sm and the؛t?؛٨ €؛ Spiritual Direct'^n Cnvenant Church:ADescant on Text

and Life1

c. John Weborg, emeritus professor o f spiritual formation and theology, North Park Theological Seminary, Chicago, Illinois

I was asked to speak about spiritual direetion in the history of ?ietism and the tradition ofthe Covenant Chureh.^ My subtitle is A Descant on Text and Life. A descant can refer to an extensive discussion or

to a commentary. Musically, the descant is sung above the melody line, often with the soprano voice, and is heard as counterpoint. Counterpoint, we are told, is a texture that results from the combination of individual lines. Contrast and juxtaposition then do their work.

1 propose that spiritual direction shares some affinity with a descant in that it forms a texture of life lin es-th a t of a directee, the director, and the Holy spirit, to name a few. In a more specific sense, each director offers direction out of an ecclesiastical tradition that becomes a descant over all that is said or asked. In this lecture, I want to look at the descant in the text and life o fthe tradition of Lutheran ?ietism and the heri- tage bequeathed, mediated, and modified by the £vangelical Covenant Church. I owe the metaphor ofthe descant to August Hermann Francke, a major ?ierist who lived from 1663 to 1727.

The closest descriptions I know of spiritual direction within the Cov- enant heritage are three. The first comes from Martin Luther:

[The Cospel] offers counsel and help against sin in more than one way, for Cod is sur^ssingly rich in his grace: First, through the spoken word, by which the forgiveness of sin (the peculiar function ofthe gospel) is preached to the whole world; second, through Baptism; third, through the holy Sac- rament ofthe Altar; fourth, through the power ofthe keys;

27

and finally, through the mutual eonversation and eunsnlatinn ofbrethren.3

That is the Lutheran doctrine ofthe priesthood of all believers, stressing “mutual conversation.” The second is from ?hilipp Jakob spener:

For this purpose, as well as for foe sake of Christian growth in general, it may be usefirl if those who have earnestly resolved to walk in foe way ofthe Lord would enter into a confiden- tial relationship with their confessor or some other judicious and enlightened Christian and would regularly report to him how they live, what opportunities they have had to practice Christian love, and how they have employed or neglected them-There should be firm resolution to follow such advice at اك times unless something is expected that is quite clearly contrary to Gods will. If there appears to be doubt whether one is obligated to do this or that out of love for ones neigh־ bor, it is always better to incline toward doing rather than leaving it undone.^

August Hermann Francke offers foe third:

We are bound, on our parts, to use diligent prayer, and con- stant meditation; to institute perpetual collations of Scripture; to be instant in our attention to what passes in others and our- selves; and to exercise a vigilant observation of our own state of mind. Fqually essential with these important particulars, are conversation with those who have made greater advances in spiritual knowledge; and the cultivation of inward peace; of which, the more we possess, the more we shall enter into the true meaning ofthe Scripture.3

These three texts-from Luther, Spener, and H ^cke— might be called a description of spiritual direction in the heritage of Fietism.

Fear of GodAs I was trying to design this manuscript under the rubric of spiritual

direction, I started to ask myself, “Directed toward what?” One thing that came to my mind is the continuous strain that runs through Fietism concerning the fear of God. It is ^rticularly strong in Philipp Jakob Spener, the so-called “father of Pietism,” and Johann Albrecht Bengel, the so-called “exegete of Fietism.’̂ T he Swedish leader of spiritual renewal,

28

Carl OlofRosenius, picks up this theme, as did biblical scholar and former North Park Seminary dean Nils Lund. If you were to ask those persons, “Toward what are you directing someone?” they would say, “The fear of God.”

The focus on the fear of God stems from Luthers explanation of the first commandment: “You shall have no other gods before me.” Luther explains that it means you “should fear, love, and trust in God above all else.” ̂ In Luthers explanations of the rest of the commandments, the key word in each i sfear. “You should so fear God that you will not take his name in vain.” “You should so fear God th a t....” This fear of God, according to spener, is one of the three virtues that are demanded of Christians. So, toward what are you directing people if you are speak- ing of spiritual direction in the Pietist tradition? Toward fear, love, and trust of God. Because I cannot treat all three, I am going to single out fear because it is the more difficult one and one uniquely prevalent in the Pietist tradition.

We begin with Philipp Jakob Spener, who lived from 1635 to 1705. This is my translation, more literal than literary, of Spener’s explanation of Luther’s Small Catechism, but it will do for our purposes (By foe way, Spener’s explanation of the Small Catechism is not so small— 800 pages in all).

What are the chief virtues demanded of us in foe First Com- mandment? (Q.53)

The fear o f God, his love', and trust in him.

1) How manifold is foe fear of God? (Q.63)Twofold— a servile anda childlike.

2) What is servile fear? (Q. 64)Where one fears Godalonefor the sake ofpunishment, which one is apprehensive about without love and trust; whichfear much more repelsfrom God and disturbs the heart.

3) What is childlike fear? (Q. 65)Where one fears God as a loving, kind father and out oflove does not want to provoke anger whether or not one had anticipated judgment— whether or not there will even be judgment.

4) What is the true fear required here? (Q. 66)Not the servile fear, as is found among the godless where they

29

see divine judgment as it awakens their certainty:ل but childlike fear which stands in love, indeed is interwoven together from love, obedience, humility, andconfidence in the Fathers grace*

You notice this fear takes its rise from grace, not law. That is key: grace is a source of fear.

