as problematically separating these elements.72 Although Anabaptists have not denied the doctrine of “justification by faith,” according to Harold Bender, when compared to the magisterial Reformers there are significant differences in their “main thrust”: “Luther emphasized the status of forgiveness and peace achieved through justification, whereas the Anabaptists conceived the chief thrust of God’s grace to be in regeneration following forgiveness, and this regeneration is understood as a vital change, not primarily as conferring status, but as transforming heart and mind and producing newness of life.”73 It should also be mentioned that some Anabaptist traditions, such as the Amish and many Old Order Mennonites, have been heavily influenced by spiritualist traditions which reject the term “born again” due to its implied completion, speaking only of “new birth” as a lifelong process which takes place in the context of the spiritual community. Although the Christian certainly has a “new nature,” according to the Amish Bishop Ben Blank the “birth pangs” of Neugeburt have not ended. “How long will these pangs and struggles last?” he writes: “They will last as long as life lasts.”74

2.4.2 Reformed Theology Understanding the relationship between regeneration and baptism in Reformed theology75 is more difficult, due to the fact that the Reformed 70 71 72 73 74

Menno Simons: 59 Cf. Brunck, Pannabecker, “Conversion.” Cf. Friedmann, Theology of Anabaptism: 91; Finger, A Contemporary Anabaptist Theology: 109. Bender, “Walking in the Resurrection”: 103–04. Ben Blank, The Scriptures Have the Answers: 66. Cf. Kraybill, et al., The Amish Way: 37–39. Cf. also Ibid., Amish Grace. I am indebted to Donald Kraybill, a scholar of Amish life and spirituality, and Edsel Burge Jr., a Mennonite theologian, for helping me grasp this important distinction during my stay at the Young Center in Elizabethtown, Pennsylvania. 75 This section will focus primarily on the Calvinist, as opposed to Zwinglian, tradition of Re-

The separation of regeneration from baptism in Protestant theology

57

tradition has theological affinities to both the Lutheran and Radical Reformation. John Calvin, like Luther, affirmed infant baptism against the Anabaptists,76 yet Calvin’s defense of infant baptism did not entail the affirmation of baptismal regeneration, since for Calvin there is a sharper sacramental distinction between the internal regeneration and the external sign which is a “seal” or “badge” of this grace. Unlike Luther, regeneration for Calvin is associated with the beginning of faith, which Calvin defines as “a firm and certain knowledge of God’s benevolence toward us, founded upon the truth of the freely given promise in Christ, both revealed to our minds and sealed upon our hearts through the Holy Spirit.”77 Although propositional knowledge of doctrines is not completely irrelevant, this “knowledge” of faith is “more [a matter] of the heart than the brain, and more of the disposition [affectus] than of the understanding [intelligentia],” and “of knowing what is [God’s] will toward us.”78 It includes the personal conviction of the truth of God’s promises as well as a “certainty” not merely confined to dogmatic matters but also felt in one’s heart and expressed in one’s demeanor. Still, Calvin is hesitant to speak of faith as a mental state sui generis, but instead understands it in conjunction with it its object, which is the Word of God. “Take away the Word,” he writes, “and no faith will then remain.”79 However, Calvin is also much more hesitant than Luther to associate faith’s object, the Word of God, with the external sacraments, which he defines as “an outward sign by which the Lord seals on our consciences the promises of his good will toward us in order to sustain the weakness of our faith; and we in turn attest our piety toward him in the presence of the Lord and of his angels and before men.”80

Therefore, in contrast to Luther, whose conception of faith includes trust in the grace-bestowing nature of the sacraments themselves, for Calvin the sacraments, which are baptism and the Lord’s Supper, “do not bestow any grace of themselves, but announce and tell us, and (as they are guarantees and tokens) ratify among us, those things given us by divine bounty.”81 Calvin’s logic of signs reveals a meaning-oriented understanding of the sacramental mystery, distinguishing the “physical sign” from the “spiritual truth,” in which “the

76 77 78 79 80 81

formed theology, considering that the former has had a much stronger influence on the evangelical, conversionist understanding, particularly under the influence of Puritanism. For in in-depth study of Calvin’s quarrel with different Anabaptist traditions, both historically as well as theoretically, cf. Willem Balke, Calvin and the Anabaptist Radicals. Cf. also David C. Steinmetz, Calvin in Context 155–169. Calvin, Institutes: 3.2.7 Ibid.: 3.2.8, 6. Ibid.: 3.2.6 Ibid.: 4.14.1. Ibid.: 4.14.17. Cf. Trigg: 218.

58

Overview of the Doctrine of Regeneration

visible sign is given as the seal of an invisible gift.”82 Hence for Calvin, writes Jonathan Trigg, “the word of the gospel and the sacraments are not on the same plane.”83 Without the inward state of faith, the sacraments are completely ineffectual; for Calvin there is no “hidden power … joined and fastened to the sacraments” themselves which gives them efficacy if not accepted in faith.84 Accordingly, baptism for Calvin is a “a token and proof of our cleansing,” comparable to “a sealed document to confirm to us that all our sins are so abolished, remitted, and effaced that they can never come to his sight,” but not the new birth itself.85 In contrast to Anabaptist thought, and similarly to Luther, for Calvin the “sealed document” of baptism is more than just a symbol that commemorates the internal event of faith. Calvin argues that to explain baptism as “as nothing but a token and mark by which we confess our religion before men, as soldiers bear the insignia of their commander as a mark of their profession,” as some Anabaptists did, is not enough in that it ignores exactly this element of the promise.86 Instead, the “seal” of baptism is more like the seal of an official document, guaranteeing its content.87 When affirming the doctrine of infant baptism, Calvin makes an argument very similar to Luther’s: namely, that simply because one did not previously acknowledge the promise given in baptism does not negate the fact that “promise, since it was of God, ever remained fixed and firm and trustworthy.”88 It is thus to be seen as a practice in continuity with Jewish circumcision, which was also administered to infants.89 Because baptism is the seal of God’s promise of the remission of sins, when one who has been baptized as an infant later repents and comes to the faith, this repentance is a return to that baptism in that it is a return to the promise given. Although it may sound odd that the seal of the promise should come before the acceptance of the promise, Calvin’s doctrine of eternal election, which asserts that the salvation of Christians has already been predestined by God,90 makes any discrepancy in time unproblematic. To the reply that it is still presumptuous to baptize infants when one does not know which ones are truly saved and which are not (as the Anabaptists objected), Calvin replies that, a) the spiritual promise of circumcision was given to infants,91 b) the spiritual truth of baptism also applies to infants, making it more

82 Ibid.: 4.17.11, 10. For the second quotation I have used the translation by Tony Lane and Hilary Osborne in their abridged version of Calvin’s Institutes: 269. 83 Trigg: 217. 84 Calvin, Institutes, 4.14.17 85 Ibid.: 4.15.1 86 Ibid. 87 Cf. John Calvin, Institutes: 4.14.5. 88 Ibid.: 4.15.17 89 Cf. Ibid.: 4.16.3–6. 90 Cf. Ibid.: 3.21. 91 Cf. Ibid.: 4.16.3.

The separation of regeneration from baptism in Protestant theology

59

presumptuous to withhold it than to grant it,92 and c) baptism, as a sacrament, is not to be seen as an event merely pertaining to an individual but to an entire community: “Baptism is the sign of the initiation by which we are received into the society of the church, in order that, engrafted in Christ, we may be reckoned among God’s children.”93 Just like Jewish male babies circumcised on the eighth day, baptism marks a covenant which expresses itself through participation in a community; this is why, according to Calvin, an infant belonging to Christian families may be baptized, but not one who does not belong to Christian parents, since the latter “is reckoned as alien to the fellowship of the covenant until he is joined to God through faith.”94

Yet Calvin, although a staunch defender of infant baptism, is much more reluctant than Luther to associate the doctrine of baptism to regeneration. His humanist background leads him to disagree, for instance, with the prevailing theological opinion that the phrase “of water and the Spirit” in John 3:5 is a reference to baptism, instead seeing “water” as a metaphorical reference to the presence of the Holy Spirit in rebirth: “to be reborn of water and the Spirit is but to receive that power of the Spirit, which does in the soul what water does in the body.”95 This exegetical move, along with the fact that the sacraments and the word are on two different “planes” (to use Trigg’s terminology), makes it much easier to view regeneration as an event of conversion (or “repentance” in Calvin’s terminology96). Accordingly, although he was always skeptical of “Anabaptists” who “conjure up a sort of frenzied excess” of religious emotion,97 Calvin still grounded his theology of regeneration in the inwardness of subjective change. Anyone “moderately versed in Scripture,” he writes 92 Cf. Ibid.: 4.16.5. 93 Ibid.: 4.15.1. Also cited in Niesel, “The Sacraments”: 252. 94 Ibid.: 4.16.24. As a conclusion: “Those who embrace faith in Christ as grown men, since they were previously strangers to the covenant, are not to be given the badge of baptism unless they first have faith and repentance, which alone can give access to the society of the covenant. But those infants who derive their origin from Christians, as they have been born directly into the inheritance of the covenant, and are expected by God, are thus to be received into baptism.” 95 Ibid.: 4.16.25. Calvin acknowledges that many others interpret the passage differently, but he is certain that “this is the real meaning.” 96 Ibid.: 3.3.5: “I am aware of the fact that the whole of conversion to God is understood under the term ‘repentance,’ and faith is not the least part of conversion; but in what sense this is so will very readily appear when its force and nature are explained. The Hebrew word for ‘repentance’ is derived from conversion or return; the Greek word, from change of mind or of intention. And the thing itself corresponds closely to the etymology of both words. The meaning is that, departing from ourselves, we turn to God, and having taken off our former mind, we put on a new. On this account, in my judgment, repentance can thus be well defined: it is the true turning of our life to God, a turning that arises from a pure and earnest fear of him; and it consists in the mortification of our flesh and of the old man, and in the vivification of the Spirit.” With this emphasis on repentance being a change from old to new, it is not surprising that Calvin later equates repentance and regeneration: “Therefore, in a word, I interpret repentance as regeneration, whose sole end is to restore in us the image of God that had been disfigured and all but obliterated through Adam’s transgression” (Ibid.: 3.3.9). 97 Ibid.: 3.3.14.

60

Overview of the Doctrine of Regeneration

in the Institutes, “will understand by himself, without the admonition of another, that when we have to deal with God nothing is achieved unless we begin from the inner disposition of the heart.”98 It is very important, however, to distinguish between Calvin and later Calvinism. For while Calvin himself directed attention to the “internal disposition of the heart,” he provides no phenomenological analysis of these or any other experiences of regeneration.99 It was later Calvinist thought, particularly in the Anglo-American Puritan tradition, which developed an abiding fascination with conversion as a subjective experience, even to the point of requiring it from all congregants as a mark of true new birth. 2.4.3 The Dawn of Puritanism and Pietism 2.4.3.1 Puritanism: The doctrine of preparatory grace and the conversion narrative Puritanism, a primarily Calvinist movement which first developed in the late 16th and early 17th centuries seeking to reform the Church of England through emphasis on personal piety, has devoted more attention than any other Protestant tradition to the description of and reflection upon the experience of new birth. This led to the copious production of devotional literature, most significantly Lewis Bayly’s The Practice of Piety, which shortly after its original publication in 1611 was translated into multiple languages and exerted a large international influence, most notably among German-speaking Protestants with theological sensibilities very similar to English Puritanism, and who would later receive the label “Pietist.” Puritanism also led to a new, experientially-based form of theological reflection summarized in the statement of its first great theologian, William Perkins, that theology is the “science of living life blessedly forever.” “Blessed life ariseth from the knowledge of God,” continues Perkins, “and therefore it ariseth likewise from the knowledge of ourselves, because we know God by looking into ourselves.”100 Perhaps the most significant result of this “experimental” piety101 was the 98 Ibid.: 3.3.16. 99 I am indebted to my conversations with the great Reformed scholar Alasdair Heron (†) for helping me understand the necessity of separating Calvin’s own theology of regeneration from later Calvinist interpretations of the doctrine, particularly in the Puritan tradition, which devoted much more attention to subjective experience. 100 The Work of William Perkins: 117. 101 The term “experimental” appears frequently in early Puritan writings. It does not refer, as is the case in contemporary English, to experimentation but instead to being based on experience – in other words, what English speakers today would refer to as “experiential.” Andrea Knutson summarizes this perspective in her recent study, American Spaces of Conversion: “Puritans understood their experimental faith as occurring at the intersection of God’s hidden will (their daily lives) and his declared will (the Bible), and their efforts to interpret experience against

The separation of regeneration from baptism in Protestant theology

61

development of the doctrine of “preparationism” as an attempt to translate the Calvinist doctrine of predestination into the language of experience. Functioning as a phenomenological ordo salutis, preparationism views the event of rebirth as the culmination of a lengthy period of deeply personal, emotional struggle, in which those who are not yet regenerate undertake the fruitless enterprise of attempting to fulfill God’s law by their own efforts, after which they experience the inevitable despair (or “humiliation”) which arises from realizing that they by themselves are utterly helpless in attaining spiritual salvation. Mark Valeri comments on this process: “According to the typical scenario, converts initially underwent a period of legal humiliation in several stages. First, they learned of the evil of disobedience to God, then felt remorse for their sin. They next came to hate their sin and to attempt repentance under their natural faculties and powers (although the Holy Spirit, operating through the Word of God, provoked their consciences). Yet while this preparatory work of repentance or humiliation was crucial in producing a change of heart, it was ultimately unsuccessful. Sinners would therefore fall into despair over their inability to repent.”102

“Legal” refers to law (as opposed to Gospel or grace), and is thus not salvific because it is separate from grace which cannot be attained through works or moral striving but only as a free gift of God. “Legal humiliation” in turn represents “an attempt to justify God’s justice through the performance of duties”103 – an act which is, of course, impossible according to classic Reformed theology in that it ignores the true character of grace, which can never be earned through the performance of any work, no matter how pious. Thus the pre-convert in this “legal” phase is inevitably “humiliated”: stuck before a precipice separating the old life from the new, yet at the same time under the realization that he or she is fully dependent upon God’s action to become a new being. According to the preparationist model, such a state is typical. Indeed, it is even viewed as an expected stage in the life of every Christian, since it is first after this despair that God bestows the grace of new birth by granting the sinner saving faith in his or her heart.104 This is all part of God’s plan of “effectual calling,” according to classical Puritan thought, in which those who doctrine determined the course of their spiritual advancement in conversion” (4). Despite the clear parameters of Puritan theology, then, “experimental” piety points to the lively reciprocity between scripture/doctrine and personal experience within Puritan life. 102 In Valeri’s Preface to Jonathan Edwards, Works, vol. 17: 11. 103 Owen C. Watkins, The Puritan Experience: Studies in Spiritual Autobiography: 37. 104 Preparation itself, then, is also a passive event and not an active “work” of the individual. As Charles Hambrick-Stowe writes, “New Englanders consistently rejected the idea that an unregenerate sinner could achieve preparation for conversion. They understood preparation for conversion to be of a sinner by Christ. They regarded the soul as incapable of any saving action until it was made capable by God in the preparation of the heart” (The Practice of Piety: 80).

62

Overview of the Doctrine of Regeneration

have been predestined to salvation are, “in His appointed and accepted time,” according to the Westminster Confession, “enlighten[ed in] their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God.”105 Therefore, the event of conversion, including the moment of regeneration, is radically passive: there is no movement of the rational will towards the “acceptance” of an “offer” of salvation, as later theologies have posited, but instead a patient waiting on the work of a sovereign God by a penitent sinner whose legal humiliation can only prepare the way for, but not cause, new birth.106 The Puritan logic of preparation is thus highly paradoxical: on the one hand it is doomed to failure, since it marks a period in which the sinner attempts to gain God’s favor through his or her own “natural” efforts; yet, on the other hand, it is exactly this failure – this “humiliation” – that God uses a means to regeneration. This theological conception led Puritan thinkers to attempt to trace the stages leading to true regeneration – in classic Protestant terminology, the ordo salutis – by way of the language subjective experience, a simultaneously descriptive and theoretical undertaking which has since come to be called the “morphology of conversion,” a term coined by Edmund Morgan in his classic study Visible Saints. This concept draws attention to the distinction in Puritanism between conversion, understood as a steady process of “turning” towards God, and the exact moment of regeneration.107 Unlike the latter, which is difficult to determine – indeed, only God truly knows the exact moment of the bestowal of divine grace – the steps of conversion can be reasonably identified and recounted by individual Christians interested in their own spiritual development, most importantly whether or not they are truly saved. Thus the late 16th-century Puritan divine William Perkins can portray the road to salvation as a series of steps in the individual believer’s life, and his book The Golden Chain even develops a complex diagram to assist in its representation. According to Perkins, preparation begins with “effectual calling,” which refers to the message of the Christian gospel affecting the listener in a way that he or she is open to its truth, after which follows “the mollifying of the heart, the which must be bruised in pieces 105 Westminster Confession: X.1. 106 Cf. Ibid.: X.2: “This effectual call is of God’s free and special grace alone, not from anything at all foreseen in man, who is altogether passive therein, until, being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit, he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it.” 107 Frequently, both in older Puritan as well as contemporary conversion narratives, the moment of regeneration is also referred to as “conversion.” For the purposes of this study, however, conversion will refer to the general process and not the moment of regeneration. Even when viewed as a longer process, however, for the Puritans conversion is not to be understood as an isolated event. “Conversion was but one part,” writes Hambrick-Stowe, “albeit with its own stages, of a larger pilgrimage. Just as God continually dealt with His people in scripture – He did not simply on one occasion bring them out of Egypt – so He continually dealt with His saints in New England” (Practice of Piety: 76).

The separation of regeneration from baptism in Protestant theology

63

that it may be fit to receive God’s saving grace offered unto it,” and finally the event of faith in the individual, which is nothing other than “a miraculous and supernatural faculty of the heart, apprehending Christ Jesus being applied by the operation of the Holy Ghost and receiving him to itself.”108 Yet for all his concern about in the subjective experience of faith, like Luther and Calvin, Perkins was quick to point out that in that in times of spiritual turmoil it is not proper to focus on the event of faith in itself “but the object of faith which is Christ.”109 However, the tendency towards an increasingly self-reflexive bent within English Calvinism is clear, in which countless individuals sought to discern whether their inward feelings (and frequently those of others) were those of someone who has been truly born again.

In the sixteenth and early seventeenth century, notes Morgan, Puritan theologians were not yet interested in using “morphologies” as a test for church membership, but instead used them for private devotional meditation.110 Soon afterwards, however, the morphology of conversion quickly became used in ecclesiastical practice as a method of identifying those who could be reasonably believed to have been regenerated. It had already been common practice among British Puritans, as well as in the influential Amsterdam Separatist congregation, to require a simple testimony of inward change in addition to the affirmation of doctrinal creeds – a practice consistent, notes Patricia Caldwell, “with the Reformation impulse to eliminate mindless ceremony.”111 But in the 17th century, American Puritanism took this process a step further by requiring an entire narrative of conversion, which would be theologically analyzed by church leaders for veracity. The first historical reference to the ecclesially required conversion narrative is found in a letter by John Cotton (son of the first John Cotton and grandfather of Cotton Mather), written in 1679, on a practice which had already become well established: “The practice was for men orally to make confession of faith and a declaration of their experiences of a worke of grace in the presence of the whole congregation, having bin examined and heard before by the Elders in private and then stood propounded in publick for 2 or 3 weeks ordinarily.”112

108 The Work of William Perkins: 228. 109 Ibid.: 240. 110 Cf. Morgan, Visible Saints: 65: “In their writings on the subject [Puritan divines] were concerned with the individual rather than the church. They wished to trace the natural history of conversion in order to help men discover their prospects of salvation; and the result of their studies was to establish a morphology of conversion, in which each state could be distinguished from the next, so that a man could check his eternal condition by a set of temporal and recognizable signs.” 111 Caldwell, The Puritan Conversion Narrative: 54. 112 Cited in Morgan: 61–62. It is worth noting that at this time, women did not give their testimony in public but instead had the pastor read a written version.

64

Overview of the Doctrine of Regeneration

Morgan comments on this passage: “Here, for the first time in our examination of admission practices, applicants for membership are required to make a declaration of their experience of a work of grace, that is, they must describe how they became convinced that they had received saving faith, and then must stand cross-examination about the experience. A test has been devised to make the church a company of people, each of whom, in his own opinion and in the opinion of the church was destined for salvation.”113

When exactly this practice began is unclear (Morgan estimates the 1630s114), but what is important is that a “morphology” which was originally used in a devotional setting had now become institutionalized. The institutionalization of this highly experiential theology of regeneration led to prickly theological questions concerning the status of those who were involved in church life yet had not yet experienced legal humiliation followed by a conversion experience. Are such individuals, for instance, to be allowed to participate in the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper? Even more urgent for the second and third generation of Puritan settlers was the question of what to do concerning the baptism of children of those who had not yet professed to be born again. “The twin ideals,” writes Mark Noll, “of the great [Puritan] experiment – churches made up of genuine believers and a society subject to the covenant of grace and the law of God – were coming into conflict.”115 The original answer to this problem was the so-called Half-Way Covenant, first instituted in 1662, which stipulated that baptized adults who could not relate a conversion experience were not allowed to participate in the Lord’s Supper, but were allowed to have their children baptized. In the year 1700, the influential pastor Solomon Stoddard (grandfather of Jonathan Edwards) further liberalized this practice, allowing for the Lord’s Supper to be administered to those adults who had experienced personal regeneration but also to all who affirmed the Christian faith.116 Edwards, the subject of Chapter 4, would later revoke his grandfather’s reforms, which precipitated his dismissal from the congregation – all of which goes to show the difficulties which arise when “heart religion” is synthesized with ecclesiastical organization.

113 114 115 116

Ibid.: 62. Cf. Ibid.: 63. Noll, America’s God: 40. Cf. Ibid.: 40–42. Stoddard’s reasoning for this change is strikingly “civil-religious,” in that he held that because members of New England Puritan congregations are not only under a church covenant, but also a “national covenant,” they are eligible for the bread and wine, since the Lord’s Supper, according to Stoddard, was (in the words of Noll) “a seal, not of personal regeneration, but of the truth of God’s revelation in Christ and God’s willingness to covenant with Christian nations” (Ibid.: 41).

The separation of regeneration from baptism in Protestant theology

65

2.4.3.2 German Pietism and proto-Pietism: the legacy of Johann Arndt German Pietism, while mostly rooted in Lutheranism, was in many ways a parallel movement to Calvinist Puritanism which also emphasized the new birth, personal piety, and purity of life and worship.117 These similarities are no coincidence, as Continental Pietism was in constant contact with English Puritanism, seen in the well-documented flood of English devotional literature translated in German beginning in the second half of the seventeenth century.118 In contrast to its Calvinist correspondents, however, there was significantly less interest in conversion narratives in 17th and 18th century Pietism, particular among its non-sectarian (or “non-radical”) Lutheran adherents. One reason for this was their extreme reluctance of certain Pietists, such as Spener, to abandon the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, which was affirmed by Luther (in contrast to Calvin) and continued to be maintained by Lutheran Orthodoxy. As opposed to the Puritan emphasis on morphologies of conversion, the aspect of personal narrative is generally less emphasized (although later Pietists such as Francke have indeed celebrated it119), since from the perspective of many Lutheran Pietists the ideal Christian life is one without a conversion experience, since a baptized youth, already regenerated, is expected to live and grow in piety through scripture, the sacraments, and the church community. Moreover, for Pietist thinkers such as Spener (the subject of the next chapter), dwelling on one’s conversion experience was seen as a temptation to dwell on the past when one should instead be focusing on his or her relationship with God now. What is vital is not whether or not there has been an experience of rebirth, but whether or not one is born again – a state typically referred to as “renewal” [Erneuerung] or “sanctification” [Heiligung] – and how firmly the believer presently stands in this state. Clarifying such questions does not entail a conversion narrative as much as it 117 Perhaps the most thorough definition of Pietism has been given in Douglas Shantz’s recent publication, An Introduction to German Pietism: “Pietism arose in the late seventeenth-century German empire among empowered laity and clergy in the prosperous urban settings of Frankfurt and Leipzig. The Pietism movement introduced a new paradigm to traditional German Protestantism, one that encouraged personal renewal and new birth, conventicle gatherings for Bible study and mutual encouragement, social activism and postmillennialism, and ecumenical cooperation – in contrast to the polemical Protestantism that gave rise to the Thirty Years War. Pietism included an eclectic mix of esoteric spirituality, radical Reformation traditions, and biblical devotion, with no clear line separating church Pietists, such as Spener, from the Radicals. The cultural legacy of Pietism includes reforms in caring for the poor and the orphan, new Bible translations, new social networks, experiential literature such the autobiography and the memoir, and worldwide mission” (7). 118 Cf. Shantz, Ibid.: 47–48; Wallmann, Philipp Jakob Spener und die Anfänge des Pietismus: 16–24. 119 Francke’s Durchbruch, experienced during student years, is well-known within Lutheran Pietism. Cf. Brecht, “August Hermann Francke und der Hallische Pietimsus”: 443–46.

66

Overview of the Doctrine of Regeneration

does the self-examination of one’s “heart”120 (a ubiquitous term in Pietist literature), hence the strong devotional, meditative bent of much the German Pietist tradition. The experience of God, in this tradition, is generally portrayed as a constant and abiding inward presence, aiding the believer in a life of contemplation, prayer, and good works. It is a presence, in contrast to Schwärmerei or “enthusiasm,” which is not seen as being in tension with the Bible, or even as offering additional revelations, but instead confirming the truths already found in scripture and making them existential (to use an obviously anachronistic term). While there is debate as to who should be considered the “Father of German Pietism” (a designation usually attributed to Spener), the devotional text which was foundational to Pietist thought is generally considered to be Johann Arndt’s treatise On True Christianity,121 first published in 1605 and soon after expanded into multiple volumes. To identify Arndt himself as a “Pietist,” however, would be anachronistic. As Douglas Shantz writes: “Although Arndt was a trailblazer for Pietism, he was no Pietist. Key features typical of later Pietism were foreign to him. In Arndt there is no emphasis on gatherings of the godly in conventicles nor the idea of a priesthood of all believers. The importance of Bible study is nowhere to be found in On True Christianity. The promise of better times and conversion of the Jews were also foreign to Arndt: he shared the Orthodox Lutheran belief in the imminent end of the world and the Last Judgment.”122 However, where Arndt did resemble later Pietists (and can thus be credited as having developed a proto-pietistic theology) in his strong emphasis on the personal faith experience, which resulted in the doctrine of justification, though still strongly affirmed by Arndt, forfeiting its central place in Lutheran thinking to the more experiential doctrine of the “holy blessedness” [Gottseligkeit] of the Christian believer.123 On True Christianity became immensely popular in German society, right up to the turn of the 20th century, and like Englishman Lewis Bayly’s Practice in Piety (which was greatly appreciated by German Pietists) enjoyed countless republications as well as translation into a multitude of languages. It was the first German monograph, for instance, published in the American colonies (by a publishing house owned by Benjamin Franklin).124 On True Christianity displays the classically Pietist temperament: a somber call to pious living, the renunciation of things “of this world” for treasures in heaven, the importance of constant repentance, self-reflection and growth in one’s faith. The text often appears quite dreary, for instance when Arndt 120 Pietist thinkers used various terms to describe the changed inward state of the reborn Christian – Herz, Seele, Geist, Gemüt – but their main concern was not to develop a faculty psychology but to show that the reborn Christian is changed in all their inward faculties. 121 Cf. Arndt, Von wahrem Christenthumb (1605). In the following footnotes I cite the pagination of this edition as well as that of the original in parentheses. 122 Shantz: 30. 123 Wallmann, Philipp Jakob Spener und die Anfänge des Pietismus: 14. 124 Cf. Wallmann, “Johann Arndt”: 21–22.

The separation of regeneration from baptism in Protestant theology

67

exhorts readers to meditate on their own final judgment and the possibility of damnation, which he sees, positively, as helping “the delight [Lust] of this world disappear.”125 Like Puritanism, however, such seemingly dismal and self-flagellatory practices are viewed as leading to a deeper “sweetness … in our heart” which the Christian “tastes, feels, and perceives.”126

The purpose of Arndt’s On True Christianity is to encourage imitation of Christ, which is founded on “true repentance from the innermost depths [dem innersten Grundt] of our hearts,” a change of “heart and sense [Sinn] and mind [Gemüth].”127 The majority of chapters in the first edition of On True Christianity make reference to the “newe Geburt,” a term referring to the belief that the true believer has been made a new creation (cf. 2 Cor. 5:17) through the death of resurrection of Jesus Christ, which in turn enables a personal transformation through which the Word of God creates “new spiritual creatures.”128 In chapter 3 of On True Christianity Arndt describes just how a person becomes born again.129 According to Arndt, there are two births available to humanity: the natural, “fleshly” birth of Adam, also known as the “old birth,” and which leads to death; and the new birth, which occurs through the “seed of God’s Word” and is made possible by Christ’s incarnation and the available presently through the Holy Spirit. The reborn Christian still carries both of these births: the old, godless, prideful, arrogant self; and the new, faithful, humble, and thankful self. Arndt uses countless more adjectives to describe both of these states, but his point is that the reborn Christian is fighting a battle of two natures, yet through Christ’s redemption and the guidance of the Holy Spirit the reborn believer has assurance that this battle is won – that the old Adam will not gain the upper hand: “Now note how we are then born anew [new geboren werden]. Just as the old birth was physically transmitted from Adam, so the new birth [newe Geburt] is spiritually [transmitted] from Christ, and this happens through the Word of God, [which is] the seed of the new birth…. Faith grasps this Word, in the word of Jesus Christ together with the Holy Spirit. And through the Holy Spirit’s power and agency [Krafft vnnd Wirckung] one becomes born anew.”130

This is why Christ became man, continues Arndt: so that all can receive the Holy Spirit and be born anew. Just as Adam was our old father, Christ becomes our new father threw the new birth, bestowing eternal life and making us into 125 Arndt, Von wahrem Christenthumb (1605): 166 (225). All translations are my own. An abridged English translation of the final six books of True Christianity has been published by Peter Erb (see bibliography). 126 Ibid.: 174 (238). 127 Ibid.: 10 (4–5). 128 Ibid.:10 (5). 129 Cf. Ibid.: 37–44 (41–53) 130 Ibid.: 38 (43).

68

Overview of the Doctrine of Regeneration

new creatures.131 Thus while the “old Adam” is always never fully absent, according to Arndt when one is born again the old self as “dead,” which has significant consequences for the shape of the Christian’s life,132 for just as a tree is known by its fruits (cf. Matt. 7:15–20; Luke 6:43–45), so does a truly reborn Christian exhibit different behavior. While Arndt’s conception of new birth implies a holistic transformation which includes external practice, he also anticipates later evangelical doctrines of the new birth in that he clearly prefers the language of inward feeling and experience (as opposed to external behavior) when expressing the transformation that takes place. For instance, Arndt writes that “the new birth is a work of God the Holy Spirit through which our heart, sense and mind, reason [Verstandt], will and emotions [Affecten] are changed and renewed, in and according to Christ Jesus, into a new creature.”133

This “heart” is the point of intersection between the Holy Spirit and the believer’s world. “The power of living faith is, in a certain way, tasted in the heart”; “for in the inward depths [im jnneren Grunde] of the heart, there is Christ.”134 In one passage, Arndt portrays the battle of two natures as that of an “inward person,” which he equates with the new birth, versus an “outward person,” which must “die” if the “inward” person is to thrive (this is based on a somewhat Docetic interpretation of 2 Cor. 4:16).135 In another, Arndt asserts that Jesus died for “your soul” – which is worth more than “the entire world.”136 Obviously, the point of these passages is not to degrade the external world but to emphasize, like Perkins, that theological reflection cannot be separated from piety and therefore, if it is to be the “science of living blessedly” must have a deeply phenomenological component. However, Arndt does not develop any “morophology of conversion,” as do his Puritan counterparts. Instead, he chooses to focus on the constant state of indwelling, in which the believer dwells in God and God in the believer: “Thus we live in the new birth and the new birth in us; thus we live in Christ and Christ in us; thus we live in the Spirit and the Spirit of Christ in us.”137 This leads to a life of daily renewal, 131 Ibid.: 41 (47–48). 132 Cf. Ibid.: 124 (162): “When henceforth this old person dies, so is a new person born. Just as the haughtiness [Hoffart] in you dies, so is meekness [Demut] born; just as wrath [Zorn] dies, so is gentleness [Sanfftmut] born; just as avarice [Geitz] so is trust in God born; just as love of the world in you dies, so is the love of God born. This is henceforth the new inward [jnnwendige] person with his members; these are the fruits of the Holy Spirit; it is living faith; it is Christ in us and his noble life; it is new obedience; Christ’s new commandment; it is the new birth in us, in which you must live if you desire to be a child of God. For only those who live in the new birth are God’s children.” 133 Ibid.: 37 (41). 134 Ibid.: 51–52 (63); 197 (271). 135 Ibid.: 129 (171). 136 Ibid.: 168 (228). 137 Ibid.: 42 (49).

The separation of regeneration from baptism in Protestant theology

69

in which the reborn believer is assisted by the Holy Spirit in overcoming the weaknesses of the old being and grows “like a young palm tree.”138 In this way he anticipates the theology of Spener, which is the subject of the next chapter.139

138 Ibid.: 185 (255). 139 Obviously, this study cannot devote an entire chapter to every significant German Pietist theology of new birth. There are a few not dealt with significantly in my study who are particularly worth mentioning. The first is August Hermann Francke, who along with Philipp Jakob Spener helped found the theological faculty at the University of Halle. Francke is an extremely influential figure in the history of German Protestantism, whose influence arguably surpasses that of Spener. In many ways, Francke represents the proto-typical Pietist position, which includes new birth: “Those who are born again have received a heart that rejoices in God and seeks divine and heavenly things; and as far as the find God in something they rejoice in it” (Francke, Verantwortung gegen die so genandte Beschreibung des Unfugs der Pietisten/ und die darinnen enthaltene alte und neue Aufflagen, [Halle: Christoph Salfeld, 1694]: 43. Cited in: Francke, Streitschriften: 192.). Although Francke was a theologian in his own right, he also devoted his energies to more practical undertakings, for instance his own orphanage as well as publishing endeavors. Johann Jakob Schütz, whom Douglas Shantz identifies as the true “founder of Pietism” (German Pietism: 3), has often been downplayed by scholarship due to the fact that his increasingly spiritualistic theology ultimate led him to break from Spener, along with his fellow “Saalhof Pietists.” His literary contribution, which includes his two main works A Christian Book of Reflection and Christian Rules of Life, cannot be ignored by any complete historicaltheological overview of Pietism (Ibid.: 74–86). Neither does deep and original reflection on the new birth from the Pietist tradition cease after Schleiermacher. The so-called “Erlangen school” of the 19th century, although mostly forgotten (even in Germany), was the center of very sophisticated work on Wiedergeburt, reaching its pinnacle in Franz Hermann Reinhold von Frank’s System der christlichen Gewissheit [System of Christian Certainty], a dense work which struggles theologically as well as phenomenologically with the question of what it means for a Christian to have certainty of his or faith in a cultural and intellectual context which is no longer always sympathetic towards Christian convictions. Understanding what Frank means by “certainty,” as well as the role that new birth plays in providing the Christian individual with this certainty, is the subject of a book in itself, to which Notger Slenczka’s first volume of Studien zur Erlanger Theologie, which examines Frank’s theological dispute with Albrecht Ritschl, provides an invaluable scholarly contribution. An excellent dissertation on 19th century Erlangen theology in general, which includes treatment on the doctrine of regeneration, has been written by Karlmann Beyschlag (Die Erlanger Theologie).

3 Baptismal Regeneration or Transformation of the Soul? The Tensions in Philipp Jakob Spener’s Theology of Regeneration 3.1 Historical and Cultural Context: the Pia Desideria1 Philipp Jakob Spener is often identified as the father of German Pietism, a movement which can be seen as having helped accelerate the increasingly “subjective orientation”2 within Protestantism (for which it has been both heavily praised and strongly criticized3), and which went on to influence the theological reflection of both Protestant liberalism and modern evangelicalism. Very few of Spener’s ideas, however, were sui generis. He was greatly influenced, like so many others, by the devotional writings of Arndt, whose On True Christianity was for Spener a constant companion and which shaped Spener’s own reflections on new birth and Christian piety. Spener relied heavily on Arndt’s writings for his pastoral work, including his sermons on Wiedergeburt, and once remarked it would be hard to improve upon Arndt’s teachings on this subject.4 Furthermore, Reformed thinkers such as the Anglican bishop Lewis Bayly, whose devotional work The Practice of Piety had already been translated into German before Spener’s birth, and the Frenchman Jean de Labadie, whom Spener visited personally in Geneva while a student, were also deeply influential. And Johann Schmidt, Spener’s professor and mentor at the University of Strasbourg, had already built upon Arndt’s theology of Frömmigkeit, adding yet more characteristic traits to a developing 1 The research for this section is indebted primarily to two works: most importantly, Johann Wallmann’s classic study Philipp und die Anfänge des Pietismus, as well as Martin Brecht’s extensive chapter “Philipp Jakob Spener, sein Programm und dessen Auswirkungen,” which is found in the more recent Geschichte des Pietismus, Bd. 1: 278–389. 2 This phrase is used by Theodore Tappert in the introduction to his translation of Spener’s Pia Desideria: 26. 3 As Dale Brown notes, “Many twentieth-century theologians have used ‘Pietism’ as a swearword to blast undesirable theological tendencies…. Pietism has been identified negatively as emotionalism, mysticism, rationalism, subjectivism, asceticism, quietism, synergism, chiliasm, moralism, legalism, separatism, individualism, and otherworldliness. Such characterizations in many ways echo the polemical utterances of the Pietists’ early orthodox opponents” (Understanding Pietism: 9–10). 4 Cf. Spener, Theologische Bedencken III: 186, 237. Clearly, Spener did not think of himself as a theological innovator; yet his theology of new birth, while retaining the basic understanding found in Arndt’s devotional readings, shows far more intellectual sophistication and systematic dedication than his predecessor, as will be shown in this chapter.

Historical and Cultural Context: the Pia Desideria

71

theological orientation later to be labeled Pietism, which can be seen most clearly in Schmidt’s Straßburger Reformgutachten of 1636.5 Yet it was Spener who first developed a wide-ranging, systematic program for ecclesial reform based on the ideas found in Arndt, Bayly, Labadie, Schmidt, and others. In other words, it was Spener who involved in the founding of what clearly was a movement, and his influential book Pia desideria, originally published as an introduction to a collection of Arndt’s letters while Spener was a pastor in Frankfurt am Main, gave the movement its clearest form: the centrality of Bible study and devotion, the importance of faithful laity who live out their faith as the true backbone of the church, and sermons which focus on edifying the listeners’ personal relationship with God. In short, Spener’s theological program was a forerunner to later movements labeled as “evangelical,” although there are certain significant theological differences between Spener and many contemporary Christians who are given the moniker (which will be dealt with later in this chapter). Before beginning to describe what Spener means by Wiedergeburt, it is important to understand how he viewed the spiritual context in which he found himself in late 17th century Germany, a century-and-a-half after Luther’s Reformation began and when state Protestant churches had comfortably settled into mainstream society under the dictum cuius regio, eius religio (“whose realm, his religion”), first uttered in the Peace of Augsburg and later, in Spener’s youth, in the Peace of Westphalia after the conclusion of the Thirty Years’ War. Philipp Jakob Spener was, from the beginning till the end of his life, a Lutheran, and completely dedicated to the success of the Lutheran state church. However, he found himself in the middle of a church he deemed “sick”: 5 Cf. Wallmann, Philipp Jakob Spener und die Anfänge des Pietismus: 26–32, concerning these reforms. This document, which had been ignored until recently, is quite remarkable as a predecessor not only to German Pietism but evangelicalism in general. It proposes twelve remedies, or Media, by which “true Christianity … is to be planted” in “these our final challenging and depraved times.” These are the following: 1) Calls to repentance during sermons, 2) Public teaching of the catechism to adults, 3) Study of the catechism at home, 4) Interest of the pastor in such home study, 5) Pastoral home visits, 6) “Confidential devotional discussions” during such visits, 7) “Edifying” discussion when the pastor incidentally encounters a congregant, 8) Spiritual discussions at public gatherings and celebrations, 9) General Christian “edification” and piety, including in the absence of the pastor, 10) Concern for spiritual progress of congregants, 11) Actual documentation of such progress, and 12) The repetition of sermons during catechesis and private discussion. Wallmann comments on the significance of this document for later Pietism: “Das Drängen auf ,wahres Christentum’, auf die Übung der Gottseligkeit oder die Praxis pietatis, die Prüfung, ob man in Stande des lebendigen Glaubens sei, der Vorschlag erbaulicher Gespräche wie überhaupt die Abzielung alles kirchlichen Handelns auf die Erbauung, die Beobachtung der Fortschritte und des Zunehmens im Christentum – alle diese pietistischen Topoi sind hier – ein Jahr nach Speners Geburt – bereits anzutreffen und als die Grundgedanken eines kirchlichen Reformplanes zu erkennen“ (Ibid.: 28; 31–32). However, Wallmann notes that there are also elements in Schmidt’s program which are not found in later Pietist thought, the most apparent being the belief in the impending end of the world, which was characteristic of Lutheran Orthodoxy during the Thirty Years’ War.

72

Baptismal Regeneration or Transformation of the Soul?

it was not in line, he believed, with the true Word of God, and thus his book Pia Desideria, by far his most famous and influential publication (and to this day, his only complete work available in English), encourages its readers to “learn to know our sickness”6 by taking account of the corruption and general spiritual apathy within German Protestantism. According to Spener this “sickness” does not have its roots in doctrinal error, for he sees Luther and his theology as a “blessed instrument of God” (and the Roman Catholic Church as the “anti-Christian Babel”7), and believes that the “Evangelical8 church is a true church and is pure in its teaching.”9 Yet when Spener viewed the society surrounding him, he saw that despite proper theological beliefs, regular church attendance and the partaking of the sacraments, there was still a profound lack of spiritual earnestness. This dearth of piety spanned all levels of society: civil leaders who live lavish lifestyles of debauchery and use faith for cynical political gain; pastors who often themselves “do not actually possess the true marks of a new birth,”10 and thus can be hardly trusted to lead their flock; down to the common folk, who are often characterized by drunkenness, material possessiveness, and a penchant for settling disputes through lawsuits which “go beyond the bounds of Christian love.”11 Spener’s assessment of the surrounding spiritual climate (first in Strasbourg, where he studied, then in his pastorate in Frankfurt) led him to conclude that “it is by no means enough to have intellectual knowledge [wissen] of the Christian faith, for [Christianity] consists more accurately in practice.”12 It is very important, however, to understand exactly what Spener means by practice. It would be a mistake, for instance, to see it as a kind of “works righteousness,” as if Spener believed that Christians merely need to do more of certain things (or less of others) in order to attain blessedness. Instead, the term “practice” refers to the belief that Christianity consists not 6 Spener, Pia desideria: 36. Unless otherwise noted, all English citations from the Pia are taken from Tappert’s translation. 7 Ibid.: 40. 8 It should be noted that the German term evangelisch refers to Protestantism, primarily of the Lutheran variety (which is does here in Spener’s quotation) but also making room for Reformed (Calvinist) forms. 9 Ibid.: 67. 10 Ibid.: 46. 11 Ibid.: 60. 12 Ibid.: 95. In German: “daß es mit dem wissen in dem Christenthum durchauß nicht genug seye / sondern daß es vielmehr in der praxi bestehe” (256 [110]). While I have relied on Tappert’s translation when citing the Pia for the rest of this chapter, this sentence is my own translation. I have done this for two reasons. First, and most important, Tappert’s English translation has merely “knowledge,” but I chose to alter the translation due to the fact that Spener uses other German nouns that can mean “knowledge” of a more practical bent – for instance, Erkenntnis (in the dialect of his time erkäntnüß) – and which are not synonymous with Wissen. Secondly, Tappert translates vielmehr as “rather,” which in my estimation confuses the point Spener is making: that intellectual knowledge (i. e. doctrine), while important, is not enough, since true Christianity consists in putting this knowledge into practice.

Historical and Cultural Context: the Pia Desideria

73

primarily in cognitive beliefs but in a way of being, from which proper practice springs forth. Thus Spener’s argument is not that something more needs to be done, but that something is missing. Having been educated in the school of Lutheran Orthodoxy, he never denies that there is a connection between orthodoxy and orthopraxy, or that true doctrine is necessary for the Christian life (indeed, it is an unquestioned assumption that it is); however, he does believe, like Arndt, that orthodox beliefs in themselves are clearly not sufficient for “true Christianity.” For both Arndt and Spener, in addition to right doctrine a change at the level of “the feelings of the heart”13 is needed as well. It is this transformation of the heart that Spener signifies with the term Wiedergeburt, which can be translated as “rebirth,” “new birth,”14 – or in classical theological discourse, “regeneration” (from the Latin regeneratio). Although technically the term refers to a moment in an “order of salvation” (ordo salutis), one of the many aspects of Lutheran Orthodoxy which Spener affirms,15 he often uses the term in the sense of being born again, referring ultimately not to the moment of new birth but to the fact that one has now been born again and is in the state of Christian spiritual growth, or in Spener’s terminology “renewal” [erneuerung].16 Up until this point, Spener’s view of being born again as a divinely initiated change in one’s heart appears identical to the position taken by early Anabaptism, Puritanism, as well as modern garden-variety evangelicalism. Indeed, it is the thesis of this present study that Spener’s theology identifies the basic theological structure of the born-again experience as conceived within these traditions. However, there is one significant difference between Spener and these other traditions: as the inheritor of a tradition that affirms infant baptismal regeneration, Spener goes to great lengths to retain both the classic Christian doctrine of baptismal regeneration, which sees “new birth” as a result of the workings of baptism’s sacramental grace, and the experientialist view of regeneration as a change in the “heart” which inaugurates one’s personal relationship with God. As a consequence of this peculiarity, this chapter is divided into two main sections, the first being dedicated to Spener’s theology of regeneration and the second to the question of how he believes he can reconcile two seemingly contradictory positions. 13 Ibid.: 106. This phrase comes in the context of a citation from Abraham Calov’s Paedia theologica de methodo studii theologici (Wittenberg 1652): 57–58. 14 Among German Pietists, including Spener, the terms Wiedergeburt [“rebirth”] and Neugeburt [“new birth”] are often used interchangeably. 15 Cf. Wallmann, Spener: 21–22, 27–28. As Wallmann notes, the fact that Spener sees Wiedergeburt as happening in a moment, and not as a process, sharply distinguishes him from mysticalspiritualist theologians such as Jakob Böhme and Caspar Schwenkfeld. 16 Spener’s use of Erneuerung derives from the concept of renovatio in Lutheran Orthodoxy, which follows regeneratio in the ordo salutis. Important to note is that while the first is a passive event, renovatio implies the Christian’s cooperative action with the Holy Spirit. Cf. Ibid.: 27–28.

74

Baptismal Regeneration or Transformation of the Soul?

3.2 Spener’s Theology of New Birth: An Introduction and Short Summary 3.2.1 The three-fold event of regeneration In his book Der hochwichtige Articul von der Wiedergeburt, Spener dedicates over a thousand pages (66 sermons in all) to the subject, with additional reflections on regeneration frequently appearing in other texts. Spener believes, like Arndt, that “if one aspect of our Christianity is (most) necessary, it is certainly new birth [wiedergeburt]…. It is the fountain from which all that is good in our lives flows.”17 This Wiedergeburt is a miraculous event, for “only God effects the new birth,”18 and is an act of “pure grace.”19 For Spener, being born again happens in an instant and is marked by a radical inward change in which the individual receives true faith. Thus there is no such thing as being partially born again or of understanding regeneration as a process,20 since the moment of regeneration is merely a passive “entryway” [eingang] into the Christian life.21 Spener divides the doctrine of new birth into three parts: the “igniting” or “sparking” [entzündung] of faith; justification [rechtfertigung], which includes “adoption” as a child of God [annahme an kindes statt]; and the creation of a “new being” [neuer mensch].22 Important to note is that these three elements do not represent a chronological sequence, but instead all happen instantaneously. All three of these elements – faith, justification/ adoption, and the new being – represent three different events, albeit on three different planes; they are distinguishable through abstraction, but in experience they inextricably belong together. The event of change into a “new being” is the aspect of new birth which is often thought of as “conversion” and is a presence experience in the sense that one experiences, immediately, a radical change in one’s own inward disposition. The second type of presence-experience, that of faith’s “spark,” is more difficult to articulate, in that it describes not the presence of one’s own 17 Spener, Der hochwichtige Articul von der Wiedergeburt: 1. Church historians, mostly in Germany, have debated the centrality of Wiedergeburt in relation to other doctrines in Spener’s theology; however, whether or not Wiedergeburt “displaces” the doctrine of justification, as Martin Schmidt suggests and Johannes Wallmann vehemently rejects, has little bearing on this study. Cf. Martin Schmidt’s chapter “Speners Wiedergeburtslehre” in Wiedergeburt und Neuer Mensch: 169–194 (originally published in ThLZ 76, 1951, 17–30), and Johannes Wallmann, “Wiedergeburt und Erneuerung bei Philipp Jakob Spener. Ein Diskussionsbeitrag.” For a more evangelical perspective on Spener’s theology of regeneration and its relevance for the present, cf. Burkhard Weber, “Der Artikel von der Wiedergeburt bei Philipp Jacob Spener.” 18 Ibid.: 141. 19 Ibid.: 53. 20 Cf. Spener, Kurtze Catechismuspredigten (1689): 517. 21 Wiedergeburt: 93. Cf, Wallmann, “Wiedergeburt”: 27. 22 Cf.: Wiedergeburt, 150 ff.; Kurtze Catechismus-Predigten: 445, Theologische Bedencken I: 305.

Spener’s Theology of New Birth: An Introduction and Short Summary

75

(changed) person but the experience of God’s Holy Spirit. Thirdly, there is change in one’s status before God – one is “justified” – which in contrast to becoming a new being and receiving faith is not a subjective experience at all but instead a divine act. It is a dogmatic proposition, attested by scripture, which promises that the sinner has been declared righteous before God. The fact that this belief is dogma, however, does not entail that it is accepted arbitrarily, since according to Spener (as well as Pietism in general) the truth of God’s promises is confirmed through inner experience – here, in the change in one’s heart and the presence of the Holy Spirit. A quick overview of theologians connected to the evangelical movements of revival and awakening beginning in the 16th century reveals the ubiquity of Spener’s threefold pattern. This pattern is seen perhaps at its earliest moment in the sermons of Anabaptist leaders such as Menno Sinons, the Philips brothers, and Hubmaier, but it soon after appears in Calvinist devotional writings, and is implicit in the 1646 Westminster Confession’s section on sanctification.23 Furthermore, the early Puritan divine William Perkins, for instance, writing in the second half of the 16th century, comes very close to Spener in identifying “four several works of grace in every child of God”: conversion, union with the divine, adoption, and justification.24 Thus the only primary difference between Perkins and Spener is that Perkins separates justification and adoption into two categories; for the sake of simplicity, I have adopted Spener’s model. Arndt writes in the original 1705 version of Von Wahrem Christenthumb that “new birth is a work of God the Holy Spirit through which our heart, sense and mind, reason (Verstandt), will and emotions (Affecten) are changed and renewed, in and according to Christ Jesus, into a new creature.”25 What results from this new birth is a “new inward (jnnwendige) person,” who possesses “the fruits of the Holy Spirit,” including “living faith,” “Christ in us and his noble life,” a “new obedience,” and “Christ’s new commandment.” This event is, continues Arndt, “the new birth in us, in which you must live if you desire to be a child of God. For only those who live in the new birth are God’s children.”26 Arndt makes not attempt to systematize the event of regeneration, as do Perkins and Spener, but the three elements are clearly there. The three-fold structure of conversion, union with the divine, and justificationadoption can also be deduced from countless conversion narratives. Consider John Wesley’s famous passage concerning his “heart strangely warmed,” which took place during a public reading of Luther’s Preface to Romans: “About a quarter before nine, 23 Cf. Westminster Confession, XIII.1: “They, who are once effectually called, and regenerated, having a new heart, and a new spirit created in them, are further sanctified, really and personally, through the virtue of Christ’s death and resurrection, by His Word and Spirit dwelling in them: the dominion of the whole body of sin is destroyed, and the several lusts thereof are more and more weakened and mortified; and they more and more quickened and strengthened in all saving graces, to the practice of true holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord.” 24 Cf. Perkins’ short writing, A Grain of Mustard Seed, in The Works of William Perkins: 394. 25 Johann Arndt, Von Wahrem Christenthumb: 41. 26 Ibid.: 162.

76

Baptismal Regeneration or Transformation of the Soul?

while he was describing the change which God works in the heart through faith in Christ, I felt my heart strangely warmed. I felt I did trust in Christ, Christ alone for salvation, and an assurance was given me that he had taken away my sins, even mine, and saved me from the law of sin and death. I began to pray with all my might for those who had in a more especial manner despitefully used me and persecuted me. I then testified openly to all there what I now first felt in my heart.”27 Here Wesley writes of an experience of personal change, of “trust in Christ” and “assurance,” which even causes him to have a new perspective towards his enemies. Yet Wesley makes it clear that this change has occurred through an encounter with an outside force, God, which he describes the metaphor of warmth. Finally, this event included the assurance that Wesley had been “saved … from the law of sin and death” – an action which is not an experience, but of which one can only have “assurance.”

3.2.2 Spener’s rejection of Predestination and espousal of baptismal regeneration There are two theological elements which significantly separate Spener from his Calvinist conversation partners: his strong rejection of the doctrine of Predestination, and his refusal to jettison the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, which were affirmed by both Luther and subsequent Lutheran Orthodoxy. Although he rejects Predestination, Spener is not completely positive concerning the role of the freedom of the will in relation to being born again, however. Like many Calvinists, as well as Lutherans, of his day, Spener views the human will as “completely corrupted [verderbt]” and naturally drawn towards evil,28 thus in Spener there is no trace of the modern evangelical belief that one becomes born again at the moment he or she “accepts Jesus into his or her heart.” In the moment of regeneration, the inward change which takes place during new birth is passive, just as being born is passive and not a choice.29 In the case of Lydia in the New Testament, for instance, “the Lord opened her heart” through the preaching of Paul.30 However, the ensuing state of sanctification – or “renewal” [erneuerung] in Spener’s terminology – is indeed a process which lasts a lifetime and requires the active participation of the believer. Therefore, although the conversion of the (adult) believer, preceded by repentance, is certainly necessary for being born again,31 the moment itself is like having a seed planted inside oneself, 27 From Wesley’s journal entry from May 24, 1738, in John Wesley, Works 18: 249–250. 28 Spener, Wiedergeburt: 21. For Spener, this means that the will is particularly enslaved to feelings and emotions [affecten]. 29 Cf. Ibid.: 7. 30 Ibid.: 162. Cf. Acts, 16:14–15. 31 Cf. Ibid.: 104. That repentance precedes regeneration, rather than being caused by it, is a subtle but important difference between Spener’s ordo salutis and that of Calvinism (including the Puritan morphology of conversion).

Spener’s Threefold-division of New Birth: An Analysis

77

“something imprinted on one’s heart.”32 Yet according to Jesus’ parable of the seed, not all seeds that sprout end up flourishing, and in opposition to Calvinist theologies Spener views such bad seeds as having been truly born again. Spener, unlike his Calvinist conversation partners, is convinced that the grace of new birth is something that can be lost: in other words, that one can digress from being born again to no longer truly being so. Indeed, according to Spener losing the grace of regeneration is quite commonplace, meaning that for many there is the need for a “repeat or second new birth of those who have fallen from it, and continuation through constant renewal.”33 Interestingly, he uses this position as an inroad towards reconciling the doctrine of baptismal regeneration with the belief that being born again is an inward experience, since according to Spener, the sacrament of baptism is truly a Wiedergeburt in that it imputes faith to the baby who receives it; however, because this baptismal new birth is not cultivated in most individuals through “renewal,” the grace of this first rebirth is often lost, hence the need of most individuals to be born again again, which happens this time through conversion [bekehrung], characterized by earnest repentance [buße], and in which the convert experiences a radical change in his or her being. This second new birth is essentially the same as, yet also distinguished from, the new birth experienced in baptismal regeneration. Thus for the Pietist Spener, the key to general renewal in German Lutheranism was not that most of its parishioners become born again, but that they become born again again.

3.3 Spener’s Threefold-division of New Birth: An Analysis Spener’s theology of regeneration is thus marked by multiple tensions: between subjective experience and divine action, between free will and passivity of new birth (as implied in the very metaphor of birth), as well as between the Lutheran affirmation of baptismal regeneration and the observation that only a minority of those baptized appear to show traits of the new birth. The following section will discuss Spener’s own theological development of the doctrine of regeneration in light of his three criteria: becoming a new being, the “flame” of faith, and justification/adoption. Here, particular emphasis on how Spener develops a particular conception of regeneration as an experience presence, which he uses to reconcile two 32 Ibid.: 103. The metaphor of the seed (saamen in Spener’s dialect) corresponds to the Word, and thus has the function of “birthing anew” [wiedergebähren] and hence a slightly different function than the “spark,” which represents not wiedergebähren but wiedergebohren sein. 33 This passage is found in the preface to Wiedergeburt, entitled “To the Christian Reader,” which is not page-numbered. The German reads: „Wiederhohlung oder nochmalige Wiedergeburt der darauß gefallenen / und die fortsetzung durch die stäte erneurung.“

78

Baptismal Regeneration or Transformation of the Soul?

seemingly incompatible rival conceptions of baptismal and conversional regeneration.

3.3.1 The “new being” According to Spener, to have been truly born again is to have gone through an essential inward change, and those who have not first experienced it cannot begin to truly live a faithful life because they are bound to their “old selves.”34 They must first be transformed into a “new being” (neuer mensch is Spener’s preferred term), which is the aspect of new birth most often thought of as “conversion,” in that it describes the experience of a radical change in one’s own inward disposition. Here, the convert receives a “new heart and new spirit”,35 thus becoming a kind of “new creation”36 (all terms taken from the Bible). Importantly, this change is one that the individual cannot bring about by him- or herself: I can work to change my habits, but I cannot change my “heart,” hence any truly radical transformation can only be God’s work. This is why, comments Spener, the New Testament uses the metaphor of new birth: “the word Wiedergeburt reminds us that the individual does not do anything in this process [der mensch in derselben nichts thue],” just as in the case of a real birth.37 This is part of the “new nature” received by one’s reason and will, which leads the reborn believer to feel drawn toward doing the good in way that he or she previously was not.38 Spener describes this as an experience of presence: “They feel an inner drive [trieb] towards the Word or prayer, and when they follow this same thing they sense [empfinden] from it a new light, strength, solace, peace and joy, as well as the power of the Kingdom of God which exists within them.”39

Thus the born-again Christian feels regeneration as an inward presence affecting all facets of his or her personality – in “body and soul, reason, will, emotions and the like.”40 As a result, this change in inward disposition leads to a seamless relation between internal experience and external behavior, meaning that the new birth is not merely an esoteric feeling but will inevitably lead to “uncountable fruits of good works.”41 As Spener writes in another earlier text, those who are born again are different: they do not live according to “the winds of the flesh and the world” [den lüften deß fleisches und der welt] 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41

Cf. the 6th chapter of Paul’s Letter to the Romans. Wiedergeburt: 213; cf. Ibid.: 145, 212, 283. Ibid.: 142. Ibid.: 7. Italics reflect bold print in the original text. Cf. Ibid.: 152; Theologische Bedencken I: 336. Wiedergeburt: 765. Theologische Bedencken III: 230. Wiedergeburt: 886.

Spener’s Threefold-division of New Birth: An Analysis

79

but instead according to God’s will.42 Not only will the born again believer “feel” [fühlen] a difference, but “they will become stronger and it will become steadily easier to do the good.”43 Those who are truly born again will reveal an “earnestness and zeal” [ernst und eiffer], which is based on a “joyful trust” in God’s will.44 Spener emphasizes the importance of behavior for true rebirth by making a theological point which, as orthodox as it is, has often been neglected in modern discourse on regeneration: namely, that it is not merely the soul that is born again but also the body is born again as well. “The entire human being, flesh of flesh” is born again.45 Not only the soul [seele], but also body [leib] itself “receives through new birth a spiritual strength [geistliche krafft]” which renders it capable of consistently doing good.46 Obviously he is not suggesting here that being born again creates a physical alteration, but instead that the body receives a new obedient nature. Here Spener makes a sophisticated theological distinction between one’s body and one’s “flesh,” which for Spener denotes humanity’s “sinful corruption” [sündliche verderbnüß], thus rejecting any Docetic interpretation which assumes “spirit” denotes internal feelings and thought processes and “flesh” the outward physical body.47

42 43 44 45 46 47

Einfältige Erklärung der christlichen Lehr: 742 (1034). Wiedergeburt: 43. Ibid.: 122. Einfältige Erklärung: 737 (1026). Cf. also Wiedergeburt: 218 (324). Wiedergeburt: 35. Ibid.: 15–16. In Wiedergeburt Spener reflects further on the inseparability of the internal and external aspects of being reborn by given attention to the meanings of “of the flesh” and “of the spirit” in the New Testament. For Spener it is important to point out that the Bible uses these terms in different senses, but “sinful nature” is the one which applies to the subject at hand. When the Bible refers to Jesus becoming “flesh,” however, here the term refers not to sinful nature but merely to a human body, for no one would claim that Jesus was incarnated into a sinful nature (Spener points out that the Bible also refers to a “spiritual body,” which should silence any arguments about the corporal matter being the source of sin (Ibid.: 36)). The term “spirit,” while frequently in the New Testament a reference to the Holy Spirit, according to Spener also describes nothing inherent in present human nature but something which can only be received through the grace of being born again: “If you are a mere human [mensch] and flesh alone, … you cannot be anything other than human. But you must know: as a mere fleshly [fleischlich] human you also cannot be blessed [seelig]. If you want to become blessed, you must do something other than be merely human, namely be born again. Then you are also spirit and spiritually-minded [geistlich gesinnet]” (Ibid.: 41). The term “spiritually-minded” refers to the human intellect as affected by spiritual illumination. It does entail a kind of knowledge, but it is not intellectual knowledge [Verstand]. It is Erkenntnis (or in Spener’s dialect erkäntnüß) – the same word used in the German Bibles to describe the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil – which enables the “enlightenment [erleuchtung] of recognizing God’s clarity in the appearance of Jesus” [die erleuchtung von der erkäntnüß der klarheit Gottes in dem angesicht JEsu Christi] (Ibid.). This results in a new demeanor, a new way of going about one’s life, hence the lack of tension between descriptions of new birth in terms of both an internal presence and an external set of behaviors.

80

Baptismal Regeneration or Transformation of the Soul?

3.3.2 The “igniting” of faith Yet the experience of presence which takes place when one is “born again” is more than the experience of a change in one’s personal orientation. It is also the experience of the presence of God. Thus the second type of presenceexperience is more difficult to articulate, in that it is a presence that is mystical, its object being neither material nor subjective, but instead a higher spiritual reality. After one is born again, God is no longer merely a postulate whose existence, perhaps along with other doctrines, is to be affirmed, or is deduced as the reason behind one’s moral conscience. Instead, once one has been born again, God now dwells in the soul, writes Spener, like a tenant in a building.48 Following Reformation tradition, he calls this experience of God’s indwelling “faith,” with Wiedergeburt being the moment in which one’s faith is “ignited” [entzündet], in which there appears a “little spark” [füncklein]: “The igniting of faith [entzündung des glaubens], without which one is capable of no further grace, has to do with the following: where one first in repentance [buß] is brought to knowledge of one’s sins [erkäntnüß der sünden] and hatred of them (we are speaking here of new birth among adults, where the matter can be seen more clearly, since for children not all of this is necessary in the same way), and hence yearns for help, and then through reading or preaching is confronted with the Gospel of divine grace, the Spirit first lights a little spark of faith [füncklein des glaubens] inside of him, so that he now perceives [erkennt] divine grace in this light of God and confidently strives toward it. As soon as this faith is there, new birth has begun, which is why we justifiably call the awakening [erweckung] of faith the first element [stück] of new birth and the beginning of the spiritual life.”49

“As soon as the spark [funcke] of faith enters the soul,” Spener writes in Kurtze Catechismus-Predigten, “this is the beginning of a spiritual life.”50 Thus the existence of the “spark” of faith is completely the work of God and not the result of any inherent human spiritual propensity.51 Many – even those who live among other Christians and attend church regularly – do not have it, and

48 Cf. Ibid.: 887 ff. In the German Spener is able to use a play on words: Wohnung means “abode” (in modern German, it primarily means “apartment”), while God’s act of “indwelling” the soul is Einwohnung. 49 Ibid.: 151–52. 50 Kurtze Catechismus-Predigten: 445. 51 Spener does not deny, however, that humanity has a (limited) natural ability to perceive God, particularly in respect to the “conscience” [gewissen], and occasionally even refers to this as a “flame” [funcke] (cf. Wiedergeburt: 326), although it is clear that in this case the metaphor has a different function. Even the heathen, Spener writes, have the Law [gesetz] written on their consciences (cf. Ibid.: 845). However, only the “flame” of faith can make one “blessed” [selig] and “spiritual” [geistlich].

Spener’s Threefold-division of New Birth: An Analysis

81

those who do have it must cultivate it by directing their gaze (and ears) towards the “word of God.” In addition to the metaphor of fire, and in common with countless other theological traditions, Spener also uses the biblical metaphor of light to describe the presence of God’s Holy Spirit, who causes the regenerate soul, including the intellect, to be “illuminated.”52 “Faith is nothing other than a light [liecht],” he writes, which “has been ignited by the light of the divine word.”53 “Through the word, God awakens the faith in the soul thus: He lets his divine light shine into the understanding, so that one exhibits [erzeiget] God’s grace in Christ Jesus and perceives [erkennet] all his good works [wohlthaten]…,” filling the convert with “heartfelt trust.”54 Drawing on 2nd Corinthians, 4:655 Spener writes that God, “who called the light to shine forth out of the darkness, has given us a bright glow [schein] in our hearts (this is the light of the Spirit, with which the Apostles were directly [unmittelbar] enlightened), so that (through us) the illumination [erleuchtung] of the knowledge of God’s lucidity [klarheit] in Jesus Christ’s countenance would arise.”56

This “light,” then, cannot be separated from the object of its gaze, which is the countenance [angesicht] of Jesus Christ. Although Christ does not stand before every reborn Christian in person, his “word” endures, and its power [krafft] is perceived in the light of “the igniting [entzündung] of faith in the hearts of those who allow it.” It is therefore the same “inner light”57 that inspired the original Apostles which shines in the heart of every believer. God’s presence in the born again Christian is therefore not like God’s general presence in nature, writes Spener. Expanding the analogy of light, Spener writes that it is not as if the Christian merely perceived the presence of the Holy Spirit in the sense of someone feeling the sun’s warmth without seeing standing in its light: “on the contrary, in this union [vereinigung] and indwelling [einwohnung] is the essence of God himself.”58 According to Spener, this experience “vastly transcends our reason”; it is a union comparable to the mystery of how the soul and body are united despite each clearly retaining its own, separate essence. Although the imagery of light 52 Spener continues: “Through the word, God awakens the faith in the soul thus: He lets his divine light shine into the understanding, so that one exhibits [erzeiget] God’s grace in Christ Jesus and sees [erkennet] all his good works [wohlthaten]…,” filling the Christian with “heartfelt trust.” Ibid.: 167. 53 Ibid.: 100. 54 Ibid.: 167. 55 “For it is the God who said, ‘Let light shine out of darkness,’ who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.” 56 Ibid.: 168. 57 Ibid. 58 Ibid.

82

Baptismal Regeneration or Transformation of the Soul?

and heat is primary for Spener, it is not exhaustive: the mystery of new birth can also be described using metaphors such as that of “sweetness”59 or of God having his “abode” [wohnung] in the believer.60 Spener is forced to resort to this set of metaphors and analogies because, ultimately, he has no other choice since what he is describing is a mystery and “we have to let it remain a mystery.”61 However, although it is a mystery one cannot rationally understand, it is still one which is felt. Thus for Spener, whether or not one is “illuminated” is clearly discernable through introspection, which is particularly important considering that the light can be “extinguished” [außgelöschet].62

3.3.3 Justification The third and final aspect of Wiederbegurt, according to Spener, is justification, and with it one’s adoption as a “child of God.” This event, unlike conversion and the indwelling of the Spirit, is not an experience at all, but instead a normative change in divine status “before God”: “We have seen that the term ‘born again’ [wiedergebohren werden] means becoming a different person [anderer mensch]…; yet this happens not only through the bestowal of a new nature, in which one is thereupon a different person than one was before, but also in that one becomes so before God.”63

It is a doctrinal proposition, based on scripture, which promises that the sinful human being has been reconciled and declared righteous before God, and is now one of God’s children. The classic term used by Reformation theology to describe this event of being declared righteous64 is forensic justification, and that of becoming a child of God adoption. That such justification and adoption is possible is, according to the theology of this tradition, ultimately the result of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, which enables God, in the words of Spener, to “become our friend again.”65 This third element of new birth, then, is not an experience of presence like the first two, but is a doctrine to be affirmed. And in a certain sense, Spener’s 59 Cf. Lauterkeit I: 664: „gleichsam die küsse und süßigkeit ihres bräutigams“. This passage is also cited in Peschke: 217. 60 Cf. Wiedergeburt, 887 ff. This indwelling – the German verb wohnen is also used to designate the place where one lives – is one in which the tenant takes care of his or her abode, redesigning it from the inside and thus giving the regenerated Christian a “new heart and a new spirit,” just as God promised in Ezekiel 26:27 (Ibid.: 32). 61 Ibid.: 884. 62 Ibid.: 170. 63 Ibid.: 184. 64 Or “imputed righteousness.” Cf. Ibid.: 178. 65 Ibid.: 175.

Spener’s Threefold-division of New Birth: An Analysis

83

theology of justification is the least creative and original in comparison to the other two aspects of regeneration: it does not significantly depart from his Lutheran Orthodox teachers and, as Dale Brown notes, Spener “did not alter to any significant degree” the classic Reformation belief that Christians are saved by grace, through the imputed righteousness of Christ’s atonement. What is significant in Spener, according to Brown, that “this forensic of the Christ for us must be supplemented by the understanding of the Christ working in us and through us.”66 (Indeed, the prepositions in, through, and for represent well the three-fold nature of regeneration according to Spener.) Moreover, by including this doctrine in his three-fold division, Spener anticipates the most significant tension in the evangelical Protestant understanding of new birth: namely, that it describes both a subjective experience as well as a nonexperiential, doctrinally-based conviction. Yet the fact that this belief is doctrine and not an experience does not entail that it is accepted arbitrarily, since according to Spener (as well as Pietism in general) the truth of God’s promise of justification and adoption is confirmed through inner experience – here, the change in one’s heart and the presence of God’s Holy Spirit. Furthermore, this change in status, though ultimately transcendent, is made present through its embodiment in a community of others who share it. It is this kind of community to which Spener refers with his well-known concepts of collegia pietatis, “schools of piety,” and ecclesiola in ecclesia, literally “little church within the church”: a close-knit, core-community of born-again believers who support each other in spiritual edification and ultimately, according to Spener, hold the larger church institution together.67 It is an idea which led to the flourishing of Continental Pietism and AngloAmerican Puritanism during the 17th and 18th centuries, and which endures in contemporary evangelical “Bible studies” and “cell groups,” as well as countless Christian groups on high school and college campuses, all of which draw together participants from various denominational backgrounds under the assumption that the one’s identity as a born-again Christian – which assumes a “personal relationship with Jesus” – is far more important than any other theological or confessional boundaries.

3.3.4 Being born again: “renewal” as the continuation of regeneration For Spener, being born again is a presence experience in two different ways: the metamorphosis of the heart (i. e., conversion) and the direct presence of 66 Brown, Understanding Pietism: 89. 67 In Spener’s context, this was the Lutheran Church in Germany (or, more accurately, the different Lutheran Landeskirchen found in the various independent German states). Most modern evangelicals, particularly in North America, place far less of an emphasis on the importance of the institutional church.

84

Baptismal Regeneration or Transformation of the Soul?

God. Concerning these two elements, two further summary points need to be made. Firstly, although Spener separates these two kinds of presence on an abstract level, he clearly sees them as a unity, often describing one form of presence in ways which implicate the other. This should not be surprising, considering that according to Spener these two levels of presence experience were originally a unity in humanity’s prelapsarian state. Before the Fall, he writes, the “divine light” of God “illuminated” [leuchtete] human nature “into its innermost being” [in das innerste desselben hinein] in a way which made it possible to perceive God “without much difficulty or effort.” “Divine justice,” he continues, “illuminated the will, and the human and divine will were in complete conformity.”68 After the Fall, however, this complete unity is no longer possible, even among those who are born again. Thus the illumination and metamorphosis which take place in the heart of the Christian are incomplete and a mere foretaste of a later, consummate eschatological union with God. In the present, the regenerate believer must still battle with a “natural secret hatred of God” in addition to general selfishness.69 Simply being born again will not remove these blemishes; it will however, allow them to no longer have dominion over one’s soul. This ties in to the second point, which is that when Spener discusses Wiedergeburt he usually pays far less attention to the moment of regeneration than to the general state of being born again, which is the same thing as being in the state of Erneuerung or “renewal.” Regeneration, according to Spener, happens instantly, in which the recipient is fully passive in receiving God’s grace.70 However, it will not solve all one’s problems, as it is not “perfection” [vollkommenheit] but merely the beginning.71 The ensuing renewal, which “consists in the growth of faith,” is what makes up the “continuation” [fortsetzung] of the “beginning” [anfang] which was the new birth, and in which the believer uses the abilities [kräfften] bestowed in the moment of rebirth to continue growing in the Christian faith.72 Expanding on the analogy of fire, Spener compares faith to a lamp whose flame depends on an external source of energy: “For faith is a little flame [flämmlein] which must always be filled with the oil of the word.”73 Thus in contrast to the moment of regeneration, which is passive, the state of being born again is one of active participation in the life of the Spirit, which includes Bible study, prayer and meditation, and active participation in a community of believers. Only 68 Wiedergeburt: 20. 69 Ibid.: 24. 70 Wallmann (“Wiedergeburt”: 27–28) notes that Spener was probably influenced by Johan Conrad Dannhauer’s Hodosophia christiana, in which regeneratio is a momentary action in which the human being is completely passive, and the renovatio is a development in which the human being is active. 71 Theologische Bedencken, I: 336. 72 Wiedergeburt: 101; Einfältige Erklärung: 739 (1024). 73 Wiedergeburt: 373.

Spener on Sacraments and Faith

85

through these practices will the “oil” of the Word of God continue to feed the “flame” of faith. Renewal is thus the active result of one’s new birth and, though predicated on a moment of regeneration, is ultimately more important since the former provides no guarantee of perseverance. In renewal the battle between the old and the new being continues to rage on, and it involves the believer’s own free will, which is why Spener believes it is still possible to lose one’s status as born again, even after a second new birth later in life: “Where the Holy Spirit and faith are disowned [verstossen], there the new birth falls away and nothing more remains but the old birth.”74 The “spark” can be “extinguished,” so the Christian must continue to obey God’s commandment (John 24:21), since it is his or her duty to “increase” it.75 However, those who are reborn are not left alone to fight against their old being, as they receive assistance from the Holy Spirit, not only in the abiding presence of the “spark” but also in the form of an inward disposition which allows them to be victorious against temptation and continue in their new birth (which means progressing in renewal).

3.4 Spener on Sacraments and Faith 3.4.1 The sacraments and the presence of faith Spener’s ecclesiological program, which emphasizes the necessity of a close, tight-knit community of those who are truly born again, leads him to warn of the dangers of overemphasizing the external efficacy of the sacraments, to which he connects the classic Lutheran critique of “justification by works.” Many people, according to Spener, seem to think that the power of the sacraments somehow excuses them from a living a complete Christian life. As Spener writes in the Pia Desideria: “Just as the above illusion of faith as the only means of salvation from our side does great harm, so from the side of the divine means of Word and sacraments the shameful illusion of an opus operatum is added. This is not less harmful to the church, leads many people to damnation, and strengthens the aforementioned false notion of what true faith is. We cannot deny – on the contrary, daily experience convinces us – that there are not a few who think that all that Christianity requires of them (and that having done this, they have done quite enough in their service to God) is that they be baptized, hear the preaching of God’s Word, confess and receive absolution, and go to the Lord’s Supper, no matter how their hearts are disposed at 74 Einfältige Erklärung: 741–742 (1032). 75 Wiedergeburt: 170–171.

86

Baptismal Regeneration or Transformation of the Soul?

the time, whether or not there are fruits which follow, provided they at least live in such a way that the civil authorities do not find them liable to punishment.”76

Two things are important to point out from this citation. Firstly, these remarks are not the result of abstract, systematic speculation but instead arise from personal observation: Spener, not unlike the Anabaptists, points out that there is a large number of people who view themselves as Christian because they have fulfilled certain requirements, but their attitude shows a lack of understanding for what being a Christian really is – an analysis may which sound judgmental but which Spener thinks is painfully obvious. For Spener this lack of concern for living the true Christian life is encouraged by what he labels an “opus operatum”77 interpretation of the sacraments, which assumes that the spiritual benefits of the sacraments can be enjoyed without indwelling them. Secondly, Spener introduces the idea of the “disposition of hearts” – the presence experience of having one’s internal faculties radically transformed (through the “spark”) – as a second kind of presence in addition to sacramental presence. At the end of the Pia Spener returns to the subject of sacraments, taking a clear theological position on sacramental efficacy by appealing to a specific conception of inwardness: “One should therefore emphasize that the divine means of Word and sacrament are concerned with the inner man. Hence it is not enough that we hear the Word with our outward ear, but we must let it penetrate to our heart, so that we may hear the Holy Spirit speak there, that is, with vibrant emotion and comfort feel the sealing of the Spirit and the power of the Word. Nor is it enough to be baptized, but the inner man, where we have put on Christ in Baptism, must also keep Christ on and bear witness to him in our outward life.”78

He is not claiming, as many others later would, that this inner disposition is the only presence important to the sacrament. He simply believes that an external sacramental presence alone, separated from personal faith, is inadequate; thus the proper “disposition of the heart” becomes a prerequisite for the sacrament’s effectiveness. Obviously, it is not the sacraments which separate the pious from the more nominal members, particularly in the case of baptism, since the majority of Spener’s contemporaries (with the exception of young Anabaptists, as well as Jews) had been baptized. Therefore, from the perspective of a “Pietist” ecclesiology, the sacraments cannot form the core of 76 Ibid.: 65. 77 Obviously very few Protestants, if any at all, would have claimed to have an opus operatum view of the sacraments; Spener’s criticism is that the way people treated the sacraments was practically the same as the Catholic opus operatum view in that it ascribed to the sacraments an external power independent of the faith of the one receiving them. 78 Ibid.: 117. Italics are mine.

Spener on Sacraments and Faith

87

any ecclesiology, but instead the community of those whose hearts have been changed, i. e. of those who are truly born again. On this point Spener may sound similar to the Anabaptists or Calvinists of his time, yet he never seriously considered rejecting the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, since he believed attempts to argue that baptism is not a Wiedergeburt blatantly ignore the clear meaning of Scripture. The fact that “the bath of rebirth” in Titus 3:5 refers to baptismal regeneration, for instance, is so obvious that “no one could deny it.”79 Thus baptism is not to be viewed as merely “symbolic” of rebirth but as its “instrument” [mittel].80 Spener thus rigorously defends the doctrine of infant baptismal regeneration, viewing it as an expression of “pure grace.”81 According to Spener, the doctrine rightly points to the fact that being born again has nothing to do with the idea that one can “attain or earn” blessedness through good works, but instead that those who are reborn have become “completely new people” who have been “reformed” [umgeschmelzet] and given a new nature.82 He sees the sacrament of baptism as a gift from God to be received only once in a lifetime, and agrees with Luther’s Catechism that “‘it effects forgiveness of sins, delivers from death and the devil, and grants’ (not merely promises) ‘eternal salvation.’”83 Like Luther, Spener does not want to see baptism as simply a past event, and therefore reminds his readers that baptism is also a “covenant” [bund]: “from [God’s] side a covenant of grace and from your side a covenant of faith and good conscience.” To have any benefit, baptism “must remain in constant use” throughout the life of the believer.84 On all these points, Spener mirrors Luther’s core beliefs concerning the baptism and new birth.

3.4.2 The presence of faith as the unity of baptismal and non-baptismal regeneration Yet how does Spener reconcile labeling two seemingly very different things – the baptism of an infant and the “kindling” of faith in an adult – both as being “born again”? Firstly, Spener’s answer is that the “spark” of faith is not limited to adults with developed rationality, thus when an infant is baptized, faith is “ignited [entzündet] in the soul,” through the administration of the sacrament, which allows the individual to participate in the “covenant” God has made through Jesus Christ.85 Regeneration is indeed caused by baptism 79 80 81 82 83 84 85

Ibid.t: 80. Ibid.: 81. Ibid.: 53. Ibid.: 52. Spener, Pia Desideria: 63, citing Luther’s Small Catechism, IV, 6. Ibid.: 66. Wiedergeburt: 119. Spener sees this new bund as analogous to the practice of circumcision among the Israelites.

