Evangelicalism’s Pietist Roots

Chris Gehrz is correct to offer the badge “pietism” as an alternative to evangelicalism, which is on the ropes these days:

I strongly suspect that many evangelicals are actually Pietists — they just don’t know it.

Now, I don’t pretend that every evangelical is a Pietist, or vice-versa. But the connections are not merely historic, confined to the influence that German Pietists like Phillip Spener, August Francke, and Nicolaus von Zinzendorf had on 18th century evangelicalism (in part via John Wesley). And while I know that “Pietist” carries its own baggage, treated by evangelicals and non-evangelicals as synonymous with everything from “anti-intellectual” to “legalistic” to “world-denying,” it is nonetheless an “honorable handle.”

I have been arguing the same for some time, that revivalistic Protestantism is an Anglo-American derivation of European pietism, and that it was the major strain of Protestantism that informed both the evangelical and mainline Protestant camps:

The revivalist heritage of both evangelicalism and mainstream Protestantism not only calls into question many of the accepted definitions of conservative Protestantism, but the differences between pietism and confessionalism make such categories even more slippery. If evangelicals and fundamentalists make up the sector of American Protestantism that favors small-government, individual responsibility and traditional roles for men and women, then they are conservative, as that term is commonly used in American politics. But this definition, ironically, relies upon political categories to designate one of the factions in America’s two-party Protestant system that is supposed to avoid politics for evangelism. Furthermore, if evangelicals and fundamentalists make soul-winning a greater priority than liberals, then again they are conservative in the prevailing understanding of American Protestantism. But this categorization ignores the heritage of confessional Protestantism and the churchly and liturgical features of historic Protestantism that revivalist Protestants abandoned. What discussions of American Protestantism need is the addition of another category, much like one that has entered assessments of American politics. Instead of distinguishing simply between political liberals and conservatives, some now speak of two wings within the latter’s ranks, namely, neo-conservatives and paleo-conservatives. In the same way, for the purpose of distinguishing between evangelicals and confessional Protestants, it might be best to speak of the former as neo-Protestants and the latter as paleo-Protestants. If such a linguistic turn were ever to succeed, these new designations for conservative Protestants might remind their users that just as political neo-conservatives are, as the adage has it, liberals who got mugged by the 1960s, so neo-Protestants were the liberals of the nineteenth century who got mugged in the 1920s by the excesses of trying to make an otherworldly faith relevant. (The Lost Soul of American Protestantism, 79-80)

But I wonder if Gehrz’s understanding of pietism’s emphasis on unity will succeed in rescuing evangelicals from Donald Trump:

We’ll talk more about the Pietist understanding of the Bible and its authoritative status when the podcast returns next week (like Phillip Spener, our first proposal for a renewal of Christianity is that we return to Scripture), but one thing is undeniable: in all charity, humility, and grace, Christians will inevitably disagree about what the Bible means and how its truths should be lived out in this world. So Pietists have generally tended to avoid needless controversies and angry disputation, preferring to find ways to stay in communion with one another — and where there are necessary denominational or other formal divisions, to work together. (As we Covenanters like to say, we are the friends of all who fear God.)

There’s a practical concern here that should be familiar to most evangelicals at most times: that people committed to evangelism, missions, and social reform will be more effective when sharing those difficult labors with others. But in the midst of a society and polity as polarized as 21st century America, I think evangelicals today might hear in Pietism a more profound argument: that the starting point of Christian witness is Christian unity. (I’ll develop this more tomorrow, but maybe look back to this post to get a head start.)

After all, don’t you need to break ranks sometime?

Image