آمما me turn to Johann Aferecht Bengel, who lived from 1687 to 1752. In Bengel’s words:

Glory is the chief ground of conversion and worship.. .spon- taneous and voluntary fear is the beginning of ones turning from sin to God. Without fear there is no recognition of God’s omnipotence, omniscience, righteousness, and the misuse of Gods mercy.9

Bengel distinguishes between two kinds of fear. The first is “distress- ing” or “scrupulous” (peinlich, in German). This was particularly prior to Luther, when people had great fear ofhell and purgatory and judgment; but then Bengel talks about “delicate” fear {zart, in German). Luthers preaching of pure grace engendered a rich fear. Justification by grace through faith, when it is abused, leads to lethargy, indolence־ a pretext for formalized spiritual security. The result is a presumption on Gods grace and a taking of justification for granted. The religious dimension of justification is totally missing.10

The meaning of “delicate fear” is that one will never be more acquit- ted on the Day ofjudgm ent than one is right n o w -b u t that is not a license for frivolousness. One cannot presume on it. Please excuse me if my metaphor is ill-chosen, but Bengel’s fear (though not his word) is that grace will be ra p e d - it is that vulnerable to abuse. This is delicate, delicate fear. For Spener, as was previously observed, this fear originates not in law, but in grace.

Moving closer to home, the writings of Carl Olof Rosenius were like a second Bible to many of the early Swedish Mission Friends because he edited the famous newspaper, Pietisten. 1 discovered that 1 owned at least a thousand pages ofRosenius in my libraty at home, and in preparation for this presentation 1 felt compelled-1 was going to say “condemned”— to read them. Once 1 started, 1 read everything 1 owned and, lo and behold, 1 discovered in Rosenius these discussions of fear: the same as in Luther, Spener, and Bengel.

Rosenius cites Luther’s interpretation of the first commandment and the threefold structure of fear, love, and trust. Rosenius writes that fear

30

involves “the injunetion that I am آس to he carnally minded, secure, and indifferent concerning God and my soul; that I am not to sin lightly, but that I am to fear to do anything displeasing to God.”* إ He continues writ- ing that loving God requires of him, “not to be cold in my relationship to God, but that I am to love with God as my greatest joy and desire.” That trust forbids self-sufficiency and selfishness and “requires true faith and confidence in [God].”12 Taken all together the commands to fear, love, and trust God demand a congruence of inner and outer life.

Rosenius then describes healthy fear through the lens of Paui’s words in Philippians: “workout your own salvation in fear and trembling” (2:12). Rosenius writes: “The Tear and trembling’ ofwhich the Apostle speaks is that which a man feels who has received a great treasure which he must carry with him through a land filled with robbers.”*^These “robbers” are largely constituted of those who take justification by grace through faith for gran ted-the same as B engel-or the feeling that justification by faith is going to put you to sleep. Because, after all, one can’t do anything to earn it or pay for it: there’s nothing one can do. It is a land filled with robbers, and the worst robber is spiritual sleep.

In his commentary on Romans, Rosenius outlines two kinds o f fe a r - bondage-fear and child-fear-and makes distinctions between the two. “Bondage-fear grows out of self-righteousness and unbelief. The soul is trying to meet the requirements of the law.”*̂ That’s the first kind, but Rosenius continues: “child-fear is a fruit of faith. It consists in reverence for God’s promises, assurance of his presence, all in the context of an awareness of his pleasure or displeasure.”15 Rosenius concludes this sec- tion of commentary by joining this child-fear to the consolations of the Holy Spirit so that believers can be assured of their adoption.

Nils w. Lund, a former dean of North Park Theological Seminary, wrote an article entitled The Way 0f H 0 liness}G Again, he begins where Spener and Rosenius began-w ith Luther’s interpretation of the first commandment. Lund wrote his article in 1945, so his readers were likely confirmed on Luther’s Catechism— fear, love, and trust in God. He gets into an exegetical study offear and holiness and the deuteronomic text. He moves into the conventional topics of relations, separateness, and set- ting apart and then into the character of God. God was unapproachable, so Lund discusses issues of the clean and the unclean and distinguishing the righteous from the unrighteous. From there Lund begins his critical engagement with the topic of worship, which is not unrelated to the public controversies of today, among them the relationship between

31

ceremonial rubrics and the moral law. Lund made use of the work of Albert Knudson, a theologian in the Methodist tradition who taught at Boston University. Quoting Knudson:

Moral obedience is fondamental and absolutely essential, but ceremonialism has its place in the farther culture ofthe soul.If it obscures, as it sometimes does, the moral requirement of religion, it is of course to be condemned; but in and of itself it simply aims by a reverent and thoughtful approach to God to give expression to the inviolable purity of his nature.^

Ceremony can obscure or substitute for moral observance— one can say we have foe right ritual and God ought to be h a p p y -b u t ceremony “simply aims by a reverent and thoughtful approach to God to give expression to the inviolable purity of God’s nature.”*؟

To summarize, foe Pietist heritage says that we are directed to three virtues— to fear, love, and serve G o d -a n d 1 have had time only to select fear. Does spiritual direction in our heritage have anything to say to a “fearless” person? 1 really want to ask these questions: Is foe Christian- ity that’s fostered today hospitable to fear the way Spener, Bengel, and Rosenius spoke ofit? Is it a virtue today to fear God? If the Pietist heritage teaches us anything, it is an orientation toward this virtue.