88

Baptismal Regeneration or Transformation of the Soul?

through the sacramental act – “the awakening of faith is to be attributed to it”86 – though not through the water in a magical sense but through the power of the Word of God, more specifically the power of Christ’s blood.87 Spener also sees the sacrament of baptism as bestowing “the power to do good,” since in Titus 3:5 it is referred to as the washing of regeneration and renewal.88 Therefore, infants who are baptized are “truly born again” through baptism, and already in the state of renewal, even though many will “resist” [widersetzen] this grace and in turn “lose” their new birth.89 The subject of adult baptism provides an interesting case study for the relation between sacramental efficacy and the internal presence of faith. Does an adult convert, for instance, first receive the “spark” of true faith during baptism? Spener’s answer to this question is that the faith of new birth is only “sealed” [versiegelt] by the adult baptism of a convert to Christianty, but not “ignited” [entzündet], since regeneration “has already been effected [gewürket] through the Word of God.”90 This act of “sealing” is connected to the renewal which began with the faith of conversion. This is all assuming, of course, that the adult who comes to baptism has truly been converted through the Word of God. Those adults, however, who desire to be baptized out of “another intention [Absicht]” or have not experienced “true repentance” can expect nothing of the sacrament, which is “no deficiency of baptism, but their own fault.” Thus adult baptism is not universally effective as is in the case of infants when properly administered – since no one, comments Spener, could seriously doubt the faith of a baptized child – and instead is only sacramentally effective when adult recipients “allow room for it in their souls” [in ihren seelen platz lassen] and receive it “earnestly” [ernst].91 In this way, Spener is allowed to consistently affirm that both infant baptism as well as adult conversion are both experiences of being born again – and both in the full sense of the term. This is a very elaborate doctrine of regeneration which, to put it mildly, does not exactly pass the test of Occam’s razor. As peculiar as it is, however, Spener’s theology of regeneration is internally consistent, and it is important to see why: a particular conception of presence – more specifically, the presence of faith – is what ties both kinds of rebirth together. The sacramental power of infant baptism is viewed as an external power which imputes grace to the infant and even creates inward faith (the logical conclusion being that baptized babies behave somehow differently than non-baptized ones), while the baptism of an adult becomes a confirmation of the new birth that began 86 Ibid. 87 Cf. Ibid.: 116–117. Spener cites the example of Moses striking the rock (Num 20) in order to bring forth water. It was not Moses’ rod that caused the water to flow but the Word of God. 88 Ibid.: 119. 89 Ibid.: 121. 90 Ibid.: 119. 91 Ibid.

Spener on Sacraments and Faith

89

with a conversion experience – though this conversion experience does not entail the ability to identify the exact moment of regeneration, but instead the knowledge that one has experienced true faith and repentance. In the case of both infant and adult baptism, however, the mark of true rebirth is ultimately the inward presence of faith, since “true [rechte] baptism” is one which enters into the soul, and thus “is of benefit as long as the power [krafft] remains in the soul.”92

3.4.3 Spener and Luther: baptism, new birth, and faith Although Spener, as a Lutheran, certainly shared deep similarities to Luther concerning regeneration, justification, and sanctification,93 Spener’s primary identification of new birth with faith as a reflexive, subjective presence marks a fork in the road for Lutheran theology. For Luther it would not make sense to say that baptism’s “grace” could be lost, since according to the Large Catechism repentance means returning to an acknowledgement of one’s baptism – indeed, it is “actually nothing other than baptism”94 – and the daily Christian life “is nothing other than a daily baptism”95 or “practice in baptism” [uben an der Taufe]96. When I “live in repentance,” according to Luther, I do this “in baptism.”97 Thus baptism “remains forever” [bleibt … immerdar stehen] even if I fall away from faith, which is why can Luther famously tell those who are burdened by “sin and bad conscience” to remind themselves ich bin dennoch getauft: “Nevertheless, I am baptized.”98 It is therefore in the baptism itself that the Christian finds solace – and not in any inward state – because baptism is a promise from God, since “to be baptized in the name of God is not to be baptized by a human being but from God himself.”99 Hence Luther’s recommendation to someone who has been baptized as a baby but has not yet truly believed: “You did not believe; so believe now and tell yourself, ‘The baptism was correct, but I did not receive it 92 Ibid.: 122. 93 “Allein aus dem Glauben wird der Mensch vor Gott gerecht, die Werke haben kein Verdienst an der Seeligkeit, die uns bereits in der Taufe geschenkt wird…. Dieser Glaube wird im Herzen des Christen aus der Schrift vom heiligen Geist entzündet. Er ergreift nicht nur die Gerechtigkeit Jesu Christi, sondern wandelt auch den inneren Menschen in der Wiedergeburt von Grund auf um, der durch Wort und Sakrament immer weiter wächst, aber gleich wie weit dieses Wachstum sich entwickelt, »bleibe doch seine rechtfertigung noch immer allein aus gnaden und dem glauben«” (Kurt Aland, “Spener und Luther”: 215). 94 Cf. Bekenntnisschriften: 706. 95 Ibid.: 704. 96 Ibid.: 699. 97 Ibid.: 706. 98 Ibid.: 699–700. 99 Ibid.: 693.

90

Baptismal Regeneration or Transformation of the Soul?

correctly.’”100 The adult conversion of an already baptized individual, therefore, is a return to baptism, to the promise that was always there. From this perspective, the act of “faith” in this individual’s return to baptism is not understood primarily as a reflexive inward state but is directed toward the sacrament itself. Faith, for Luther, was something that needs an object, thus believing in the efficacy of the sacrament is the same as believing in Jesus Christ.101 For Spener, however, as well as for many others in his time, faith increasingly becomes seen as a subjective state which can be examined for its own sake; in this conception believing in the efficacy of one’s baptism becomes more of a stumbling block than a comfort, since this belief is dangerously misleading when not accompanied by the presence of faith. Therefore, unlike Reformers such as Luther who viewed baptism as the beginning of discipleship – even for those who fell away from the faith and then experienced conversion later in life – Spener viewed the new birth of baptism as something that could be easily lost and saw no necessary connection between infant baptism and the “kindling” [entzündung] of faith in the later convert. Although Spener agrees with Luther102 that baptism also “kindles” faith in the soul of the infant and unites it to the people of God in a way analogous to circumcision, “however, not all will partake of this [new birth] because many resist the effected grace [gnadenwürckung]. Concerning the little children who are baptized we have no doubt that they are truly born again [thätlich wiedergeboren werden], since they are

100 Ibid.: 702. 101 For an excellent summary of Luther’s doctrine of the sacraments in comparison to other Protestant traditions, cf. Jonathan Cary’s “Why Luther is not quite Protestant: the Logic of Faith in a Sacramental Promise.” Cf. also Jonathan Trigg, Baptism in the Theology of Martin Luther. 102 Although Luther’s doctrine of fides infantium, which asserts that infants receive faith through baptism, is not necessarily a prominent subject in his overall theology, it is briefly mentioned in his Large Catechism (cf. Bekenntnisschriften: 702–03) and is given significant attention in other occasional writings, most notably Von der Widdertaufe an zween Pfarherrn (Luthers Werke, WA 26: 144–174; 27: 32–38, 42–45). One can ask whether Spener’s conviction that “a little spark of faith” is “ignited” in the infant through baptism is essentially the same as Luther’s understanding of fides infantium – indeed, many interpreters of Luther, as Eero Huovinen notes, have done just this (cf. Huovinen, Fides Infantium: 16–17). However, as Huovinen demonstrates in his study, Luther (in contrast to Spener) completely avoids anthropological language when describing fides infantium, since he is clearly less concerned with speculating about inward events in infants than he is of defending Christ’s presence in the sacrament. “Word” and “baptism itself,” Huovinen argues, cannot be “contrasted” [gegenübergestellt] for Luther. He therefore concludes that “Luther’s primary argument for the view that children receive their own faith in baptism is the presence of God,” which is “based on [the belief] that God himself is present in the sacrament” (Ibid.: 88–89). Cf. also Trigg: 103–105; Brinkel, Die Lehre Luthers von der fides infantium bei der Kindertaufe.

Spener on Sacraments and Faith

91

not able to resist the grace, although unfortunately many will in turn lose this baptismal grace in the following years.”103

“Therefore, dear Christian,” Spener writes to the backslider, “be assured that even if you had been baptized a hundred times, you would not yet stand firm in new birth and in such a state have no share in blessedness.”104 This is statement is very similar, and perhaps even an allusion, to Luther’s Large Catechism, in which Luther makes a claim which is quite different: “Even if one is dunked into water a hundred times, it is not more than one baptism, but the effect and the significance continue and abide. Thus repentance is nothing other than a returning [Wiedergang] and getting closer [Zutreten] to baptism, so that what had been previously been begun and abandoned is now taken up again and practiced.”105

Thus while Luther’s quotation calls the backslider back to his or her baptism by reminding him or her that the promise of baptism still stands, Spener wants to prevent the backslider from using baptism, as well as any other “external” formalities, as an excuse to not live a pious life. Indeed, according to Spener most individuals lose the grace of baptism, and those that do are in a more precarious state than those who have never been baptized106 – a statement Luther would certainly reject. In conclusion, as opposed to Luther’s advice to the backslider to “return” to his or baptism, Spener’s advice to the same individual would be to stop clinging to his or her baptism and be born again – again. Spener sees a confirmation of his theory in the example of King David’s “seduction” of Bathsheba and subsequent murder of her husband Uriah (2 Sam. 11), to which Spener poses the question: Was David at this time “born again”? According to the Reformed tradition, which Spener acknowledges, David is viewed as having lost the “enjoyment” of God’s grace but not the grace itself; in other words, he was still, even in his darkest moments, born again, even if he did not appear (or feel) that way.107 Spener counters that David had clearly lost his new birth, since it is “impossible” that someone who lived so long in such deep sin could still be a “child of God” (note that it was not the acts themselves that led to the loss of his new birth: these acts were manifestations of David’s already corrupted state). David was instead a “child of the devil”: “He truly had lost his divine childship [kindschafft] and new birth.”108 Although circumcised, he was just as lost as the countless Europeans who had 103 Wiedergeburt: 121. Also cited in Weber, “Der Artikel von der Wiedergeburt bei Philip Jakob Spener”: 92. 104 Wiedergeburt: 122. Also cited in Weber: 93. 105 Bekenntnisschriften: 706. 106 Wiedergeburt: 919. Cf. also Weber: 93. 107 Ibid.: 143. Spener does not say exactly which Reformed theologians he had in mind. The Puritan tradition will be further discussed in the chapter on Jonathan Edwards. 108 Ibid.: 144.

92

Baptismal Regeneration or Transformation of the Soul?

been baptized as infants but lived in total obliviousness to God’s Spirit. Thus David’s prayer in Psalm 51:12, the topic of Spener’s tenth sermon in Wiedergeburt – “create in me a clean heart, O God, and put a new and right spirit within me” – is not mere poetic symbolism but the realization of his falling away from God’s grace and therefore an earnest plea for rebirth. The term “heart” becomes central in Spener’s sermon on David, since it is clear to him that it refers metaphorically to something that people in David’s time would have understood as “soul, mind, and sense.”109 David asked God to “create” [schaffen] in him a clean heart because he realized that he did not have one anymore and could not attain one by himself. The term “a new and right spirit,” according Spener, refers to “the new nature from God” which “effected through rebirth,”110 in interpretation he sees confirmed in the prophet Nathan’s assurance to King David that God has removed his sin and that he will “not die” (2 Sam. 12:13).111 The primary “promise” of God is located not in the sacraments, as with Luther, but instead in the promise that if one earnestly repents and asks God for internal regeneration, one will receive it.

The born-again presence for Luther, as well as for the Roman Catholic theology of his time and today, is not merely a subjective presence but also a sacramental one, which has not only priority over but also a certain independence from the presence of one’s own personal faith; according to Luther, to experience the grace of the sacrament I need to reach out towards it, which is indeed an act of personal faith – yet “my faith does not make the baptism, it accepts it.”112 Luther was famously skeptical of the ability to gauge the strength of one’s own faith, which was his primary argument against the Anabaptist practice of adult baptism. For Luther, since “all men are liars and God alone knows the heart … whoever bases baptism on the faith of the one to be baptized can never baptize anyone.”113 For who, asks Luther, can be sure of one’s own faith? Therefore, even if an individual comes to faith later in life, there is no need for rebaptism because a covenant is not invalidated simply because it is abused, just as gold does not become straw just because a thief steals it.114 Spener, of course, was not an Anabaptist but a Lutheran, and thus shares Luther’s opinion that baptism need not be predicated on the existence of faith in the recipient. However, there are deep differences between the two theologians, which are seen in the logic of Luther’s rejection of rebaptism: for Luther the unconditional promise of baptism is a precious gift from God for this life, and any return to faith means accepting the sacrament of infant baptism. Thus for Luther the logic used for understanding the new birth is the

109 110 111 112 113 114

Ibid.: 145. Ibid.: 148. Ibid. Bekenntnisschriften: 701. Cited in Cary: 452. Cf. WA 26, 161: 22–26, cited in Trigg: 85.

Conclusion

93

logic of gift-giving,115 which distinguishes his theology from previous Medieval theologies which viewed baptismal regeneration primarily as the washing of sin and thus primarily as preparation for the afterlife. For Spener, on the other hand, the essential logic is one of a presence experienced by the subject. This born-again presence is primarily inside of me – although of course confirmed by my general actions and demeanor – and it is this presence which ultimately decides the efficacy of the sacrament. Thus in contrast to Luther, then, the backslider can find no consolation in his or her baptism, just as David could not in his circumcision,116 because such external signs are worthless without the accompanying faith.

3.5 Conclusion 3.5.1 Being born again as an experience of presence For Spener the state of being born again is accessible through introspection, but it is not an introspection which insulates the subject from his or her surroundings. Being born again is indeed something one can feel, not in the sense of experiencing specific emotions such as anger or sadness, but instead more comparable to how I, for example, can “feel” (or, epistemologically speaking, “know”) that I am an intellectual: I recognize that intellectual discussions deeply interest me and that I enjoy partaking in them; I notice myself spending my free time reading books without anyone forcing me to do it; and I find my mind often wondering off and ruminating over intellectual questions. Subjectivity and practice thus find themselves in an unproblematic, seamless relation, since these “inward” states confirmed by my external behavior and inevitably noticed by others. To use two biblical metaphors which Spener frequently draws upon, every individual has a certain kind of “heart,” which can be recognized in the “fruits” of his or her behavior. The entire text of the Pia desideria, for instance, strives to make this point. This does not mean, however, that God’s presence in the new birth is merely the presence of one’s own (changed) characteristics, (“as if God’s essence [wesen] itself were not there,” as Spener writes117) because it is not possible to radically change one’s heart by oneself, just as it is not possible to birth oneself. Thus not only is regeneration a change of the heart, but also in it, as a supernatural presence, which can even be labeled a unio mystica, as long as 115 Cf. Cary: 460. 116 Cf. Spener, Wiedergeburt: 143. 117 Wiedergeburt: 883. As Peschke (“Speners Wiedergeburtslehre”: 217) remarks: “Die Einwohnung Gottes beschränkt sich nicht auf die Einwirkung göttlicher Kräfte, sondern es kommt zu einer wirklichen Vereinigung des göttlichen Wesens mit dem Gläubigen.”

94

Baptismal Regeneration or Transformation of the Soul?

this term is properly understood. It would be a mistake, for instance, to label it ecstatic in the sense of Teresa of Avila’s Interior Castle, or of modern Pentecostalism’s doctrine “baptism in the Spirit,” or even of the dramatic experiences described in certain conversion narratives – first and foremost Paul’s conversion experience on the road to Damascus, described in Acts 9 and 22, in which he encounters an external, audible voice (9:7) and a bright light (22:9) which left him blinded for days.118 Spener’s Wiedergeburt, on the other hand, is something very different: an extraordinary presence which then becomes ordinary, being granted to every Christian, and marked not necessarily by any particular moments of intensity but, instead, of what John Wesley described as “a heart strangely warmed.” This presence of the Holy Spirit is a steady, enduring one: not the presence of an intense conversion experience, but that of “renewal,” the sanctified life of the believer who has been born again. To use the analogy of romantic love, Spener’s description of being born again is like the “being in love” of a happily married couple, as opposed for instance to the burning desire of “love at first sight.” This is why the “spark” is his most preferred metaphorical description, in that the picture it presents describes perfectly what Spener sees as the most important aspects of Wiedergeburt and accompanying Erneuerung: a spark begins small, and through proper care grows into steady source of warmth and light. As the metaphor of the “spark” implies, intensity is not a distinguishing characteristic of the moment of rebirth – a spark is something small, perhaps even unnoticeable, which will later develop into a flame, and this is also the case with the change in heart. Spener was for this reason very skeptical of much of the English devotional literature of his day, which often emphasized the miraculous nature of the conversion moment, leading to the result that regeneration and renewal, according to Spener, were often “mixed.”119 This is a problem, from Spener’s standpoint, because it is important to emphasize that the moment of new birth, as miraculous as it is, is merely the beginning of an inward relationship that should continue to grow in intensity, as one is further brought into a deeper personal relationship with the Holy Spirit through faith. This explains why when Spener deals with the subject of Wiedergeburt he usually means the state of being born again (i. e. wiedergeboren sein),120 and 118 Paul sees his conversion experience as not only an encounter with an external presence (which he professes to be the risen Christ) but also as highly atypical, granting him the status of Apostle. Cf. 1 Cor. 15:8, Gal. 1:16. 119 Cf. Theologische Bedencken I: 335. This complaint is very similar to what was often voiced among Anabaptists. 120 Thus, in German, when Spener mentions Wiedergeburt he often actually means wiedergeboren sein. This point, as simple as it is, could perhaps lead to a truce between the perspective, represented by the German church historian Martin Schmidt, that Wiedergeburt is the central theme of Spener’s theology (cf. Wiedergeburt und Neuer Mensch: 169–194) and that of Johannes Wallmann, who attempts to make the doctrine as insignificant as possible in comparison to Eneuerung (cf. “Wiedergeburt und Erneuerung bei Philipp Jakob Spener”).

Conclusion

95

thus the state of sanctification or Erneuerung, and not any particular point in time.121 Indeed, in the best-case scenario, conversion does not even take place: the “moment” of regeneration takes place during one’s infant baptism, which is then cultivated in the life-long process of spiritual growth. Yet even in the case of adult conversion, the exact moment in which new birth happens is not important for Spener; instead, what is crucial one’s knowledge that he or she is born again – which is nothing other than being in the present state of Ernuerung. According to Spener the plant that sprouts from this seed can whither and die if not cared for, so focusing retrospectively on when the moment of rebirth took place is counterproductive, just as an overly sacramentalist concept of “returning to baptism” is – at least partially – counterproductive as well in that it rejects the foundational role of the presence of lively faith for understanding the new birth. This is why the Pietistic ecclesiology of Spener, seen in his attempts at reform, was one of small-group Bible studies (collegia pietatis) and not of revival camp meetings, since cultivation is far more crucial than conversion. It also clarifies why Spener shows little interest in conversion narratives, a subject which will later become a debate among other evangelical groups.

3.5.2 Contrast to Puritanism and Anabaptism While Spener does affirm the general need for Buße, or “repentance,” as leading up to regeneration,122 but does not see the necessity of developing anything like a Puritan “morphology of conversion” to be used as an autobiographical framework for those who are born again. No kind of preparation, for instance, is necessary for babies who are born again in baptism – a proposition Spener sees as foolish to deny considering what he believes to be the clear meaning of Titus 3:5, namely that baptism is the “bath of new birth and renewal” and hence the Spirit must give faith to those who receive it. Even in some adults, he continues, preparation is not necessary, for instance the Philippian jailor in Acts 16 who was baptized, along with his whole family, on the same evening he asked Paul and Silas what he needed to 121 Cf. Wallmann, “Wiedergeburt und Erneuerung bei Philipp Jakob Spener”: 20–21, who makes a similar point when he points out that Spener’s interest is not in the “moment” of the new birth itself but in the person who has been born again. 122 Cf. Wiedergeburt: 426. Here Spener describes a “heartfelt hatred” of sin that “already begins before regeneration in repentance [buß]” and the realization that one is “deserving of God’s wrath and punishment [göttlichen zorns und straffen schuldig].” This hatred of sin only intensifies after regeneration, now not merely because of personal experience of sin because of the awareness that it is offensive to God. It is important to point out that the orthodox Puritan position assumed a kind of “double repentance,” first in the form of preparation leading to conversion, and then in the repentance caused by true faith. Cf. Hambrick-Stowe, Practice of Piety: 81.

96

Baptismal Regeneration or Transformation of the Soul?

do to be “blessed” [selig].123 Yet Spener admits that the more common experience of having one’s faith “ignited” involves God effecting “earnest repentance [ernstliche buß], and even prolonged sadness in the human heart” in order to make the individual hate his or her sin (literally, become an “enemy of sin”), after which the convert is, “by means of the Gospel, slowly converted and illuminated.”124 In other words, Spener affirms the basic Puritan phenomenology of “preparatory grace” – though, importantly, not making it absolute – as well as affirming a general doctrine of sanctification. According to Spener, God “freely carries out his work in different ways, working on some for a long time and preparing them through repentance until he has completed his work, while for others everything happens abruptly.”125 Spener thus makes no reference to the need to identify the moment in which the convert intuits that the “flame” or “light” of faith has suddenly arrived, or to map out the necessary steps of conversion. Instead, he exhorts his readers (and originally, his listeners) to examine whether or not they have this light now. For those who do not find this light in their soul but instead “nothing but darkness” [lauter finsternüß], Spener gives neither a formula for conversion, as is popular in modern evangelism, but similar to the Puritan tradition instead urges them to “make room for the Spirit” where they had previously given room to sin, in order that this light may be cultivated in them as well.126 It is also important to note that for Spener, and in contrast to the Anabaptist position that true new birth as only possible among mature adults, being born again does not require one’s “reason” [verstand]. Instead, following Reformation tradition Spener argues that there must first “be given a light in my soul” so that I can “recognize” [erkennen] certain spiritual truths in the first place and “devote [myself] to them” [ihnen beypflichte], since according to Spener human nature has been corrupted to the point that it cannot grasp these truths intellectually without prior regeneration.127 While holding this pessimistic view of human reason does not necessarily lead to affirming the regeneration of infants, as seen in the Calvinist tradition, Spener sees it as an opportunity to reconcile the doctrine of baptismal regeneration with the more Pietist and Puritan view of regeneration as the experience of a personal relationship with God. For Spener, the fact that receiving this light is not essentially a cognitive event means that the doctrine of baptismal regeneration must not necessarily be jettisoned, as it is in Anabaptist thought, since even an

123 Ibid.: 169. “Indeed,” Spener comments on the next page, “what a swift conversion and illumination.” 124 Ibid.: 170. 125 Ibid.: 160. 126 Ibid.: 170: „und gebe also dem Geist bey sich erstlich darinnen platz, da derselbe den hass der sünden in ihm würcken wolle, um nachmahl erst auch zu diesem liecht tüchtig zu werden.“ 127 Ibid.: 101.

Conclusion

97

infant can just as easily be given this “spark.” Spener even claims in another book that the regeneration of an infant is just as powerful as that of an adult.128

3.5.3 Scripture and Ecclesiology Despite his emphasis on personal experience and introspection, Spener sees no tension between the “internal” experience of new birth and the external authority of the Bible, since being born again entails the internalization of the Scriptural message. God’s dwelling in the Christian is therefore essentially coupled with the Christian’s dwelling in the scriptural text and the spiritual community (including, but not limited to Sunday worship), where the Word of God is encountered. Spener had a very high view of biblical inspiration: referencing 2 Tim. 3:16, he claims the Bible is inspired by the Holy Spirit and is to be the basis for all teaching.129 However, the importance of the Bible’s total authority, including its “verbal inspiration,”130 goes much deeper than the positivistic acceptance of certain doctrines: Spener sees the Bible, in its entirety, as something to be internalized during the Christian’s progress in renewal, as it is important that the born-again believer not only has an understanding of specific biblical passages, but also “of the entire context, which is nevertheless of the greatest importance.”131 Johannes Wallmann contrasts Luther, for whom the quality of “pureness” of the Word was most important, with Spener’s theology, which emphasizes the quantity of scriptural reading and meditation.132 This necessitates private reading of the scriptures (and not only during Sunday services), as well as additional meetings during the week in which the Bible is read aloud for those who cannot read.133 Wallmann even makes the initially shocking claim that Spener was even the first Protestant theologian to claim that every Christian should read the entire Bible from front to back, for him- or herself for devotional purposes.134 Until Spener, no one – not even Arndt – had come to such a radical conclusion, yet Spener’s logic of doubleindwelling necessitates this hermeneutic: “The more at home [unter uns wohnen] the Word of God is among us, the more we shall bring about faith and its fruits.”135 Spener’s hermeneutic is thus one of immersion in the scriptural world, or “context” 128 Cf. Theologische Bedencken III : 49–50. 129 Cf. Wiedergeburt: 100; Theologische Bedencken I: 159, Pia Desideria: 87–88. 130 Cf. Johannes Wallmann has written multiple essays on the subject of Spener’s biblical hermeneutics as compared to previous strands of Lutheranism, which can be found in Wallmann, Spener: 221–259. 131 Pia Desideria: 88. 132 Cf. Wallmann, Spener: 233. 133 Ibid.: 89. 134 Ibid.: 223. Cf. Pia Desideria: 88. 135 Pia Desideria: 87.

98

Baptismal Regeneration or Transformation of the Soul?

as he calls it, so that the word of God not only describes the experience of being born again but also guides it.

Furthermore, it is not hard to see how such a Biblical hermeneutic would make Spener critical of certain forms of “high church” ecclesiology, since an overemphasis on liturgical practice can overshadow the more pressing matter of immersion in the Biblical text. “If we put together all the passages of the Bible which in the course of many years are read to a congregation in one place,” writes Spener, “they will comprise only a very small part of the Scriptures which have been given to us.”136 In contrast to his reflections on the use of scripture, the ecclesiological need from Spener’s standpoint was not quantity – i. e. a church to which everyone belongs – but quality: namely, the necessity of tight-knit communities the key to the ecclesial renewal was the internal spiritual renewal of those Christians who do not merely view their church as a kind of civic club but instead those who have been truly “born again.” Private, independent Bible study by itself does not suffice, since questions are bound to arise concerning its interpretation. Teaching, singing, and general fellowship in a community of believers is also necessary, as Spener notes, citing Colossians 3:16: “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, as you teach and admonish one another in all wisdom, and as you sing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs.”137 Historically, Spener had first-hand experience with the success of such communities, known as collegia pietatis, or “schools of piety,” which closely resemble the kinds of Bible study groups popular particularly among later evangelicals. Spener views such groups as carrying a central ecclesiological importance, coining the phrase ecclesiola in ecclesia to signify a voluntary core community of believers – made up of those who are truly born again – which acts as the heart of the larger, state church.138 Thus while Pietism is often seen as being overly subjective or individualistic, it is important to realize that for these individuals, including Spener, this orientation arose not out of a desire to individualize the faith but instead out of a belief in the fundamental importance of the Church as an institution and the passionate desire to see it reformed. In the words of Tappert, “If the church was to be renewed, [Spener] felt, a beginning would have to be made with the remnant of true Christians in every congregation.”139 The practical foundation of the Church is not the sacraments or the authority of the priest – since if a priest is not born again, his guidance cannot be adequate – but the Bible itself and the community of those who dwell in its teachings by dwelling among one another.

136 137 138 139

Pia: 88. Pia: 91. Cf. Wallmann, Spener: 260–61. Tappert: 19.

Conclusion

99

3.5.4 The tension between doctrine and experience Of the various theological doctrines which tie into Spener’s theology of regeneration, the most important are baptism and justification. The question of why Spener retains the doctrine of baptismal regeneration when it would be much simpler, in light of his presence-centered conception of new birth, to reject it, is answered quite clearly by Spener himself: because he accepts the authority of the Bible. This creates an inevitable tension in Spener’s theology, one which will ultimately become a fundamental tension in modern theology: namely, the tension between the authority of fixed, doctrinal claims on the one hand, and the experience of the believer on the other. For Spener’s theological program this question is not so pressing, since he never makes the subjective certainty of being born again the basis for interpreting other theological doctrines: Spener does not interpret the Bible in light of this experience but tests the experience’s veracity in light of the Bible’s authority. Moreover, once one is born again, the external, authoritative words of scripture must be internalized in order to cultivate one’s new birth. Thus as important as this presence-experience is, it is dependent upon external factors – the (entire) Bible, the community of professing believers – for its content. Put another way, one could say that for Spener’s theology of the Bible, the concept of presence has an explanatory, but not legitimizing function. The “internal” experience of being born again, as real and palpable as it is, is still subordinate to the “external” truth of God testified to in Holy Scripture. This privileging of doctrine over experience becomes clear, for instance, in Spener’s reflections on infant baptism as regeneration: here, the presence of faith in the baby is used to explain the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, but it would be a mistake to say that this presence justifies the act of infant baptism – for how could one ever prove that newborns have faith? A baptized baby cannot demonstrate such faith, and no one could possibly remember having this faith at such a young age. For Spener the theological conviction comes first, its explanation in the language of inwardness second. However, in a subjective, as well as pastoral, sense, the internal presence does indeed have a “legitimizing” role in that it confirms one’s being born again. Here, despite doctrinal differences, Spener indeed anticipates the “subjective orientation” of later forms of evangelical, “born-again” Christianity.

4 Jonathan Edwards: The Born Again Experience Under the Authority of Scripture 4.1 Edwards’ Theological Background and Cultural Context 4.1.1 Introduction Jonathan Edwards was, according to historian Thomas Kidd, “the greatest American articulator of the evangelical view of God, man, and revival” in his era.1 A Puritan Calvinist active during the period of the so-called first Great Awakening,2 Edwards had the privilege of both experiencing and leading an epoch-shaping event in American Christianity. Moreover, it was through the first Great Awakening, led by the preaching of Edwards, George Whitefield, and many others, that a global evangelical network of revivalism was inaugurated whose “foundation,” writes historian Mark Noll, “was unswerving belief in the need for conversion (the new birth) and the necessity of a life of active holiness (the power of godliness).”3 The driving pastoral force behind 1 Thomas S. Kidd, The Great Awakening: 13. The full citation reads: “Edwards was not the most important preacher of his era. Surely that distinction rests with George Whitefield. But Edwards’ deep roots in the Reformed and Puritan spiritual tradition, combined with his uncanny brilliance, made him the greatest American articulator of the evangelical view of God, man, and revival.” 2 It should be noted that a small minority of scholars either reject the term “Great Awakening” or view the movement as greatly exaggerated. See, for instance, Jon Butler’s 1982 essay “Enthusiasm Described and Decried: The Great Awakening as Interpretive Fiction” in the Journal of American History, which brings attention to what Butler sees as a “gap between the enthusiasm of historians for the social and political significance of the Great Awakening and its slim, peculiar historiography” (Butler: 307). Joseph Conforti, like Butler, takes a constructivist stance towards to the term, but attributes the invention not to overenthusiastic historians but instead to later revivalists – those of the so-called second Great Awakening – who used “reified” concept to meet their “cultural and polemical needs” (Conforti, Jonathan Edwards: 4). A more level-headed contribution to this debate is the provocatively (and misleadingly) titled Inventing the “Great Awakening” by Frank Lambert, who points out that although the revivalists of this period (Whitefield, Edwards, etc.) did indeed not use the term “Great Awakening,” this subsequent appellation indeed names an organized and coherent movement, as attested to by the creative use of media by its promoters. It was an “invention” in the 18th-century sense of the word, writes Lambert, meaning not only that it was something new brought forth by human means (“revivalists believed that human ‘means’ were conduits of divine outpourings of grace”) but also in the sense of a discovery of something hidden: “The revivalists were evangelicals who were looking for a revival of ‘true religion,’ and they found it – uncovered or invented it – in the events of the 1730s and 1740s” (Lambert: 8). 3 Mark A. Noll, The Rise of Evangelicalism: 15.

Edwards’ Theological Background and Cultural Context

101

this historical event was certainly not Edwards but Whitefield;4 Edwards, however, was its greatest intellectual articulator and defender. Edwards grew up a century after the original Puritan settlements in New England, but also died “before there was an inkling of the American Revolution.” Hence Edwards, argues George Marsden, should not be thought of as an “‘American’ in the modern sense, but an English colonial loyal to the British crown.”5 What is more, Edwards belonged to the cultural elite, as the grandson of the immensely influential Northampton pastor Solomon Stoddard.6 His father, Timothy Edwards, was also a pastor as well as an accomplished revivalist. Jonathan Edwards was situated in a Puritan context full of political, philosophical, and theological turmoil. Politically, the anti-Protestant French to the north were a constant threat, and many Native American groups were quick to ally themselves with the French to fight against the British settlers, which led to a series of wars during Edwards’ lifetime, fought in conjunction with larger European conflicts but now known in the United States collectively as The French and Indian Wars. Philosophically, older, trusted methods of reflection were losing their credibility,7 and new ideas such as Deism, exemplified in John Toland’s Christianity Not Mysterious and later Matthew Tindal’s Christianity as Old as the Creation, represented a philosophical natural theology which directly contradicted the traditional Puritan beliefs of divine revelation and God’s sovereignty, as well as exhibiting a rationalism which allowed little to no room for mystical religious experience. Furthermore, the writings of John Locke and Sir Isaac Newton, both of whom would have an influence on Edwards, were beginning to make their way to the American colonies. This combination of constant political anxiety and philosophical plurality hardly engendered theological stability, leading to a New England Calvinism which, in the words of Conrad Cherry, was constantly having to steer between the Scylla and Charybdis of rationalism and enthusiasm, as well as between “neonomianism,” i. e. religion based on moral scrupulosity, and “antinomianism,” which in the Puritan context was a Predestination-inspired anti-authoritarianism.8 Of the latter two, antinomianism was more of a clear and present danger, with the most well-known 4 Noll estimates that during Whitefield’s ten-week preaching tour which began in September, 1740, he was heard by over half the population of the seven colonies he visited (Ibid.: 13). 5 George Marsden, “Biography,” in Cambridge Companion to Jonathan Edwards: 19. Cf. also Harry Stout, “The Puritans and Edwards. 6 It was also Stoddard who instituted the most liberal version of the Half-Way Covenant, which allowed not only those who had not yet shown the signs of regeneration to have their children baptized, but also to participate in the Lord’s Supper. It was Edwards’ overturning of this practice which primarily led to his dismissal from the parish, which he had taken over after his grandfather’s retirement. Cf. Noll, America’s God: 22–23. 7 Particularly Ramist philosophy, based on the writings of the martyred French Hugenot Petrus Ramus. Known as the “old logic,” Ramism was strongly influential in 17th-century Puritan thought but slowly began to recede in 18th-century New England curriculum. Cf. Marsden, Edwards: 63, 76. 8 Cf. the 10th and 11th chapters of Conrad Cherry’s The Theology of Jonathan Edwards.

102

Jonathan Edwards: The Born Again Experience

case being that of Anne Hutchinson, the charismatic wife of a wealthy merchant, who argued that those who are filled with grace do not necessarily need to heed the rules of religious and civil authorities (which she characterized as “works”) – ideas just as politically subversive as they were theologically controversial.9 At the source of such Puritan quarrels were the theological doctrines of divine sovereignty and predestination, doctrines at once highly speculative, yet also directly tied to the experience of being born again. For example, in light of the doctrine of predestination, to what extent can one speak of human free will being necessary to accept the grace of regeneration? Orthodox Puritans such as Edwards thought it best to err on the side of God’s sovereign will and eschew any language which would place salvation within humans’ moral capacities, for to reject the doctrine of predestination is to fail to do justice to God’s sovereignty and take seriously humanity’s fallenness, therefore undermining the profundity of God’s grace in conversion. Hence even proper “preparation” for regeneration, though necessary, is no guarantee of salvation, as ultimately only God through an act of pure grace can regenerate the sinner. One cannot force God to grant salvation. It comes of little surprise that many Christians, even those of traditionalist and Pietist persuasions (such as Spener in the previous chapter), found the orthodox Calvinist teaching on predestination difficult to swallow. In Edwards’ own time, this doctrine was falling increasingly into disrepute in Calvinist New England – by so-called “Arminians,” a term stemming from the 16th-century Dutch theologian Jacob Arminius, but which in Puritan New England functioned as a catch-all category for those who had theological qualms with the doctrine of predestination, particularly theological liberals who exhibited Deist tendencies. Pastors such as Jonathan Edwards’ father, Timothy Edwards, saw Arminianism as an acute threat to New England spirituality, and viewed both orthodox Calvinist doctrine and experiential, revivalist preaching as the proper remedy – a perspective wholeheartedly adopted and continued by Jonathan Edwards throughout his career.

4.1.2 Edwards’ youth, conversion, and subsequent career As the son of a Puritan revivalist preacher, Edwards was steeped in the culture of “awakening” from his childhood on; it was even at one of his father’s revivals, at the age of nine, that the young Jonathan Edwards first experienced his own “remarkable awakening,” as he recounts later in life in his Personal Narrative: “I was then very much affected for many months, and concerned about the things of religion, and my soul’s salvation; and was abundant in duties. I used to pray five times a day in secret, and to spend much time in religious talk with other boys; and used to 9 Cf. Noll, America’s God: 40.

Edwards’ Theological Background and Cultural Context

103

meet with them to pray together. I experienced I know not what kind of delight in religion. My mind was much engaged in it, and had much self-righteous pleasure; and it was my delight to abound in religious duties.”10

However, according to Edwards this “awakening” was not a true experience of “grace,” but instead the result of the young boy’s religious enthusiasm – as the term “self-righteous pleasure” hints. Hence “in process of time,” he continues, “my convictions and affections wore off; and I entirely lost all those affections and delights, and left off secret prayer, at least as to any constant performance of it; and returned like a dog to his vomit, and went on in ways of sin.”11 Edwards’ second period of spiritual struggle and awakening took place during his later teenage years, while attending college at Yale. While his schoolmates were behaving rowdily, Edwards was involved in a strict regimen of spiritual searching and meditation which led – as Puritan tradition expects – not to a sense of spiritual progress or superiority but instead profound frustration in light of his own perceived sinfulness. This period of struggle also included an intellectual facet, as Edwards became deeply troubled by certain elements of his inherited Calvinist Orthodoxy, particularly the doctrine of double predestination. He was “full of objections against the doctrine of God’s sovereignty in choosing whom he would to eternal life, and rejecting whom he pleased; leaving them eternally to perish, and be everlastingly tormented in hell.”12 The idea of God “choosing whom he would to eternal life,” while sending others “eternally to perish, and be everlastingly tormented in hell,” seemed for a time “like a horrible doctrine” for the young Edwards. His doubts were eventually overcome, but it happened neither by abandoning the doctrine nor by being rationally convinced by any argument; instead, it was through a “wonderful alteration in my mind.” “I remember a time very well,” he continues, “when I seemed to be convinced, and fully satisfied, as to this sovereignty of God.” Edwards could never give an account of how this change came about – at the time, he writes, he did not even attribute the change to God’s spirit. Moreover, Edwards was plagued by the question of whether he was truly converted, with much of his confusion stemming from the fact that he could not recount “exactly those steps, in which divines say [regeneration] is generally wrought.”13 He could only 10 11 12 13

Edwards, Works, 16: 790–791. Ibid.: 791. Ibid.: 791–92. Cf. Marsden: 40–41. Edwards, Works, 16: 759. In his very first journal entry (Dec. 18, 1722), written at the age of 19 and shortly after his ordination, Edwards expresses doubts concerning his own “interest in God’s love and favour,” for four main reasons, with the first two pertaining directly to the experience of preparation: “1. Because I cannot speak so fully to my own experience of the preparatory work, of which divines speak,” and “2. I do not remember that I experienced regeneration, exactly in those steps, in which divines say it is generally wrought.” The others are: “3. I do not feel the Christian graces sensibly enough, particularly faith. I fear they are only such hypocritical outside affections, which wicked men may feel, as well as others. They do not seem

104

Jonathan Edwards: The Born Again Experience

describe the personal experience of the doctrine becoming a “delightful conviction,” which enabled his intellect to “apprehend the justice and reasonableness of it.”14 After a short stint at a Presbyterian perish and a job as a tutor, Edwards inherited the congregation of his grandfather Solomon Stoddard in Northampton, Connecticut. It was while the pastor at this congregation that he led experienced the revivals of the “Great Awakening” in the 1730s, as well as their aftermath, which including receiving harsh criticism from the Christian skeptics of revival, or “Old Lights,” who often identified Edwards as their main intellectual enemy. Neither was Edwards’ career as a reverend without frustration: as brilliant as his intellect was, and as successful as his revival preaching had been, he frequently had difficulties relating to his parishioners and was often perceived as being cold and overly strict. His decision, for instance, to completely overturn his grandfather’s interpretation of the HalfWay Covenant that enabled all confirmed congregants who had not yet shown the marks of regeneration to receive communion, was the final straw for the strained relations between Edwards and his church community. Edwards was shortly afterwards forced out, and began ministering to a local Native American tribe in the area. He then died, at the age of 54, shortly after becoming president of the College of New Jersey (now known as Princeton University), from a smallpox inoculation he had received to encourage the local Native American population to do the same, in order to prevent an outbreak.

4.2 The Born Again Experience: Conversion 4.2.1 Introduction In addition to his own conversion narrative, reflections on new birth can be found in various texts written throughout Edwards’ lifespan, two of the most important of these being his early sermon “Born Again”15 and his celebrated 1733 sermon “A Divine and Supernatural Light.”16 “Born Again,” composed sometime between 1730 and 1731, is neither well-known nor considered to be to be sufficiently inward, full, sincere, entire and hearty. They do not seem so substantial, and so wrought into my very nature, as I could wish. 4. Because I am sometimes guilty of sins of omission and commission.” Cf. Yarbrough and Adams: 6–7. 14 Edwards, Works, 16: 792. Due to this uncertainty, Edwards’ earliest diary entries keep track – or, in Marsden’s words “literally kept score” – of experiences which would point to evidence of God’s grace (Marsden: Edwards: 52). 15 Edwards, Works, 17: 184–195. 16 Ibid.: 405–426.

The Born Again Experience: Conversion

105

among his best literary works. Mark Valeri describes it as “abstract,” “disjointed,” and “awkward,” but notes that it can be viewed as leading up “A Divine and Supernatural Light.”17 This is also the perspective of the present chapter, which will devote particular attention to these two sermons in tandem as a foundational, pre-Awakening exposition of Edwards’ theology of new birth. The theological reflection laid out in these two short works provides the groundwork for Edwards’ later theological reflections on the events of the Great Awakening, most importantly his A Faithful Narrative of the Surprising Work of God, a work containing Edwards’ observations and analyses of conversions witnessed firsthand, and Distinguishing Marks of a Work of the Spirit of God, a more systemic treaty, which seeks to identify the characteristics of true conversion.18 The subject of regeneration is also dealt with in his small Treatise on Grace, written sometime between 1739 and 1742,19 and Charity and its Fruits, written in 1749.20 His 1754 work A Treatise Concerning Religious Affections, still read devotionally by many evangelicals today, contains significant reflection on the internal change effected by regeneration.21

4.2.2 “Born Again” Edwards begins “Born Again” by asserting that new birth is not an event of baptism but is instead an event of the “heart” – a “conversion from sin to God,” of “being changed from a wicked to a holy man.”22 It is a radical change in one’s nature, which is why the image of birth is so appropriate, since regeneration does not result from education or a change in habits, nor is it a “moral” change, i. e. one effected through an act of one’s will; instead, according to Edwards being born again is a “physical” change, bestowing upon the recipient “new principles” of “perception,” “action,” and “understanding.”23 The new spiritual “principles” of the regenerate Christian as a kind of “infusion,” a term he will continually use throughout his career, since these are qualitatively different than natural human ones – “as far above any principles that man had before, as the heaven is high above the earth.”24 Therefore, according to Edwards there is a qualitative difference between the unregenerate and regenerate human being – “truly and entirely different as the nature of man is from the nature of mere clay or earth.” Due to the 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Cf. Valeri’s introduction to the text in Edwards, Works, 17: 184–85. Edwards, Works, 4. Edwards, Works, 21: 150–198. Edwards, Works, 8. Edwards, Works, 2. Edwards, Works, 17: 186. Ibid.: 187. Ibid.

106

Jonathan Edwards: The Born Again Experience

complete corruption of sin, which reduces the (non-regenerate) individual “to a state in many respects lower than when he was in his first dust,”25 those who are in this unregenerate state are “spiritually dead, condemned to eternal death.”26 Such a radical distinction between the regenerate and unregenerate, coupled with the Calvinist belief in divine sovereignty, would seem to invite the antinomian temptation towards a spiritual stance of resignation, in which each individual can only wait, passively, in the hope the God will regenerate him or her. However, in typical Puritan fashion Edwards reminds his congregants that they can be actively involved in the “preparatory work” which leads to regeneration. This involves confrontation with the Word of God, as encountered in scripture and sermon, followed by its subsequent internalization. The need for preparation is analogous to the observation that instead of creating each person in the way that God created Adam and Eve, God chooses to work “according to a fixed law of nature” of natural birth; and just as in natural birth, in which a baby develops in the womb of its mother, in spiritual birth there is also a “stated means” by which the Christian is born again, namely the conversion process.27 Always concerned with protecting God’s sovereignty, Edwards remarks that God is in no way forced to regenerate people in this way. “God could, if he pleased, convert man immediately without the use of any means at all,” just like God did with Adam and Eve; however, “he doth not so.”28 Such is the “ordinary way” of the Holy Spirit’s working. Moreover, the analogy to regular human birth applies not only to the preliminary preparatory stage but also to one’s state immediately after conversion: although one is now of a completely different nature, one is still a child in the faith. This explains why New Testament writers, and even Jesus, frequently address adult converts as “little children.”29 Edwards continues his theological reflection with four “reasons” for God’s choice of the new birth as an expression of grace. The first is that humanity’s true end cannot be reached through natural means. Following Calvin, Edwards states that “the proper use of human understanding is to know God, and the proper use of the human will and affections [is] to love God and enjoy him.”30 Yet this end cannot be accomplished by human nature due to the effects of sin. “The vessel,” writes Edwards, “is broken: man is born with essential defects.” Thus “supernatural principles” are “absolutely necessary in man in order to his serving and glorifying God.”31 The second “reason,” related to the first, is that humanity’s creation in the image of God has been tainted and thus humanity must be regenerated to attain this proper image once again. The 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

Ibid. Ibid.: 189. Ibid. Ibid. Cf. Matt. 18:3, John 13:33, Gal. 4:19, I John 2. Ibid.: 190. Cf. Calvin, Institutes, 1.1.1; 3.9.3; 3.10.2. Ibid.: 191.

The Born Again Experience: Conversion

107

third is that only by being born again does a person attain true happiness. This is because true happiness is “the enjoyment of God; but it is not possible that man should enjoy God with only those things in him which he receives by the first birth.”32 The fourth and final reason is mainly a summation of the first three points: that those things which are worth striving for in life, namely true knowledge of God and spiritual enjoyment, cannot be attained under the first birth. Edwards then concludes his short sermon be giving an “application” of the doctrine. The most important matter is the doctrine’s ability to awaken the listener (or reader) to the urgency of new birth, since “every man that shall not see the kingdom of heaven will feel the torments of eternity, so that, except that he be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.”33 The stakes, in other words, could not possibly be higher. On top of this is the fact that, according to Edwards, the majority of citizens of Northampton seem to be neither concerned about heaven and hell nor about the self-examination necessary for discerning one’s own spiritual state. As a pastor, Edwards views himself as obligated to warn them so that they do not continue “laying blocks in the way” of proper preparation, “making it more and more unlikely that they shall ever be the subjects of such a change.” In addition to these cases, there are also those individuals who view themselves as born again but have “never experienced any remarkable, habitual change in their hearts.”34 Their situation is perhaps more precarious than the first group, since it is marked by false spiritual pride. Edwards’ homiletic goal is therefore to move the listener first towards doubt, and then towards intense spiritual introspection, as demonstrated in one of the sermon’s concluding remarks: “There are many that think themselves born again, that they have been the subjects of this change which is so great, so wonderful, as it were, a coming out of nothing into being, that never have experienced any change in nature at all; that hadn’t had one new principle added, nor one sinful disposition really mortified; that never saw one glimpse of divine light, never saw the least of God’s or Christ’s glory, nor ever put forth one act of love to God in their lives. They think themselves now made renewed in the whole man that never have had one finger renewed, if I may use such an expression.”35

Autobiographical reflection in the form of a “return in their thoughts to [a] remarkable change,” i. e., a conversion experience, is necessary, but is not in itself adequate; of equal importance is the thorough introspection of “hearts, and tempers, and dispositions,” to identify a change which has not merely 32 33 34 35

Ibid.: 192. Ibid.: 193. Ibid.: 194. Ibid.

108

Jonathan Edwards: The Born Again Experience

been “superficial” and “transient” but instead reveals a profound “sense and disposition about spiritual and heavenly things.”36 This includes humility, love, and the character of an obedient child, which can be discerned through the “appointed means” of the Word, “which is the seed [of regeneration],” the law, “which causes the pangs of the new birth,” and “the ordinances administrated in the church, which is the mother.”37

4.2.3 “A Divine and Supernatural Light”: regeneration as spiritual illumination While the sermon “Born Again” presents a general theological outline of the doctrine of new birth and an admonishment to self-examination, “A Divine and Supernatural Light” can be seen as a continuation – or even consummation – of the first. Instead of a warning to those who may not be saved, the latter sermon is a theological celebration of the experience of being a new person through the change of regeneration – a newness which is signified by the metaphor of light. “There is such a thing,” writes Edwards, “as a spiritual and divine light, immediately imparted to the soul by God, of a different nature from any that is obtained by natural means.”38 This light “formally consists” in the “heart,” where it is given “immediately by the Spirit of God.”39 It represents the immediate presence of God’s Holy Spirit, inaugurated at the moment of new birth. Hence the sermon can be seen as an exercise in practical mystical theology, seeking to explicate an experience which is ultimately inexplicable, i. e. of communion with God, with the help of various linguistic tools such as metaphor, analogy, as well as more abstract theological and philosophical concepts. Edwards contrasts this “divine light” with what he calls a “natural” kind of light, which describes certain feelings and actions which all individuals, not merely those who have been born again, possess. Examples include feeling guilt and a general apprehension of truth, as well as certain religious concerns, such as God’s divine wrath and vengeance. Conscience is another primary example, as a natural faculty which enables humans to distinguish between right and wrong. All of these things are good, notes Edwards, and they can even be the result of God’s direct influence (referred to as “general grace”), yet they still “only assist the faculties of the soul to do that more fully, which they do by nature.”40 They are not the marks of regeneration, which bears the marks not only of a morally good but a “holy” or “spiritual” principle. 36 37 38 39 40

Ibid. Ibid.: 195. Ibid.: 410. Ibid.: 417. Ibid.

The Born Again Experience: Conversion

109

Those who truly have the spirit of God have something in addition to this natural light: an “indwelling vital principle,” in which God “unites himself with the mind of a saint, takes him for his temple, actuates and influences him as a new, supernatural principle of life and action. There is a difference; that the Spirit of God in acting in the soul of a godly man, exerts and communicates himself there in his own proper nature. Holiness is the proper nature of the Spirit of God. The Holy Spirit operates in the minds of the godly, by uniting himself to them and living in them, and exerting his own nature in the exercise of their faculties.”41

Throughout his writings, Edwards returns to the metaphor of light to articulate the event (including the experience) of this indwelling. Like Spener’s light, for Edwards this experience does not refer to a particular “impression made upon the imagination,” as if the convert sees something “outward” with his or her own physical eyes. Nor does the light refer to the revelation of any new propositional theological knowledge, which would be the view of “enthusiasts”; for Edwards, the “Word of God” adequately provides all the propositional spiritual truth ones needs. What the light does provide, on the other hand, is “a due apprehension of those things that are taught in the Word of God,” a “real sense of the excellency of God, and Jesus Christ, and of the work of redemption, and the ways of and works of God revealed in the gospel.”42 In other words, it is a kind of knowing which transcends the rational and which instead allows the believer to experience, and to comprehend, the glory of God in his or her “heart.” Following Calvin, Edwards sees this experience as also a kind of knowledge which, while non-speculative in its essence, does have direct influence on the rational faculties. The first of these influences is “negative,” meaning the removal certain “prejudices that are in the heart” which lead individuals to false theological conclusions (the Deist conception of God, or the rejection of predestination come to mind), thereby allowing the mind to more clearly see the rationality of orthodox doctrines, hence “becoming susceptive of the due force of rational arguments for their truth.”43 Here Edwards cites as an example the Biblical testimony that certain historical witnesses were convinced of Christ’s miracles, while others were not (primarily the “scribes and Pharisees”). Furthermore, we know from Edwards’ journals that this “negative” influence was also a personal experience, since it is here, as well as his later “Personal Narrative,” that he discloses his deep struggles as a young man with the doctrine of God’s sovereignty, by which Edwards means primarily the doctrine of predestination. 41 Ibid.: 411. 42 Ibid.: 412. 43 Ibid.: 414.

110

Jonathan Edwards: The Born Again Experience

That the doctrine of predestination could now not only no longer be a stumbling block, but even a “delightful conviction” for Edwards, points to the “positive” rational influence of the divine light: namely, that it redirects one’s attention, providing the mind with “more fixedness and intenseness” concerning the Christian doctrines, allowing it in turn to “have a clearer view of them” and “more clearly to see their mutual relations” and “take more notice of them.” Drawing on the language of Platonism, Edwards follows in the tradition of Calvin by comparing the one who has this divine light to someone viewing the objects of the earth with the light of the sun fully cast upon them.44 Such an individual, notes Edwards, has a clear advantage to anyone who must view the same objects “in a dim starlight or twilight.” He continues: “The mind having a sensibleness of the excellency of divine objects, dwells upon them with delight; and the powers of the soul are more awakened, and enlivened to employ themselves in the contemplation of them, and exert themselves more fully and much more to purpose. The beauty and sweetness of the objects draws on the faculties, and draws forth their exercises: so that reason itself is under far greater advantages for its proper and free exercises, and to attain its proper end, free of darkness and delusion.”45

The experience of God is, accordingly, not one which abandons the human faculties, including reason, but instead one which directs them towards a higher goal, by giving them a “sense” of what is truly “excellent,” to use Edwards’ vocabulary, leading to a higher rational clarity. However, this rational clarity is clearly secondary to the immediacy and directness of the sense given by the divine light. Those with this sense are able 44 Cf. Calvin, Institutes, 1.1.2: “And because nothing appears within or around us that has not been contaminated by great immorality, what is a little less vile pleases us as a thing most pure — so long as we confine our minds within the limits of human corruption. Just so, an eye to which nothing is shown but black objects judges something dirty white or even rather darkly mottled to be whiteness itself. Indeed, we can discern still more clearly from the bodily senses how much we are deluded in estimating the powers of the soul. For if in broad daylight we either look down upon the ground or survey whatever meets our view round about, we seem to ourselves endowed with the strongest and keenest sight; yet when we look up to the sun and gaze straight at it, that power of sight which was particularly strong on earth is at once blunted and confused by a great brilliance, and thus we are compelled to admit that our keenness in looking upon things earthly is sheer dullness when it comes to the sun. So it happens in estimating our spiritual goods.” Cf. also Ibid.: 3.2.34: “Therefore, as we cannot come to Christ unless we be drawn by the Spirit of God, so when we are drawn we are lifted up in mind and heart above our understanding. For the soul, illumined by him, takes on a new keenness, as it were, to contemplate the heavenly mysteries, whose splendor had previously blinded it. And man’s understanding, thus beamed by the light of the Holy Spirit, then at last truly begins to taste those things which belong to the Kingdom of God, having formerly been quite foolish and dull in tasting them…. Indeed, the Word of God is like the sun, shining upon all those to whom it is proclaimed, but with no effect among the blind. Now, all of us are blind by nature in this respect. Accordingly, it cannot penetrate into our minds unless the Spirit, as the inner teacher, through his illumination makes entry for it.” Cf. also Erdt, “The Calvinist Psychology of the Heart and the ‘Sense’ of Jonathan Edwards”: 170–72. 45 Edwards,Works, 17: 415.

The Born Again Experience: Conversion

111

to perceive “a glory that is so high and great, that when clearly seen, commands assent to their divinity, and reality.” The “evidence … of the truth of things of religion,” he continues, “is a kind of intuitive and immediate evidence.” (The “unregenerate,” who are only capable of “common assent” to spiritual truths, have no inkling of this, because the light is “as immediately from God, as light from the sun,” and is not the result of any human effort.) The faith of the regenerate is thus “spiritually seeing [Christ]”46 – an analogy which many, both in Edwards’ time and today, would reject as irrational (or at least non-rational), but which according to Edwards is perfectly rational in that it presupposes, correctly, a qualitative difference between the human and divine: for “when God speaks to the world, there should be something in his word or speech vastly different from men’s word.”47 It is perfectly reasonable, therefore, to conceive that there are spiritual truths which make the wisest of worldly men and women appear foolish. It is also perfectly rational, he continues, that divine things may be perceived by humans, and that this perception would have to be a pure gift, given immediately through noncreaturely means. Hence this perception would not be worldly knowledge but “spiritual wisdom,” whose function is not ratiocination but “excellency,” since “the perceiving of spiritual beauty and excellency no more belongs to reason, than it belongs to the sense of feeling to perceive colors, or to the power of seeing to perceive the sweetness of food.”48 Such language of “excellency” and “spiritually seeing” is reminiscent of medieval mysticism, yet Edwards is not addressing a small group of the spiritually advanced, but instead an entire congregation. Such a “sense” for these things is given by God to all who are truly born again, and while it would be wrong to try to “prove” one’s regeneration through an observation of experiences, the experience of God’s light can serve as an affirmation of the fact that they are God’s children. Therefore, just like the sermon “Born Again,” Edwards concludes by imploring his listeners to self-examination, asking if they can identify such a sense. Those who possess it will recognize the sweetness and joyfulness of the experience, as well as how their behavior has been changed as the result of the light’s presence. They will have a “joy” which is incomparable to other joys. It is overwhelming in its power, which is felt particularly in times of difficulty and affliction, “giv[ing] the mind peace and brightness, in this stormy and dark world.” They will experience how the light “influences the inclination, and changes the nature of the soul,” thus “effectually dispos[ing] the soul to give up itself entirely to Christ.” And finally, “as [the light] reaches the bottom of the heart,” molding the born again

46 Ibid.: 415; 418; 416; 419. 47 Ibid.: 420. 48 Ibid.: 422.

112

Jonathan Edwards: The Born Again Experience

Christian into a new being, it will also “effectually dispose to an universal obedience” and “universal holiness of life.”49

4.3 Guiding Theological Concepts in Edwards’ Theology of Regeneration 4.3.1 Introduction As the previous two sermons make clear, for Edwards the experience of being born again is inaugurated by an event, conversion,50 which is “birthed” by God through the labor pains of preparatory grace and sustained through the grace of new spiritual principles and of the guiding presence of the Holy Spirit. Those who, after personal reflection and meditation – which includes examination of how they lead their lives – find that they truly possess these characteristic have trustworthy evidence, based on the promise of scripture, that they are counted among God’s predestined children and will spend eternity in God’s presence. As a pastor caring for his flock, Edwards felt it to be his duty not only to frequently return to this theme but also to articulate it as clearly and forcefully as possible, so that those in his congregation can recognize and understand the work that the God was performing in their own lives as well as in the wider community. This need for articulation led Edwards to develop various concepts for better understanding the doctrine of regeneration and its application to the Christian, including various metaphors, analogies, and even philosophical categories. Most of these can already be found in “Born Again” and “A Divine and Supernatural Light,” and his later works allowed Edwards the opportunity to develop them, expand upon them, as well as apply them to the spiritual experience of his community. The following examines in more detail three concepts which appear repeatedly throughout the span of Edwards’ writings: light, sense, and infusion.

4.3.2 Light “No one,” according to George Marsden, “looked more intensely at the biblical meaning of light for his day than did Edwards.” The concept of light is the guiding metaphor in Edward’s theology of regeneration, which “meant to be given eyes to see the light of Christ in hearts that had been hopelessly deluded 49 Ibid.: 424. 50 Throughout his writings, Edwards sometimes uses the term “conversion” to refer to the moment of regeneration, while other times referring to the larger conversion process.

Guiding Theological Concepts in Edwards’ Theology of Regeneration

113

by sin.”51 Edwards was certainly not the first to use this term in relation to the experience of being born again: as has been shown, it is found in Pietists such as Spener and Arndt, and Edwards’ grandfather and mentor, Solomon Stoddard, also published in 1719 a Treatise Concerning Conversion, in which he emphasized “spiritual light” which opens the eyes of the soul to God’s glory, “captivat[ing] the heart” and “irresistibly conquer[ing] the will” so that the convert is powerless to do anything other than love and serve God.52 Moreover, as already noted, it appears frequently in Calvin. But most importantly, the image of light is deeply rooted in scripture, representing, in the words of Marsden, “the primary biblical image to describe God’s love.”53 The Psalmist, for instance, praises Yahweh as “my light and my salvation” (27:1),54 and Jesus himself is often portrayed through the metaphor of light, most famously in John 8:12: “I am the light of the world.”55 Furthermore, this light is conceived, both in the New Testament and in Edwards’ writings, as both permeating and reflected by those “children of light”56 who are graced with its presence. Comparable to its role in the Bible, the metaphor of light has multiple functions for Edwards, describing God, the presence of God, as well as the experience of being changed by God.57 In terms of how the light affects the regenerate Christian, it clearly has a mystical, transformative effect, “becom[ing] one with the knower” in the words of Michael McClymond.58 Like Spener, for Edwards the image of light refers to the presence of God’s Holy Spirit in the soul, of which the event of regeneration marks the beginning. This does not mean that the Holy Spirit is limited to acting only upon those who are born again: for Edwards and Puritan theology, the Holy Spirit is always present, which includes the pre-regenerative preparatory process; however, only in those who are reborn does the Holy Spirit act “as an indwelling vital principle,” forming a mystical union: “The Holy Spirit operates in the minds of the godly, by uniting himself to them, and living in them, and exerting his own nature in the exercise of their faculties. The Spirit of God may act upon a creature, and yet not in acting communicate himself…. But as

51 Marsden, Edwards: 55. 52 Cf. Solomon Stoddard, A Treatise Concerning Conversion (Boston, 1719): 57, 34. Cited in Ibid.: 118. 53 Marsden, Edwards: 54. 54 The image of light is also frequently applied to God in the Psalms, perhaps most memorably in Psalm 119:105: “Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path.” Cf. also Ps. 4:6, 18:28, 27:1, 36:9, 43:3, 118:27, 119:30, 139:12. 55 Cf. Lk 2:32, 11:35–36, as well as the entirety of the first chapter of John’s gospel. 56 Cf. Lk 16:8, Jn 12:36, Eph 5:8, 1 Th 5:5. 57 Perhaps the earliest development of the metaphor in Edwards’ writing is in his sermon, “Christ, the Light of the World,” (Works, 10: 533–547), in which Edwards applies the metaphor of the sun and its rays to all three persons of the Trinity, the Bible, and the heart of the regenerate Christian. 58 McClymond, “Spiritual Perception in Jonathan Edwards”: 210.

114

Jonathan Edwards: The Born Again Experience

he acts in his holy influences and spiritual operations, he acts in a way of peculiar communication of himself; so that the subject is thence denominated ‘spiritual.’”59

This change does not come from the outside, “so as violently to actuate it,” as Edwards writes in Religious Affections, but instead from within, “(i)n the soul where Christ savingly is” – where he “lives.”60 In Religious Affections, Edwards expands the light metaphor to describe the experience of spiritual illumination, incorporating Platonic imagery in which God is like the sun, and God’s grace shines in the Christian’s soul like light from the sun shining into a glass. But even this analogy, Edwards continues, is incomplete, since the sun’s light does not change the nature of the glass: “But the soul of a saint receives light from the Sun of Righteousness, in such a manner, that its nature is changed, and it becomes properly a luminous thing: not only does the sun shine in the saints, but they also become little suns, partaking of the nature of the fountain of their light.”61

Edwards also offers water as a parallel analogy to light, writing that not only do those who are truly reborn drink “the water of life” from the “original fountain,”62 but they also themselves become little fountains.63 Yet this mystical union is not completed on earth, even by regeneration: in a reference to 1 Cor. 13:12,64 Edwards describes the kind of vision possessed by the regenerate on earth is but a foretaste of a clearer, mystical vision only attainable in God’s heavenly presence: “Now the saints see the glory of God but by a reflected light, as we in the night see the light of the sun reflected from the moon; but in heaven they shall directly behold the Sun of righteousness, and shall look full upon him when shining in all his glory.”65 The second use of the light metaphor, which is related to the first, is to describe the change which has taken place in the recipient through the light of God’s presence. From this standpoint, the light is conceived as a kind of knowledge, though not in the sense of the mediation of new propositional truths. Moreover, not only one’s reason, but also the other internal faculties are 59 Edwards, Works, 17: 411. 60 Edwards, Works, 2: 342. Andrea Knutson writes, “Edwards identified a new spiritual perception as the distinguishing feature in regeneration, and Religious Affections is a spectacular feat of description and of searching to find the language for that description” (American Spaces of Conversion: 91). 61 Ibid.: 343. 62 Cf. Jn 4:14: “But those who drink of the water that I will give them will never be thirsty. The water that I will give will become in them a spring of water gushing up to eternal life.” 63 Works, 2: 343. 64 “For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then we will see face to face. Now I know only in part; then I will know fully, even as I have been fully known.” The more often cited King James translation reads: “For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.” 65 From “Thanksgiving Sermon, Nov. 7, 1734,” Sermons, Series II, 1734 (WJE Online Vol. 49). Cf. also “Christ, the Light of the World.” Cf. Naffziger: 19–20.

Guiding Theological Concepts in Edwards’ Theology of Regeneration

115

affected by this light; indeed, according to Edwards, “they are subject in such a manner, that they are not merely passive, but active in it.”66 Moreover, it is not an element of natural affections, religious or otherwise.67 Rather, the knowledge this light bestows, which “formally consists” in the “heart” and which Edwards frequently identifies with the presence of the Holy Spirit, is something qualitatively different: it is something “of which there is nothing of the like kind in the soul by nature.”68 In Charity and its Fruits, he even expands the analogy, including the metaphor of heat as a guide for discernment as to whether or not one possess true Christian light: “If their faith seems to have light in it, but no heat or warmth, it is not the true light.”69 Reason, under this conception, is something to be sanctified through this light, which means Edwards avoids both the specific enthusiast position of seeing new birth as providing new, extra-biblical knowledge as well as the general anti-rationalist tendency, certainly not foreign to the Pietist tradition, of seeing human reason as a hindrance to true spiritual enlightenment. Instead, he sees them as going hand in hand. Indeed, according to Edwards, the divine light is the fulfillment of human reason: “It not only removes the hindrances of reason, but positively helps reason. It makes even the speculative notions the more lively. It engages the attention of the mind, with the more fixedness and intenseness to that kind of objects; which causes it to have a clearer view of them, and enables it more clearly to see their mutual relations, and occasions it to take more notice of them.”70

Those who have it are “spiritually enlightened,” seeing the truth of Christianity through “a kind of intuitive and immediate evidence,”71 which expresses itself not merely in propositional affirmation of the Christian faith but in the “conviction” of its truth.72 It is “faith” in its truest sense (in John 12:44–46, writes Edwards, “believing” in Christ and “spiritually seeing him” are seen as parallel).73 This sanctification of one’s reason provides deeper insight into the Bible, giving “due apprehension of those things that are taught in the Word of God.”74 Here one is reminded of the young Edwards’ own struggles with the doctrines of predestination and God’s absolute sovereignty, about which he writes that he received peace, not due to any rational argument, but simply because he “saw further.”75

66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75

Works, 17: 416. Ibid.: 410–412. Cf. also Miscellany 782 in Edwards, Works, 18. Ibid.: 417, 411. Works, 8: 336. Ibid.: 415. Ibid. Cf. Ibid.: 413. Ibid.: 419. Ibid.: 412. Works, 16: 792.

116

Jonathan Edwards: The Born Again Experience

4.3.3 “Sense” The experience of having one’s internal faculties transformed, of being permeated and illuminated by the divine light of regeneration and receiving a new kind of knowledge, results in something Edwards calls a “sense,” a popular term in the Puritan tradition and which can be traced all the way back to Calvin’s Institutes.76 In his “Personal Narrative,” Edwards writes that “The first that I remember that ever I found anything of that sort of inward, sweet delight in God and divine things, that I have lived much in since, was on reading those words, 1 Timothy 1:17, ‘Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honor and glory forever and ever, Amen.’ As I read the words, there came into my soul, and was as it were diffused through it, a sense of the glory of the divine being; a new sense, quite different from anything I ever experienced before. Never any words of Scripture seemed to me as these words did. I thought with myself, how excellent a Being that was; and how happy I should be, if I might enjoy that God, and be wrapt up to God in heaven, and be as it were swallowed up in him.”77

Interestingly, Edwards writes that at this moment he did not suspect any “saving nature” in this event; however, from this time forward, he “began have a new kind of apprehensions and ideas of Christ, and the work of redemption, and the glorious way of salvation by him.” The reading of scripture, as well as prayer and contemplation, began to fill him with a “delightfulness” and “sweetness” he had not experienced before. “The sense I had of divine things,” he continues, “would often of a sudden as it were, kindle up a sweet burning in my heart; an ardor of my soul, that I know not how to express.”78 As ecstatic as the initial experience was, for Edwards this “sense” never disappeared: it became an ordinary presence that accompanied him throughout his life, a change in character which bestowed upon Edwards a deeper appreciation of the world around him as well as a more profound understanding of the depths of his own sinfulness (which in turn led him to more greatly appreciate God’s grace). Although Edwards often highlights the radical discontinuity between the regenerate and the unregenerate, it would be a mistake, argues McClymond, to 76 Cf. Terence Erdt, “The Calvinist Psychology of the Heart and ‘Sense’ of Jonathan Edwards”: 170–71. According to Erdt, “Perhaps of more importance to later Calvinist teacing on the makeup of faith is not Calvin’s metaphor of a special sense organ but his repeated mention of a unique emotional feeling or ‘sense’ as the essence of faith…. Generally in the Institutes Calvin uses the Latin sensus to signify the special feeling comprising faith. Unfortunately sensus has several possible meanings in English and has consequently been rendered with latitude, so much so that the continuity of the term in the Institutes is lost sight of, and its use among seventeenth-century Puritans writers, to say nothing of Edwards, unperceived” (Ibid.: 170.) 77 Edwards, Works, 16: 792. 78 Ibid.: 793.

Guiding Theological Concepts in Edwards’ Theology of Regeneration

117

conceive of Edwards’ sense as a kind of “sixth sense” given during conversion. Writes McClymond, “There is no sixth sense. The spiritual sense is interwoven throughout mundande experience and is integrally related to ethics, aesthetics, and ordinary perception. The spiritual sense is not a way of looking at ordinary things, but rather a way of looking at everything. The unregenerate and the regenerate live in the very same world, though only the latter properly perceive its spiritual depth and breadth.”79

Yet despite its constancy and its ordinariness, once the “sense of the heart” given by God to the regenerate, the possibility to be swept away in mystical rapture at any moment remains. Edwards writes, for instance, that oftentimes “only mentioning a single word, causes my heart to burn within me: or only seeing the name of Christ, or the name of some attribute of God.” Such experiences, he continues, carry him beyond worries of his own personal concerns: “It seems at such times a loss that I cannot bear, to take off my eye from the glorious, pleasant object I behold without me, to turn my eye in upon myself, and my own good estate.”80 Edwards struggles to articulate this experience, and often gives the impression of frustration over not being able to express them adequately. He often resorts to the use of rich, poetic language: “glorious majesty,” “majestic meekness,” “holy gentleness,” and “soulsatisfying” are just a few reoccurring examples of his attempts to communicate the intensity of both the desire to encounter God and its continuous, often unexpected fulfillment. Edwards also draws upon many metaphors and analogies, in addition to the light metaphor, to better explain what it means to have this new “sense.” One of his most frequent, most likely inspired by the writings of John Locke,81 is the analogy is between the knowledge of God’s presence and the knowledge of taste. Yet it is not only a blissful experience, but also a form of knowledge, as Edwards writes in “A Divine and Supernatural Light”: “There is a difference between having an opinion that God is holy and gracious, and having a sense of the loveliness and beauty of that holiness and grace. There is a difference between having a rational judgment that honey is sweet, and having a sense of its sweetness. A man may have the former, that knows not how honey tastes; but a man can’t have the latter, unless he has an idea of the taste of honey in his mind.”82

One can have never tasted honey and still “know” that it is sweet (for instance, if one reads this information somewhere), yet there is another kind of 79 McClymond, “Spiritual Perception in Jonathan Edwards”: 197. 80 Edwards, Works, 16: 800. 81 Cf. particularly Locke’s Essay Concerning Human Understanding, which deals extensively with taste as a form of knowledge. Locke uses the analogy of someone who only truly understands “the relish of a pineapple” after travelling to the “Indies” and tasting one. (Book IV, Ch. 11, §4; Cf. also Book II, Ch. 1, §6.) 82 Edwards, Works, 17: 414.

118

Jonathan Edwards: The Born Again Experience

“knowing” how honey tastes which can only be attained through the direct experience of its sweetness.83 It is similar, Edwards continues, using a different analogy, to the difference between being informed that a person is beautiful and experiencing this beauty oneself. Thus all three of these experiences – of taste, beauty, and God – are a form of knowledge: one recognizes these things, develops a “sense” for them, and even experiences “delight in the presence of the idea of [them]” – all of which happen in a way that the involves “the will, or inclination, or heart.”84 Conrad Cherry comments on the analogy’s epistemological function in Edwards’ theology: “The Edwardsean ‘tasting’ in faith is an experience which one man cannot have for another – and which he cannot give another. And it is a kind of knowledge which is radically different from a mere knowing about. Just as one cannot perceive the sweet taste of honey for another and give it to another, so knowledge in faith is a knowing which one man cannot attain for or give to another.”85

Thus Edwards’ use of the taste analogy is a classic example of tacit knowledge: the subject “honey” can be researched, for example, even to the point of knowing that “honey is sweet,” but a person still cannot “have a sense of its sweetness … unless he has an idea of the taste of honey in his mind.”86 Analogically, someone may have a certain notion of God, but still lack the immediate perception of God’s “excellency.”87 Moreover, the “sense” is tacit in that it guides Christian practice; for now, comments Andrea Knutson, “saints can know they have undergone conversion because they can detect a difference between old tendencies and new dispositions,” and they can be the “most effective judges” of whether or not they possess this “sense” because “they feel the difference.”88 4.3.4 Infusion In contrast to the concepts of “light” and “sense,” which serve a primarily phenomenological role, “infusion” performs a more theoretical function by 83 Cf. Calvin, Institutes: 3.2.15; 3.2.41. Erdt comments on Calvin: “The feeling of suavitas, or sweetness, the saint had in hearing the promise of salvation was the sign God cared for him, had chosen him for salvation. The feeling was the saint’s first-hand knowledge of God’s mercy…. It was the response resulting after the Holy Spirit changed the heart’s inclination. Then the heart had the capacity to respond to spiritual matters. The feeling was an inward revelation” (Erdt, “Edwards”: 173). 84 Edwards, Works, 17: 413–14. 85 Conrad Cherry, The Theology of Jonathan Edwards: 21. 86 Edwards, Works, 17: 414. 87 As McClymond comments, “There is no sweetness at second hand” (McClymond, “Spiritual Perception”: 213). 88 Knutson, American Spaces of Conversion: 67.

Guiding Theological Concepts in Edwards’ Theology of Regeneration

119

answering the question of how it is that a person can go from being a sinner, and thus without grace, to a life of spiritual virtue.89 Edwards believes that “the proper use of the human understanding is to know God, and the proper use of the human will and affections to love God and enjoy him,” and that “proper happiness consists in the enjoyment of God,”90 but the first birth is clearly defective for attaining this goal, due to the complete fallenness of sin. Edwards then describes the state of unregenerate humanity: “Man by his first birth has natural faculties of understanding and will. He has selflove. He has love to happiness and aversion to misery. And these principles may be so modified and directed that man may thereby attain to great learning, and human knowledge, and may excel in outward virtue and have a love to it. But man by this means can never come to the true knowledge of the glory of God, and the excellency of Christ, or come to a sincere and unfeigned love to God, or have a spiritual appetite, or be in a capacity for the reception of spiritual enjoyments.”91

If “true knowledge” of God means far more than the propositional knowledge contained in the Bible, then conversion, for Edwards, cannot be like the change one receives through education. Yet neither is it comparable to learning a habit, since is it not a “moral” change in the sense of learning better behavior.92 Regeneration happens in a moment and is a complete break with the old self, in which “a man receives a nature that is entirely diverse from the nature he had before or anything that he had in nature,” one which is “as truly and entirely different as the nature of man is from the nature of mere clay or earth.” He continues: “But man, when he is changed from a sinner to a saint, has new principles of perception and action, principles that are entirely diverse and not arising merely from [a] new disposition of the old…. They are principles that are vastly superior to those he had before, superior to ’em in such a manner that ’twould be as impossible that they should arise from them as that a principle of reason should arise from a power of sensation, and so that a brute could be changed into a rational creature without a physical change.”93 89 Cf. Miscellany #72 in Jonathan Edwards, The Miscellanies: a-500 (Works, 13): 242–43. “To say that a man who has no true virtue and no true grace can acquire it by frequent exercises of [it], is as much a contradiction as to say a man acts grace when he has no grace, or that he has it [when] he has it not. For tell me [how] a man that has no true grace within him shall begin to exercise it: before he begins to exercise it, he must have some of it. How shall [he] act virtuously the first time? how came he by that virtue which he then acted? Certainly not [by] exercise of virtue, for it supposes that he never acted virtuously before, and therefore could not get it by acting of it before” (242). 90 Edwards, Works, 17: 190; 192. 91 Ibid.: 192. 92 Ibid.: 187. 93 Ibid.

120

Jonathan Edwards: The Born Again Experience

The contrasting imagery used in this passage – humanity and clay, reason and sensation, animals and humans – varies, but its rhetorical point is clear: to emphasize the complete, supernatural break that the moment of regeneration entails. “Physical change” is the key term here: as opposed to a “moral” change, which involves the human agent’s own free will,94 this refers to God’s supernatural intervention in order to effect a change in the soul’s own internal faculties. “There is infused,” writes Edwards, “a principle of spiritual understanding and spiritual action that is as far above any principles that man had before, as the heaven is high above the earth.”95 This terminology of “infusion” is a constant in all of Edwards’ major writings on new birth. In Charity and its Fruits, he compares the infusion of regeneration to the way that “in the first generation, several faculties are communicated in one generation of the child, the sense of seeing, hearing, feeling, speaking and tasting, and the power of moving, breathing and digesting.”96 Just as 2 Corinthians 5:17 declares that for a “new creature,” “all things have become new,” so does what happens in regeneration affect “all the graces of the Christian”: “All of them are members of the individual after conversion, and none of them were members before conversion.”97 In his Treatise on Grace he remarks that the “saving grace in the heart” bestowed in conversion takes place through “an immediate infusion or operation of the Divine Being upon the soul.”98

4.4 Experiences from the Revival Front 4.4.1 The beginnings of the Great Awakening Edwards’ celebrated book A Faithful Narrative of the Surprising Work of God in the Conversion of Many Hundred Souls in Northampton recounts the religious awakening experienced by Edwards’ congregation in 1734 and 1735. Its initial publication in London in 1737, by none other than Isaac Watts (along with John Guyse), had an immense impact on trans-Atlantic evangelicalism, particularly in Great Britain but certainly not limited to the English-speaking world, as it began almost immediately to be translated into multiple

94 “A moral change is wrought by human instruction, and government, and example, and by a man in himself, by resolution and pains. But these changes don’t reach to the nature of the soul so as to change that” (Ibid.). 95 Ibid. Italics mine. 96 Edwards, Works, 8: 332. 97 Ibid.: 335. 98 Edwards, Works, 21: 165.

Experiences from the Revival Front

121

languages. Already by 1738, for instance, it had been translated into German by two separate groups (one Lutheran and one Reformed).99 Edwards’ narrative begins with rumblings of revival first beginning in April 1734, in the wake of two tragic deaths: first, of a young man “in the very bloom of his youth, who was violently seized with a pleurisy” and died shortly afterwards; and secondly, in the death of a young married woman who, though at first “in great distress in the beginning of her illness,” was later “hopefully converted before her death” and spent her final moments “full of comfort” and in spiritual discussion.100 These two events were a jolt particularly for the youth of the town, whom Edwards characterizes as having previously been living care-free lives (“frolicking,” in his 18th-century New England parlance) but were now increasingly filled with spiritual earnestness. Edwards seized upon this opportunity to preach to the youth, now no longer of a frivolous temperament, convincing them to establish small groups for Bible study and spiritual edification. By December, his entire town seemed to be filled with an increasing religious earnestness which began to express itself in dramatic conversion experiences: “The Spirit of God began extraordinarily to set in, and wonderfully to work amongst us; and there were, very suddenly, one after another, five or six persons who were to all appearance savingly converted, and some of them wrought upon in a very remarkable manner.”101

“All seemed to be seized with a deep concern about their eternal salvation,” with such “strong conviction” found even among those who were considered “the vainest, and loosest persons in town,” as Edwards commented in a private letter to another pastor.102 Edwards remarks in A Faithful Narrative that he was initially skeptical of 99 Cf. Jan Stievermann, “Faithful Translations: New Discoveries on the German Pietist Reception of Jonathan Edwards.” Stievermann’s recent essay is particularly important for Edwards studies in that it corrects the long-held assumption that there was only one translation of A Faithful Narrative into German at this time, and that this translation had a less than significant influence. Instead, the existence of two early translations, one by Lutheran Pietists and the other by Reformed, reveals that “the news about the American awakening was received enthusiastically as an encouraging sign of God’s advancing kingdom, a model for inner-churchly revivals, and an argument for the legitimacy of Pietist conventicles at home” (Ibid.: 324). Stievermann agrees with the notion of a “trans-atlantic evangelical consciousness,” and describes in his essay the kinds of theological challenges that such a network entails, the most significant of these being the German Lutheran Pietists appreciation for Edwards with their strong rejection of his Calvinist conception of predestination. “Lutheran as well as Reformed,” he concludes, “these circles were more intimately interwoven into transatlantic communication networks with Anglo-American evangelicals that historians have acknowledged” (Ibid.: 362). 100 Edwards, Works 4: 100; cf. 147–48. Cf. Marsden’s chapter “The Mighty Works of God and Satan,” in Edwards: 150–67. 101 Ibid.: 149. 102 Ibid.: 101; cf. 148–49.