What is the consequence of the loss of the delicate, childlike fear of God, foe fear that Rosenius described as foe “treasure” that is being stolen from us by foe cultural, social robbers? How do ritual and liturgy relate to foe recovery ofthe appropriate fear of God? Does this issue of fear relate to the broader social loss of respect for others, regard for persons as being in the image of God? Does the term “sacred” have any secular currency? In his essay Lund wrote that “ritual is nothing but foe etiquette of religion,” and his language of “etiquette of religion” interests me. He also speaks of form as “regard for the holy.”*1 ؟ wonder if our fast-food culture, disposable goods mentality, and mobile relationships all eat away any referent points for foe structures of such etiquette and foe freedoms cultivated by such respect for foe canons of relationships. 1 leave it there. But if we’re going to pay attention to the Pietist tradition, there is no way to escape an appropriate modality of fear. I return to it at foe end.

Spiritual D^ectiun and the Practice of ReadingIf one is doing spiritual direction in foe Pietist heritage, there is also

direction toward becoming “readers” {lasare in Swedish), spener cites

32

Luthers threefold understanding ofthe way of devotion.^ When Luther had his devotions, he understood them as having three parts, and spener repeats this with approval. The three parts are: oratio, meditatio, tentatio.21 First, oratio, prayer for the Holy Spirit’s enlightenment. Second, meditatio, the reading o ^ rip m re -re p e a tin g it and comparing it. Third, tentatioy which is “affliction, suffering.” Luther substitutes tentatio for the medieval contemplatio, which was “union with God”— Lutherans were never very hospitable to mystics. Luther thought that part of a genuine devotional life was suffering. He did not expect daily devotions to be a gleeful trip. As he said: “The devil will harry you and make you a real doctor of theol- Ogy.”22 Or as he said in another ofhis treatises, he learned his theology by “living... dying, and being datnned.”^ It was not happy stuff.

Every time Luther read Scripture, the first thing he experienced was the sense that he was not measuring up. The devil found all kinds of wrong and said: “Martin! You think that you’re justified.” Remember that Bonhoeffer said that you never argue with the devil about your sins: you lose every time (a modern paraphrase).^ Every time you argue with the devil about your sins, you have to explain them and defend them and before long you’re in the real Lutheran nexus of self-justification, not justification by g race-and for Luther, that is the real crucifixion. To have a devotional life was not a picnic, it was to face the self But one could face it with both law and gospel.

More particularly for spiritual direction, when we are helping people work with Scripture, two entries from Spener and Francke carry with them some very sound wisdom. From Spener:

All knowledge of God and his will according to the law and gospel, however, does not exist in mere knowing but must come forth in praxis and action.. ٠ .There must continually be a holy intention to put into practice that which one comes to know as the divine will.^

That can be summarized very simply by saying that to Fietists, you don’t know Scripture until you do it. And so spiritual direction in a Pietist heritage must work toward implementing what is read. One understands by doing, by practice. Spener wrote in the Pia Desideria, “it is by no means enough to have knowledge ofthe Christian faith, for Christianity consists rather of practice.’’̂ My summary is simply that all theology is p ractical-but be careful ofthat word, “practical.” Spener did not mean the American idea of “will it work?” He meant it the way the medical

.3.3

field understands It: one practices, one learns by doing.From Francke: “Remember that you may know no truth in Scripture

for which you will not have to give an account (ل Timothy 6: ل4)ء of whether you have transformed it into life as one transformed food and drink into flesh and blood.”27 When it comes to understanding Scripture, one does not understand it by thinking it through, one thinks it through by doing it. Francke had a very sophisticated understanding about foe relationship oflanguage and foe affections. He did not mean sentimental- ity, but rather that words are an index to foe affections. He believed there is an indissoluble union be^een words and affections: “The knowledge of the affections ofwhich we speak, is practical; whereas, an unrenewed man peruses the Scriptures theoretically; and believes it sufficient, if he understands them through the medium of practical reason.”^ But understanding the Scriptures folly requires more than practical reason, it requires an inward perception that flows from personal renewal and a sensitivity toward affections.

The more we “put on” [foe apostles’] affections, the more deeply shall we enter into their writings, and meditate on foe truths which they reveal. Whenever foe affections of the Sacred Fenmen develop and unfold themselves, let us seek to possess the same amiable em otions....the meaning of Scripture thus laid up in foe heart, rather than foe head, will transform our souls.29

Francke does not concentrate on foe grammar of the text as a means of understanding. To summarize his point: unless we have the affections of the apostles, we will not understand what foe apostles wrote. So we think with foe heart. That’s a bit exaggerated, but Francke makes a very close connection between affections and understanding. We pray for the affections of the apostles, a thought not so far from Saint Augustine, who also taught us that we must first love what God commanded if we are going to do what God wills. Note foe word order: what one loves precedes doing. That is an important point for Pietists.

Finally, for those leading Bible study groups, Francke has a handy method for those willing to try it. He proposes that when studying a text of Scripture, one should ask three questions of the text. It makes for a good discussion.

1) What is to be believed? That is, what does it teach?2) What is to be done? What am I supposed to do?

3) What are you to hope? What promises are made?^

W hat is taught? W hat is commanded? W hat is promised? The cash value— if I may be allowed to use a monetary analogy־ of that little exercise turns out to be the three theological virtues of the Middle Ages: faith, hope, and love, without which a Christian cannot live a Christian life. Faith, hope, love: notice that hope is never omitted. So when you are leading a bible study, ask: What does it teach us? W hat does it com־ mand us? What does it promise us?

To summarize, Francke and other advocates in the Fietistic tradition adhered to the rule that one comes to know and understand through practice. It may surprise us, but spener, Francke, and Rosenius all dis־ played a very Catholic sense ofwhat can be used in spiritual formation, including the Apocrypha. Im not prepared to explain this, but they had a special interest in the book of Sirach. I found all three of them quot־ ing fois work ofwisdom literature: the Pietists were vitally interested in literature that looked like the Book of Proverbs, because one could do it. Rosenius loved Sirach. If I may say so myself, I have used Sirach in spiritual direction, especially with people who have been reluctant to use medicine or medical practitioners. It is the only text in the larger bibh- cal tradition that carries with it the divine institution of physicians and pharmacists (Sirach 38:1-15). The wisdom literature, of which Sirach is a small part, was rich in material requiring discernment, the heart of spiritual direction.

Spiritual Directiun and PrayerSpiritual direction concerns itself with prayer, and the Pierists have a

lot to say here. In some texts on God-pleasing prayer, spener talks about the base for p rayer-G od’s love and the one on whom we call, Christ’s name. We are to pray according to his commandment, and our anees- tors were vety interested in foe role of commandment in prayer. In other words, one is delivered from the bondage of “I don’t feel like it,” or “I don’t feel pure enough,” or WI don’t feel right enough.” You pray because you’re commanded. That’s the authorization to pray. That’s our history, and it’s a freeing thing. We pray according to Christ’s commandment, promise, and m erit- th e merit of Christ, not our merits, but the merit ofchrist. Faith rests on grace in the name ofChrist. To pray in the name of Christ is to believe that the Father has required foe prayer. Note foe word: required to pray. 1 think that is important in helping people to pray whether they feel like it or not. We can talk to God irrespective of

35

what we feel.What are the means ٠۴ carrying cut this prayer? Spener emphasized

the prayer formulas c f Scripture, especially foe Psalms and Jesus’s use cf the Lcrd’s Prayer. Spener enccuraged m ed ita ticn -cn Holy Baptism and Holy Communion, on the experience of trials and purification and suffering, and on fasting. He talked about the practice ofprayer, praying in groups, and foe proper use of written prayers.^ After all, our ancestors used written prayers in foe Lutheran liturgy.

Rosenius gives this instruction: when in prayer, think of God’s burning love, divine omnipotence, and eternal truthfulness, qualities Rosenius called a threefold rope. Prayer points to foe person and work of the mediator and his merits. There we have that word again— merits. Prayer is based on God’s love and esteem for his Son. This is what it means to pray in foe name of Christ: it is not for our sake, but for the sake of God’s Son. The prayer of faith insists on foe glory of the name of God—we refer to the glory of God when we face God wifo his Word. What would God not do for the sake of his name? We can almost hear the psalmist: “Not to us, Lo r d , not to us, but to your name be foe glory, because of your love and faithfirlness” (Psalm 11 تو1)م This is a recurring theme in Rosenius: not for our sake but for God’s sake, God’s name, and the name ofhis Son.32

Here we receive some instructions that fit wifo our practice of spiritual direction. Notice a theme common to spener: prayer is not one’s own venture but is commanded. Therefore one does just that. Do not come to God with your own words, but arm yourself with God’s words— stress them. Say: “I am praying only for what you yourself have asked me to pray for. You are gracious, a God of truth. Do according to your own nature.” Left to your own reasoning and feeling, you will be deprived of this picture of God, so keep your eyes fixed on foe Word. Do not come before God wifo foe worthiness ofyour own name, but set before yourself foe mediator. Prayer does not rest on your worthiness but on God and God’s g lo ry -n o t your faith, but foe faithfulness of God.

Pierism works within the orbit ofWord and Sacrament as foe means of grace. Word and Sacrament are the inception of the Christian life, ^ ticu la rly baptism. Revivalism and much of evangelicalism work within foe orbit of the Word, calling people to make a decision which is foe inception of the Christian life. Here is where I return to the word “des- cant.” Spiritual direction by Covenant people will be a descant on one of these two melody lines (drawn altogether too starkly and wifo much

36

oversimplification).Let me illustrate. People of Pietistic heritage asked one another: “Are

you living yet in Jesus?” or “Do you live?” Lina Sandell’s hymn “Do You Live?” is in The Song Goes On, a Covenant songbook.33 Those who come out ofa revival tradition might he asked: “Are you saved?” or “Have you been born again?” Note the difference: “Are you living yet in Jesus?” and “Are you saved?” are different questions. Pietists tended to ask, “Are you living yet in Jesus?” because they did not know if one would ever quit. It made a big difference-and it makes a big difference in spiritual direction if one speaks as a Pietist or as a revivalist.

I’m a third-generation Covenanter. I was raised in a Pietist congrega- tion, not a revivalist congregation, so I come out ofa specific Covenant history. People ask questions differently, and those questions become a descant over all the other lines. When Lina Sandell asked, “Do you live?” she wasn’t presuming you were dead. She meant, “Were you living in your baptism?” The question, “Are you living yet in Jesus?” meant, “Are you continuing in your baptism?” To a Pietist, it meant, “Do you have living أس ” That was the issue in my life and in my church: “Is your faith still alive?” It was not a question ofwhen it began. I was never asked that question.

I’m trying to nuance why the Lvangelical Covenant Church has com- plex spiritual histories among its members. I cannot solve that issue right here, and I’m not going to try, but that is what I mean by a descant. Whoever does spiritual direction in the Covenant Church brings their heritage and therefore is asked: “What is your formation tradition?”34 That is your descant. You will hear people out ofyour formation tradi- tion, which means you listen doubly carefhlly to what they are saying.