122

Jonathan Edwards: The Born Again Experience

the intensity of many conversions, and thought that this might actually serve to turn others away from Christianity (a comment that would almost certainly have reminded his readers of Paul’s concerns about glossolalia in 1 Corinthians 14), yet to his delight the conversions seemed to have the opposite effect, causing genuine interest in Christian piety to spread throughout the region. Thus the events of the early 1730s filled the young Edwards with great optimism, and he began to collect arguments for their authenticity against possible detractors. Those who had been converted, he noted, seemed to show a genuine change of character and behavior and did not merely revert to their previous ways after a short span of time. He was particularly surprised, for instance, by one young woman “who had been one of the greatest company-keepers in the whole town,” but had now been “given … a new heart, truly broken and sanctified.” Despite her reputation and the suddenness of her conversion, he remarks that the change she has exhibited since that time has not faltered, so that he could not reasonably doubt the genuineness of her change.103 And unlike previous times, in which conversion was experienced primarily among the women, “about the same number of males as females” were being “savingly brought home to Christ.” Indeed, the “awakenings” appeared to transcend all boundaries of status, monetary income, and education; and even more importantly, the events were not limited to whites, as “several Negroes … appear to have been truly born again in the late remarkable season.”104 The fact that these experiences could not be identified with a particular sociological contingent was for Edwards evidence that the revival was not merely the result of human factors but was truly the work of the Holy Spirit. Edwards, always the analyst, uses his experiences in the revival to lay out a typical pattern of conversion, according to which individuals “are first awakened of their miserable condition” and “the danger they are in of perishing eternally, and that it is of great importance that they escape.”105 This is often accompanied by extreme mental anguish, bringing the convert “to the borders of despair” in light of “a sense of their exceeding wickedness and guiltiness in [God’s] sight” and the knowledge that “God would be wholly just and righteous in rejecting them.”106 Edwards reflects that this despair is usually initially directed towards outward sins, but then steadily grows deeper and more inward, taking on a more theological character, in which it is concerned with issues such as “the dreadful corruption of their nature, their enmity against God, the pride of their hearts, their unbelief, their rejection of Christ,” among others.107 It is while in this state of deep theological despair 103 104 105 106 107

Ibid.: 149. Ibid.: 157–159. Ibid.: 160. Ibid.: 162; 163. Ibid.: 164.

Experiences from the Revival Front

123

that pre-regenerate converts wonder about in their “legal” humiliation until, in typical Puritan fashion, “God gives them a conviction of their own utter helplessness and insufficiency,” and reveals the “true remedy.”108 This leads to an experience of illumination, and often also certainty concerning the truths of the Bible,109 as well as an overall feeling of “joy” and “exquisite sweetness.”110 And as always, Edwards is clear that it is God who is the actor, not the convert. At the same time, Edwards’ experiences during the revival led him to reject any rigid schema of the preparatory steps experienced during conversion, as “God has appeared far from limiting himself to any certain method.” “God has of late abundantly shown,” for instance, that the process of preparation does not need to be prolonged and marked by “long and often repeated fruitless trials.” Instead, “in multitudes of instances he has made a shorter work of it.”111 Edwards was even led to conclude that true conversion can take place in little children, as he documents in the case of Phebe Bartlett.112 Moreover, he acknowledges that many converts cannot identify the exact time in which God’s grace was implanted in their hearts, and others, he continues, have most likely misdated the moment.113 108 Ibid.: 166. 109 Writes Edwards, “…they have been as far from doubting of the truth of them as they are from doubting whether there is a sun, when their eyes are open upon it in the midst of a clear hemisphere, and the strong blaze of his light overcomes all objections against his being. And yet many of them, if we should ask them why they believed those things to be true, would not be able well to express or communication a sufficient reason to satisfy the inquirer, and perhaps would make no other answer but that they see ‘em to be true: but a person might soon be satisfied, by a particular conversation with ‘em, that what they means by such an answer is, that they have intuitively beheld, and immediately felt, most illustrious works and powerful evidence of divinity in them…. Some are thus convinced of the truth of the Gospel in general, and that the Scriptures are the Word of God: others have their minds more especially fixed on some particular great doctrine of the Gospel, some particular truths that they are meditating on; or are in a special manner convinced of the divinity of the things they are reading of, in some portion of Scripture” (Ibid.: 179). 110 Ibid.: 182; 184. 111 Ibid.: 166. 112 According to the account, Phebe’s parents did not consider children of her age to be capable of understanding true conversion, but the child showed an incredible amount of piety, secretly retiring for private prayer and even earnestly paying attention to theological discussions (although Edwards does not write that she actually understood them). This was only the start of it, as her religious yearning was by a mystical experience: “…she continued exceedingly crying, and wreathing her body to and fro, like one in anguish of spirit. Her mother then asked her whether she was afraid that God would not give her salvation. She answered, ‘Yes, I am afraid I shall go to hell!’” She continued crying for a period of time before abruptly stopping and declaring to her mother that “the kingdom of heaven is come to me” (Ibid.: 200). 113 “And many are doubtless ready to date their conversion wrong, throwing by those lesser degrees of light that appeared at first dawning, and calling some more remarkable experience that they had afterwards, their conversion; which often in great measure arises from a wrong understanding of what they have always been taught, that conversion is a great change, wherein old things are done away, and all things become new, or at least from a false arguing from that doctrine” (Ibid.: 178).

124

Jonathan Edwards: The Born Again Experience

4.4.2 “Distinguishing marks” As the “great awakenings,” as Edwards calls them, spread throughout New England, so did many accompanying controversies. In the years after the initial conversions of 1734–35, emotional outbursts during religious meetings had become more common and more extreme. “It was a very frequent thing,” reported Edwards to a colleague, “to see an house full of outcries, faintings, convulsions and such like.”114 Such intense expressions of religious fervor proved particular attractive to the mentally instable, as well as many others who tended towards theological heresies or displayed judgmental attitudes. Even more destructive was the fanaticism of revivalists such as James Davenport, an itinerant who had a penchant for accusing the local pastors as being unregenerate, and even once held a book burning which included cherished Puritan works, followed by Davenport encouraging his congregants to burn jewelry and clothing as well (legend has it that Davenport tossed his only pair of trousers into the fire).115 Examples such as these added fuel to fire of the most outspoken anti-revivalist voices, and the Great Awakening became a movement that literally split Edwards’ theological tradition: into the socalled “New Lights,” who embraced at least some of the phenomena associated with the revivals as the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, and the “Old Lights,” who rejected them wholesale as expressions of mass hysteria.116 Aside from the sweeping criticisms of revivalism from various intellectuals, Edwards’ more basic pastoral concern was to help common parishioners understand their own experiences. “One of the most vexing problems in the Great Awakening,” comments C.C. Goen, “was the doctrine of personal assurance: how does a convert know he is truly saved, and how does he prove it to others?”117 Edwards addressed these questions in The Distinguishing Marks of a Work of the Spirit of God, published in 1741, in which he admits that there are flaws in the behavior of many of those who had been “awakened” during the revivals, but refuses that to acknowledge that such flaws discount the true work of Holy Spirit. Moreover, many supposed arguments against the revivals, or “negative signs” as he calls them, are not flaws at all but merely external phenomena.

114 Edwards, Works, 4: 547. Cf. Ibid.: 51. 115 Cf. Marsden, Edwards: 275. 116 Cf. Marsden’s chapter, “A House Divided,” in Edwards: 268–90. It was Edwards’ reasoned, circumscribed support of the movement that made Old Lights such as Charles Chauncy view his supposed heresy as all the more dangerous. “Error is much more likely to be propagated, when it is mixed with truth,” wrote Chauncy in his critique of Edwards. “This hides its deformity and makes it go down the more easily” (Cited in Amy Schrager Lang, “‘A Flood of Errors’: Chauncy and Edwards in the Great Awakening”: 160). 117 Goen, “Editor’s Introduction,” in Edwards, Works, 4: 47.

Experiences from the Revival Front

125

4.4.2.1 “Negative signs” According to Edwards, the “negative signs” – real or apparent faults in converts that were being used to cast skepticism on the entire revivalist movement – are primarily nine in number, which he confronts one by one. Firstly (1), just because a “work” appears odd, new, or even “very unusual or extraordinary” (such as “trembling” or “quaking”) does not entail that it is not the work of the Holy Spirit. “We ought not to limit God,” he warns, “where he has not limited himself.”118 This entails that (2) a religious experience cannot be judged, either positively or negatively, based on any physical reaction, whether that be “tears, trembling, groans, loud outcries, agonies of body, or the failing of bodily strength.”119 Such experiences, in themselves, in no way add or detract from the authenticity of a conversion. (3) Nor does it detract from the authenticity of a conversion when people make “a great ado” and “a great deal of noise about religion,” or (4) that it has a great effect on their imaginations.120 Instead, it is “human nature” that people often react with “strong affection,” and God is perfectly free and justified in using the human faculty of imagination, for instance with dreams, visions, and other “glorious sights.”121 It is also not fair to doubt a conversion experience because it (5) appears to be influenced by the example of others, which is to be expected in the communal setting of revivals and other religious meetings. Indeed, many “religious affections” do “prove flashy, and soon vanish, as Christ represents of the stony-ground hearers,” but others abide and thus “prove to be of saving power.”122 Moreover, (6) the fact that those who have been converted sometimes “behave imprudently” afterwards is no proof that “a work … is not from the Spirit of God.” Teenagers, in other words, no matter how truly regenerate they may be, will often still behave like teenagers, and those with difficult personalities will not necessarily become miraculously sociable after their conversion. “We are to consider that the end for which God pours out his Spirit,” writes Edwards (in what is arguably the best quotation of the book), “is to make men holy, and not to make them politicians.”123 According to Edwards, it is also important to avoid overly intellectualized understandings of revivals which assume that (7) any true work of God will leave the recipient free of theological errors. Edwards was deeply concerned with preserving Calvinist orthodoxy and fighting perceived heresies such as Arminianism, and he also believed that those who are born again can be led, 118 119 120 121 122 123

Edwards, Works, 4: 229. Ibid.: 230. Ibid.: 234–35. Ibid.: 234; 235–36. Ibid.: 239. Ibid.: 241.

126

Jonathan Edwards: The Born Again Experience

through diligent prayer and study, to a rational and mystical appreciation of true doctrine; but he also acknowledged the genuine presence of the Holy Spirit in those with whom he often strongly disagreed. “Yea,” comments Edwards, “the same persons may be the subjects of much of the influences of the Spirit of God, and yet in some things be led away by the delusions of the Devil.”124 It should also not be surprising that (8) “counterfeits” among the revivals will emerge, as it has been the case throughout Christian history that certain individuals, often leaders, are reasonably perceived to be “true Christians,” yet later reveal themselves to be “apostates” – Judas being the most obvious example.125 (On this point Edwards, ever the orthodox Calvinist, is careful not to imply that such individuals were once truly members of the church, only to later fall away from God’s grace due to their own free will.) Finally, and perhaps most controversially, (9) Edwards sees no problem in a “work” being prompted by ministers resorting to fearful portrayals of hell’s torments and God’s wrath. “If I am in danger of going to hell,” he remarks, “I should be glad to know as much as I possibly can of the dreadfulness of it.”126 4.4.2.2 “Positive evidences” While the “negative signs” are in themselves neutral, neither by necessity good nor bad, there are also five “positive evidences” by which offer valid confirmation that a “work” – whether in oneself or in others – is truly of the Spirit of God. The first of these is simply that the convert “raise[s] their esteem” of Jesus Christ, confessing the he is the Son of God and doing so not merely in word but also “with manifestation of esteem and affection.”127 Moreover, those who have truly been recipients of God’s saving work (2) will be drawn away from the “corruptions and lusts” of “the world” and instead (3) towards the Bible, whose authors “God has appointed and inspired to deliver to his church its rule of faith and practice.”128 Additionally, despite inevitable theological disagreements, Edwards asserts that all true converts (4) will be affirmative of the general revealed truths of Christianity: that God exists, is good, and hates sin; that human beings are “exceedingly sinful” but also have “immortal souls,” and thus must be held accountable before God. This is all part of the illumination granted by “the spirit of truth,” which “removes our darkness and brings us to the light, undeceives us, and convinces us of the truth.”129 And finally, (5) those who are truly filled with God’s spirit will possess a spirit of love, loving both God as well as being filled with kindness 124 125 126 127 128 129

Ibid.: 244. Ibid.: 244–45. Ibid.: 247. Ibid.: 249. Ibid.: 251, 253. Ibid.: 255.

Conclusion

127

and goodwill towards other human beings. All five of these marks, continues Edwards, are contrary to “the spirit of the Devil” and should grant Christians assurance that they have truly been transformed. “These marks … plainly shew the finder of God, and are sufficient to outweigh a thousand such little objections, as many make from oddities, irregularities, and errors in conduct, and the delusions and scandals of some professors.”130 In light of these reflections, Edwards is led to conclude that the “extraordinary influence” that has swept over his land “is undoubtedly, in the general, from the Spirit of God.”131 Hence, the revivals of Puritan New England, despite certain excesses, are to be cherished as a true and faithful expression of God’s Spirit. Still, theological errors, expressions of human pride and arrogance, as well as false and manipulative leaders (here, one cannot help but think of Davenport) are bound to arise. It would be a mistake, however, to expect such perfection from regenerate souls.

4.5 Conclusion 4.5.1 Phenomenology of religious experience and the certainty of regeneration Jonathan Edwards was both highly celebratory and deeply skeptical of religious experience, especially concerning the subject of conversion. It is a tension that arises from the “experimental Calvinism” of his day, which celebrated the joy, and even mystical rapture, experienced the individual Christian as a gracious gift from a loving God, yet which also constantly reminded its adherents of the depth of human sinfulness and its seductive ability to express itself in religious experience which, on the surface, can appear identical to true regeneration and sanctification. This tension has its roots in Edwards’ own autobiography, which saw him experience an “awakening” at a very early age, but whose effects ultimately faded away with time. Later, after experiencing what he interprets as being true, “saving” conversion – i. e., true regeneration – as a young man, Edwards was then confronted with an outbreak of conversion experiences which he could not deny as being a “surprising work of God,” yet which he also acknowledged were collectively fraught with theological error, fanaticism, and mere human emotion. What was necessary for pastors was theological discernment, which entailed a strongly intellectual component in that the ultimate guide was the Bible and proper doctrine, yet which also acknowledged that the Holy Spirit influences humanity in all its facets, including the “affections.” 130 Ibid.: 258–59. 131 Ibid.: 260.

128

Jonathan Edwards: The Born Again Experience

Absolute certainty of one’s own regeneration is presumptuous, since salvation ultimately depends on the sovereign grace of God. However, Edwards sees God as graciously granting the convert experiences which testify to his or her true generation. Edwards resorts to metaphorical imagery to describe these experiences, particularly from human sense experience, for which he has received particular attention, as well as rightly-earned praise, from scholars.132 This is seen in his description of the internal presence of rebirth as a “light,” which bestows a new “sense” upon the regenerate soul, and in his perceptive and didactically effective analogy of the difference between knowing what honey is and knowing how it tastes. Like Spener, these metaphors are both descriptive and theoretical, phenomenological and theological. 4.5.2 Free will and predestination As mentioned, Edwards takes a clear stance on the issue of predestination, believing that his own experience confirms that his new birth was no work of his own, which in turn affects everything he has to say about the subject. As Edwards biographer Conrad Cherry remarks, although in certain strands of Calvinism this doctrine was highly speculative, being employed “for the explanation of the mind of God and the soteriological status of every man in the universe,” for Edwards, following the tradition of Luther and Calvin, “predestination is an existential affirmation that what a man is in faith, he is by the sovereign will of a trustworthy God.” “It is a way of affirming that faith is not a product of human nature,” Cherry continues, “that it is not achieved through man’s obedience to the law. Saving faith is predestined: it is by grace alone; a free, undeserved gift of God.”133 Edwards does not see the role of the 132 According to Juan S nchez Naffziger: “Although Edwards often used logic in order to advance his arguments and make ideas clear and compelling, the rhetorical force of his sermons lay mainly in their imagery” (“Divine Communication in a Time of Revival”: 12). Obviously, “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” is often viewed as Edwards’ most rhetorically powerful work. According to Edwin Cady, “[this sermon] is in the widest sense a work of literary art. It uses all the weapons, conscious and subconscious, verbal, emotional, and sensuous, of the author at his best” (Cady, “The Artistry of Jonathan Edwards”: 69). 133 Conrad Cherry, The Theology of Jonathan Edwards: 56–57. For those whose only familiarity with Calvinist thought is the speculative doctrine of predestination, it might be tempting to assume that because, A) the difference between being regenerate and non-regenerate is radical, and B) only God can truly effect regeneration, that it follows that each individual can do nothing other than to wait passively and hope that God regenerates him or her. Such a deduction, referred to generally as “antinomianism,” was always a temptation within Puritan thought because it takes certain ideas of Calvinist theology to their logical conclusion (Ibid.: 186–215.). However, orthodox Puritan thought, which includes Edwards, always sought to avoid such antinomianism, and the doctrine of preparation – which was confirmed by personal experience as well as observation of others – was generally effective at keeping this heresy at bay.

Conclusion

129

pastor as contributing in any way the process of regeneration except as a receptacle through which God’s Spirit moves the heart of the listener, and his writings on the Great Awakening reflect this position. Like most Puritan theologians, Edwards actually believed that a “natural” heart which is not yet born again will be filled with offence towards and even hatred of God when confronted with the message of the Bible; the heart can thus only be changed by the Holy Spirit and not through any kind of persuasion from the pastor or anyone else. There is no call to a “decision for Christ” in any of Edwards’ sermons or writings. It is within this framework that Edwards’ practice of preaching on hell is to be understood. Edwards certainly was not unusual in his predilection for describing the horrors of hell, as it was a popular subject in Puritan sermons of his day. His most well known writing today, the sermon “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God,” is infamous for its horrifying imagery of “natural men … held in the hand of God over the pit of hell,” of a “lake of burning brimstone … extended abroad under you,” of a God “that holds you over the pit of hell, much as one holds a spider, or some loathsome insect, over the fire, abhors you, and is dreadfully provoked; his wrath towards you burns like fire; he looks upon you as worthy of nothing else, but to be cast into the fire; he is of purer eyes than to bear to have you in his sight; you are ten thousand times so abominable in his eyes as the most hateful venomous serpent is in ours.”134

Is this the work of revivalist scare-mongering? At least in Edwards’ own theological understanding of his actions it was not, as he was not using this imagery of hell in order to pressure his listeners into becoming Christians; instead, he believed that he had observed that God used such language as a means to bring sinners to conversion.135 In addition, the idea that one who is truly born again could later lose the grace of regeneration is rejected categorically – a rejection that appears to be based more on normative theological claims (in this case, the doctrine of predestination) than experience. Edwards openly admits that many who are converted later fall away, as he experienced during the revivals of 1734–37, but their experience was not true regeneration but instead the expression of natural “religious” sentiments. Edwards also appeals to his own childhood, in which he experienced “two remarkable seasons of awakening” before encountering the change that brought him a new “sense.”136 While Edwards does not view the experience negatively, he interprets the pleasure he gained

134 Works, 22: 409; 410; 411. 135 Ibid.: 409. In the words of Stephen Yarbrough and John Adams, Edwards’ sermons “do not attempt to persuade listeners to choose rightly but to convince them that they cannot choose rightly and should submit to God’s will” (Delightful Conviction: 88). 136 Edwards, Works 16: 790.

130

Jonathan Edwards: The Born Again Experience

from his early religious zeal as purely “self-righteous,” and remarks that “in process of time, my convictions and affections wore off.”137

4.5.3 Preparationism and the importance of narrative Much has been made of the Puritan doctrine of preparation. It is important to remember that for orthodox Calvinists, however, to whom Edwards belonged, such preparation did not cause or guarantee God’s granting of new birth; new birth is instead based on God’s free decision to grant this grace. As is the case in traditional Puritan theology, for Edwards regeneration takes place in a “moment,” but he does not believe that every convert, during this moment, is aware of what is happening. Often (as was the case with Edwards himself) full realization of what has happened only comes with later reflection – a statement which places Edwards theologically close to the position of Spener, who emphasized that new birth begins small, as a “spark,” and steadily grows during the process of sanctification. Yet Edwards, unlike Spener, came from a tradition which laid strong importance on the ability not only to recall but also to narrate the moment of conversion, and this perspective has clearly impacted Edwards’ theology, seen in his autobiographical concern for the conversion experience as well as its frequent appearance as a theme in sermons. And as opposed to Spener, who was generally skeptical of such narratives, Edwards’ pastoral experience was that conversion narratives, particular when recounted in a public setting, often lead to further conversions. “There is no one thing that I know,” he writes in the Faithful Narrative, “that God has made such a means of promoting his work among us, as the news of others’ conversion.”138 However, his experience on the revival front also caused him to be hesitant to make any claims concerning any sort of normative structure of such narratives; for as Edwards believes himself to have witnessed firsthand, the Holy Spirit is always capable of doing something new.

4.5.4 Church, community, and the sacraments It is also important to note that the kind of conversion experience emphasized by Edwards and other Puritans, particularly its “preparatory” stage, requires a tacit familiarity with Puritan theology, particularly concerning concepts such as sin, salvation, justification, and of course new birth. Those to whom Edwards preached were raised in the church community – a parish system 137 Ibid.: 791. 138 Edwards, Works 4: 176.

Conclusion

131

more similar to European Christianity than to that of the future United States – and were deeply influenced by its language and worldview. Although Edwards, following Calvin, expressly denies any interpretation of John 3:5 or Titus 3:5 as referring literally to the sacrament of baptism, he is situated in a religious community which clearly takes the sacraments very seriously. Unlike his influential grandfather, for instance, Edwards only admitted those to the Lord’s Supper who could be reasonably assumed to have experienced genuine conversion. In contrast to Spener, for whom the “spark” of faith in regeneration is in itself not essentially rational but instead steadily reforms the rational faculties in the course of renewal, Edwards sees the fundamental change through God’s miraculous intervention as also directly affecting human rationality. Infusion effects a radical change in understanding, “whereby the soul knows God and understands his glory and excellency, and the truth and excellency of spiritual things.”139 This theological difference spills directly into their respective theologies of baptismal regeneration: because Spener’s new birth is essentially not an event of the intellect, retaining this doctrine – which in his view seems to be supported by biblical texts such as John 3:5 and Titus 3:5 – is much less of a problem; whereas for Edwards, who happens to come from a Calvinist tradition which does not interpret these passages as being about baptism, attaching to new birth an “infused … principle of spiritual understanding” all but rules out new birth for those who have not yet developed basic intellectual capacities – in other words, infants.140

4.5.5 Revivalism Jonathan Edwards has the honor of being at the forefront of an event, the Great Awakening, which would have an immense impact on later North American religious life. Like future revivalist movements, the first Great Awakening’s emphasis on new birth as an experience led to ecumenical cooperation which was astounding for that historical period, with Anglicans, Presbyterians, and Baptists worshipping together and even receiving communion from one another.141 Although theological disagreements soon extinguished any utopian hopes of perfect ecumenical harmony, the “born-again” experience and the subsequent the life of piety seemed to achieve a unity that previous 139 Works, 17: 188. 140 Yet neither should the difference to Spener be exaggerated, since for Edwards the recently reborn Christian is not one of impressive spiritual maturity, even considering the new set of spiritual, “infused” faculties. It is called a birth because like a natural birth, it is a beginning, meaning that the new convert is still, spiritually speaking, only a child, born “into an imperfect state (I Pet 1:23–25), [a] growing state; I Pet. 2:1–2.” Ibid.: 189. 141 Cf. Noll, The Rise of Evangelicalism: 14–15.

132

Jonathan Edwards: The Born Again Experience

theological councils had not. Here one can see clearly the development of a legacy that began with earlier Pietist and Puritan movements, and which has continued in evangelicalism to this day: the grass-roots ecumenism of smallgroup study groups, charity projects, evening church services and revivals, and political activism, in which broader theological disagreements are overlooked in order to foster a “personal relationship with Jesus” in oneself in addition to serving others.142

142 However, there are significant differences between the first American Awakening and subsequent revivalist movements, which need to be mentioned here in advance in order to prevent anachronistic projections. Firstly, the first awakening in the American (which means British) colonies, unlike future revivalist movements, was almost completely an east-coast phenomenon, for the simple reason that the land to the west was still only sparsely colonized. This is not to ignore the international nature of the first Great Awakening, however, particularly in England and Scotland. Second, and related to the first point, is the fact that the participants in this movement were typically highly theologically literate, often coming from Puritan settlements in which church attendance was required of all citizens. This was the case in Edwards’ Northampton congregation, as well as in Puritan New England in general. And finally, the movement was largely, though not entirely, Calvinist in its theological orientation, a tendency exemplified in the writings of Jonathan Edwards, who remained a dedicated and orthodox Calvinist throughout his entire career and interpreted new and often surprising spiritual events through the lens of this framework. Notable exceptions are the brothers John and Charles Wesley, who travelled to Georgia from 1735–37 (Charles left in 1736), and the Moravian settlement, led by Spangenberg, which settled in Georgia in 1735. For more on the Wesleyian and Moravian traditions in North America, including their theological battles with Calvinism, cf. Ibid.: 80–88, 119–124.

5 Schleiermacher on New Birth 5.1 Introduction 5.1.1 Modernity and subjectivity Although Friedrich Schleiermacher is typically not associated with evangelicalism in general, or with the phenomenon of being “born again” in particular, he is a natural choice for this study for many reasons. Firstly, he is generally considered to be one of the greatest theologians of the modern era, often called “the father of modern theology,” and with some even going as far to label him a “modern church father.”1 Furthermore, the fact that Schleiermacher’s thought did not develop within one Protestant tradition but instead drew from the wells of Calvinism, Lutheranism, as well as Moravian Pietism as theological influences, make him an interesting case study. This Protestant ecumenism2 is reflected in Schleiermacher’s own dedication to the Prussian Union of Churches, a union of Lutheran and Calvinist traditions, as well as in his opinion that he had never completely left behind the Moravian piety of his youth. The third and final reason why Schleiermacher is so indispensible for this study is his life-long dedication to theorizing the Christian faith as an experience of presence: it was Schleiermacher who introduced the terms “God-consciousness” and “feeling of absolute dependence” into the modern theological vocabulary, not merely as descriptions of subjective states, but also as (at least according to Schleiermacher and his followers) an indispensible theoretical foundation for understanding Christian dogmatics. Surprisingly, however, very little attention has been given to Schleiermacher’s understanding of regeneration, although it is a doctrine implicitly found nearly everywhere in his thought. Indeed, it would not be an exaggeration to say that

1 In Germany, Schleiermacher is frequently referred to as Kirchenvater des 19. Jahrhunderts, a designation which dates back at least to theologian Christian Lülmann’s 1907 book of the same title. 2 While seeing much room for discussion and reconciliation among Protestant traditions, Schleiermacher felt that “[any] system of doctrine drawn up at the present time within the Western Church cannot be indifferent to the antithesis between Roman Catholic and Protestant, but must adhere to one or the other” (The Christian Faith §23: 101). When passages from The Christian Faith are cited in this chapter, all page numbers are taken from the English translation. However, sub-chapter numbers are also included to enable easy reference to the original German text. Moreover, the title “The Christian Faith” and “Ibid.” will generally not be used, since the § symbol indicates that this source is being cited.

134

Schleiermacher on New Birth

regeneration, both as an experience and as a doctrine, is the linchpin of his entire theological method, as will be shown in this chapter. It was Schleiermacher’s great accomplishment to make the religious experience central to theological reflection. Schleiermacher was not a Schwärmer, as he did not want to separate this experience from doctrine or tradition, yet he did see the experience of faith as possessing an inward certainty which provided it foundational importance for interpreting doctrine. The experience of faith, according to Schleiermacher, “is a purely factual certainty, but a certainty of a fact which is entirely inward.”3 The “certainty” of faith as a presence experience means that it is not only existentially of utmost importance, as it was for Pietism, but also hermeneutically so as well, since the experience of faith becomes for Schleiermacher a tool with which one can understand seemingly abstract theological doctrines. This allows him to develop a methodology which remains faithful to the spirit of Pietism while also taking seriously the “subjective turn” and modernism’s skepticism concerning religious doctrine (and demonstrated in his clever apologetic On Religion: Speeches to its Cultured Despisers). These post-Enlightenment concerns are what have given his writings an enduring quality and earned him the title of first “modern” theologian. Keith Clements, in his excellent introduction to Schleiermacher’s life and thought, describes this influence: “The ‘modern’ note in Schleiermacher’s work sounds familiar to us across nearly two centuries … because Schleiermacher to a remarkable extent articulated both questions and ideas which struggle towards the surface whenever and wherever theology resolutely faces the questions posed to traditional belief by modern western thought and culture: questions of historical knowledge of the past, of the scientific explanation of nature, of the nature of ‘authority’ in religion, of the validity of any claim to a special revelation in a multi-religious world, and, most fundamentally, the question of what place is left for belief in ‘God’, in an age which trusts more in immediate experience and empirical observation than in metaphysical speculation about any reality existing ‘beyond’ human experience in the world.”4

Schleiermacher, then, speaks to the modern soul. Yet he does so not from the perspective of a coolly rationalistic skeptic, but instead as someone driven by passionate, dedicated religious piety. Thus despite all his misgivings, Schleiermacher could look back and reflect cheerily about his time as a Moravian: “There is no other place which could call forth such lively memories of my spirit’s entire journey like this one, from its first awakening to a higher [life] right up to the point where I now am. It was here that I for the first time became conscious of 3 The Christian Faith, §14.1: 68. The German reads: “Der hier in Rede stehende Glaube aber ist eine reine thatsächliche Gewißheit, aber die einer vollkommen innerlichen Thatsache.” 4 Keith W. Clements, Friedrich Schleiermacher: Pioneer of Modern Theology: 7.

Introduction

135

humanity’s relation to a higher world…. It was here that the mystical disposition developed which has been so important to me and has rescued and sustained me throughout all storms of skepticism. At that time it was sprouting, now it is developed and I can thus say that after all this I have become a Moravian [Herrnhuter] again, but of a higher order.”5

As a “Moravian … of a higher order,” Schleiermacher still viewed himself as a carrying on the spirit of the Pietist tradition, but in ways that are perhaps in tension with what previous Pietist thinkers had believed. This tension between Pietist and modern theological impetuses in Schleiermacher’s theology will become particularly clear in an analysis of Schleiermacher’s understanding of Christian new birth.

5.1.2 Schleiermacher’s early life and theology Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher, born in 1768, was the son of a pastor deeply influenced by Pietist thought and practice. Although his father, a Reformed clergyman in Prussia, never officially joined the Moravian brethren, he and his wife were impressed enough by the community to entrust them with the education of their own children. Schleiermacher officially joined the Moravians in 1783, and it was in a Moravian theological school in Niesky that the young Friedrich experienced firsthand the classically Pietist traits of Moravian belief: a “personal relationship” [freundschaftliches Verhältnis]6 with Jesus, the “heart” as the center of human action, the need for selfexamination, a general love for humanity, and a strong division between true believers and “the world.” The Niesky school sought to holistically integrate faith and piety into every facet of knowledge, while still attempting to develop critical thinking; however, when such critical thinking was directed towards Christianity itself, the leaders typically found it best to err on the side of piety. This was perceived by intellectually curious pupils such as the young Schleiermacher as an obstacle, thus the young Friedrich, along with a few other boys (including an agnostic from England), started a secret philosophical club which read and discussed forbidden fruits such as Johann Wolfgang von Goethe and Immanuel Kant. These intellectual interests were paralleled by the young Schleiermacher’s difficulties in experiencing the “supernatural works of grace”7 so valued by Moravians, in addition to his difficulties with their strict separation from the “world,” which appeared to him as unnecessarily reactionary. 5 This is my own translation of the German text found in Schleiermacher’s letter to Georg Reimer on April 30, 1802. Cf. Aus Schleiermacher’s Leben. In Briefen: 295. 6 Cf. Seibert, Glaube, Erfahrung und Gemeinschaft: 37. 7 In German, übernatürliche Gnadenwirkungen. Cf. Seibert: 48.

136

Schleiermacher on New Birth

Ultimately, Schleiermacher’s intellectual curiosity and personal doubts led him to leave the Moravian community and enroll at the University of Halle, where he was able to encounter a wider variety of viewpoints. Yet he became neither a religious skeptic, nor a Deist, nor a watered-down liberal rationalist (as he is sometimes portrayed in conservative American circles). Instead, Schleiermacher became a staunch defender of the faith, releasing at the turn of the nineteenth century his celebrated work On Religion: Speeches to its Cultured Despisers [Über die Religion. Reden an die Gebildeten unter ihren Verächtern], a passionately written apologetic in which Schleiermacher argues that not only do religion’s critics misunderstand the nature of what they are attempting to denounce, but also that they fail to recognize that religion, as a “feeling,” is a universal element of human nature. Consequently, these “cultured despisers” are in fact criticizing a part of themselves, even if they do not realize it. Schleiermacher’s term “feeling” is not to be misunderstood as feeling in the sense of “feeling pain” or “feeling happy”; instead, it is an all-encompassing attitude towards living and a fundamental component of human nature. It is in this realm, and not in morality or metaphysics, that religion finds it locus: “Religion’s essence is neither thinking nor acting, but intuition and feeling [Anschauung und Gefühl]. It wishes to intuit the universe, wishes devoutly to overhear the universe’s own manifestations and actions, longs to be grasped and filled by the universe’s immediate influences and childlike passivity.”8

Schleiermacher’s placing such strong emphasis on anthropology, even to the point of making it methodologically fundamental, was not without its apologetical advantages. It was, in the words of Keith Clements, a “daring but highly creative option for theology,” in that it faced Enlightenment criticism on its own turf, “challeng[ing] the age at the core of its citadel-belief: humanity.”9 Theology under Schleiermacher claimed that religion was a basic element of human nature, separable from others (such as the intellect) and observable in itself. Schleiermacher could now argue that critics who dismissively attempted to relegate religion to other areas of human nature (such as morality, la Kant) have not only misunderstood religion but human nature itself – an aggressive, frontal attack upon religious skepticism, based not on biblical revelation (which his “cultured despisers would have glibly dismissed) but instead on a detached analysis of the transcendental Ego.

8 Schleiermacher, On Religion: Speeches to its Cultured Despisers: 22; in German, Über die Religion. Reden an die Gebildeten unter ihren Verächtern: 35. 9 Clements: 14.

Theological Background to Schleiermacher’s Theology of Regeneration 137

5.2 Theological Background to Schleiermacher’s Theology of Regeneration 5.2.1 Zinzendorf and Moravian theology The Moravian movement to which Schleiermacher belonged as a youth has influences which date back even prior to the Reformation, but its most significant representative was Count Nicholas von Zinzendorf, arguably the most important figure in 18th-century Pietism. The son of pious parents, and the Godson of Spener, Zinzendorf was a deeply reflective and intelligent man who claimed to have entertained atheism at the age of seven – according to him, these rational misgivings were overwhelmed and defeated by the certainty of Christian truth in his heart.10 Herrnhut, one of his estates in Moravia, became the German designation for adherents of his movement. The Moravians, or Herrnhuter, were classically Pietistic in their beliefs, placing primary emphasis not on mere doctrine but on the believer’s personal relationship with God, which is cultivated by meditation on scripture and fellowship among a close-knit community of believers who viewed Jesus’ presence as so real that they referred to him as “elder” [Älteste].11 Those familiar with Schleiermacher will find strong similarities between his own thinking and that of Zinzendorf, for instance in the concept “feeling” [Gefühl] as well as “sentiment” [Empfindung], which Zinzendorf used to describe the experience of the heart’s encounter with faith. Such remarks sound typical for Pietism, but Zinzendorf ’s emphasis on inwardness is taken one step further than the likes of Spener, and towards the theology of Schleiermacher, by claiming the spiritual superiority of interior spiritual life as opposed to the outward: the “interior person of the heart” [der inwendige Mensch des Herzens], writes Zinzendorf, “sees, tastes, feels, (and) smells” in a “very distinct and more complete way” [eine ganz aparte und viel völligere Art] than the mere “outward person.”12 Hence “religion” cannot be a primarily intellectual matter, which confirms for Zinzendorf the classically Pietistic emphasis on the heart and his overall skepticism towards dryer forms of orthodoxy and speculative philosophy.13 “Religion must be something which is attained without concepts, through sheer sentiment,” wrote the young Zinzendorf, “for otherwise no deaf person, or even less so someone 10 11 12 13

Cf. Bernhard Becker, Zinzendorf und sein Christentum: 2, 22–23. Ibid.: 14. N.L. v. Zinzendorf, Jüngerhausdiarium: 30. Nov. 1754, cited in Seibert: 86. Zinzendorf himself was an avid reader of philosophy and never rejected its importance; he did, however, see it as having serious limitations. Speculative philosophy marks an important such for truth and contains much wisdom; however, it deals with “hypotheses” and cannot communicate the deeper truths experienced through a relationship with Christ. Zinzendorf was particularly appreciative of what he termed “practical philosophy.” Cf. Becker: 41–48.

138

Schleiermacher on New Birth

born blind, and least of all a crazy person, or a child, could have the religion necessary for blessedness.”14 He referred to this relationship as a kind of unio mystica, but not in the sense of an intense, ecstatic experience; instead, it is the enduring presence of Christ in one’s life and in the community, an enduring “lively happiness of having Him there in person.”15 Zinzendorf, like Spener before him, was particularly concerned with Erkenntnis, or knowledge, of God. As previously mentioned, the noun Erkenntnis, derived from the verb kennen, is particularly important in Pietist theology in that it denotes a kind of knowledge not reducible to information. Zinzendorf sees this knowledge as taking place in the Imagination,16 a German term is not to be confused with its English cognate which suggests non-existence (and which is usually translated into German as Fantasie); it instead carries the Platonic sense of “innate ideas”: “that one sees his God in the mind [Geist].”17 Zinzendorf relied on heavily psychological terms to describe the Pietist experience of the heart, claiming that it is primarily in the Gemütsanschluß – a term difficult to translate, but perhaps “connection of the mind” is best – that Christianity receives its “essential certainty” [wesentliche Bestimmtheit].18 This experience in the Geist or Gemüt guarantees the presence of God, since “everything having to do with the mind [Gemüt] does not allow itself to be classified as absent.”19 The inwardness of the individual, whether referred to as Seele, Herz, Gemüt, Imagination, or Geist (they are used relatively interchangeably), calls attention to the fact that God’s relation to the individual is “immediate,” giving every single Christian the ability to experience and enjoy Christ’s presence.20 Herzreligion is therefore the only true religion, according to Zinzendorf: “We must become acquainted with the Savior [Heiland] in person, otherwise all theology is worth nothing.”21 Particularly when it comes to one’s theological convictions, feeling is a “much greater and more certain persuasion [Überzeugung] than anything else.”22 In typical Pietist fashion, Zinzendorf strongly affirms the authority of the Bible as necessary for guiding the life of the community, while emphasizing that scripture must be experienced by each believer through a personal faith.23 The Bible is itself revelation; however, this revelation must encounter an open heart. For instance, Zinzendorf never thinks about separating the historical Jesus from the Jesus of scripture,24 but this means that believers cannot just “hear” that Jesus has died for 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

This is my own translation from N. v. Zinzendorf, Teutscher Sokrates, 289 f., cited in Seibert: 74. Cited in Becker: 7. All translations of Becker’s and Seibert’s texts are my own. Cited in Ibid.: 10. Cited in Ibid.: 12. Cited in Ibid.: 5 Cited in Ibid.: 14. Cited in Ibid.: 9. Cited in Ibid.: 18, 16. Cited in Ibid.: 56. An excellent summary of Zinzendorf and the importance of experience as a theological concept can be found in Seibert’s chapter “»Erfahrung« und »Gemeinschaft« bei Zinzendorf”: 68–128. 24 Cf. Becker: 70.

Theological Background to Schleiermacher’s Theology of Regeneration 139 their sins: “they have to feel it.”25 Jesus Christ is the “object” and “subject” of scripture, guaranteeing its harmony,26 meaning scripture is to be continuously meditated upon in order to find true knowledge of God.27 When this is done, the reader will realize that the trustworthiness of the biblical revelation is confirmed by his or her subjective experience. Hence while it would be false to say that for Zinzendorf inward experience justifies the authority of the Bible, from the perspective of the individual believer it is the most certain testimony to the Bible’s truth and trustworthiness. That the Bible does not deceive is therefore not merely an intellectual proposition: “I have experienced in my soul for so many years what is written there, that I would have had to have seen the deception; but my heart has the same feeling day and night.”28 Subjective feeling, then, confirms the truth of external doctrines. “Feeling,” writes Zinzendorf biographer Bernhard Becker, “is the sole, absolutely necessary means through which the instrumentality [Mitwirkung] of the biblical content can become the soul’s possession [Gemütsbesitz] of the believer.”29 Due to this emphasis on inwardness, a certain “partial autonomy,” as Seibert puts it, develops between the Holy Spirit, and hence personal experience of faith, and scripture.30 According to Zinzendorf, “the Holy Spirit is not bound to any rule [Vorschrift],” which means that the Spirit can even work in people not familiar with the Bible.31 This statement in itself is nothing radical, not even in his time, but the fact that the Spirit works primarily through the “heart experience” of the individual means that the certainty or Gewissheit derived from such “heart experiences” is one of self-certainty. “The knowledge of God’s word with the help of reason,” writes Seibert, “is replaced by the impartation of personal self-evidence gained through immediacy and inner experience.”32 This is why Zinzendorf, when attempting to describe why he believes the Bible is such a truthful guide for his life, can ultimately only reply, Es ist so: “That’s the way it is.”33 Despite all his talk of personal experience, it would be a mistake to claim that the religious community is merely the sum of all these individual experiences or even a consequence of them.34 Ecclesiologically, Zinzendorf rejected the Anabaptist idea of an “Apostolic church,” particularly one which practices the ban. Those were different times and did not fit the present situation, he claimed. Instead, he conceived the community as being one of “disciples” [Jünger] who all share a “personal connection

25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34

Cited in Becker: 65. Cited in Ibid.: 34. Cf. Ibid.: 31. Cited in Ibid.: 66. Ibid.: 67. Seibert: 79. Cited in Seibert: 79. From N.L. v. Zinzendorf, Londoner Predigten I: 72 ff. Seibert: 81. Cf. Becker’s chapter on “Scripture and Feeling” (Schrift und Gefühl): 66–69. Cf. Seibert: 123.

140

Schleiermacher on New Birth

with the Savior.”35 It is important that this community has people who speak “as if Christ were in front of their eyes.”36

5.2.2 Schleiermacher’s “God-consciousness” Schleiermacher adopts the Pietist impulse, emphasized by Zinzendorf and the Moravians, which understands the personal, inward experience of faith to be the cornerstone of the religious life. However, for Schleiermacher not only is the faith-experience the foundation of the Christian life, but also of theological reflection. As he famously states in the opening pages of The Christian Faith, every human being is imbued with a Gefühl der schlechthinnigen Abhängigkeit – “feeling of absolute dependence” – which seeks after spiritual fulfillment.37 This feeling is separate from both physical activity and intellectual knowledge – though it always accompanies them. It is the common element among all forms of religious expression and is found in every individual person. More importantly, it is immediate, which means it is discovered by looking inside oneself. “As a matter of fact,” writes Schleiermacher, “our relation to God is really an affair of the quiescent selfconsciousness [ruhendes Selbstbewußtsein], looking at itself reflected in thought and finding a consciousness of God included there.”38 It is therefore crucial for Schleiermacher to understand the nature of human consciousness, particularly religious consciousness, before turning to dogmatics proper.39 Schleiermacher defends his thesis through a phenomenological analysis of the “pious” human self-consciousness. As previously mentioned, much attention is often given to Schleiermacher’s philosophical influences, particularly German Romanticism, but the essentially Pietistic thread of his argument is not to be overlooked: the life of faith – or “religion” – is measured not by external doctrinal formulations but by a deeply personal relationship with the divine. Yet Schleiermacher added a post-Enlightenment twist to this feeling in that he allowed it to be categorized within a larger philosophical anthropology, giving it its “place,” so to speak, and thus helping him to appear 35 36 37 38 39

Cited in Becker: 17. Cited in Ibid.: 11. Cf. §4. §107.1: 478–79 This is a move which would seem very strange to traditional Pietists, even to Zinzendorf. Zinzendorf can be seen as a precursor to Schleiermacher in this regard, in that his “heart experience” became a subject to be examined on its own – a psychologizing move not found in Spener or the Anabaptists, but frequent among the Puritans – but although this Herzenserfahrung is foundational for understanding the Christian life, for Zinzendorf it holds no such role in a systematic-theological sense. As Seibert puts it, “Obwohl Zinzendorf die Art und Weise, wie der Mensch religiöse Wahrheiten gewinnt, häufig im Modus des menschlichen Gefühlslebens beschreibt, ist das unqualifizierte Gefühl noch nicht von besonderer religiöser Bedeutung” (Seibert: 84).

Theological Background to Schleiermacher’s Theology of Regeneration 141

much less reactionary than his Pietistic predecessors. Historical-critical biblical exegesis, for example, must no longer be seen as being in tension with inward religious experience, since these two things deal with separate areas of experience and to confuse them would be a category mistake – an idea much more Enlightenment-friendly than the response to historical-critical exegesis given by Zinzendorf, who claimed that such methods reveal how the Bible cannot be properly understood merely rationally, i. e. without the help of the Spirit, and thus ought to be ignored.40 Schleiermacher’s theory of the pious consciousness is therefore a mix of the old and the new. Like earlier Pietist thinkers such as Spener and Zinzendorf, Schleiermacher sees piety as transcending the old dichotomy of “knowing,” in the sense of intellectual knowledge [Wissen], and “doing”: although both of these elements are important, they are not piety’s “essence.”41 Instead, true piety is essentially found in the realm of feeling, or self-consciousness, which Schleiermacher defines as “a consciousness of our existence in the world or of our co–coexistence with the world, in a series in which the feeling of freedom and the feeling of dependence are divided.” In other words, for Schleiermacher “self-consciousness” is not a subjective form of navel-gazing, but describes instead each human being’s conscious experience of how he or she interacts with the outside world. And his argument is that this is always a complex mixture of active and passive (or “receptive”) elements, the active side being primarily characterized by “freedom” and the receptive by “dependence” [Abhängigkeit].42 From the standpoint of human self-consciousness, then, whatever situation we are in we are always doing something, and something is being done to us as well. Although the experience of freedom is an essential element of every person’s self-consciousness, anyone who thinks he or she has a feeling of absolute freedom, argues Schleiermacher, is delusional, because every single action is at least partially dependent upon surroundings one cannot control: we are not in complete control of every aspect of our lives, he reasons, since the freedom to act presupposes an object, and the objects on which we can act are already there and the world of objects was not placed there by ourselves.43 In other words, while you may have chosen a specific action, you did not chose to be you, in your time period, on your particular section of the earth, surrounded by the people and situations you know – all things which made that choice possible in the first place. On the flip side, however, Schleiermacher believes it to be a basic truth of human psychology that, despite all our limited freedom, we are still nagged by a feeling of being absolutely dependent. In contrast to the feeling of absolute 40 41 42 43

Cf. Seibert: 81. §3.4: 10. §4.2: 15. Cf. §4.3: 15.

142

Schleiermacher on New Birth

freedom, therefore, this “feeling of absolute dependence” is more than a mere psychological illusion: according to Schleiermacher the feeling of absolute dependence expresses the basic truth that not only are we as human beings not in control of our lives at the present, but that neither are we in control of our fates. It is this feeling that he defines as religion: “the consciousness of being absolutely dependent, or, which is the same thing, of being in relation with God.”44 Religion is thus essentially not about right beliefs, or moral action, but is instead encapsulated in the experience of being overwhelmed by existence itself. And this experience is not only available to the pious or to those who attend religious services, but to everyone. From the perspective of anthropology, religion is to be seen as an essential, universal component of human nature. From that of systematic theology, it is to be used as the methodological vantage point to interpret all Christian doctrine. But most importantly for this study, from the perspective of the phenomenology of the Christian life – i. e. “existentially” – the religious element’s actualization (a concept which will be explained shortly) is the experience of being born again.

5.3 New Birth 5.3.1 Introduction Although Schleiermacher does not explicitly deal with the subject of regeneration until later in The Christian Faith, it is clear from the beginning that the radical change of one’s demeanor, emphasized by Schleiermacher as a transformation of consciousness, is key to understanding what it means to become a Christian. Schleiermacher’s chapter on new birth attempts to explicate this doctrine from the standpoint of its being experienced by the believer, thus attempting to compose his theological reflections not from a traditional, detached perspective but from an anthropological/phenomenological one which understands regeneration as a subjective experience of the human consciousness.45 His chapters on regeneration and sanctification, it should be noted, find themselves within a larger section on the experience of grace, which Schleiermacher understands as the consciousness of fellowship with God through the “communication of the Redeemer” [Mittheilung des Erlösers].46 More specifically, it is the grace of redemption through Jesus Christ, experienced as a “gift” [Gabe] that brings a radical break with the past, 44 §4: 12. Cf. §32–36. 45 As Schleiermacher writes concerning the experience of redemption (of which regeneration is a significant part): “This exposition is based entirely on the inner experience of the believer; its only purpose is to describe and elucidate that experience.” (§100.3: 428) 46 §63: 262. Cf. §91.

New Birth

143

in which “the former personality dies” and the self, though retaining its previous self-identity, can still at the same time be identified as a “new person” [neuer Mensch] which has shed the “old person.” This new being, now conscious of the forgiveness of sin through Christ and in a “state of union” with Christ (which he later refers to as a “mystical”47 relation), has received the “real possession of the consciousness that Christ is in us in the center of our life,” which bestows “His blessing and His peace.”48 The act of existing in this “state of union” is sanctification [Heiligung], and the “turning point” at which this union takes place is the new birth [Wiedergeburt].49 In his chapter specifically on Wiedergeburt, which makes up the second division of his explication of “the development of the consciousness of grace,”50 Schleiermacher writes that every human being has an inherent, albeit diminutive, “God-consciousness.” This God-consciousness is present even in those who are not born again, yet prior to regeneration it is not “determinative of the will” [willensbestimmend] – i. e. active and dominant – but is merely “casual and fleeting.” Instead, the “sensuous consciousness” [sinnliches Selbstbewußtsein] provides the dominant drive.51 Such is the state of normal sinful, human consciousness. While a person can believe in God while in such a state, according to Schleiermacher it cannot provide a positive relationship with God; the only relationship a diminutive God-consciousness can have to “divine holiness” is that of “the self-consciousness of guilt and merited punishment.”52 Hence something must change, in order that the individual can overcome this state of stunted God-consciousness and attain a relationship marked by grace and a “dominant” consciousness of the divine. It is exactly in the event regeneration, Wiedergeburt, that the change takes place from a passive, dormant God-consciousness to one which “is made dominant” and “take(s) constant control,” [gehoben und zur Herrschaft gebracht] thereby transforming the nature of one’s personality to one of piety. According to Schleiermacher, this transformation is a passive, supernatural event which cannot be attributed to any effort by the individual human being; instead, it is explainable only by “the entrance of the living influence of Christ” which gives the individual a “religious personality not his before.”53 In new birth, “the power of the new life is implanted in the soul.”54 Schleiermacher is aware that there are different biblical terms for this change, yet he chooses Wiedergeburt because this biblical metaphor describes the event most 47 §101.3: 434. 48 §101.2: 433. Since English version uses the antiquated translation of “new man” for neuer Mensch (see p. 433), I have provided my own translation. 49 Cf. §106.1. 50 Entwicklung des Bewußtseins der Gnade is his heading for §86–§169. 51 §107.1: 478. 52 §107.1: 479. 53 §106.1: 476 54 §106.2: 478. German: daß die Kraft des neuen zugleich der Seele muß eingeplanzt worden sein.

144

Schleiermacher on New Birth

effectively. In contrast to Spener, Schleiermacher initially divides the event regeneration into two main categories and not three: justification, or “one’s changed relation to God,” and conversion, as “a changed form life.” These two events are “utterly inseperable” and “must also be regarded as happening simultaneously.”55 However, conversion can be additionally categorized into a “change of heart” as well as “faith,” which implies the “appropriation of the blessedness and perfection of Christ,”56 hence Schleiermacher’s categorization of regeneration conforms well to the three-fold structure of his Pietist forebear.

5.3.2 Conversion For Schleiermacher there is no grey area in terms of whether or not someone has an “active” God consciousness: either one has it or one does not, and “there can be no true consciousness of fellowship with Christ as long as that other [i. e. non-active] consciousness persists.”57 Accordingly, there must be a particular “moment,” a “turning point at which the continuity of the old ceased, and that of the new began to be in process of becoming.” This turning point, which is “the essence of the concept ‘regeneration,’”58 is nothing other than “conversion,” a term which Schleiermacher does not use to designate a longer conversion process, but instead the moment of regeneration as experienced by the religious individual, marked by the crossing of the threshold into true Christian fellowship. While the exact moment generally cannot be identified, its effects are recognizable in one’s subjective experience: “Conversion, the beginning of the new life in fellowship with Christ, makes itself known in each individual by Repentance [Buße], which consists in the combination of regret [Reue] and change of heart [Sinnesänderung]; and by faith, which consists in the appropriation of the perfection [Vollkommenheit] and blessedness [Seligkeit] of Christ.”59

It is important to note that Schleiermacher, following the Calvinist tradition, does not view these experiences as active steps which an individual can attain through effort or study. As an expression of “absolute dependence,” they are fundamentally passive. Accordingly, repentance marks the turning away from sin and the old life, which Schleiermacher describes as being marked by a 55 56 57 58 59

§107: 478; 107.1: 479. §108: 480–481. Ibid.: 479. Ibid. §108: 480–81. Cf. §108.6: 492: “As regards the state of the subject himself during conversion, we may take conversion to be the moment at which the entry into living fellowship with Christ is complete.” For a recent exposition of the relationship between sin and redemption in Schleiermacher’s theology, cf. Walter Wyman, Jr. “Sin and Redemption.”

New Birth

145

certain feeling of “regret,” which does not mean the remorse for a particular action (or lack of action), but instead for one’s entire sinful condition. Such regret is made possible by spiritual illumination, since it is only in the light of Christ’s perfection that one can comprehend the repugnance of one’s own sin. It is therefore a “wholly perfect regret” – in contrast to the “imperfect” regret one experiences before and leading up to conversion – “the purest and most perfect pain, which, if allowed to reach its limit, might bring life itself to an end.”60 It does not lead to complete despair in the repentant sinner, since the grace of God is already present, “in so far as His self-imparting perfection meets us in all its truth, which happens at the dawn of faith.”61 In other words, the experience of this regret, as painful as it is, is actually a sign of hope: that one now has true faith, that one’s heart has been irreversibly changed, and that the abiding presence of God is now in one’s life. On this basis Schleiermacher develops a basic pattern for the conversion process reminiscent of the Puritan morphology of conversion. “Preparatory grace” [vorbereitende Gnade] (and here Schleiermacher prefers the Calvinist term, as opposed to the more Lutheran “prevenient [zuvorkommende] grace”62) names the pre-conversion grace which accompanies the process of despair leading to new birth, in which the individual experiences an often profound but yet still incomplete regret. This can be a long and gradual process, analogous to how a natural birth is not an “absolute beginning” but is instead preceded by a period in which the fetus, already taking shape, incubates in the womb of the mother.63 It is characterized by (imperfect) regret in the face of one’s own sinfulness, or “guilt and merited punishment,” in which the pre-convert feels this consciousness of sin as a “disturbance,” as “pain,” yet recognizes that in Jesus Christ there is hope for change.64 While the person in this state is not yet born again, after conversion he or she can look back on this period as a work of grace. Such grace is of course only understood in hindsight, after one has experienced the “effective grace” [wirksame Gnade] of conversion which is the unity of regret, change of heart, and faith.65 While the process of preparation is not the result of the convert’s active volition, the realization that one is accepted and must not live in despair, based on Christ’s promise, leads to a “stimulation of the will,” thus marking the completion of conversion, which is a Sinnesänderung, “change of heart,” out of which a “double-desire” emerges which seeks (negatively) to avoid one’s previous sinful ways and (positively) to grow in one’s personal relationship to 60 §108.2: 484. 61 §108.2: 484. Julia Lamm notes that this “perfect,” religious regret is “essentially positive,” in that it is not merely focused on human shortcomings but also – and ultimately – on the perfection of Christ, thus providing profound hope. Cf. Lamm, “Schleiermacher’s Treatise on Grace”: 147–48. 62 Cf. footnote to §108.2 on page 485. Schleiermacher, however, uses both terms. 63 §108.2: 486. 64 §107.1: 479; 108.2: 484 65 Lamm translates the word as “effectual.” Cf. Lamm: 147.

146

Schleiermacher on New Birth

God: “This desire, acting in two directions, is the change of heart affected by Christ which binds regret and faith together and represents the true unity of conversion.”66 Afterwards, the convert still feels regret, but it is in a more perfect, complete form, which Schleiermacher defines as “the self-consciousness moved by the consciousness of sin.”67 It is true repentance, the sign of saving faith, which Schleiermacher defines as a “permanently enduring state of mind [beständig fortdauernder Gemütszustand],” marked by inward “certainty” regarding the “feeling of absolute dependence,” and by the “experience” of Christ satisfying a “spiritual need.”68 Up to this point, the role of the subject is to be seen as passive (or even as “resistant” or at least “indifferent”), as “part of the divine work of grace and not his own action.”69 Afterwards, in the state of sanctification [Heiligung], the convert begins to take on a more active role which corresponds to the now active Godconsciousness. Unlike Spener, Schleiermacher also rejects the idea that such conversion is not necessary for all individuals, for instance those who have grown up in the church, and instead asserts that everyone needs to experience conversion, since having a changed God-consciousness is part and parcel of what it means to be a Christian. However, to the contrary of what “an otherwise worthy party in the Church” believes to be the case, according to Schleiermacher it is not necessary to pinpoint this moment of regeneration, or even to provide a conversion narrative.70 One simple reason is because different individuals have different sensitivities to religious feeling and capacities for emotion: thus while some religious conversions may be marked by heart-wrenching regret followed by intense spiritual elation, others may experience the event of conversion more quietly. Moreover, it is often difficult to distinguish between the “preparatory” work of grace leading to one’s new life and the exact moment of rebirth.71

5.3.3 Justification From a divine or cosmic perspective, this moment of regeneration is understood as “justification” in that the reborn Christian has a new relation to 66 67 68 69

§108.2: 485. §109.1: 498. §108.1: 482; 14.1: 68; 14.2: 70. §108.6: 493. “Even the consent accompanying the reception of the Divine Word, as far as it is directed to what is essential and characteristic in it, can be ascribed only to the antecedent work of grace” (Ibid.: 494). Any language of “consent of the will,” continues Schleiermacher, must merely be seen as a “surrender to the operation of Christ or giving rein to a lively susceptibility thereto.” 70 §108.3: 487. 71 Cf. §108.3: 488.

New Birth

147

God, while from a human perspective it is conversion because the individual experiences this event as a “transformed form of life” [veränderte Lebensform].72 Justification entails the “forgiving of the [convert’s] sins, and the recognizing of him as a child of God,” i. e. “adoption.”73 As a transformation of one’s relationship to God, justification happens “only insofar as [one] has true faith in the Redeemer,” and thus the event of justification is to be seen as parallel to the experience of conversion.74 This statement at first glance seems to make justification an effect of one’s conversion, yet such an interpretation would be a mistake: Schleiermacher does not intend to portray God as a type of divine bureaucrat, pencil and notebook in hand, waiting for true faith to arise in a person’s consciousness in order to check the “saved” box (which is the impression many contemporary “born-again” Christians give, whether intentionally or not). The assumption that the justification of each person rested on “a distinct and separate divine decree” would be a mistake, he argues, in that it inadvertently anthropomorphizes God, “subject[ing] God to the antithesis of abstract and concrete.”75 “But in God,” asserts Schleiermacher, “thought and will are one.”76 Hence there is only one decree, “eternal and universal,” and so that “an individual act making the individual an object of divine love is not necessary.”77 All that is necessary is for the individual to become conscious of this decree, which the conversion event marked by true repentance and a change of heart. Therefore, the statement that the regenerate Christian is “justified by faith” refers to the fact that “the universal divine justifying act” is inextricably associated with the event of the dawn of faith in each individual, which “arises only through the agency of Christ.”78 Schleiermacher consequently affirms the doctrine of predestination – not, however, as the speculation on the seemingly arbitrary decisions of an absolutely sovereign God, but instead as a detectable experience: namely, “that the manner and the time of each individual’s regeneration is determined by what is peculiar to his own inner life, that is, his freedom, and by his relations to the natural and historical development of justifying divine grace, that is, his place in the world.”79

While justification and conversion are “simultaneous” events, what remains with the regenerate afterwards, as “our present possession,” is forgiveness. 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79

Cf. the heading to §107. §109: 496. §109: 496. §109.3: 501. Ibid. Ibid.: 501, 502. §109.4: 503–04. §119.1: 547. This does not, significantly, entail supporting the doctrine of double predestination. Cf. §119.2–3: 547–551.

148

Schleiermacher on New Birth

Consciousness of forgiveness does not annul the consciousness of sin – no one is sinless, and the born-again Christian will be even more conscious of this sin after his or her conversion than before – but it is perceived not in a spirit of despair but instead in one of profound hope, since sin is no longer “active” in the consciousness of the “new person” [neuer Mensch], but “is only the aftereffect of the old” and is now experienced “as something foreign.” Now, “the consciousness of sin will become the consciousness of forgiveness of sin.” This new relation to one’s sinfulness is a reminder that one is now adopted, as a child of God, so that now “the likeness of the Father develops in the child.”80

5.3.4 Sanctification: the continuance of regeneration Although receiving possession of this faith is a single, passive act, the state of consciousness endures throughout the life of the believer, marking his or her “sanctification” [Heiligung], a term which for Schleiermacher refers to enduring “living fellowship [Lebensgemeinschaft] with Christ,” in which the “natural abilities” of the individual are now “put at His disposal,” causing his or her life to be formed increasingly in Christ’s image.81 And according to Schleiermacher, “there can be no surer sign of real regeneration than steady process in Christian sanctification.”82 If regeneration is the “divine act of union” with God, then sanctification names the resulting “state constituted by that union.” It is a union which entails the “fellowship” [Gemeinschaft] with and “participation in the perfection and blessedness of Christ,” along with an increasing “clarity of … self-consciousness in relation to the divine,” i. e. “illumination” [Erleuchtung].83 In this state, sin is something which “is no longer active; it is only the after-effect of the old man.” Schleiermacher continues: “The new man thus no longer takes sin to be his own; he indeed labours against it as something foreign to him. The consciousness of guilt is thus abolished. His penal desert must vanish with this; while for the rest, there lies in living fellowship with Christ, immediately and not just as a vague something in the future, a readiness for and a right to fellowship with the sufferings of Christ, which make it impossible for him to keep regarding social and still less natural evils as punishment, or to go on 80 §109.2: 498, 499. As before, I have changed Mackintosh and Stewat’s antiquated rendering of “new man” to “new person,” since Mensch implies both genders in German. I have also capitalized the term “Father,” whereas they have translated it in the lower case, since it is clear that Schleiermacher is referring to general fatherhood as well as the Person of the Trinity simultaneously (in modern German, all nouns are capitalized). 81 §110: 505. I have chosen to translate natürliche Kräfte as “natural abilities” instead of “natural powers,” as it stands in the Mackintosh and Stewart version. 82 Cf. §110; §138.2:636. 83 §110.3: 509.

New Birth

149

fearing punishment – impossible, for he is at the same time received into fellowship of the kingly office of Christ.”84

The one who is born again therefore experiences a drastic change in inward orientation: no longer bound by guilt and fear, the existence of sin, although still present, becomes perceived as something alien in light of the “surrender” which is the “steadfast willingness to be controlled by Him.”85 The Christian in this state of sanctification still must cope with sins, but according to Schleiermacher the sins of the regenerate are different than those of the unregenerate: they do not have the same power over the Christian that they had before, in that they are perceived not merely as sins but as forgiven sins. Consequently, “in the state of sanctification no new sins develop,” and those sins that are still present in the regenerate are qualitatively different from those in the unregenerate.86 The state of sanctification, then, is “progressive,” not only in the temporal sense of becoming ever further removed from the “turning-point of regeneration,” but also spiritually, in the sense that one grows closer and closer to “pure harmony” [der reinen Angemessenheit] with the “impulse” of Christ – and hence closer “to indistinguishability from Christ Himself.”87 The statement that one who is truly born again will develop no new sins, and that progression in sanctification is inevitable, may sound implausible in the ears of many hearers, even those who consider themselves born again; furthermore, it may sound threatening, as if sanctification carried an oppressive moral burden which only the most pious can bear, and any sin which appeared to be “new” would cause the Christian to doubt his or her own regeneration. Schleiermacher, however, intends it to be a message of grace: the sins of the regenerate individual are fundamentally different from those of the unregenerate, in that the former’s sins are forgiven, and are continually being battled by a heart that is irrevocably renewed and in fellowship with Christ. Schleiermacher thus affirms the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints, not primarily as a speculative teaching about the seemingly arbitrary decisions of an absolutely sovereign God, but instead as the experience that no matter how defeated one may feel, “the sins of those in the state of sanctification … have no power to annul the divine grace of regeneration.”88 Sin, therefore, is on a 84 §109.2: 498–499. 85 §110.2: 507. 86 §111.1: 510, 511. “Yet if the sin be the deed of a regenerate man, it cannot be the same sin as a sin ever so like it in the unregenerate.” Later in the same paragraph, Schleiermacher concludes: “In every case where sin appears to have entered we must say either that the sin is not really new, but belongs to a former period that has simply been revived; or else that regeneration has not been of a right and true kind, inasmuch as sinfulness has borne new fruit.” 87 §110.1: 506. 88 §111: 510. This does entail, however, that there will be cases in which “regeneration has not been of a right and true kind, inasmuch as sinfulness has borne new fruit” (§111.1: 511).

150

Schleiermacher on New Birth

continual retreat, whereas “good works” have become the “natural effects of faith.”89 5.3.5 The Church as fellowship of the regenerate and locus of the Holy Spirit Although Schleiermacher’s methodology begins with the “God-consciousness” of the individual, this “religious self-consciousness … leads necessarily in its development to fellowship or communion” with other people, with the highest form of this fellowship being a “Church.”90 Therefore, “all regenerate people are always found” in the “Christian Church.”91 Thus the moment of regeneration marks not only the beginning of fellowship with Christ, but also with others who have had this same experience, “coming together … [to] form a system of mutual interaction and participation.”92 According to Schleiermacher, it is in this fellowship – and not in the individual experience of regeneration93 – that one experiences the presence of the Holy Spirit, which Schleiermacher defines as the “common spirit” [Gemeingeist] of the fellowship of regenerate believers, as a “moral personality” [moralische Person] that makes up “the vital unity of the Christian Church,” causing each individual believer to experience the Holy Spirit as a “common consciousness.”94 Schleiermacher sometimes resorts to questionable analogies to describe this consciousness, for instance when he compares this to the unity of a nation by which “the nation is one through the national character common and identical to all.”95 However, the presence of the Holy Spirit is, in contrast to a nation, not merely a name for something created, as a result, by the interaction of a community – it is thus not, remarks Schleiermacher, quantifiable, as if it grew or shrunk with the size of the Church – but is instead the ground of its very possibility.

True to his Reformed roots, Schleiermacher emphasizes the communal setting of the church as giving the sacrament of baptism its logic. While he supports the practice of infant baptism, he still observes that sin shows its power just as much over people who have been baptized as infants as those who were not. 89 §112: 517. 90 §6:26. 91 §113: 525. Schleiermacher defines a “church” as “nothing more than a communion or association relating to religion or piety” (§3.1: 5). The “Christian Church takes shape through the coming together of regenerate individuals to form a system of mutual interaction and cooperation” (§115: 532). 92 §115.1: 532. 93 According to Schleiermacher, the regenerate Christian “has his share in the Holy Spirit not in his personal self-consciousness viewed by itself, but only in so far as he is conscious of his being part of this whole – that is, he shares the Spirit as a common consciousness” (§123.3: 573). 94 §116.3: 535; §123.3: 573. 95 §121.2: 563. That Schleiermacher would feel comfortable comparing the church to nationalistic unity obviously says quite a bit about his political views.

Conclusion

151

Furthermore, the idea of connecting regeneration too closely to baptism makes Schleiermacher uncomfortable since “one can all too easily lapse unawares into the region of magic.” For instance, the event of baptism in itself should not be seen as providing an inherent spiritual advantage for youth; instead, what is crucial is whether or not they have had a Christian upbringing in the Church, since for these youth “the gospel call” has already “reached their ears.”96 Baptismal regeneration is therefore rejected by Schleiermacher, who sides with Calvin in viewing infant baptism as the “seed of repentance and faith,”97 but not an event of faith itself, since the sacrament marks the promise of the parents and congregation to support the child and show him or her what it means to be a Christian. Still, the sacrament of baptism is to be closely associated with the doctrine of regeneration. Sometimes baptism takes place after regeneration and other times, as is the case in Schleiermacher’s own church, it takes place before, but it is still a “fact,” writes Schleiermacher, “that regeneration and entrance into the fellowship of believers are essentially bound up together and reciprocally conditioned.”98 It is from this very fellowship outwards, for instance, that the Holy Spirit causes the actions which produce regeneration (for without Christian preaching and fellowship, there would be no true spiritual new birth). Children within the church community, therefore, are to be baptized,99 not because baptism somehow “kindles faith in the heart of the person baptized,” but instead because they already “are marked out for it by their natural connexion with the Christian order in which God has placed them, and with a view of bringing them into the Church.” Never to be forgotten, however, is that the goal of infant baptism is always “personal confession of faith.”100

5.4 Conclusion 5.4.1 Regeneration as an experience of presence Although Schleiermacher is often viewed as the father of “liberal” theology, his views on the doctrine of regeneration largely mirror those of much of 96 97 98 99

§108.4: 489. Cf. Calvin, Institutes: 4.16.20. §136.4: 625. Schleiermacher’s support of infant baptism, however, is sometimes quite tepid. He asserts, for instance, that the practice of infant baptism is largely responsible for its being attributed “magical powers” as well as its being understood as a “purely external custom” (§138.1:636). He is also extremely open and optimistic concerning ecumenical relations with churches which practice adult baptism, “if only they will not pronounce our infant baptism absolutely invalid” (§138.2:638). 100 §137.2: 630 (f.n. 3); §138.1: 636.

152

Schleiermacher on New Birth

mainstream evangelicalism: the new birth happens in a conversion moment between repentance and the sanctified Christian life, in which God miraculously changes one’s internal disposition and sparks the advent of faith; although this happens in a moment, what is important is not that someone can pinpoint the exact time of rebirth but feel (which means know) that he or she is presently born again; furthermore, the sacrament of baptism, as meaningful as it is, is not to be identified with new birth because to do so would be to give it a “magical” interpretation. The differences between Schleiermacher and contemporary evangelicalism, as well as the other theologians in this study, arise when one looks beneath the doctrine of new birth itself to its dogmatic grounding. Schleiermacher’s entire dogmatic project “makes its starting point the self-consciousness of the individual,” which in the case of new birth means “the consciousness of an alteration in the relation to God.”101 His theology of regeneration is therefore based on a phenomenology of presence, with “feeling” and “God-consciousness” being the theological categories which serve this foundational role exactly because he views them as immediately intuitive to every individual. The emphasis on feeling is nothing new in light of the Pietist tradition, and Zinzendorf in particular devoted much attention to religious experience of Herzenserfahrung as a matter in itself. However, in previous Pietist thought, even Zinzendorf, experience and feeling were primarily pastoral categories, referring to the need for every Christian to have a vibrant, personal relationship with God; they were not the foundation of a Glaubenslehre. For the Pietism of Spener and Zinzendorf, among others, the truth of the content of scripture was accepted as true, but rational arguments were ultimately inadequate and ineffective, since the important thing was learning to feel and live out the truth of the Bible. Schleiermacher continues in this tradition, yet gives this self-conscious religious experience an explicit methodological priority. Clearly, Schleiermacher attempts to emphasize that “consciousness” is not a bodiless event, causing a change in disposition. However, although not ignoring the importance of a changed disposition, he steers the language of new birth strongly in the direction of internal presence, making “immediate self-consciousness the sign (Indiz) which is to be interpreted as the feeling of absolute dependence,” as Dietrich Korsch puts it.102 Still, Schleiermacher’s definition of the Holy Spirit as the “common spirit” of the fellowship of regenerate believers makes it clear that although his thinking begins methodologically with the individual’s religious experience, the community is essential for being born again.

101 §109.3: 501. 102 Korsch, “Luther im Licht Schleiermachers”: 187.

Conclusion

153

5.4.2 The universality of religion and the specificity of Christian regeneration There is a particular tension in Schleiermacher’s thought between the general concept religion, or the “feeling of absolute dependence,” and the specific dawning of Christian faith in regeneration. On the one hand, it is clear that regeneration for Schleiermacher is not a gradual transition but, as the metaphor implies, a radical change from death to life. This event is the result of divine work and not anything that the individual could achieve on his or her own. Moreover, it is a distinctly Christian event, conditioned by Jesus Christ, and not a general “religious” experience. Still, Schleiermacher views this divine act as the actualization of a faculty already inherent in every human being. One of the consequences of such a concept is that it allows for a more positive evaluation of other philosophies and even faith traditions outside of Christianity, since these too can be seen as “religiously” stimulating the “God consciousness.” On this point, a comparison with Jonathan Edwards (see previous chapter) is instructive. Both Edwards and Schleiermacher are keenly concerned with making clear that God makes use of basic human experiences and emotion in bringing about conversion and regeneration; both are led to the conclusion that religious experience in general, and conversion in particular, are marked by various forms of emotional expression, therefore it is a mistake to expect all conversion experiences to be the same. Moreover, they both agree that it is often difficult to identify an exact moment of regeneration (although both believe that regeneration happens in a moment), since the process from preparatory grace to true faith is often fluid. However, as Michael McClymond points out, “Schleiermacher’s basic strategy for vindicating religion was to declare its independence from the spheres of knowledge, metaphysics, and morality,” through its reification as a universal category, whereas Edwards saw faith itself as a form of knowledge and had no general concept of “religion” in the sense that Schleiermacher did.103

5.4.3 The importance of certainty The language of “consciousness” leads to a conception of “justification by faith” markedly different from that of Luther. For Schleiermacher, justification by faith means “that the application of the universal divine justifying act to the individual is bound up with and conditioned by the dawn of faith”104 – with “faith” here understood as an abiding state of consciousness. In other words, 103 Michael McClymond, Encounters with God: 22–24. 104 §109.4: 503

154

Schleiermacher on New Birth

even though my justification is not caused by faith, the two are strongly correlative. Therefore, from a perspective which views the immediacy of selfpresence as foundationally important, the answer the question of certitude – namely, “How do I know I am born again?” – becomes increasingly grounded in the subjective experience of presence, since faith is “certainty of a fact [i. e. the “feeling of absolute dependence”] which is entirely inward.”105 Clearly Schleiermacher was not the first to deal with the question of inward certainty in relation to the new birth. Luther himself wrote of an emotional effect that the believer “finds in himself,” feeling “a certain kind of conscience and joyful heart for God’s grace.”106 For Luther, however, such inward certainty was seen as a gift of God and an example of God’s grace, and he never thought of explicitly connecting the apparent onset of such feelings with regeneration. As previously mentioned, Luther’s famous answer to the question of how a Christian can be certain of being born again is to direct him or her away from consciousness – and toward baptism. In Schleiermacher’s methodology, all such questions inevitably lead in the other direction: inward towards the “God-consciousness” of the regenerate Christian. Thus Christian faith, for Schleiermacher, is marked by the “certainty of a fact which is entirely inward,” as the transformation of a general faith in God (which is “nothing but the certainty concerning the feeling of absolute dependence”) into one which has been confronted with the presence of Christ and his redeeming power.107 Thus for Schleiermacher, the question How do I know I am born again? becomes implicitly connected to the question How do I know that Christianity is true? Indeed, for Schleiermacher this epistemological prioritization of subjective religious experience had an apologetic goal, given that the “cultured despisers” whose attention he sought were deeply skeptical of the Bible as a whole as well as the doctrines of different Christian traditions, whether Lutheran, Catholic, Orthodox, or Anabaptist. How could he communicate to them the truth which he felt so passionately except by meeting them at the level of feeling? On this level Schleiermacher does something which Edwards, as interested as he was in the phenomenology of religious experience, does not: Schleiermacher appeals to the experience of regeneration as an argument for the truth of Christianity. In his earlier work On Religion, it takes an explicitly apologetic tone; in The Christian Faith, it is implicit in his methodology.

105 §14.1: 68. 106 WA 2: 714, 21. Cf. Korsch, “Luther im Licht Schleiermachers”: 183. 107 §14.1: 68. According to Schleiermacher, this experience of certainty is the basis for “testimony,” which in turn “shall arouse in others the desire to have the same experience” (Ibid.: 69).

Conclusion

155

5.4.4 Scripture and doctrine For post-Reformation theology “faith” had increasingly become an entity of its own, a possession of one’s heart, soul, and mind, whose presence confirms whether or not a believer is truly born again. Yet for most Protestants of this period, the presence experience of faith was not of central systematic importance: while it was crucial for every believer to possess faith, it was generally not seen as a tool to explain doctrine, which was based on biblical revelation. Occasionally there arose those “enthusiasts” who claimed to have received a new, extra-biblical revelation, but these were relegated to the fringes of theological discussion, even among the more radical reformers. Moreover, since the life of faith was, through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, cultivated through the internalization of “external” biblical principles (which were seen as being unproblematically true), the question of whether there could be a tension between this presence experience and the external teachings of the Bible did not arise – for why would the Holy Spirit contradict the Bible? Thus even among theologians who valued a more ecstatic and mystical form of presence, theological debates centered, as they always had, on scriptural interpretation. At least on the surface, Schleiermacher appears to challenge this traditional “theo-logic” with his claim that “Christian doctrines are accounts of the Christian religious affections set forth in speech.”108 Now, “true theological affirmations” seem to be “derived ‘from below,’” comments Randy Maddox, instead of from the tradition biblical and doctrinal authorities.109 While the genuine originality of Schleiermacher’s method is not to be denied, on closer examination, however, he turns out to be far less radical than he is often suspected. In terms of his doctrinal beliefs, Schleiermacher is conservative by many theological standards. For instance, although he did go through personal stages of doubt as a young student, Schleiermacher the theologian never expresses doubt concerning the doctrines of Incarnation, Resurrection, or even the Trinity (although he relegates the latter to a short, final chapter which David Bentley Hart has described as “an appendicitic twinge”).110 Moreover, his theology is still replete with dogmatic statements which ultimately cannot be explained by his own appeals to religious consciousness, such as the doctrines of justification and adoption – which for Schleiermacher, just like Spener, represent not an experience of presence but a change in status made possible through a divine decree. And statements such as, “the sin … of a regenerate man … cannot be the same sin as a sin ever so like it in the unregenerate,” have far less to do with any analysis of religious experience 108 §15: 76. 109 Maddox, “Schleiermacher and the Holy Spirit”: 94. 110 Hart, The Beauty of the Infinite: 156. Cf. Schleiermacher, The Christian Faith: §170.

156

Schleiermacher on New Birth

than they do with viewing this experience through the lens of doctrine.111 Instead, Schleiermacher’s particular gift is the ability to take doctrines in which he already believes and translate them into language which lends them a distinct freshness. This is seen, for instance, in his simple decision to replace the traditional term “repentance” with “regret,” or in his attempt to describe the experience of faith in the language of “consciousness.” Schleiermacher is famous for this sort of practice, and it has generally been interpreted as a plea to academic theologians to do theology by supposedly “translating” Christian concepts into another (generally philosophical) terminology. However, it can alternatively be seen as confirming a fundamental claim of this study, which will be elaborated in Part II: that one need not always use traditional theological language to think theologically, and hence the boundaries between the reflections of professional theologians and those of pious laity are not always as clear as theologians would perhaps like them to be. The Bible, moreover, is ubiquitous in Schleiermacher’s The Christian Faith, and this holds for the doctrine of regeneration in particular. Two biblical passages guide Schleiermacher’s theory of new birth: 2 Cor. 5:17, “So if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has passed away; see, everything has become new!”; and Eph. 4:22–24, “You were taught to put away your former way of life, your old self, corrupt and deluded by its lusts, and to be renewed in the spirit of your minds, and to clothe yourselves with the new self, created according to the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness.” It is not difficult to see why Schleiermacher would be particularly attracted to the latter passage and its reference to “spirit of your minds,” since his section on new birth – and, indeed, his entire theological method – is based on the experience of a radical change in consciousness. A final word needs to be dedicated to Schleiermacher’s doctrine of the Holy Spirit, which has been vulnerable to the “charge of reducing pneumatology to ecclesiology,” as Maddox remarks.112 While most theologians ascribe the work of conversion primarily to the Holy Spirit, and justification to the Father, Schleiermacher believes that the subjective experience of regeneration ought instead to be seen as the work of the “divine power of the Word,” which is the “self-revelation of Christ … now mediated by those who preach him.”113 The work of the Holy Spirit, on the other hand, is to be identified with the life of the Christian community, not only in the sanctification process following regeneration but also in the life of the individual leading up to regeneration, which begins with baptism. This is a peculiar dogmatic move, and it would seem, at least on the surface, to discourage the language of mystical encounter with the Holy Spirit (although not, interestingly, in a communal context). 111 §111.1: 511. 112 Maddox: 94. Cf. also Kevin Hector’s recent article, “The Mediation of Christ’s Normative Spirit: A Constructive Reading of Schleiermacher’s Pneumatology.” 113 §108.5: 490.

Conclusion

157

Finally, in an interesting twist, it ought not to be overlooked how much Schleiermacher’s reflection on this subject has been shaped by the doctrine of the Trinity, although Schleiermacher himself appears to minimize the doctrine’s significance in his dogmatic system: justification through the Father, the experience of conversion through the Son, and the ensuing life of sanctification in which the Spirit is experienced in the community of other believers.114 This is a reminder of how certain doctrines can be at work tacitly – perhaps even unknowingly so – even in the best systematic theologians.

114 This provides evidence for Hector’s judgment that “while Schleiermacher’s pneumatology may not require orthodox Trinitarianism, it certainly is not incompatible with it.” Hector even goes as far to claim that “Schleiermacher’s worries about the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity have nothing to do with any equivocation about the full divinity of Christ and the Spirit. Quite the contrary: Schleiermacher has misgivings about the tradition doctrine because he sees it as unable to uphold their full divinity in any kind of straightforward way” (“The Mediation of Christ’s Normative Spirit”: 16, 15).

6 Charles Finney: New Birth as Decision 6.1 Introduction 6.1.1 Finney’s conversion experience Charles Grandison Finney was born in the late 18th century, the son of common farmers (he was the youngest of fifteen children), and grew up primarily in upstate New York, which according to Finney’s autobiographical Memoirs, was “at that time, to a great extent, a wilderness.”1 Finney intends this description to apply not only literally but spiritually as well, going on to describe the area as being marked by blatant religious ignorance: very few religious books were to found, few “Gospel sermons”2 to be heard, and most of the settlers, including his own parents, were according to Finney not very pious. It was in this humble, rather typical American milieu in which Finney was raised, occasionally moving to a new location in the Northeast, and sporadically attending school, where despite these circumstantial hindrances he seems to have shown success. According to his Memoirs, Finney even contemplated attending Yale University, to which his high school teacher, a Yale graduate, replied that it would be a waste of time. Finney then eventually settled on an internship at a law firm, and at this time he began showing interest in Christianity, having been beforehand “almost as ignorant of religion as a heathen.”3 Finney then began seeking theological instruction from a local, influential Presbyterian pastor by the name of George Gale, whose preaching often left him “rather perplexed than edified.”4 Finney claims to have recognized very quickly a contradiction between the kind of reasoning performed by orthodox Calvinist theologians and that of the logical, evidence-based argumentation taught in his law firm. It was this tension, along with the fact that many of his contemporary legal theorists made reference biblical passages, which led Finney to purchase his first Bible for himself, an event which he portrays as a turning point in his life. At first, Finney’s Bible reading provided him with 1 Finney, Memoirs: 4. The version cited for this chapter is the classic 1876 publication, released by the faculty of Oberlin college, and recently re-released by Applewood Books in 2009. There are occasional problems with the abridgement of this text, which will be dealt with when appropriate. 2 The widely-read 1876 version of Finney’s Memoirs contains the phrase “I seldom heard a sermon,” whereas the original text, released in an edition edited by Garth M. Rosell and Richard A.G. Dupuis (The Original Memoirs of Charles G. Finney), contains the critical adjective “Gospel.” 3 Memoirs.: 7. 4 Ibid.

Introduction

159

more questions than answers, to which his mentor Gale seems have provided limited help (the young Finney, clearly dissatisfied with Gale’s Calvinist stance, portrays himself as having often overwhelmed his mentor with intellectual intensity5), and top of this, Finney’s concerns were not merely hermeneutical but deeply existential: he was becoming increasingly restless concerning the state of his own soul. “A little consideration convinced me that I was by no means in a state of mind to go to heaven if I should die,” he writes. “I needed a great change in my inward state to be prepared for happiness in heaven.”6 Finney knew that according to traditional Calvinist theology, such as that affirmed by Edwards, the individual can put him- or herself in a position to be “prepared” for regeneration, but that the regeneration event itself ultimately was based entirely on God’s sovereignty. Thus one can only wait. Yet if this were the case, he asks, then why does Jesus state in Matt. 7:8 that “everyone that asketh receiveth, and he that seeketh findeth, and to him that knocketh it shall be opened”? Driven by these questions, and despite working long hours at his law office, “[o]n a Sabbath evening in the autumn of 1821, I made up my mind that I would settle the question of my soul’s salvation at once, that if it were possible I would make my peace with God.”7 He proceeded to read the Bible voraciously but also with self-conscious embarrassment, recounting that “when anybody came in, I would throw my law books upon it, to create the impression that I had not had it in my hand.”8 This situation changed, however, when one morning at the office something inside of him, “as if an inward voice,” confronted Finney with the question: “What are you waiting for? Did you not promise to give your heart to God? And what are you trying to do? Are you endeavoring to work out a righteousness of your own?” He continues: “Just at this point the whole question of Gospel salvation opened to my mind in a manner most marvelous to me at the time. I think I then saw, as clearly as I ever have in my life, the reality and fullness of the atonement of Christ. I saw that His work was a finished work; and that instead of having, or needing, any righteousness of my own to 5 Cf., for example, Memoirs: 8: “In conversing with him and asking him questions, I perceived that his own mind was, as I thought, mystified; and that he did not accurately define to himself what he meant by many of the important terms that he used. Indeed I found it impossible to attach any meaning to many of the terms which he used with great formality and frequency. What did he mean by repentance? Was it a mere feeling of sorrow for sin? Was it altogether a passive state of mind, or did it involve a voluntary element? If it was a change of mind, in what respect was it a change of mind? What did he mean by the term regeneration? What did such language mean when applied to a spiritual change? What did he mean by faith? Was it merely an intellectual state? Was it merely a conviction, or persuasion, that the things stated in the Gospel were true? What did he mean by sanctification? Did it involve any physical change in the subject, or any physical influence on the part of God? I could not tell, nor did he seem to me to know himself, in what sense he used these and similar terms.” 6 Ibid.: 9. 7 Ibid.: 12. 8 Ibid., 13.

160

Charles Finney: New Birth as Decision

recommend me to God, I had to submit myself to the righteousness of God through Christ. Gospel salvation seemed to me to be an offer of something to be accepted; and that it was full and complete; and that all that was necessary on my part, was to get my own consent to give up my sins, and accept Christ. Salvation, it seemed to me, instead of being a thing to be wrought out, by my own works, was a thing to be found entirely in the Lord Jesus Christ, who presented Himself before me as my God and my Saviour…. [T]he question seemed to be put, ‘Will you accept it now, today?’ I replied, ‘Yes; I will accept it today, or I will die in the attempt.’”9

Yet Finney writes that he did not accept it at that moment. Instead, he retired to the nearby woods to pray and wrestle with this decision, a moment in which he becomes acutely aware of his own sinfulness due to his worrying that someone would see him praying and he would be embarrassed. “What!” cried Finney, “such a degraded sinner as I am, on my knees confessing my sins to the great and holy God; and ashamed to have any human being, and a sinner like myself, find me on my knees endeavoring to make my peace with my offended God!” It was at this moment a passage of scripture came into his mind “with a flood of light”: Deuteronomy 4:29, which promises that those who seek God with all their hearts will not be disappointed.10 Finney continues, “I instantly seized hold of this [passage] with my heart. I had intellectually believed the Bible before; but never had the truth been in my mind that faith was a voluntary trust instead of an intellectual state. I was as conscious as I was of my existence, of trusting at that moment in God’s veracity. Somehow I knew that that was a passage of Scripture, though I do not think I had ever read it. I knew that it was God’s word, and God’s voice, as it were, that spoke to me. I cried to Him, ‘Lord, I take thee at they word. Now though knowest that I do search for thee with all my heart, and that I have come here to pray to thee; and thou hast promised to hear me.’”11

According to his Memoirs, after this moment Finney continued to pray and reflect, a time in which other promises from the Bible, from both Testaments, were given to him by God. “I took them one after another as infallible truth, the assertions of God who could not lie.”12 He views these promises as having been grasped not as much intellectually as they were by his “heart,” comparable to how a drowning man grasps for life-saving support. Finney writes that during this experience the question of his own conversion subsided. There was even a point where, after feeling “most wonderfully quiet and peaceful,” he wondered whether such a pacified subjective state meant that he had lost all his religious conviction.13 (He wondered, for instance, if he had said something to offend 9 Ibid.: 14. 10 “There you will seek the Lord your God, and you will find him if you search after him with all your heart and soul.” 11 Ibid.: 16. 12 Ibid. 13 Ibid.

Introduction

161

the Holy Spirit during his time in the woods and thus committed blasphemy.) However, this did not account for the pleasantness which he was experiencing, marked by a feeling that all guilt and sin had departed from him. He then began to feel guilty about his guiltlessness, and attempted to work up feelings of remorse and anxiousness, but to no avail. Instead, he felt nothing but peace: “The thought of God was sweet to my mind, and the most profound spiritual tranquility had taken full possession of me.” Finney describes this experience as a “mystery.”14 This feeling of tranquility, accompanied by a spontaneous bout of weeping, continued throughout the remainder of the day as a heightened mystical state. “There was a great sweetness and tenderness in my thoughts and feelings,” writes Finney, who goes on to describe his heart as being like “liquid within me.”15 He then returned to his office, where he had a series of ecstatic experiences. In of these, his room, although completely dark, appeared as if it were bright; then, after shutting the door behind him, Finney had a vision in which “it seemed as if I met the Lord Jesus Christ face to face,”16 an experience he claims was as real as if an actual person were standing there. He then received “a mighty baptism of the Holy Ghost” – a concept which he claims he had never heard of before – in which “the Holy Spirit descended upon me in a manner that seemed to go through me, body and soul.” It felt like a “wave of electricity,” “waves and waves of liquid love”; “for I could not express it in any other way.”17 Finney continued in this state until he felt as if he could not bear it any more and cried out to God let it cease. Afterwards he experienced successive ecstatic experiences which expunged any remainder of doubt about the authenticity of his state. Finney ends the chapter by reflecting on the doctrine of justification, which he views as being “taught” to him “as a present experience.” He had heard of the doctrine before, but “could now see and understand what was meant by [it].” He continues, “I could see that the moment I believed, while up in the woods all sense of condemnation had entirely dropped out of my mind; and that from that moment I could not feel a sense of guilt or condemnation by any effort that I could make. My sense of guilt was gone; my sins were gone; and I do not think I felt any more sense of guilt than if I never had sinned.”18

Fresh from this experience, with “mighty waves of love and salvation flowing over me,”19 Finney felt that he knew, “with a certainty that was past possibility of all doubt,”20 that he was being called to preach the gospel. This internal 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Ibid.: 18. Ibid.: 19. Ibid. Ibid.: 20. Ibid.: 23. Ibid.: 25. Ibid.: 25.

162

Charles Finney: New Birth as Decision

certainty was confirmed externally when Finney was able to convert a Universalist, after having “blow[n] his argument to the wind,” and then subsequently a host of others.21 After experiencing his own conversion and then converting others, Finney never looked back, going on to become one of the most famous and influential revivalists in American history. He was a figurehead of the second Great Awakening, and was also unceasingly active in the anti-slavery movement leading up to the Civil War, as well as other progressive political causes such as the temperance movement. He was also influential in the founding of Oberlin College in Ohio, which in the 1830s became the first American college to regularly admit African Americans and women,22 teaching as a professor and later becoming the school’s president. Even as a lifelong social activist, however, Finney’s primary concern was always winning others to the Christian faith. Such is Finney’s portrayal of his early life and conversion – yet despite its sober, objective tone, Finney’s narrative is highly stylized. Subsequent research, for instance, has revealed Finney’s portrayal of the spiritual ignorance of his youth to be an exaggeration: Finney’s parents, though perhaps not pious enough according to his own standards, still attended church “somewhat regularly,” according to one scholar,23 meaning that the young Finney would have had extended exposure to Christian faith and doctrine. Thus Finney’s questioning concerning his personal salvation, which his Memoirs depicts as arising from natural human religiosity in first contact with the biblical narrative, betrays a deep implicit familiarity with Christian doctrine. As Charles Hambrick-Stowe notes, “Finney’s schooling, along with his exposure to more than fifteen years of biblical and doctrinal sermons, had prepared him well for the religious crisis of his twenty-ninth year.”24 Furthermore, Finney often portrays Gale as a doctrinaire, orthodox Calvinist, yet while Gale was certainly a Calvinist at this time, he was also a dedicated revivalist not averse to adopting new methods, even some that would later be labeled “Finneyan.”25 It is also highly unlikely 21 Ibid.: 26. Writes Finney: “I cannot remember one whom I spoke with, who was not soon after converted.” 22 Concerning Oberlin College’s influence on the American abolitionist movement and its overall importance for antebellum history, cf. J. Brent Morris, Oberlin, Hotbed of Abolitionism: College, Community, and the Fight for Freedom and Equality in Antebellum America. 23 Cf. Charles E. Hambrick-Stowe, Charles G. Finney and the Spirit of American Evangelicalism: 4. Hambrick-Stowe claims that Finney’s Memoirs, which were written near the end of the evangelist’s life, he frequently exaggerates his youthful lack of familiarity with Christianity. “In his Memoirs, Finney claims that, having ‘paid very little regard to the Sabbath,’ he was at this point ‘almost as ignorant as the heathen’ and had ‘no definite knowledge of religious truth whatever.’ Apparently no pastor had given him a Bible, and he had not purchased one of his own. But it cannot be said that he was unfamiliar with the Scriptures and Christian beliefs. He had heard a great deal of biblical preaching as a teenager and young adult. His ignorance was not intellectual but spiritual; the knowledge he lacked was saving knowledge” (Ibid.: 5). 24 Ibid.: 8. 25 Cf. Ibid.: 10.

Introduction

163

that George Washington Gale, who later went on to found Knox College in an Illinois town which would later come to be called Galesburg, was ever the intellectual slouch portrayed in Finney’s Memoirs.

6.1.2 Finney’s theology Though primarily famous for being one of the most important evangelists in American history, Finney also developed a highly sophisticated, albeit idiosyncratic, systematic theology, which hinges on the central conviction that the Christian life is inaugurated by a movement of the subject’s free will. This is the pragmatic, revivalist core of Finney’s often unconventional theology, whose “test of a doctrine,” notes James Johnson, “was the results it was able to achieve in the form of conversions and holy living.”26 Finney’s pragmatism also contributed to his impatience with academic theology: with the exception of his mentor Gale, Finney was mostly theologically self-taught27 (if one ignores his legal training), and he writes that he had no desire to delay his entrance into the ministry of saving souls for the purpose of theological study – particularly that of the dry, orthodox Calvinism that he so mistrusted for so many reasons, the primary one being that it rejected the very view of free will that Finney saw as so foundational.28 However, Finney cannot be dismissed as a mere anti-intellectual. Even before becoming a college professor later in life, he was always interested in, as well as opinionated about, matters concerning the contemporary theological debates of his time, which included not only the back-and-forth between the “old school” and “new school” Presbyterians, but also the entrance of the more radically liberal Universalists and Unitarians. Moreover, although he never attended seminary, Finney’s theology was clearly heavily influenced by the writings of the theologian Samuel Hopkins and the “New Divinity” movement in American theology.29 26 Johnson, “Charles Finney and a Theology of Revivalism”: 343. 27 Adrianus van der Dussen writes that “Finney was not a theologian in the true sense of the word,” (“The Tension between Freedom and Reason in the Theology of Charles Grandison Finney”: 205). This statement itself is, of course, highly theological, and whether it is correct is certainly an important debate, yet not one to be considered in this chapter. 28 It is important to note that Finney was certainly not the first evangelist to radically question Calvinism. As James Johnson notes, “Three of the more important names in the New England revivals of the early nineteenth century were Timothy Dwight, Lyman Beecher, and Nathaniel W. Taylor. Their actions resulted in a modification of Calvinism to the point that it could hardly be recognized as such. These men were never as concerned with building a coherent scheme of theological thought as they were in winning conversion…. Revivalism was the means which they employed to obtain their ends” (Johnson: 339). 29 Cf. Conforti, Samuel Hopkins and the New Divinity Movement. Cf. also Allen Guelzo, “An Heir or a Rebel? Charles Grandison Finney and the New England Theology.”

164

Charles Finney: New Birth as Decision

Finney’s two-volume Systematic Theology, which represents his mature thought and serves as the primary text of this investigation, arose from lectures delivered during his time as a professor at Oberlin. Though from the pen of a revivalist preacher, the Systematic Theology is a surprisingly dense and abstract work, as well as strongly rationalistic in its reasoning, which at first glance appears to be a marked contrast to the supernatural experience of Finney’s conversion. The book begins, for instance, not with the work and person of Christ or even the character of God, but instead with a philosophical, or natural-theological, exposition of universal “moral law.” According to this theory, the world is marked by a basic ontological dualism of the “physical” and the rational, or “moral”: “physical” actions encompass everything from the mechanistic workings of nature to animal instincts to unreflective bodily actions, while “moral” actions are the results of human free will.30 While physical actions are bound to a “physical law” external of human volition, moral actions are bound to “moral law,” which is “that rule to which moral agents ought to conform all their voluntary actions.”31 And “ought” is the crucial term, for all human moral action is marked not by necessity, as is the case in “physical law,” but instead by free will, and thus is driven by obligation, or “oughtness,” instead of by the mechanistic, cause-and-effect nature of the physical world. This “oughtness” is, according to Finney (apparently borrowing the language of Immanuel Kant), “an idea of the pure reason,”32 which is discovered when human beings, as possessors of free will, act in ways which are not driven by their natural desires (i. e. “self-love”33) but instead by “disinterested benevolence.”34

In Kantian fashion, Finney equates the religious and moral spheres, asserting that any particular sin, whatever it may be, consists of an immoral action committed voluntarily; “sin,” as an abstract noun, is nothing other than “supreme preference for self-gratification,” i. e. a moral failure.35 Sin is to be avoided not only because it is an affront to God’s will but also, more fundamentally, because it violates the moral law of the universe – since moral law is a “rule to which [God] conforms his whole being.”36 The same applies to “holiness,” which is nothing other than moral virtue, the “supreme preference for the good of being.”37 Even God is, according to Finney, “under a moral obligation to require us to be holy, as he is holy.”38 Yet if the religious and the moral are identical, and God is subject to moral law accessible through pure reason, then why does humanity need religious revelation? Or, more specific to our topic: why does humanity need 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38

Systematic Theology: 6. Ibid.: 2. Ibid.: 12. Ibid.: 14. Ibid.: 28. Ibid.: 32. Ibid.: 8. Ibid.: 32. Cf. Ibid.: 28. Ibid.: 8. Italics mine.

Introduction

165

supernatural redemption – particularly the redemption achieved through the person and work of Jesus Christ – if humanity is capable of grasping the extent of its own sinfulness as well as what it means to be holy? In other words, why does one need to be “born again”? Kant certainly did not see the necessity of supernatural atonement or personal religious conversion for achieving moral excellence – so why does Finney? Shortly summarized, Finney’s argument is the following: although no one could have rationally deduced, a priori, the coming of Christ, the human need for divine redemption itself is indeed a truth inferable by reason; therefore, from a rational standpoint, a posteriori, the sacrificial atonement of Christ can be seen as the perfect solution to humanity’s plight. For instance, Finney asks his readers to consider the paradox that “all nations have felt the necessity of expiatory sacrifices,” while at the same time “the wisest of heathen philosophers” have seen the “intrinsic inefficiency” of the very sacrifices which are felt to be so necessary.39 Clearly, he believes, it is a universal anthropological fact that human beings yearn for atonement, but yet are not able to fulfill this need themselves. Christ’s sacrifice on the cross is the answer to this problem, according to Finney, who views Christ’s death as a vicarious, blood atonement intended for all of humanity (this is what Finney labels “public justice,” as opposed to retributive justice40). God “made the atonement to satisfy himself, … for the benefit of the universe, … [and] for the benefit particularly of the inhabitants of this world.”41 This is stated in knowing opposition to the Calvinist doctrine of “limited atonement,” which sees Christ as only dying for the elect. For Finney, Jesus Christ died for everyone, yet it is ultimately up to the individual to freely choose to accept this grace.

That human nature is in a fallen state is for Finney clear, since humanity does not follow the very moral law that it perceives through reason. This disjointed relation between knowledge of law and obedience to it makes clear that human beings are guilty; thus they are in need of pardon for their sin. It is also clear that God, as a benevolent God, would desire to pardon the sinner; yet God would not do this without the “condition of repentance,” given that humans possess free will,42 since such a pardoning of the sinner without his or her free will – which was of course the classical Puritan view of redemption – would contradict the moral logic of the universe (and thus also God’s will). Due to this emphasis on free will, Finney views Christ’s atonement as “offered to all indiscriminately,” and those who reject it are “universally condemned.”43 It is therefore the duty of all Christians to pose others with a clear decision: to accept Christ’s sacrifice or to reject it. This is the 39 40 41 42 43

Ibid. Cf. Ibid.: 201, 207. Ibid.: 211. Ibid.: 200. Ibid.

166

Charles Finney: New Birth as Decision

fundamentally evangelistic impulse of Finney’s theology, which corresponds to the fundamentally evangelistic ambition of his preaching: at the moment when a human being, through free will, truly accepts the Christian message of salvation, the salvation afforded by the cross is received and the individual is no longer condemned. Those who accept Christ will experience regeneration, and can be assured of its truth based not only on the testimony of scripture, but also subjectively, in the gift of the Holy Spirit’s presence which enables them to will the good in a way not previously possible.

6.2 Finney on Regeneration 6.2.1 Introduction: activity vs. passivity, “moral” vs. “physical” Finney’s Systematic Theology provides four chapters on the subject of regeneration, in which he goes into depth concerning the exact nature of the change which takes place. On the surface, his doctrine of regeneration appears very similar to the previous theories discussed in this study: it is an “instantaneous” moment,44 the beginning of a “new heart,”45 induced by God’s agency, which brings the convert “from entire sinfulness to entire holiness.”46 However, where he disagrees with prior theologies is concerning the proper relation between the passivity and activity of the human will. Finney begins his chapter on new birth by rejecting the popular Puritan distinction between “regeneration,” signifying the passive change of the heart through divine agency, and “conversion,” signifying the active process of repentance by the subject caused by the Holy Spirit’s regenerating work.47 For Finney, however, such a distinction, even if only abstract, is “nonsense” in that it affirms that “[one’s] moral character is changed without any activity or agency of his own.”48 Such a change, according to Finney’s rationalist metaphysics, would not truly be “moral” at all, since it robs the subject of all free will. “Passive holiness,” he declares, “is impossible.”49 Hence the repentance exhibited by the convert is not only the result of one’s regeneration, as the Puritans and Calvin before them believed; instead, it is a requirement for it. This is the direct 44 Ibid.: 226. 45 Ibid.: 219. 46 Ibid.: 227. Finney’s basic conception of regeneration conforms perfectly to Spener’s classic threefold division: the convert experiences an inward change as well as the supernatural presence of God, which is interpreted to be the true beginning of the Christian life. 47 Cf. Ibid.: 218. Toon comments that the “identification of conversion with regeneration was to become a common presupposition within popular evangelism throughout the nineteenth and into the twentieth century” (Born Again, 172). 48 Ibid.: 219. 49 Ibid.

Finney on Regeneration

167

result of his Finney’s rationalist, deontological ethics, in which any “change, to have moral character, must be voluntary.”50 Finney is not suggesting that the Holy Spirit is not present before conversion. In Finney’s own conversion narrative, for instance, the Holy Spirit had communicated to him “as if by an inward voice” before he made his decision. Still, Finney had to “take him at his word,”51 through an act of free will. Therefore, in his conversion, both Finney and the Holy Spirit were “active,” since the event of conversion/regeneration requires the agency of both. Finney writes: “The fact that a new heart is the thing done, demonstrates the activity of the subject; and the word regeneration, or ‘born of the Holy Spirit,’ asserts the Divine agency. The same is true of conversion, or the turning of the sinner to God. God is said to turn him and he is said to turn himself. God draws him, he follows.”52 There is nothing wrong with the unregenerate’s ability to reason or feel passions. Instead, the problem lies solely in the will, since for the heart to be changed it must first open itself to the possibility of change.

Furthermore, the change which takes place in regeneration is not about “feeling,” given that no “moral character” can be “predicated” on such a thing.53 Thus the term “heart” for Finney signifies the “propelling influence” of the mind54 and “the source of moral action.”55 In other words, one’s “heart,” according to Finney, is nothing other than one’s will. When someone is viewed as having a good or bad heart, for instance, what is meant is a judgment of character; therefore being born again, or having a changed heart, means “a radical change in character,” having to do with “the ultimate choice or intention of the soul.” Finney continues: “Regeneration, to have the characteristics ascribed to it in the Bible, must consist in a change in the attitude of the will, or a change in its ultimate choice, intention, or preference; a change from selfishness to benevolence; from choosing self-gratification as the supreme and ultimate end of life, to the supreme and ultimate choice of the highest well-being of God and of the universe; from a state of entire consecration to self-interest, self-indulgence, self-gratification for its own sake or as an end, and as the supreme end of life, to a state of entire consecration to God, and to the interests of his kingdom as the supreme and ultimate end of life.”56

50 This citation is taken from Finney’s sermon, “Sinners Bound to Change Their Own Hearts,” (Sermons on Important Subjects: 16) which, although written decades earlier, in many ways serves as a summary of his reflections on regeneration in Systematic Theology. 51 Memiors: 17. 52 Systematic Theology: 220. “The Spirit acts upon him through or by the truth: thus far he is passive. He closes with the truth: thus far he is active” (Ibid.: 226). 53 Ibid.: 222. 54 Ibid. 55 Ibid.: 221. 56 Ibid.: 223.

168

Charles Finney: New Birth as Decision

Finney labels this internal change which takes place during regeneration as “moral” instead of “physical” – the exact reversal of the Puritan (including Edwards’) theory – and specifically rejects the language of “infusion,”57 all of which are intended to make clear that the individual must not merely wait passively for regeneration but can actively participate in his or her holiness.

6.2.2 What regeneration is not 6.2.2.1 A feeling In light of his differences with the orthodox, “old school” Puritanism of his day, Finney devotes a significant amount of space to clarifying what regeneration is not. He believes both Christians and non-Christians typically desire their own happiness, as well as the happiness of others; they also both “dread their own misery, and the misery of others.”58 The non-regenerate often love truth, desire moral goodness and social justice, as well as behave with the utmost moral exemplariness. Both regenerate and non-regenerate may have similar intellectual opinions. Moreover, the new birth is not a feeling, even though “nothing is more common than to hear religion spoken of as consisting altogether in mere feelings, desires, and emotions.”59 Yet this is wrong according to Finney, since feelings cannot be trusted, thus the assumption that one’s feelings can guarantee that he or she is truly born again is “a deep delusion, and one of the most common in Christendom, or at least one of the most common that is to found among what are called revival Christians.”60 This “moral” perspective on regeneration leads Finney to opinions which diverge strongly from the Puritanism represented by Edwards by granting more spiritual insight to the unregenerate. For instance, in contrast to the traditional Puritan perspective, a non-regenerate person does not necessarily react in anger or rebellion when confronted with the Gospel; on the contrary, Finney observes that many non-religious people (the young Finney included) demonstrate a deep interest in the Bible and receptivity to its message. Finney even remarks that he rejoiced in the religious conversion of his brother – before Finney himself had become converted.61 It would also be a mistake to believe that only the regenerate can be theologically perceptive, according to Finney, since even the non-regenerate may deeply disapprove of “sin,”62 because no one desires “sin” in the abstract, but instead specific sins, which 57 58 59 60 61 62

Cf. Ibid.: 221. Ibid.: 237. Ibid.: 239. Ibid.: 243. Ibid.: 238. Ibid.: 239.

Finney on Regeneration

169

are clearly abhorred by many (if not most) non-religious people. Thus drunkards, notes Finney, are often ashamed of their actions while continuing to do them: they know they are sinning, but still feel as if they cannot do otherwise. This also explains why so many religious conversions are fleeting: in such inauthentic conversions, the shame and disgust over one’s own sin – which, as has been mentioned, is common to both regenerate and non-regenerate – is emotionally stimulated to the point that this conviction temporarily outweighs one’s attraction to the sin. Thus one feels freed, one feels changed, yet this is merely an emotional state that will eventually fade. Afterwards, “when conviction subsides, and the consequent feelings are no more, these spurious converts ‘return like a dog to his vomit, and like a sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.’”63 Therefore, according to Finney it is a deep theological mistake, with disastrous pastoral consequences, to assume that being born again is essentially the calling forth of a deep feeling of disgust about one’s sins. The essential change of regeneration must instead be based on the stable foundation of the human will.

6.2.2.2 A “taste” These reflections lead Finney to strongly reject what he labels the “taste scheme” of regeneration, which he connects with classic Presbyterianism and to Edwards in particular. According to this popular view of regeneration, writes Finney, the unregenerate heart is “not identical with choice or intention” but instead is controlled by a kind of “taste” for sin.64 This “taste” completely overwhelms any free will, like an addiction, corrupting the soul completely and making it, “in its very nature, … enmity against God,” meaning that only a radical, external influence can alter this state of total depravity and wickedness. The change of heart that takes place during regeneration, from this perspective, is thus a literal “change in constitution,” – a “physical” (as opposed to “moral”) change in which the Holy Spirit supernaturally implants a new taste for what is good and holy. It is an agency which, according to this perspective, “is sovereign, irresistible, and creative”: sovereign in the sense that it comes from God, irresistible in that free will plays no role (just as it did not previously), and creative in the sense that a new “holy taste, relish, or craving is implanted or infused by the Holy Spirit into the constitution of the soul.”65 Finney disagrees with this “taste” view on a fundamental level: according to Finney, this view of regeneration rests on a false view of moral depravity and 63 Ibid.: 240. 64 The following quotations, unless otherwise noted, are found in Ibid.: 228. 65 Ibid.: 228–229.

170

Charles Finney: New Birth as Decision

ignores the basic truth that sin is a choice. As previously mentioned, according to Finney no one desires to sin as an end in itself (as if someone would say, “I would really like to sin right now”) but instead chooses a specific act which is a sin, no matter how powerless he or she may feel. “The sin never lies in the appetite,” therefore, “but in the will’s consent to unlawful indulgence.”66 The “taste” school thus seems to confuse the act of sin itself with the mere temptation to sin, but these are not the same, according to Finney. Finally, Finney resorts to the classic speculative critique of predestination, arguing this view “throws the blame of unregeneracy upon God,” since God alone is responsible for bringing the regenerate out of their sinful state and into new birth.67 6.2.2.3 The result of a necessary morphology of conversion Finney also rejects “mixed” views of regeneration which attempt to acknowledge the agent’s free will, but still assert the necessity of preparatory grace by which God must first prepare the convert to be able to make such a decision.68 Although more room is given for free will, within this perspective regeneration is still seen as an event which ultimately results from God’s act of putting the will in a place to make the proper choice.69 The pressing question, according to Finney, is whether the Bible teaches that new birth generally takes place through any kind of “physical” influence. Finney admits that there are indeed many passages which can be read as affirming such a perspective, particularly those which refer to God “opening the understanding”70 or “opening the 66 Ibid.: 229. The following quotations, unless otherwise noted, are also found on this page. 67 Finney also expresses his rejection of a type of metaphysical hyper-Calvinism in which all events are caused directly by God. According to this view, “what we call laws of nature are nothing else than the mode of divine operation,” (Ibid.: 230) and “the universe exists only by an act of present and perpetual creation” (Ibid). It is a view that is “based upon, or rather is only a carrying out of, an ancient heathen philosophy,” a statement which can be reasonably inferred (although Finney does not mention it by name) to refer to the Stoic doctrine of fate. It is clear that if Finney rejects the “taste scheme” he will more vehemently reject this one, and his theses against the “divine efficiency scheme” are similar but also stronger: it “tends to produce and perpetuate a sense of divine injustice,” as well as contradicting “human consciousness” itself, considering that “consciousness not only gives us our mental actions and states, but it also gives us the cause of them” (Ibid.); furthermore, it “represents God as the only agent, in any proper sense of that term, in the universe,” which in turn implies that God has no moral character (such much that is immoral takes place) and that human free agency is a chimera. In summary, it is rejects the fundamental metaphysical and anthropological distinction, so important to Finney’s thought, “between moral and physical power, and moral and physical government” (Ibid.: 231). 68 Ibid.: 231–232. In Finney’s words, to “direct and physical agency of the Holy Spirit upon the constitutional susceptibilities of the soul, to quicken and wake it up, and predispose it to be deeply and duly affected by the truth.” 69 Ibid.: 234. Finney does not want to imply that God cannot work in this way, but he sees no reason to assume it is the norm: “I admit that it may be, but I cannot see either that it must be, or that there is any good ground for the assumption that it is.” 70 Finney cites Luke 24:45 as an example. (Cf. Ibid.: 232–233)

Finney on Regeneration

171

heart”71 of converts. However, such metaphors according to Finney describe moral, and not physical, events; they describe intellectual acceptance of God’s truth. Furthermore, no period of physical “preparation,” in which the Holy Spirit externally prepares the soul for conversion, need be seen as necessary. Certainly, as seen in Finney’s own case, there may be a period of preparation – however, “why assume that this is a physical influence?”72 Why assume that such a period is necessary for new birth? In contrast to earlier Puritan conversion theologies – even those that are not strictly predestinarian – Finney sees any preparatory stages as essentially unnecessary to being born again. Anyone, theoretically, can become born again at this very moment.

6.2.3 Regeneration as moral sensibility According to Finney, all of the previously cited misunderstandings of new birth share one commonality: they assume that being born again is primarily a passive change in the way one feels, separate from any movement of the will. Equating sin with moral failure, Finney has a different criterion for differentiating those who are truly born again from those who are not: “All unregenerate persons, without exception, have one heart, that is, they are selfish.” Regenerate persons, on the other hand, are marked by “disinterested benevolence,” which is nothing other than “love to God and our neighbor.”73 Their actions only “have one ultimate reason,” which is God. The regenerate “sees the path of duty, and follows it,” while the unregenerate person, even if interested in truth, goodness, and justice, is “not governed by reason and principle, but by feeling, desire, and impulse.”74 He refers to this view of regeneration as “moral suasion” in order to make clear that being born again is being truly persuaded, which happens not through any kind of infusion of new spiritual traits into the soul (since such an event would not even be real persuasion) but instead in the “moral” sphere of one’s own intellect. For 71 Finney cites Acts 26:14. (Cf. Ibid.: 233) 72 Ibid.: 234. 73 Ibid.: 245. The phrase “disinterested benevolence” was also commonly used in New England theology around Finney’s time. Although the term (and particularly Finney’s use of it) has a Kantian ring, it came to Finney through the writings of Samuel Hopkins, Jonathan Edwards’ most gifted student, and the so-called “New Divinity” movement, which was at once inspired by the writings and revivalism of Edwards, yet also sought to break away from what they saw as his dogmatic Puritanism. From the standpoint of historical theology, this theological school is the “missing link” between the often radically divergent theologies and revivalist methods of Edwards and Finney. Cf. Joseph Conforti, Samuel Hopkins and the New Divinity Movement, particularly the chapter “Disinterested Benevolence: A Theology of Social Reform”: 109–124. Cf. also Stephen Post, “Disinterested Benevolence: An American Debate Over the Nature of Christian Love.” 74 Ibid.: 246.

172

Charles Finney: New Birth as Decision

Finney, regenerate Christians have become masters of all appetites and passions, through the moral power of their wills, which leads to the conclusion that a “self-indulgent Christian is a contradiction.”75 At first glance, this statement would seem to imply that Finney only exhibits two of Spener’s three characteristics of regeneration, namely: 1) being justified and a true child of God, and 2) the mystical presence of the Holy Spirit; but not 3) the experience of having one’s nature changed, since such a change would appear to be just the kind of “physical” event that Finney believes undercuts the absolute authority of the free will. Moreover, this raises a significant question: If the change is “moral” and not “physical,” then what is the difference between a Christian who is presently in sin and a nonChristian – particularly a non-Christian who is behaving very ethically? Would not the moral state of the latter, at least at the present moment, appear to succeed that of the former? Finney is well aware of these objections, and gives a two-fold answer: firstly, that “a Christian is a child of God and an unconverted sinner a child of the devil” – i. e., “forensic” justification; and secondly, that Christians receive a new internal, God-given “sensibility,” which enables them to see the world more clearly and behave better.76 He continues: “The sinning Christian differs from the unconverted man, in the state of his sensibility. In whatever way it takes place, every Christian knows that the state of his sensibility in respect to the things of God, has undergone a great change.”77

Every truly born-again Christian, even the sinning Christian, still “knows” that he or she has been changed; but the born-again Christian is also aware that he or she has free will. Finney is quick to not attribute too much importance to this “sensibility,” most likely in the fear that readers will associate it with the infused “sense” of earlier Puritan thinkers such as Edwards. Moreover, he reminds his readers that “moral character does not lie in sensibility, nor in the will’s obeying the sensibility.” “Nevertheless,” he continues, it still is an essential change, of which the regenerate are aware through its presence and which is of indispensible significance: “our consciousness teaches us, that our feelings have great power in promoting wrong choice on the one hand, and in removing obstacles to right on the other.” The power of the fallen human will is not enough to achieve holiness on its own – hence the new “sensibility” is necessary to “give truth a more decided advantage over his will” than it has for a non-Christian.78 What the believer does with this “decided advantage,” however, is up to him or her.

75 76 77 78

Ibid.: 252. Ibid.: 46. Ibid.: 45. Ibid.: 46.

Finney on Regeneration

173

6.2.4 Regeneration and sanctification as presence of the Holy Spirit For Finney, this emphasis on the freedom of the will does not entail the Holy Spirit’s absence in the process of being born again; instead, the Holy Spirit “effects [regeneration] with, through, or by the truth.”79 Regeneration is therefore not merely a movement of the will; it is also a passive experience of grace, granted immediately after one has made a decision for Christianity. The Holy Spirit provides essential guidance, for just as humanity is not capable of achieving its own atonement, so is the individual not capable of living a righteous life without the presence of the Holy Spirit. Interestingly, the dominant metaphor used to describe the presence of God in one’s heart is the same as in Edwards: the Platonic metaphor of light, and with it clarity of vision: “We need the light of the Holy Spirit to teach us the character of God, the nature of his government, the purity of law, the necessity and fact of atonement – to teach us our need of Christ in all his offices and relations, governmental, spiritual, and mixed. We need the revelation of Christ to our souls, in such power as to induce in us that appropriating faith, without which Christ is not, and cannot be, our salvation.”80

We need, continues Finney, to know Christ as “king,” “mediator,” “advocate (Paracletos),” “redeemer,” “propitiation for our sins,” as well as knowing he is risen.81 By this kind of knowing Finney means more than mere propositional knowledge: in addition to intellectual assent to the Bible’s truth, “the soul needs clearly to apprehend, in a spiritual sense that is, to apprehend it, not merely as a theory or as a proposition, but to see the truth spiritual import of this saying.”82 Finney writes: “We also need Christ revealed to the inward being, as ‘head over all things to the church.’ All these relations are of no avail to our sanctification, only in so far forth as they are directly, and inwardly, and personally revealed to the soul by the Holy Spirit. It is one thing to have thoughts, and ideas, and opinions concerning Christ, and an entirely different thing to know Christ, as he is revealed to the soul by the Holy Spirit.”83

This experience of the presence of “the fulness and glory of Christ” is indispensable for true faith, since it is the mark of “[having taken] Christ home to dwell in the heart, to preside over all its states and actions.” Like the other theologians discussed in the previous chapters, it is an experience which is in 79 80 81 82 83

Ibid. Ibid.: 378. Ibid: Ibid.: 382. Ibid.: 380.

174

Charles Finney: New Birth as Decision

its essence indescribable: Finney can ultimately only assert that those who have it are “blessed,” and that “happy is he who knows it by his own experience.”84 “O how infinitely blind he is to the fulness and glory of Christ, who does not know himself and Christ as both are revealed by the Holy Spirit.”85 6.2.5 Holiness and social reform Finney makes the controversial affirmation, which has later come to characterize the “holiness” tradition, that truly born-again Christians are able to live largely sin-free lives. He sees this optimistic view of sanctification as having clear scriptural precedent, such as the third chapter of 1 John, which asserts, “Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin”; or in 1 John 2:3: “And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.”86 Finney remarks that obviously no one except Jesus is sinless; so what, then, are readers to make of these verses? His answer is that the life of the regenerate is largely without sin: sin is instead an “exception,” considering that “the regenerate habitually live without sin, and fall into sin only at intervals, so few and far between, that in strong language it may be said in truth they do not sin.”87 Perhaps Finney’s most surprising assertion, in light of today’s assumptions about revivalists, is that truly regenerate Christians will be progressive social activists. “True saints love reform,” he writes: “The saints in all ages have been reformers.”88 Finney makes the claim, not uncommon in Anabaptist circles, that the prophets, Christ, and primitive Christianity were against such practices as war and slavery. But whereas Anabaptists had often tended towards sectarianism, Finney advocates an active, social-gospel-style involvement in national politics. This is because, according to Finney, the goal of Christians has always been twofold: to “introduce the gospel as a divine revelation,” i. e. to attempt to convert people, but also “to set up and organize the visible kingdom of God on earth.”89 Thus Finney views true Christians as the most socially active of all social activists. Clearly there are many activists who are not born again, but Finney argues that such activists are ultimately acting out of selfish desires (self-righteousness, for instance, is selfishness). It is therefore easy to distinguish between born-again activists and all others, for although the latter may be passionately involved in specific causes, they are still marked by their own personal sins: 84 85 86 87 88 89

Ibid.: 381. Ibid. Ibid.: 253. Ibid.: 253–254. Ibid.: 248. Ibid.: 249.

Finney on Regeneration

175

“Has he, in ignorance of the evils growing out of his course, used ardent spirits, wine, tobacco, ale, or porter? Has he held slaves; been engaged in any traffic that is found to be injurious; has he favored war through ignorance; or, in short, has he committed any mistake what-ever?”90

In the case of a typical reformer, the answer will be yes. “The saint is not merely sometimes a reformer,” on the other hand: “he is always so.”91

6.2.6 Evangelism Finney is famous for a style of confrontational preaching which associates regeneration with a “decision for Christ.” The Christian evangelist is to plead his or case like a lawyer, and just as a lawyer can learn more and less effective methods, so too with the evangelist. Finney therefore rejects Edwards’ view that the leaders of revivals are to be understood as the passive receptacle of God’s sovereign will, since such a view is in his opinion a stumbling block to effective revival.92 Instead, since “religion is a work of man,”93 Finney believes there is such a thing as more and less effective methods revivalism, and these can be learned. However, truly effective evangelism has nothing to do with emotional manipulation but instead with clear, convincing arguments that force the listener to make a clear decision based on the information presented. Creativity and innovation in evangelization are thus viewed as positive, therefore Finney fully supports the “new measures”94 developed by his contemporaries in order to more effectively bring their listeners to making a decision for Christ. Some “measures” are uncontroversial today, such as encouraging clear language and general oratorical skill among pastors, playing organ music, and (at least in most congregations) allowing women to speak and pray in the presence of men. Much of the language he recommends the pastor use will sound very familiar to those who have grown up in conservative evangelical circles in the United States, for instance that of the pastor’s summoning of those who desire new birth to stand up and walk towards the front of the sanctuary, a practice now generally referred to as an “altar 90 Ibid.: 250. 91 Ibid.: 249. 92 For a good summary of Finney’s thought concerning Calvinism and revivalism, cf. Johnson, “Charles Finney and a Theology of Revivalism”: 343. 93 Finney, Lectures on Revivals of Religion: I, 9. In light of the large number of reprints of the book, I will cite from the original 19th-century Boston publication (which, due to the blessing of modern technology, is available on Google Books). I have occasionally included the chapter number out of consideration for readers whose versions have different pagination. 94 It is important to note that most of these “new measures” were not necessarily invented, but instead popularized by Finney.

176

Charles Finney: New Birth as Decision

call.”95 Finney also supported the practice of holding multiple revival services on a series of consecutive evenings, or “protracted meetings” as he called them, “in order to make a more powerful impression of divine things upon the minds of the people”96 – a practice which has now become an annual institution in many evangelical churches and is simply referred to as a “revival.” Other “new measures” supported by Finney were, and still are, more controversial. Perhaps the most (in-)famous example is Finney’s “anxious seat,” which consists of a special seat (generally in the front of the congregation) for those who are “anxious” about conversion, so that they “may come and be addressed particularly.”97 While critics viewed this practice as creating unnecessary emotional pressure, Finney instead sees the “anxious seat” as a declaration of the genuineness of one’s intention – “as a public manifestation of their determination to be Christians” – and thus an effective method for “prevent[ing] a great many spurious conversions.”98 Finney views such measures as putting the listener in the best position, through overcoming any “counteracting influences,”99 to comprehend the exigency of the evangelist’s message.

Finney’s more optimistic stance also allows for clergy to actually have a vision of what their job is and how to improve their methods: “For if sinners are to be regenerated by the influence of truth, argument, and persuasion, then ministers can see what they have to do.”100 And by “what they have to do,” Finney means figuring out how to convert sinners, or “win souls,” as he often calls it.101 In contrast to Puritanism, the evangelist should openly refer to scriptural texts in order to make an argument, since the unsaved sinner is often open to hearing the Bible. Regeneration is thus seen as an act of “embracing the gospel.”102 For Edwards and Puritan thought, it was just the opposite: God’s embracing of the sinner who, in his or her own pride, cannot but reject the truth of the gospel. Moreover, for Finney there is no preparatory 95 Although Finney does not use the term “alter call,” the language (and method) he encourages the pastor to use is the same. “Something is wrong,” writes Finney: “There is a struggle and a pang. He may not exactly see where and what the difficulty is.” The conscience of this individual is not at peace, although the person may not know why. It is thus the job of the evangelist to inform this person why he or she is in this state: because this person needs to be born again. (Systematic Theology: 247) 96 Lectures on Revivals: 242 (Lecture 14). 97 Ibid.: 246. 98 Ibid.: 248. 99 Cf. Ibid.: 9–10: “God has found it necessary to take advantage of the excitability there is in mankind, to produce powerful excitements among them, before he can lead them to obey. Men are so sluggish, there are so many things to lead their minds off from religion, and to oppose the influence of the gospel that it is necessary to raise an excitement among them, till the tide rises so high as to sweep away the opposing obstacles. They must be so excited that they will break over these counteracting influences, before they will obey God.” 100 Systematic Theology: 235. 101 Cf. Lectures on Revivals, Lecture 12: “How to Preach the Gospel.” Finney’s language of “winning souls” is taken from the King James translation of Proverbs 11:30b: “He that winneth souls is wise” (Ibid.: 180). 102 Ibid.: 225.

Conclusion

177

phase necessary, so “[ministers] should aim at, and expect the regeneration of sinners, upon the spot, and before they leave the house of God.”103 Hence the doctrine of new birth itself, as Finney understands it, is to be an indispensable evangelistic tool to be used actively by the preacher to convince listeners that they must make a decision.

6.3 Conclusion 6.3.1 Freedom of the will Finney unapologetically defends the freedom of the will, conceiving of regeneration as based upon a “decision” – a conception which can be viewed as nothing other than blatant heresy in the eyes of an orthodox Calvinist. Finney’s staunch belief in the centrality of free will was certainly influenced by his own experience, yet it is also an abstract concept, forming the central tenet of his moral metaphysics: God desires free agents who, on the basis of their own God-given rational powers, consent to allow God into their lives. “Behold,” God says in Revelation 3:20, “I stand at the door and knock.”104 As James Johnson points out, it was this conception of regeneration, along with his legal training that “stressed an independent approach to problems,” which shaped the thoroughly anti-Calvinistic nature of Finney’s revivalism.105 Finney was certainly not the first to assert that conversion depends on the free will of the recipient: Methodism, with its “Arminian”106 theology, was spreading rapidly at this time in the rural United States, and increasing numbers of “New School” Presbyterian revivalists such as Timothy Dwight, Lyman Beecher, and Nathaniel Taylor modified their professed Calvinism “to the point,” writes Johnson, “that it could hardly be recognized as such.”107 (Finney would become particularly influenced by Taylor and be hailed by many as his successor.108) Yet in comparison to earlier “Arminian” theologies, which were more concerned with preserving the general notion of human free will, there is a particular absoluteness in Finney’s emphasis on choice, as if he is drawing a clear line in the sand between the “free will”103 Ibid.: 235. 104 For this passage I have chosen to use the classic Authorized, or “King James” translation of the Bible. 105 Johnson: 343. 106 The reason that the term is in quotation marks is that it is being used (as it was in the chapter on Edwards) not in the sense of referring to the theology of Jacob Arminius, but instead to various New England theologies which rejected the orthodox Calvinist doctrine of predestination in order to create room for human free will. 107 Ibid.: 339. 108 For a summary of the similarities between Taylor and Finney, cf. Johnson: 340–342.

178

Charles Finney: New Birth as Decision

affirming and predestinarian strands of evangelical Christianity.109 His rhetoric was a sign of things to come, since many churches, particularly in North America, have split over this very issue, and it continues to be hotly debated in evangelical circles today.

On the issue of free will and moral law, Finney the lawyer has clearly been influenced by modern contract theory as well as American democracy, yet it would be a mistake to view these philosophical concerns as the only driving force behind his rejection of Calvinist regeneration; according to Finney regeneration based on a free decision also offers a deeply theological message of grace. In Finney’s conception, one need not wait passively for God to regenerate him or her: new birth is available now, to any one who sincerely accepts it. One need not even understand, theologically, all the complexities of original sin, redemption, or the Trinity. Instead, all that is needed is sincere repentance and movement of the will, a simple acknowledgement that one is lost and that Jesus is the answer. According to this scheme, knowledge of one’s own sinfulness, in contrast to Puritanism, is something attainable by natural reason and which can be possessed before regeneration, which means that the concept of repentance becomes a term which designates the decision to accept Jesus Christ on account of this knowledge and not, as is the case in Calvinist theologies, the consciousness of one’s sinfulness caused by regeneration. With this in mind it is not surprising that he rejects the idea that new birth is something which cannot be lost – or the doctrine of “perseverance of the saints,” as it is known in Calvinist circles – since if this were the case “then perseverance would be no virtue.”110 Finney thus views the state of sanctification after new birth as cultivated through the individual’s own efforts, together with the constant guidance of the Holy Spirit, but in a way in which human free will is not deprived of its dignity. Whether such a view deprives God of his sovereignty is a debate that continues to flourish, particularly on the level of popular theology. 6.3.2 “Moral” vs. “physical” change Of Spener’s three aspects of regeneration, the subjective change of the individual is clearly the weakest link in Finney’s theology. Indeed, Finney’s 109 This emphasis began early in his career as a pastor, when he became so angered at his congregation being merely “pleased” his message that he called upon every person in the building to either stand up and “pledge to make your peace with God immediately” or stay seated and remain “committed to remain in your present attitude, not to accept Christ.” The congregation did not react kindly to Finney’s confrontational style: they all remained seated. After Finney reproached them for “reject[ing] Christ and his Gospel,” they stormed out of the church building. The next evening, however, they returned – in even larger numbers – and many were converted. Cf. Finney, Memoirs: 62–64; also Hambrick-Stowe, Finney: 36–37. 110 Ibid.: 47.

Conclusion

179

defense of free will is often so radical that it appears to completely suppress this aspect to the point of non-existence, for instance with his staunch rejection of any “physical” change during regeneration. Finney’s intellectual goal is clear: to navigate the Scylla of Calvinism, with a language of “physical change” that seems to diminish personal responsibility, and the Charybdis of a pure rationalism which in its emphasis on personal responsibility and free will makes being “born again” superfluous, not to mention any form of supernaturalism. Whether or not Finney’s solution is convincing is for the reader to decide. His explanation, for instance, that the new “sensibility” is there to “give truth a more decided advantage over [the Christian’s] will”111 makes it sound as if God is “stacking the deck” in favor of those who have made a decision of acceptance, which would appear to violate the moral law of free will: for why should not God give all humans the ability to attain the moral goals for which they strive? However, like many other aspects of Finney’s theology, there is something “common-sense” about his position, in that it attempts to acknowledge the presence of the Holy Spirit in the regenerate’s life, as well as that the regenerate is truly born again – i. e. a different person – while also preserving the integrity of free will. Ultimately, then, Finney’s language of “sensibility” (instead of “sense”) and “a more decided advantage” is a compromise – and a warranted one, in that it prefers the tensions of theology over the clarity of a particular rationalistic philosophy. Moreover, although Finney is always wary of sentimentalism and too much emphasis on Christian “affections,” he still claims that the born again Christian feels different. For example, the reborn Christian is “at peace with himself.”112 He or she possesses a simple and pure peace of mind, the peace of knowing that one “is conscious of the law of reason and of love,” and that one’s will and intellect are in perfect harmony.113

6.3.3 The reformation of the role of narrative Finney’s personal narrative was crafted in an age for which the spiritual autobiography was a highly developed art form, which is seen in the fact that, from a literary perspective, so much in Finney’s memoir is familiar. Just like in the classical Puritan conversion narrative, Finney experiences the uselessness of any attempts to earn God’s favor. Moreover, his portrayal of the preconversion experience of frustration in light of one’s own futility, accompanied by deep self-doubt which culminates in a revelatory confrontation with God, departs little from older Puritan representations of “preparatory grace.” It is at the climax of the story, however, where Finney’s narrative deviates from 111 Ibid.: 46. 112 Ibid.: 247. 113 Ibid.: 246.

180

Charles Finney: New Birth as Decision

previous ones: he is posed with, and then makes, a choice. Interestingly, Finney portrays this different theological interpretation as being an intuition he had in that very moment: “Gospel salvation,” he writes, “seemed to me to be an offer of something to be accepted.”114 This significant change in theological interpretation leads to an entirely different function of the narrative: it is now no longer a true conversion narrative in the Puritan sense, i. e. a “morphology of conversion” with a preparatory phase seen as tying into conversion115; instead, it is primarily a narrative of the personal struggles and intellectual processes which finally led to making a decision. Thus while many conversions of the Finneyan type are presented in the frame of a narrative, and often this narrative seems to fit the “classic” Puritan genre (as did Finney’s own), a more subtle analysis shows a deep theological chasm between the two; for while Puritanism views the process of preparation ultimately as part of God’s plan, and thus an expression of grace, the Finneyan conversion narrative sees this process as unnecessary from a normative doctrinal standpoint, since anyone can make a “decision for Christ” at any time. However, while it is theologically unnecessary, it can be a very effective literary device to emphasize the contrast between a life before and after new birth, which in turn serves the purpose of convincing others to make the same decision. In other words, Finney’s conversion narrative theologically diverges from previous Puritan theologies in that Finney does not see his own inward struggle leading up to his decision as an expression of God’s grace. This experience was perhaps personally necessary, as a result of Finney’s own stubbornness, but God does not demand a similar struggle from everyone as a prerequisite to rebirth. Now, under this new rubric of conversion, any description of one’s previous state is not used to show God’s movement but instead primarily as a dramatic contrast, i. e. to highlight one’s own fallenness and ignorance.116 Although many people, due to ignorance or stubbornness, will indeed have to endure long periods of frustration before finally deciding to make the decision, these frustrations are not a necessary preparatory stage.

114 Memoirs: 14. 115 For example, from the standpoint of traditional Puritanism, Finney’s statement that “I think I then saw, as clearly as I ever have in my life, the reality and fullness of the atonement of Christ” (Ibid.) could only conceivably come after one’s regeneration, since one can only perceive the truth of Christ’s atonement after having been radically changed from the inside. 116 One could even argue that now the “preparatory” stage in the Finneyan conversion narrative has the effect of a product advertisement: before buying (this great product), my life was filled with difficulties (doing such and such); now, however, my experience with (such and such) has been completely transformed because of (this product).

Conclusion

181

6.3.4 The authority of scripture Because of his being deeply influenced by the rationalist, “common sense” tradition which was so prevalent in the 19th-century United States,117 Finney does not see the necessity of appealing to any tradition when reading the Bible. Finney’s legal training leads him to a proto-fundamentalist biblical hermeneutic, viewing the Bible as a legal document to be appealed to as a kind of authoritative precedent; thus scripture, “which has been proved to be a revelation from God,” becomes a kind of proof text for moral action as well, “contain[ing] a most simply yet comprehensive system of moral government.”118 The “rugged individualist” Finney thus sees all his dogmatic beliefs as arising from independent, dispassionate investigation. Intellectual acknowledgement of the Bible’s truth, however, is merely one step (albeit a necessary one) towards true belief. The actual crossing of the threshold takes place in a moment of “voluntary trust,” in which the subject, through a movement of the will, embraces Christianity in a way that transcends mere intellectual acceptance. In the example of his conversion narrative, Finney’s entire search for God, including his experience of new birth, rests on the two familiar Protestant pillars of scripture and experience. Both are seen as infallible, and thus ultimately cannot contradict one another. If they appear to do this, then one has falsely interpreted either experience or the Bible. The Bible in its entirety is a testimony of God’s promise of salvation; its content is trustworthy, since it contains “the assertions of God who could not lie.”119 But not only the content of the book, but the book itself possesses spiritual power: the decision to purchase a Bible for himself is a turning point in the narrative, and his hesitancy to accept the Christian faith is reflected in his own embarrassment concerning the possibility of being discovered reading the Bible. Even his very conversion moment is viewed as being inaugurated by a particular verse, Deuteronomy 4:29, which Finney views as being miraculously introduced into his mind by the Holy Spirit.

117 Cf. Noll, America’s God: 93–113; 233–38; 307. So-called “common sense” philosophy (or “common sense realism”) originated in the writings of Scottish Enlightenment philosopher Thomas Reid and was characterized by its basic trust in the sense perceptions of the common individual, which serve as the foundation of philosophy. Common sense philosophy strongly influenced many of the American “Founding Fathers” and went on to gain authority in many different early American political and theological traditions. “By the 1830s and 1840s,” writes Noll, “the synthesis of evangelicalism, republicanism, and common sense had become not only the most powerful value system in the nation, but also the most powerful value system defining the nation” (Ibid.: 14). 118 Finney, Systematic Theology.: 12. 119 Memoirs: 14.

182

Charles Finney: New Birth as Decision

6.3.5 Ecstasy and transcendence After the decision to accept Christ is made, a new stage of experience begins which is marked by the supernatural guidance of the Holy Spirit. Finney’s own conversion narrative gives a clear picture of the divine presence which is granted to those who accept Jesus Christ into their hearts. For Finney, the truths of scripture which he rationally accepted then became confirmed by immediate experience. Using the same language as Edwards, he describes a “sweetness” and “peace” inside of him; his heart was like “liquid.” This was followed by an even more mystical experience, which he calls “baptism in the Holy Spirit” – a separate event from the moment of regeneration – which for Finney included a vision of Jesus face-to-face, followed by an experience he could only describe as overwhelming “waves” of love. At first glance, Finney’s seemingly proto-Pentecostal mysticism would appear to conflict with his highly rationalistic anthropology; however, at a deeper level they are complementary: because faith for Finney is a “voluntary trust,”120 i. e. a human act of the will made possible through the Holy Spirit’s guidance, and not a term for the presence of the Spirit itself, the direct presence of the Holy Spirit finds itself shifted away from the event of faith and into other areas. In the case of Spener’s “spark,” for instance, the event of faith is itself a miracle. For Finney, however, faith becomes “believing” in the normal sense of the term; true miracles and displays of God’s presence, therefore, are to be found primarily elsewhere.

6.4 Postscript: Finneyism and American Evangelicalism Finney’s characterization of new birth as a “decision” has had immense impact on contemporary American evangelicalism’s understanding of what it means to be “born again.” Peter Toon, in his study Born Again, dedicates an entire chapter to theology of regeneration as a “decision for Christ,” to which he attaches the following criteria: “(1) The expressions ‘to be born again,’ ‘to be converted,’ and ‘to make a decision for Christ’ tend to run into each other and mean the same. Particularly, to be born again is seen not as a passive but an active experience. (2) It is held that regeneration can occur immediately in the context of the evangelistic service: there are no requisite preparations to delay one’s decision for Christ. (3) It is maintained that regeneration 120 Systematic Theology: 16.

Postscript: Finneyism and American Evangelicalism

183

has no meaningful connection with infant baptism and little vital relation to adult (believers’) baptism.”121

Billy Graham, the person who has done more than anyone else to introduce the term to the wider public, has made no secret of his indebtedness to Finney, and much of his preaching can be seen as arising in direct theological lineage from the Systematic Theology and especially Lectures on Revivals of Religion.122 Graham has even written a well-known evangelistic treatise entitled How to Be Born Again, a subject which he considers to be “one of the most important subjects in the entire world.” Graham continues, “Governments may be elected or may topple. Military machines may advance or retreat. Men may explore outer space or probe the ocean depths. All of these events are part of the grand plan for humans on this planet. But the central theme of the universe is the purpose and hope and destiny of every individual. Every person is important in God’s eyes. That is why God is not content to stand with His arms folded (as it were) and simply watch the human race wallow in misery and destruction. The greatest news in the universe is that we can be born again!”123

The title of Graham’s book is, as Toon notes, highly theologically problematic, since in all classical Protestant theologies of regeneration, whether Calvinist or not, the how of regeneration is ultimately known only by God, and thus is a mystery. Even the terms “regeneration” and “born again” themselves seem to defy any attempts at writing a how-to book, since one cannot birth oneself. A better title, writes Toon, “might more correctly be stated as ‘how to become a Christian who can humbly claim to have been born again by the Holy Spirit.’”124 And this is of course what Graham actually means,125 but the fact that he can market a treatise on regeneration as a how-to book is revealing and shows just how much being born again has become dependent upon an action of the free will. (It should therefore not be surprising that the official magazine of the Billy Graham association is called, appropriately, Decision.) In How to be Born Again, Graham develops “four steps” (based on the “four spiritual laws” by Bill Bright) which can guide people into receiving Jesus Christ as their savior: first, “recognize what God did: that He love you so much He gave His Son to die on the cross”; second, “repent for your sins”; third, “receive Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord”; and fourth, “confess Christ publicly.” If someone is able to do all these things, it “is a sign that [they] have 121 Toon: 166. 122 Cf. Graham’s “Forward” to Lewis A. Drummond’s (highly hagiographical) Charles Finney and the Birth of Modern Evangelism, in which he writes that “the lessons and insights of [Finney’s] life are as applicable today as they were in his own age.” 123 Billy Graham, How to Be Born Again: 9–10. 124 Toon: 177. 125 As Graham himself writes in How to be Born Again: “Only God can re-create us. Only God can give us the new birth we so desperately want and need” (9).

184

Charles Finney: New Birth as Decision

been converted.”126 And according to Graham, this can happen now; indeed, it is not a process to be delayed until a supposedly better time. Graham continues, directly addressing his reader, which is typical for his book: “If you are willing to make this decision and have received Jesus Christ as your own Lord and Savior, then you have become a child of God in whom Jesus Christ dwells. You do not need to measure the certainty of your salvation by your feelings. Believe God. He keeps His word. You are born again. You are alive.”127

Graham never tires of quoting the stories of people who “thought” they were Christians later to find out that they have never truly dedicated themselves to God. In the chapter, “The New Birth is not Just a ‘Feeling,’” he relays the story of a man who was confronted by an individual who asked him if he was a Christian, to which he replied “Well, I’m trying to be.”128 The individual then asked him, “Ever try to be an elephant?” and then proceeded to explain how being a Christian had nothing to do with “trying” but instead with accepting Christ and allowing him to take over one’s life. Referencing Revelation 3:20 (“Behold, I stand at the door and knock”), Graham writes that the man “flung open the door” and God kept his promise: “He was good as His word.” According to Graham, after this moment of acceptance, “[t]his man was born again.”129 A criticism of such a strong emphasis on a “decision” as a prerequisite for regeneration is that it can easily become, in the words of Baptist historian Bill Leonard, a “transaction” which radically separates regeneration from sanctification by making conversion “less a process of experience with grace than an event which satisfies a salvific requirement.”130 Moreover, according to Leonard such an emphasis on the moment of decision as the moment of regeneration lends the act of “accepting Christ and Lord and Savior” a quasi-sacramental character, which explains why the moment of “getting saved” has so often been attached to a ritual practice, such as walking down the church aisle after the pastor has given an “altar call.” Under the quasi-sacramental logic of the “decision for Christ,” the event of the decision is recounted as an act in which, though human, God’s grace is bestowed upon the decider – an act in which the presence of the Holy Spirit and human administration become one. Proper administration, in this case, is not an external act but an internal proper movement of the will (or proper “intention”). Moreover, the lynchpin theological category is, as in traditional sacramental theology, the concept of the promise: earnest acceptance of Jesus Christ as savior, as opposed to earnest acceptance of the sacraments, is correlative to justification, adoption, and salvation – 126 127 128 129 130

Ibid.: 168. Ibid.: 169. This story is found in Ibid.: 171–172. Ibid.: 172. Leonard, “Getting Saved in America”: 124.

Postscript: Finneyism and American Evangelicalism

185

because God has promised it is so. Deathbed conversions thus replace deathbed baptisms. Furthermore, in the Finneyan tradition it would not be much of a stretch to label the moment of decision a “divine institution,” even one with words of institution, as seen in Billy Graham’s “four steps.” Those familiar with evangelicalism in the United States can testify to such formulas being ubiquitous in many evangelical traditions.

Part II: Regeneration in Contemporary Evangelical Discourse in North America

7 New Birth as an Experience of Presence 7.1 The Three-fold Structure of New Birth A primary argument of this book is that the threefold structure of regeneration outlined by Spener – the “external,” dogmatic promise of justification; the experience of inward change in character; and the experience of God’s immediate presence – has held for the majority of “born-again” theologies until the present day among laity, clergy, and theologians alike. This three-fold structure is also clearly present in Edwards, Schleiermacher, and Finney, despite their significant theological differences. However, the purpose of Part II of this study is to make the stronger claim that this three-fold pattern constitutes the theological backbone of even the most contemporary evangelical conversion narratives. Anyone familiar with such conversion “testimonies” will notice the following narrative archetype: the convert often speaks of certain vices and doubts, previously seen as insurmountable, being conquered through a miraculous change of heart; in addition to this is a general, constant feeling of peace and the certainty of God’s presence; and finally, the promise that one is now a child of God, both in the present life and afterwards, is professed based on the authority of the Bible, the affirmation of which being confirmed and strengthened by the conversion experience, as well as by the subsequent life led thereafter. Here, the three-fold pattern has been integrated into the larger testimony. It is not explicit, as in the theologies of the four theologians examined in this study; however, it provides the tacit theological guidance for the narrative. The following three subsections provide a close analysis of each of the three elements.

7.1.1 Presence of changed internal faculties As the metaphor of new birth implies, those who are born again see themselves as having experienced a metamorphosis in their mind, will, and heart. Although this event is often conceived as primarily the experience of a detached, transcendental ego, it is assumed that one’s behavior will also reflect the renewal that has taken place internally, since a tree is judged by its fruit.1 It is at this point that different theologies diverge in how they understand this conversion as taking place. Spener, for instance, is very careful to emphasize 1 Cf. Matthew 7:16, Luke 6:44.

190

New Birth as an Experience of Presence

that the change which takes place after regeneration, “renewal,” is one of steady growth, analogous to physical birth and development. He sees support for this view not only in the metaphor of new birth itself, but also the biblical image of a growing seed. Edwards agrees with Spener that those who are newly born again are children in the faith and grow steadily in the Spirit, yet his Puritan theological convictions also lead him to emphasize the complete break between the old being and the new, and so he develops a theory of “infusion” in the attempt to understand how God effects this radical change. Schleiermacher sees the change between the old and new as less drastic than Edwards does, and uses a phenomenological vocabulary to describe how the “Godconsciousness,” previously nascent, now becomes “active,” resulting in a new “permanently enduring state of mind.”2 In comparison to the other three, Finney is much more hesitant to emphasize a qualitative change in the convert, since this would seemingly depreciate the sovereignty of the free will, and hence moral integrity, of every individual. Still, Finney acknowledges that being born again creates a “new heart” and “sensibility” which enables the regenerate believer to behave morally with more ease, even (at least theoretically) to live a largely sinless life.

7.1.2 Presence of God For “born again” theologies, the experience of regeneration, along with the ensuing life of sanctification, is more than simply the experience of one’s own changed internal state. There is something more, as an additional presence: the completely immediate experience of the transcendent God in one’s heart. Due to the nature of this experience, it cannot be fully articulated, so it is important to pay attention to how people attempt to describe it, both in terms of traditional theological concepts used (i. e., as the Holy Spirit), as well as phenomenological concepts used to communicate an experience of presence (i. e., “sweetness,” “light,” “waves,” or “fire”). It is here that the concept of metaphor becomes vitally important. As has already been mentioned, there is an inventory of biblical metaphors which are used to describe this experience, with fire, light, water, and love being the most common. Both Edwards and Spener rely heavily on the metaphor of light to communicate the belief that those who are born again now have the immediate presence of God’s Holy Spirit in their lives. Spener, a Lutheran Pietist, mostly associates this light, along with his favorite metaphor of fire, with the event of faith but shows little interest in ecstatic mystical experience; whereas Edwards, while agreeing that faith is the miracle of God’s abiding presence, also sees the Holy Spirit as bestowing periods of mystical rapture and “sweetness,” which sometimes take 2 The Christian Faith, §108.1: 482.

The Three-fold Structure of New Birth

191

place during conversion itself. Schleiermacher writes of “holy blessedness,” which he connects primarily to the presence-experience of the Person of Jesus Christ and not, as most theologians have done, to the Holy Spirit, whose presence he assigns almost exclusively to the gathering of the community; moreover, his concept of a natural religious faculty (or “God-consciousness”) allows for similar, yet inferior experiences of divine presence before regeneration. Finney develops new metaphors, such as “waves of liquid love” and even “electricity” (reflecting his own time period) to describe God’s mystical presence, and also posits an additional ecstatic experience, the “baptism of the Holy Spirit,” which takes place after regeneration. Whereas Finney’s and Edwards’ metaphors of electricity and “sweetness,” respectively, are clearly phenomenological, others – such as the language of fire and light – can be viewed as both a description of an experience of presence as well as an affirmation of traditional biblical descriptions God. Of the four, Spener is by far the least concerned with phenomenological description. Yet even Finney’s language of “love” is not necessarily purely the attempt to describe a personal experience, since “God is love” (1 John 4:8). It is therefore important, going forward, to pay close attention to how these metaphors function theologically, as well as phenomenologically, in conversion narratives, both in terms of what they say about the event of new birth, as well as about God’s nature.

7.1.3 Change in divine status This third element appears to be much more dogmatic that the first two, since it is the aspect of regeneration that is “absent”: it is not experienced immediately by the believer and thus more directly dependent on scriptural interpretation and inherited doctrine. In other words, the typical convert infers his or her change in status, based on the presence-experience and in light of a promise, which is seen through the lens of implicit theological categories which have already been learned and which are affirmed by a community.3 Traditionally in Protestant theology, this change in status has been referred to as forensic justification, signifying that the believer has been “declared righteous” by God. Some contemporary evangelicals often prefer the language of salvation, referring to themselves as being “saved,” a term which often emphasizes the assurance that God has declared them eligible for entry into heaven (the traditional theological term here being election) – although being “saved” can also equally refer to deliverance from earthly sins and burdens. Closely related to the doctrine of justification is that of adoption, 3 In other words, the convert already has an idea of who Jesus Christ is, which typically includes (partial) understanding of other theological concepts such as “sin,” “salvation,” and even “church.” Acknowledgement of this fact is the epistemological basis of mission.

192

New Birth as an Experience of Presence

referring to one’s being a child of God. Among the four theologians examined in the first section, there is generally less variation in this category: all four figures analyzed, for instance, use the language of justification and adoption as a change in status, and where they generally disagree is concerning the relation of these categories to the subjects of free will and predestination. Moreover, any detailed theological exposition of these doctrines entails reflection on the nature of Christ’s atonement, thus one could argue that to truly understand the implications of this third category would mean to write an entire systematic theology. It is therefore important, going forward, to pay attention to how much – or how little – this doctrine is developed in autobiographical conversion narratives.

7.2 Theological Criteria However, each of the four theologians emphasizes different aspects of the experience of regeneration and often draws conclusions which vary from – indeed, even contradict – those of the others. Take for instance the doctrine of baptismal regeneration: on this point, Spener is alone among the four in his insistence on infant baptismal regeneration. His reason for retaining it is clear: the authority of the Bible, which in Spener’s opinion clearly affirms the doctrine. Edwards, on the other hand, comes from a Calvinist exegetical tradition which does not view the third chapter of John’s Gospel as referring to baptism, therefore he is able to simply dismiss baptismal regeneration at the beginning of his sermon “Born Again” without sacrificing many words. Schleiermacher, an inheritor of the Lutheran, Calvinist, and Moravian traditions, is more conflicted than Edwards concerning the doctrine of baptismal regeneration but ultimately rejects it on account that it would be “magical” believe that infant baptism directly affects the “God consciousness.” For the revivalist Finney the doctrine is hardly under discussion, as it is an accepted fact that regeneration is an event only found in adult conversion. As this variance of opinion reveals, although the three-fold structure described above is nearly universal among those who view being born again as a conversion experience, there are significant theological differences among those who have written on the subject. At first glance, the proper methodology would seem to be the development of a typology of different theologies of regeneration – for instance, the Anglo-American Puritan type, the Lutheran Pietist type, and the evangelistic “decision for Christ” type. While such a typology is certainly helpful, the problem with such typologies is that they represent ideal types which often find themselves fractured into a myriad of variations. As a result, my investigation will focus less on types and instead on

Theological Criteria

193

these variations themselves, particularly the question of where these variations take place within theologies of new birth. My methodology, therefore, is less of a typology and instead a topography, in that it focuses on the theological elements, or criteria, which differentiate various theologies of regeneration from one another in order to create a picture of the terrain of “born again” theology. In my analysis I have attempted to organize the variations around a cluster of theological questions that continually reappear in theologies of regeneration, which I have classified in five categories: the nature and importance of the moment of new birth; the role of free will; the nature of conversion; the relation to scripture and doctrine; and the relation to church and community. These five categories are all broad, which is intentional, in that their function is to direct the theologian’s attention to where more specific theological variations are likely to occur.

7.2.1 Importance of the moment of regeneration Among those who consider themselves to be “born again,” this presence is conceived as an enduring, everyday experience: one not only has been, but is born again. Still, this abiding presence of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer, generally referred to as sanctification, is often inaugurated by a particular moment of intensity which is viewed as the moment of regeneration. The question of just how important the exact moment of regeneration is has long been a topic of theological debate. Spener sees little merit in attempting to identify the moment of new birth because he sees in it the danger of undermining the importance of sanctification. Edwards is quite flexible: like Spener, he does not believe it necessary to identify a conversion moment, yet he also celebrates the dramatic conversion experiences of the Great Awakening as the work of the Holy Spirit. Schleiermacher, like Edwards, emphasizes that conversion is experienced with different levels of intensity and therefore that it is often difficult to distinguish from earlier “preparatory grace,” yet he is far more skeptical than Edwards concerning those who celebrate the event of their conversion. Finney, as a forerunner of modern revivalism, places far more emphasis than his predecessors on the moment of conversion, since it is also the moment of a rational decision for Christianity. Because Finney rejects the classic conception of preparatory grace and associates regeneration with a movement of the will, the ability to identify a specific moment becomes crucial. To identify this moment, one merely needs ask oneself: When did I make a true decision for Christianity? Certainly, there are cases when a convert does not remember this moment, so devout Christians who are certain of the truth of the Christian message and the rightness of their hearts need not despair.

194

New Birth as an Experience of Presence

However, for Finney these are the exception to the rule, since it is typical that such momentous decisions are remembered. Despite this rationalism, such conversion experiences are still frequently portrayed as being very dramatic, as in Finney’s own case, and are to be recalled by the subject in a public setting as a “testimony.” Furthermore, because any experience of a “moment” of regeneration is intricately tied to the two types of presence-experience – the experience of God’s presence and of one’s own changed state – often conversion narratives will emphasize one of the two. One of the most famous examples of a mystical conversion moment is that of Blaise Pascal, who kept a secret note in his hat marking the date (November 23, 1654), along with a short yet fervid description, of his conversion: “From about half-past ten in the evening until about half-past midnight … Fire. The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob, and not of the philosophers and intellectuals. Certitude, certitude, feeling, joy, peace. The God of Jesus Christ. My God and your God … Forgetfulness of the world and of everything except God. One finds oneself only by way of the directions taught in the gospel … Joy, joy, joy, teats of joy … My God, will you leave me? May I not be separated from him eternally. This is eternal life, that they know you the one true God and J.C. whom you have sent…. May I never be separated from [Jesus Christ] … Renunciation total and sweet.”4

Pascal’s note served as a reminder, or re-presentification, of the experience which began his life of faith. For Pascal this moment was to be preserved – even enshrined – as a hallmark of his own personal Christian identity. In contrast to Pascal’s emphasis on mystical experience, other conversion narratives place primary emphasis on an immediate personal change that takes place after the moment of conversion: alcoholics are suddenly sober, festering hatreds are released, newfound enjoyment is experienced in virtuous action. This emphasis on an immediate “moral” transformation becomes particularly prevalent in Finney’s revivalist theology after the second Great Awakening, and many theological traditions today privilege or even expect it. Consider the story of Jim Dycus, reported in the magazine Pentecostal Evangel, who before converting to Pentecostal Christianity was a drug-addicted pimp and robber: “Dycus felt like a new man that January day in 1972. ‘I met Jesus Christ, the only One who had the power to set me free from all my bondages and declare me not guilty,’ he says. He has never used illegal drugs again.”5

All three of Spener’s criteria are in this passage: there is mention of “meeting” Jesus, of being “declare[d]” no longer “guilty,” and of a change in personality. The change in nature, however, is far more abrupt than in other narratives 4 Cited in Marvin O’Connell, Blaise Pascal: Reasons of the Heart: 96. 5 Kennedy, “Transformed.”

Theological Criteria

195

which emphasize the sanctification process. For Dycus, the immediate cessation of his drug addiction is portrayed as a testament to Jesus Christ’s power to free his followers from “bondages.” Such a (tacit) theology is popular among many in the Pentecostal tradition, and is also found in the testimony of Lillie Carraway, also reported in the Evangel, who previously spent most of her time “carousing, boozing, and arguing” with her live–in boyfriend: “Carraway fell to her knees and confessed her sins. She felt her burdens lift and God’s forgiveness fill her life. That night marked an end to her eight-year nightly ritual of downing a six-pack of beer and a half pint of scotch.”6

Like the first example, a crippling addiction is portrayed as being definitively overcome – “that night” – in the moment of regeneration. 7.2.2 The role of free will Like many intellectual quarrels in modernity, the question concerning the role of free will has been ubiquitous in the theological controversies surrounding the experience of being born again. The debate concerning whether it is possible to lose the grace of new birth is its most significant theological manifestation, with opinions on this matter varying radically. In North America, it has frequently split churches and even divided entire denominations.7 A strongly Puritan theology of new birth would deny the possibility of losing the grace of regeneration, while many in the Holiness traditions, such as Pentecostals and Methodists, believe the opposite.8 How one approaches this theological question typically involves a complex interaction between personal experience and theological conviction. From the perspective that values God’s sovereignty over personal free will, one may make the claim that even if I feel that I am no longer born again, as long as my conversion was authentic, God’s promise still endures; or, in a variation of this interpretation, one may claim that those who have apparently lost their faith were never truly born again in the first place. From another perspective, however, such a claim is a theological error which deprives the individual Christian of any personal responsibility, and it points to cases of individuals who clearly showed the traits of being born again at one time, yet who just as clearly appear to no longer abide in such a state (the adulterous murderer King David, for example). Both sides, of course, have their respective inventories of biblical proof texts ready to be used in debate, and the fact that the debate still rages on 6 Kennedy, “Lilly Caraway’s Legacy.” 7 Already in the 18th century, for instance, there was a division between the “Particular Baptists” who supported the Calvinist doctrines of predestination and “limited” atonement, and the Arminian “General Baptists.” Cf. Noll, The Rise of Evangelicalism: 163–64. 8 As I argue in Chapter 12, the Holiness view of regeneration has had a significant effect on evangelical politics in North America.

196

New Birth as an Experience of Presence

in evangelical circles should lead to the conclusion that there is no definite biblical answer. Spener, for instance, is adamant in his stance that because the state of sanctification (or “renewal”) is a process in which the believer cooperates with the Holy Spirit, it is possible to go from being “born again” to no longer being so. As has been shown, Spener believes this allows him to affirm both baptismal regeneration as well as regeneration as the experience of conversion, but another clear reason is the observation that there are individuals who previously appeared, by all measurements, to be genuinely born again yet have lost any semblance of this. Indeed, there are those today who proudly declare themselves to be lapsed Christians. Common experience, then, would seem to be a strong argument for Spener’s “Arminian” position concerning perseverance. Yet Edwards takes the polar opposite view, with an argument that appears equally theologically plausible. How could anyone who has truly been made a new being in Christ, he asks, possibly lose this grace of regeneration? Significant backsliding is certainly possible and indeed prevalent, according to this perspective, but the radical change of regeneration and the grace of God’s justification persevere, which means that every truly born again Christian – every “saint” – does as well. Hence those who appear to have a genuine conversion experience yet fall away from the faith were never truly born again in the first place, according to Edwards. Schleiermacher’s argument is similar to Edwards’, but more experience-oriented: he deduces from the experiences of preparation, regeneration, and sanctification themselves that God’s providence overwhelms any elements of free will. Anyone who views their becoming a Christian as an act of free will, he argues, ignores the fact that no one chooses the surroundings and situations in which they find themselves. All Christians, therefore, can have the certainty that they will not lose the grace of regeneration. Thus Schleiermacher wholeheartedly affirms the doctrine of predestination, yet unlike Edwards also rejects “double predestination,” since the doctrine’s rootedness in the personal religious experience of those who have been born again can only apply to them, and therefore should not use the doctrine as an occasion to speculate on the mind of God. Finney, like Spener, also holds the belief that the grace of regeneration can be lost, yet his reasons for doing so are grounded in philosophical and theological assumptions which were completely foreign to the 17th century Lutheran Spener. For Spener there is no “decision” for Christ, as the moment of regeneration is a passive event, whereas for Finney even the conversion moment is necessarily preceded by a movement of the will – and becomes dangerously close, as certain critics have pointed out, to a kind of transaction with God. Although many modern evangelicals freely use the language of making a “decision” to “accept” Jesus Christ, the assumption that regeneration is initiated by a movement of the subject’s free will has been highly

Theological Criteria

197

contested in Christian thought. Pascal’s experience, for example, makes no reference to a decision, and the classic Puritan conversion narrative strongly emphasizes the passivity of the moment of regeneration as well. Indeed, for orthodox Puritans, it would be theologically blasphemous to view one’s regeneration as contingent upon a decision to “accept Christ” because this would appear to question God’s absolute sovereignty. However, many later theologians and pastors in the revivalist tradition, following Finney, have seen the Puritan rejection of free will (rooted in the doctrine of Predestination) as philosophically and theologically objectionable, as well as viewing calls to make a “decision for Christ” as an effective evangelizing tool. It is because of this history of theological controversy that an analysis of autobiographical conversion narratives can prove instructive concerning the issue of free will. It is interesting to see, for instance, if there are those who come from revivalist traditions which emphasize a “decision for Christ,” yet do not feel as if this language adequately describes their experience and thus resort to theological language of predestination – or perhaps vice versa, as in the case of Finney, who rejected the inherited language of Reformed theology in favor of that of free will. It would also be a mistake, furthermore, to assume that there will only be two possible answers: a non-theologian may feel less compelled to take a firm stance on the question of free will, since they are typically less concerned with logical consistency as they are with faithfully describing their own experience. This can be seen, for example, when converts often use the language of “accepting Jesus,” yet also see the work of the Holy Spirit leading up to this decision and even making it possible in the first place – a position which Finney accuses of being intellectually inconsistent, yet which many still view as most accurately describing their conversion.