I want to share a story from Covenant history that will illustrate foe problem. The event happened in 1876 and is retold in £ric Hawkinson’s book, Images in Covenant beginnings. It goes a long way to show you the conflict that occurred nine years before foe Covenant Church was organized-nine years of conflict between Pietists and revivalists, between E. A. Skogsbergh and j. E Sangren. Skogsbergh, the charismatic preacher called foe “Swedish Moody,” was really becoming famous— everyone wanted to hear him. As Hawkinson recounts:

Their situation, in a great measure, had its source in the fact that foe revival was now dependent upon certain leaders. No one expected any results without them. Yes, both the leaders

and the Christians in general began ©penly to eredit the lead־ ers with a certain number of converts each time they appeared in a meeting. This may seem to many a usual matter now. But before this time such practices were completely unknown in the evangelical work which had emerged from Sweden. On the contrary, a preacher considered it a temptation to pride to tell or call attention to what he had accomplished. But, of course, then he would not know so exactly; he had only preached the word, and if any had been pricked in the heart to awakening, or some balm to peace had come through the sermon, he might not perhaps find that out for many years.It never occurred to him to require anyone to give such a confession.35

That’s Rosenian piety, because the Word alone did it. It is a totally differ- em mood than that of the revivalistic tradition. We come back to those questions: “Are you alive then in Jesus?” “Do you live?” “Are you saved?” “Have you been born again?” These questions and this story represent two different spiritual direction traditions that sit side-by-side in the history of the Tvangelical Covenant Church, and that is the descant. I want to be fair to both sides, but my task is to speak about the ?ietistic heritage.^

Sustaining FaithThe crucial issue for Rosenius was foe continual conflict between faith

and unbelief in people. He called this “foe acquittal notice,” that one has receivedjustification by grace through faith and that forgiveness from sins implies freedom from the law. “A state of grace, a constant forgiveness” implies that we are not under the judgment of the law.^

Rosenius, writing metaphorically, says that in Gods great account book foe justified persons account is perfectly balanced, but that same persons little passbook in his or her conscience seldom corresponds with Gods book. Why?

...fo r we have an enemy who continually makes new entries of debt against us in order to disturb and terrify us. But praised be God, that foe covenant of grace is in His heart perfect, firm, and undisturbed; that He does not count our sins against us; and that He does not judge us according to the Law, although we ourselves do SO.38

38

“Freedom ٠؛ eonseienee,” said Rosenius, “is an imperfect freedom because it is dependent on faith and faith is never perfect.”^ That’s the problem. What does one do about faith? I ask because the way one lives begins to question whether one truly believes. The freedom of conscience enjoyed is that sin is not reckoned to us. Thus the “secret bondage” (that is his word) is a lack of faith and can threaten, frighten, but not condemn us. The basis for this freedom is that the remission of sin has a legal basis wherein God’s law and justice have been fully satisfied-salvation is founded upon “a complete satisfaction of the indebtedness.”^

Anselmian in his atonement theology, Rosenius could say the indebt- edness was totally paid off. For him it had a legal background. When sinners sought forgiveness in Christ alone by grace alone through faith alone, what God gave was a pronouncement of acquittal. The confessor was not declared innocent but acquitted by the one against whom offenses had not only been committed, but had accumulated. This offended one, God, elected of his own will to holdnothinga%2im t the confessor on the basis of Jesus Christ’s offering to God as a sacrificial intercession. On that basis and in Jesus’s name God forgives the confessor and justifies that person’s confession. 1 am acquitted of all charges against my life and name. Rosenius sought an objective basis for the declaration for the justification of sinners in the satisfactions of God’s righteousness. He sought to remove all grounds for doubt in God’s intention to forgive.

Regarding sustaining faith, Rosenius had absolutely no confidence that experience could play a role in one’s comfort. The sources of comfort are foe Word and foe Sacraments. First, baptism. It is more than a confes- sion or obedience: it is a holy comfort. It rests entirely on God’s work of grace. It unites and identifies believers with Christ, through which we become a partaker of grace. Identity with Christ brings acquittal from foe guilt of sin and a new holy power.^ One finds exactly the same thing in Spener, that a person’s death date is the completion of one’s baptism. “If one is baptized as an adult and does not feel fit and says, ‘Ferhaps I ought to be baptized again,’ then let him rejoice in fois: he was engrafted into foe vine, and let him draw sap from foe vine.”^ Those baptized as children need to make certain they have grown together with it since their baptism took place at a period in life in which alone, according to the words ofjesus, a person is fit and ready to receive foe kingdom of God.

However a “withered branch may still regain life. For even though a life-union with Christ has been lost, yet foe sacramental union has not been lost. Only return to your Savior and to foe covenant relationship

39

ofyour baptism.”^ “When we beende cnnverted, we expressly revert ٢٠ the e^enan t with Christ into which we were baptized.”^ To Rosenius, conversion is a reversion to baptism. If I could talk with any of our Cov- enant ancestors, I’d like to ask them: when they said to someone, “You have to be converted,” did they mean in the Rosenian sense, reversion to your baptism? Or did they mean it in the revivalistic sense, the first step in salvation? Again, there is a big difference.

In addition to baptism, we have Holy Communion: “Like the Word of God, Holy Communion is a means of grace. As you do آس come to the Word to give or show God something good but only to get.. ٠ help for your feeble faith, to strengthen your imperfect repentance and prayer, so also you should come to the Lord’s Holy Supper in the same way to seek help for all that is lacking.”^ Do you remember what he said was lacking? Security and faith. “You dread going to foe Lord’s table because you know that your daily life is so foil of shortcomings. ...W hat else is this than a complete forgetfulness of the real purpose of the Holy Com- munion namely, that it is a remedy for all these morbidities and faults in our faith and life?”46 “It is not enough that you want to believe. You need to make use of the means which God has provided.” Notice foe words: “Make use of the means which God has provided for foe creation and sustenance of faith. You need the Gospel, foe Holy Supper, prayer, the intercession.. .”47 and so forth. However, Rosenius also warns against false sacramental comfort.

Moving to some Covenant contributions: Carl Hanson taught at North Park Seminary from 1905 to 1911, then at Moody Bible Institute. I quote Hanson:

Here I find another instance where foe old Lutheran theology struck the right note in discriminating between conversion and regeneration. How often did I not emphasize in North Park, manyyears ago, that complete regeneration is a gradual process which reaches its completion in the resurrection of the body.... I believed in infant baptism, bywhich foe regen- erating forces are brought into historical contact with the human being.^

Notice his distinction, that old Lutheran idea that death is complete regeneration.

Covenant pastor Herbert Palmquist much later is quoted in a foot- note by Clen Wiberg from a lecture on Covenant perspectives he gave

40

in January 1954: “a baptized baekslider shnuld never be told that he needs to be born again. That was the same as being baptized again. But he should be told to arise, be converted, come home as the prodigal to the father to whom he belongs.”^ Is this Roseniuss conversion in the reversion to baptism? Again, when early Covenant people said they had been converted, in what sense did they use the term? The conhrmation book we currently use says regarding infant baptism: “When that child responds to Gods grace and comes to personal faith in Jesus Christ, all that was provided in baptism will be hrlftlled. A child becomes a Chris- tian in the adult seme only when and if he or she has faith in Christs atoning work ofwhich the earlier baptism is a sign.”^ Does that require a decisive moment? If you read Covenant Affirmations, the section “We Believe in the New Birth,” the description of the new birth does not say it has to be a moment you remember. What it must be is continuous, living faith. That’s very Rosenian.

So this is the descant: a Rosenian, or revivalist, or some other theologi- cal determinant plays a role in the way spiritual directors serve people who are bedeviled by Roseniuss issue-how faith in the truth of one’s salvation is secured. Do we refer them to their baptism and an active, sacramental life? I have done that. I have told people to return to the font in which they were baptized. Or, do we work more anthropologically by stressing one’s making sure? The spiritual director supplies the descant to this key issue since a search for some kind of inner rest is relentless. In the Covenant tradition, where the two traditions live together, can each hear the other with integrity?

In this situation a person formed in American revivalism or evangelical- ism may be uneasy with viewing conversion as a return to one’s baptism in contrast with conversion as the beginning of the Christian life. To the extent that interior, subjective commitment plays a decisive role, the spiritual director may seek to help the directee “make sure” of his or her salvation. A Rosenian calling for a return to one’s baptism would point to foe objective character of God’s promises in the Word and Sacrament as trus^orthy, despite any sense of unworthiness. This baptismal cov- enant is a gift God maintains for us despite our waywardness. The Word and Sacrament are what God has made sure for life and salvation. Any fluctuation of feelings is for Rosenius unreliable. The objective ground in God’s promise is without variability and itself creates confidence.

SenseTrainingI want to pick up a page from Nathaniel Franklin, a major educator

in the Covenant Church. Ne served from 1920 to 1945 as a Covenant leader and designer in Christian education. Ne wrote a little book called Jesus atHome, a story that is partly fiction and partly fact. Nis footnotes are copious about the facts, but then he builds a whole fictional develop- ment about Jesuss home life which is really quite enriching. I want to apply it to a way of Covenant spiritual direction, but 1 need to apply it tro u g h Olga Lindberg. Olga Lindberg was avery sophisticated educator in Covenant Christian education circles as early as 1918. One can read her writings in the Covenant Archives and see that Olga hindberg was interested at that early date in the difference between myth, epic, story, and a whole range of narrative styles, and the difference between giants and epic heroes, all kinds of people. Among her ideas was that stories do “sense training.” Sense training, meaning that a person needs to get the “sense” of it. It is somewhat parallel to Francke-one needs to get the “affecrion؟ ”^

With Lindberg’s “sense training” in mind. I’ll read an excerpt from Jesus atHome. In it Nathaniel Franklin imagines a biblical event. Remember that the resurrection text in 1 Corinthians 15 reports that Jesus appeared to James, his brother. Franklin writes a fictional account ofjesus’s encoun- ter with James. 1 reproduce it here because that is a Covenant way of doing spiritual direction. It does not give directives, but it does what Olga Lindberg talks about in “sense training.” It does what Francke talks about in “developing the affections.” You have to get the “affections” of the story to get the story. 1 think it is very important to see how story functions in our history.

Before daybreak, one morning, after a restless and sleepless night, James sought solitude. Ne found himself crossing foe plain behind Capernaum; soon he was climbing up the hill- side. Nis steps led to an arbor opening toward the lake which he, together with Jesus, had discovered when on a visit in earlier years with their cousins James and John in Capernaum.And just recently James had learned that Jesus would often rise before sunrise and go out to a secluded spot to pray. James had suspected that this was the place. Ne had, however, never sought to intrude on his brother’s privacy. And even now, when he saw the open, green spot facing foe blue expanse of

42

the lake beneath, he held back.He Stopped.He sat down and slowly took off his sandals.Then, just as the rising sun appeared over the plateau

beyond the lake, he arose and entered reverently. He walked a few paces; he fell on his knees to pray. He buried his face in the cup of his hands on the ground. Words failed him. it was left for “the Spirit with his spirit to make intercession for him with groanings which cannot be uttered!”

James felt a hand softly laid on his head.James looked up! Jesus was standing before him, and was

bending over him! James reached out his hands, circled his brothers ankles and kissed the nail-pierced feet.