7.2.3 The conversion process Traditional Protestant reflection on regeneration has generally assumed that the experience of being born again must be preceded by a form of spiritual wrestling. Spener references this preparatory period but dedicates less space to its description than many of his British contemporaries, because he sees it as being of little significance for one’s present state of “renewal.” Moreover, his tradition of Lutheran Pietism generally rejected any normative “morphology of conversion” as a litmus test for church membership. For traditional Puritanism, on the other hand, there was no question that preparation was necessary, and many even attempted to systematize its morphology. Edwards comes from this tradition of conversion narratives and morphologies, which he finds helpful, but his experience of revivalism led him to question the absoluteness of inherited schemes of preparation. Schleiermacher, deeply

198

New Birth as an Experience of Presence

influenced by both the Reformed and Moravian traditions, describes the process of being confronted with one’s own sinfulness, of “guilt and merited punishment,”9 which leads to a stage of (imperfect) regret [Reue] (which is his translation of the traditional theological concept “repentance” [Buße]) over one’s sinful condition, which culminates in the perfect spiritual regret of regenerative repentance. In the perspective held by much of modern revivalism, following Finney, no such preparation is necessary: one merely needs to make a “decision for Christ,” which if made with true intentions signifies true new birth. From this standpoint, there is no such thing as “preparatory grace,” since everyone is, in theory, “prepared” to be born again; instead, all that stands in the way is the mere personal stubbornness of those who refuse to make a decision. When examining conversion narratives, attention therefore needs to be directed to descriptions of events and presence-experiences leading up to regeneration. For instance, does the author describe emotions or psychological anxieties? What kind of language is used to describe these events and experiences? Are they viewed as necessary, or merely the incidental result of the convert’s own stubborn refusal to make a decision for Christianity at an earlier time? Here, the term “conversion” is not being used to describe the experience of the regeneration moment (as it does, for instance, in Schleiermacher) but instead the larger, overarching pattern of change – if there is one – which begins before the moment of regeneration and continues afterwards into sanctification.

7.2.4 Relation to scripture and doctrine10 Though all four theologians view being born again as a subjective experience of presence, none of them could be properly labeled “enthusiasts”: for Spener, Edwards, Schleiermacher, and Finney, the Bible functions as a stable, “external” standard to the “internal” experience of new birth. However, this leads to an inevitable tension, since how one views and interprets the Bible heavily influences the experience of being born again – and, importantly, vice versa – making it important to identify which scriptural texts, as well as theological teachings, provide the primary framework for understanding the doctrine of regeneration. For instance, whether or not one sees Matthew 7:7–811 as applying to the moment of regeneration, as Finney does, will greatly 9 The Christian Faith, §107.1: 479. 10 Obviously, this is somewhat of a “meta-category,” since it is impossible to separate scripture and doctrine from any of the previously mentioned categories in this study. 11 “Ask, and it will be given you; search, and you will find; knock, and the door will be opened for you. For everyone who asks receives, and everyone who searches finds, and for everyone who knocks, the door will be opened.”

Theological Criteria

199

affect questions concerning free will and the need to make a “decision” for Christianity; and whether or not the term “washing” in “washing of rebirth” (Titus 3:5) is read literally as a description of baptism, as is Spener’s interpretation, or metaphorically, as most evangelicals have done, will greatly affect one’s opinion concerning the doctrine of baptismal regeneration.12 Furthermore, if a convert is convinced of the truth or falsity of the doctrine of predestination and the “perseverance of the saints,” as was Edwards, or of glossolalia as are Pentecostals and Charismatics, then his or her experience of regeneration will be interpreted through this distinct lens. In addition, the Bible as a book in its entirety often plays a significant role in conversion narratives. Finney, for instance, writes of examining the Bible’s trustworthiness from the perspective of a lawyer and coming to the conclusion that it is a collection of statements which are “infallible truth, the assertions of God who could not lie.”13 Still, such intellectual acceptance of the Bible is for Finney no replacement for approaching the scriptures in faith, which includes the possibility that certain specific scriptural passages will speak mystically to the regenerate Christian. Particularly in more rationalistic strands of evangelicalism, the road towards acceptance of Christianity often involves being convinced of the Bible’s trustworthiness, and in many fundamentalist and conservative evangelical traditions, assent to the Bible’s absolute inerrancy is crucial for being considered a true “Bible-believing” Christian.14 Often, however, these same traditions will view the Bible as imbued with supernatural capabilities, which produces conversion narratives in which an encounter with scripture leads to mystical experience.

7.2.5 Friendship and the church community Although the concept of presence has so far primarily referred to immediate, subjective experiences – in the sense of having one’s own nature changed, as well as the presence of God – there is another equally important, implicit type of presence at work when someone is born again: the presence of other people. Justification, election, and adoption, though in themselves not experiences of 12 The primary objects of this study separate, in some way or another, the doctrine of new birth from the sacrament of baptism, yet it still remains to be asked if any relation still exists. Often the connection is very tenuous, for instance in the view that baptism is a “proclamation” of one’s new birth. However, in other cases, such as Spener and even the Puritan tradition, there is a deeper and more complex relationship. One’s position on this matter will have an effect on which scriptural texts provide the foundation for the doctrine of regeneration, as well as how these texts are interpreted. 13 Finney, Memoirs: 17. 14 The effect of this view of the Bible on evangelical politics in North America is dealt with in Chapter 12.

200

New Birth as an Experience of Presence

presence, are confirmed and actualized through participation in a community of others who share the same divine status, as well as the subjective experience, of being born again – and are thus made present.15 It is this community that Christian theology calls the church. Particularly for the early Anabaptists, it was unthinkable to separate the experience of being born again from a concrete community of other Christians. The same is true for Spener: although new birth itself is not a process, the ensuing life of holiness, “renewal,” is to be cultivated through edifying encounters with others through Bible studies as well as traditional worship services. For it is in this community, he asserts, that one hears the Word of God. Edwards, Schleiermacher, and Finney are all in agreement with Spener on this point, seeing the community of believers as naturally and inextricably related to the personal experience of regeneration and sanctification. In light of this theological background, it should not be surprising when other actors, through their presence and support, play a central role in conversion narratives. Despite the fact that the experience of being born again is often assumed to be a private, “internal” affair, when those who have had this experience are asked to describe it, frequently they spend just as much time describing human relationships as they do the stirrings of their own heart. From the perspective of this theological analysis, then, it is important to examine just how they depict the community which they see as integral to their own conversion story. For instance, is the relationship portrayed in the narrative that of a small group, such as a Bible study, or a close two-person friendship, or is it a large congregation? Often, the answer will be a mixture of all three. Furthermore, if a congregation is mentioned, does the author make reference to its denomination or theological tradition? And does the celebration of the sacraments play any role whatsoever?

15 The solidarity which arises among those who share the experience of regeneration also has implications for the political behavior of evangelical Christians. Not only does the question arise as to whether it is preferable to elect a “born-again” politician, but it can be assumed that those politicians who identify themselves as “born again” and speak the same theological language will often have an intuitive appeal to evangelicals. I take up this subject furthermore in Chapter 12.

8 Charles Colson’s “Born Again” 8.1 Introduction The story of Charles Colson (1931–2012) is well-known among evangelicals in the United States. His conversion memoir, entitled Born Again, has sold over two-million copies, and Colson’s foundation, Prison Fellowship, has long been a catalyst for both religious outreach and political reform. His decision to pen an autobiography came while he himself was still in jail, following the infamous Watergate scandal which ultimately brought down President Richard Nixon, his boss.1 Colson’s story is that of a self-made, successful, and cut-throat politician, who worked his way up the ranks to become a trusted aid of the president (Nixon’s “hatchet man,” as he was called). Yet despite the fame and pomp of political victory, Colson writes that he was a man haunted by “the deadness inside me,”2 as well as a swollen sense of pride. It was these circumstances, combined with Colson’s encounter with Christianity through a friend, which led to one of the most celebrated modern conversion narratives of evangelical Christianity.

8.2 The Story of Charles Colson 8.2.1 Early life and political involvement Charles Colson was raised in a working-class family in New England, the son of a factory-worker father who attended night school to earn a law degree while Colson was a child. Despite this notable feat, the elder Colson still was never able to gain full acceptance among the established elite of his trade, leading to a deep-seeded bitterness towards “Eastern intellectualism” in his son, which culminated in Charles’ rejection of a full-ride scholarship to Harvard University in order to attend Brown, “which Harvard men looked upon as a poor Ivy League cousin.”3 After college Colson joined the Marines, where he was confronted with questions about God and the meaning of life and first felt certain about the existence of a higher being.4 However, his spiritual searching 1 2 3 4

Colson, Born Again: 14. Ibid.: 22. Ibid.: 29. Ibid.: 32.

202

Charles Colson’s “Born Again”

subsided after returning home, and he then found a job in “Boston style” politics, which included, among other things, “phony mailings, tearing down opposition signs, planting misleading stories in the press, voting tombstones, and spying out the opposition in every possible way.”5 It was during this time that Colson went through a failed marriage (a subject which he barely touches upon in the book), and remarried shortly afterwards. With the intriguing exception of his later views on prison reform, both the pre- and post-conversion Colson was a staunch political conservative (in the American sense of this very relative term). These convictions led him to unwavering support of Richard Nixon’s candidacy and his eventual selection to the president’s cabinet in 1969. It was intense, difficult work: “Pressures were unrelenting, days vanished into night, passing like wisps of smoke.”6 Still, Colson’s loyalty did not waver, though certain events – the invasion of Cambodia, the Kent State shootings, countless demonstrations – did lead him to question his commitment. It was for his willingness to take on the “dirty work” during Nixon’s first administration that earned Colson the title “hatchet man,” an image that the brash politician embraced, even once commenting (though obviously tongue-and-cheek) that he would “walk over [his] grandmother if necessary” to get Nixon reelected.7 The first hundred pages of Born Again read more like a political memoir than a conversion narrative, with occasional hints of his spiritual dissatisfaction (“my life was miserable”; “the familiar inner deadness”8) sprinkled throughout the story. There are insights into the psychology of President Nixon, who became increasingly reclusive while in office, as well as fascinating stories such as that of Colson’s diplomatic visit to Moscow and of the interpersonal dynamics of Nixon’s cabinet, exemplified particularly in the president’s complex relationship with Henry Kissinger. The most important political event, however, is the breaking and entering into the Democratic Party’s headquarters at the Watergate Complex by five men in 1972. Subsequent investigation revealed that the burglars were financed by Nixon’s reelection campaign, and that the president himself had knowledge of this event and attempted to cover it up, as well as the fact – perhaps most disturbing of all – that he had secretly tape-recorded conversations in his offices, including the Oval Office. Despite accusations, Colson is adamant that he had no personal involvement in the Watergate break-in, and writes that he was completely shocked and distressed to learn that conversations he had with the president had been secretly taped. He had become one of the president’s staunchest public defenders immediately following the scandal, only to have his world come crashing down in light of revelations of Nixon’s misdeeds. 5 6 7 8

Ibid.: 33. Ibid.: 43. Ibid.: 80. Ibid.: 84, 92.

The Story of Charles Colson

203

8.2.2 Colson’s conversion The Watergate scandal unleashed a period of spiritual turmoil for Colson. He was happily married, had no problems with substance abuse, had a successful career, and was in good health – yet he still found himself immersed in thoughts about the purpose of life and his spiritual emptiness. These thoughts were only intensified when a friend, Tom Phillips, became converted at a Billy Graham crusade. Colson began speaking to Phillips regularly about his decision to accept Jesus Christ (language which Colson admits he did not quite understand at the time), as well as beginning to read Christian literature, particularly Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis. These experiences increased his determination to “find” God, and according to Colson, it was at this time that he prayed the “first real prayer” in his life: “God, I don’t know how to find You, but I’m going to try! I’m not much the way I am now, but somehow I want to give myself to you.”9 Colson writes that the more he reflected on the nature and claims of Christ, the more he felt compelled to towards making a decision, particularly after reading Lewis’ thesis that in light of Jesus’ own claims about himself, one ought to consider Jesus as either a lunatic or savior of the world but nothing in between. He also began spending more time with Phillips, which included communal prayer. “The only prayers I’d ever heard were formal and stereotyped, sprinkled with Thees and Thous,” reflects Colson. Yet when Tom Phillips prayed, “it sounded as if Tom were speaking directly to God, almost as if He were sitting beside us.”10 Colson comments that when Phillips prayed, he felt something new – “a kind of energy” – and that once, after leaving the Phillips’ residence, he began weeping uncontrollably, followed by “the wonderful feeling of being released” and a “strange sensation that water was not only running down my cheeks, but surging through my whole body as well, cleansing and cooling as it went.” Although he had not yet “accepted” Christ, Colson writes that “something inside me was urging me to surrender – to what or to whom I did not know.”11 Soon thereafter, while on vacation in a cottage by the sea, Colson continued to read C.S. Lewis and mull over the subject of conversion: “I knew the time had come for me. I could not sidestep the central question Lewis (or God) had placed squarely before me. Was I to accept without reservations Jesus Christ as Lord of my life? It was like a gate before me. There was no way to walk around it. I would step through, or I would remain outside. A ‘maybe’ or ‘I need more time’ was kidding myself.”12 9 10 11 12

Ibid.: 129. Ibid.: 128. Ibid.: 129. Ibid.: 142.

204

Charles Colson’s “Born Again”

Colson writes that he finally accepted Jesus Christ on a Friday morning, sitting in front of the sea, with the words, “Lord Jesus. I accept You. Please come into my life. I commit it to You.” He then describes what happened next: “With these few words that morning, while the briny sea churned, came a sureness of mind that matched the depth of feeling in my heart. There came something more: strength and serenity, a wonderful new assurance of life, a fresh perception of myself and the world around me. In the process, I felt old fears, tensions and animosities draining away. I was coming alive to things I’d never seen before; as if God was filling the barren void I’d known for so many months, filing it to its brim with a whole new kind of awareness.”13

Shortly afterwards, Colson began noticing a change in his demeanor. He enjoyed the beauty of nature that he had previously taken for granted, began treating the workers in his office with more respect, and was even able to read the newspaper without angrily crumpling it up. “I found I could no longer hate so easily and quickly as I once had,” writes Colson: “The old was dying.”14

8.3 Post-conversion 8.3.1 Brotherhood The replacement of the “old” with the “new,” however, was “not without pain, not without resistance, not without tears and sorrow.”15 Therefore, Colson had to rely on wiser, more experienced Christian friends to support him in his new life. He had immediately written Tom Phillips after his conversion by the sea, and others, particularly members of a political “prayer breakfast” group in Washington, began to take Colson under their wing. Colson portrays this community as transcending the divisions of American politics, contrasting the support he received from other Christians with the abandonment of his own political party. “Some of my erstwhile colleagues in the Nixon administration … had grown more distant as the accusations increased,” he writes. “Yet in the days that followed, men whom I hardly knew did not hesitate to ally themselves with me.”16 This included Democratic senator Harold Hughes, an outspoken critic of the Nixon administration who despite their political differences reached out to Colson in support, and even went as far as to suggest a prayer meeting together with the president in the White House 13 14 15 16

Ibid.: 142–143. Ibid.: 157, 159. Ibid.: 159. Ibid.: 148.

Post-conversion

205

(which Nixon declined).17 “Chuck, you have accepted Jesus and He has forgiven you,” Hughes told Colson. “I love you now as my brother in Christ, I will stand with you, defend you anywhere and trust you with anything I have.”18 Hughes and the rest of Colson’s Christian “brothers” continued to support Colson, despite increasing scrutiny concerning Watergate.

8.3.2 Politics and the press News that Colson was attending a prayer breakfast eventually reached the press, whose reaction was a mix of skepticism and amusement. The new convert was then flooded with calls from news agencies asking for his story, which he hesitantly answered, still believing that his religious life could be kept private. “Colson Has ‘Found Religion,’” was the New York Times headline, and the Los Angeles Times proclaimed that “‘Tough Guy’ Colson Has Turned Religious.”19 Countless newspaper editorials speculated on the veracity of his conversion experience, with most believing that it was a cynical political ploy for sympathy amid the Watergate allegations, while others took the line found in a Boston Globe lead editorial which concluded, “If Mr. Colson can repent of his sins, there just has to be hope for everybody.”20 Colson’s conversion story was, despite his own wishes, now irreversibly public, which was difficult for many of his friends to grasp, and it did not make things easy for Colson’s family either. His wife, for instance, was afraid he would want her to renounce her Catholic faith, and his parents interpreted his conversion story as an insulting denial of his Christian upbringing; even one of his sons, now in college, worried that his father had become a “Jesus freak.” However, Colson patiently attempted to clarify to those around him what he had experienced: while he “was hardly a transformed person,” there had been an undeniable change – “a change in my spirit, in my attitudes, in the set of my will.”21 He was, as the title of his book proclaims, “born again.” He now began viewing the public nature of his new birth as an opportunity – “a powerful public testimony for Christ”22 – which was part of God’s plan to bring others around the world to the same experience.

17 18 19 20 21 22

Cf. Colson’s chapter “Brothers” in Ibid.: 160–73. Ibid.: 164. Ibid.: 182. Ibid.: 183. Ibid. Ibid.: 187.

206

Charles Colson’s “Born Again”

8.3.3 Trial and imprisonment Simultaneous with Colson’s newfound spiritual peace was the deterioration of the situation in the Nixon administration. Colson portrays the president as becoming increasingly paranoid, constantly wondering (ironically) if he is being secretly taped, and pondering the possibility of a future resignation.23 For Colson, “Nixon, flag and country were no longer the same,” and instead he began seeing “for the first time Richard Nixon, the man.” “This individual,” he continues, the one out of 200 million who rose to the highest office in the land, was great in some ways, weak in others, limited as all mortals are.”24 Nixon also began to open up to Colson concerning his own religious beliefs, and even participated in a prayer group with Colson and Billy Graham, among others. Colson notes that one positive result of the Watergate scandal was that it led to “a great introspection” among many White House staffers.25 Outside of this group, however, the scandal was only gaining momentum. After turning down a plea bargain (because he would have had to lie), Colson was officially indicted. Still, his “brothers” continued to support him. “If you’re indicted, Chuck, we all are,” one friend told him: “We’re together. That’s the way it is.”26 In addition to local support, Colson writes that he also received countless of support from all over the world, often written by those who strongly disagreed with his politics, but pledging their support as fellow Christians. It was at this time that Colson made a decision that would shock his friends and colleagues, particularly his defense lawyer: he would plead guilty on his own accord. While the majority of accusations against him were false (some even disseminated, he claims, by the CIA), it was true that Colson had intentionally spread false information about Daniel Ellsberg, an enemy of the Nixon administration. As a Christian, he felt it was his duty to tell the truth. After hearing the charges by the prosecution (which he secretly wrote himself), and with his family and “brothers” present in the courtroom, Colson was sentenced to 1–3 years in federal prison. He was first sent to a small prison in Baltimore, sharing the vicinity with drug kingpins and hitmen, among others, before being transferred to a larger federal prison camp in Alabama, where he worked in the laundry room. Here Colson was confronted with the harsh reality of prison life, as well as the lack of dignity of the individual prisoners, whose best method to avoid trouble was by staying isolated, silent, and conforming. As a bona fide political celebrity, attaining such inconspicuousness was difficult, and Colson even learned that another inmate had 23 In one telephone conversion, Nixon told Colson, “You know, Chuck, I get on my knees every night and just pray to God.” Colson was “startled” by this confession, writing, “From the tone of his voice I am convinced he was sincere” (Ibid.: 195). 24 Ibid.: 196. 25 Ibid.: 204. 26 Ibid.: 218.

Post-conversion

207

claimed to be planning to kill him – exactly who it was, he could not decipher, since none of the inmates wanted to be a “rat” – which caused him no small anxiety. He also saw what he calls “the injustice of the system”: a radical disparity in the sentences of different individuals, which included many young men (typically poor and uneducated) serving exaggerated sentences for petty offences; a lack of psychological treatment for prisoners undergoing nervous breakdowns; inmates neglected parole due to their overworked caseworkers; prisoners transferred without even notifying their loved ones.27 As a lawyer, Colson was forbidden to offer other inmates legal advice, but after encountering a Tennessee moonshiner28 who was barely literate and in jeopardy of losing his home, Colson felt it was his Christian duty to help him write a simple letter to his judge to receive parole. “From that moment my new course was charted,” writes Colson: “I could not refuse those who needed help.”29 He continued to assist others, which led him to be finally accepted by the other prisoners, but also to become more distanced from the guards and warden, whom he also began to view with more suspicion.30 Colson, once part of Washington’s political elite, was now a simple prisoner, having learned to view the world from a prisoner’s perspective. “If God chose to come to earth to know us better as brothers,” he reflects, “then maybe God’s plan for me was to be in prison as a sinner, and to know men there as one of them.”31 Colson also began to forge spiritual friendships with various inmates, learning their stories and sharing their heartbreak. One of these was with the 27 Although the last hundred pages consist of Colson’s prison experience, the most heartbreaking description of the injustices of the prison system is found in the chapter “Spiritual Warfare,” Ibid.: 344–56. 28 “Moonshining is considered by these mountain people an honorable, respected profession. The profits are usually small, certainly in relation to the backbreaking work required. Many older moonshiners know no other trade or profession; it is a skill passed down from one generation to the next. Staying ahead of the ‘revenooers’ is simply one challenge of the craft; they recognize its illegality, but do not consider it immoral. Many when caught do not go to jail because of an unwritten ‘social compact’ between local judges and lifelong moonshiners. Those imprisoned do not understand why they are put with men who lie, cheat and steal – and yet have about the same length of sentence. Moonshiners are usually hardworking, Bible-reading, God-fearing men” (Ibid.: 234). 29 Ibid.: 325. 30 Colson tells the story of how he, while working one day in the laundry room, discovered boxes of warm, down-filled coats which had been discarded by the Air Force. These coats were desperately needed by the prisoners, but because they were the wrong color – green and not dark brown – they were not allowed to wear them. After the prison refused to purchase brown ink, he began a clandestine campaign to smuggle ink into the vicinity – a highly dangerous endeavor. However, he later viewed this decision to be untruthful as an expression of his old, dishonest, “politician” self. Eventually, the prison leadership acquiesced and purchased the necessary brown ink. Cf. Ibid.: 335–39. 31 Ibid.: 307. “For the rest of my life,” he continues, “I would know and feel what it is like to be imprisoned, the steady, gradual corrosion of a man’s soul, like radiation slowly burning away the tissue.”

208

Charles Colson’s “Born Again”

jail chaplain, a fiery Southern Baptist preacher referred to as “Brother Blow,” whose fellowship allowed Colson to develop a deeper trust in the Holy Spirit: “For the first time the Trinity began to come alive for me. God was first the Creator, and Father; then as Jesus – the Son – He lived with us; finally, experiencing our needs in the flesh, He gave us the Holy Spirit, as Christ’s replacement, to remain with us as a Comforter and Helper. Up to now I had merely accepted the Trinity as gospel – the way it was – but I had only sampled this Third Part. Now I saw it more and more as the source of strength and power, very real and part of God’s logical plan. Before, I had asked the Spirit to lead me and I felt He was, not really understanding what was happening to me. How clear it now appeared.”32

“Brother Blow’s” spiritual guidance led to increased spiritual flourishing among the inmates. Colson began organizing prayer groups and Bible studies with various prisoners, in addition to the faithful visits from his “brothers” as well as his wife. Some inmates even began praying a blessing for the food before eating in the dining hall, which in turn caused others to do the same. One day, he witnessed speaking in tongues for the first time while praying with another prisoner (“not for a minute did I doubt that the Spirit was in control”33), which led Colson to reflect further on the nature of the Holy Spirit. “I had asked for the Holy Spirit to guide and strengthen me,” he writes. “But it suddenly occurred to me that I had not asked the Holy Spirit to fill me with power.”34 Shortly afterwards, during a Monday night Bible study, Colson asked to be filled with the Holy Spirit. Immediately afterwards, “the most curious effervescent sensation rushed through my body”: “It was like the cleansing I had experienced in the Phillipses’ driveway. I was persistent and I kept praying…. Then the bubbling sensation turned into a tingling from head to foot, like fever chills but pleasant, comforting and energizing. Joy and new strength were welling up within me.”35

Although the experience is difficult to describe, Colson claims that he “had no more doubts” about having his “spirit washed clean” by the Holy Spirit. He now did not just believe in the Holy Spirit, or passively experience its presence, but was Spirit-filled and emboldened. He even asked the Spirit to reveal to him the man who wanted to kill him, whom he subsequently found shortly thereafter: a former police lieutenant who blamed the Nixon administration for his imprisonment, and whom Colson then befriended. The most dramatic work of the Holy Spirit, however, was the faith-healing of a deathly ill man by Colson and two other inmates. Eventually, Colson was transferred away from the prison in Alabama and 32 33 34 35

Ibid.: 307. Ibid.: 322. Ibid.: 339. Ibid.: 340–41.

Theological Analysis of Colson’s Conversion

209

back to Baltimore, where he was freed shortly after, to the joy of his family and his Christian “brothers.” It was clear, however, that his prison experience would never leave him, and in retrospect he saw it all as God’s providence. He concludes that there was a “purpose” to his being put in prison: namely, to begin a Christian ministry for inmates. He begins by taking groups of prisoners to Washington, D.C. for two weeks, to “disciple them as I had been discipled,” and eventually his foundation, Prison Ministry, was invited into the prisons themselves. Afterwards Colson helped found the InnerChange Freedom Initiative, which is designed to prepare prisons for reentry into society. These organizations are part of his dual concern for social betterment as well as “transform[ing] lives to be more authentically Christlike.”36 Only the change effected by Jesus Christ, he believes, can reverse what he views as the decline in moral values taking place in American culture.

8.4 Theological Analysis of Colson’s Conversion 8.4.1 Introduction Colson’s “personal testimony” is perhaps the most well-known conversion narrative in modern evangelicalism. Not only has his book sold more than two million copies: his conversion was also on the front page of national newspapers and the discussion topic on prime time news shows such as 60 Minutes. It is a narrative of stark contrasts. At one moment, he is furiously debating foreign policy with Henry Kissinger and Richard Nixon in the White House; at the next, he is the neighbor to an illiterate moonshiner in an Alabama prison. Yet despite the riches-to-rags trajectory of his external circumstances, Colson’s inward spiritual development acts as the antithesis to his outward situation: while his own life seems to be becoming progressively worse, he himself only increases in happiness and spiritual fulfillment. Though Colson never directly references the passage, his narrative reflects Jesus’ injunction in the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 6:19–21: “Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust consume and where thieves break in and steal; but store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust consumes and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.”

Colson’s is a story of the discovery of spiritual treasures. Theologically, it represents the mainstream of American evangelical piety in nearly all its facets: a “decision” to “accept” Jesus Christ which inaugurates an instanta36 Ibid.: 393.

210

Charles Colson’s “Born Again”

neous change, an emphasis less on the doctrine of forensic justification (or being saved from the fires of hell) and more on being “saved” from one’s own destructive habits, and the centrality of a community of Christian friends which transcends one church building or tradition. 8.4.2 New birth as “decision for Christ”: a moment of free will In many ways, Colson’s new birth experience closely resembles Finney’s. In both cases, the decision is preceded by an obstinate, “ruggedly individualist” determination to discover God and God’s truth, along with intense struggling, both existential and intellectual, over the nature of Jesus Christ and the necessity of surrendering one’s life to him. Colson’s “first real prayer” in his life – “God, I don’t know how to find You, but I’m going to try! I’m not much the way I am now, but somehow I want to give myself to you”37 – is also remarkably similar to the one Finney prayed before his conversion. Here the typical evangelical reader would immediately think of Jesus’ words in Matthew 7:7: “Ask, and it will be given to you; search, and you will find; knock, and the door will be opened for you.” All that is needed to become born again is that the individual humbles him- or herself and takes the step to ask. This is the theology of the “altar call,” popularized by Billy Graham – whose theology, through a friend, indirectly influenced Colson before his conversion – and of the Baptist, as well as Charismatic, tradition as represented by prison chaplain Brother Blow, who proclaimed during a service, “Come forward or just raise your hand and you will receive right now the salvation of Jesus Christ and the washing of His blood at Calvary.”38 Although Colson appears unaware that such a conception of new birth is not universal among Christianity, it is not surprising that those close to him who came from theological traditions which affirm infant baptism had the most difficulty understanding his experience. His wife, Patty, whom Colson portrays as a devout Catholic even before his conversion, had according to Colson “somehow … identified what was happening to me as a Protestant experience, rather than an across-the-board Christian one.” The language of “acceptance,” he continues, frightened her, when it is really “the simplest decision each man or woman makes in life.”39 Sociologically speaking, Patty was indeed right: her husband’s experience is largely a Protestant one, and not even a universally Protestant one at that.40 This also helps explain why Colson’s 37 38 39 40

Ibid.: 129. Ibid.: 334. Italics mine. Ibid.: 172. According to the extensive 2008 U.S. Religious Landscape Survey by the Pew Forum for Religion and Public Life, over 18 % of Americans are members of non-evangelical Protestant churches, and over 26 % are members of what the Pew forum classifies as evangelical or “born again”

Theological Analysis of Colson’s Conversion

211

parents, as Episcopalians, were so offended by their son’s statement that he had “just now” converted. “His father and I raised our boy as a good Christian,” his mother told a neighbor. “We taught him every Christian principle.”41 Colson treats his mother’s objection as a mere misunderstanding (“It was my fault, not theirs”), and while in a certain sense it was, it also reveals deeper implicit theological differences in each person’s understanding of the doctrine of regeneration: for both Colson’s wife and mother, having a conversion experience or making a “decision” for Christ is not necessary for being a true Christian. Instead, those who have strayed from the proper path need to return, not “convert,” to the faith of their youth which began in baptism. For Colson, on the other hand, the adult conversion experience is considered normative. Despite these theological differences, however, it is important to note that Colson never disparages his wife’s church or the genuineness of her personal faith, nor does he (at least directly) criticize the Episcopal Church. Here he displays the ecumenical openness which distinguishes mainstream evangelicalism from many of its fundamentalist cousins. 8.4.3 Mystical presence For Colson, like Finney, the decision to accept Jesus Christ was followed by an inexpressible experience of God’s overwhelming presence, along with what Colson calls “a fresh perception of myself and world around me” – a description clearly in line with the classic theological doctrine of illumination. Although his decision was active, the subsequent experience of God’s presence is completely passive: it is the gracious work of God, who promises new birth to anyone who asks for it. Finney describes the experience as “most wonderfully quiet and peaceful,” as “profound spiritual tranquility”; for Colson it is a “sureness of mind” and “strength and serenity.” In both cases, past burdens (Finney: “sin” and “guilt”; Colson: “tensions and animosities”) instantly disappeared. However, the conversion moment is not viewed as the pinnacle experience of God’s Holy Spirit: this presence is continuous, guiding the believer through everyday decisions, but is also often unpredictable, manifesting itself with new moments of intensity. For instance, Colson writes that in prison, both his understanding and experience of the Holy Spirit deepened. He had the “conviction that God was speaking to me” through the Bible,42 and experiences what Finney referred to as “the baptism in the Holy Spirit” (although he does not use this term exactly, his description of the churches (5). The study does not even have a category for “born again” Cathollics or Orthodox, since very few from these traditions claim to have such an experience. 41 Colson, Born Again: 184. 42 Ibid.: 306.

212

Charles Colson’s “Born Again”

experience as having his “spirit washed clean” fits the doctrine). According to Colson, the experience “was almost like a conversion again.” He comments: “I’ve heard of people who have experienced this power and were transformed overnight. An alcoholic completely loses his craving for alcohol; a drug addict is so changed and freed from bondage that he does not even go through a withdrawal period. I believe the power of the Holy Spirit can work dramatically this way in us. More often, I surmise, the Spirit resides in us a great source of new power, but He serves more as a Helper while we develop our own spiritual disciplines.”

Colson views this experience as having helped him attain a new level of spiritual maturity. “From the moment of this infilling, I felt a new sharpness in my awareness of life about me,” he concludes.43

8.4.4 New being Colson’s entire autobiography is conceived as a testament to his becoming a different person. In many ways, his narrative is paradigmatic for the modern evangelical conversion narrative, as demonstrated in his opening comments to the book: “In one sense, I had lost everything – power, prestige, freedom, even my identity…. But in another sense I had found everything, all that really matters: a personal relationship with the living God. My life had been dramatically transformed by Jesus Christ.”44

Whether intentional or not, his words here echo John Newton’s classic hymn “Amazing Grace”: “Amazing Grace, how sweet the sound, that saved a wretch like me. I once was lost, but now am found, was blind but now I see.” Though Colson may have never plumbed the spiritual abysses of the former slave-ship captain Newton, his life had been dominated by pride, which expressed itself in obsession with the bitterness and resentment of American politics.45 The political “hatchet man” was his identity; it was what gave his life its primary meaning, and only after his conversion did he begin to feel this identity change. Although he reports an immediate change in perspective following his conversion moment, he clearly views his change into a new being as a process. He had to learn, for instance, to pray, and the steady growth of his prayer-life led him to the conclusion that he should be honest and plead guilty to certain Watergate charges – a stark contrast to the earlier “hatchet man.” After his baptism in the Holy Spirit, this experience of personal change was deepened 43 Ibid.: 341. 44 Ibid.: 11. 45 “The more I thought about it, the more one word seemed to sum up what was important to me. Pride” (Ibid.: 26).

Theological Analysis of Colson’s Conversion

213

ever further: “I felt more understanding for prison officials, more love for fellow inmates.”46 Afterwards, Colson dedicated his life to the task of reforming the prison system, both on a spiritual as well as structural level.

8.4.5 Community This learning to be a Christian was not possible without the support of others. Indeed, Colson’s autobiography is arguably less about himself and more about those who nurtured his young faith. Christianity is clearly a “personal relationship” for Colson, which includes private prayer and meditation in addition to a personal conversion experience; however, he also views the community of other Christians as an indispensable, every-day source of spiritual direction. This entails regular communal prayer, as well as being open to one’s “brothers” about one’s own problems, including one’s own spiritual struggles and temptations, and asking for their support. In Colson’s situation, this usually meant being supported, particularly considering that he was, in his own words, “a baby in Christ.”47 They supported him when the majority of Americans, particularly in the news media, viewed him as a scoundrel and wanted nothing more than to see him in jail. They supported him in the courthouse while he was being sentenced, and they continued to visit him in prison. In perhaps the most poignant and theologically profound expression of their support, one of his “brothers” stumbled across an obscure legal statute which appeared to allow, with the special approval of the president, others to serve the rest of Colson’s prison term in his place. Colson, though touched, refused this request.48

8.4.6 Importance of narrative In the opening pages of the book, Colson asserts that he “felt God’s hand on my shoulder” while looking over his notes from prison: “Tell the story,” Colson “seemed to hear,” “of one life – yours.”49 Thus in Colson’s view the narrative of his changed life as guided by God’s Spirit, for the purpose of changing other lives – and even, from Colson’s own conservative civil-religious standpoint,

46 47 48 49

Ibid.: 341. Ibid.: 238. Cf. Ibid.: 365. Ibid.: 314.

214

Charles Colson’s “Born Again”

the United States, which has “strayed” from its “religious roots.”50 Throughout the text, Colson mentions others who informed him of the effect his conversion story had on their own lives. There is the Christmas letter he received from Sgt. Nathaniel Green, the struggling alcoholic who wrote that although he is usually drunk on morning, “here I am watching the children open up their presents and thinking about going to church somewhere,” inspired by an article he read in the newspaper about Colson’s conversion.51 There was the waitress, who after watching Colson’s interview on 60 Minutes, asked him to explain to her how to “find Christ.”52 There was the probation officer who, like “a thirsty man looking for the giver of fresh water,” asked Colson to tell him personally his entire conversion experience.53 And, of course, there were all the prison inmates, who heard not only his testimony but experienced his solidarity. Colson’s book is conceived as being a continuation of this act of “personal testimony”: it is meant as a comfort and encouragement for those who are already born again, and an earnest plea to those who are not. The logic of his narrative is therefore not of the classic Puritan doctrine of “preparatory grace,” but instead of spiritual struggles which can be overcome starting with the simple genuine plea to God to enter one’s heart. Colson, like Finney, views this emphasis on free will and non-Calvinist perspective on the pre-conversion struggle as a message of grace and freedom: no matter where one is in life, no matter how unprepared one may view themselves, the offer of God’s grace – of new birth – is there for anyone who earnestly seeks it.

50 Ibid.: 15. This belief later went on to become a central conviction of the “Religious Right” in American political discourse. 51 Ibid.: 187–88. 52 Ibid.: 207. 53 Ibid.: 261.

9 Brian “Head” Welch 9.1 Introduction Before going into detail about the conversion experience of Brian “Head” Welch, former guitarist of the successful hard rock band Korn, it is perhaps for some readers necessary to give an explanation for why the autobiography of a rock star was chosen for an academic study. One reason is its wide cultural relevance: Welch’s testimony represents one of the most interesting, and to the music world shocking, religious conversions in recent times, an event which was covered by major cable news networks, talk-shows, and magazines. Yet there are other more substantive reasons. Firstly, although not a theologian himself (and someone who is very wary of unnecessary theological controversy), it is clear that Welch is a deeply reflective individual and, even more importantly, often painfully honest. As a result, he certainly thinks very “theologically” in the sense that he strives to understand the role of Christian doctrine in his own life; on the other hand, he lacks both the background education and intellectual compulsion to make his story systematically consistent – as would, for instance, a 17th-century Puritan, and to a lesser extent anyone who has been reared in one specific theological tradition. This lack of concern for systematization makes Welch’s story valuable for my theses that, 1) Christians today have a great deal of freedom in constructing their own theologies of regeneration, and 2) that these theologies are still united by a common underlying theological structure. Hence Welch’s situation and pragmatic, non-systematic approach to theological reflection provide a perfect case study of how contemporary Christians handle the disputed theological elements in the doctrine of regeneration. Moreover, although at first glance Welch’s story – that of an out-of-control, drug-addicted rock star who seemingly had everything, yet did not find true peace until experiencing a religious conversion – may sound somewhat clich to skeptical readers (and this includes many theologians), a closer examination reveals Welch as showing little desire to conform his testimony to any predetermined narrative template, as will later become clear in the course of this chapter.

216

Brian “Head” Welch

9.2 The Story of Brian “Head” Welch 9.2.1 Early life Brian “Head” Welch (who received his nickname at a young age from bullies who teased him about his head being too big for his body) grew up in suburban California in conditions that, although certainly not ideal, were far from the dysfunctionality that would characterize his young-adult life. His father was an alcoholic, but was rarely violent, and worked together with Brian’s mother running a local truck stop. Both parents attempted to support their children’s interests (for instance paying for Brian’s regular guitar lessons) as well as establish general rules for behavior. While his family was not particularly religious, Welch did in fact have childhood encounters with Christianity. The most significant episode was a summer friendship he developed with a boy, Kevin, from an evangelical family who spoke openly about their faith in Jesus Christ with the young Brian. Both confused and intrigued by this message, the young Brian even asked Jesus to “come into [his] heart” while alone in his bathroom one evening, an event which Welch still views as a true conversion. “I felt something,” he writes: “I was thirteen years old; I didn’t know what I was feeling, but I definitely felt something inside me change.”1 Interestingly, the he did not inform anyone, including his friend, of this decision. Afterwards, he slowly drifted away from Kevin and this early conversion experience was quickly ignored. If there has been one constant in Welch’s life, both as a boy and as an adult, it is music. His love of guitar-playing seemed to transcend other concerns. Yet the music lifestyle also brought along with it certain problems, particularly what Welch refers to as “partying”: a euphemism for large, collective drugand alcohol-saturated binges. As a teenager, these parties were largely confined to alcoholic beverages, yet they soon led to marijuana use, which in turn became a gateway to harder drugs such as cocaine and methamphetamines. These early experiences with drugs helped characterize his life as a consistently inconsistent emotional roller-coaster. It was during this time, for instance, that Welch met his first girlfriend, a young woman with whom he fell deeply in love, but who then ended the relationship with Welch in large part due to the destructive influence that drugs were having on both individuals. This event led Welch into a deep depression, which included suicidal thoughts, which he in turn sought to escape through both drugs and alcohol, leading to a vicious cycle which would only cease after his conversion.2

1 Brian Welch, Save Me from Myself: 19. 2 There are light moments in Welch’s narrative as well, for instance an amusing story of how the young Brian, already an avowed heavy metal fan, and his older brother, Geoff, who was a disciple

The Story of Brian “Head” Welch

217

9.2.2 Korn and conversion The pain caused by his breakup led to Brian moving to Los Angeles to be with some musician friends, and after multiple unsuccessful attempts to find the right singer, they finally discovered one in Jonathan Davis (a strange young man who, among other things, worked at a coroner’s office) and formed the band Korn. Even after forming Korn, a moment in which he intuitively knew, he claims, that he had found something special, the drug experimentation continued to grow, to the point of inhibiting the band’s creativity. According to Welch, all of the band’s members participated in drug binges, eventually with the exception of lead singer Jonathan, who after being led to the brink of suicide decided it would be prudent to quit. The others, however, continued to “party” in Davis’ absence (and sometimes his presence). It was during his time in Korn that Welch fell in love with another woman, who then became pregnant with his child. However, drug addiction led Welch to the decision, along with his girlfriend, to give their child up for adoption – an event so painful that Brian and the mother later decided to get married and have a second child. It is clear from his autobiography that even at his lowest points, Welch deeply desired, and struggled to be, a good father and husband, but his relationship was extremely dysfunctional and often turned abusive. Moreover, the environment he inhabited made it nearly impossible to responsibly raise a young daughter. On top of all this, he continued destroying his own body. These experiences were the impetus for his reaching out to two friends from his real estate business, both outspoken evangelical Christians, giving them hints about his personal unhappiness. After an email correspondence, Welch finally agreed to attend a church service with these friends (which he did while still being high on meth), in which the pastor delivered a sermon on Matthew 11:28 (“Come to me all who are weak and heavy burdened, and I will give you rest”). This message inspired Welch to “ask Jesus into [his] life,”3 which he did later on that day – while doing drugs at the same time.4 It was this moment which eventually led him to quit the band Korn, be baptized in the Jordan River, become in involved in various charities, and finally write his own music.

of the “new wave” movement, developed an intense rivalry which culminated in Geoff refusing to let Brian ride in his Volkswagen Beetle. 3 Ibid.: 133. 4 As he said frankly in an interview for the televised church service Hour of Power, “I did drugs and talked to Jesus.” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2U4eGWKc3o).

218

Brian “Head” Welch

9.3 Conversion Experience 9.3.1 Conversion and aftermath Before Brian Welch’s conversion, Korn had sold multiple platinum records and even reached the top of the Billboard charts. Its members were fabulously rich and celebrated opulently, yet the outward perception of their success shielded a downward spiral of addiction which engulfed the musicians, as well as many of those around them. Welch’s case was perhaps worst of all: “By the middle of 2004, I was just saturated with evil and depression. I was doing more speed than you can imagine. I was getting more obsessed with pornography on the Internet, turning into more of a sicko than I already was. I had hit rock bottom.”5

Interestingly, the event which seems to have been the tipping point for Welch had nothing to do with his own addictions; instead, it was hearing his young daughter sing the child-inappropriate lyrics to one of Korn’s songs: “I was already down in the gutter, but hearing that song come out of Jennea’s mouth really made me feel like a piece of trash.”6 It was after this event that he sent the emails to his two Christian friends, hinting at how dissatisfied he was with his life and initiating a conversation about Christianity. At one point, Welch received an email from one of them, Eric, citing Matthew 11:28–30,7 at which Welch completely let down his guard, replying that he was “a lost soul” and that he wanted to return to the feeling he had as a kid when he had asked Jesus into his heart.8 After this, Eric replies with another email, which Welch prints in his book: “A relationship with Jesus is personal. He is your confidant and friend, you can turn to him ANYTIME. He is ALWAYS accepting and not matter what you have done he can release you from any guilt, pain, or shame you have. People in far worse circumstances have turned their lives around and come to know the unconditional love of God! You don’t have to make a public spectacle of yourself to accept Christ into your life – you simply need to kneel down right where you are and say, ‘God, I’m sorry for my sins, please forgive me and come and live within me. Help me walk in your light, read your word daily and rely on you for all my decisions. Let me be an example of you and let others see the change in me because I have made the decision today to give my life to you.’”9 5 Welch, Save Me from Myself: 123–124. 6 Ibid.: 124. 7 “Come to me, all you that are weary and are carrying heavy burdens, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.” 8 Ibid.: 124–125. 9 Ibid.: 125.

Conversion Experience

219

Welch did not accept Jesus Christ at this time, but afterwards he remarks that “all sorts of weird stuff happened to me,” including discovering that former friends who were drug addicts had now become Christians and even having a vision of dying and going to heaven, which he views in retrospect as being a message from God.10 During this time, Welch continued doing drugs, and after experiencing a bad trip which was so intense that he thought he had been having a heart attack, he called Eric to meet with him personally. While at a coffee shop, Eric suggested that Welch, who was still high on drugs, pray with him to “ask Jesus back into my life,” an idea which Welch found at first objectionable because he did not want to pray the prayer while high.11 However, he prayed it anyway, although he notes that he felt pressured to do so, and thus did not truly “mean” it. Afterwards, Welch drove home and prayed to God again, telling God he did not mean what he had said and that he was going to do more drugs (which he subsequently did). Later that week, he decided to attend a church service with another Christian friend, Doug, and his family. During the service, the pastor preached on Matthew 11:28–30, which Welch, still high on meth, at first assumed to be a set-up in which Eric had contacted Doug and told him to get the pastor to preach on that verse. Needless to say, there was no conspiracy, but Welch now sees this event as more than a coincidence: “It was one way that God used to call me to him.”12 It was the sermon’s message of having his burden’s removed which spoke to Welch and led him to finally ask God into his heart. He narrates the event in the following manner: “Well, [the message] got me really excited inside, because to me, that meant that I could go home, snort lines, talk to God, and then he would take away my addiction. That sounded like it was exactly what I needed, so at the end of the service, when the preacher asked if anyone wanted to ask Jesus into their life, I raised my hand and decided on my own to go through with it. Although I had told God I didn’t mean that prayer I said in that coffee shop, this time, I meant it. January 9, 2005, was the day I began my new relationship with Jesus Christ. My life was never going to be the same.”13

Although Welch does not specifically use the terms “born again” or “regeneration,” it was at this moment that he began his “relationship” with Christ. It is also after this point that a direct, steady line of communication between Welch and God develops, characterized by prayer and supplication on the side of Welch and God “speaking,” through various means, to Welch in return. Immediately after his conversion, Welch then went home to do more drugs 10 11 12 13

Cf. Ibid.: 126–129. Ibid.: 131. Ibid.: 133. Ibid.

220

Brian “Head” Welch

and talk to Jesus. “I snorted a line, then sat there on the floor, a rolled-up bill in my right hand, and prayed.”14 It was at this time that he received a phone call from a former friend with whom he used to do drugs but had now become a Christian, telling Welch that he had seen him in church and offering his support. Welch views this event, like many others, not as a coincidence but an example of God’s method of communication.15 A few days afterwards, Welch called another friend to help him flush his large stash of meth down the toilet, as well as all his other drugs, including his alcohol. “God was really doing something awesome inside of me,” he writes: “I could feel it.”16 Afterwards, Welch checked himself into drug rehabilitation, using this time to meditate on scripture and pray. Upon successfully leaving rehab, Welch felt intense joy at the prospect of being given a second chance in life: “I was feeling God touch me inside every day. I would just cry and cry for no other reason than that I just felt loved. I wasn’t sad at all. I just felt total peace. I had done drugs every day for almost two years, and now here I was, clean for a couple weeks. I couldn’t believe it.”17

Interestingly, Welch had a one-week period of relapse after he discovered another bag of drugs in his closet. Although he portrays himself as cowardly hiding from God, this moment does not seem to have driven him into despair or spiritual self-doubt. Even though he had relapsed, something had changed. “I just knew without a doubt that would be my last binge ever,” he writes.18 And according to Welch, it was. The next major step after Welch’s conversion was leaving Korn. After grappling with this decision, he writes that he felt “a strong feeling inside of me” which he interpreted to be “God himself,” telling him to leave the band: “It was a direct order from God, I could tell. I knew it. I knew it in my heart. For sure.”19 He immediately felt a presence of peace and freedom afterwards, and the drugs he had been doing – he was still in his relapse – suddenly seemed to lose any effect. “It don’t know,” he writes, “it was like God preventing it or something, showing me that he wasn’t going to let me enjoy getting high anymore.”20 After this moment, Welch had another experience of divine ecstasy: “Later that evening, I was sitting at my computer and flipping through the pages of my Bible, when I felt a peaceful presence hovering over me. Then I felt something hug 14 Ibid. 15 Ibid.: 134: “I’d just finished asking God to help me, and here was this guy on my phone two minutes later. A guy I could trust. I knew that God was telling me to admit my problem to this guy, but I fought it.” 16 Ibid.: 135. 17 Ibid.: 136. 18 Ibid.: 137. 19 Ibid.: 139–140. 20 Ibid.: 140.

Conversion Experience

221

me – wrapping around me in an embrace. I don’t really know how to describe the feeling, other than to say it was like someone poured liquid love into my body and all around me. I had chills all over my body – I had never felt anything like that before in my life. I was caught up in total ecstasy. The high was higher than any drug I’d ever done in my life and I was instantly addicted to it. I looked up and gently said, ‘Father?’ There was nothing there for me to see, but I could feel his presence so strong. It was God.”21

God continued to speak to Welch, this time through the Bible (in this case Ezekiel 18:20: “The soul who sins is the one who will die”), and after reading this Welch writes that “I instantly felt the fear of the Lord consume me,” which led him to flush all of his drugs down the toilet. According to Welch, this was the moment when “all of my addictions (drugs, alcohol, money, pornography) were completely broken off from my life.”22

9.3.2 Additional experiences of divine presence 9.3.2.1 Baptism After his conversion experience, followed later – but not immediately – by his final break from drugs, Welch continued to have extraordinary encounters with God. The first, as well as most complicated, was Welch’s experience of baptism, which he admits was a “confusing” subject to him at the time. Perhaps surprisingly, Welch writes that at this time he had an understanding of baptism very similar to baptismal regeneration: “I knew that being baptized symbolized being reborn as a new person, but for some reason, I believed that, when I was baptized, every bad thing, every bad feeling, every bad thought was going to fall off me forever…. I thought that when you go under, you go under as yourself and when you come up, you come up changed.”23

However, this expectation would end in disappointment: “I didn’t understand that it was going to be this long, on-and-off, painful process that I would have to go through over the next couple years.” However, he still claims that in baptism he was “putting my old self to death” and that “a new would rise out of the water.” He then refers to his baptism as “the best decision I’ve ever made,”24 going on to summarize the experience in language which, once again, sounds very close to a doctrine of baptismal regeneration: “I did feel the presence of the Lord change me that day, but instead of being an end, it was 21 Ibid.: 140–141. Surprisingly, Welch informs the reader that afterwards he continued doing drugs the entire night, even after this experience. 22 Ibid.: 141. 23 Ibid.: 161–162. 24 Ibid.: 162.

222

Brian “Head” Welch

merely the beginning. The baptism was just the first step of my transformative process.”25 9.3.2.2 Speaking in tongues The second noteworthy presence-experience was Welch’s encounter with Pentecostalism and his eventual embrace of speaking in tongues as a legitimate method of communication with God. While visiting a Pentecostal worship service for the first time, Welch admits that he found the “prayer language” of its members “weird,” but at the same time he recognized their passion for God and for prayer in particular, which he shared, so he decided to inquire more into this phenomenon.26 After speaking with the pastor, Welch writes that he felt something change inside him. Then, suddenly, he was speaking to God in a language he could not understand. This was a very edifying experience: “I could feel it inside of me,” he writes, “building me up.”27 Although speaking in tongues became a staple practice in Welch’s prayer life, it also led to an eventual rift between him and his original spiritual advisor, who as pastor of a “Bible” church28 did not view speaking in tongues as being truly from God. Welch was heartbroken when this pastor told him that if he continued studying the Bible with the Pentecostal pastor and speaking in tongues, he would cease to mentor him. Although Welch eventually decided to stop his “prayer language” for the time being in order to keep his bond with the pastor and his church, he continued to encounter other who had the same spiritual gift, and even received a book on the subject from closet Charismatics in his own church. Since then, speaking in tongues has become a regular part of Welch’s life, helping to “buil[d] my faith and my ability to see God” as well as opening up deeper truths of the “spiritual world.”29 9.3.2.3 Forces of darkness A third post-regeneration presence-experience was Welch’s struggle with depression, as well as what he sees as the battle with “spiritual beings (fallen angels) that are very real, very evil, and in the world today.”30 Although skeptical of the devil at first, Welch believes in supernatural evil, and even believes to have had a personal encounter with such a presence (either a demon or the devil himself). However, he writes that he quickly learned that 25 26 27 28

Ibid.: 163. Ibid.: 171. Ibid.: 173. Many so-called “Bible churches” stem from fundamentalist Baptist traditions which reject speaking in tongues. 29 Ibid.: 192. 30 Ibid.: 153.

Theological Analysis of Welch’s Testimony

223

the presence of the Holy Spirit could overcome the demonic.31 A more complicated aspect of Welch’s spiritual warfare is depression. Unlike Welch’s experience of the demonic, his depression has endured, although appearing only sporadically. He often describes this depression in ways not expected in the “typical” conversion narrative, for instance when disclosing that he uttered phrases such as, “Fuck you God!” and, “I hate you!” while in its grasp.32 Yet he ultimately sees periods such as these as strengthening his faith, since even then, he writes, the “divine light of [God’s] spirit was shining in my soul,” as “unconditional love.”33 In an interesting piece of theological reflection, Welch interprets these sporadic moments of depression as the result of the “divine light” burning away the troubles of his past, and that this reaction was like the burning of one’s eyes when walking into sunlight after having been in a movie theater. This insight “completely floored” Welch: “I spent so much time screaming at God, or rebuking the devil, when in reality, it was the light of the Holy Spirit that was purging my soul from the impurities so I could be in complete union with God.”34

9.4 Theological Analysis of Welch’s Testimony 9.4.1 Introduction Welch’s narrative of an alcoholic saved from the pit of despair is well-known in American evangelicalism, dating back to the Puritan Thomas Shepard in the first half of the 17th century.35 Welch’s understanding of his own new birth also clearly matches the three-fold pattern of regeneration discussed in this dissertation: he experienced the direct presence of God, through the Holy Spirit, which came into his “heart” and transformed him into a “new man,” leading to the conviction that he was now a “child of God” and “saved,” and has Jesus as a “friend.” Moreover, it is also clear that, at least on the surface, Welch identifies the moment of regeneration as taking place when he accepted 31 32 33 34 35

For a more in-dept description of this experience, cf. Ibid.: 149–154. Ibid.: 212. Ibid.: 215. Ibid.: 215–216. In Shepard’s own words: “I drank so much one day that I was dead drunk, and that upon a Saturday night, and so was carried from the place I had drink at and did feast at unto a scholar’s chamber, one Basset of Christ’s College, and knew not where I was until I awakened late on that Sabbath and sick with my beastly carriage. And when I awakened I went from him in shame and confusion, and went out into the fields and there spent that Sabbath lying hid in the cornfields where the Lord, who might justly have cut me off in the midst of my sin, did meet me with much sadness of heart and troubled my soul for this and other my sins which then I had cause and leisure to think of.” Cited in Charles Hambick-Stowe, The Practice of Piety: 83.

224

Brian “Head” Welch

Jesus Christ as his Savior – a theological position identified with Charles Finney and modern revivalism. However, it would be a mistake to simply label his theology “Finneyan,” for although Welch clearly affirms that a decision for Christ is needed, his description of the experience of regeneration is genuinely eclectic, which will be demonstrated by a closer analysis of the overall narrative of his book, as well as of his specific theological reflections on various subjects.

9.4.2 Presence of God 9.4.2.1 God’s presence as the overcoming of false presence Welch’s autobiography is marked by a life-long search for a presence that is not only intense but also true and enduring. Drugs, alcohol, romantic love and even music are portrayed as futile attempts to fulfill the need for a higher power. This presence, which is the presence of the Christian God, is experienced as “a very intense love”; it is, according to Welch, “what I had been really craving my whole life.”36 “The Word [i. e. the Bible] says that God is love, and I’m addicted to God’s love because he saved me from killing myself with drugs and alcohol.”37 Welch uses different metaphors to describe this presence, often inventing his own, such as “liquid love”38 (a term Finney used) and even “downloading.”39 “Liquid love” is interesting in that it combines two of the classic metaphors – water and love – which have been used throughout the evangelical tradition to describe the presence of God in the born-again believer. Moreover, there is no evidence that Welch has ever read Finney, which is a testament to the power of the metaphor. Welch also uses the language of “light” that was so important for Spener and Edwards, even using the Edwardsean phrase “divine light” when describing a particular insight which he was given concerning his depression: “As an illustration, [God] reminded me of what it felt like to walk out of a movie theater in the middle of the day after sitting in the dark for a couple hours. Walking into the sunlight, my eyes would hurt and burn until I covered them up with my hand. He told me that the light of his presence, which he was shining in my soul, was a similar light, one that created another reason I was feeling so much pain. He also

36 Save Me from Myself: 148. 37 Ibid.: 147. 38 Cf. Ibid.: 140: “I don’t really know how to describe the feeling, other than to say it was like someone poured liquid love into my body and all around me.” Cf. also Ibid.: 150. 39 Cf. Ibid.: 191–192. Welch sees much of his songwriting as resulting from the direct influence of the Holy Spirit, “as if God was just downloading these songs inside me” (191).

Theological Analysis of Welch’s Testimony

225

reminded me about all the different people in the Bible who fell to the ground with fear and trembling when they came into the Lord’s presence.”40

This is a remarkable analogy, and deeply Platonic in its ontology of transcendence.41 Even more interesting, from the perspective of this study, is how the analogy attempts to explain an interaction between the two types of presence experience in Spener’s structural analysis. The depression is understood as part of the experience of becoming a “new being,” which although perceived by Welch as a painful event is the result of God’s direct presence (God’s “light”) during the sanctification process.

9.4.2.2 Hearing God’s voice This leads to another, theologically controversial aspect of God’s presence: the fact that Welch views God as speaking to him on a regular basis. This emphasis on communication is perhaps the one element of modern evangelicalism that makes non-evangelicals, not to speak of non-Christians, most uncomfortable. Even within Pietist and Puritan Christianity, historically, there was a steady concern about outbreaks of “enthusiasm” because it seemed to undermine the authority of scripture. Is Welch, then, an “enthusiast”? Firstly, it is important to understand exactly what he means when he claims to hear God speak. For Welch, “hearing” God speak is primarily an act of interpretation of media, of learning to see the “little signals” that God sends.42 This can happen through coincidences – which are seen as more than mere coincidence – such as the pastor preaching on the same biblical text that a friend had sent him in an email. It is worth noting here that Welch’s conception of God’s “speaking” completely confirms Tanya Luhrmann’s thesis of When God Talks Back that “people train the mind in such a way that they experience part of their mind as the presence of God.” “They learn,” continues Luhrmann, “to reinterpret the familiar experiences of their own minds and bodies as not being their own at all – but God’s. They learn to identify some thoughts as God’s voice, some images as God’s suggestions, some sensations as God’s touch or as the response to his nearness. They construct God’s interactions out of these personal mental events, mapping the abstract concept ‘God’ out of their mental awareness into a being they imagine and reimagine in ways shaped by the Bible and encouraged by their church 40 Ibid.: 215. 41 Welch does not mention in what manner God communicated this illustration, for instance through direct inspiration (for instance a vision) or through the medium of a book or a Christian friend. This question does not seem to matter, since either way the message is from God. 42 Cf. Ibid.: 188. A more traditional phrase which could be used to describe Welch’s theology is that of the guidance of the Spirit.

226

Brian “Head” Welch

community. They learn to shift the way they scan their worlds, always searching for a mark of God’s presence.”43

While Luhrmann does not dismiss or minimize the importance of ecstatic, mystical experience, she here observes that the kind of presence typically involved in the presence of God’s “speaking” – that which Charismatics such as Welch describe as taking place on an everyday basis – is the result of spiritual formation. Although Luhrmann is a psychological anthropologist, and not a theologian, Welch would most likely completely agree with her characterization because it accurately summarizes his own implicit theological convictions. For Welch, divine communication does indeed take place in ecstatic, mystical experiences, but it happens more frequently in everyday forms. It can happen through texts, as seen in a touching story of when Welch, along with his daughter, read the story of Pinocchio for the first time and ending up weeping because “it was very clear that [God] was showing me how I was like Pinocchio.”44 Welch even describes God speaking to a friend through a Nine Inch Nails song.45 Perhaps most importantly, God frequently “speaks” to Welch through the wisdom of friends. Importantly, although this language may sound strange to others, including many Christians, it would be unfair to label these experiences “enthusiasm,” since they do not – indeed, cannot – contradict what Welch believes to be the message of the Bible, since he views his ability to interpret such divine communication as guided by the biblical story. Even the “prophetic dreams” occasionally experienced by Welch46 are in need of interpretation in light of scripture.

9.4.2.3 Prayer and ecstatic experience This communication, however, goes in both directions, as Welch cherishes the practice of speaking to God in prayer. He is painfully honest when praying, speaking to God as if God is in the same room and knows him intimately. Sometimes this takes the form of a quiet conversation, sometimes loud profanity, and sometimes in Welch’s own prayer language. Welch’s spirituality is also highly mystical, often culminating in moments of ecstasy, often do not have any direct purpose, or communicative “meaning,” except as an expression of God’s love. Many will be quick to connect these experiences with Welch’s prior drug use, as if they “replaced” getting high. Welch certainly invites this interpretation himself when 43 44 45 46

Luhrmann, When God Talks Back: xxi Cf. Save Me from Myself: 142–43. Cf. Ibid.: 137. Cf. Ibid.: 128–129;198–200.

Theological Analysis of Welch’s Testimony

227

he writes of a moment of “total ecstasy” that “the high was higher than any drug I’d ever done in my life and I was instantly addicted to it.”47 However, it is important not to forget that ecstatic experience has a long history in Christian meditation, and the majority of those who have had such experiences (for instance Finney) had not been prior drug addicts. Like with metaphors of love, liquid, and light, Welch is here using his experiences with drugs as an analogy to describe a presence experience which is by definition indescribable.

His experience of spiritual ecstasy is closely related to his “baptism of the Holy Spirit,” and its most well-known manifestation: namely, speaking in tongues, which for Welch expresses an ineffable experience in an ineffable language. Welch believes that the ability to speak in tongues strengthened his own faith and his ability to hear God, as well as allowing the Bible to “come alive” for him in new ways.48 His experience with tongues, which took place while Welch was still an inexperienced and often theologically confused Christian, is a classic example of how doctrine and experience interact in complex ways. After Welch first had the experience, he notes that he was at first skeptical since it felt “really odd,” but he could not deny that it was also edifying at the same time.

9.4.3 A new “self”: a work in progress While Welch’s conversion story is dramatic, he portrays his sanctification as being a slow development, and not without its valleys. Welch himself remarks that “dying to my old [self]” was a process: “it would be in stages.”49 This process involves both moral as well as emotional renewal: replacing the “old roots,” which are “pain, bitterness, jealousy, anger, depression, abuse, and all those other ungodly things that we have accumulated over the years,” with the “new roots” of “peace, happiness, confidence, and boldness.”50 Such a process takes time, and Welch does not characterize it with any of the moral optimism espoused by Finney. “I’m not claiming to be some Holy Roller that lives a perfect, sin-free life,” he writes: “I screw up all the time, but when I do, I get up, dust my knees off, and keep walking with God.”51 Perhaps the most obvious – and for some surprising – of these post-regeneration shortcomings is the fact that Welch did not immediately stop doing drugs after he asked Jesus into his heart. For some “born-again” Christians, this would invalidate his conversion narrative, since it appears to put both God’s healing power and the new life after regeneration into question. However, the fact that Welch does not gloss 47 48 49 50 51

Ibid.: 141. Ibid.: 192. Ibid.: 202. Ibid.: 202. Ibid.: 147–148.

228

Brian “Head” Welch

over, but instead directly confronts issues and events that do not fit the typical narrative of conversion (for instance with his depression) is a testament to his genuineness. Welch also seems to share Finney’s assumption that being a new person in Christ will lead towards active involvement in societal problems. The primary example of such engagement is a trip to India which took place relatively shortly after his conversion. Here, Welch writes that he “immediately felt the heart of Jesus the second I stepped off the plane in Mumbai.”52 He continues that he was shocked that so few “of us Americans” are helping the thousands of starving people who are in such obvious dire need. Welch felt led to purchase an entire orphanage for starving orphans, as well as reach out to what he describes as a village of “murderous cannibals.” The latter decision was influenced by an experience of God’s direct communication: “I suddenly felt the Lord’s presence hovering over me in my hotel room, just like I had that one time in my house. He was there, and I started weeping uncontrollably. His presence was just so thick – I couldn’t contain it. Then I heard another direct order: I’M SENDING YOU TO THE UNTOUCHABLES. NOBODY WANTS THEM, BUT I DO. DON’T BE AFRAID.”53

With the help of friends, and despite warnings from the locals,54 Welch decided to travel to the village, where he encountered hundreds of malnourished individuals waiting for help. One man explained to Welch that they had become cannibals because of broken promises from the Indian government. Since then, however, he writes that “crime has dropped 90 percent” and the orphanage is running successfully.55 After his return home, however, the newly-converted Welch was confronted with the sober reality that “many Americans didn’t share my concerns” after he had made the effort to “do a little press to make the people in America aware of what was going on over there.”56 Although Welch does not develop his reflections on this event further, it is clear that his conception of a personal relationship with God includes social, and even political, engagement. 9.4.4 Justification and Adoption In the epilogue, Welch relies heavily on the theory of substitutionary atonement to explain the justification effected by his decision to accept Christ: 52 Ibid.: 179. 53 Ibid.: 180. 54 In a moment of comic relief, Welch recounts how one local told him, worriedly, “These people are ferocious headhunters!” to which Welch comments, “This was not exactly good news for someone whose name is Head.” Ibid.: 181. 55 Ibid.: 184. 56 Ibid.: 185.

Theological Analysis of Welch’s Testimony

229

“God proved [his] love to us, when he sent his only son Jesus Christ to die a horrible death, instead of us, so that justice would be done and so that we could be reconciled to God through the crucifixion of Christ. If you ask Christ to be your Savior, you’re basically saying, ‘God, thank you for not punishing me. Jesus, thank you for taking my punishment on yourself….’ The blood of Christ covers all our ungodliness so that we can go to God boldly in prayer to ask him questions, or just hang out and talk to him like a friend.”57

Interestingly, this doctrine of atonement plays little to no role in the implicit theology of his autobiography, and its explication in the epilogue appears distanced and formulaic – like a kind of dogmatic appendix – when compared to the rest of the narrative. In his own telling of the events, for instance, Welch shows little concern of his deserving the wrath of God, or even of being a “sinner” in the abstract sense. He was doing perfectly fine creating his own hell on earth, hence the title of the book: “save me from myself.” Furthermore, the text which spoke so deeply to Welch and led to his conversion, Matthew 11:29–30, and forms the scriptural base of his implicit theology of regeneration, refers not to Christ’s atonement but to his role as a refuge and solace for those who are weak and burdened in this present life. This does not mean, however, that classic doctrines are not to be found in the bulk of the narrative. Towards the end of the book, for instance, Welch affirms that the moment of acceptance marked his adoption as a child of God: “When I accepted Christ, God became my heavenly Father.”58 And when he remarks that “‘getting saved’ is a term Christians use when we talk about giving our lives to Jesus,”59 Welch is implicitly connecting the decision to accept Jesus to one’s personal salvation. The doctrine of adoption, moreover, is found frequently in the text, and is expressed in the language of friendship with God. Welch was first taken aback by his friend Eric’s email message that “[Jesus] is your confidant and friend,” one who is “accepting and no matter what you’ve done can release you from any guilt, pain, or shame you have.”60 This message stuck with Welch, who characterizes his own relationship to God as one of friendship. Hence prayer is portrayed as a conversation between friends, in which one can “just hang out [with Jesus] and talk to him like a friend.”61 He ends with epilogue with the message that those who have made the decision to accept Jesus Christ are “[now] a friend, a child of God.”62 Behind these descriptions is the image of God as a good and loving parent: one who provides guidance and authority while also being a true friend along the way. 57 58 59 60 61 62

Ibid.: 219, 220. Ibid.: 213. Ibid.: 152. Ibid.: 125. Ibid.: 220. It should be noted that for Welch this is not the only kind of prayer. Ibid.: 221.

230

Brian “Head” Welch

9.4.5 Decision When discussing the theological implications of Welch’s testimony, it is important to note that he ends his book Save Me from Myself with an “Epilogue” in which he invites his reader to make a decision for Jesus Christ. Unlike the rest of the book, much of this section is explicitly theological, and represents the general theology of decision made popular by Billy Graham; it is therefore highly probable that Welch wrote this section in conjunction with a pastoral advisor. Here, Welch compares this experience to being set free, a description to which his own life is a testimony. Then, like so many modern spiritual autobiographies, Welch then offers his reader a prayer to use for accepting Christ: “God, in the name of Jesus Christ, I want to thank you for sending your Son to die in my place. Please forgive me for my past, and help me to believe and trust in Christ. God, please send your Holy Spirit to live in my heart, to teach me how to know you. Thank you. Amen.”63

He writes that he does not want his reader to feel pressured, because Welch himself had to reach a certain point in his life before he felt ready to pray such a prayer. Important, he writes, “is that if you say it, you’ll mean it.” Once this happens, “all that’s left is to pour your heart out to God,” which includes asking for spiritual revelations, including the baptism in the Holy Spirit. “Talk to him like a friend, every day, as much as you can, and he will reveal himself to you. Because now you are a friend, and a child of God. God bless you.”64 Many passages in the book Save Me from Myself affirm the necessity of making a conscious decision, and often this moment of decision appears to be equated with the moment of regeneration. This appears most notably in his identification of Jan. 9, 2005 as the day he “began [his] new relationship with Jesus Christ.”65 However, it would certainly not be difficult for a Calvinist, for instance, to interpret Welch’s experience differently, as a steady process of conversion, including “preparatory grace,” and in which the specific moment of regeneration is difficult to identify. Moreover, Welch himself often downplays the role of free will in his regeneration. For instance, when he describes hearing the text of Matthew 11:28–30, he uses language of God “calling” him,66 (in a television interview he describes the event as a presenceexperience, “as a big-old Gatorade bottle the size of this room, and I was stranded in the desert”), and then portrays his own “decision,” although truly “intended,” as spiritually na ve and shallow, and even partially reached due to 63 64 65 66

Ibid. Ibid.: 221. Ibid., 133. Cf. Ibid.: 133.

Theological Analysis of Welch’s Testimony

231

the “selfish” motive of wanting to finally kick his drug habit.67 Thus although he uses the language of “decision,” Welch is clearly not as confident in the integrity of human reason as is Finney, or even Billy Graham for that matter. In addition to this there is Welch’s own surprisingly sacramentalist description of his baptism, which he describes as “putting my old self to death,” after which “a new man would rise out of the water.”68 Obviously this language problematizes any clear identification of new birth with a moment of acceptance. Ultimately, then, despite the epilogue Welch leaves the question of free will wide open, which although theologically frustrating, is not highly problematic from a narrative standpoint, given that an overriding theme in Welch’s story is not his own acceptance of God but God’s acceptance of him. A few remarks need to be made concerning the question of the role of Brian Welch’s prior childhood conversion. In his book, as well as in television and magazine interviews, Welch clearly focuses on the conversion experience he had as an adult, yet his conversion experience as a boy never leaves the picture. A brief span of spiritual awakening at an early age is not foreign to Christian evangelical autobiography. Jonathan Edwards, for instance, mentions the “remarkable awakening” he experienced as a boy, but does not view it as true regeneration. Whether or not Welch views his childhood conversion as true regeneration is open to interpretation. He obviously attaches significant importance to the event, seen in the fact that after it had become public that Welch was a Christian, he personally visited his childhood friend Kevin and his family, informing them of “the role [they] played in my conversion.” The experience of asking Jesus into his heart as a boy, he continues, “was the main reason that I had come to Christ recently.”69

9.4.6 Scripture and doctrine Welch’s understanding of the Bible’s role in his spiritual life could be labeled “mainstream evangelical”: he is not primarily concerned with a particular theory of inspiration, and does not focus on the importance of every passage being “literally true,” but it is clear that for Welch scripture is the authoritative Word of God, which includes the Bible’s ability to speak supernaturally to Christians in concrete life situations. The most obvious example is the passage Matthew 11:28, whose message directly led to Welch’s conversion. (He now even has this passage tattooed on his neck – a fascinating subject in its own right.) Other examples include his theological questions concerning speaking in tongues as well as his experiences in the mission field. Early on Welch was confronted by the reality of doctrinal disagreement 67 “[B]ecause to me, that meant that I could go home, snort lines, talk to God, and then he would take away my addiction.” Ibid.: 133. 68 Ibid.: 162. 69 Ibid..: 168.

232

Brian “Head” Welch

when Welch’s original mentor, “Pastor Ron,” gave him an ultimatum after discovering that Welch had sought out a second spiritual mentor, a Pentecostal pastor named Eddie: either Welch break off his Bible study with Eddie, who had introduced Welch to speaking in tongues, or Pastor Ron could no longer mentor him. Welch was deeply hurt by this situation, particularly the fact that Ron did not share his excitement about speaking in tongues. However, Welch understood that Ron was not trying to be selfish or unfair: “He just didn’t want me to get confused.”70 How Welch sorts out his confusion is a classic example of how scriptural interpretation and personal experience work together: he researched the subject in the Bible, and was convinced by 1 Corinthians 14 that speaking in tongues could be legitimate, and was writes, “I could feel it working inside me, building me up (1 Corinthians 14:4, Jude 20). I couldn’t explain it. I just knew it was happening.”71 Thus the presence of his mystical experience worked in conjunction with the hermeneutical task of reading the Bible in order to produce his theological conviction on the matter: namely, that speaking in tongues truly is a gift of the Spirit which can be experienced today.72 9.4.7 Friendship and ecclesiology The rivalry between Welch’s two spiritual mentors was not merely a matter of scriptural interpretation and theological argument; it was also his first experience of ecclesiological disunity. As a new Christian who was filled with a passion for living out his faith in community with others, this disunity was deeply painful for Welch. His implicit ecclesiology also clearly views the position of pastor with great respect, and he often seeks out clergy as spiritual mentors, which is why experiencing the doctrinal rift between his two mentors was particularly agonizing on a personal level. Moreover, he is clearly dedicated to the practice of Sunday morning worship, which is what led to his conversion in the first place. Even the sacrament of baptism receives mention in the narrative, with Welch had the expectation that his baptism would be more than a symbol and would actually effect a physical change. The sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, however, receives no mention. The theme of friendship runs steadily throughout Welch’s book, and it is the core of his implicit ecclesiology. God communicates through friends, comforts through their presence, and is even a friend himself. Welch’s first conversion, as a child, was caused by his interaction with a friend and that 70 Ibid.: 173. 71 Ibid.: 172. 72 “The Bible says that when you pray in tongues, you’re edifying yourself (1 Corinthians 14:4), building yourself up in your most holy faith (Jude 20), even though nobody – not even you – understands you except God (1 Corinthians 4:12). I had to believe the Bible was true, because God can’t lie (Hebrews 6:18)” (Ibid.: 192).

Theological Analysis of Welch’s Testimony

233

friend’s parents. It was the way they behaved and led their lives that first led Welch to believe that a personal relationship with God may be possible. Welch later describes what were clearly meaningful relationships with his band members and also girlfriends and wives, portraying all of these relationships as good, yet also incomplete, which is seen in the fact that they often led to destructive behaviors. It was only through his friendships with Christians that he was shown a way to ultimately conquer his addictions and anger. After his conversion and while he was still a new convert, his friends were there in support, picking him up every time he fell and praying for him every day. And ultimately, God for Welch is the paradigm of the friend: one who loves, supports, and guides, who is always forgiving and in whom he can place his complete trust.

10 Christianity Today Testimonies 10.1 Introduction As has been demonstrated in the previous chapters, it is possible to trace a general, basic theological structure of how Christians in the various evangelical traditions understand their experience of being “born again”: firstly, as the metaphor of new birth implies, the convert feels that he or she has experienced a profound, qualitative change in nature which cannot be brought about by one’s own efforts; secondly, in addition to this experience of subjective change there is an additional presence, more difficult to describe, of God; and thirdly, in addition to these two experiences of presence there is a change in divine status, which is not an experience at all, and which has been expressed in classical Protestant theology with the concepts of forensic justification and adoption. To repeat, the claim here is not that there is a universal theological “essence” of the born-again experience, in the sense that every evangelical who claims to be born again makes reference to these three elements; however, the vast majority of evangelicals, past and present, do indeed make reference to these three things, and there are enough family resemblances among the various conversion narratives and theological treatises to make it quite sensible to speak of a fundamental theological structure. Furthermore, it has been shown that in addition to these three basic elements, a cluster of theological criteria continually appears. These are: 1) How the experience of presence is described, 2) How the convert understands his or her change in divine status 3) The role and importance of the moment of regeneration, 4) The role of free will, 5) The larger conversion process, 6) The role of the Bible and biblical texts, and 7) The presence of the church community and/or other people. Unlike the basic three-fold theological structure of the regeneration, however, these categories are marked by a broad range of opinions among the theologians, often including concrete disagreements. One should expect, then, that such theological plurality will not only be found among professional theologians but also in the conversion narratives, or “testimonies,” of those who profess to have had a born-again experience, such as Colson and Welch. The goal of this chapter is to analyze additional, shorter contemporary conversion narratives with the aforementioned criteria in mind, which requires noting when specific theological doctrines are mentioned explicitly, while also seeking to trace the tacit theological convictions within such narratives.

Introduction

235

My hope is that this chapter can provide valuable insight into how doctrine and theology actually function, practically, within the lives of Christians. Once again, the fact that this study is a “portrait” becomes clear in this final section: there are countless numbers of conversion narratives, and I have chosen a mere fraction of those, while doing my best to assure that my selection represents a wide range not only theologically, but also in terms of age, gender, class, and culture. The “testimonies” selected for this chapter are taken from the influential evangelical magazine Christianity Today, which in 2013 began publishing a one-page, autobiographical column, “Testimony,” appearing on the final page of every issue. Christianity Today, published in the United States and originally founded by the evangelist Billy Graham, is dedicated to publishing “globally minded” articles written by “a broad network of top journalists, pastors, theologians, ministry workers, scholars, artists, and others around the world to help our readers think deeply about their faith and cultures.”1 Thus although dedicated to the evangelical hallmarks of a personal relationship to Jesus Christ and the authority and inspiration of the Bible, it is also a highly ecumenical and theologically pluralistic publication. Within its pages, one finds articles written by Baptists, Pentecostals, (evangelical) mainline Protestants, Episcopalians, and representatives of the Black Church tradition, among others. This variety is reflected in the various conversion stories published under “Testimony,” which makes the magazine a perfect candidate for this chapter’s analysis. In the following pages, I study twelve different narratives published in Christianity Today, starting with the January/February 2013 edition and ending with March 2014. The narratives, listed in order of publication, are the following: “My Train Wreck Conversion,”2 by Rosaria Champagne Butterfield, a former self-described “lesbian leftist professor” with a deep disdain for Christianity who, following her friendship with an evangelical Presbyterian pastor, had a conversion experience; “The Atheist’s Dilemma,” by Jordan Monge, a young female Harvard student who was converted from atheism to Christianity through reason and debate; “Antidote Poison,” by Ravi Zacharias, a well-known Christian apologist who grew up in a nominally Christian family in India; “Forgiving Iran,” by John Majid (as told by Kate 1 Cf. http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/help/about-us/what-is–christianity-today.html. “Christianity Today is a globally minded evangelical magazine that provides thoughtful, biblical perspectives on the news and ideas of our day. We are passionate about using all forms of journalism to help evangelicals understand both the gospel of Jesus Christ and the world in which we live, so that we will more effectively share that gospel in word and deed throughout the whole world and in all spheres of life. We rely on a broad network of top journalists, pastors, theologians, ministry workers, scholars, artists, and others around the world to help our readers think deeply about their faith and cultures. Our readers are influencers—from small-group Bible study leaders to relief agency CEOs—who want the influence they wield to be biblically based, deeply informed, tested, and pertinent to their sphere of ministry.” 2 For bibliographical information on the following twelve “testimonies,” cf. “Works Cited” at the end of this study.

236

Christianity Today Testimonies

Harris), the story of an Iranian man who lost family and friends amidst the brutality of the Iranian Revolution, and who later came to Christianity as an immigrant; “The Golden Fish,” by Eric Metaxas, an evangelical intellectual who describes having experienced conversion in a dream; “My Crash Course on Jesus,” by Casey Cease, the story of a high school student who killed his friend while driving drunk and later, as a disillusioned youth-group member, experienced conversion; “Forgiving the Man who Murdered my Mom,” by Everett Worthington, a psychology professor who uses his love of hiking as an analogy for understanding the twists and turns of Christian life; “Saved by U2 and an Audible Voice,” by Travis Reed, the story of a fatherless boy who later as a young man discovers his “heavenly Father,” who spoke to him through Reed’s love of music; “Fox News’ Highly Reluctant Follower of Jesus,” by Kirsten Powers, a news anchor who describes herself as having been “aggressively secular” until beginning to attend the church of noted New York evangelical pastor Timothy Keller, which was followed by an intense conversion experience; “How I Escaped the Mormon Temple,” by Lynn Wilder, a former leader in her Mormon congregation whose son’s conversion to evangelical Christianity (while on a Mormon mission) precipitated that of their entire family; “Christ Called Me off the Minaret,” by Nabeel Qureshi, a former zealous Muslim whose a three-year investigation into Christianity was marked by dreams and eventually a decision for Jesus, which caused him to be alienated from his family; and finally, “Pro Football was my God,” by former NFL player Derwin Gray, who committed his life to Jesus Christ after encountering an outspoken Christian on his team.