Then, suddenly his pent-up emotions broke through in convulsive sobs which shook his frame! Our Lord bent over deeper and stroked affectionately his brothers hair, cheek, and beard. In these moments the deep bitterness, which in recent years had crystallized in the heart of James, melted and vanished completely. Peace came to his heart, and James was calm.

Our Lord then took James by both hands and lifted him to his feet. He then pointed to the wide rock beside them which formed a ground-made settee that faced out upon the sea below. Both sat down. And for the next hour the two brothers chatted confidently and happily as they used to do in their boyhood days when ftom a cave above Nazareth they looked out over the verdant plain of Esdraelon. And can we doubt that the Lord shared with this new disciple the promise for the Helper soon to come from Above? And that James offered gladly to witness of his experience with the risen Lord to each one of his brothers and sisters?^

This imagined encounter during the forty days bettveen Laster and Ascension Day lets the reader become a silent observer to James’s unex- peered meeting with Jesus. We sense Jamess heaviness. He cannot find words. But can’t we also sense foe m em ory-o r better, the memories that were never named or resolved. Memories ofthe time he and John wanted fire to consume some of Jesus’s enemies (Luke 9:5 6 ل-و ), or the time they wanted to sit at the right and left hand of Jesus in the kingdom, only

43

to earn the rebuke ofjesus and the anger of the disciples. So was James overwhelmed with alienation and alone? Then the gracious gesture of Jesus led to his breakthrough and a ^ o -h o u r conversation. What is to be “sensed” in the story that suggests a direction? What affections are needed to understand the way to the life that had been lost?

In sum, spiritual direction in the heritage of the Lutheran Pietism mediated by the Covenant Church manifests four contours. First, the fear of God will not be seen as jeopardizing the friendship of God, but as guarding it. Pietist hymns often focus on this theme. But the measure of the metaphor of friendship can foster an intimacy that minimizes grace, if it becomes “buddy-buddy.” Note the words from “Amazing Grace,” “T ’was grace that taught my heart to fear, and grace my fears relieved.” John Newton had to fear grace. Note the wording. It is not fear that is removed: fears are. That’s plural.

Second, the practice of Scripture will give entry to the perspective behind the Scripture. Francke was careful to advocate dealing with the scope of Scripture, not just its texts. The affections of the authors of Scripture are to become the affections of the readers so that readers can become doers of Scripture.

Third, the Pietist tradition advocates vigorous prayer, even confrontive prayer with God. If the vigor and integrity ofthe prayer forms advocated by Rosenius were practiced, perhaps communities descended from foe Pietists would be more adept at conflict engagement.

Fourth, foe Pietist tradition in which the Evangelical Covenant Church participates entails an experiential side to its ethos. By experiential I do not only mean that one can encounter God’s grace in Jesus Christ. The additional dimension is that Scripture is learned by experimenting— by the “obedience of faith” as one reaches a hand to another in need, offers a word to one silenced by the assaults of life, or one is offering a first prayer.

Spiritual direction among Covenant people requires listening with integrity. Rosenians and sacramentalists will listen to revivialists and charismatics. The director will require a “Lindbergian sense” of a high order as he or she who hears is entrusted with foe story of another, lest in listening there is a rush to judgment.

Endnotes Delivered August 5, 2006, as the first annul leeture in spiritual directinn at North .ل

?ark Theological Seminary. I wish to thank ?amela Hubbard for preparing foe transcrip- tion and notes and Andy Meyer for editing and checking citations.

2. It is necessary to set some parameters, because there is nothing in the history of

Pietism that says, “Thou shalt do spiritual direetion” First ه£لك , there are “Pietisms,” including Reformed Pietism and Anabaptist Pietism, to name two It IS a complex subject with thousands of pages of material written, so 1 have isolated some themes to narrow the focus to spiritual direction in Pietism and the Covenant Church

3 Martin Luthers Basic Theological Writings, ed T F Lull (Minneapolis Fortress Press, 1989), 327 (Smalcald Articles 111 4) A number the translations used here reflect the original use of masculine nouns and pronouns

4 Philipp Jakob spener, Pia Desideria, translated, edited, and with an introduction by Theodore G Tappert (Philadelphia Fortress Press, 1964), 97

3 August Hermann Francke, A Guide to the Reading and Study of the Holy Scriptures, trans Wiliam Jacques (Philadelphia David Morgan, 1823), 115

6 c John Weborg, “Bengel, J(ohann) A(lbrecht),” m Dictionary ofMajor Biblical Interpreters, ed Donald K McRim (Downers Grove, 1L IYP Academic, 2007), 184

7 See Luthers section on the Ten Commandments in his Small Catechism, included m Martin Luthers Basic Theological Writings, 476-79

8 Philipp Jakob spener. Einfaltige Erklarungder Christlichen LehrNach der Ordnung dess kleinen Catechismi des Theuren Mann Gottes Lutheri (Frankfurt Johann Deurich Friedgen, 1677), 41, 50, 52 (author’s translation) See Revelation 11 7, Μ 6

9 Johann Albrecht Bengel, Sechzig Erbaulicher Reden über die Offenbarung johannes oder vielmehr Jesu Christi samt einer Nachlese gleichen Inhalts, 2 Auflage (Stuttgart Johann Christian Erhard, 1758), 750-2, and Erklärte Offenbarung johannes oder vielmehr, Jesu Christi, 3AufIage (Stuttgart Johann Christoph Erhard, 1758), 544 (authors translation)