10.2 “My Train Wreck Conversion,” by Rosaria Champagne Butterfield 10.2.1 Butterfield’s narrative The conversion of Rosaria Champagne Butterfield is the first of Christianity Today’s “Testimony” series, and is bound to be considered one of its most controversial. As a self-described “lesbian leftist professor,” “radical,” and “postmodern intellectual” before her conversion, Butterfield’s disdain for Christianity was acute, to the point that she had difficulty merely saying the word “Jesus.” As a professor of English and women’s studies in the 1990s, Butterfield was deeply concerned about “morality, justice, and compassion” – in themselves certainly not anti-Christian values – but was convinced by her experience that Christians were bigoted, shallow, and anti-intellectual: they were the students who threw Bible verses at her, the protestors who yelled at her and other marchers on Gay Pride day. Furthermore, there was the

“My Train Wreck Conversion,” by Rosaria Champagne Butterfield

237

Religious Right’s ascendancy within the Republican Party, marked by its hostile stance towards feminism and homosexuality. “Those who professed the name [Jesus] commanded my pity and wrath,” she writes. Butterfield notes several factors of influence on her path to her conversion, the first being a simple letter. After publishing a scathing critique of Promise Keepers (“the unholy trinity of Jesus, Republican Politics, and patriarchy”), which led to large amounts of mail (both positive and negative), she received one letter, sent from a local pastor of a Presbyterian church, which “defied [her] filing system” by neither congratulating nor attacking her, but instead posing basic questions: “How did you arrive at your interpretations? How do you know you are right? Do you believe in God?” After first throwing the letter away, Butterfield then fished it back out of the trash can. As non-confrontational as its message was, she writes that it had struck a nerve by highlighting the fundamental difference between her “historical materialist worldview” and that of Christianity, which is a “supernatural worldview.” She then contacted the pastor who wrote the letter, Ken, and met with him and his wife to discuss their faith. “My motives at the time at the time were straightforward,” she writes: “Surely this will be good for my research.” However, Butterfield proceeded to form a friendship with Ken and his wife, Floy, and they often met to discuss political themes. More importantly, Butterfield was able to see the faith of Ken and Floy in practice. She writes, “They did not treat me like a blank slate. When we ate together, Ken prayed in a way I had never heard before. His prayers were intimate. Vulnerable. He repented of his sin in front of me. He thanked God for all things. Ken’s God was holy and firm, yet full of mercy. And because Ken and Floy did not invite me to church, I knew it was safe to be friends.”

In order to do research on her arch-nemesis, the Religious Right, Butterfield had begun reading the Bible, which she views as the second major influence in her conversion. She read the Bible voraciously, “the way a glutton devours.” One friend, a transgendered woman who had been a Presbyterian minister for 15 years, began to notice that this practice was “changing” Butterfield. “I prayed that God would heal me, but he didn’t,” the friend said. “I will pray for you if you want.” Butterfield attempted to fight the idea that the Bible was inspired, but she continued to be changed through her reading. “It overflowed into my world.” Then, one morning, Butterfield “rose from the bed of [her] lesbian lover” to go to church. She felt as if she did not fit it because of her “butch haircut,” but reminded herself that she “came to meet God, not fit in.” She portrays this Sunday service as a watershed moment. The theme of the sermon, “If anyone wills to do [God’s] will, he shall know concerning the doctrine” (John 7:17, NKJV), challenged her perception of herself as an intellectual for whom “understanding came before obedience”; however, the text of John 7:17

238

Christianity Today Testimonies

implies that in matters of faith, the reverse is often the case. Butterfield saw this spiritual insight as having a very personal application: “I wrestled with the question: Did I really want to understand homosexuality from God’s point of view, or did I just want to argue with him? I prayed that night that God would give me the willingness to obey before I understood. I prayed long into the unfolding of day. When I looked in the mirror, I looked the same. But when I looked into my heart through the lens of the Bible, I wondered, Am I a lesbian, or has this all been a case of mistaken identity? If Jesus could split the world asunder, divide marrow from soul, could he make my true identity prevail? Who am I? Who will God have me to be?”

Shortly afterward, on “one ordinary day” (although she does not specify more), Butterfield converted. “I came to Jesus,” she writes, “openhanded and naked.” She provides little phenomenological description of the experience, instead focusing on those who supported her in the process. “Ken was there. Floy was there. The church that had been praying for me for years was there. Jesus triumphed.” Tellingly, she views her conversion as a “war of worldviews.” Although not going into detail, it is apparent that the worldview-switch of conversion led to painful loss of friendships as well as, presumably, her academic ascendency. Even more important was the issue of her sexual identity. “I was a broken mess. Conversion was a train wreck. I did not want to lose everything that I loved.” However, Butterfield’s final full paragraph ties up all the loose ends, albeit vaguely: “But the voice of God sang a sanguine love song in the rubble of my world. I weakly believed that if Jesus could conquer death, he could make right my world. I drank, tentatively at first, then passionately, of the solace of the Holy Spirit. I rested in private peace, then community, and today in the shelter of a covenant family, where one calls me ‘wife’ and many call me ‘mother.’”

Butterfield then ends her narrative with two sentences, each given their own paragraph. The first, “I have not forgotten the blood Jesus surrendered for this life,” shows her theological allegiance to the classic evangelical theology of atonement. The second, however, is more cryptic: “And my former life lurks in the edges of my heart, shiny and still like a knife.” 10.2.2 Analysis of Butterfield’s conversion Butterfield’s testimony feels incomplete, on both the narrative and theological level. The narrative’s most controversial element is clearly the issue of her sexuality. While Butterfield never retracts her criticisms of the Religious Right, and still appears to deeply appreciate the LGBT community’s values of tolerance, hospitality, and social concern, she

“My Train Wreck Conversion,” by Rosaria Champagne Butterfield

239

clearly sees her former lifestyle as a sin which her spiritual regeneration has enabled her to overcome.3 Interestingly, the themes which were so important to Butterfield while a university professor, gender roles and sexuality, continue to concern her. Mystical Presence Her references to “the voice of God [singing] a sanguine love song” and “the solace of the Holy Spirit” refer to a supernatural, mystical encounter with the Person of the Holy Spirit. The “voice” is not described as having been audible, but instead can be understood as the kind of “hearing” chronicled by Luhrmann in her study of Charismatics. Her use of romantic imagery (“sanguine love song”) is well-established within Christian tradition, predating the Protestant tradition. The use of the term “solace” to describe the presence of the Holy Spirit is both phenomenological and biblical: the Holy Spirit is called the “comforter,” for instance, in John 14:26. Presence of Changed State In many ways, her portrayal of the change effected through conversion is Finneyian: she views her pre-conversion self as morally upstanding (aside from her sexuality), capable of spiritual insight, and not gnawed by any feelings of helplessness; instead, according to Butterfield what was missing was the power to obey what she increasingly saw to be God’s will. The most controversial aspect of Butterfield’s narrative is her view that being born again entailed a change in her sexuality. She believes that she was able to change her orientation through obedience to God’s will – or, perhaps better put, that God changed her in light of her obedience. Even before becoming a Christian, she was troubled by the thought that “homosexuality was a sin.” She eventually accepted this belief around the time of her conversion, and now contrasts her earlier lifestyle with her present one as a wife and mother. Change in Divine Status This element plays less of a direct role compared to the first two, yet it is implied in the entire narrative, as seen in the subheading to the article (“I despised Christians. Then I somehow became one.”). She does mention that while attending church she had an “image hat came in like waves, of me and everyone I loved suffering in hell, [which] vomited into my consciousness and gripped me in its teeth.” It is not clear, however, what she means by this sentence. Is she referring to her previous negative experiences with hellfireand-brimstone preaching Christians, or was she truly worried about her and her friends going to hell? The penultimate sentence of the text, “I have not forgotten the blood Jesus surrendered for this life,” is a clear reference to the 3 The issue of homosexuality and its relationship with evangelical theology and biblical interpretation is revisited in the final chapter of this book.

240

Christianity Today Testimonies

doctrine of atonement. However, this section has little relevance to the rest of the narrative and has the appearance of a required theological addendum, which makes it quite reminiscent of Brian “Head” Welch’s final chapter. Importance of Moment of Regeneration As opposed to many other evangelical conversion narratives, Butterfield clearly does not see the moment of regeneration as being of central theological/biographical importance. She mentions that it happened “one ordinary day,” and then proceeds to describe the support she received from others after the event. Role of Free Will The statement that she “came to Jesus” seems to imply a decision (as opposed to “Jesus came to me”), yet it is not entirely unambiguous. Furthermore, her emphasis on the theme of obedience is reminiscent of Finney’s theology. Conversion Pattern In this short narrative, the events leading up to her conversion are given central focus. This decision is not merely literary: it is clear that in Butterfield’s view, her conversion to Christianity can only be understood through the journey that led her there. Interestingly, Butterfield does not view her life before Christianity as unsatisfying. “My life was happy, meaningful, and full,” she writes: “My partner and I shared many vital interests: aids activism, children’s health and literacy, Golden Retriever rescue, our Unitarian Universalist church, to name a few.” She would thus not appear to be a “type” ripe for conversion, as her life was marked by intellectual, emotional, ethical, and even religious fulfilment. Indeed, initially she was repulsed by Christianity. Therefore, her journey to the faith was a long process, involving long, meticulous study of the Bible as well as frequent conversations with her Christian friends. The Role of the Bible and Doctrine The Bible, as an inspired book in its entirety, plays a central role in enabling Butterfield to change her worldview. “It overflowed into my world,” are her words to describe the experience of reading scripture before her conversion: “I read it many times that first year in multiple translations.” There is only one direct reference to a specific scriptural text, John 7:17. Interestingly, this passage is not about new birth but instead obedience to God’s will, a theme with which Butterfield continually wrestled due to her sexual orientation. Butterfield assumes, both before and after her conversion, that the Bible leaves no room for a homosexual lifestyle. “When I looked into my heart through the lens of the Bible,” she writes, “I wondered, Am I a lesbian, or has this all been a case of mistaken identity? If Jesus could split the world asunder, divide marrow from soul, could he make my true identity prevail? Who am I? Who will God

“The Atheist’s Dilemma,” by Jordan Monge

241

have me to be?” Central to her conversion experience was submitting to the authority of the Bible’s judgment that homosexuality, “from God’s point of view,” is a “sin.” Friendship and Community Community and friendship had always been important to Butterfield. She recalls warmly her days as a member of the LGBT community. Her journey towards Christianity began with her friendship with a Presbyterian pastor and his wife. Beginning with a letter, the pastor, Ken, “initiated two years of bringing the church to me, a heathen.” Butterfield notes that the friendship did not begin with the Ken and wife inviting her to church or attempt to proselytize; instead, they appeared truly interested in her as a person. When she did first attend a church service, it was there that she felt most confronted with questions of her identity and who God wanted her to be. After her conversion, she remarks that “the church that had been praying for me for years” was there to support her.

10.3 “The Atheist’s Dilemma,” by Jordan Monge 10.3.1 Monge’s narrative Already as a middleschooler, Jordan Monge was an outspoken atheist who enjoyed intellectual fights with Christians. Her conversion took place, perhaps surprisingly, on the campus of Harvard University. It was there, on the campus of a university whose motto is Veritas (“truth”), that she came into contact with intellectual Christians, particularly one student, Joseph, who had written an essay for a student journal defending the existence of God. The two frequently debated philosophical subjects, for instance metaethics and the so-called Euthyphro dilemma (“Is something good because God declared it so, or does God merely identify the good?”). Eventually Monge became aware of her perspective’s own inconsistencies, and acknowledged that many of her philosophical opinions were grounded not on scientific certitude but on “faith,” such as her belief concerning the godless origin of the universe. Monge then began, almost grudgingly, to believe in God – although not the God of Christianity. “There was no intellectual shame in being a deist, after all, as I joined the respectable ranks of Thomas Jefferson and other Founding Fathers.” However, philosophical deism was not satisfying, and she soon began to develop a deeper appreciation for the Christian concepts of love and the Cross. She started reading the Bible, which confronted her with her sins: arrogance, selfishness, and the passing of “sexual boundaries that I’d promised I wouldn’t.” She continues,

242

Christianity Today Testimonies

“The fact that I had failed to adhere to my own ethical standards filled me with deep regret. Yet I could do nothing to right these wrongs. The Cross no longer looked merely like a symbol of love, but like the answer to an incurable need. When I read the Crucifixion scene in the Book of John for the first time, I wept.”

Despite being attracted to Christianity on this emotional level, “beauty and need,” she writes, “do not make something true.” She was not yet ready to become a Christian, because for her “the intellectual evidence was still insufficient.” So she read: she read the Qur’an, she read Richard Dawkins, she read Kant, and she read an array of theologians from Augustine to Thomas Aquinas to C.S. Lewis. After this exhaustive survey, she concluded that “the only reasonable course of action was to believe in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.” Following this moment of intellectual assent, however, “my head and my heart suddenly switched places.” She was no longer emotionally moved by the passages of scripture that had previously brought her to tears. She then, while taking a nature walk during a church retreat, began praying and “begged” God to reveal his presence. While she was not given a direct revelation or mystical experience, she interpreted her long hike – which included getting lost, mired in mud, and caught in a briar patch – as a metaphor for her spiritual journey: “I’ll make it through, though not without a few cuts.” It became clear to her that in this journey, intellectual knowledge would not suffice without the more important element of obedience. “I committed my life to Christ by being baptized on Easter Sunday, 2009,” writes Monge. Her “walk” has continued to progress, but not without struggles, which included depression. “I would yell, scream, cry at this God whom I had begun to love but didn’t always like,” she writes. “But never once did I have to sacrifice my intellect for my faith, and he blessed me most keenly through my doubt.” God revealed himself to her, she continues, through the Bible, prayer, friendship, and “Christian tradition” whenever she approached God earnestly. She is committed to following Christ until the end. “When confronted with the overwhelming body of evidence I encountered, when facing down the living God, it was the only rational course of action.” “I came to Harvard seeking Veritas,”4 she concludes. “Instead, he found me.”

10.3.2 Analysis of Monge’s narrative Monge’s narrative is the story of an intellectually curious, as well as stubborn, rationalist “skeptic” who through earnest and prolonged investigation of the 4 As well as being the Latin word for “truth,” veritas is also a reference to the popular Veritas Forum, a popular Christian organization which holds seminars, lectures, and debates on college campuses across the United States. The organization was originally founded on Harvard’s campus and has played a pivotal role in Monge’s own conversion and spiritual growth.

“The Atheist’s Dilemma,” by Jordan Monge

243

Christian faith is finally forced to give up her atheism and profess Christianity to be the most reasonable of intellectual positions. However, this intellectual conclusion leads Monge beyond the realm of the rational to that of the heart: she must become obedient to make this truth existentially true for her. Here, she must ask for God’s help. Up to this point, the implicit theology of Monge’s narrative perfectly matches Charles Finney’s theology. Where she diverts from this model, however, is her theological identification of her baptism as the moment she officially “committed [her] life” to Jesus Christ, not the moment when, while hiking in the forest, she prayed to God to reveal his presence. Mystical Presence God’s mystical presence plays a minor role in Monge’s narrative, which should not be surprising, since she herself admits to being of a deeply rationalist bent. Her pre-conversion experience of being moved to tears by the crucifixion narrative in John is not interpreted as an experience of God’s presence; and her long nature hike, in which she “felt disconnected from God” and “begged God to make it all click, as a test for me to know that he was there,” is not consummated by a mystical experience – as many readers of such narratives have come to expect. However, she also describes herself as having a deeply personal relationship with God, which includes yelling and screaming, and sees God as “reveal[ing] himself through scripture, prayer, friendships, and the Christian tradition.” Presence of Changed State Prior to her conversion, Monge was aware of morally faulty character traits that she had wanted to change – anger, arrogance, selfishness, hypocrisy – but felt powerless to do so on her own. Now, she believes that “the obedience required by true faith” has allowed her to overcome these moral faults. She views this as a process, however, and admits that she still often “struggles” in her “walk,” particularly in her bouts with depression. “I would yell, scream, cry at this God whom I had begun to love but didn’t always like.” Still, she knows she is on a “journey,” and has “committed to follow the way of Christ wherever it may lead.” Change in Divine Status There is no reference to the doctrines of justification, adoption, or the doctrine of hell. She does, however, refer to the Cross of Christ as being able to “right [her] wrongs,” although this statement appears to apply to specific earthly shortcomings. Importance of Moment of Regeneration It is very difficult to locate one Archimedean point on which her conversion stands. Many readers would probably view it as happening over a span of an evening, in which she prays to God to “make it click” for her, and then later

244

Christianity Today Testimonies

that day interprets her walk in the woods as a metaphor that her relationship with God is a “journey.” However, it is very difficult to assign the event to a moment, and the story contains no dramatic mystical experience, as the typical evangelical conversion experience does. Furthermore, Monge writes that she “committed my life to Christ” in the sacrament of baptism – in a sentence which stands as its own paragraph and even provides the exact date when it took place. Although she does not use the term “regeneration” or “new birth,” her narrative is reminiscent of Augustine’s Confessions, who despite long descriptions of his intellectual and spiritual journey, still views the moment of being “born again” as taking place in baptism, not in any subjective experience. Role of Free Will Like most conversion narratives, the question of free will is open to interpretation. As a rational thinker looking for intellectual fulfillment, Monge needed to be convinced of Christianity’s reasonableness before she would accept it as true. After she had been convinced of the truth of Christianity, she writes that she still needed to take the step towards “obedience.” However, in the final sentence, she writes that “[God] found me,” and not that she found God. Conversion Pattern Monge’s narrative is that of a skeptic whose intellectual objections to Christianity are slowly removed, allowing her to make the step from intellectual acceptance to a life of faith. The bulk of her story is of how she became intellectually convinced of Christianity’s truth before her conversion. The Role of the Bible and Doctrine The truth of the Bible, according to Monge, is on two different levels: first, there is its intellectual trustworthiness, the “evidence” of which she deduced before her becoming a Christian; however, she then noticed that she also needed to experience the truth of scripture in her “heart.” It was through reading the Bible that Monge was “confronted by my sin,” and began to view the Cross not merely as a “symbol” but perhaps even the answer to her problems. Moreover, through reading other theological texts she was confronted with the Christian conception of love, which appeared “beautiful” to her. Eventually, she was even convinced of the truth of the central biblical teaching of Jesus’ resurrection. Consequently, her conversion can be seen as taking the step from intellectual acceptance of the Bible and these doctrines to true “obedience.” Friendship and Community Like so many others, Monge’s first serious engagement with the Christian faith began with a friendship, which for her was an intellectual sparring partner at

“Antidote Poison,” by Ravi Zacharias

245

Harvard. Monge writes that “God revealed himself” to her through friendships and “the Christian tradition” – a term which could reference both the intellectual tradition as well as liturgy. The fact that she views baptism as the turning point of her conversion implies the centrality of the church community, although she does not expand upon this theme.

10.4 “Antidote Poison,” by Ravi Zacharias 10.4.1 Zacharias’ narrative Ravi Zacharias, a famous evangelical Christian apologist, was born and raised in India (a “world swimming in religion”) in a nominally Christian family. “My family and I went to church, celebrated Christmas, observed certain rituals on Good Friday,” he writes, “but I was never taught the gospel or its significance for my life.” As a young Indian, he was confronted by different attempts at “holiness,” for instance in the form of a (presumably Hindu) mystic who would wander the streets of the young boy’s neighborhood. Still, such religiosity was the “backdrop,” but “never the focus of my life.” As a teenager, Zacharias was a sports-obsessed, popular jokester, but was a failure in school and “impoverished when alone.” He began reflecting on the meaning of his life, and even attended a rally by Youth for Christ, an international evangelical Christian association founded by Billy Graham, where Zacharias came forward during the “invitation” to accept Jesus. However, he comments that he did not really “know what it meant,” and that his “half-hearted commitment” was “like a speck of salt being dropped into a vast tub of water.” He continued to be haunted by his academic failures, and at the age of 17 decided to commit suicide using poisons stolen from the university chemistry lab. The next morning, after his family had left, he took the poison, which induced violent vomiting, and “instinctively” he called for the family servant, who saved his life. Zacharias then awoke in a hospital bed, where he was visited by a leader from Youth for Christ, who brought him a Bible and began to read the 14th chapter of John: “Because I live, you also will live in me.” The word “live” struck him. He then prayed to Jesus, “if you are the One who gives life as it is meant to be, I want it. Please get me out of this hospital bed well, and I promise I will leave no stone unturned in my pursuit of truth.”

“Five days after being wheeled into the ER, I left a changed person,” he writes, with Youth for Christ becoming his new “spiritual home.” At this time a close friend of his, who was Hindu, also began attending one of their Bible studies and “gave his life to Christ.” Both young boys began studying the Bible intensely.

246

Christianity Today Testimonies

Zacharias then jumps to the present day, where he, “as an apologist preaching in more than 70 countries,” sees God as “the Grand Weaver, capable of creating an unexpected and beautiful pattern out of a broken life.” After his own conversion, his parents also subsequently made “a public commitment to Christ” – with the change in his father being “the most dramatic conversion I have ever witnessed.” Now, he concludes, he understands what it means to be “immersed in a culture of religion without asking questions,” yet still being saved by Christ, “who rescues us from the illusion of religion to the promise and hope of receiving life from our Creator and Savior.”

10.4.2 Analysis of Zacharias’ narrative The fact that Ravi Zacharias is a theologian – although his form of evangelical apologetics is not necessarily of the academic theological sort – leads to his narrative being heavily theoretical in comparison to the first two published in the Christianity Today series. Borrowing the terminology of Gumbrecht, one could say that in this narrative there is little presencelanguage, and much interpretation-language. Furthermore, the narrative’s theology is clearly consistent with that of Finney, hence its evangelistic bent, functioning as a plea to any reader who may not be a Christian to make a decision for Christ. Mystical Presence While he refers to the “sunburnt mystic” who fascinated (and terrified) him as a child, Zacharias’ own conversion contains little that could be labeled mystical. His first decision to accept Christ was, by his own admission, “halfhearted,” and he gives no hint of feeling any sort of spiritual presence after making it. After his hospital-bed conversion, Zacharias writes that he was “a changed man,” but gives no description of the experience. The only language that could be interpreted as a mystical experience would be his statement that the word “live,” from John 14, “hit me like a ton of bricks” – this interpretation, however, would be a stretch. Presence of Changed State Zacharias writes that he was “a changed man” afterwards, and that God is “capable of creating an unexpected and beautiful pattern out of a broken life,” but gives little description of particular struggles other than difficulties in school and his suicidal thoughts. Perhaps the most significant change Zacharias experienced was that his life now had meaning. Prior to conversion, the meaning of his had been centered around sports (particularly cricket and tennis); afterwards he began to read the Bible voraciously, and even went on to preach as a traveling apologist.

“Antidote Poison,” by Ravi Zacharias

247

Change in Divine Status In Zacharias’ final sentence, the statement that Jesus Christ “rescues us from the illusion of religion to the promise and hope of receiving life from our Creator and Savior” is a reference to forensic justification (although it also implies the other elements of regeneration). Change in one’s divine status is also implicit in the style of evangelism that he experienced as a member of Youth for Christ, as well as his use of the term “gospel,” which implies that Jesus Christ has died for our salvation. Still, in the body of the narrative, this doctrine does not play a major role. Importance of Moment of Regeneration The importance of recalling a specific moment is clearly important, since it is connected to the moment in which one makes a decision for Christ. Zacharias recalls the exact words he said: “‘Jesus,’ I prayed inwardly, ‘if you are the One who gives life as it is meant to be, I want it. Please get me out of this hospital bed well, and I promise I will leave no stone unturned in my pursuit of truth.’” He does not go on to describe how he felt at this moment, since most important is the fact that in it he asked Jesus to come into his life – and this time with true intentions, as opposed to his earlier, inauthentic conversion. He also later mentions his parents converting, writing that his father’s was “the most dramatic conversion I have ever witnessed.” Role of Free Will It is clear that for Zacharias, like Finney, a “commitment to Christ” is necessary, which implies an active movement of the will. Interestingly, Zacharias made two of these in his life: once as a young teenager, and then again at the age of 17, following his suicide attempt. The difference is that while the first was “half-hearted,” the second, prayed after he had nearly lost his life, was in earnest. Here he reflects Finney’s concern for a genuine, truly “intended” decision. Zacharias’ decision to commit suicide provides a stark contrast to what he sees as his subsequent life-saving decision of accepting Jesus Christ. Now, as “as an apologist preaching in more than 70 countries,” his goal is to convince others to make a decision for Christ. Conversion Pattern While the bulk of Zacharias’ narrative is dedicated to his life prior to becoming a Christian, he does not portray these events as a journey leading up to conversion. Even his involvement in church and youth camps is dismissed as having a minimal effect, as is his own family’s faith. If there is any event that can be seen as having a preparatory effect on Zacharias’ conversion, it is his abortive suicide attempt. Immediately after this, while in the hospital, he decided that he did not want to merely “live” physically, but also to live for Jesus.

248

Christianity Today Testimonies

The Role of the Bible and Doctrine The biblical text is central to his conversion. Indeed, it was directly after hearing a passage from John’s Gospel that Zacharias prayed to Jesus to give him “life.” He then began studying Paul’s epistle to the Romans intently with his friend, using a Biblical commentary they found on top of a garbage heap. Friendship and Church Community Like Finney, Zacharias downplays his Christian upbringing, viewing it as empty ritual because it lacked the “gospel.” He mentions that he attended church regularly with his family, but later informs the reader that his parents had not yet experienced true conversion. For Zacharias, as for many evangelicals, church attendance is spiritually useless unless one has been born again. Far more important than Sunday services was his reading of scripture with his close friend and with other members of Youth for Christ. It was this community – and not a church – which mentored Zacharias after his conversion and which prepared him to be an evangelist.

10.5 “Forgiving Iran,” by John Majid (as told by Kate Harris) 10.5.1 Majid’s narrative The story of the Iranian John Majid (whose full name has been withheld, presumably for protection) begins like the curse of Job. Eight of his brothers and sisters were murdered, often in his own sight (“I witnessed this”). His sister-in–law, then two months pregnant, was also brutally killed – “even though Islamic law expressly forbids killing a pregnant woman.” His mother and lone surviving sister were imprisoned. Many of his friends died in battle. Majid’s father, who was spared the scourge of death, suffered from Alzheimer’s, with his son now as his only caregiver. “Everyone I loved,” writes Majid, “– every person I cared about – died or was killed or taken to prison.” All of these events, with the exception of his father’s dementia, had a political cause: the 1979 Iranian revolution. His experienced in the aftermath of this event filled Majid with a profound, seething hatred. “I was filled with rage,” he writes, “because I saw everyone as responsible for my family’s death—the shah, the new leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the revolutionaries, those resisting revolution. It seemed everyone had hate in their hearts, that there was no one with clean hands. I wanted to take revenge upon so many people—especially the cousins and close friends who had turned on our family and aided in their deaths and imprisonment.”

“Forgiving Iran,” by John Majid (as told by Kate Harris)

249

Relief from this overwhelming rage came only through a mystical vision – experienced following a suicidal driving rampage which ended in Majid crashing his automobile into a wall – which came to Majid while standing on the edge of a hill, looking over a valley: “As I looked down at the valley, a vision came over me. I saw thousands of people praying for their enemies instead of fighting. From that moment, the hate inside me began to weaken. The forgiveness started to heal me. From that moment, Somebody took me and helped me, though I was still very confused. I still had many questions, but for some reason, I was able to look at people and say, ‘I will forgive you.’”

This vision, while not a conversion, enabled Majid to live not only a functional but also a successful life. He married, started a business (which grew into multiple businesses), and even “bought cars and land and swimming pools.” Still, however, he “had no peace.” Majid’s lack of spiritual fulfillment, in contrast to his material bounty, led him to the process of what many evangelicals today call “searching.” He travelled to India “to see if Buddhism might help,” but was led instead to Mother Teresa’s ministry in Calcutta, where he was given the task of caring for an old man with Alzheimer’s (“just like my father”). Here was Majid, a wealthy businessman looking for spiritual fulfillment, in an Indian church “helping someone for nothing.” Theologically, Majid found the church both foreign and intriguing. He tells the story of visiting a baptismal ceremony (“It was all candles, many candles, and singing and clapping”) and not understanding why the congregation was so happy. “I couldn’t understand this place,” he writes, “but a loved being there.” This trip did not lead to an immediate conversion, but instead “lingered” in his mind and led to further spiritual seeking. Afterwards he took the Muslim hajj (pilgrimage to Mecca), which he describes as “a time of insight and forgiveness, even though there was still much I did not know.” It was during this trip that he finally forgave an uncle who had executed one of Majid’s brothers in prison. It was also following his hajj that Majid decided “I would do anything to find peace.” He sold all his business and gave the profits to his family, deciding that “I would follow any sign God gave me.” One sign, which Majid interprets as a “miracle,” was for the Iranian government to allow him to visit the United States in 2010 to visit his sister (now out of prison). Along with his mother, who was also visiting, he attended an English class at a local Christian church, which immediately brought back memories of his time in Calcutta. “I went with her and thought, This smells of God. I smell the smell of Calcutta. I kept going to the class.” Then, on one Sunday, Majid decided to attend a worship service, where he once again experienced people singing joyfully. Although he struggled with his English, he was able to understand one word: “Iran.” “I realized,” he continues, “that the 1,000 people gathered there with their heads bowed, on their knees—they were praying for Iran.” He continues:

250

Christianity Today Testimonies

“This is the Iran that teaches ‘death to America,’ the Iran that wants to kill your citizens and neighbors with weapons. And you pray for them? Is this heaven? Are these angels? Thousands of people praying for their enemies, showing love instead of hate. Since I was a young man, this had been my vision.”

Majid immediately began “laughing, crying, and dancing” at the back of the church. He had finally found true peace. “I finally understood this was a place where I could know God, where I could know peace,” he writes. Shortly afterwards (“on May 9, 2010, at that church”) he was baptized. He began reading the Bible, particularly the Gospel of John, which appeared to be particularly relevant to his situation. “I would read verses and think, Yes, all of this happened to me.” The Bible was not a mere book but instead his “life on the page.” “This is true,” writes Majid in a reference to the Johannine parable of the lost sheep: “I am the one lost sheep whom he went out to find.” “When I see how good God is,” he continues, “how powerful and close is his Son Jesus Christ who died for me, how this made sense of all my pain and my hate and helped me understand how to forgive myself and others once and for all—often my Bible is wet from my tears.” It was through Jesus Christ that Majid was able to know true forgiveness, and it was Jesus Christ who “saved” him. “Now,” he concludes, “I understand.”

10.5.2 Analysis of John Majid’s narrative While many conversion narratives include personal tragedy, and even death, John Majid’s story begins with a tale of inexpressible horror by the hand of a totalitarian regime. That hate, rage, and suicidal thoughts dominated his early life is understandable. Furthermore, unlike most Christian conversion narratives, Majid’s is not one of conversion from atheism, agnosticism, or nominal Christianity to evangelical Christianity but instead from another world religion, Islam. Yet he is not particularly critical of the Muslim religion: he describes himself as having true spiritual experiences (for instance his vision) while a Muslim, as well as making spiritual progress (for instance with forgiveness); still, however, he “had no peace” until finding Christianity. Unlike the first two narratives, Majid’s has a far less rationalistic bent: he is not concerned with particular arguments against the faith or with certain doctrines, but instead with finding healing. Mystical Presence Majid’s narrative is one of mystical longing, of searching for “the scent of God,” as he calls it. After an unsuccessful suicide attempt, he was overwhelmed by a vision whose message was forgiveness. This first vision, however, was not his conversion, but led him along a journey which ended in an American Christian congregation, where he had another mystical experience. Here after

“Forgiving Iran,” by John Majid (as told by Kate Harris)

251

realizing that the congregation was praying for Iran, Majid began “crying, laughing, and dancing” out of happiness. He describes the experience as “peace” and “heaven.” His final statement, “Now I understand,” is not a remark concerning the rational truth of Christianity, but instead one about his own illumination. Presence of Changed State Prior to his conversion, Majid began to slowly learn forgiveness, as well as accumulate extensive wealth, but he still had “no peace.” It was only after his conversion, baptism, Bible study that he truly understood complete forgiveness and was finally able to “ma[ke] sense of all my pain and my hate and helped me understand how to forgive myself and others once and for all.” Change in Divine Status Majid writes that Jesus died for him and “saved” him, with the term saved applying to both his earthly life and spiritual status. He also mentions his baptism, which marks his official entry into the church. Importance of Moment of Regeneration The moment in which Majid experiences “peace,” “heaven,” and “finally understood” that Christianity would enable him to “know God,” is the climax of his narrative and can be reasonably interpreted as the moment in which he crossed the threshold into Christian faith. Interestingly, however, the one date that Majid provides is not of this moment, but instead that of his baptism. Role of Free Will Majid’s narrative leaves speculative questions of free will open to interpretation. For instance, he does not state that he made a “decision” for Jesus Christ; instead, he describes attending a Christian worship service and being overwhelmed with joy. It would appear from this description that Majid understands his conversion more as an experience of passivity. Conversion Pattern Most of the narrative deals with Majid’s spiritual journey, which is that of a seeker. Particularly noteworthy is the positive role that his Muslim faith played in his path to Christianity, although it ultimately provided him with “no peace.” He views himself as having had an authentic – though incomplete – relationship with God while still a practicing Muslim. For instance, Majid’s first mystical vision, after his car accident, which was of “thousands of people praying for their enemies instead of fighting” and which was what first enabled him to begin forgiving others, was given to him while still a Muslim. And later he took a hajj (the pilgrimage to Mecca, which is viewed as one of the five Pillars of Islam), which he describes as a “time of insight and forgiveness,” and which led to his decision to become a radical

252

Christianity Today Testimonies

follower of God. This journey culminated finally in an American church with his conversion to Christianity. The Role of the Bible and Doctrine Unlike the first two “testimonies,” Majid approaches the Bible from a standpoint that is far less concerned with correct doctrine and more with mystical experience. It is clear that the Bible is deeply important to him, to the point of “often [being] wet from my tears,” as he writes in the final paragraph. He comments that the “Book of John,” by which he most likely is referring to the Gospel, affected him on a deeply personal level. He also develops a personal “narrative theology” of scripture, seen in how he applies the parable of the lost sheep5 to himself: “I am the one lost sheep whom he went out to find.” Friendship and the Church Community Prior to conversion, Majid experienced Mother Teresa’s community in Calcutta, where he encountered a selfless form of care for the sick as well as mysterious ceremonies such as baptism. Although baffled by this community, he could not deny their happiness, and his experience inspired him to continue his spiritual journey. His next time in a Christian church, in the United States, reminded him of Calcutta – which he expresses, interestingly, using the metaphor of smell. Witnessing this community praying for Iran – “the Iran that teaches ‘death to America’” – was for him a revelation: the revelation of a community of true forgiveness, a “place where I could know God, where I could know peace.” The sacrament of baptism, of being grafted into this church community, is also important to Majid, seen in the fact that he provides the exact date and makes clear that it was in the same church that he had been attending.

5 Cf. Luke 15:3–7: “So [Jesus] told them this parable: 4 ‘Which one of you, having a hundred sheep and losing one of them, does not leave the ninety-nine in the wilderness and go after the one that is lost until he finds it? 5 When he has found it, he lays it on his shoulders and rejoices. 6 And when he comes home, he calls together his friends and neighbors, saying to them, ‘Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep that was lost.’ 7 Just so, I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance.’” Cf. also Matthew 18:12–14. Majid apparently fuses this parable with Jesus’ description of himself as the “good shepherd” in John 10:11–16, since he references it in the context of discussing his reading of John’s Gospel.

“The Golden Fish,” by Erich Metaxas

253

10.6 “The Golden Fish,” by Erich Metaxas 10.6.1 Metaxas’ narrative Eric Metaxas begins his conversion story with the moment of his regeneration. “Is it possible for one’s life to change literally overnight?” he asks. The answer, for Metaxas, is yes: at the age of 25, “God spoke to me” through a dream, using “the secret vocabulary of my heart.” “The next morning,” he continues, “all was new and newness.” The narrative breaks at this point, shifting to Metaxas’ pre-conversion story. The son of European immigrants (Greek father and German mother), Metaxas grew up as a child in New York, attending a Greek Orthodox school, and then moved in the fourth grade to rural Connecticut. Before his conversion, he writes, “three themes [were] at the heart of my identity:” that he was Greek, that he loved freshwater fishing, and that he “was deeply committed to the life of the mind and the search for meaning.” Metaxas then goes on to tell the story of his “half-hearted” search for spiritual meaning as a student at Yale. He had a blossoming social life, which included editing a campus humor magazine, singing in musicals, and writing short fiction, and he was even elected Class Day speaker at graduation. Despite his Greek Orthodox upbringing, during these times Metaxas’ Christianity was “essentially nominal,” he writes, which led to his becoming a spiritual drifter. He dabbled in psychoanalytic spirituality, drawn particularly to the Jungian idea that the “collective unconscious” was some kind of “God force.” He even appropriated symbols from fishing in order to describe his own beliefs about spirituality, which he viewed as “the symbolic image of drilling through ice on the surface of a lake,” with “the goal of life and all religions to drill through this ice.” It was a “vague,” “impersonal,” and “Eastern” spiritual creed, he writes, whose innocuousness and moral unobtrusiveness appealed to young college graduates such as himself. After college, however, Metaxas was lost. His literary efforts were mostly unsuccessful, as was his romantic relationship, and his drifting from different jobs and places of residence led the young graduate “to that singularly humiliating cul-de-sac of moving back in with one’s parents.” Metaxas’ experience after this change of location was, in his own words, “a seriously awful time.” He was not only searching for a job, but himself. His romantic relationship, never good to begin with, was now long-distance and faltering. When he was able to finally find employment, it was in a windowless cubicle at a local factory, proofreading chemical manuals. As depressing a job as it was for the young humanities graduate, it was also here, “alone in the belly of a corporate whale, that I would finally consider the question of God.” Metaxas had the fortune of befriending a coworker, Ed Tuttle, a young graphic designer who was also “one of those born-again Christians” that Yale grads had been taught to view with a skeptical eye.

254

Christianity Today Testimonies

Despite this prejudice, their month-long discussion on matters of faith was a welcome intellectual respite from the dreariness of his surroundings. However, whenever Ed invited him to church, Metaxas declined. Still, Ed remained determined. “Perhaps you don’t really know God as well as you think, Eric,” he once quipped – a statement which the young Metaxas found offensive. “Anyone with a brain knew that even if it were all true, we certainly couldn’t know it,” Metaxas replied. Yet Ed insisted that one could know God, and recommended prayer as a start – which Metaxas occasionally attempted, although he thought praying to a God whose existence he doubted “didn’t make sense.” In June of 1988, however, Metaxas experienced a watershed moment when his uncle had a stroke and went into a coma. Ed informed Metaxas that he and others were praying for his uncle, and then eventually asked him if he could pray for his uncle with Metaxas. “I had never done anything like this,” he writes, “but it couldn’t hurt.” Then, while praying in a “ghastly fluorescent-lit conference room,” Metaxas felt what he describes as “a transcendent shift”: “It was as though a window had been opened onto another realm and I’d felt the faintest touch of some heavenly breeze. When it was over, I opened my eyes. What was that?”

It was around this time that “a slight shift was taking place in my mind, too.” He began reading M. Scott Peck’s People of the Lie, which led him to ponder the existence of evil, as well as Thomas Merton’s The Seven Storey Mountain and Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s The Cost of Discipleship. It was also during this time that Metaxas had the dream described at the beginning of the narrative. In the dream, he was ice-fishing with a childhood friend and the friend’s father, when a fish poked its nose out of the hole they had cut into the ice (which, of course, virtually never happens in real life). After reaching down and picking up the fish (“a large pickerel or perhaps even a pike”), it appeared to be golden. “But then,” continues Metaxas, “I realized that it didn’t merely look golden, it actually was golden.” He knew, from his Greek Orthodox upbringing, that the Christian symbol of the fish was a reference to Jesus: “ixthys – Jesus Christ Son of God Our Savior.” “God,” in his interpretation of the dream, “was one-upping me in the language of my own symbol system.” He explains: “I had wanted to touch inert water, to touch the so-called ‘collective unconscious,’ but he had something more for me: this was his Son, a living Person, Jesus Christ. And I realized in the dream that he was real and had come from the other side and now I was holding him there in the bright sunlight and at long last my search was over. And I was flooded with joy.”

The next day, he informed his friend Ed about the dream. When Ed asked for Metaxas’ interpretation, his answer was something “I never would have said before”: he had “accepted Jesus.” As he told Ed these words, he was “flooded

“The Golden Fish,” by Erich Metaxas

255

with the same joy” from his dream the night before. “And I’ve had that joy with me,” he concludes, “for the past 25 years.” 10.6.2 Analysis of Metaxas’ narrative Metaxas’ narrative is in many ways typical of the genre: the subject, a young person with a nominally Christian upbringing who is on the search for spiritual fulfillment, suddenly finds him- or herself in the midst of a crisis of meaning, which is overcome only through a conversion experience in which the subject discovers a true relationship with God. What is strikingly atypical about Metaxas’ narrative, however, is the fact that this conversion takes place within a dream. This is of obvious biographical interest, considering that he had a fascination with dreams which began during college, when he delved into psychoanalytic forms of spirituality. Consequently, Metaxas views his conversion-dream as a direct answer to (or even a “one-upping” of) his earlier spirituality, and as proof of a deeply personal Christian God, as opposed to an impersonal “force” which does not involve a story, community, and moral expectations. Mystical Presence The primary encounter with God’s mystical presence is the dream, which Metaxas gives narrative priority by placing both at the beginning and end of his testimony. Noteworthy is the fact that he became a Christian in the dream itself, as he writes that “I realized in the dream that he was real and had come from the other side and now I was holding him there in the bright sunlight and at long last my search was over” (italics mine). God “spoke” to Metaxas in this dream, which he describes not as an audible voice but instead using “the secret vocabulary of my heart.” Furthermore, the dream is marked by the classic light imagery found in Spener and Edwards, among others, although here it is literal and not metaphorical: a “dazzlingly bright sunlight” illuminated the golden fish. After coming to the realization of what the symbols meant, he was – all the while still dreaming – “flooded with joy.” After waking up, “all was new and newness.” Interestingly, Metaxas also experienced a foretaste of this mystical experience prior to his conversion when, while praying with Ed, “a transcendent shift seemed to take place,” which gave him the feeling he was seeing “another realm.” Presence of Changed State Metaxas devotes little attention to specific changes in his lifestyle, but it is clear that he had previously been unhappy in his search for meaning, while after conversion he is deeply fulfilled. One example of this change is that he was able to say he had “accepted Jesus,” a statement which he would have never said before “and would have cringed to hear anyone else say.” The “joy” which he

256

Christianity Today Testimonies

describes as immediately following his dream and continuing until today can be interpreted as a description of both God’s presence as well as Metaxas’ changed state. Change in Divine Status This element is primarily implicit in the narrative. It is implied in the ichthys symbol, which refers to Christ’s salvific role. Importance of Moment of Regeneration As has been previously mentioned, the moment in which his “life change[d] literally overnight” is central for Metaxas, seen in its occupying both the beginning and ending of the narrative. Although he views his life as having changed “literally overnight” due to this dream, he mentions nothing about his life after the conversion moment except that he still has the same “joy” 25 years later. Role of Free Will Metaxas writes that he “accepted Jesus” in his dream, which is an interesting interpretation considering it is debatable how much free will one is capable of exercising in such a state. Moreover, in his description of the dream he describes himself as “realizing” the dream’s meaning – namely, that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and Savior – which would seem to lend to a more passive view of his slumberous conversion moment. These factors lead to the conclusion that the role of free will in Metaxas’ narrative is more complicated than his language of “decision” implies. Conversion Pattern Like John Majid, Metaxas portrays himself as a spiritual drifter prior to his becoming a Christian, yet unlike Majid he views his early spirituality as a puerile expression of his own self-centeredness and not as a spiritually edifying experience. Still, God was able to use the symbolism of his former spirituality to communicate with Metaxas, and he also views God as communicating to him prior to his becoming a Christian via Ed. For instance, while praying with Ed, Metaxas writes that “felt the faintest touch of some heavenly breeze.” The Role of the Bible and Biblical references Surprisingly, the Bible plays little to no explicit role in Metaxas’ narrative, yet it is present in the background. Even before his conversion, he appears to be biblically literate, which is most likely the result of his Orthodox schooling, combined with his later discussions with Ed. This biblical literacy allowed him to recognize the meaning of the symbolism in his conversion-dream.

“My Crash Course on Jesus,” by Casey Cease

257

Friendship and the Church Community Like many other narratives, an underlying theme for Metaxas is that of friendship. It was with an evangelical colleague, Ed Tuttle, who challenged him to “know God” on a deeper level. The fact that Ed and other Christians were praying regularly for Metaxas’ sick father “astounded” him, and it was while in prayer with Ed that he had he first felt the presence of God, although just “the faintest touch.” Institutional Christianity, however, is not seen as having any significant effect on his later conversion, even though he attended a Greek Orthodox church “every Sunday.”

10.7 “My Crash Course on Jesus,” by Casey Cease 10.7.1 Cease’s narrative The opening two sentences of Case’s narrative provide a theological summary: “When I was 17, I was in a car crash that would change the course of my life. It brought me to nothing, and then God made me new.” The event took place in 1995, while throwing a party at his parents’ house. “After years of anxiety and depression, a recent breakup, and growing discontent with life,” he writes, “I coped in the way I had done many times before and turned to alcohol.” Late into the party, with “an overwhelming urge to leave,” he got into his brand new Camaro and sped through the neighborhood, “consumed” by “emptiness and hopelessness.” He then turned around to go home. “I woke up covered in glass,” is the next thing he remembers. In the midst of chaos and screaming voices, Cease only remembers asking who he hit and then being escorted into an ambulance. In the hospital, he learned from a police officer that there had been a fatality: it was one of Cease’s friends, John, who had been in the street when Cease returned in his car. He had died on impact. If Cease had thought his life was “falling apart” before this, now he was “in the deepest, dirtiest, darkest pit of my despair.” It was at this lowest point, however, “that God began to make himself known to me.” Cease then informs the reader that he “was raised in a ‘Christian’ family” and had grown up attending church. “I prayed, sang the worship songs, and believed that I would go to heaven.” However, as a teenage he found himself increasingly doubting Christianity and instead turning to drugs and alcohol. The Christians he knew, he writes, were either hypocrites or “didn’t talk to people like me.” Still, he “longed for direction” after the tragedy, so he started going back to church, where he was turned off by the youth group’s “goofy games” and unwelcoming students. At this point, he entered into an “extremely frustrating” spiritual phase, filled with “questions about the

258

Christianity Today Testimonies

Bible” and doubts concerning whether God could truly love and accept him. He starting reading through the entire New Testament, but this did not help: instead, he oscillated “between forth between self-condemnation and false hope in my good behavior.” “The more I tried to be a Christian, the emptier I felt,” he lamented. “The more I tried to figure faith out, the more confused I became.” There were times when he wanted to abandon thinking about Christianity, yet something continued to draw his mind back to Jesus. During his senior year of high school, he attended a revival at a local Methodist church, in which the guest preacher recounted the biblical passage about Jesus’ healing of a paralytic at the Pool of Bethesda (John 5:1–15). In this story, Jesus asks a man who has been lying beside the pool for 38 years if he wants to be well, to which the paralytic, in Cease’s paraphrase, “began making excuses about why he couldn’t get into the water.” Jesus, however, “healed him on the spot.” After telling this story, the preacher asked the crowd, “Do you want to be well?” Cease writes that he had always been “paralyzed by fear, by depression, by pride” and always had an “excuse” for behaving the way he did. That night, Cease asked Jesus to make him “well.” “It was a quiet moment between the Lord and me, but that day he began to open my eyes, open my ears, and soften my heart. He made me his own.” This conversion did not solve all his problems. He was still “a little unstable” as a new believer, but “the God who justifies us also sanctifies us,” so Cease made steady improvement and “began to realize that my sins were forgiven, not because of anything I had done but because of what Jesus accomplished on the cross.” “God purchased me completely,” he continues: “I belonged to him.” Cease reflects that it was because of Jesus that he was able to face the consequences of killing his friend courageously. He began talking to teenagers about the mistakes he had made, “encourage[ing] others away from sin and toward Jesus.” God “transformed” Cease, making him into “his very son,” forgiving him and giving his life “hope and purpose.” “God has changed and is still changing me,” he writes, concluding with a profession of faith: “I am confident that Jesus is the Son of God, that he is able to forgive sins, and that he is in the business of making broken people brand new.” 10.7.2 Analysis of Cease’s narrative Cease’s story is, structurally, a classic contemporary evangelical conversion narrative: a young nominal Christian, whose care-free lifestyle leads to substance abuse and then personal tragedy, all the while haunted by feelings of spiritual emptiness, and who finds redemption and peace only after asking Jesus Christ into his heart. His final sentence provides a simple, yet wellcrafted theological summary of his doctrine of regeneration: “While I still lack answers, I am confident that Jesus is the Son of God, that he is able to forgive sins, and that he is in the business of making broken people brand new.” Like

“My Crash Course on Jesus,” by Casey Cease

259

this credo, Cease’s narrative is heavy on theological interpretation and clearly has evangelistic intent, which is not surprising, given that the author is a professional pastor and evangelist. Mystical Presence This aspect is given very little attention in comparison to Spener’s other two elements. As dramatic as Cease’s pre-conversion narrative is, his moment of conversion was “a quiet moment,” without any outpouring of the Spirit or even overflowing emotion. However, it was a moment “between me and the Lord,” as he describes it, implying the presence of the Holy Spirit (whom, interestingly, is not mentioned explicitly anywhere in the text). Furthermore, the doctrine of spiritual illumination is clearly reflected in his statement that God “began to open my eyes [and] my ears.” Presence of Changed State Cease specifically uses the theological language of sanctification, and this doctrine is referenced throughout his text. “God has changed me and is still changing me,” according to Cease. God has “soften[ed] [his] heart,” “transformed” him, and given him “purpose.” God changed his old, selfish “desires” into a new desire to follow Jesus. The narrative makes it clear that this was, and still is, a process: he was spiritually “unstable” in the years following his conversion, but his “heart” had been “softened,” enabling him to gradually learn, through discipleship, how to live the Christian life on a daily basis. This change enabled him to confront the consequences of his actions “with courage,” which included accepting punishment and then going on to tell others of the dangers of drinking and driving. It also includes telling others the story of his conversion, which he does for Christianity Today. Change in Divine Status This purely theological, non-present element receives more attention in Cease’s narrative than in the previous testimonies. Cease writes that as a youth he “believed that I would go to heaven,” yet his mentioning of this statement is meant to put that very sentiment into question: just because someone believes he or she will go to heaven does not mean that it is truly the case. Furthermore, Cease specifically uses the language of justification, atonement, and adoption in multiple sections of the text. He writes that God “made me his own,” that his “sins were forgiven … because of what Jesus accomplished on the cross,” and that “God purchased me completely” so that he now “belonged to him.” He is now God’s “very son.” It is this change in status, enabled by Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross, which Cease sees as providing the basis for the change in his nature and the realignment of his life. Importance of Moment of Regeneration Cease does not portray his conversion moment as overly dramatic. He asked

260

Christianity Today Testimonies

Jesus to “make [him] well,” but he “didn’t pray a special prayer or speak in tongues or fill out a card or even cry.” It was a “quiet moment,” but also the beginning of a transformation. By emphasizing the low-key nature of the conversion moment, the pastor Cease is making a theological point: namely, that one need not have an overtly mystical – or even emotional – experience in order to be truly born again. That he feels compelled to make such a point reveals much about the expectations of the theological culture in which he finds himself. Role of Free Will Cease dates his conversion moment to a Methodist revival service in which the preacher recounted the passage on Jesus healing a paralytic at the pool of Bethsaida (John 5:2–96). In this passage, Jesus asks the paralytic, who has been waiting for 38 years beside a pool with purportedly healing powers, if wants “to be made well,” to which the man replies that yes he does, but he is too slow to be the first to enter the water and thus be healed. Cease (and apparently also the preacher) interprets the paralytic’s response as “making excuses,” which is a curious reading considering that the man was unable to move (which happens to be a very good excuse), as well as the fact that the text gives no indication that he knew who Jesus was. However, Cease sees this passage as applying to himself. “I always had an excuse for why I did what I did,” he writes, but now the preacher had confronted him with the same question Jesus asked the paralytic: “Do you want to be well?” After the preacher had directed this question to the crowd, Cease “ask[ed] Jesus to make me well.” Like the message of the revival preacher, Cease’s entire conversion story can be seen as a similar plea to others to make a decision for Christ. Conversion Pattern Cease’s is one of the few Christianity Today testimonies that reflect the classical Puritan morphology of conversion, reflected in statements such as “I bounced back and forth between self-condemnation and false hope in my good behavior,” and “The more a tried to be a Christian, the emptier I felt.” He could not “figure out” the faith on his own, and writes that he would have given up had it not been for a “gnawing in my heart.” It was this steadily growing frustration which culminated his conversion moment – which, unlike in the Puritan tradition, Cease sees as having been an active decision.

6 “Now in Jerusalem by the Sheep Gate there is a pool, called in Hebrew Beth-zatha, which has five porticoes. 3 In these lay many invalids—blind, lame, and paralyzed. 5 One man was there who had been ill for thirty-eight years. 6 When Jesus saw him lying there and knew that he had been there a long time, he said to him, ‘Do you want to be made well?’ 7 The sick man answered him, ‘Sir, I have no one to put me into the pool when the water is stirred up; and while I am making my way, someone else steps down ahead of me.’ 8 Jesus said to him, ‘Stand up, take your mat and walk.’ 9 At once the man was made well, and he took up his mat and began to walk.”

“Forgiving the Man Who Murdered Mom,” by Everett L. Worthington, Jr. 261

The Role of the Bible and Doctrine Cease writes that before he was converted, he “struggled with many questions about the Bible,” but was at the same time captivated by it. After his car accident, he resolved to read the New Testament, which he did “every night”; but still, the Bible confused him. It was the sermon on chapter 5 of John’s Gospel that finally led him to ask Jesus to “make [him] well,” just as he had done for the paralytic beside the pool. Although this passage is the only one explicitly cited by Cease, his testimony is filled with biblical terminology and doctrine, such as sin, forgiveness, salvation, discipleship, and the specific confession that “Jesus is the Son of God.” Friendship and the Church Community Before his conversion, Cease was very skeptical about Christians and church. “The Christians I knew,” he writes, “either went to church but then abused drugs and alcohol the way I did, or went to church and didn’t talk to people like me.” His own family is described as “a ‘Christian’ family that attended church off and on,” with scare quotes implying hypocrisy and/or a lukewarm faith. He attended youth group meetings, but found them “goofy” and the others kids unfriendly. However, it was in a church – which Cease specifically mentions as Methodist – that he finally became a Christian. Moreover, after his conversion God brought him “wise and faithful men to correct me and disciple me,” drawing attention to the necessity of Christian community for the sanctification process. That Cease only mentions “men” is intriguing, and most likely reflects a more conservative theological tradition which views only males as called to church leadership positions.

10.8 “Forgiving the Man Who Murdered Mom,” by Everett L. Worthington, Jr. 10.8.1 Worthington’s narrative Worthington, a psychology professor, is also an avid hiker who grew up “a hop, skip, and a jump” from Tennessee’s Great Smoky Mountains National Park. He compares the “many ways to walk with God” with different types of mountain trails: “Some … are smooth, like being born and raised in a Christian home and making a natural transition to personal faith. Others … take people so far from the mountain peak that they forget where they are headed. They slog through a leg-wearying, backwrenching hike until they suddenly break out into freedom.”

262

Christianity Today Testimonies

His own story, he continues, is comparable to a cave trail: one moves in darkness, only catching glimpses of light through “eyes” of the cave, until one has reached the next vista. “My walk with God,” he writes, “has been a series of vistas at which I changed direction.” Worthington grew up poor (“but not dirt-floor poor”), the son of a railroad worker and a mentally instable mother. “Nonetheless,” his parents “transmitted … a rudimentary faith” to Worthington and his siblings, which “developed over the years” and enabled him to “face difficult turns on the climb.” He married as a young adult (“a crucial event in my spiritual journey”) and soon afterward joined the Navy, where he “made a commitment to Christ” and “got involved with church,” even leading a youth group. “But I didn’t know Jesus personally,” he writes, “and I didn’t know that I didn’t know him.” It was while working at a youth conference in California that Worthington first heard about a “personal relationship with Jesus,” a phrase which confused him. “Would you like to understand?” a pastor asked him. The two men then prayed together, along with a small group of others, that Worthington would experience this relationship with Jesus. During this prayer Worthington was filled with an uncontrollable laughter. “I experienced Jesus’ joy for the first time,” he writes. It was “the invisible presence of the Holy Spirit,” which had been there throughout the time he “had been walking between conversions up that mountain.” Later, he learned more about this Spirit through an encounter at a New Year’s party with a man, Nick, who was diagnosed with terminal cancer but was healed after others prayed for him. Worthington writes that after hearing about this miracle, “I was once again converted, this time to know an active, powerful God.” After this, his narrative then takes a radical turn. On another New Year’s day, later on in his life, he was informed that his mother had been brutally murdered by burglars. “As a clinician I had counseled many couples to forgive, and had written several books about the psychological and spiritual dimensions of forgiving,” he writes. “Yet my faith and my identity were tested severely.” Attempting to forgive his mother’s killers “was like standing in a storm” at the top of a mountain. However, the “personal relationship with Jesus” that had “transformed” him set him “on a different path.” Instead, together with the help of counseling models he and colleagues had developed, he “recalled Christ’s death on our behalf to open up the way to the Father’s forgiveness of our own many sins.” He attempted to see through the murderer’s eyes, perceiving his “fear of prison and anger at having his plans spoiled.” This empathy was not an excuse for the young man’s actions, but “it did,” comments Worthington, “help me to forgive him.” About ten years later, tragedy hit Worthington’s family again when his brother committed suicide. Although a clinical psychologist, Worthington regrets that he had not been able to help his brother because “childhood dynamics [got] in the way.” Now, Worthington’s main challenge was to forgive himself amidst “waves of self-condemnation” and “anger at God.” Yet he was

“Forgiving the Man Who Murdered Mom,” by Everett L. Worthington, Jr. 263

eventually able to forgive himself, and it was during this time that he realized that “the personal relationship with Jesus I had discovered in my immaturity” was now “robust.” In conclusion, Worthington approvingly cites the sociologist Robert Wuthnow’s description of life as “made of times of dwelling comfortably with God and times of seeking God,” and compares this statement to the experience of hiking a trail. “There are many trails up the mountain,” he continues, “but there is only one way to the summit.” Furthermore, the hiker is not alone: “It is a beautiful trip when we stop watching our own feet and gaze at the One who goes before us.” 10.8.2 Analysis of Worthington’s narrative Worthington’s “testimony” is contemplative and introspective, which is a reflection of its author. It even has a guiding metaphor: that of a mountainous path, which is marked by beauty as well as treacherousness. This path begins differently for every individual, but each trail leads up the same mountain, to the same true path – the “one narrow way” – which leads to the peak. Worthington spent much of his life walking through caves at the base of the mountain, occasionally reaching lighted vistas at which he “changed direction.” It was first when he began his “personal relationship with Jesus” that the path turned steadily upward. Interestingly, Worthington spends more time narrating his life after his conversion than before it, and on this point differs from the majority of other “testimonies.” Moreover, he makes it clear that the path following conversion is not always smooth – which in his case included two tragic deaths of close family members, followed by feelings of guilt and depression – but now Worthington can recognize the presence of the Holy Spirit, which had been there even while he was in dark caves, leading him towards the summit. Mystical Presence Worthington reiterates that his “relationship” with Jesus is “personal,” which entails that God is intimately present in his life. Interestingly, however, he does not explain exactly what he means by this – possibly because he assumes that those reading his article do not need any clarification. Where he is clear, however, is in his conviction that “the invisible presence of the Holy Spirit” expresses itself in charismatic gifts. During his conversion experience, Worthington experienced for the first time “holy laughter,” caused by the “joy” of Jesus. Later, he writes that he was “taught me more deeply about that invisible presence” by a man who had been miraculously healed. Presence of Changed State It was Worthington’s personal relationship with Jesus that enabled him to forgive the man who murdered his mother, which he compares to attempting

264

Christianity Today Testimonies

to weather a storm while on the top of a mountain. The “personal relationship with Jesus that had transformed me” gave him the strength to pray for the murderer, which even included empathizing with him. Worthington also sees his “personal relationship” as also enabling him to forgive himself for not preventing his brother’s suicide. Like Spener, Worthington views the process of sanctification as far more important than what takes place in regeneration: he understands his “personal relationship” as beginning small – “in my immaturity” – and then slowly growing into the “robust” proportions which enabled him to weather the storms of spiritual crises. Change in Divine Status The doctrine of justification, which Worthington describes as “Christ’s death on our behalf to open up the way to the Father’s forgiveness of our own many sins,” helped him forgive his mother’s murderer. He was only able to forgive others because he knew that his own sins had been forgiven. Importance of Moment of Regeneration Despite the pluralistic imagery of different trails leading to the same mountain summit, Worthington believes that true spiritual fulfillment is only achieved through a “personal relationship with Jesus.” Even though he had previously “made a commitment to Christ,” and was even leading a church youth group, Worthington believes that it was first after praying for this relationship that he “experienced Jesus’ joy for the first time.” He thus differentiates, in a way similar to Edwards, between the “conversions” he had previously experienced and true new birth, as well as between abstract, intellectual knowledge of the Christian faith and a deeper, personal one – a distinction common among modern evangelicals and found in all four theologians examined in this book. However, Worthington makes it clear that he does not believe every Christian needs to have experienced such a conversion moment to be truly born again, since many make a “natural transition to personal faith” from childhood. Even his own narrative is not structured like many others, in which the bulk of the story is dedicated to pre-conversion difficulties which find their resolution in a conversion moment. Significantly, Worthington’s discovery of a “personal relationship with Jesus” marks the midpoint of the narrative, but not its focal point. Moreover, he describes his discussion with Nick, who convinced Worthington that the Holy Spirit has the power to miraculously heal the sick, as a second kind of conversion: “I was once again converted, this time to know an active, powerful God.” This is clearly the doctrine of “baptism in the Holy Spirit” affirmed by Finney, as well as by Pentecostal and Charismatic Christians. Role of Free Will Worthington describes himself as asking God for a “personal relationship”; however, he does not emphasize being born again as a “decision for Christ.”

“Forgiving the Man Who Murdered Mom,” by Everett L. Worthington, Jr. 265

He even insinuates that many do not have to make such a decision because they have made a “natural transition to personal faith.” Conversion Pattern Worthington views the Holy Spirit as having an “invisible presence” in his life even before he had a “personal relationship” with God. This even includes a “false” conversion moment when he was a young man. Interestingly, unlike other narratives in the Christianity Today series, Worthington does not dismiss the basic faith he learned as a child. Instead, he views this “rudimentary faith” as having “developed over the years” and enabling him to face “difficult turns on the climb,” i. e. spiritual crises later in his life. The Role of the Bible and Doctrine Worthington mentions James 5:14–167 as bringing his attention to God’s ability to heal the sick, noting that many Christians read its words metaphorically instead of truly believing that God can heal them. It is significant that Worthington names all three persons of the Trinity in his narrative, and assigns each a role: The Father as forgiver; Jesus Christ as the one who “open[s] up the way” to forgiveness of sins through his death, and through his resurrection invites Christians to be “transformed” so as to have a “personal relationship”; and the Holy Spirit as the ever-present companion who reveals the “active, powerful God.” Friendship and the Church Community As previously mentioned, Worthington does not dismiss the “rudimentary faith” he received from his parents (and, presumably, a local church) as a child. However, he writes that involvement in a church community as an adult does not necessarily equate with having a “personal relationship” with God. Worthington’s discovery of this “personal relationship” took place during an ecumenical youth conference, which included a sermon by a Presbyterian pastor followed by spiritual mentorship in a small group composed of “a Lutheran pastor, a church elder, a missionary, and a Christian college student.” It was through this pastor and the others that Worthington first discovered what it means to have a “relationship with Jesus,” and later through another (Charismatic) Christian that he learned of the power of the Holy Spirit.

7 “Are any among you sick? They should call for the elders of the church and have them pray over them, anointing them with oil in the name of the Lord. 15 The prayer of faith will save the sick, and the Lord will raise them up; and anyone who has committed sins will be forgiven. 16 Therefore confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, so that you may be healed. The prayer of the righteous is powerful and effective.”

266

Christianity Today Testimonies

10.9 “Saved by U2 and an Audible Voice,” by Travis Reed 10.9.1 Reed’s narrative Travis Reed begins his narrative with the story of his baptism, which he portrays not as a joyous occasion but one of spiritual confusion. “To be honest,” he admits, he was baptized because he “wanted to date the pastor’s daughter and assumed that baptism was a prerequisite.” He also thought that having his stepfather baptize him “might make him stick around.”8 Three days after the baptismal ceremony, however, his stepfather assaulted Reed’s mother and “ran off with the wife of a youth leader at our small church. We never saw him again.” Reed’s family never spoke about those events, or other uncomfortable moments in his childhood (such as when he was almost abducted by a stranger). He lived his entire boyhood without a stable father, his mother having “cycled through” different churches as well as men – leading to “four different dads within four years” for Reed. The people at the churches they visited, he recounts, were interested in “saving” him, “but this did not usually mean listening to me.” They did not understand his pain, and so “my story felt stolen,” he writes: “I was without a father and without a voice.” Reed discloses that he found his “stand-in fathers” in his music. Johnny Cash, the singer who wore black “to honor the voiceless … until Jesus returns and makes it all right,” became his “soundtrack.” Cash was for Reed “the wooing voice of God,” and his music, along with a personal encounter after a concert in 1975 (in which he shook his hand and said, “Hello, son, I’m Johnny Cash”) “sustained” Reed as he “continued searching for a father who would stay.” After moving away from home and joining the army (and subsequently getting discharged), Reed continued his search “to know the truth” through music, which eventually led him to the music of U2, particularly the 1987 album “The Joshua Tree.” Despite being high and drunk at the moment, during a U2 concert Reed felt “a wind of grace [blow] over me” when U2 played the song “40,” which is based on Psalm 40. However, “it wasn’t the lyrics that got me,” he writes, since he did not know they were based on the Bible, but instead “the music and the people singing together.” He describes himself as being at this moment “drenched in a universal love, and immediately sobered,” being carried “toward the arms of God” by “the mass of voices.” As “profound” as the concert experience was, “it was fleeting.” “I carried on,” he writes, “chained to voiceless anger.” While trying out various forms of employment, even working for his birth father a few years and then “kicking 8 Although Reed does not clarify the point, it is most likely that his stepfather was an associate pastor on the church’s staff, since it would be very usual (as well as theologically problematic) to have a non-ordained member perform a baptism.

“Saved by U2 and an Audible Voice,” by Travis Reed

267

around dead-end jobs,” he began to realize that he could not “manufacture my own joy.” He tells the story of one night, in 1995, in which he “was driving around listening to Nirvana, flipping off people who were lined up outside of bars.” “My middle finger,” he continues, “was my life statement.” This was his way of telling others that their “games were meaningless” – “even though I couldn’t have told them what was meaningful.” It was later that night, while lying on his bed, that Reed “heard a voice”: “It both was and wasn’t audible.” Give me 100 percent, was its message. He “knew right away” that this voice was from God. “I realized that I had never talked to God,” he continues, but only “to God’s people.” He had been “judging [God] based on Christians’ attempts, however well intentioned, to save me.” Now, however, God was asking Reed to “see him for himself.” “All right,” he told God (speaking aloud), “I’ll give you 100 percent.” He then retrieved an old Bible from his youth and started reading the Psalms, whose “deep and rich” texts he “devoured,” “like the lyrics … on a Cash album.” The next morning, while driving, he was listening to a U2 song when the lyrics (which were about God) caused him to begin weeping. He then describes what happened next: “I didn’t just hear Larry Mullen’s drumbeat at the end of the song—I felt it with my being. His bass drum was smashing Satan in the face, each hit loosening his grasp on my life. It called me from violence to chivalry. It called me to a strength that was for justice and gave me hope. All the chains I’d been dragging around, all the screaming and no one listening—it all shattered and fell away.”

After pulling over, he observed a woman watering her lawn. “I watched the water fall from the hose, the sun sparkling and dancing off the drops, lighting them up like jewels.” He “knew God was there … with all of us” at that moment. Reed proclaims that he has been “raised from the dead by the God of love.” Now, he is “alive,” and because his story is “now a salvation story,” he has a “voice.” “I see the fruit of my resurrection every day,” he writes, in the ministry he founded: “living, breathing proof of the fruit that resurrection makes possible.” Reed concludes, “Because of union with my heavenly Father, I’m becoming less and less fatherless.” God is like the father in the parable of the Prodigal Son, “running toward you with robe, a ring, and a party.”

10.9.2 Analysis of Reed’s narrative Reed’s story is one of a fatherless drifter who is passionate about life but has not yet found its true meaning. “I couldn’t manufacture my own joy,” is his description of the spiritual frustration he endured as a young man. Even during these dark times, Reed found hints of God’s presence in the experience

268

Christianity Today Testimonies

of music, a subject which plays a central role in the narrative. The music of Johnny Cash (“the wooing voice of God”) in particular spoke and continues to speak to him, and the Psalms have become a continual source of inspiration for his post-conversion faith. Mystical Presence In retrospect, Reed views the joy he experienced when listening to music as a troubled child as an expression of God’s goodness and a foretaste of later, more explicit experiences of divine presence. Reed’s first clear experience of God’s presence was before his conversion, while attending a U2 concert (“a wind of grace blew over me”), which he describes the event as being “drenched in a universal love,” as a kind of worship experience which brought him “toward the arms of God.” The second mystical experience of the narrative takes place during his conversion, in which he “heard a voice” which “both was and wasn’t audible,” asking him to give God “100 percent.” Reed writes that he “knew,” immediately, this was the same (Christian) God he had heard about in church, “the God I had started to believe might exist at the U2 concert.” It was also at this moment that he began to believe that he could talk to God and not just “God’s people.” The next day, when Reed was listening to a U2 song with a Christian message, he writes that he “did just hear” it: “I felt it with my being.” He describes the drumbeat as “smashing Satan in the face and loosening his grasp on my life,” and calling Reed away from “violence” towards “chivalry,” “justice,” and “hope.” Presence of Changed State Prior to his conversion, Reed was an angry, confused rebel. He describes himself as driving around in his car and giving people the middle finger, awash in cynicism yet with nothing significant to say because he had no “truth” himself. His spiritual disillusionment led to substance abuse, which included alcohol, marijuana, and even cocaine. His decision to become a Christian, however, marks a turning-point: “I was raised from the dead by the God of love.” Afterwards, he was given hope, peace, and a purpose in life. Reed sees himself as now “resurrected” and writes that he “see[s] the fruit of my resurrection every day,” particularly in his ministry. Change in Divine Status Reed is critical of those Christians who were interested in “saving him” yet showed little interest in his personal struggles. However, Reed does not abandon the doctrines of forensic justification and adoption. He claims, for instance, that he “was raised from the dead by the God of love,” and that his “story is now a salvation story.” The doctrine of adoption is particularly significant for Reed, whose youth was marked by the “continued searching for a father who would stay.” Unlike his earthly father-figures, Reed discovers he has a Heavenly Father, who is marked by patience, love, and steadfastness.

“Saved by U2 and an Audible Voice,” by Travis Reed

269

This enables him to read Jesus’ story of the Prodigal Son as a narrative of his own spiritual adoption. Importance of Moment of Regeneration Instead of focusing on one perceived moment of regeneration, Reed’s crossing of the threshold to Christian faith is framed by two mystical experiences, one beginning in the evening and the other on the next morning. The first takes place in his room, when he “hears” the voice of God (which he describes as audible and not audible), and then promises to give “100 percent” to God. Afterwards, he was able to read the book of Psalms with a spiritual satisfaction he had never before experienced – and even “slept like a baby” for the first time in years. The next morning makes up the second moment, in which Reed, while driving, begins weeping uncontrollably while listening to a Psalm-like U2 song. All the pain he had felt, “the chain [he’d] been dragging,” felt as if they had been miraculously lifted. After pulling over, Reed is mesmerized by the drops of water falling from a watering hose. Reed “knew” that “God was there.” Role of Free Will In the event of his conversion, God tells Reed to “give me 100 percent.” According to Reed, God was “asking,” not ordering. Conversion Pattern The bulk of Reed’s narrative describes his life leading up to conversion, but it is difficult to discern any narrative trajectory in the sense of a “journey” described by others. Moreover, the classic Protestant theme of “repentance” is largely absent (although it is implied in his comparison of himself to the Prodigal Son). Instead, Reed portrays himself as lost and without a purpose in life, wondering about confusedly, yet still experiencing glimpses of God’s grace through the beauty of music. It was at his lowest point, when he “had nothing to lose,” that Reed felt God “speak” to him and when he experienced his conversion. The Role of the Bible and Doctrine The first thing he did after his conversion experience was pick up a Bible and turn to the Psalms, which he remembered were in the middle. He “devoured” the Psalms like the lyrics of a favorite album, describing their words as “deep,” “rich,” and relevant (“street cred”). He views the Psalms as something to be experienced and devoured, as expressing both God’s love for him as well as his own spiritual desires. It is not just the Psalms that Reed sees as relating to his life: at the end of the text, he uses the parable of the Prodigal Son to describe God’s love for him. While there are very little explicit doctrinal beliefs, there is certainly an implicit use of Christian doctrine in the text. For instance, Reed mentions the figure of Satan, although he does not go into detail concerning

270

Christianity Today Testimonies

Satan’s role in his personal theology. Also significant is that of the three persons of the Trinity, the Father receives the most attention Reed’s story. In contrast to many other Christians, who often view the Father as the most “distant” person of the Trinity, for someone like Reed who never had a true earthly father, his “union with my heavenly Father” is deeply meaningful. Because of the Heavenly Father, he sees himself as “becoming less and less fatherless,” which is the key to his own role as a husband and father. Friendship and the Church Community Reed’s narrative is characterized by multiple negative experiences with the church community. He begins his narrative by mentioning his baptism, but immediately minimizes its importance, writing that he only allowed himself to be baptized for selfish reasons: a crush on preacher’s daughter, a desire to form a bond with his step-father, and a general “emotional high” from a recent church camp. Almost immediately after his baptism, his stepfather beat his mother and left the family, which inaugurated years of spiritual searching of confusion. During this time, other Christians, though often “well meaning,” were of little help in that they attempted to “save” him but showed little interest in listening to his story. Furthermore, most of what he heard in church “had no staying power.” During his pre-conversion mystical experience, Reed encounters true community not at a church but a U2 concert, in which he experiences the other voices in the crowd as a kind of worship (“The mass of voices carried me toward the arms of God.”). However, in the entire narrative there are no personal companions – friends, family, Bible study groups – which he mentions as leading him towards faith or, after his conversion, supporting his growth in Christianity. Even the moment of conversion is marked by a pessimism concerning the church community, as it is here that Reed claims to have realized that he had never spoken to God directly but only “God’s people.” Despite their absence in his narrative, however, Christian friendship and the church are clearly an important component of Reed’s faith, as he concludes by mentioning that he is now a husband and father, and that he founded a media ministry.

10.10 “Fox News’ Highly Reluctant Jesus Follower,” by Kirsten Powers 10.10.1 Powers’ narrative “Just seven years ago,” Powers begins, “if someone had told me that I’d be writing for Christianity Today magazine about how I came to believe in God, I would have laughed out loud.” At that time, she had been “sure” that she would

“Fox News’ Highly Reluctant Jesus Follower,” by Kirsten Powers

271

never belong to any religion, particularly to evangelical Christianity, which she “held in particular contempt.” Powers grew up in the Episcopal Church, but her “belief was superficial and flimsy” – “borrowed,” as she describes it, from her father. However, when her father confided in her his own doubts, her faith faltered, and she began to oscillate between atheism and agnosticism. She later became involved in politics with the Democratic Party (including the Clinton administration), and her worldview “became aggressively secular.” “Everyone I knew,” she writes, “was politically left-leaning, and my group of friends was overwhelmingly atheist.” Christians, she writes, often talk as if the life of a non-believer is terrible, yet Powers’ life at this time “actually seemed pretty wonderful.” She had “opportunity, good conversation and privilege.” In retrospect, it was not as good as her life now, but how can someone miss something, she asks, that they do not believe exists? Moreover, her impression of Christians from the media was extremely cynical: “I derided Christians as anti-intellectual bigots who were too weak to face the reality that there is no rhyme or reason to the world.” It was therefore a shock when, after they had been together for a few months, Powers’ boyfriend asked her, “Do you believe Jesus is your Savior?” Her first thought was He’s crazy, but she calmly answered in the negative. The boyfriend began informing her about his Christian beliefs and the fact that he could never marry a non-Christian, and asked Powers if she would be “open-minded” enough to the possibility of converting. Powers, as a political “liberal” who viewed herself as very open-minded (“Even though I wasn’t at all”), decided to tolerate the “oddity” of her boyfriend’s church attendance in order to salvage the relationship. Powers writes that she was “creeped out” by her boyfriend’s Christianity, but also deeply respected his “smart, educated, and intellectually curious” manner. They began attending an evangelical Presbyterian church (“I was so clueless about Christianity that I didn’t know that some Presbyterians were evangelicals,” she writes), where Powers was “shocked and repelled” by what she encountered: not the “high-church liturgy” she had grown up with, but instead “praise music.” “How am I going to tell him,” she though to herself, “I can never come back.” Then, however, she heard the sermon, which was delivered by the noted evangelical pastor Timothy Keller: “Tim Keller’s sermon was intellectually rigorous, weaving in art and history and philosophy. I decided to come back to hear him again.” Soon, his sermons became “the highlight of my week,” although this was due more to his intellectual rigor than “this Jesus nonsense.” Yet Keller’s sermons slowly chipped away at her secular worldview, causing Powers to question her atheism. Powers also began reading the Bible at this time, and even praying with her boyfriend. After attending Keller’s church for eight months, Powers “concluded that the weight of the evidence was on the side of Christianity.” Despite this, however, she felt no “connection to God,” and “was fine with that.” She continued to view

272

Christianity Today Testimonies

Christians as delusional, lying, or “just imagining things that made them feel good.” But this all changed on one evening while on a trip, “I woke up in what felt like a cross between a dream and reality.” “Jesus,” according to Powers, “came to me and said, ‘Here I am.’ It felt so real.” In confusion, she called her boyfriend the next to explain what happened, but before she had time to tell him her experience, he informed her that he had been praying the previous evening and felt it was right to end their relationship. Although Powers was upset by this news, she writes that she “was more traumatized by Jesus visiting [her].” Powers at first attempted to doubt her experience, explaining it as “misfiring synapses,” but to no avail. “I couldn’t shake it,” she writes: “I suddenly felt God everywhere.” She did not particularly enjoy or desire this experience, describing it as “unwelcome” and “an invasion.” Furthermore, she worried that her family and friends would not understand what had happened to her. She contacted a friend in the church, Eric Metaxas, who advised her to join a Bible study group led by Kathy Keller, Timothy Keller’s wife. When Powers first walked into the Bible study, she was still filled with unease. Soon after, however, her doubts and anxieties disappeared: “All I know is that when I left, everything had changed. I’ll never forget standing outside that apartment on the Upper East Side and saying to myself, ‘It’s true. It’s completely true.’ The world looked entirely different, like a veil had been lifted off it. I had not an iota of doubt. I was filled with indescribable joy.”

Even after this experience, the “horror of the prospect of being a devout Christian crept back in,” and Powers did her best “to wrestle away from God.” However, it was all “pointless,” as “slowly there was less fear and more joy.” “The Hound of Heaven,” she concludes, “had pursued me and caught me – whether I liked it or not.” 10.10.2 Analysis of Powers’ narrative Powers’ story is one not primarily about overcoming past sins or failures, but instead of overcoming bias towards Christianity, and evangelical Christianity in particular. It takes place within the backdrop of the so-called American “culture wars,” in which politically left-leaning groups, or “liberals,” are often viewed as hostile to authentic expressions of Christian faith. This is particularly significant for Powers, who is most well-known for being a “liberal” commentator on the famously (and for many infamously) right-wing Fox News Network – a network which, ironically, often propagates the assumption that people such as Powers cannot be evangelical Christians. Like Colson, Powers understands her conversion as having allowed her to transcend political biases and divisions, which in Powers’ case included the belief that Christianity and Christians were irrational and bigoted. Although it

“Fox News’ Highly Reluctant Jesus Follower,” by Kirsten Powers

273

may not be obvious to the casual reader, Powers’ conversion narrative also contains strong Calvinist undertones. She makes it clear, for instance, that her conversion was the result of God chasing after her, and not the other way around. Most significantly, nowhere in her testimony does Powers refer to making a “decision” or “asking Jesus into her heart,” but instead portrays her conversion as happening against her own will. Mystical Presence Powers’ conversion experience is inaugurated by a mystical vision – “between a dream and reality” – of Jesus, who announces his presence, telling her, “Here I am.” She writes that the experience “felt so real,” but was also very confusing; and in an unexpected twist, her boyfriend broke up with her right when she called him to report what had happened. While this was upsetting, Powers “was more traumatized by Jesus visiting me.” The mystical presence she had experienced that night lingered with her for the next “few days”: she was “lost” and “suddenly felt God everywhere,” an event she describes not as spiritual bliss but “terrifying” and “an unwelcome invasion.” Only did the experience cease to be “unwelcome” after attending a Bible study, where she experienced illumination: “The world looked entirely different, like a veil had been lifted off it.” Any lingering doubts concerning the truth of Christianity then completely left her. Now, there was no longer terror but only “indescribably joy.” Presence of Changed State Powers’ narrative focus neither on personal failures nor struggles which were overcome through conversion. In contrast to most conversion narratives, she writes that she “was not looking for God” prior to becoming a Christians. The only struggle she mentions is her deep distain towards evangelical Christianity, due to her being raised in the liberal Episcopal Church and then spending her time with secularly-minded political progressives. In this sense, her story can be placed among the more rationalist strands of conversion narratives, in which intellectual doubts concerning the truth of Christianity itself are perceived as a primary barrier. However, more important than this rational element is that her life, though not unsatisfying before, became filled with a “joy” during her conversion that began to “slowly” replace the “fear” in her life. It is noteworthy that her conversion did not cause her to switch political allegiances, which she describes as one of her main fears prior to conversion. However, she does not delve into specifics concerning political issues in this testimony. Change in Divine Status This theme is largely implicit in Powers’ narrative. There are no explicit references to justification or to Jesus’ atonement, except for when her boyfriend asks her if she believes in Jesus as her “Savior.”

274

Christianity Today Testimonies

Importance of Moment of Regeneration Powers’ conversion story is similar to Reed’s in that her transition to faith is framed by two moments, one which begins the conversion experience and a second which consummates it after a period of “a few days.” For Powers this period of time is characterized as a kind of mystical limbo, which begins with the terrifying, confusing, and ultimately “unwanted” presence of God and concludes in a moment of peaceful clarity during a Bible study. Although she cannot recount every aspect of this period, she is certain that afterwards “everything had changed,” thus making this period of change the key event in her narrative. She does not neglect the role of sanctification, however, writing that afterwards the “horror of the prospect of being a devout Christian crept back in almost immediately,” and that she still attempted to “wrestle away from God.” This, however, was “pointless,” and “slowly” there became “less fear and more joy” in her relationship with God. Role of Free Will It is perhaps no coincidence that Powers, who attends a Calvinist congregation, recounts a conversion narrative that is completely in line with the classical Puritan doctrine of irresistible grace. Powers makes it clear that her conversion had nothing to do with a “decision” for Jesus Christ, portraying herself instead as actively resisting God’s grace, only to be overwhelmed, even “traumatized,” by a mystical encounter with Jesus Christ. Immediately afterwards, she attempted to resist this event by writing it off as “misfiring synapses,” yet God continued his “unwelcome” presence. Even after her conversion, she writes that she still tried to “wrestle away from God,” which was “pointless.” The final sentence reiterates her belief that it was God, “the Hound of Heaven,” who pursued her (and not the other way around), irrespective of her own will or wishes. Conversion Pattern Powers’ conversion story is a mix of evangelical rationalism and classical Puritanism. She describes a long process, first of being confronted with the subject of Christianity and the question of whether or not it was “true,” which began to steadily increase in intensity, and then finally of a mystical conversion experience which began as unwelcome and terrifying and concluded with “indescribable joy.” Timothy Keller’s sermons played a significant initial role by “expos[ing] the intellectual weaknesses of a purely secular worldview,” which was an important step in enabling Powers to become more receptive to hearing the Christian message. During this time, she also began reading the Bible and even praying with her boyfriend that God would “reveal himself” to her, though she notes that she did such things very skeptically and not out of genuine interest. Unlike more traditional conversion narratives, she does not describe herself as struggling with her own sinfulness prior to the moment of rebirth, but instead with the truth of Christianity itself. She finally “concluded that the

“How I Escaped the Mormon Temple,” by Lynn Wilder

275

weight of evidence was on the side of Christianity,” but did not “feel any connection with God” and writes that she was still believed people who claim to experience God “were even delusional or lying.” It was only after a completely “unwelcome” mystical encounter that Powers finally became a Christian. The Role of the Bible and Doctrine Powers indicates that she had started to read the Bible regularly prior to her conversion. However, she mentions no specific passages as having had a particular impact on her. It was also during a Bible study that she felt as if “a veil had been lifted off [the world]” and was completely convinced of the truth of Christianity and her conversion, but she does not “remember what was said that day,” which presumably means that she does not remember the subject of the Bible study either. Neither are there explicit references to doctrine; however, her descriptions of God “pursuing” her, even when God’s presence was “unwelcome,” can easily be interpreted as affirming the doctrine of Predestination – not from a speculative, but instead an existential standpoint, similar to how Schleiermacher defends the doctrine in his Christian Faith. Friendship and the Church Community Powers specifically mentions that it was Timothy Keller’s evangelical Presbyterian congregation (Redeemer Presbyterian Church in New York City) which guided her during the conversion process. She describes herself as initially being shocked by the more contemporary “praise music,” but impressed by the intellectual content of Keller’s sermons. However, she views her personal friendships as most significant. It was her Christian boyfriend who began praying with her and encouraging her to read the Bible. After her conversion experience (and breakup of her relationship), when Powers worried about how to explain the event to family and friends, it was other Christians, such as Eric Metaxas and the Bible study group led by Keller’s wife, who supported her, both through private conversations as well as within the walls of Redeemer Church.

10.11 “How I Escaped the Mormon Temple,” by Lynn Wilder 10.11.1 Wilder’s narrative Lynn Wilder and her family were proud residents of “Zion,” or Salt Lake City, Utah: the spiritual heart of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, also known as Mormons. Converted as a young couple by Mormon missionaries, her husband went on to become a leader in the church (“high priest, a

276

Christianity Today Testimonies

bishopric member and high counselor, temple worker, seminary teacher, and Sunday school president”), while she taught at the flagship Mormon academic institution, Brigham Young University. At this time, she “looked down on Christians who followed the Bible,” since she believed Mormons had additional scriptural texts which made up “the fullness of [the gospel].” Furthermore, writes Wilder, “I believed the Mormon Church secured my eternal life.” Since their conversion to Mormonism, the Wilder family’s spiritual life had been centered around the activities of their congregation. “Serving untold hours in church callings, reading Mormon scripture, tithing, attending meetings, keeping a health code, and doing genealogy so we could redeem the dead in the temple” were just “a few of our offerings to the Mormon God.” It was in the context of these activities that she believed she “knew Jesus”: “We believed he was born first as a spirit child to Heavenly Father and Mother, and came to Earth to receive a body. He atoned for our sins in the Garden. Like the Pharisee in Luke 18, I thought I knew him better than others through the exclusive instruction I received in the temple.”

On Sundays, she sang hymns not only about Jesus but also about Joseph Smith, the founder of the Mormon faith. Her husband, as a leader, was “working to become a god,” just like “Heavenly Father,” Jesus, and Joseph Smith himself. At this time, Wilder was not filled with spiritual doubt: “life was good there.” However, this “perfect Mormon life” was interrupted by the expulsion of her son Micah from his two-year mission – “a horrific disgrace in Mormon culture” – due to his questioning of the Mormon faith based on his reading of the New Testament. “There,” writes Wilder, “he encountered a different Jesus than the one I was taught about in Mormonism – a God of grace, not of works, so that no one can boast.” The Mormon Church, however, told the Wilder family that Micah “had the spirit of the Devil in him.” After returning home, Micah pleaded with his family to read the New Testament with fresh eyes, and they did. Wilder views the experience of reading the New Testament as an “event horizon” in which “the gravitational pull is so powerful that there is no escape.” Her “appetite for God” increased. One evening the family decided to watch the movie Luther, and Wilder felt that she was in a “similar struggle” comparable to the young Luther’s with the Catholic Church. “Did I believe the Mormon system of obedience to laws and ordinances would secure my forgiveness?” she asked herself: “Or did I believe what the Bible taught, that Jesus alone was the Way, the Truth, and the Life?” Afterwards, as she felt herself “speeding toward the point of no return,” she lay down prostrate on the floor and cried out to Jesus, “I am yours. Save me.” “Instantly,” she continues, “I was sucked over.” After this moment, “God became personal,” which included her talking with God and sometimes even hearing him answer, as well as “stark dreams,” feeling led by God, and experiencing God through other people and

“How I Escaped the Mormon Temple,” by Lynn Wilder

277

circumstances, “through the Word and during prayer.” God got her a new job, and God sold their home after they left the Mormon Church, she writes. “I discovered this Jesus could not be confined by the laws and ordinances of a religion. Jesus is real. This palpable relationship transformed me.” Wilder ends by describing a dream experienced by her daughter recently after she “came to Christ”: “There were small pools of blood on the ground, but she wasn’t afraid. This courtyard was where Jesus had been beaten and whipped until near-death. The blood was his. Katie looked right at the man, who was wearing a cream-colored robe and a shawl over his head, and immediately trusted him. He knelt in the dirt to gaze at her, directly at eye level. Taking the shawl off his head, he touched it to the bloodstained ground and gently began to cover her with the blood, starting with her forehead. He smiled at her as if she were the joy set before him.”

“This is the Jesus my family and I now know,” reflects Wilder. This Jesus “loves [her] personally” and teaches her daily. She does “not need the laws and ordinances of the Mormon Church to be saved,” but only Jesus. 10.11.2 Analysis of Wilder’s narrative Wilder’s story is one of an intellectual’s conversion from one faith to another, making it the most theologically complex of all the Christianity Today “testimonies” chosen for this study. It is also the most polemical, as she regards herself as “escaping” the religious culture of Mormonism, which she repeatedly compares to Pharisaism and the Medieval Catholic Church against which Martin Luther battled. Interestingly, her use of Luther consists not of his writings but instead his story, which she uses as a narrative-theological template for her own spiritual journey. Like Luther, Wilder understands her conversion as a story of grace, a term that she frequently uses to contrast what she views as the works-oriented nature of the Mormon Church with the grace achieved by Christ on the cross. Mystical Presence Wilder writes that after she asked Jesus to “save” her, “God became personal” in what she calls a “palpable relationship,” which included her talking to God and experiencing God’s presence in “stark dreams.” Not only did God’s presence “gently lead” her, but she views God as intervening in her life and “doing” things such as getting her a job or her house sold. She does not attempt to engage in any phenomenological description of her experience of being led by and talking with God. As opposed to her previous following of “laws and ordinances of a religion,” her post-conversion experience was that “Jesus is real.” Wilder concludes her testimony with a description of a dream her daughter Katie experienced “about a month after [her daughter] Katie

278

Christianity Today Testimonies

came to Christ.” The dream contains heavy theological symbolism, functioning as a pictorial, or even cinematic, representation of the doctrine of atonement. In it, a figure “wearing a cream-colored robe and a shawl over his head” takes Katie through a “sheep gate” and into the “courtyard … where Jesus had been beaten and whipped unto near death,” and proceeds to wipe her with his blood. “This is the Jesus my family and I now know,” concludes Wilder. The vision of Jesus wiping her with his blood is an allusion to the orthodox, as opposed to Mormon, doctrine of atonement, which centers on Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross. Interestingly, however, the portrayal of Jesus wearing a cream-colored robe and shawl is a common depiction in Mormon art – revealing that even after leaving the Mormon church, the Wilder family’s perception of Jesus is still subtly influenced by their past faith. Presence of Changed State Before her conversion, Wilder was a pious, religious individual who even believed in Jesus – although, from the standpoint of those outside of the Mormon Church, it was a heterodox belief in Jesus, as it was based not only on the New Testament but also the writings of the 19th-century American religious leader Joseph Smith, who claimed to have received additional revelations from God. Despite her piety, however, she sees her worldview at this time as being marked by religious legalism, as well as a spiritual pride “like the Pharisee in Luke 18,”9 since she had believed herself to be the recipient of “exclusive instruction” in the Mormon temple. Through her conversion to evangelical Christianity, she sees herself as having overcome this pride. Change in Divine Status Wilder writes that she “believed the Mormon Church secured my eternal life.” According to her previous theological beliefs, this meant not only a place in heaven, but also the possibility of her husband becoming a “god.”10 Such spiritual progress, both in this life and afterwards, was for her only possible through following the “laws and ordinances” of her church. After her conversion to Christianity, Wilder views herself as being saved by grace and 9 Cf. Luke 18: 9–14: “[Jesus] also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous and regarded others with contempt: 10 ‘Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee, standing by himself, was praying thus, “God, I thank you that I am not like other people: thieves, rogues, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week; I give a tenth of all my income.” 13 But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even look up to heaven, but was beating his breast and saying, “God, be merciful to me, a sinner!” 14 I tell you, this man went down to his home justified rather than the other; for all who exalt themselves will be humbled, but all who humble themselves will be exalted.’” 10 Cf. Doctrine and Covenants of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 132:20: “Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them.”

“How I Escaped the Mormon Temple,” by Lynn Wilder

279

not by the works required by an institution. The dream that her daughter, Katie, experienced shortly after her conversion serves as a cinematic representation of the doctrine of justification: through the blood of Jesus she has been saved. Importance of Moment of Regeneration Wilder’s spiritual metamorphosis happens in a brief moment. She “cried out to Jesus,” and then, “instantly,” she was “sucked over.” It was from this exact point on that “God became personal”: she began to pray and experience God’s presence on a regular basis, and see the world in a different way. Role of Free Will The relationship between human free will and the irresistible work of God is marked by significant tension in Wilder’s narrative. Before her conversion, Wilder writes that she felt herself being drawn towards Christianity as if there was “no escape” from “the gravitational pull,” and as “speeding toward the point of no return” – language which would clearly place her in the “existential predestination” camp espoused by Schleiermacher. However, the exact moment of conversion was marked by a decision-language, in which Wilder asked God to “save” her, after which she was “instantly … sucked over.” Conversion Pattern Interestingly, Wilder’s description of her experience with the Mormon Church significantly mirrors the classic pattern of the Puritan conversion narrative: she attempted to win God’s favor through her own efforts – through obedience “laws and ordinances” – only to discover that she could only be saved through the grace of Jesus. She describes this as a process in which she felt herself steadily being drawn to God in a way in which there was “no escape.” However, the element of existential despair in the face of one’s own sinfulness, which is typically a staple of older conversion narratives, is largely missing in Wilder’s testimony; instead, the source of her spiritual unease was Mormon doctrine and history, which she does not regard as conforming to the teachings of the New Testament. The Role of the Bible and Doctrine Like Martin Luther, Wilder assumes that there is a link between faulty doctrine and spiritual health, and that the anchor of true doctrine is the Bible. “In all the years of serving the church, I thought I knew Jesus,” she writes. “We believed he was born first as a spirit child to Heavenly Father and Mother, and came to Earth to receive a body. He atoned for our sins in the Garden.” All of these beliefs are, from the perspective of mainstream Christianity, blatantly heterodox and highlight the doctrinal gap between her previous and new faith. Wilder also cites a Mormon hymn whose subject at first glance would appear to be Jesus (“Great is his glory and endless his priesthood. Ever and ever

280

Christianity Today Testimonies

the keys he will hold. Faithful and true, he will enter his kingdom, Crowned in the midst of the prophets of old.”), but is actually Joseph Smith. Even more shocking to the average reader of Christianity Today is her statement that her husband Michael “was working to become a god.” The “interruption” which led to Wilder’s conversion was when she learned that her son Micah had converted to Christianity during his Mormon mission. This happened after he had read the text of Ephesians 2:8–9, a passage which can be considered the theological leitmotif of Wilder’s conversion narrative: “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God – not the result of works, so that no one may boast.” When he returned home after being expelled, Micah begged the rest of his family to read the New Testament in a contemporary translation, as opposed to the King James Version “authorized” by the Mormon Church. It was here, in the Bible, that Wilder’s desire for God “grew exponentially,” and that she came to the conclusion that “Mormonism taught a different gospel than what the Bible taught.” Wilder’s testimony is littered with references to scripture, both explicit and implicit. She cites John 6:44 (“No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them”) when describing her experience of being drawn to God with increasing intensity while reading the Bible. Her description of Jesus being “the Way, the Truth, and the Life” is a reference to John 14:6. She also compares Mormonism to the Pharisees in the New Testament, and her daughter’s dream of a “sheep gate” is a cinematic representation of John 10, where Jesus is portrayed as the “Good Shepherd,” with the “pools of blood” acknowledging that it was on the cross, and not in the garden of Gethsemane as Wilder used to believe, where Jesus atoned for the sins of humanity. Friendship and the Church Community Wilder’s conversion is not merely personal, but also an ecclesial conversion. Like Luther, it was deeply painful for Wilder to leave her previous church, which provided her family with spiritual meaning as well as numerous concrete tasks: “Serving untold hours in church callings, reading Mormon scripture, tithing, attending meetings, keeping a health code, and doing genealogy so we could redeem the dead in the temple—these were a few of our offerings to the Mormon God.” Moving to “Zion” (Salt Lake City, Utah), the headquarters of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, had only heightened her feeling of belonging. However, when this community expelled her son for espousing traditional Christianity, claiming that he “had the spirit of the Devil in him,” she began to feel increasingly alienated from the church. She began questioning Mormonism’s past, for instance its earlier racism and continuing patriarchal structure, as well as its theological beliefs about the person of Jesus. She then came to the conclusion that her situation was similar to the one Martin Luther faced in the Catholic Church: both she and Luther were part of a church that believed “obedience to laws and ordinances” would

“Christ Called Me Off the Minaret,” by Nabeel Qureshi

281

secure one’s forgiveness. She had believed that her “eternal life” could be secured through the Mormon Church, and understands her conversion as one away from ecclesial works and towards pure grace. Unlike Luther, however, the institution of the church plays a completely negative role in Wilder’s narrative. She does not mention the church institution of which she is now a member, only remarking that prior to their conversion to Mormonism, she and her husband “attended Protestant churches while growing up” but “rarely if ever read the Bible.” Neither does she mention the role played by close friends from either her Mormon or evangelical Christian communities. Although she does not mention friendships, the importance of family is central to Wilder’s narrative. Wilder’s conversion followed her son’s, and her daughter’s then followed hers. (She does not describe how it happened, but it is clear that her husband also converted to evangelical Christianity, since she writes, “This is the Jesus my family and I now know.”) Her narrative’s concentration on family is singular among all the other testimonies found in Christianity Today, and is arguably also a legacy of her Mormon background.

10.12 “Christ Called Me Off the Minaret,” by Nabeel Qureshi 10.12.1 Qureshi’s narrative The words “Allahu Akbar” were, according to Nabeel Qureshi, “the first words ever spoken to me.” Qureshi is a descendent of the Quresh tribe, that of Muhammed: “Our family stood sentinel over Islamic tradition.” By the age of five, he was already reciting and memorizing the Qur’an. Qureshi’s land of residence, however, was not the Middle East or North Africa, but instead the United States. Yet being a cultural outsider did not dampen his religious fervor, and by middle school he was debating and challenging his Christian peers on subjects such as the divinity of Jesus and the doctrine of the Trinity. “Bolstered by every conversation I had with Christians,” he writes, “I felt confident in the truth of Islam.” Islam provided him with “discipline, purpose, morals, family values, and clear direction for worship.” It was his “lifeblood,” his “identity.” “And it was there,” he continues, “atop the minaret of Islamic life, that Jesus called to me.” This “call” happened while Qureshi was attending Old Dominion University, where he befriended an intelligent young Christian named David Wood. Qureshi attacked Wood’s beliefs, just as he always had, but remarks that Wood’s reactions were unlike those of previous Christians he had encountered. He was not defensive or threatened, and “did not waver” in his “witness” or his friendship to Qureshi. As a Muslim, Qureshi appreciated this “zeal,” even though it came from another religion, and proceeded to

282

Christianity Today Testimonies

further engage Wood on the subject of Christianity, even signing up for classes on the subject. Through the course of time the two became best friends. Parallel to the development of their friendship, Qureshi writes that he began to change his mind about Christianity. After spending thee years “investigating the origins of Christianity,” he came to the conclusion that “the case for Christianity was strong – that the Bible could be trusted and that Jesus died on the cross, rose from the dead, and claimed to be God.” His best friend then challenged him to view his own faith as critically as he had Christianity in the last three years. “When I finally read the sources [on Islam],” he writes, “I found that Muhammad was not the man I had thought. Violence and sensuality dripped from the pages of his earliest biographies, the life stories of the man I revered as the holiest in history.” “Shocked” by this revelation, Qureshi began to lean on his belief of the Qur’an as a perfect and inspired book. This attempt, however, also “faltered.” Qureshi then began to pray to God – to Allah, to Jesus, or whomever that may be. As a Muslim, he had been taught to rely on dreams and visions for guidance, so he “began imploring God daily” to grant him one. By the end of his first year in medical school, he writes, God had given him three dreams and a vision. He views the second dream as the most powerful: in it, he was “standing in the threshold of a strikingly narrow door,” watching others taking their seats at a wedding. He wanted to attend the wedding as well, but was not allowed to, because he had not yet accepted his friend David’s invitation. “When I awoke, I knew what God was telling me, but I sought further verification,” – which he found that day when he discovered the parable of the narrow door in Luke 13:22–30.11 Despite these visions, Qureshi writes that he still “couldn’t walk through the door,” since such would be a betrayal of his family, who loved him dearly, and would cause them to “lose their honor.” This caused him no small emotional anguish, and Qureshi writes that it all became eventually “too much to bear,” leading him to skip class one day and place both a Bible and Qur’an in front of him – apparently (although he does not explicitly say) in order to make a final decision on which to follow. At this moment, the Qur’an “seemed utterly

11 “Jesus went through one town and village after another, teaching as he made his way to Jerusalem. 23 Someone asked him, ‘Lord, will only a few be saved?’ He said to them, 24 ‘Strive to enter through the narrow door’; for many, I tell you, will try to enter and will not be able. 25 When once the owner of the house has got up and shut the door, and you begin to stand outside and to knock at the door, saying, ‘Lord, open to us,’ then in reply he will say to you, ‘I do not know where you come from.’ 26 Then you will begin to say, ‘We ate and drank with you, and you taught in our streets.’ 27 But he will say, ‘I do not know where you come from; go away from me, all you evildoers!’ 28 There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrown out. 29 Then people will come from east and west, from north and south, and will eat in the kingdom of God. 30 Indeed, some are last who will be first, and some are first who will be last.”

“Christ Called Me Off the Minaret,” by Nabeel Qureshi

283

irrelevant to my suffering.” It provided him “no comfort,” but instead seemed “irrelevant to my life.” “It felt like a dead book.” According to Qureshi, he then opened up the Bible and came across the following saying of Jesus: “Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted.” These “electric” words “leapt off the page and jump-started my heart,” he writes. After this, he could not stop reading the Bible. He read Matthew 10:37, which teaches that one must love God even more than his or her parents. “But Jesus,” he said aloud, “accepting you would be like dying. I will have to give up everything.” The next verses he read, however, “spoke” to him: “He who does not take his cross and follow after me is not worthy of me. He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for my sake will find it.” Qureshi then knelt at the foot of his bed and “gave up my life.” For a Muslim, writes Qureshi, becoming a Christian is more than a “call to prayer”: “It is a call to die.” The repercussions of conversion were harsh: the two people he loved the most were “shattered” by his “betrayal,” and “to this day,” he continues, “my family is broken by the decision I made, and it is excruciating every time I see the cost I had to pay.” Yet despite the painfulness of this reality, “Jesus is the God of reversal and redemption.” Just as Jesus “redeemed” the cross – “a symbol for execution” – by giving it a new purpose (namely “salvation”), Qureshi’s also views Jesus as redeeming suffering, “by making me rely upon him for my every moment, bending my heart toward him.” It was in these trying times that he began to know Jesus “intimately.” Jesus “reached” him through different methods – dreams, visions, and “investigations” – and called him to prayer amidst his struggles. “To follow him” Qureshi concludes, “is worth giving up everything.” 10.12.2 Analysis of Qureshi’s narrative Nabeel Qureshi’s narrative is unique in that it represents a religious conversion in the full sense of the term: from one major faith, Islam, to another in (evangelical) Christianity. Furthermore, certain central concerns for the Muslim Qureshi – such as his fondness of “zeal,” enthusiasm for religious debate, and preoccupation with holy texts – are indeed “converted” into his later Christianity. The most striking continuity, however, is the belief that God communicates through “dreams and visions,” which Qureshi describes as having been significant for his earlier Muslim faith, and which he sees as integral in guiding him towards Christianity. Despite this mystical element, his theology is also highly rational: he writes of his earlier attempts to convince Christians of the logical inconsistencies of doctrines such as the Trinity, and his later conversion to Christianity was preceded by years of investigation which convinced him of “the evidence of Christianity and the weakness of the Islamic case.” He is also clear that his conversion entailed deep personal sacrifice, particularly in the fact that he would damage his family’s

284

Christianity Today Testimonies

“honor” and cause it to be “broken.” However, he sees his suffering as overcome through the suffering of Jesus. Thus Qureshi’s narrative, while published in a magazine for evangelical Christians, also has a clear evangelistic intent. Mystical Presence Qureshi grew up in a religious tradition which explicitly looked to dreams and visions as providing spiritual guidance. Unlike the typical mystical presence experienced during new birth – the general, inexpressible experience of God’s presence – such experiences have a specific meaning and symbolism. Later, after his conversion moment, he writes that he “knew God intimately,” particularly in moments of despair, through “dreams,” “vision,” and prayer, and perhaps most importantly in reading the Bible – an experience which he describes as “electric” and in which he often felt God speaking to him. Presence of Changed State Qureshi gives no specific example of a sin which was overcome through his conversion. He had already been a deeply spiritual – indeed, “religious” – person before his conversion. Unlike most testimonies, Qureshi was not necessarily happy after he made his decision: indeed, he was actually in anguish over how he had “broken” his family. Qureshi’s most theologically sophisticated and interesting reflection is how he views this suffering as essential to the change that takes place in a Christian’s life. He writes that his suffering has been “redeemed” by directing him to Jesus, “bending my heart toward him” and helping him understand better his own struggles. Change in Divine Status Qureshi’s anguish also led him to reflect on the suffering on Christ, which he views as ultimately providing redemption. In the final paragraph, he writes that he has been “redeemed” by Jesus Christ, who “redeemed sinners to death by his life” and also “redeemed a symbol of execution by repurposing it for salvation.” This change in status is actualized by “becoming a Christian,” which he did when he made his decision to follow Jesus. Importance of Moment of Regeneration Qureshi clearly views his bedside decision to “give up” his life as the moment he became, officially, a Christian. He describes the moment of a conversion as the result of wrestling with different biblical texts, which ended in his decision. He does not describe what he experienced immediately afterwards, commenting instead only that “a few days later” two loved one were “shattered” by his “betrayal.” Role of Free Will For Qureshi it is clear that his true conversion had to be preceded by a

“Christ Called Me Off the Minaret,” by Nabeel Qureshi

285

rational decision. Indeed, the term “decision” appears frequently throughout the narrative. For instance, even though he had encountered God through dreams and a vision, Qureshi does not view himself as converted until he “gave up” his life to Jesus Christ. Even his dream, in which he was standing in front of a narrow door to a wedding feast but was not able to enter, made it clear that there was a “decision I knew I had to make.” After his conversion, when he laments that his family is “broken” by his “betrayal,” he remarks that it is because of “the decision I made.” Furthermore, his statement that following Jesus “is worth giving up everything” has evangelistic overtones: he is clearly attempting to persuade others who might read his testimony to do the same. Conversion Pattern Although Qureshi clearly assents to the theological view that new birth is a “decision” for Christ, he spends the majority of his narrative reflecting on the events leading up to this decision. The journey was largely an intellectual journey, beginning with theological debates with his Christian friend, which led to the deeper process of investigating the Bible and seeing how his friend David practiced his faith. This entire process lasted about “three years,” according to Qureshi, until he came to the conclusion that “the case for Christianity was strong.” After this period, he began a more critical study of Islam, which led to a moment of crisis in which Qureshi felt that he needed to choose between the two religions. The crisis reached its critical peak in a dream whose message was clear (“I knew what God was telling me”), namely, that he needed to make a decision for Christianity. Even after this point, he did not immediately convert, but continue to mull over the “decision I knew I had to make.” The Role of the Bible and Doctrine The Bible as a book in its entirety plays an important role, particularly in contrast to the Qur’an. His faith in the Qur’an’s divine inspiration was challenged when he learned things about its earthly author, Muhammad, which called into question Muhammad’s spiritual authority. Then, writes Qureshi, he “began to lean on” the inspiration of the Qur’an itself, as a book of “miraculous knowledge and perfect preservation.” However, these beliefs also “faltered.” At the same time, he found himself coming to the conclusion that “the case was strong” that the Bible, in contrast, was a trustworthy book. The climax of the narrative takes place when Qureshi places the two books beside each other, knowing that he could only choose one. In a certain sense, this scene is theologically problematic, since it ignores the fact that the two holy books have different functions within each tradition: even among theologies which attribute “verbal inspiration” to the Bible, it is still acknowledged to be a collection of disparate texts written by multiple authors, many of which – such as Paul’s letters – originally had a non-scriptural function; the Qur’an, on the

286

Christianity Today Testimonies

other hand, claims to be the direct, miraculous revelation of God to the illiterate Muhammad. However, the reason why the Bible “won” was ultimately not based on a rationalistic theory of verbal inspiration but instead on the ability of the Bible to speak directly to Qureshi, which is depicted in contrast to the Qur’an as a “dead book” offering “no comfort.” Qureshi had already had a vision referring him to Luke 13:22–30. Now, while kneeling over the holy books of the world’s two largest religions, it was the passages of the Bible he read – Matt. 5:4, 10:37–39 – were “electric,” not those of the Qur’an. These passages, along with the Bible as a whole (and particularly the New Testament) gave him the courage to make a decision for Christianity, despite the high cost he knew it would entail. Friendship and the Church Community Interestingly, Qureshi does not contrast the fellowship of the church community with his post-conversion alienation from his family. He also does not reference any church services, campus ministries, or Bible studies, and makes no mention of the sacraments. However, his Christian friend, David Wood, was instrumental in patiently leading him to Christianity over a period of years, first as an intellectual sparring partner and later as a model of Christian integrity.

10.13 “Pro Football Was My God,” by Derwin Gray 10.13.1 Gray’s narrative As a young black man living in San Antonio, writes Gray, “I believed in god – the god of football.” Football was “my ticket out of an early life saturated with violence, addiction, abuse, and chaos.” Born to teenage parents, Gray was raised in poverty by his grandmother, who was a Jehovah’s Witness. He soon discovered football as an escape from the “hell [he] was living in” and the promise of “the heaven of the American dream.” It was his “savior,” giving him “identity” as well as the “mission” of attending college and making something of his life. Early on, his “mission” began to look successful: in high school, he was offered a scholarship by Brigham Young University to play football, which he accepted (“So, you have a black kid from a lower socioeconomic, multiethnic context with a Jehovah’s Witness religious background (whose god is football) attending a Mormon university.”). He met his wife at BYU, and succeeded on the field, eventually being drafted by the Indianapolis Colts in the National Football League. It was there, in the NFL, that he met “the Naked Preacher,” Steve Grant. Grant was a linebacker for the Colts who after games would wrap a towel

“Pro Football Was My God,” by Derwin Gray

287

around his waist and approach the other players in the locker room to ask them if they knew Jesus. Gray had little interest in hearing about Jesus or talking to a half-naked man, so he explained to the Naked Preacher that he was a good person (indeed, one of the few people in his family who had not been in jail), had graduated from college, and did not father any children out of wedlock. This answer did not satisfy the Preacher, who opened up his Bible and informed Gray that “‘No one is good except God alone’ (Mark 10:18, ESV)” and, “‘all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God’ (Rom. 3:23).” Gray was “disturbed” by this answer, and asked the Naked Preacher what he could do to be “perfect,” to which the Preacher answered: “Nothing.” Although Gray was baffled, the Naked Preacher viewed this conversation as a success. “Rookie D. Gray,” he told him, “now you are starting to get it. You can’t do anything to reach a perfect God. But Jesus has done everything for the perfect God to come down and reach you.” Gray “sat in silence,” needing time to ponder the discussion and “what I was experiencing in my heart.” Yet he did not immediately convert. Instead, over the next five years, while playing on the Colts, he watched Steve Grant “live out the gospel.” Grant was there for other teammates who needed him, supported the community, and was a model father and husband. “He preached through his words and actions.” Through watching the Naked Preacher and listening to his message, “God’s love crushed me,” Gray writes. Gray had indeed escaped his past and achieved the “America dream,” but this accomplishment could not “empower” him to love his wife, for instance, or forgive his father. “My fame and money could not erase my sin, shame, guilt, fear, and insecurity.” Moreover, after multiple injuries, Gray began to realize that his days as a professional athlete were limited, which was a bitter pill to swallow. As his ageing body increasingly weakened, “I was stripped of everything I thought gave me meaning.” Then, one day, after practice, Gray writes that he “sensed an emptiness and brokenness like I had never experienced.” He immediately picked up the phone and called his wife. “I want to be more committed to you,” he confided in her. “And I want to be committed to Jesus.” It was at that very moment that Gray “realized that God loved me.” God did not love him because he was athletic, or rich, or a good person: “I realized that as Jesus hung on the cross, I was forever loved and accepted by God. I realized my sin had been erased by Jesus’ blood. It was as if I could see for the first time. That day I got infected with a virus called grace. The symptoms are now fullblown.”

Soon after, Gray retired and began speaking to churches and youth groups – which he regards as a “miracle,” since he had been a stutterer. “All my wife and I knew was that Jesus loved us and that if he could transform my life, he could transform anyone’s,” he writes. “So I took every invitation I received to share my testimony.” Since then, Gray sees his faith as having increasingly deepened. “Eventually

288

Christianity Today Testimonies

Jesus gave me a love for his bride, the church,” and Gray and his wife decided to “plant” a congregation that would “[reflect] the diversity of the eternal kingdom and the New Testament churches of the first century (Rev. 5:9–12; Eph. 2:14–22).” This congregation, Transformation Church, is “multiethnic, multigenerational, missional,” and has according to sources been one of the fastest growing churches in America from 2010 through 2012. “This is my story of grace,” he concludes, “one that Jesus continues to write to this day.” 10.13.2 Analysis of Gray’s narrative Sports figures are a prevalent subgenre of the contemporary evangelical conversion narrative. There is a deep tension in the enthusiasm for such testimonies, however, given that Christian professional athletes’ popularity, and implicit spiritual authority, is arguably based on the tendency of sports to take on “religious” qualities (“my god,” as Gray referred to football) – which is the very danger these Christian athletes have often fought to overcome. These criticisms, however, do not necessarily apply to Gray: he was never a sports superstar and was far from a household name, and he is now an ordained minister leading an influential congregation, thus his authority and the appeal of his narrative are not based on Gray’s athletic achievements or namerecognition. At a deeper level, Gray’s is a story of a young African-American man, born in poverty and without a father, who despite disadvantages was able to escape “the hell [he] was living in” through hard work, dedication, and a life of integrity. Still, he came to the conclusion that being “a good person” was not enough, as he could never earn his own salvation. Mystical Presence Gray experiences the presence of God after he calls his wife and informs her that he “want[s] to be committed to Jesus,” writing that it was “at that moment” that he then “realized that God loved me.” “It was as if I could see for the first time,” as he describes the experience, making a clear reference to spiritual illumination. Moreover, his reference to being “infected” by grace is reminiscent of Edwards’ language of “infusion.” Later in the text, Gray refers to him and his wife “sens[ing] deeply” that God was calling them to found a church. Presence of Changed State Gray was a morally upstanding individual before his conversion: he did not struggle with substance abuse, was successfully employed, and was happily married with no illegitimate children. As a young African-American man who had grown up in difficult circumstances, the fact that he could consider himself “a good person” was a matter of great pride. Still, he could not overcome feelings of “sin, shame, guilt, fear, and insecurity,” because

“Pro Football Was My God,” by Derwin Gray

289

according to Gray his “god” was football, giving him ultimate meaning and significance in life. After his conversion, he was “infected with a virus called grace,” whose “symptoms are now full-blown.” In contrast to his previous football-obsessed self, Gray is now dedicated to spreading the message of Jesus Christ. His life, he comments, has been “transformed,” which includes being more committed to his wife. He also notes a small “miracle,” namely that after his conversion he was able to overcome his stuttering problem and become a public speaker. Change in Divine Status Gray makes explicit reference to the doctrine of justification, writing that “my sin had been erased by Jesus’ blood” and that it was through Jesus’ crucifixion that “I was forever loved and accepted by God” because of Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross. Moreover, his change in belief from the “god” of sports to the God of Christianity reflects a change in spiritual identity. Importance of Moment of Regeneration Gray writes that after he made a “commitment” to Christ, he immediately “realized” that God loved him, and that his “sin had been erased by Jesus’ blood.” Although Gray does not describe the moment as a dramatic event, it does play an important role. It was “at that moment” that Gray was “infected with a virus called grace.” Role of Free Will Gray’s new birth appears to be predicated on a decision, although it is not completely clear. His experience of “realizing” God’s love, and that Jesus died for him on the cross, and his spiritual illumination all took place immediately after he told his wife that he wanted to be “committed to Jesus.” However, Gray also views God as “crushing” him through the sermons of the Naked Preacher, leading him to the point where he made a decision. Conversion Pattern Moreover, Grant experiences something similar to the Puritan doctrine of humiliation: he had thought he was “good” because he compared himself to others, but the Naked Preacher led Gray the realization that God is “the standard of goodness and righteousness,” not other people, and that “everyone has sinned and falls short” of this righteousness. “This disturbed me,” according to Gray, but Steve Grant viewed Gray’s discomfort as progress, telling him “now you’re getting it.” This did not, interestingly, lead to an immediate conversion, as Gray writes that he spent five years watching Steve Grant, paying attention to how he led his life and interacted with others, which Gray interprets retrospectively as “preach[ing] … through his actions.” During this time, “God’s love crushed me,” he writes. The final step in his preparation came when he was no longer able to “serve” his “god,” i. e.

290

Christianity Today Testimonies

football. This led to a deep “emptiness and brokenness,” which finally led Gray to commit his life to Jesus. The Role of the Bible and Doctrine Scriptural texts play a significant role in Gray’s narrative. When Gray tells Grant that he is a good person, Grant answers with two biblical texts, Mark 10:18 (“no one is good except God alone”) and Romans 3:23 (“For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God”), which are used to convey the classic evangelistic message that “being good” is not good enough for God. Interestingly, although not religious at the time, Gray appears to have treated those two texts as authoritative. Towards the end of the text, Gray references Rev. 5:9–12 and Eph. 2:14–22 when describing his “calling” to found a church.” The Church Community Prior to his conversion, Gray mentions only one Christian acquaintance who helped guide him to the faith: Steve Grant, the “Naked Preacher.” Afterwards, however, Gray informs that reader that he developed “a love for [Jesus’] bride, the church,” and along with his wife has founded a church which attempts to reflect “the New Testament churches of the first century” by being ethnically diverse and missionally oriented. Gray interprets this development as the outgrown of his own testimony: “if he could transform my life, he could transform anyone’s.”

11 Summary Analysis of Christianity Today “Testimonies” 11.1 Presence of God 11.1.1 Metaphor and descriptive language Throughout this study, theologians as well as Christian laity have repeatedly resorted to metaphor as a method of communicating the conviction that God is present in the heart of the believer. For Spener, it was the “spark,” for Edwards the “divine and supernatural light,” and for Finney “waves of electricity” and “liquid love.” Both Charles Colson and Brian Welch have employed numerous forms of metaphor and descriptive language when describing and reflecting upon their own experiences of God as born-again Christians. It should not be a surprise, then, that such language appears frequently in the twelve “testimonies” analyzed for the previous chapter. Perhaps the most basic metaphor among contemporary evangelicals is that of a “personal relationship.” When Worthington, for instance, reiterates that his “relationship” with Jesus is “personal,” the fact that he does not feel the need to explain what he means by the statement assumes that those reading his article need no clarification. Lynn Wilder writes that after she asked Jesus to “save” her, “God became personal” in what she calls a “palpable relationship.” Not only did God’s presence “gently lead” her, but she views God as intervening in her life and “doing” things such as getting her a job or her house sold. Metaxas contrasts his earlier religious belief in a “vague,” “impersonal,” and “Eastern” conception of a “God force,” whose innocuousness and moral unobtrusiveness appealed to young college graduates such as himself, with the “personal” God of Christianity. Monge also describes herself as having a deeply personal relation ship with God, which includes yelling and screaming, and sees God as “reveal[ing] himself” through different means. Although one could argue that the language of “personal relationship” has for many become simply part of evangelical Christianity’s stock vocabulary, and therefore does not necessarily refer to any direct experience of God, the majority of the narratives develop further use of metaphor to describe God’s presence in highly personal and creative ways. When Butterfield writes that she was able to overcome this pain due to “the voice of God [singing] a sanguine love song in the rubble of my world,” she uses a voice-metaphor which has become a popular choice for expressing God’s communication. Reed, who had already experienced the music of Johnny Cash as “the wooing

292

Summary Analysis of Christianity Today “Testimonies”

voice of God,” describes a mystical experience during his conversion in which he “heard a voice” which “both was and wasn’t audible,” asking him to give God “100 percent.” This language is strikingly similar to Metaxas’, who writes that God “spoke” to him, not audibly, but in “the secret vocabulary of my heart.” The experiences of both Reed and Metaxas are portrayed as being marked by a strong inner certainty, as neither writes that he had any doubts about whose voice it really was. In addition to hearing, other senses often become a preferred picture for expressing mystical experience. Majid describes his experience of attending the church in which he would later convert as “smell[ing] of God.” Butterfield “drank,” at first “tentatively, but then with increasing passion, of the solace of the Holy Spirit.” Metaxas was “flooded with joy.” Travis Reed’s first taste of God’s presence was before his conversion, while attending a U2 concert, when “a wind of grace blew over [him].” He describes the event as being “drenched in a universal love,” as a kind of worship experience which brought him “toward the arms of God.” The next day after his conversion, when Reed was listening to a U2 song with a Christian message, he writes that he “did not just hear” it: “I felt it with my being.” He describes the drumbeat as “smashing Satan in the face and loosening his grasp on my life,” and calling Reed away from “violence” towards “chivalry,” “justice,” and “hope.” And Gray describes himself as being “infected” by grace by his conversion – language reminiscent of Edwards’ “infusion.” 11.1.2 Illuminiation Perhaps the most significant use of sensual metaphor in the “testimonies” is that of sight, demonstrating that the long theological tradition of illumination is still alive among contemporary evangelicals. Metaxas’ dream conversion is marked by light imagery: a “dazzlingly bright sunlight” illuminated the golden fish. Afterwards, “all was new and newness.” According to Kirsten Powers, after attending a Bible study in the midst of her conversion experience, “the world looked entirely different, like a veil had been lifted off it.” Although God’s mystical presence is given very little attention in Casey Cease’s text (the Holy Spirit, for instance, is given no mention at all), the doctrine of spiritual illumination is clearly reflected in his statement that God “began to open my eyes [and] my ears.” After Gray calls his wife and informs her that he “want[s] to be committed to Jesus,” he writes that it was “at that moment” that he then “realized that God loved me”: “It was as if I could see for the first time,” as he describes it. Even the final sentence in Majid’s testimony, “Now, I understand,” can also be viewed as an expression of the doctrine of illumination.

Presence of God

293

11.1.3 Visions and dreams Dreams and visions are particularly significant in that they have a specific content and are not merely an undefined, inexplicable inward sense of mystical presence: they contain symbols, and these symbols have specific meanings which can be unlocked by those who have them. Significantly, in none of the narratives do converts seek out a dream interpreter. Kirsten Powers’ conversion experience is inaugurated by a mystical vision (“between a dream and reality”) of Jesus, who announces his reality as well as presence in her life by telling her, “Here I am.” Most of the dreams reported, however, are much less direct and contain more complicated theological symbolism, for instance when Wilder reports her daughter having a dream which integrated imagery of Jesus as the “Good Shepherd” in John 10, along with scenes from the crucifixion and even an interactive experience of the doctrine of atonement. Eric Metaxas’ story is noteworthy in that he became a Christian in a dream itself. He knew, from his Greek Orthodox upbringing, that the Christian symbol of the fish was a reference to Jesus: “ixthys – Jesus Christ Son of God Our Savior.” Metaxas interprets the fact that God used this imagery, as well as the fact that God chose to communicate to him in the form of a dream (a subject which had always interested Metaxas), as proof of God’s personal relationship with Christians. Interestingly, the two conversions of former Muslims are both marked by dreams, and both report experiencing dreams before their conversions to Christianity. John Majid’s first vision, whose message was forgiveness, was not his conversion but instead led him along a journey which ended in an American Christian congregation, where he had another mystical experience that resulted in his becoming a Christian. Qureshi writes that as a Muslim, he had been taught to rely on dreams and visions for guidance, so he “began imploring God daily” to grant him one, which God answered by giving him three dreams and a vision in his first year of medical school. He views the second dream, in which he was “standing in the threshold of a strikingly narrow door” and watching others taking their seats at a wedding, as the most powerful. He immediately knew this dream was from God, and found “further verification” of its meaning that day when he discovered the parable of the narrow door in Luke 13:22–30.

11.1.4 Gifts of the Spirit and ecstatic experience Often, God’s presence is experienced in ways particularly common to Charismatic Christianity and its concern for “gifts of the Spirit.”1 Prior to his 1 Cf. Rom. 12:4–7; 1 Cor. 12:4–12. Cf. also Eph. 4:11–16.

294

Summary Analysis of Christianity Today “Testimonies”

conversion, Metaxas experienced a foretaste of this mystical experience when, while praying with Ed, “a transcendent shift seemed to take place,” which give him the feeling he was seeing “another realm.” In the days after her conversion experience, Kirsten Powers “suddenly felt God everywhere,” an event she describes as “terrifying.” Any doubts she had previously had completely left her. Now, there was only “indescribably joy.” During his conversion, Worthington experiences “holy laughter,” caused by the “joy” of Jesus, which he was experienced for the first time. Later, he writes that he was able to recognize the presence of the Holy Spirit (which had always been there), for instance in a man who had been miraculously healed. After realizing that the congregation was praying for Iran, Majid began “crying, laughing, and dancing” out of happiness. He describes the moment as “peace” and “heaven.”

11.1.5 The rationalist exception In a significant minority of narratives, the direct experience of God is underemphasized, often among those who were converted primarily through rational persuasion. God’s mystical presence plays a minor role, for instance, in Monge’s narrative, who writes of a pre-conversion experience of being moved to tears by the crucifixion narrative in John, yet does not interpret this event as the mystical experience of God’s presence, as many readers would expect. Later in the narrative, she describes a long nature hike, in which she “felt disconnected from God” and “begged God to make it all click, as a test for me to know that he was there” – yet even this moment is not consummated by a mystical experience. Still, she also describes herself as having a deeply personal relation ship with God, and sees God as “reveal[ing] himself” through different means. Ravi Zacharias, an internationally known apologist and evangelist dedicated to the rational defense of Christianity, also says very little that could be labeled mystical. After his hospital-bed conversion, Zacharias writes that he was “a changed man,” yet gives no description of the experience. The only language that could be interpreted as a mystical experience would be his statement that the word “live” in John 14 “hit me like a ton of bricks” – this interpretation, however, would be a stretch.

Presence of Changed State

295

11.2 Presence of Changed State 11.2.1 Language of the new being That fact that Zacharias proclaims that he became “a changed man” after his conversion, but gives little description of how, is a testament to how a change in personal character is viewed as a matter of course among evangelicals. Cease, now a pastor, specifically uses the theological language of sanctification, emphasizing that this change is a process: “God has changed me and is still changing me.” This change enabled him to confront the consequences of his actions “with courage.” Worthington describes the change he experienced as beginning small (“in my immaturity”) but growing into “robust” proportions, which empowered him to weather the storm of spiritual crises. It enabled him, for instance, to forgive the man who murdered his mother, as well as forgive himself for not preventing his brother’s suicide.

11.2.2 Overcoming substance abuse One of the primary themes of Welch’s narrative, that of overcoming substance abuse, is only present in two of the twelve “testimonies.” Casey Cease writes that God has “transformed” him and given him “purpose.” This included leaving behind a life filled with drugs and alcohol. Reed’s story is similar: drugs and alcohol were an outlet for escaping his own anger, confusion, and spiritual frustration. Neither men, however, appear to have reached the depths of addiction experienced by Welch.

11.2.3 From negative to positive attitude Much more frequent than the overcoming of addictions is the emotional transformation from sadness to happiness, from despair to joy. It was only after his conversion, baptism, and Bible study that John Majid claims to have truly understood forgiveness and was finally able to “ma[ke] sense of all my pain and my hate,” which enabled him to overcome his deep-seeded anger and forgive himself and others. Previously Metaxas had been clearly unhappy, and afterwards he was deeply fulfilled. The “joy” which he describes as immediately following his dream and continuing until today can be interpreted as a description of both God’s presence as well as Metaxas’ changed state. Prior to his conversion, Travis Reed was an angry, confused,

296

Summary Analysis of Christianity Today “Testimonies”

and rebellious young man, but he sees his conversion as overcoming these earlier emotions and freeing him to a life of ministry. Echoing Paul’s analogy of being crucified and risen in Christ (Gal. 2:20), Reed applies this to his own person, writing, “I was raised from the dead by the God of love.” Often the change in attitude applies particularly to the convert’s views of Christianity, for instance in Butterfield’s description of her transformation from a cynical critic of evangelical Christianity to discovering “private peace” and then “community” in that very tradition. Powers, like Butterfield, also overcame a deep distain towards evangelical Christianity, due to her being raised in the liberal Episcopal Church and then spending her time with secularly minded political progressives. 11.2.4 Freedom to moral obedience Occasionally the testimonies analyzed in this study have reflected the Finneyan emphasis on a new capacity for moral obedience, as opposed to any radical change in fundamental personality or the overcoming of debilitating addictions. According to Butterfield, before her conversion she had been morally upstanding, capable of spiritual insight, and was not gnawed by feelings of helplessness; instead, what was missing was the power to obey what she increasingly saw to be God’s will, which she saw as a change in her sexual practices. Prior to her conversion, Monge was aware of morally faulty character traits that she had wanted to change, which also included issues of “sexual boundaries,” but was not able to do so. Afterwards, she comments that she is freed to “the obedience required by true faith.” 11.2.5 The exception The change in character that takes place during conversion is often the centerpiece of conversion narratives: in the case of Welch, it was the hopeless, angry drug addict who was freed from his substance abuse only through having his heart changed; for Colson, it is the story of a cynical, manipulative politician who was transformed into a forgiving and prayerful philanthropist who dedicated his life to helping prisoners. However, there is a minority of conversion narratives that place a smaller theological emphasis on what others see as the most significant aspect of being born again. A classic example is Derwin Gray, who before becoming a Christian was a morally upstanding individual: he did not struggle with addiction, was successfully employed, and was happily (and faithfully) married. Still, Gray was “transformed” in the sense that his “god” is no longer football, and he is now a full-time pastor. Often this exception is found in those who converted from a previous religion to Christianity. Such individuals had often already been morally

Change in Divine Status

297

upstanding and concerned about a relationship with God before becoming evangelical Christians. Wilder, for instance, was a pious, religious individual who even believed Jesus – although, from the standpoint of those outside of the Mormon Church, it was a heterodox belief. Despite her piety, however, her worldview had been marked by a religious legalism which she sees as Pharisaic. Qureshi, a formerly pious Muslim, gives no specific example of a sin which was overcome through his conversion. He had already been a deeply spiritual – indeed, “religious” – person before his conversion. His only change was that he was no longer filled with anguish concerning the decision of whether or not to convert to Christianity, an experience he describes repeatedly as “suffering.”

11.3 Change in Divine Status 11.3.1 Atonement and forgiveness of sins through Christ’s crucifixion Evangelical Christianity often has the reputation of emphasizing the change in status made possible by Christ’s sacrifice on the cross. This theology is clearly important for Cease, who writes that God “made me his own,” that his “sins were forgiven … because of what Jesus accomplished on the cross.” Zacharias proclaims to have been “redeemed” by Jesus Christ, through the salvation accomplished by Christ’s sacrifice on the cross. Majid writes that Jesus died for him and “saved” him. Frequently this doctrine is not merely affirmed in the abstract, but is also seen as applicable to life situations. According to Worthington, for example, “Christ’s death on our behalf to open up the way to the Father’s forgiveness of our own many sins,” helped him forgive his mother’s murderer: Worthington was able to forgive, he writes, because his own sins had been forgiven. The imagery of blood is particularly common, for instance in the penultimate sentence of Butterfield’s text, “I have not forgotten the blood Jesus surrendered for this life,” which is an explicit reference to the doctrine of atonement. (However, this statement has little relevance to the rest of the narrative, making it reminiscent of Brian “Head” Welch’s final chapter.) The dream that Wilder’s daughter, Katie, experienced shortly after her conversion serves as a graphic, cinematic representation of the doctrine of atonement, in which Katie is covered in blood by Jesus himself. Gray writes that “my sin had been erased by Jesus’ blood” and that it was through Jesus’ crucifixion that “I was forever loved and accepted by God.”

298

Summary Analysis of Christianity Today “Testimonies”

11.3.2 Eternal life Perhaps surprisingly, the question of heaven and hell is barely negligible in the twelve testimonies. Wilder writes that she “believed the Mormon Church secured my eternal life” through her obedience to its “laws and ordinances,” but later learned that she was saved only by grace, which can be read as an indirect reference to the afterlife. The only two passing references to hell come from Butterfield’s narrative, in which she experienced an “image … of me and everyone I loved suffering in hell” (but she does not explain the purpose of this image, or even if it was from God), and in Cease’s statement that he “believed [he] would go to heaven” as a youth. Not one of the twelve narratives, significantly, mentions converting to Christianity out of fear of going to hell.

11.3.3 Adoption The language of adoption, which was so important for Welch, is also to be found in three of the twelve narratives (all of which were written, interestingly, by men). “God purchased me completely,” writes Cease so that he now “belonged to him.” He is now God’s “very son.” Moreover, Gray’s change in belief from the “god” of sports to the true God of Christianity reflects a change in spiritual identity. The doctrine of adoption is particularly central for Reed, who discovered a father-figure in God. Unlike his earthly father-figures, the Heavenly Father is marked by patience and love. He ends the narrative by referencing the story of the Prodigal Son as a parable of his own relationship with the Father.

11.3.4 The exception In very few, if any, of the Christianity Today “testimonies” is change in divine status the central theological theme, with the possible exception of Cease. There are certain narratives in which the doctrines of justification and adoption play only a significantly minor role, almost to the point of being undetectable. They are primarily implicit in Metaxas’ narrative, for instance, being implied in the ichthys symbol, which refers to Christ’s salvific role. Also in the narrative of Powers, who attends the same church as Metaxas, there are no explicit references to justification or to Jesus’ atonement, except for when her boyfriend asks her if she believes in Jesus as her “Savior.” Monge makes are no references to justification, adoption, or the doctrine of hell, although her reference the sacrament of baptism can be argued to imply these.

Importance of Moment of Regeneration

299

11.4 Importance of Moment of Regeneration 11.4.1 Moment as dramatic and/or central event in narrative Evangelical conversion narratives often have a reputation for featuring dramatic moments in which the convert clearly crosses the threshold into true faith. Both Welch and Colson, for example, fit this category. In the Christianity Today “testimonies,” some, but not all, of the converts identify a distinct particular moment. Perhaps the most dramatic conversion moment of the group belongs to Metaxas, who views his life as having changed “literally overnight,” i. e. while dreaming. Wilder’s conversion clearly happens in a dramatic moment, when she “cried out to Jesus,” and then, “instantly,” she was “sucked over.” John Majid, while attending a worship service, suddenly experienced “peace,” “heaven,” which was followed by what can be interpret as charismatic “gifts of the Spirit.” For other testimonies, the moment of conversion is less sensational, but still functions as the central point of the narrative. For Zacharias, the moment of conversion is his decision for Christ. Similarly, Qureshi clearly views his bedside decision to “give up” his life as the moment he became, officially, a Christian. Although Gray does not describe the moment of his decision as a dramatic event, it does play an important role. It was after he made a “commitment” to Christ that he immediately “realized” that God loved him, and that his “sin had been erased by Jesus’ blood.” While he does identify a moment of regeneration, Cease also intentionally downplays it, writing that he asked Jesus to “make [him] well,” but he “didn’t pray a special prayer or speak in tongues or fill out a card or even cry.” It was a “quiet moment,” but also the beginning of a transformation. Worthington goes even further theologically, acknowledging that while he can identify the time in which his “relationship” began, not every Christian has to have a memorable experience, since many make a “natural transition to personal faith.” 11.4.2 Identification of extended period Both Reed’s and Powers’ conversions are unique in that they are based upon two conversion moments – or perhaps more accurately, an extended, mystical conversion period which has a beginning and a consummation. When the exact moment of regeneration takes place, however, is open to interpretation: neither of the two identifies a moment in which he or she crossed the threshold into true belief. In Reed’s case, the period begins in his room, when he “hears” the voice of God (which he describes as audible and not audible) and then promises to give God “100 percent.” Afterwards, he was able to read the book of Psalms with a spiritual satisfaction he had never previously experienced –

300

Summary Analysis of Christianity Today “Testimonies”

and even “slept like a baby” for the first time in years. The next morning makes up the second moment, in which Reed, while mesmerized by the drops of water falling from a watering hose, is filled with the intense feeling of God’s presence. For Powers, the length of this extended mystical conversion experience was much longer than one evening and a morning: it began with a direct confrontation with Jesus, who announced his presence to her, continued with a period (she does not specify how long) in which she “felt God everywhere” and ended in a Bible study, in which “the world looked entirely different, like a veil had been lifted off it.” Although many would interpret this final event as the moment of regeneration, Powers’ narrative gives no final answer; far more important, in her opinion, is to stress that the conversion was against her own will. 11.4.3 Exceptions Two of the twelve narratives land in the “other” category concerning the moment of regeneration. The first is Butterfield’s, who merely mentions that it happened “one ordinary day,” and then proceeds to describe the support she received from others after the event. Although she mentions the day, Butterfield does not mention whether or not she can identify a moment, and she does appear to regard such a concern as theologically significant. Also in the case of Monge, it is very difficult to assign the event to a moment in her narrative. The matter is even further complicated by Monge’s claim that she “committed my life to Christ” in the sacrament of baptism – and even provides the exact date when it took place. Whether or not she affirms the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, her narrative is the only one among the twelve which is clearly open to such an interpretation.

11.5 The Role of Free Will 11.5.1 “Decision” Many of the narratives emphasize the necessity of a conscious decision for Christianity. Qureshi, for instance, experienced a dream in which God communicated to him that there was a “decision I knew I had to make.” Even though he had already experienced dreams and a vision, Qureshi does not view himself as being converted until he “gave up” his life to Jesus Christ. Casey Cease tells of “making excuses” before coming to a decision, and on the day after his dream, Metaxas informed his Christian friend and coworker that he had “accepted Jesus”. Ravi Zacharias, an evangelist who encourages his

The Role of Free Will

301

hearers to make a “commitment” to Christ if they have not already done so, made two such commitments in his life: once as a young teenager, and then again at the age of 17, following his suicide attempt. The difference is that while the first was “half-hearted,” the second, prayed after he had nearly lost his life, was in earnest. Others, while not explicitly using the term “decision,” appear to view their conversion in a similar light. Butterfield’s statement that she “came to Jesus,” for instance, implies a movement of the will (as opposed to “Jesus came to me”). Travis Reed writes that God told him to “give me 100 percent,” which according to Reed was “asking,” not ordering. Also Gray’s new birth appears to be predicated on a decision: his experience of “realizing” God’s love, and that Jesus died for him on the cross, and his spiritual illumination all took place immediately after he told his wife that he wanted to be “committed to Jesus.”

11.5.2 Rejection of language of “decision” Of the twelve narratives, one explicitly rejects the notion of free will being involved in regeneration. It is perhaps no coincidence that Powers, who attends a Calvinist congregation, recounts a conversion that is completely in line with the classical Puritan doctrine of irresistible grace found in Edwards. Powers portrays herself as actively resisting God’s grace, only to be overwhelmed – even “traumatized” – by a mystical vision of Jesus. Even after she had been born again, she attempted to resist this event by writing it off as “misfiring synapses”; however, God continued his “unwelcome” presence and refused to release her.

11.5.3 Ambiguity Other narratives leave open significant ambiguity in relation to questions of free will and a “decision” for Christianity. As a rational thinker looking for intellectual fulfillment, Monge needed to be convinced of Christianity’s reasonableness before she would accept it as true. In the final sentence, however, she writes that “[God] found me.” Majid also does not state that he made a “decision” for Jesus Christ. Instead, he was attending a Christian worship service and was overwhelmed with joy, allowing his experience to be interpreted easily through the lens of Edwards’ revivalist Calvinism. While Worthington describes himself as asking God for a “personal relationship,” he does not emphasize being born again as a “decision for Christ.” He even insinuates that many do not have to make such a decision because, “being born and raised in a Christian home,” they make a “natural transition to personal

302

Summary Analysis of Christianity Today “Testimonies”

faith.” Before her conversion, Wilder writes that she felt herself being pulled towards Christianity in a way in which there was “no escape” from God’s “gravitational pull” – language which sounds very similar to the Calvinist Powers. However, she then describes the moment of her regeneration as being marked by a decision (“I am yours. Save me.”).

11.6 Patterns of Conversion 11.6.1 Journey For many of the testimonies, being born again was the result of a long journey towards the Christian faith. In general, this journey is often less harsh than the classic Calvinist understanding of “preparatory grace,” and even views other forms of spirituality as positive, yet ultimately incomplete. John Majid is a perfect example: even before becoming a Christian, Majid experienced visions, made religious pilgrimages, and slowly learned how, though not completely, to forgive others. His final conversion in an American church feels like the culmination of all these prior events; it is not a crisis, but instead the moment in which he finally was overwhelmed by a presence he had experienced before, albeit fragmentarily. Worthington views the Holy Spirit as having an “invisible presence” in his life even before he had a “personal relationship” with God, shining a light into his “cave trail” and steadily leading him towards the mountaintop. Thus he is not dismissive of the basic faith he learned as a child, which he sees as foundational for his later post-conversion life. The conversion itself takes place during a quiet moment in which he tells a study group that he would like a “personal relationship” with Jesus Christ. Often this journey is primarily rational, in which certain doubts and objections concerning the Christian faith are slowly cleared away. Butterfield, for instance, was leading what she experienced to be a deeply fulfilling life before she became a Christian, but as a skeptical college professor she was filled with doubts about the Bible and Christianity which could only be overcome through study and conversation. Monge’s story is similar: although her journey to Christianity was also driven by moral and spiritual dissatisfaction, her main emphasis is on how she needed to become convinced of Christianity’s truth before taking the next step. And Powers describes the long process of grappling with Timothy Keller’s sermons, which “exposed the intellectual weaknesses of a purely secular worldview,” enabling her to become more receptive to hearing the Christian message.

Patterns of Conversion

303

11.6.2 Crisis For others, being born again was less of a culmination of a steady journey and more the result of an acute crisis taking place over a shorter period of time. For Zacharias, this was the event of near death following an abortive suicide attempt, after which his conversion took place nearly immediately, in a hospital bed. For Cease, it was a deadly automobile accident, which was followed by a period of what Puritan theology has labeled “humiliation”: the attempt to win God’s favor through his own goodness, vacillating “between self-condemnation and false hope in my good behavior.” Wilder had long attempted to gain holiness through her own works of righteousness, and in contrast to Cease had appeared to achieve it to some degree, but the family crisis of her son’s conversion to Protestant Christianity initiated a process in which she began to increasingly question her righteousness, and in which she simultaneously felt God begin to irresistibly pull her towards himself.

11.6.3 Other, mixed forms For much of his early life, Metaxas was spiritually lost at sea, and he interprets his youthful spiritual experimentation not as pointing him in the right direction but as selfish and shallow. A trajectory begins to take shape, however, when he meets Ed, from whom he slowly began to learn more about the Christian faith, including the act of prayer, during which he once “felt the faintest touch of some heavenly breeze.” Like Metaxas, Reed’s life was also spiritually shapeless, except for the presence of music, which he sees as an experience of the divine; however, music itself was not enough to guide him, and instead it was only hitting rock-bottom that brought about his conversion. Grant describes himself as also grappling with spiritual humiliation: he was “disturbed,” he writes, to learn that despite his moral accomplishments he was still a “sinner” and had not attained “righteousness,” but the process of working through this preparatory phase lasted years, and included a deepening friendship with another Christian who patiently demonstrated, through his actions, what the Christian life looked like.

11.6.4 False conversions Though he had previously “made a commitment to Christ,” and was even leading a church youth group, Worthington believes that it was first after praying for this relationship that he “experienced Jesus’ joy for the first time.”

304

Summary Analysis of Christianity Today “Testimonies”

He thus makes a distinction, similar to Edwards, between the “conversions” he had previously experienced and true new birth, as well as the basic distinction – common among modern evangelicals and found in all four theologians examined in this book – between abstract, intellectual knowledge of the Christian faith and a deeper, personal one. Zacharias tells a similar story, but claims not that he had been ignorant (as does Worthington) but instead that his intentions were false, which is similar to Reed’s decision to be baptized as a youth.

11.7 The Bible and Doctrine 11.7.1 The Bible as book For those conversion narratives in which the Bible, as an inspired book in its entirety, is viewed as assisting in the conversion process, there are generally two levels on which its authority is acknowledged. First, there is what can be termed a rational affirmation of the Bible’s inspiration and authority: scripture is viewed as a trustworthy and reliable source, whose teachings are binding. This is generally, but not always, the first of the two aspects mentioned in the narrative, and often leads a the second, existential affirmation of the Bible, as seen in Finney’s testimony.2 The existential facet is almost unanimously regarded as more important than the first, since it is marked by the convert’s direct experience of the Bible’s power. For Monge, for instance, the “truth” of the Bible is on two different levels: first, there is its intellectual trustworthiness, the “evidence” of which she compiled during a long and intense investigation of Christianity; however, she then noticed that she also needed to experience the truth of scripture in her “heart.” Powers mentions that she started to read the Bible prior to her conversion, which she did with a skeptical eye. It was during a Bible study that she felt as if “a veil had been lifted off [the world]” and was completely convinced of the truth of Christianity as well as of her conversion. For Butterfield, the typical order of rational and existential affirmation is reversed, with her acceptance of the Bible’s doctrines coming after her personal experience of the text. “It overflowed into my world,” are Butterfield’s words to describe the experience of reading scripture; yet Butterfield also had to come to terms with what she sees as the unavoidable consequences of scripture’s teaching on sexuality. These two levels are seen in the narratives of those who converted to evangelical Christianity from another religion, in which the Bible as a book was compared, and judged superior, to other holy texts. For Wilder, it was 2 “I had intellectually believed the Bible before; but never had the truth been in my mind that faith was a voluntary trust instead of an intellectual state” (Memoirs: 16).

The Bible and Doctrine

305

through reading the New Testament in particular that her desire for God “grew exponentially,” and that she came to the conclusion that “Mormonism taught a different gospel than what the Bible taught.” Qureshi’s faith in the Qur’an’s divine inspiration was steadily eroded, while “the case was strong” that the Bible, in contrast, was a trustworthy book. The climax of his narrative takes place when Qureshi places the two books beside each other, knowing that he could only choose one. Just as in Wilder’s case, for Qureshi the Bible ultimately “won” not based on a rationalistic theory of verbal inspiration but instead on the ability of the Bible to speak directly to Qureshi, which is depicted in reaction to the Qur’an as a “dead book” offering “no comfort”; the Bible, on the other hand, was “electric.” John Majid is here the exception, for while he mentions that he was a Muslim, he does not appear to have had a deep concern for the rational truth of Muslim teachings or the inspiration of the Quran. Thus Majid is convinced of the Bible’s truth solely based on its ability to speak to him on a spiritual level.

11.7.2 Biblical passages For others, the Bible’s authority as a book in its entirety is primarily implicit: more important are particular passages which the convert sees as having had a significant effect in bringing him or her closer to God. For three of the twelve testimonies, this passage came from the Gospel of John. It was directly after hearing a passage from John’s Gospel, for instance, that Ravi Zacharias prayed to Jesus to give him “life.” He then began studying Paul’s epistle to the Romans intently with his friend, using a Biblical commentary they found on top of a garbage heap. Majid comments that the “Book of John,” by which he most likely is referring to the Gospel, affected him on a deeply personal level. He also applies the parable of the lost sheep to himself, fusing it with the imagery of Jesus as shepherd found in John 10: “I am the one lost sheep whom he went out to find.” For Cease, it was a sermon on chapter 5 of John’s Gospel that finally led him to ask Jesus to “make [him] well,” just as Jesus had done for the paralytic beside the pool. Also common are references to other New Testament texts. Wilder’s son converted to Christianity during his Mormon mission, after reading the text of Ephesians 2:8–9. Gray is told by Steve Grant, the Naked Preacher, that “no one is good except God alone” (Mark 10:28) and “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23). Worthington, who is clearly influenced by Charismatic Christianity, does not mention any specific text aiding in his conversion, but he does refer to James 5:14–16 as bringing his attention to God’s ability to heal the sick. Travis Reed is an interesting exception in that his scriptural inspiration came primarily from the Old Testament, in the Psalms, which he “devoured” like the lyrics of a favorite album. At the end of

306

Summary Analysis of Christianity Today “Testimonies”

the text, he also uses the parable of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11–32) to describe God’s fatherly love.

11.7.3 Implicit biblical and doctrinal literacy Oftentimes, the use of scripture and doctrine is completely implicit. Although the Bible plays little to no explicit role in Metaxas’ narrative, the dream in which he converted is based on the basic doctrinal belief and biblical testimony that Jesus is the “Son of God” and “Savior.” Monge, Cease, Wilder, and Gray all make explicit reference to Jesus’ role as the “savior” who has, through the cross and resurrection, freed them from sin. Reed once again is the exception, focusing primarily not on the Son but instead God’s role as Heavenly Father. It is significant that Worthington names all three persons of the Trinity in his narrative, and assigns each a role: The Father as forgiver; Jesus Christ as the one who “open[s] up the way” to forgiveness of sins through his death, and through his resurrection invites Christians to be “transformed” so as to have a “personal relationship”; and the Holy Spirit as the ever-present companion who reveals the “active, powerful God.” While none of these examples entail the explicit citation of biblical texts or the profession of a doctrine, scripture and doctrine provide the foundation which makes this language possible.

11.8 Friendship and the Church Community 11.8.1 Friendship For both Colson and Welch, friendships were crucial for both bringing them to Christianity as well as contributing to their growth in sanctification. Not surprisingly, most of the narratives in Christianity Today tell a similar story. Butterfield’s journey towards Christianity began with her friendship with a Presbyterian pastor and his wife. She interprets this friendship ecclesiologically, commenting that Pastor Ken and his wife “initiated two years of bringing the church to me, a heathen.” Monge writes that “God revealed himself” to her through friendships and “the Christian tradition.” For Metaxas, it was with an evangelical colleague, Ed Tuttle, who challenged him to “know God” on a deeper level. The fact that Ed and other Christians were praying regularly for Metaxas’ sick father “astounded” him, and it was while in prayer with Ed that he had he first felt the presence of God, although just “the

Friendship and the Church Community

307

faintest touch.” Cease writes that after his conversion, God brought him “wise and faithful men to correct me and disciple me.” Qureshi’s Christian friend, David Wood, was instrumental in patiently leading him to Christianity over a period of years. And for Gray, it was Steve Grant, the “Naked Preacher,” who guided him steadily over a period of years towards the Christian faith.

11.8.2 Worship attendance Often, conversion takes place during the attendance of a church worship service, or directly afterwards, for instance in Welch’s narrative. This was also the case with Majid, who had witnessed Mother Teresa’s community in Calcutta and was reminded of the “joy” he experienced there when attending a worship service in the United States; and it was later in this very church that he had his conversion. It was when she first attended a church service that Butterfield was confronted with questions of her identity and who God wanted her to be. After her conversion, she remarks that “the church that had been praying for me for years” was there to support her. Gray has developed “a love for [Jesus’] bride, the church,” which has blossomed into him becoming a preacher and leading a congregation himself. It is also significant that two individuals mention their baptismal ceremony. Majid gives the exact day in which he was baptized at that church in which he had had his previous conversion experience. Monge also mentions her baptism, describing it as a turning point in her spiritual biography.

11.8.3 Bible study groups The phenomenon of Bible study groups stems back to the collegia pietatis founded by Spener in the late 17th century. This form of Christian community plays a particularly important role for Colson, who was supported by Bible study groups both in the political arena as well as in prison. It can also be said to be a primary form of Christian community in at least three of the Christianity Today “testimonies”: in Powers’, whose involvement in a Bible study group directly led to her conversion experience; in Zacharias’, whose interaction with the Youth for Christ community helped prepare him to be an evangelist; and also in Worthington’s narrative, where it was in the setting of a Bible Study (at a Christian retreat) that he first discovered what it meant to have a “relationship with Jesus.” The influence of Bible studies is also discernable in other testimonies, such as that of Monge, whose conversion experience took place during a “church retreat,” and it is reasonable to assume

308

Summary Analysis of Christianity Today “Testimonies”

that Cease’s reference to the “Godly men” in his life also entails a small-group setting. 11.8.4 Criticism of the church as institution Although all of the testimonies portray a deep love for community and worship, there is frequently a deep skepticism concerning mere church attendance, as well as institutional Christianity in general, which is seen as offering empty ritual and sanctimonious Pharisaism, as opposed to a true and palpable spiritual relationship with Jesus Christ. Casey Cease, now a pastor, describes himself as feeling judged when he attended church as a youth, and mentions the “hypocrisy” of many of the congregation’s members, including presumably his own family, whom he identifies as “Christian” in scare quotes. Reed is dismissive concerning his baptism, since his intentions for participating in the sacrament were selfish, and like Cease he also describes the other members of his childhood congregation as being of little help. True spiritual community, for Reed, is experienced for the first time not in a church, but at a U2 concert. Neither is institutional Christianity interpreted as having any significant effect on Metaxas’ later conversion, even though he attended a Greek Orthodox church “every Sunday.” Zacharias also downplays his Christian upbringing, viewing it as empty ritual because it lacked the “gospel.” Wilder’s narrative is also marked by a deep skepticism concerning institutional religion, though not orthodox Christianity; in her view, the Mormon church community is marked by legalism. However, she does not contrast this experience with her present congregation, which receives no mention, but instead focuses on the faith of her family.

Part III: Concluding Analysis

12 Summary and Final Theological Reflections 12.1 Overview The goal of this study has been to theologically examine a specific conception of the doctrine of regeneration: one which appeals primarily to the language of personal experience – particularly the experience of presence – when expressing what it means to be “born again.” Although the term “born again” has often been associated with modern North American revivalist, evangelical Christianity, it has been shown that the particular theological understanding of regeneration that this movement represents – namely, being born again as an experience of presence – is far older, culturally widespread, and theologically diverse than many people would expect. While the goal of this study has not been to supply a complete inventory of all the cultures and contexts in which this understanding of regeneration appears, or even to offer a conclusive historical genealogy of the doctrine’s development, it has still shown on a small scale its historical and cultural plurality. From early Calvinists in England, including its North American colonies, to Lutherans in Continental Europe, to progressive voices such as Schleiermacher, to fiery revivalists and social activists such as Finney, and finally to a host of different contemporary voices from radically different social, economic, and political backgrounds: all of these individuals, despite their significant differences, have been convinced that their Christian identity is confirmed not only by external theological doctrines but, more importantly, through their own experience of being changed. Still, this study has demonstrated that despite this cultural and even theological plurality, there is a fundamental theological agreement in the vast majority of born-again theologies, both in the doctrinal explications of professional theologians as well as in the “tacit” theologies of everyday Christians. For all of these “born-again” Christians, being born again signifies a fundamental inward change, the experience of God’s presence in one’s life, and a change in one’s divine status. Theologically, this could be described as the God of Jesus Christ working through, dwelling in, and standing for us – in being made a “new being,” experiencing God’s mystical presence, and being justified through Jesus Christ’s death and resurrection on the cross, respectively.1 Spener, as this study has shown, clearly outlined these three 1 For the use of these three prepositions to represent the three different theological aspects of being born again, I am indebted to Dale Brown’s analysis of Spener’s theology in Understanding Pietism: 89.

312

Summary and Final Theological Reflections

elements in his writings on Wiedergeburt, but his goal in doing so, as he himself acknowledged, was not to develop any novel theology but instead to reflect, in light of what he viewed as proper doctrine, on how other pious individuals were already describing their own Christian experience and convictions. Furthermore, the fact that theologians such as Spener have always reflected on the experience of being born again with the aid of theology is not the result of unnecessary dogmatism but instead inherent to the nature of being born again itself, since being “born again” never merely refers to a subjective experience but also to an act of God. Every perceived experience of God’s presence, for instance, is assumed to be one which needs interpretation. In some traditions and cultural situations, the limits of this interpretation have been rigid, while in others – particularly in contemporary North American evangelicalism – it has a highly individual flavor, with many Christians gladly providing highly theological “personal testimonies” with little to no external pressure to do so from their congregation or friends. In all of these examples, both personal experience and theological interpretation are woven together to create a theologically guided narrative. This begins to explain the apparent paradox that it is often the very traditions that emphasize the importance of a subjective conversion experience which also place the most emphasis on the Bible’s divine inspiration and its role as a stable, external authority. There is indeed a profound tension between these two elements, yet this study has demonstrated that it is a tension at the heart of the evangelical understanding of regeneration and, seen from a theological perspective, a necessary one which establishes a creative reciprocity. This is revealed in how Christians report their born-again experience in ways that are guided by (often implicit) theological beliefs, yet also often allow their experience to alter how they interpret scripture. As has become clear in the course of the book, separating these two elements – experience and dogma – is not always simple. Instead, it is the symbiotic relationship between the two which has led to the various modern theologies of new birth as an experience of presence (including the accompanying theological controversies), and which makes every “testimony” a theologically interesting text on its own. To understand the “theo-logic” of being “born again,” therefore, means to understand “lived theology,” both in the sense of how it relates to one’s own life experiences, as well as its application to the wider social and theological context. This latter aspect is particularly clear in the four theologians chosen for this study: Spener, in the 17th century, identified both a lack of concern for personal piety among the masses as well as an overemphasis on conversion among the pious, and in addition refused to ignore the role of baptism in regeneration; Edwards embraced the “awakenings” of his community as the true work of the Holy Spirit, but was increasingly led to recognize the need for discernment due to theological controversy among theologians and ques-

Presence and Tacit Knowledge

313

tionable behavior among overzealous laity; Schleiermacher saw the need to communicate the doctrines of regeneration and sanctification with a fresh, descriptive language, which led him to critically adopt the theological traditions of Pietism, Calvinism, and Lutheranism; and Finney attempted to understand the experience of regeneration in light of his philosophical convictions concerning free will, his expertise on the revival front, and also in relation to the social and political situation in the 19th-century United States. Accordingly, the experience of being “born again” is to be understood as the result of the creative reciprocity between theological convictions and the Christian life. Theological convictions, for instance doctrines, are not always merely abstract propositions to be affirmed; instead, they are also guideposts to be followed. This is why the analysis of autobiographical conversion narratives is so necessary for a robust theological understanding of “bornagain” Christianity. Only through such an analysis can many important theological insights come to light: for instance, that metaphors of sense are not only preferred by academic theologians; or that the doctrine of hell apparently has an extremely marginal influence for most contemporary evangelicals; or that the Trinitarian person of the Father, often neglected (or even dismissed) by contemporary theology, frequently carries deep existential meaning for converts; or that despite the ubiquity of “decision for Christ” language within contemporary North American evangelicalism, many evangelicals are still reticent to link their regeneration with an act of their own free will. In conclusion, it is my hope that this research will encourage other theologians to read the texts of non-theologians texts theologically, as it is through this practice that the theologian is able to gain a deeper understanding of how theological language functions. In other words, this study has shown that there can be no absolute boundary between “systematic” and “practical” theology.

12.2 Presence and Tacit Knowledge 12.2.1 Mediation and the sacraments As Charles Taylor argues in A Secular Age, in a modern, post-Enlightenment world which had become increasingly seen as mechanized and detached from God’s presence, it only made sense that the point of human-divine contact moved away from a sacramentalized view of nature and into the confines of subjectivity (or “buffered self”). In a certain sense, then, and as Taylor himself acknowledges, modern evangelical movements such as Pietism fit perfectly into this schema.2 All four theologians in this study, as well as the various autobiographical conversion narratives, rely heavily on the language of 2 Cf. Taylor, A Secular Age: 488–89.

314

Summary and Final Theological Reflections

subjective presence in order to communicate their experience of new birth, both in the sense of their own subjective change as well as supernatural experience. Depending on one’s own theological and philosophical convictions, this move towards subjectivity can be viewed as liberating progress or a questionable retreat. When understood merely as a subjective experience of presence, the theology of regeneration can easily gain “Gnostic” qualities, as is Eastern Orthodox theologian David Bentley Hart’s criticism of the “born-again” experience, which he understands as “occurring in that one unrepeatable authentic instant in which one accepts Jesus as one’s ‘personal’ Lord and Savior”: “One could scarcely conceive of a more ‘gnostic’ concept of redemption: liberation through private illumination, a spiritual security won only in the deepest surroundings of the soul, a moment of awakening that lifts the soul above the darkness of this world into a realm of spiritual liberty beyond even the reach of moral law, and an immediate intimacy with the divine whose medium is one of purest subjectivity.”3

Hart’s caustic analysis strikes a nerve, for it draws attention to the thin line that often separates the spiritual language of evangelical Christians from the vague, shallow spirituality of Western consumerism. Moreover, Hart draws attention to the theological matter at the heart of the disagreement between those who hold the traditional doctrine of baptismal regeneration and those who understand regeneration as an experience of presence: mediation. For Luther, it was inconceivable to want to discuss regeneration without the mediation of the sacraments; he was well aware that sacraments could easily be misunderstood as “magical,” yet he regarded any wholesale rejection of their mediating power as equally heretical. For his Anabaptist contemporaries, however, as well as for many Christians today, all understandings of sacramental mediation are seen as superstitious, as well as – just as importantly – elitist, as opposed to an experience which is directly available to every individual. Clearly, the place of the sacraments in such born-again theologies of regeneration is a concrete theological problem. Many Christians from this tradition, for instance, display a desire to retain the importance of the sacrament of baptism for their understanding of regeneration, but doing so is often difficult – whether in the convoluted systematic efforts of Spener or in Brian Welch’s candid admission that he did not know how to understand his own baptism following his conversion. An even more dangerous theological problem is found particularly in revivalist traditions of evangelicalism, in which the “decision” to become a Christian often functionally replaces baptism’s role in earlier theological traditions: instead of returning to baptism, as Luther advised, as a source of strength for one’s faith, the believer 3 Hart, In the Aftermath: 51.