10 See C John Weborg, “The Eschatological Ethics of Johann Albrecht Bengel” (PhD dissertation, Northwestern University, 1983), 101-4

11 A Faithful Guide to Peace with God, Being Excerpts from the Writings o f c 0 Rose- nius, Arranged as Daily Meditiations to Cover a Period ofTwo Months, arranged with the assistance of Bishop N j Laache and reproduced by George Taylor Rygh (Minneapolis Augsburg, 1923), 31

٦١ Ibid13 Ibid 152-5314 c o Rosenius, Romans, a Devotional Commentary, trans ElmerFDahlgrenand

Royal F Peterson (Chicago Covenant Press, 1978), 9015 Ibid16 Nils Wilhelm Lund, “The Way of Holiness,” The Covenant Quarterly 5, no 1

(1945) 24-3017 Ibid , 27, quoting Knudson No original citation18 Ibid19 Ibid, 2620 Philipp Jakob spener, “On Hindrances to Theological Studies,” m Pietists Selected

Writings, The Classics of Western Spirituality, ed Peter Erb (New York Paulist Press, 1983), 67

21 “Preface to the Wittenberg Edition of Luther’s German Writings,” in Martin Luther’s Basic Theological Writings, 65-67 (.Luther’s Works [Saint Louis Concordia Pub- lishmg House, 1955-], V 34, p 285 Francke wrote a “short instruction as to how one should read Holy Scripture toward true edification,” and mentions Luther’s threefold process of devotional reading This piece was published m 1776 as an introduction to a translation of the Luther Bible along with an essay by Freilmghausen

22 Ibid , 67 cLuther’s Works, V 34, p 287)23 Timothy George, Theology of the Reformers (Nashville Broadman Press, 1988),

61 (citing Luther’s Tischreden [Table Talk], V l ,p 146)24 Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Temptation (New York Macmillan, 1955), 43 ،،We should

never argue with the devil about our sins, be we should speak about our sins only with Jesus... we should tell the devil that Jesus ealled to himself not the righteous but the sinners.

25· Philipp Jakob Spener, “The Necessary and Useful Reading of the Holy Scriptures,” in Pietists: Selected Writings, 73.

26. Spener, Pia Desiderio., 95.27. August Hermann Francke, “Scriptural Rules of Life,” in God's Glory, Neighbors

Good: A Brieflntroduction to the Life and Writings ofAugust Hermann Francke by Gary Sattler (Chicago: Covenant Press, 1982), 223 (11. 2.26.6).

28. Francke, A Guide to the Reading and Study ofthe Holy Scriptures, 132.

30. Hancke, “Scriptural Rules of Life,” in Sattler, God's Glory, Neighbor's Good, 222

31. Philipp Jakob spener, “God Pleasing Prayer,” in Pietists: SelectedWritings, 88-93.32. c. o. Rosenius, Day by Day with God: Daily Devotions, trans. Maj-len Henriks-

son (Bombay: Gospel Literature Service, 1976-1979), 4, 4 5 4 6 .and 5, 26-29 ,־33. Lina Sandell, “Do You Live?” in The Song Goes On (Chicago: Covenant Publica-

tions, 1990), #146.3 4 .1 owe this expression to Adrian Van Kaam.35. Eric G. Hawkinson, Images in Covenant Beginnings (Chicago: Covenant Press,

1968), 152.36. These themes of conversion receive further treatment in c. John Weborg, “Seeking

an Interpretive Discrimen in the Evangelical Covenant Church,” The Swedish-American Historical Quarterly 63 nos. 2-3 (April-July2012): 187-201.

37. c. o. Rosenius, The Believer Free from the Law, translation and introduction by Adolph Huit (Rock Island: Augustana Book Concern, 1923), 34.

38. Ibid, 35.

40. Rosenius, A Faithful Guide, 90-91.41. Rosenius, Romans, 58.42. Rosenius, A Faithful Guide, 161.43. Ibid., 160-63.44. Rosenius, Day by Day, 1, 45.45. Ibid., 2 ,16 .46. Ibid., 4, 57-60.47. Ibid.48. Quoted in Karl Olsson, “Sweetness and Light: Carl Hanson as a Teacher,” The

Covenant Quarterly 24 no. 2 (May 1966): 17.49. Glen Wiberg, “The Sacrament ofHoly Baptism,” The Covenant Quarterly 22 no.

3 (August, 1964), 30, note 21.50. Thejoumey (Chicago: Covenant Publications, 2001), 29-30.51. Olga Lindberg, typewritten notes (Record series 02.01.14 Box 1), Covenant

Archives, Chicago. Thanks to my wife, Lois, and my teaching assistant Lisa Burnett for procuring Lindberg material.

52. Nathaniel Franklin, Jesus at Home (Willmar, MN: Nathaniel Franklin, 1972), 61 - 6 ?

46

آلمآورلم؛

Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may priut, dow nload, or send artieles for individual use according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international eopyright law and as otherwise authorized under your respective ATT,AS subscriber agreem ent.

No eontent may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the copyright holder(s)’ express written permission. Any use, decompiling, reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS eollection with permission from the eopyright holder(s). The eopyright holder for an entire issue ٥۴ ajourna! typieally is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However, for certain articles, tbe author ofthe article may maintain the copyright in the article. Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific work for any use آس covered by the fair use provisions of tbe copyright laws or covered by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the copyright hoider(s), please refer to the copyright iaformatioa in the journal, if available, or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS®) collection contains electronic versions of previously published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association (ATLA) and received initia؛ funding from Liiiy Endowment !)٦٥.

The design and final form ofthis electronic document is the property ofthe American Theological Library Association.