Presence and Tacit Knowledge

315

instead “returns” to the event of decision. For Luther, ultimate certainty was found not in oneself but in a sacrament which promises God’s grace, while for many “born-again” Christians, certainty lies in the ability to judge one’s own experience.

12.2.2 Christianity as “knowing how” fostered in community This study has demonstrated that the theological language of born-again Christianity is more than simply the attempt to describe a private, subjective experience. It is also an exposition of what the philosopher Michael Polanyi identified as “tacit knowledge.” Descriptions of tacit knowledge are often couched in subjective language, since they are experienced as the feeling of being led, or of being able to complete a task in a way that feels natural, or of being able to improvise. It is the experience, in the words of Gilbert Ryle, of “knowing how” as opposed to merely “knowing that”: “The good chess-player observes rules and tactical principles, but he does not think of them; he just plays according to them. We observe rules of grammar, style and etiquette in the same ways. Socrates was puzzled why the knowledge which constitutes human excellence cannot be imparted. We can now reply. Learning-how differs from learning-that.”4

As seen in the theologies of many early Anabaptists, Puritans, and Pietists, one of the original reasons for separating new birth from baptism and identifying it with an inward change of personality was done out of the conviction that the Christian life consists not primarily of “knowing that,” or even of “doing this and that,” but instead of “knowing how.” The Christian who is truly born again is like the chess player in Ryle’s example: he or she does not merely recite the dogmatic propositions of Christianity but is able to successfully integrate them into his or her life – and, according to the doctrine of sanctification, increasingly so as time goes on. This entails more than following certain rules or engaging in particular rituals; instead, truly “knowing how” means, like the chess player, being able to improvise. Thus the 16th-century Anabaptist Menno Simons repeatedly connects the new birth to a “disposition,” which is discernable through self-examination.5 Such self-examination is both internal 4 Gilbert Ryle, Collected Essays: 233. 5 “As God is who is a spirit and dwells in heaven, such are also they who are spiritually born of the heavenly being, who far exceed those naturally born of flesh. Here, as in a mirror, one may view and examine himself and judge in his own mind of what birth, mind, disposition, nature, life, and conduct he is. For by this nature a man with but little pains can judge and prove himself. For a man’s walk, word, and visage testify concerning a man, and the thoughts of his heart also testify what he is; for no man knows the thoughts of a man save the spirit of man that is in him” (Menno: 60).

316

Summary and Final Theological Reflections

and external, encompassing one’s feelings as well as one’s “fruits,” since it assumes an unproblematic connection between the two.6 Spener, Edwards, Schleiermacher, and Finney, as well as most contemporary “born-again” Christians, all assume a seamless relation between inwards experience and external behavior – hence one should not too hastily brand such theologies as “Gnostic.” This tacit knowledge is also connected to another kind of “presence,” albeit one of a less mystical flavor: the presence of other people. According to Polanyi, an essential component of many forms of tacit knowledge is learning by apprenticeship, since “by watching the master and emulating his efforts in the presence of his example, the apprentice unconsciously picks up the rules of the art, including those which are not explicitly known to the master himself.”7 The skills learned by motorists, pianists, and craftspeople do not merely come from books; instead, they necessarily require the presence of a teacher. It should therefore be seen as no coincidence that all the thinkers examined in this book espouse an ecclesiology which affirms the fundamental necessity of a tight-knit community of believers who encourage and guide each other in their spiritual journeys. (There have certainly been theologians who have attempted to retain a national-church ecclesiology while still maintaining the centrality of personal conversion – Spener and German Pietism comes to mind – but nearly all born-again theologies emphasize the small, tight-knit groups which are much better suited for the apprentice-like task of learning to “dwell in” the Christian faith.) This is the result of the fundamental philosophical relation between “knowing how” and sociality: through community one first learns what it means to use concepts such as “new birth” and sees through the experience of others what it means to be born again.

12.2.3 Mysticism and metaphor There is a point, however, where the comparisons between born-again theologies and apprenticeship come to an end. According to “born-again” Christianity, one can learn, through practice, to become a more mature Christian – which is referred to as sanctification, and takes place through prayer, study, fellowship, and acts of love – but one cannot through practice learn to become a Christian. Even in “decisionist” theologies such as Finney’s and Billy Graham’s, true regeneration cannot take place without the miraculous work of the Holy Spirit, who continues to remain present with the believer in the process of sanctification. Consequently, the experience of being born again is marked by a reciprocal double-indwelling: God dwells in 6 Cf. Ibid.: 97. 7 Polanyi, Personal Knowledge: 53.

Theological Reflections

317

the soul (and the body) of the believer, while the believer dwells in the Christian life. “Thus we live in the new birth and the new birth in us,” as Arndt writes in True Christianity.8 This point draws attention to an additional way in which tacit-knowledge theory has been helpful for this study: the reliance on inarticulate knowledge which feeds the metaphors used to describe the born-again experience. This discourse finds itself within a much larger tradition. Philosopher Wolfgang Wieland calls attention to the metaphors of vision [Schau], enlightenment [Erleuchtung], and touch [Berührung] as three primary metaphors used “when forms of knowledge are being debated which cannot be presented and communicated propositionally.”9 Interestingly, these three classes of metaphors are ubiquitous in descriptions of the subjective experience of being born again, both by professional theologians and laity. While these metaphors of presence can be appealed to in the service of epistemological certainty (“I know I’m right because I can feel it,” or “I know I’m born again because I can feel it”), in the texts of this study this has generally not been the case. Instead, they are used in attempt to improve communication: references to the overwhelming “sweetness” or “fire” of the experience of new birth, or describing it as “liquid love,” are attempts – though necessarily incomplete ones – to communicate what the subject believes to the presence of God and the experience of true change. Experiences such as being in the presence of fire, or tasting something sweet, or having one’s thirst quenched, are common humanity in general, and therefore they can be called upon analogically to describe another subjective experience – for instance, the “flame” of the Holy Spirit, or the “sweetness” of mystical experience – with which the discussion partner may not be familiar. Thus the use of metaphor relies on the tacit knowledge, both physical and emotional, and based in the universality of human experience.

12.3 Theological Reflections While the goal of this study has not to cast a judgment in favor of either the “born-again” conception of regeneration or baptismal regeneration, the author has, in the course of this research, formed certain value judgments which ought to be mentioned here. Overall, when viewed not merely as abstract doctrines but also as “operative axioms in a Christian’s life … shaped 8 Arndt, Von wahrem Christenthumb: 42 (49). 9 Wolfgang Wieland, Platon und die Formen des Wissens: 229. Cf. also Paul Ricœur and Eberhard Jüngel, Metapher: Zur Hermeneutik religiöser Sprache.

318

Summary and Final Theological Reflections

by the Christian tradition,” to use the words of Wolfgang Schoberth,10 both sacramental and “born again” theologies have their virtues as well as dangers. It is clear that the modern understanding of regeneration as a presenceexperience was largely the result of grassroots movements of Christians with a vibrant, personal faith in the midst of a larger societal context in which Christianity was often viewed primarily as a set of rules, or moral spirit, or national or cultural heritage. Moreover, the concern for a personal transformation and relation to God has often led to ecumenical exchanges – including, most importantly, ecumenical worship – which would make many academic theologians envious. However, the concern for “heart religion” can easily lead to an overly judgmental attitude towards others who claim to be Christians if they do not appear to display the characteristics deemed necessary for true new birth, as well as an obliviousness towards the genuine Christian formation which can take place well before regeneration. It is quite common, for instance, that many “born-again” Christians (but certainly not all) speak dismissively of the Christian upbringing they received from their apparently inadequately pious parents. This condescension towards common Christian upbringing ignores the importance of tacit knowledge for spiritual formation, given that the theology one learns as a child often informs one’s mature spirituality. Moreover, it also betrays a deep spiritual pride by conceptualizing regeneration as a possession which guarantees one’s own righteousness, instead of a gift to be embraced and celebrated. This is a particular danger, as Bill Leonard has argued, in “decisionist” forms of “born again” theology which not only appear to functionally replace the sacrament of baptism with the event of conversion, but also turn regeneration into a kind of “transaction.”11 Ultimately, my hope is that this study can promote ecumenical dialogue, which includes the interaction between the “tradition” of academic theology and less intellectual forms of popular spirituality. Instead of dismissing the conversion experiences of “born-again” Christians, their theological critics, particularly those who affirm baptismal regeneration, should attempt to understand them with a certain hermeneutical generosity. Perhaps surprising forms of agreement and understanding – what Lindbeck describes as “doctrinal reconciliation without doctrinal change”12 – could ensue. In any 10 Schoberth, “Improvising Faith”: 286. “Faith always includes both the axioms which hold my story with in the whole story of the community of believers and so finally within the story of God, and axioms which actualize this story in my life. These two basic moments of faith elucidate, first, that faith is not a province in life among others, but governs life as a whole; and, second, that faith is at the same time individual and based on the community of believers. The implicit dimension of faith is irreducible because it is the precondition for the realization of faith in a person’s life. On the other hand, this realization is only possible as the realization of a tradition” (Ibid.). 11 Leonard, “Getting Saved in America”: 124. 12 Lindbeck, The Nature of Doctrine: 15.

Theological Reflections

319

case, this could be the opportunity for a genuinely interesting, productive, and relevant theological discussion.

13 Concluding Reflections on the Present Cultural and Political Situation in the USA 13.1 Introduction As this book has shown, the theological understanding of being “born again” as an experience of presence is one which spans beyond one particular culture, church denomination, or even political persuasion. However, many would reply that still, at least today, it is apparent that the phenomenon has a unique role in the United States of America, where one can observe the development of “born-again Christianity” as a cultural phenomenon with clear political implications. It is undeniable that for many people, both in the United States and beyond, the term “American born-again Christian” frequently evokes a specific image: one who is deeply pious, fervently patriotic, and stalwartly conservative – an “ideal type” which draws the ire of a large proportion of the American populace, as well as Europe’s. And while this characterization is certainly an oversimplification, the notion that many individuals who fit it constitute a clear voting bloc in the American political system is based on more than anecdotal evidence: according to a recent survey of the religious landscape in the USA by the Pew Forum, 55 % of self-identified evangelicals consider themselves to be “conservative,” 27 % “moderate,” and only 13 % “liberal” (a term which in the American context nearly exclusively applies to social issues and not economics).1 Must there not be, then, at least a partial relation between the general cultural phenomenon of American evangelicalism, including its political leanings, and the particular “born-again” understanding of the doctrine of regeneration? In other words, does the belief that a Christian can largely know and judge the nature of his or her relationship to God directly, through an immediate experience of presence, lend itself to certain positions in contemporary debates concerning culture, politics, and society? This is a question which has been occasionally posed to me by colleagues in Germany, where I am writing, and one that I will attempt to answer in the final chapter of this book. And it is an important question to ask, given that it directly relates to this book’s claim that religious movements must be understood in their “theo-logic” – i. e. that theological convictions cannot be completely “explained away” by other factors. 1 Cf. Gregory A. Smith, et al., 2014 Religious Landscape Survey: 98–100. According to the same survey, 50 % of self-described “evangelicals” answered that they “lean towards” the Republican Party, and 34 % that the “lean towards” the Democrats.

Preliminary Observations

321

However, as this chapter will argue, there is no clear “yes-or-no” answer: while the theological grammar of being “born again” can indeed be conducive to certain political positions (as I will argue in this chapter), on the other hand it has been and continues to display an adaptiveness and plurality which makes all cause-and-effect interpretations of evangelical, “born-again” theology and American political culture overly simplistic. With this firm caution taken into consideration, in this chapter I will seek to identify the areas in which this particular understanding of the doctrine of regeneration could have a strong influence on how evangelical Christians, both as individuals and as groups, relate to their wider cultural and political surroundings. For this, I have highlighted two theological aspects which I see as particularly significant for understanding the political and cultural implications of “born-again” Christianity in North America: firstly, a basic solidarity among, as well as trust in, those individuals who claim to have experienced rebirth; and secondly, a generally conservative view of the Bible which results from its role as an external balance to the highly personal experience of being reborn.

13.2 Preliminary Observations It is important that a theological interpretation not overstep its bounds and see direct causation where there is none. From a methodological standpoint, this study has been critical concerning any oversimplified connection between religion, politics, and culture: it has argued that conflating these elements as a matter of course will inevitably lead to a form of confirmation bias in which those examples which best seem to “fit the narrative” will be highlighted while others will slip through the cracks unnoticed. Especially from a theological perspective it is important to avoid this mistake of oversimplification, since the purpose of a theological analysis is not to make generalizations about American culture (as apposite as these may be) but to understand a particular theological conviction which, it has been argued, is inseparable from a particular form of life, the habitus of which being ecclesial (whether in church or “para-church” form) and not societal. There are a host of simple yet prevalent analytical errors which have arisen (and continue to arise) when dealing with the subject of “born-again” Christianity and American political culture. First of all, when discussing the doctrine of being “born again” in conjunction with the cultural tendencies and political proclivities of American evangelicals, it is important to remember that the experience of being “born again” has never been relegated to one particular gender, race, class, or social status (cf. 1.a. in the Introduction). For many outsiders, the term “born-again Christian” evokes the ideal type of the

322

Concluding Reflections on the Situation in the USA

white, middle-class American, and ignores the array of other cultural contexts in which this type of theology is found. African-American Baptists, Hispanic Pentecostals, and young millennial Charismatics of all ethnicities may all hold theologies within the fold of “evangelical” or “born-again” Christianity, but no scholars would dream of considering them to be a cultural-political unity, let alone a “voting bloc.” Furthermore, even when there is such a unity, correlation does not equal causation: where there appears to be a strong correlation between those who claim to be “born again” and certain political positions – for example with hot-button issues such as abortion and gay marriage – these same social views can be found to be shared by many nonevangelical Christians, particularly traditional Roman Catholics, whose theological views on the doctrine of regeneration are very different. Finally, it is important to not be misled by certain biases, whether they stem from oneself or one’s general cultural milieu, and the oversimplifications which such biases often spawn. This is a not only a problem from this author’s location in Germany, whose media tend to view “evangelicals” as a cultural and theological monolith, but also in United States, which is increasingly replacing its traditional news media with polemically motivated and rhetorically charged articles on the internet. Finally, as mentioned in the introductory chapter to this book, particularly the 1980s saw the term infused with political connotations, which have remained strong particularly in the German theological context due to the presidency of George W. Bush as well as the tendency of American politicians to brandish their faith in demonstrations of civil-religious piety which, in contrast to the largely alienating effect they have on most European observers, seem to have an inexplicable and frustratingly endearing one on many American evangelicals. Marco Hofheinz, for instance, has recently noted that the German term Wiedergeburt has become a “term of provocation” [Reizwort] within the German Protestant Landeskirchen, where it is often associated with the likes of George W. Bush, Sarah Palin and the “Tea Party” movement.2 In the United States, however, the situation is somewhat different. While the word “evangelical” remains in the center of political controversy, the strong political connotations of the term “born again” itself seem to have died down. Far fewer individuals today could relate to Eric Gritsch’s characterization in 1982 of “born-againism” as a massive “movement” with clear boundaries and an unambiguous political program. And even the term “evangelical” is starting to lose its political clout in light of the surprisingly successful campaign and eventual election of the politician Donald Trump – a man who openly embodies many values antithetical to evangelical Christianity – among a significant number of voters who self-identify as evangelical, leading to an outburst of soul-searching among an array of 2 Hofheinz, “Wiedergeburt? Erwägungen zur dogmatischen Revision eines diskreditierten Begriffs”: 49.

Regeneration as Personal Conversion: Trust in the Sanctified Self

323

evangelical leaders, both from the hard-core of the Religious Right3 as well as those who view themselves as political moderates.4

13.3 Regeneration as Personal Conversion: Trust in the Sanctified Self 13.3.1 Solidarity through the shared theological experience of transformation Despite all the oversimplifications, patriotic stump speeches, and polemical diatribes, I believe it is still possible to make certain safe generalizations about “born-again” Christianity’s relationship to American culture and politics. For instance, there is clearly a sense of solidarity among those who are convinced that they are “born again,” whose cause can be reasonably seen as having a theological origin: because the experience of true Christian regeneration is seen as having supernatural power to transform the self, such Christians are understandably able to empathize with each other on a deeper level than they are with other, non-“born-again” individuals. In other words, if I am “born again,” i. e. convinced that I have experienced the transforming power of Jesus Christ (which includes the supernatural experience of God’s presence) and am justified by Christ’s sacrifice on the cross, I will be drawn towards others whose life is guided by the same experiences and theological convictions. Brian “Head” Welch, for instance, speaks for countless other American Christians when he attributes his recovery from drugs and alcohol not primarily to any rehabilitation program but instead to the transforming power of his regeneration and the Holy Spirit’s continual presence in his life. According to Welch it was God, and only God, who enabled him to quit his habit: he does not emphasize any self-help program or specific measures which he took to overcome his addiction other than prayer and scripture reading. While outsiders may view this account of the events as misguided or dishonest, there are countless others who identify with it. Even though Welch draws upon a clear literary pattern when giving his conversion narrative, he does not allow the events which would appear to conflict with this narrative 3 Cf. Russel Moore, “Why this election makes me hate the word ‘evangelical.’” Moore, president of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, argues on the one hand that “many of those who tell pollsters they are ‘evangelical’ may well be drunk right now, and haven’t been into a church since someone invited them to Vacation Bible School sometime back when Seinfeld was in first-run episodes.” On the other hand, he admits that many evangelical leaders who previously led the charge against the Clinton administration “now minimize the spewing of profanities in campaign speeches, race-baiting and courting white supremacists, boasting of adulterous affairs, debauching public morality and justice through the casino and pornography industries.” 4 Cf. Max Lucado, “Trump doesn’t pass the decency test.”

324

Concluding Reflections on the Situation in the USA

archetype – such as his post-conversion relapse into drug use, or his cursing God – to be glossed over, which in turn lends his story a further authenticity and contributes to a sense of solidarity among other Christians who view themselves as having dealt with similar struggles. While this organic solidarity is not primarily political (at least in the prevalent sense of the term), it clearly has political implications when a politician identifies him or herself as “born again.” It is not hard to see, for instance, how George W. Bush’s own story of overcoming drug and alcohol abuse through the power of his faith could be such a significant catalyst for his popularity among so many evangelical Christians in the United States. As Bush describes it himself in his book Decision Points, For months I had been praying that God would show me how to better reflect His will. My scripture readings had clarified the nature of temptation and the reality that the love of earthly pleasures could replace the love of God. My problem was not only drinking; it was selfishness. The booze was leading me to put myself ahead of others, especially my family…. Faith showed me a way out. I knew I could count on the grace of God to help me change.5

Important to note is that this is not a conversion narrative in the traditional sense. Bush does not say that he first became a true Christian in this moment; in his book, Bush does not even identify such a moment. Yet his story calls upon a certain form of the evangelical narrative and theology of conversion, as well as the belief that a personal relationship with God can heal one’s own brokenness. There are countless individuals in the United States (as well as all over the world) who, when hearing of Bush’s story, felt a deep affinity with his narrative and a connection to him as a person because they too had experienced something similar, and they too attributed it to the work of God. Particularly after Bill Clinton’s sex scandal in office, Bush’s conversion story was easily fused with the civil-religious hope for a “godly president.” Obviously, merely confessing to have experienced regeneration and sanctification is not enough to command the allegiance of legions of evangelical voters. Jimmy Carter learned this lesson when he lost his second term to the less pious Ronald Reagan; and neither Bill Clinton nor Barack Obama have been afraid to wield their Bibles or refer to their own Christianity, but they still failed to capture the evangelical vote. There are clearly certain moral views and political policies which are just as important for “born-again” voters in America than a candidate’s mere profession of his or her faith. Still, the solidarity which arises through the appeal to such a form of Christianity – which, as this book has argued, is an appeal not just to certain experiences or to theological convictions, but to a productive synthesis of both – is a deeply powerful one. 5 Bush, Decision Points: 2.

Regeneration as Personal Conversion: Trust in the Sanctified Self

325

13.3.2 Regeneration and sanctification as catalysts for moral purity: two views This leads to the second reason why the “born-again” understanding of regeneration as conversion could have such an impact on American political culture: even more important than the powerful sense of unity evoked by such conversion narratives is the belief in the moral transformation enabled by new birth. It is this aspect of regeneration and sanctification as a moral transformation which can help illuminate why many Christians place so much trust in others who believe they have personally experienced regeneration and sanctification. For if I believe that regeneration creates a “clean heart” and a “right spirit” (Psalm 51:10), which I myself claim to have experienced personally, then why should I not prefer leaders who have experienced the same? Should they not be expected to behave in morally superieior manner when compared to others? Are they not transformed from the inside and as a result hold themselves to higher standards? All the theologians surveyed in this book, as well as non-theologians, believe that the process of sanctification inaugurated through new birth effects a genuine moral change in each person. As has been discussed, however, there are significant theological disagreements in the “born-again” tradition as to how inevitably progressive this process of sanctification must necessarily be. On what could be termed the (moderately) “pessimistic” side is the Puritan/ Calvinist tradition, which despite viewing the conversion experience as a completely miraculous event in which the individual is transformed (against his or her own will) and “infused” with new characteristics, balances this conviction with a strong emphasis on the sinfulness of humankind, even after regeneration: even after authentic conversion, “there abideth still some remnants of corruption in every part,” as the Westminster Confession states.6 From this perspective, regenerate political leaders can still make terrible mistakes, both in their private lives as well as politically. For even Israel’s King David, they believed, was still regenerate when he had intercourse with Bathsheba and then had her husband murdered (cf. 2 Sam 11–12). Hence being “born again” is not necessarily a safeguard against shocking moral transgressions and disastrous political judgments. Moreover, from this tradition’s perspective it is ultimately not pious individual actors, but instead the all-sovereign God who is viewed as the author and mover of history. According to another passage in the Westminster Confession, “God the great creator of all things doth uphold, direct, dispose, and govern all creatures, actions and things, from the greatest even to the least, by His most wise and holy providence.”7 Indeed, according to this theology, God often uses foreign armies and heathen leaders (in addition to plagues and 6 XIII.2. 7 V.

326

Concluding Reflections on the Situation in the USA

famines) to chastise his own people. Regenerate Christians who are lucky enough to be used to spread God’s kingdom – whether through the establishment of Puritan colonies on North America or bringing conversion through revival preaching – see themselves as receptacles through which God’s glory is demonstrated, not as trailblazers utilizing their converted souls to better humanity. For other traditions, however, the process of sanctification is believed to be marked by steady, often inevitable moral progress in the regenerate believer. This theology, which is usually coupled with a much more optimistic view of human free will, leads to a far more confident assessment of “born-again” political leaders and even institutions. Whereas from the perspective of Calvinists such as Edwards, it is God who acts through history by various means (even Edwards’ own revival preaching), for Finney the events of history are much more dependent on human beings, who through free-will stand in responsibility before God. And it is exactly the “born-again” Christian, according to this latter view, who is truly capable of fulfilling this responsibility through free cooperation with the Holy Spirit. Thus Finney’s view of political progress in America was one in which born-again Christians, through the moral clarity attained by their regeneration, are not only able to more effectively liberate themselves from the shackles of sinful habits, but are also capable of seeing the problems of society in a clearer light. It is this theological tradition – the “holiness” tradition – which has frequently encouraged the view that the democratic political process can be drastically improved through an increase in conversions, among both politicians as well as the general populace. The Holy Spirit is viewed as active in history, but not without generally honoring the free will of those who call upon the Spirit’s assistance. Societal change is thus dependent upon Christian activism. This is an idea with a long history in the United States. Particularly in the first half of the 19th century, evangelicals felt that “the social promise of revivalism was that converting individuals could transform society,” writes Mark Noll, since they believed that “social reform inspired by biblical holiness would grow naturally from the actions of the converted.”8 After many (mostly Northern) evangelicals successful witnessed the toppling of slavery – albeit not ultimately due to any revival, but to the one of the bloodiest wars of the 19th century9 – they continued to believe that Christian values combined with genuine conversions could continue to improve society as a whole. This opinion, at the time, was often perceived as “progressive,” and it included the

8 Noll, The Old Religion in a New World: 104. 9 This civil war, according to Noll, “was a religious war. On both sides, believers claimed that their cause was ordained by God. Representatives on both sides quoted the Bible against each other” (Ibid.: 109).

Regeneration as Personal Conversion: Trust in the Sanctified Self

327

temperance movement dedicated to freeing American society from an additional forms “slavery,” such as alcohol and poverty.10 One can see the clear imprint of this “holiness” tradition on the thinking of contemporary evangelicalism. Yet unlike earlier evangelical activists who viewed their task as “progressive,” the present mix of conversionist Christianity and civil religion generally takes on a more pessimistic, “conservative” character: today, it is not about continuing to improve society, but instead returning it to its allegedly Christian roots through both the redemption of supposedly wayward American institutions, as well as the bringing about of revival among the country’s citizens. This activism often includes such issues as abortion, views on marriage and sexuality (including pornography), as well as the importance of religious instruction and activism in public life, and is generally marked by the prevalence of civil religion – i. e., the manifold forms of sacralization of the American way of life. Thus according to the Family Research Council, one of the most important rightwing Christian lobbying groups in the United States, Government has no obligation to ignore or deny, and has every right to acknowledge, that the United States was founded, primarily, by Christians, and that our laws and government are rooted in a Judeo-Christian worldview. Citizens, churches, private organizations, and public officials have every right to proclaim their faith in public settings and to bring their religiously-informed moral values to bear in election campaigns and public policy decisions.11

Whether perceived as coming from the left or the right, the task of turning America back to its roots is one which is dependent on the diligence and dedication of Christians. While groups such as the Family Research Council may not explicitly mention the experience of being “born again,” it is clear that their political vision for America is one of Christians whose hearts and minds have been changed spiritually, leading them to actively support a certain conservative agenda. From a historical standpoint, such agendas can and often do change; what remains constant, however, is the ability of a certain form of theology of regeneration and sanctification, particularly when paired with civil religion, to view the mobilization of pious Christians as necessary for the nation’s moral improvement.

10 Cf. Ibid.: 133–135. 11 http://www.frc.org/religion-in-public-life.

328

Concluding Reflections on the Situation in the USA

13.4 The Bible as Authority The second key to understanding “born-again” Christianity’s particular influence on American political culture is its emphasis on the centrality and authority of the Bible. Throughout this study, it has been argued that the Bible (both in its entirety as well as specific passages) is of utmost importance to the theological grammar of being “born again.” On the surface, this biblical authority would appear to rest on a paradox, as the immediate, personal experience of God’s presence would seem to relativize the Bible’s role as a binding, external point of reference (as was indeed the case for certain “enthusiast” forms of Christianity in the past). If God is experienced directly, one could ask, then why should anything else be authoritative? Yet for mainstream evangelicalism this tension is ultimately viewed as a productive one, since any true experience of God’s presence, it is held, will never conflict with the Bible’s true message. The Bible’s authority, one can say, gives the subjective experience form, direction, and boundaries. As a result, the Bible’s role as a divinely inspired, infallible guide is often clearly delineated in the congregation, and individual verses (particularly in the New Testament) are viewed as relevant for today. Once again, this can easily lead to generally conservative and/or literalist interpretations of scripture – in which the “internal clarity” (claritas interna) and “external clarity” (claritas externa), to borrow from Lutheran terminology, are viewed as largely commensurate – and in turn a largely conservative orientation when it comes to contemporary debates in culture and politics. For example, many “born-again” Christians reject the placement of women in the ministry, and sometimes even in diaconal roles, in accordance with verses such as 1 Corinthians 14:34–3512 and 1 Timothy 2:11–12.13 Of particular relevance to the present-day political discussion is the biblical prohibition of homosexuality, particularly in Paul’s letters to the Romans and Corinthians.14 The case of Rosaria Butterfield (cf. Chapter 9) provides a good example of how 12 “Women should be silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as the law also says. 35 If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.” 13 “Let a woman learn in silence with full submission. 12 I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to keep silent.” 14 Cf. Romans 1:26–27: “For this reason God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error.” Cf. also 1 Cor. 6:9–10: “Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, 10 thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers—none of these will inherit the kingdom of God.” The interpretation of these passages, including the translation of the Greek words relevant to the discussion, is of course highly contentious and the subject of an entire book in itself.

The Bible as Authority

329

such passages are interpreted among the evangelical community. According to Butterfield, she was involved in a “war of worldviews,” and only through a change in heart was she able to “understand homosexuality from God’s point of view” – which for Butterfield entails the categorical rejection of any form of homosexual partnership. For Butterfield, the belief that it is “God’s point of view” to refrain from homosexual relations and instead to enter into heterosexual marriage was based upon the authority of the Bible, not on any personal experience. It was only afterwards, based on this fundamental trust in the Bible’s message, that she was able to understand this prohibition of homosexual behavior from a subjective standpoint. It therefore seems plausible to expect a certain correlation between those who count themselves as “born again” and more conservative forms of biblical interpretation, which in turn would lend support to certain conservative social policies. However, even this conclusion must be significantly tempered. Historically, it was generally the experiential Christian sects, and not the established institutions, who first acknowledged the ability of women to preach and be clergy. Prominent examples include the Methodist Phoebe Palmer (1807–1874), whose sanctificationist theology and experience of a dramatic, supernatural conversion led her to defend women’s ability and right to preach,15 and Ellen White (1827–1915), the visionary mystic who helped form the Seventh-day Adventists.16 There is also Amanda Berry Smith (1837–1915), an African-American and former student of Palmer’s who went on to preach on four different continents: in the United States, England, India, and Liberia.17 All of these women clearly had an authoritative, “evangelical” understanding of the Bible in addition to a “born-again” theology of conversion. That such women could establish themselves as clergy amidst the patriarchal society of 19th-century America demonstrates how viewing the Bible as an authoritative rule does not always inevitably lead to any specific interpretation – particularly when it is viewed in light of one’s own religious experience and in community with others who share similar convictions. Even concerning the issue of homosexuality, the lines are not as clear as often portrayed. Many self-described evangelicals would assert that anyone who is truly “evangelical” cannot deny the biblical prohibition against homosexuality – this position is assumed, for instance, in Butterfield’s testimony. However, according to the Pew Forum survey, the number of evangelicals who answered that “homosexuality should be accepted by society” rose from 26 % in 2007 to 36 % in 2014.18 This is still a minority, 15 16 17 18

Cf. Noll, America’s God: 359–362; Ibid., The Old Religion in a New World: 98–100. Cf. Ibid., The Old Religion in a New World: 101. Ibid.: 120. Cf. 2014 Religious Landscape Survey: 8. Interestingly, this shift in opinion does not apply to the other main issue associated with evangelical politics: abortion. According to the survey, evangelical support of the view that “abortion should remain legal in all or most cases” remained at 33 % (cf. Ibid.: 34).

330

Concluding Reflections on the Situation in the USA

obviously, but it is a significant one. Moreover, the fact that acceptance has risen ten percentage points in less than a decade points to a strong shift in viewpoint which is likely to have not yet stabilized. One can safely assume that many of the self-described evangelicals who answered affirmatively did so in clear disagreement with their own pastors, but the fact that they still identify themselves as “born again” or “evangelical” calls into question any inevitable link – posited either from within the movement or without – between one’s theology and one’s social and political positions. Furthermore, it is clear that there are many Christians who claim to be “born again,” including having had a dramatic conversion experience, who are themselves gay. One of the more famous examples is that of Ray Boltz, one of the most successful and popular Christian musicians in the 1990s, who came out of the closet in 2008. It is significant for this study that Boltz gave his account of his coming-out in the Washington Blade, one of the major gay newspapers in the United States at that time, in the form of a testimony. Boltz’ story, according to his own website, “went on to become the most read article in the history of the newspapers” and “generated more letters to the editor than any other story.”19 Particularly interesting is that this new testimony does not seek to annul his earlier conversion to Christianity but instead honor and preserve it. In the article, Boltz tells of his original conversion to Christianity as a young man during a Christian music concert: “That evening had a profound impact on my life…. I realized that this was the truth and that Jesus was alive … that’s really where I made a commitment to Christ. I decided I could be born again and all of the things I was feeling in the past would fall away and I would have this new life.”20

Despite his continual struggles coping with homosexuality – what he was “feeling in the past” did not “fall away” after his conversion – and the fact that his own Christian faith seemed to disapprove of being a practicing homosexual, Boltz never questions the authenticity of this conversion moment. Moreover, as the language of his narrative testifies, he remains in his theology recognizably evangelical. Thus while conversion stories of overcoming homosexuality, such as that of Rosaria Butterfield, may at this moment in time outnumber those of gay Christians, it is not unreasonable to assume that stories such as Boltz’ are the tip of the iceberg. If ever confronted by each other, it is likely that neither Boltz nor Butterfield would deny the authenticity of the other’s conversion experience or Christian faith in general, as neither is a “fundamentalist” in personality or worldview. However, such an encounter would be bound have deep theological tensions. While Boltz has the argumentative advantage of being able to appeal to his own 19 This is stated in the heading to the article “Key Changes,” by Joey DiGuglielmo, which was originally published in the Washington Blade newspaper on September 12th, 2008. 20 Ibid.

Conclusion

331

personal experience – which for “born-again” Christians is never experience as such, but the experience of the Holy Spirit in one’s life – such appeals have never been sufficient in themselves for evangelical Christianity. Instead, they must always be coupled with an interpretation of the Bible which understands it as inspired and authoritative as a whole. However, as Boltz has demonstrated in his interview with the Blade, he has invested a great amount of reflection into the matter and is not ready to jettison a Pietistic understanding of the Bible and its role for his life. In conclusion, encounters between “born-again” Christians such as Boltz and those such as Butterfield will be contentious, but they are bound to happen, and most likely do so with increasing frequency.

13.5 Conclusion The church historian and theologian Mark Noll argues that the two traits which distinguish American Christianity from its European forms in particular are its stronger emphasis on “the importance of conversion” and the “centrality of the Bible.”21 It is not surprising, then, that forms of Christianity which hold these two elements in such high regard would thrive and exert an influence in American politics and public life. They comprise the basic “theo-logic” of American evangelical Christianity and explain how so many “born-again” Christians can feel drawn to a certain brand of politics and cultural orientation which emphasizes the trustworthiness of those who claim to have been changed and a vision of the Bible as the fundamental guide for questions of morality and lifestyle. And as this study has been argued, these two traits of conversionism and Biblicism support and affirm each other through the very tensions – between presence and meaning, subjectivity and objectivity – which hold them apart. It is this very same tension, however, which prevents any attempts to oversimplify evangelical Christianity and “born-againism.” This form of Christianity, along with its theological exposition, has never been static, thus any attempt to portray it as such – whether from within or without, whether with tones of praise or censure – should be viewed with a healthy scholarly skepticism.

21 Noll, The Old Religion in a New World: 254.

Works Cited Achtemeier, Paul J. 1 Peter: A Commentary on First Peter. Minneapolis, Minn: Fortress Press, 1996. Hermeneia: a Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible, Ed. Eldon Jay Epp. Aikman, David. Billy Graham: His Life and Influence. Nashville, Tenn: Thomas Nelson, 2007. Aland, Kurt. “Spener und Luther – Zum Thema Rechtfertigung und Wiedergeburt.” Luthers Wirkung: Festschrift für Martin Brecht zum 60. Geburtstag. Ed. Wolf-Dieter Hauschild, et al. Stuttgart: Calwer, 1992. 209–32. Allen, R. T. Transcendence and Immanence in the Philosophy of Michael Polanyi and Christian Theism. Lewiston, New York: Edwin Mellen Press, 1992. Allen, William L. “Being Born Again – and Again: Conversion, Revivalism, and Baptist Spirituality.” Baptist History and Heritage 45.3 (2010): 23–37. Althaus, Paul. “Die Bekehrung in reformatorischer und pietistischer Sicht.” Neue Zeitschrift für Systematische Theologie 1 (1959): 3–25. Arndt, Johann. True Christianity. Ed. Peter Erb. New York: Paulist Press, 1979. –. Von wahrem Christentumb: Die Urausgabe des ersten Buches (1605). Hildesheim: Olms, 2005. Asmussen, Hans. “Die Bedeutung der Taufe für die Wiedergeburt.” Rechtgläubigkeit und Frömmigkeit: Das Gespräch der Kirche um die rechte Nachfolge Christi. Ed. Asmussen. Berlin: Furche, 1938. 94–109. Augsburger, Myron S. “Conversion in Anabaptist Thought.” Mennonite Quarterly Review 36. July (1962): 243–55. Balke, Willem. Calvin and the Anabaptist Radicals. Trans. William Heynen. Eugene, Oregon: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 1999. Bartlett, David L. “1 Peter.” The New Interpreter’s Bible. Ed. Bartlett, et al. Vol. 12. Nashville: Abingdon, 1998. 229–317. Bay, Gerald, ed. James, 1–2 Peter, 1–3 John, Jude. Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2000. Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, ed. Thomas C. Oden, New Testament, XI. Bayer, Oswald. Martin Luthers Theologie: Eine Vergegenwärtigung. 3rd ed. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007. Bebbington, D. W. Evangelicalism in Modern Britain: A History from the 1730s to the 1980s. London: Routledge, 1993. Becker, Bernhard. Zinzendorf und sein Christentum. 2nd ed. Leipzig: Friedrich Jansa, 1900. Die Bekenntnisschriften der evangelisch-lutherischen Kirche: Herausgegeben im Gedenkjahr der Augsburgischen Konfession 1930. 12th ed. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998. Bender, Doug, and Dave Sterret. I am Second: Real Stories, Changing Lives. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2012.

Works Cited

333

Bender, Harold S. The Anabaptist Vision. Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1944. –. “Walking in the Resurrection: The Anabaptist Doctrine of Regeneration and Discipleship.” Mennonite Quarterly Review 35. April (1961): 96–110. Beyschlag, Karlmann. Die Erlanger Theologie. Erlangen: Martin-Luther Verlag in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Verein für bayerische Kirchengeschichte, 1993. Blank, Ben. The Scriptures Have the Answers. Sugarcreek, Ohio: Carlisle Publishing, 2009. Braaten, Carl E., and Roberth W. Jenson, eds. Christian Dogmatics. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1998. Brauer, Jerald C. “Conversion: From Puritanism to Revivalism.” The Journal of Religions 58 (1978): 227–43. Brecht, Martin. “August Hermann Francke und der Hallische Pietismus.” Der Pietismus vom siebzehnten bis zum frühen achtzehnten Jahrhundert. Ed. Martin Brecht. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1993. 439–539. Geschichte des Pietismus 1. –. “Philipp Jakob Spener, sein Programm und dessen Auswirkungen.” Ibid. 278–389. Brinkel, Karl. Die Lehre Luthers von der fides infantium bei der Kindertaufe. Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1958. Brown, Dale W. Understanding Pietism. Grand Rapids: W.B. Eerdmans, 1978. Brown, Raymond E. The Gospel According to John (i–xii): Introduction, Translation, and Notes. 1st ed. Garden City, N.Y: Doubleday, 1966. Brox, Norbert. Der erste Petrusbrief. Zürich: Benziger Verlag; Neukirchener Verlag, 1979. Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament Bd. XXI. Brunk, George R., III, and S.F Pannabecker. “Conversion.” 1989. Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online. Web. . Bush, George W. Decision Points. New York: Crown, 2010. Butler, Jon. “Enthusiasm Described and Decried: The Great Awakening as Interpretive Fiction.” Journal of American History 69.2 (1982): 305–25. Butterfield, Rosaria C. “My Train Wreck Conversion.” Christianity Today 57.1 (2013): 112. Cady, Edwin. “The Artistry of Jonathan Edwards.” New England Quarterly 22 (1949): 61–72. Caldwell, Patricia. The Puritan Conversion Narrative: The Beginnings of American Expression. 1st ed. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1985. Calvin, Jean. Institutes of the Christian Religion. Ed. John T. McNeill: Westminster John Knox Press, 1960. –. Commentaries. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1979. –. The Institutes of Christian Religion. Ed. A. N. S. Lane and Hilary Osborne. Grand Rapids, Mich: Baker Book House, 1987. Cary, Phillip. “Why Luther is not quite Protestant: The Logic of Faith in a Sacramental Promise.” Pro Ecclesia 16.4 (2004): 447–86. Catholic Church. Catechism of the Catholic Church: With Modifications from the editio typica. 2nd ed. New York: Doubleday, 1997. Cease, Casey. “My Crash Course on Jesus.” Christianity Today 57.6 (2013): 96. Cherry, Conrad. The Theology of Jonathan Edwards: A Reappraisal. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1990. Cohen, Charles L. God’s Caress: The Psychology of Puritan Religious Experience. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986.

334

Works Cited

Collins, Harry M. Tacit and Explicit Knowledge. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 2010. Colson, Charles W. Born again. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Chosen Books, 2008. Conforti, Joseph A. Samuel Hopkins and the New Divinity Movement: Calvinism, the Congregational Ministry, and Reform in the New England Between the Great Awakenings. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans; Christian University Press, 1981. –. Jonathan Edwards, Religious Tradition & American Culture. Chapel Hill, North Carolina: University of North Carolina Press, 1995. Cromartie, Michael et. al. American Evangelicalism: New Leaders, New Faces, New Issues. Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, 2008. Web. . Daniels, David D., III. “North American Pentecostalism.” The Cambridge Companion to Pentecostalism. Ed. Cecil M. Robeck and Amos Yong. 73–82. DiGuglielmo, Joey. “Key Changes.” The Washington Blade, Sept. 12, 2008. Drummond, Lewis A. Charles Finney and the Birth of Modern Evangelism. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1983. Dunn, James D. “Titus.” The New Interpreter’s Bible. Ed. David L. Bartlett, et al. Vol. 11. Nashville: Abingdon, 1998. 861–80. Edinger, Gerald. “Conversion in Anabaptist and Mennonite History.” Direction 9.4 (1980): 16–23. Edwards, Jonathan. Sermons, Series II, 1734. Ed. Jonathan Edwards Center. New Haven, Connecticut: Jonathan Edwards Center, Yale University. Jonathan Edwards Works Online, Vol. 49. –. The Great Awakening. Ed. Clarence C. Goen. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale Univ. Press, 1972. The works of Jonathan Edwards, Vol. 4. –. Ethical Writings. Ed. Paul Ramsey. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale Univ. Press, 1989. The works of Jonathan Edwards, Vol. 8. –. The “Miscellanies,” a-500. Ed. Thomas A. Schafer. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 1994. The works of Jonathan Edwards, Vol. 13. –. Letters and Personal Writings. Ed. George S. Claghorn. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 1998. The works of Jonathan Edwards, Vol. 16. –. Sermons and Discourses, 1730–1733. Ed. Mark R. Valeri. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale Univ. Press, 1999. The works of Jonathan Edwards, Vol. 17. –. Writings on the Trinity, Grace, and Faith. Ed. Sang Hyun Lee. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale Univ. Press, 2003. The works of Jonathan Edwards, Vol. 21. –. Religious Affections. Ed. John Edwin Smith. Rev. ed. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 2009. The works of Jonathan Edwards, Vol. 2. Elliott, John H. 1 Peter: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. New York: Doubleday, 2000. The Anchor Bible 37. Erdt, Terrence. “The Calvinist Psychology of the Heart and the “Sense” of Jonathan Edwards.” Early American Literature 13.2 (1978): 165–80. Estep, William R. The Anabaptist Story: An Introduction to Sixteenth-century Anabaptism. 3rd ed. Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 1996. Finger, Thomas N. A Contemporary Anabaptist Theology: Biblical, Historical, Constructive. Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2010. Finney, Charles G. Sermons on Important Subjects. 3rd ed. New York: John S. Taylor, 1836. –. Lectures on Revivals of Religion. Boston: John P. Jewett & Co., 1858.

Works Cited

335

–. Finney’s Systematic Theology. Ed. Parkhurst, L.G., Jr. Abridged. Minneapolis: Bethany House, 1976. –. The Original Memoirs of Charles G. Finney. Ed. Richard A. G. Dupuis and Garth Rosell. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2002. –. Memoirs of Rev. Charles G. Finney: Written by Himself. 1876. Bedford, Massachussetts: Applewood Books, 2009. Francke, August H. Streitschriften. Ed. Erhard Peschke. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1981. Friedmann, Robert. The Theology of Anabaptism: An Interpretation. Scottdale, Pennsylvania: Herald Press, 1973. Gorday, Peter, ed. Colossians, 1–2 Thessalonians, 1–2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon. Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2000. Ancient Christian commentary on Scripture, ed. Thomas C. Oden New Testament, IX. Graham, Billy. How to be Born Again. Dallas: Word, 1989. Gray, Derwin. “Pro Football Was My God.” Christianity Today 58.2 (2014): 80. Gritsch, E.W. Born Againism: Perspectives on a Movement. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1982. Guelzo, Allen C. “An Heir or a Rebel? Charles Grandison Finney and the New England theology.” Journal of the Early Republic 17.1 (1997): 60–94. Gumbrecht, Hans U. Production of Presence: What Meaning cannot Convey. Stanford, Calif. Stanford Univ. Press, 2007. Hambrick-Stowe, Charles E. The Practice of Piety: Puritan Devotional Disciplines in Seventeenth-century New England. Chapel Hill, North Carolina: University of North Carolina Press, 1982. –. Charles G. Finney and the Spirit of American Evangelicalism. Grand Rapids, Michigan: W.B. Eerdmans, 1996. Harnack, Adolf v. Der Kirchengeschichtliche Ertrag der exegetischen Arbeiten des Origenes, Die Terminologie der Wiedergeburt und verwandter Erlebnisse in der ältesten Kirche. Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs, 1918. Hart, David B. The Beauty of the Infinite: The Aesthetics of Christian Truth. Grand Rapids, Michigan: W.B. Eerdmans, 2004. –. In the Aftermath: Provocations and Laments. Grand Rapids, Michigan: W. B. Eerdmans, 2009. Hector, Kevin W. “The Mediation of Christ’s Normative Spirit: A Constructive Reading of Schleiermacher’s Pneumatology.” Modern Theology 24.1 (2008): 1–22. Herle, Charles, et al. The Humble Advice of the Assembly of Divines, Now by Authority of Parliament Sitting at Westminster, Concerning a Confession of Faith [Westminster Confession]. London: Evan Tyler, 1647. Hindmarsh, D. Bruce. The Evangelical Conversion Narrative: Spiritual Autobiography in Early Modern England. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 2007. Hinson, Glenn. Fire in My Bones: Transcendence and the Holy Spirit in African American Gospel. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, Incorporated, 2010. Hofheinz, Marco. “Wiedergeburt? Erwägungen zur dogmatischen Revision eines diskreditierten Begriffs.” Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche 109 (2010): 48–69. Hubmaier, Balthasar. Balthasar Hubmaier, Theologian of Anabaptism. Ed. H. Wayne Pipkin and John Howard Yoder. Scottdale, Pennsylvania: Herald Press, 1989.

336

Works Cited

Huovinen, Eero. Fides infantium: Martin Luthers Lehre vom Kinderglauben. Mainz: P. von Zabern, 1997. Iwand, Hans J. “Wider den Missbrauch des pro me als methodisches Prinzip in der Theologie.” Evangelische Theologie 14 (1954): 120–24. James, William. The Varieties of Religious Experience. New York NY: Library of America, 2010. Johnson, James E. “Charles Finney and a Theology of Revivalism.” Church History 38.3 (1969): 338–58. Kennedy, John W. “Transformed: Jim Dycus’ New Lease on Life.” Pentecostal Evangel (2005). Web. . –. “Lillie Carraway’s Legacy: Fighting for Purity … 3 Generations Strong.” Pentecostal Evangel (2005). Web. . Kerr, Fergus. Theology after Wittgenstein. 2. ed. London: SPCK, 1997. Kidd, Thomas S. The Great Awakening. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 2007. Knight, George W. The Pastoral Epistles: A commentary on the Greek text. Grand Rapids, Michigan, Carlisle, England: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 1992. The New International Greek Testament Commentary. Knutson, Andrea. American Spaces of Conversion: The Conductive Imaginaries of Edwards, Emerson, and James. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. Korsch, Dietrich. “Luther im Licht Schleiermachers.” Christentum, Staat, Kultur: Akten des Kongresses der Internationalen Schleiermacher-Gesellschaft in Berlin, März 2006. Ed. Andreas Arndt, Ulrich Barth, and Wilhelm Gräb. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2008. 181–92. Krause, Gerhard, ed. Theologische Realenzyklopädie. Berlin, New York: de Gruyter. Kraybill, Donald B., Steven M. Nolt, and David Weaver-Zercher. Amish Grace: How Forgiveness Transcended Tragedy. 1st ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2010. –. The Amish way: Patient faith in a perilous world. Hoboken, N.J, Chichester: Wiley; John Wiley, 2012. Lambert, Frank. Inventing the “Great Awakening.” Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press, 1999. Lamm, Julia. “Schleiermacher’s Treatise on Grace.” Harvard Theological Review 101.2 (2008): 133–68. Lang, Amy S. “‘A Flood of Errors’: Chauncy and Edwards in the Great Awakening.” Jonathan Edwards and the American experience. Ed. Nathan O. Hatch. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988. 160–73. Laurence, David. “Jonathan Edwards, Solomon Stoddard, and the Preparationist Model of Conversion.” Harvard Theological Review 72.3/4 (1979): 267–83. Leonard, Bill J. “Getting Saved in America: Conversion Event in a Pluralistic Culture.” Review and Expositor 82 (1985): 111–28. Leu, Urs B., and Christian Scheidegger, eds. Das Schleitheimer Bekenntnis 1527: Einleitung, Faksimile, Übersetzung und Kommentar. Zug: Achius, 2004. Lindbeck, George A. The Nature of Doctrine: Religion and Theology in a Postliberal Age. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1984. Locke, John. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding: Abridged and Edited, with an Introduction and Notes. Ed. Kenneth Winkler. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1996. Lucado, Max. “Trump doesn’t pass the decency test.” The Washington Post. Feb. 26, 2016.

Works Cited

337

Lugo, Luis et. al. U.S. Religious Landscape Survey: Religious Affiliation: Diverse and Dynamic. Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, 2008. Web. . Luhrmann, T. M. When God Talks Back: Understanding the American Evangelical Relationship with God. 1st ed. New York: Vintage Books, 2012. Lülmann, Christian. Schleiermacher: der Kirchenvater des 19. Jahrhunderts. Tübingen: Mohr, 1907. Luther, Martin, and Ulrich Köpf. Werke: Weimarer Ausgabe. Sonderedition d. Kritischen Gesamtausgabe (Weimarer Ausg.). Weimar: Böhlau, 2002. Maddox, Randy L. “Schleiermacher on the Holy Spirit.” Studia Biblica et Theologica 12 (1982): 93–106. Maier, Gerhard. “Gottes Heilstat und die Bekehrung des Sünders im Pietismus und im Zeugnis der Schrift.” Taufe – Wiedergeburt – Bekehrung: in evangelistischer Perspektive. Ed. Gerhard Maier and Gerhard Rost. Bielefeld: Missionsverlag der Evangelisch-Luthrischen Gebetsgemeinschaften, 1980. 37–55. Majid, John, and Kate Harris. “Forgiving Iran.” Christianity Today 57.4 (2013): 96. Marsden, George M. Jonathan Edwards: A Life: Yale University Press, 2004. –. “Biography.” The Cambridge Companion to Jonathan Edwards. Ed. Stephen J. Stein. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2006. 19–38. Martin, William. “Giving the Winds a Mighty Voice.” Religious Television: Controversies and Conclusions. Ed. Robert Abelman and Stewart M. Hoover. Norwood, N.J: Ablex Pub. Corp., 1990. 63–70. Marty, Martin. “The Years of the Evangelicals.” Christian Century (1989): 171–74. McClymond, Michael J. “Spiritual Perception in Jonathan Edwards.” Journal of Religion 77.2 (1997): 195–216. –. Encounters with God: An Approach to the Theology of Jonathan Edwards. New York: Oxford University Press, USA, 1998. Metaxas, Eric. “The Golden Fish.” Christianity Today 57.5 (2013): 80. Moltmann, Jürgen. Der Geist des Lebens: Eine ganzheitliche Pneumatologie. Gütersloh: Kaiser, 1991. Monge, Jordan. “The Atheist’s Dilemma.” Christianity Today 57.2 (2013): 88. Moore, Russel. “Why this election makes me hate the word ‘evangelical.’” The Washington Post. Feb. 29, 2016. Morgan, Edmund S. Visible Saints. New York: New York University Press, 1963. Morris, J. B. Oberlin, Hotbed of Abolitionism: College, Community, and the Fight for Freedom and Equality in Antebellum America. Chapel Hill, North Carolina: University of North Carolina Press, 2014. Naffzinger, Juan S. “Divine Communications in a Time of Revival: Jonathan Edwards’ Use of ‘Light’ and ‘Water’ Imagery During the Northampton Revival.” Revista de Estudios Norteamericanos 15 (2011): 11–32. Niesel, Wilhelm. “The Sacraments.” Readings in Calvin’s Theology. Ed. Donald K. McKim. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1984. 244–59. Noll, Mark A. America’s God: From Jonathan Edwards to Abraham Lincoln. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. –. The Old Religion in a New World: The History of North American Christianity. Grand Rapids, Michigan, Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2002.

338

Works Cited

–. The Rise of Evangelicalism: The Age of Edwards, Whitefield, and the Wesleys. Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2003. Nüssel, Friederike, Wiard Popkes, and Wilhelm P. Schneemelcher. “Wiedergeburt.” Theologische Realenzyklopädie. Ed. Gerhard Krause. Berlin, New York: de Gruyter. O’Brien, Susan D. “A Transatlantic Community of Saints: The Great Awakening and the First Evangelical Network, 1735–1755.” The American Historical Review 91.4 (1986): 811–32. O’Connell, Marvin. Blaise Pascal: Reasons of the Heart. Grand Rapids, Michigan: W.B. Eerdmans, 1997. Perkins, William. The Work of William Perkins. Ed. Ian Breward. Berkshire, England: Sutton Courtenay Press, 1970. Peschke, Erhard. “Speners Wiedergeburtslehre und ihr Verhältnis zu Franckes Lehre von der Bekehrung.” Traditio – Krisis – Renovatio aus theologischer Sicht: Festschrift Winfried Zeller zum 65. Geburtstag. Ed. Bernd Jaspert and Rudolf Mohr. Marburg: N. G. Elwert, 1976. 206–24. Pettey, Gary R. “Bibles, Ballots, and Beatific Vision: The Cycle of Religious Activism in the 1980s.” Religious television: Controversies and conclusions, Ed. Abelman and Hoover: 187–205. Pew Research Center. Election 2012 Post Mortem: White Evangelicals and Support for Romney, 2012. Web. . Polanyi, Michael. Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-critical Philosophy. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 2009. –. The Tacit Dimension. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 2010. Popp, Thomas. Grammatik des Geistes: Literarische Kunst und theologische Konzeption in Johannes 3 und 6. Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2001. Post, Stephen. “Disinterested Benevolence: An American Debate Over the Nature of Christian Love.” The Journal of Religious Ethics 14.2 (1986): 256–368. Poteat, William H. The Primacy of Persons and the Language of Culture: Essays. Ed. James M. Nickell and James W. Stines. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1993. Powers, Kirsten. “Fox News’ Highly Reluctant Jesus Follower.” Christianity Today 57.9 (2013): 104. Puddefoot, John C. “Indwelling: Formal and Non-Formal Elements in Faith and Life.” Belief in Science and in Christian Life. Ed. Thomas F. Torrance. 28–48. Quinn, Jerome D. The Letter to Titus: A New Translation with Notes and Commentary and an Introduction to Titus, I and II Timothy, the Pastoral Epistles. 1st ed. New York: Doubleday, 1990. The Anchor Bible 35. Qureshi, Nabeel. “Christ Called Me Off the Minaret.” Christianity Today 58.1 (2014): 96. Rambo, Lewis R. “Anthropology and the Study of Conversion.” The Anthropology of Religious Conversion. Ed. Andrew Buckser and Stephen D. Glazier. Lanham, Md. Rowman & Littlefield, 2003. 211–22. –. Understanding Religious Conversion. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 1993. Reed, Travis. “Saved by U2 and an Audible Voice.” Christianity Today 57.8 (2013): 104. Ricœur, Paul, and Eberhard Jüngel. Metapher: Zur Hermeneutik religiöser Sprache. München: Kaiser, 1974.

Works Cited

339

Ritschl, Dietrich. Bildersprache und Argumente: Theologische Aufsätze. NeukirchenVluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2008. Robeck, Cecil M., and Amos Yong, eds. The Cambridge Companion to Pentecostalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014. Ryle, Gilbert. Collected Essays, 1929–1968. London: Routledge, 2009. Schleiermacher, Friedrich D. E. Selected Sermons. Ed. Mary F. Wilson (Trans.). London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1890. –. Aus Schleiermacher’s Leben. In Briefen: Von Schleiermachers Kindheit bis zu seiner Anstellung in Halle, Oktober 1804. Ed. Wilhelm von Schlegel. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1974. –. Über die Religion: Reden an die Gebildeten unter ihren Verächtern. Stuttgart: Reclam, 1993. –. The Christian faith. Ed. H. R. Mackintosh and James S. Stewart. London: T&T Clark, 2003. –. Der christliche Glaube: Nach den Grundsätzen der evangelischen Kirche im Zusammenhange dargestellt. aktualisierte Studienausgabe d. 2. Aufl. von 1830/31. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2008. –. On religion: Speeches to its cultured despisers. Ed. Richard Crouter (Trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008. Cambridge texts in the history of philosophy. Schleiermacher, Friedrich D. E., and Keith W. Clements. Friedrich Schleiermacher: Pioneer of Modern Theology. Ed. Clements. London, San Francisco: Collins, 1987. Schmidt, Martin. Wiedergeburt und Neuer Mensch: Gesammelte Studien zur Geschichte des Pietismus. Witten, Germany: Luther Verlag, 1969. Schoberth, Wolfgang. “Zur neuen Welt kommen: Überlegungen zur theologischen Logik der Metapher, Wiedergeburt’.” Wiedergeburt. Ed. Reinhard Feldmeier. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2005. 149–64. –. “Improvising Faith: An Essay on Implicit Knowledge and Living with God’s Story.” Revealing Tacit Knowledge: Embodiment and Explication. Ed. Frank Adloff, Katharina Gerund, and David Kaldewey. Bielefeld: Transcript, 2015. 279–298. Schowalter, Paul, and Nanne van der Zijpp. “Obbe Philips (ca. 1500–1568).” 1957. Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online. Web. . Seibert, Dorette. Glaube, Erfahrung und Gemeinschaft: Der junge Schleiermacher und Herrnhut. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2003. Shantz, Douglas H. An Introduction to German Pietism: Protestant Renewal at the Dawn of Modern Europe. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2013. Simons, Menno. The Complete Writings of Menno Simons. Ed. John Christian Wenger. Scottdale, Pennsylvania: Herald Press, 1962. Slenczka, Notger. Studien zur Erlanger Theologie. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998–1999. Smith, Gregory A., et al. “U.S. Public Becoming Less Religious” (2014 Religious Landscape Survey). Pew Research Center: Nov. 3, 2015. Smith, Joseph, ed. Book of Mormon; Doctrine and Covenants of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints; Pearl of Great Price: Another Testament of Jesus Christ. Salt Lake City, UT: Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2004.

340

Works Cited

Spener, Philipp J. Einfältige Erklärung der christlichen Lehr nach der Ordnung des kleinen Catechismi des teuren Manns Gottes Lutheri, 1677. Ed. Erich Beyreuther. Hildesheim: Olms, 1982. Schriften, Vol. 2.1. –. Pia Desideria (1675) 1680. Ed. Erich Beyreuther. Hildesheim: Olms, 1979. Schriften, Vol. 1. –. Pia Desideria. Ed. Tappert, Theodore G. (Trans.). Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1996. –. Der hochwichtige Articul von der Wiedergeburt. Frankfurt a. M.: Zunner, 1715. –. Korrespondenz: Theologische Bedencken, I. Theil. Nachdruck der Ausgabe Halle 1700. Ed. Erich Beyreuther. Hildesheim: Olms, 1999. Schriften, Vol. 11. –. Korrespondenz: Theologische Bedencken, III. Theil. Nachdruck der Ausgabe Halle 1702. Ed. Erich Beyreuther. Hildesheim: Olms, 1999. Schriften, Vol. 13. –. Kurtze Catechismuspredigten, 1689. Ed. Erich Beyreuther. Hildesheim: Olms, 1982. Schriften, Vol. 2.2. Steinmetz, David C. Calvin in Context. 2nd ed. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 2010. Stievermann, Jan. “Faithful Translations: New Discoveries on the German Pietist Reception of Jonathan Edwards.” Church History 83.2 (2014): 324–66. Stout, Harry S. “The Puritans and Edwards.” Jonathan Edwards and the American Experience. Ed. Nathan O. Hatch. New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1988. 142–59. Stromberg, Peter G. Language and Self-Transformation: A Study of the Christian Conversion Narrative. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008. Taylor, Charles. A Secular Age. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2007. Thomas Aquinas. Summa Theologica. Translated by the Fathers of the English Dominican Provence. 2nd ed. London: Burns, Oates & Washbourne Ltd., 1920. Toon, Peter. Born Again: A Biblical and Theological Study of Regeneration. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1987. Torrance, Thomas F., ed. Belief in Science and in Christian Life: The Relevance of Michael Polanyi’s Thought for Christian Faith and Life. Edinburgh: Handsel Press, 1980. Trigg, Jonathan D. Baptism in the Theology of Martin Luther. Leiden: Brill, 1994. Studies in the history of Christian thought 56. Ulmer, Bernd. “Konversionserzählungen als rekonstruktive Gattung: Erzählerische Mittel und Strategien bei der Rekonstruktion eines Bekehrungserlebnisses.” Zeitschrift für Soziologie 17.1 (1988): 19–33. van der Dussen, Adrianus. “The Tension between Freedom and Reason in the Theology of Charles Grandison Finney.” Pietismus und Neuzeit 22 (1996): 205–25. Wacker, G. America’s Pastor. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2014. Wallmann, Johannes. “Wiedergeburt und Erneuerung bei Philipp Jakob Spener: Ein Diskussionsbeitrag.” Pietismus und Neuzeit. Jahrbuch 1976 zur Geschichte des Neueren Protestantismus. Ed. Andreas Lindt and Klaus Deppermann. Bielefeld: Luther-Verlag, 1977. 7–31. –. Philipp Jakob Spener und die Anfänge des Pietismus. 2., überarbeitete und erweiterte Auflage. Tübingen: Mohr, 1986. Beiträge zur historischen Theologie 42. –. “Johann Arndt.” The Pietist Theologians: An introduction to theology in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Ed. Carter Lindberg. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2005. 21–37. Ward, W. R. The Protestant Evangelical Awakening: Cambridge University Press, 2002.

Works Cited

341

–. Early Evangelicalism: A Global Intellectual History, 1670–1789. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Watkins, Owen C. The Puritan Experience. New York: Schocken Books, 1972. Weber, Burkhard. “Der Artikel von der Wiedergeburt bei Philipp Jacob Spener.” Taufe – Wiedergeburt – Bekehrung. Ed. Maier and Rost. 87–96. Welch, Brian “Head.” Save Me from Myself. New York: HarperCollins, 2009. –. Washed by Blood. New York: HarperCollins, 2009. Wesley, John. A Plain Account of Christian Perfection: As Believed and Taught by the Reverend Mr. John Wesley from the Zear 1725 to the Zear 1777. Unabridged ed. Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press of Kansas City, 1966. –. The Works of John Wesley. Ed. Albert Cook Outler, et al. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1984–2013. Wieland, Wolfgang. Platon und die Formen des Wissens. 2nd ed. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1999. Wilder, Lynn. “How I Escaped the Mormon Temple.” Christianity Today 57.10 (2013): 80. Williams, George H. The Radical Reformation. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1962. Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Über Gewißheit. 1st ed. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 2001. Bibliothek Suhrkamp 250. –. Philosophische Untersuchungen. 4th ed. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 2008. Worthington, E. L., Jr. “Forgiving the Man Who Murdered My Mom.” Christianity Today 57.7 (2013): 88. Wyman, Walter E., Jr. “Sin and Redemption.” The Cambridge Companion to Friedrich Schleiermacher. Ed. Jacqueline MariÇa. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. 129–50. Cambridge companions to religion. Yarbrough, Stephen R., and John C. Adams. Delightful Conviction: Jonathan Edwards and the Rhetoric of Conversion. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1993. Zacharias, Ravi. “Antidote to Poison.” Christianity Today 57.3 (2013): 80.

Index of Subjects

Adam and Eve (biblical figures) 48, 59, 67 f., 106 Adoption (doctrine of) 31, 43, 74 f., 77, 82 f., 147, 155, 184, 191 f., 199, 228 f., 234, 243, 259, 268 f., 298 African-American Christianity 18, 162, 235, 288, 322, 329 Alcoholism 194, 212, 214, 216, 220–224, 257, 261, 268, 295, 323 f., 327 America 15–19, 21 f., 24–26, 33, 35, 39, 60, 63 f., 66, 83, 100–102, 104, 114, 118, 121, 131 f., 136, 158, 162 f., 171, 178, 181 f., 184, 187, 192, 195, 199, 202, 204, 209 f., 212–214, 223, 228, 250, 252, 272, 278, 286–288, 293, 302, 311–313, 318, 320–329, 331 Anabaptism 14, 30, 39, 49, 51–59, 73, 75, 86 f., 92, 94–96, 139 f., 154, 174, 200, 314 f. Arminianism 25 f., 32, 102, 125, 177, 195 f. Atonement (doctrine of) 43, 47, 83, 88, 159, 165, 173, 180, 192, 195, 210, 228 f., 238–240, 259, 273, 277–280, 287, 289, 293, 297–299 Baptism 19, 25, 41 f., 45–59, 64 f., 73, 77, 85–95, 99, 101, 105, 131, 150–152, 154, 156, 161, 182 f., 185, 191 f., 199, 210–212, 217, 221 f., 227, 230–232, 242–245, 250–252, 264, 266, 270, 295, 298, 300, 304, 307 f., 312, 314 f., 318 Calvinism 13, 21, 26, 32–34, 39, 56 f., 60 f., 63, 65, 70, 72, 75–77, 87, 91, 96, 98, 100–103, 106, 110, 116, 121, 125–128, 130–133, 135, 144 f., 150, 158 f., 162 f., 165, 170, 175, 177–179, 183, 192, 195, 197 f., 214, 230, 273 f., 301 f., 311, 313, 325 f.

Catholicism 29, 46–49, 72, 86, 92, 133, 154, 205, 210, 276 f., 280, 322 Cross 15, 64, 165 f., 183, 241–244, 258 f., 272, 277 f., 280, 282 f., 287, 289, 293 f., 297, 299, 301, 306, 311, 323 David (biblical figure) 44 f., 91–93, 195, 325 Decision 21, 34, 129 f., 158, 160, 165, 167, 170, 173, 175, 177–185, 192–199, 203, 206 f., 209–211, 216–218, 220 f., 224, 228–231, 236, 240, 246 f., 251, 256, 260, 264 f., 268, 273 f., 279, 282–286, 289, 297, 299–302, 313–318 Dreams 125, 226, 236, 253–256, 272 f., 276–280, 282–285, 292 f., 295, 297, 299 f., 306 Ecclesiology 86 f., 95, 97 f., 156, 232, 316 Emotion 59, 68, 75 f., 78, 86, 93, 127, 146, 153 f., 168 f., 175 f., 198, 227, 242, 259 f., 270, 295 f. Enlightenment 134, 136, 140 f., 181, 313, 317 Enthusiasm (theological heresy of) 66, 100 f., 109, 115, 155, 198, 225 f., 328 Feeling 18 f., 63, 68, 73, 76, 78 f., 81, 108, 111, 116, 118, 120, 123, 133, 136–142, 145 f., 152–154, 159–161, 167–169, 171 f., 184, 189, 194, 203 f., 216, 218, 220 f., 224, 288, 294, 296, 300, 315 f., 330 Free will 21, 25 f., 32, 34, 77, 85, 102, 120, 126, 128, 163–167, 169 f., 172, 177–179, 183, 190, 192 f., 195–197, 199, 210, 214, 230 f., 234, 240, 244, 247, 251, 256, 260, 264, 269, 274, 279, 284, 289, 300 f., 313, 326 Friendship 43, 199 f., 207, 216, 229, 232 f.,

344

Index of Subjects

235, 237 f., 241–245, 248, 252, 257, 261, 265, 270, 275, 280–282, 286, 303, 306 Glossolalia 122, 199, 208, 222, 227, 231 f., 260, 299 Great Awakening 34, 100, 104 f., 120, 124, 129, 131 f., 162, 193 f. Half-Way Covenant 64, 101, 104 Hell 103, 107, 123, 126, 129, 210, 229, 239, 243, 286, 288, 298, 313 Hermeneutics 28, 31, 97 f., 134, 159, 181, 232, 318 Holy Spirit 18, 21, 41 f., 47 f., 54, 57, 59, 61 f., 67–69, 73, 75, 79, 81, 83, 85 f., 94, 97, 106, 108–110, 112 f., 115, 118, 122, 124–127, 129 f., 139, 150–152, 155 f., 161, 166 f., 169–174, 178 f., 181–184, 190 f., 193, 196 f., 208, 211 f., 223 f., 227, 230, 238 f., 259, 262–265, 292, 294, 302, 306, 312, 316 f., 323, 326, 331 Homosexuality 236–241, 322, 328–330 Illumination 79, 81 f., 84, 96, 108, 110, 114, 116, 123, 126, 145, 148, 211, 251, 255, 259, 273, 288 f., 292, 301, 314, 325 Indwelling 21, 29, 68, 80–82, 86, 97, 109, 113, 316 Infusion 26, 105, 112, 118, 120, 131, 168 f., 171 f., 190, 288, 292, 325 Inwardness 19, 46, 49, 53–55, 58 f., 63, 66, 68, 74–78, 85 f., 88–90, 93 f., 99, 116, 118, 122, 134, 137–141, 146, 149, 154, 159, 166 f., 173, 180, 189, 209, 293, 311, 315 f. Islam 17, 236, 248–251, 281–283, 285, 293, 297, 305 Justification 21, 31, 43, 56, 66, 74 f., 77, 82 f., 85, 89, 99, 130, 144, 146 f., 153–157, 161, 172, 184, 189, 191 f., 196, 199, 210, 228, 234, 243, 247, 259, 264, 268, 273, 279, 289, 298 Light (symbolism of) 26, 31, 34, 54, 77 f., 80–82, 84, 94, 96, 99, 102–105, 107–118, 122–124, 126–128, 145, 160, 173 f.,

190 f., 218, 223–227, 254 f., 262, 291 f., 301 f. Lutheranism 25, 33, 39, 48, 51, 57, 65 f., 71–73, 76 f., 83, 85, 89, 92, 97, 121, 133, 145, 154, 190, 192, 196 f., 265, 311, 313, 328 Mennonites 53, 55 f. Metaphor 20 f., 28, 31, 33, 40 f., 45, 54, 59, 76–78, 80–82, 92–94, 108 f., 112–117, 128, 143, 153, 171, 173, 189–191, 199, 224, 227, 234, 242, 244, 252, 255, 263, 265, 291 f., 313, 316 f. Morality 136, 153, 236, 323, 331 Moravians 34, 132–137, 140, 192, 198 Mormonism 236, 275–281, 286, 297 f., 305, 308 Morphology of conversion 62 f., 76, 95, 145, 170, 180, 197, 260 Music 18, 28, 175, 215–217, 224, 236, 266, 268 f., 271, 275, 291, 303, 330 Mysticism 19, 21, 34, 70, 73, 80, 93, 101, 108, 111, 113 f., 117, 123, 126 f., 135, 138, 143, 155 f., 161, 172, 182, 190 f., 194, 199, 211, 226, 232, 239, 242–244, 246, 249–252, 255, 259 f., 263, 268–270, 273–275, 277, 283 f., 288, 292–294, 299–301, 311, 316 f. Narrative (of conversion) 17 f., 22, 24, 27, 32–35, 43, 47, 60, 62 f., 65, 75, 94 f., 102–105, 109, 116, 120 f., 130, 146, 162, 167, 179–182, 189, 191 f., 194, 197–202, 209, 212–216, 223 f., 227–232, 234–248, 250–259, 261–270, 272–275, 277, 279–281, 283–286, 288, 290 f., 293–301, 304–308, 312 f., 321, 323–325, 330 Old Testament

44, 49, 305

Paul (biblical figure) 41, 44, 76, 78, 94 f., 122, 248, 285, 296, 305, 328 Pentecostalism 18, 25, 33, 94, 194 f., 199, 222, 232, 235, 264, 322 Phenomenology 19, 21, 33, 60 f., 68, 96, 118, 127 f., 140, 142, 152, 154, 190 f., 238 f., 277

345

Index of Subjects Pietism 14, 19, 30, 32, 42, 55, 60, 65 f., 69–71, 73, 75, 77, 83, 86, 96, 98, 102, 113, 115, 121, 132–135, 137 f., 140 f., 144, 152, 190, 192, 197, 225, 311, 313, 315 f. Platonism 110, 114, 138, 173, 225 Politics 15–19, 35, 45, 55, 72, 100 f., 132, 150, 162, 174, 181, 195, 199–202, 204–207, 212, 214, 228, 237, 248, 271–273, 296, 307, 311, 313, 320–331 Predestination 26, 44, 61, 76, 101–103, 109 f., 115, 121, 128 f., 147, 170, 177, 192, 195–197, 199, 275, 279 Preparatory Grace 60–62, 93, 95 f., 102 f., 106 f., 112, 123, 128, 130, 145, 153, 170 f., 179 f., 182, 193, 196–198, 214, 230, 289, 302 Puritanism 13, 19, 21, 24 f., 30, 32–34, 42, 47, 55, 57, 60–65, 67 f., 73, 75 f., 83, 91, 95 f., 100–103, 106, 113, 116, 123 f., 127–130, 132, 140, 145, 165 f., 168, 171 f., 176, 178–180, 190, 192, 195, 197, 199, 214 f., 223, 225, 260, 274, 279, 289, 301, 303, 315, 325 f. Redemption 67, 109, 116, 142, 144, 165, 178, 258, 283 f., 314, 327 Relationship (with God) 15–17, 20, 65, 71, 73, 83, 94, 96, 132, 135, 137 f., 140, 143–145, 147, 152, 212 f., 218 f., 228–230, 233, 235, 243 f., 251, 255, 262–265, 277, 279, 291, 293, 297–299, 301–303, 306–308, 320, 324 Religious Right 17, 25, 214, 237 f., 323 Repentance 50, 52, 58 f., 61, 66 f., 71, 76 f., 80, 88 f., 91, 95 f., 144, 146 f., 151 f., 156, 159, 165 f., 178, 198, 252, 269 Republican Party 17 f., 237, 320 Revival 16, 25 f., 34, 55 f., 75, 95, 100–102, 104, 120–132, 162–164, 168, 171, 174–177, 183, 192–194, 197 f., 224, 258, 260, 301, 311, 313 f., 326 f. Sacraments 19, 25, 41, 46–52, 55–59, 64 f., 72, 77, 85–88, 90, 92 f., 98, 130 f., 150–152, 184, 199 f., 231 f., 244, 252, 286, 298, 300, 308, 313–315, 318

Salvation 26, 43, 48, 50, 52, 58, 61–64, 73, 76, 85, 87, 102, 113, 116, 118, 121, 123, 128, 130, 159–162, 166, 173, 180 f., 184, 191, 210, 229, 247, 261, 267 f., 283 f., 288, 297 Sanctification 19–21, 26, 35, 43, 56, 65, 75 f., 89, 95 f., 115, 127, 130, 142 f., 146, 148 f., 156 f., 159, 173 f., 178, 184, 190, 193, 195 f., 198, 200, 225, 227, 259, 261, 264, 274, 295, 306, 313, 315 f., 324–327 Scripture 15, 17, 33 f., 40–43, 47, 56, 59–62, 65 f., 71, 75, 78 f., 82–84, 87, 95, 97–100, 106, 112 f., 115 f., 119, 121, 123, 126 f., 129, 137–139, 141, 152, 154–156, 158–160, 162, 166–168, 170, 173, 176 f., 181 f., 189, 192 f., 198–200, 207 f., 211, 220–222, 224–227, 231 f., 234–238, 240–246, 248, 250–252, 256, 258, 261, 265–267, 269–276, 279–287, 290, 292, 295, 300, 302, 304–307, 312, 321, 323 f., 326, 328 f., 331 Sin 27, 43–45, 47 f., 50, 52 f., 58, 61, 67, 75 f., 79 f., 87, 89, 91–93, 95 f., 103–106, 113, 119, 122, 126, 130, 139, 143–150, 155, 159–161, 164 f., 168–174, 178, 183, 191, 195, 205, 211, 218, 221, 223, 227, 237, 239, 241, 244, 258 f., 261 f., 264 f., 272, 276, 279 f., 284, 287–289, 297, 299, 306 Southern Baptist 25 f., 208, 323 Tacit Knowledge 13, 27–30, 118, 313, 315–318 Taste (symbolism of) 67, 110, 117 f., 128, 137, 169 f. Trinity 49, 113, 148, 155, 157, 178, 208, 237, 265, 270, 281, 283, 306, 313 Vineyard Church

24

Water (symbolism of) 40 f., 45, 47–49, 59, 88, 91, 114, 190, 203, 214, 221, 224, 231, 245, 254, 258, 260, 267, 269, 300 Westminster Confession 62, 75, 325

Index of Names

Aquinas, Thomas 46–48, 242 Arndt, Johann 65–68, 70 f., 73–75, 97, 113, 317 Augustine 46 f., 242, 244 Bakker, Jim 17 Bartlett, David 42 f., 123 Bayer, Oswald 48 f. Bayly, Lewis 60, 66, 70 f. Boltz, Ray 330 f. Butterfield, Rosaria Champagne 235–241, 291 f., 296–298, 300–302, 304, 306 f., 328–331 Caldwell, Patricia 63 Calvin, John 13, 44, 57–60, 63, 65, 106, 109 f., 113, 116, 118, 128, 131, 151, 166 Carter, Jimmy 16 f., 19, 324 Cease, Casey 236, 257–261, 292, 295, 297–300, 303, 305–308 Cherry, Conrad 101, 118, 128 Clements, Keith 134, 136 Colson, Charles 16 f., 35, 201–214, 234, 272, 291, 296, 299, 306 f. Davenport, James

124, 127

Edwards, Jonathan 13, 33–35, 61, 64, 91, 100–132, 153 f., 159, 168 f., 171–173, 175–177, 182, 189–193, 196–200, 224, 231, 255, 264, 288, 291 f., 301, 304, 312, 316, 326 Falwell, Jerry 17 Finney, Charles G. 33–35, 158–183, 189–194, 196–200, 210 f., 214, 224, 227 f., 231, 240, 243, 246–248, 264, 291, 304, 311, 313, 316, 326

Gale, George 158 f., 162 f. Graham, Billy 16 f., 19, 24, 183–185, 203, 206, 210, 230 f., 235, 245, 316 Gray, Derwin 236, 286–290, 292, 296–299, 301, 305–307 Gritsch, Eric 17 f., 25, 322 Gumbrecht, Hans Ulrich 27 f., 246 Hambrick-Stowe, Charles 61 f., 95, 162, 178 Hofheinz, Marco 25, 42, 322 Jenson, Robert 51 Johnson, James 163, 175, 177 Keller, Timothy 236, 271 f., 274 f., 302 Knutson, Andrea 60, 114, 118 Leonard, Bill 25 f., 184, 318 Lewis, C.S. 203, 242 Lindbeck, George 29 f., 318 Luhrmann, Tanya M. 18, 23 f., 225 f., 239 Luther, Martin 48–52, 56–59, 63, 65, 71 f., 75 f., 87, 89–93, 97, 128, 152–154, 276 f., 279–281, 314 f. Maddox, Randy 155 f. Majid, John 235, 248–252, 256, 292–295, 297, 299, 301 f., 305, 307 McClymond, Michael 113, 116–118, 153 Metaxas, Eric 236, 253–257, 272, 275, 291–295, 298–300, 303, 306, 308 Moltmann, Jürgen 25, 42 Monge, Jordan 235, 241–245, 291, 294, 296, 298, 300–302, 304, 306 f. Morgan, Edmund 34, 62–64

348

Index of Names

Nixon, Richard 16 f., 201 f., 204–206, 208 f. Noll, Mark 18, 64, 100–102, 131, 181, 195, 326, 329, 331 O’Brien, Susan Durden

19

Simons, Menno 52 f., 55 f., 315 Spener, Philipp Jakob 33, 35, 44 f., 65 f., 69–99, 102, 109, 113, 128, 130 f., 137 f., 140 f., 144, 146, 152, 155, 166, 172, 178, 182, 189–194, 196–200, 224 f., 255, 259, 264, 291, 307, 311 f., 314, 316

Pascal, Blaise 194, 197 Perkins, William 60, 62 f., 68, 75 Philips, Obbe 53–55, 75 Polanyi, Michael 28 f., 315 f. Powers, Kirsten 236, 270–275, 292–294, 296, 298–302, 304, 307

Taylor, Charles 51, 313 Toon, Peter 24 f., 39 f., 46, 48, 54, 166, 182 f. Trigg, Jonathan 49–51, 57–59, 90, 92

Qureshi, Nabeel 236, 281–286, 293, 297, 299 f., 305, 307

Wallmann, Johannes 65 f., 70 f., 73 f., 84, 94 f., 97 f. Welch, Brian 35, 215–234, 240, 291, 295–299, 306 f., 314, 323 Whitefield, George 100 f. Wieland, Wolfgang 317 Wilder, Lynn 236, 275–281, 291, 293, 297–299, 302–306, 308 Wittgenstein, Ludwig 29 Worthington, Everett 236, 261–265, 291, 294 f., 297, 299, 301–307

Rambo, Lewis 23 f. Reed, Travis 236, 266–270, 274, 291 f., 295 f., 298–301, 303–306, 308 Ritschl, Dietrich 29, 32, 69 Robertson, Pat 17 Ryle, Gilbert 315 Schleiermacher, Friedrich 33–35, 69, 133–137, 140–157, 189–193, 196–198, 200, 275, 279, 311, 313, 316 Schoberth, Wolfgang 13, 20, 22, 25 f., 318 Shepard, Thomas 223

Valeri, Mark 61, 105

Zacharias, Ravi 235, 245–248, 294 f., 297, 299 f., 303–305, 307 f. Zinzendorf, Nicholas von 137–141, 152