Reviving Dead Bones: Contours Of Pietism In The Writings Of Jodocus Van Lodenstein And Philipp Spener

By Stanley K. McKenzie

The religious climate in some parts of Europe in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries shifted in reaction to the arid orthodoxy and airy spirituality of the age, a change known as Pietism. [1] Characteristic to Pietism was an emphasis on an experienced faith. [2] “Its interest was focussed upon deepening and strengthening the devotional life of people rather than upon correctness of theological definition or liturgical form,” F. Ernest Stoeffler writes. [3] With an irenic spirit, it fought accommodation of the world in the church—whether in the form of “ecclesiasticism, theologism, and sacerdotalism,” or moral and spiritual superficiality. “Always and everywhere these people set themselves resolutely against an easy accommodation of the Church to the world, and they did so positively, through edificatory preaching and writing rather than by means of polemical attacks”—reform measures not always welcomed. Its effects touched church and home, preacher and pastor, social outreach and missions, literature and education, and more. [4] Its impulses were part of “revival of moral and religious earnestness” in Christendom that, negatively, “represented a protest against the formalism in doctrine, worship, and life into which churches and their members had fallen after the original impulses of the Reformation had dissipated,” and, positively, “represented an attempt to cultivate a keener awareness of the present reality of God’s judgment and grace and the bearing which these were believed to have on personal and social life.” [5]

Critics have charged Pietism with being overly subjective, focused on emotions, extreme, fanatical, and legalistic—elements no doubt present at times. But Pietism is also understood by its internal emphases, not external manifestations (whether extreme or not). [6] Stoeffler identifies four characteristics Pietism exhibits regardless of where it is found working. First, in Pietism “the essence of Christianity is to be found in the personally meaningful relationship of the individual to God” as opposed to an excessive focus on liturgy or doctrine, cult, or theology. This characteristic at times accents an “inner identification with God” and speaks “much of the creative work of the Spirit.” [7]

Second, Pietism seeks a “religious idealism”—a concept described in words such as “whole,” “perfect,” or “entire,” and expressed in discriminating between true and false professors. Pietism draws on Calvinistic roots in its stand against accommodating the status quo and in making a “total break with the old life, a total commitment to the new life in Christ.” Justification issues in a “divinely initiated and supported striving for sanctification.” [8] Prevailing orthodoxy saw piety as synergistic; “to the Pietists it was Biblical Christianity.” [9]

Third, Pietism is rooted in a biblicism that grounds its ethic and keeps its experiential and religious idealism from slipping into mysticism. It particularly has roots in Reformed theology as developed in English Puritanism, which concerns itself predominantly with the question of how to apply Scripture to daily life. [10]

And fourth, Pietism has “an oppositive element”—that is, it is necessarily set in opposition to something else, like any -ism technically is. [11]

With something of the nature of Pietism setting the context, this article compares principle writings on piety from two leading pietists in the seventeenth century: Pia Desideria (1675) by German Lutheran Philipp Jakob Spener (1635-1705) of Frankfurt am Main, considered the father of Pietism; and A Spiritual Appeal to Christ’s Bride (1697), nine posthumously published sermons by Nadere Reformatie preacher Jodocus van Lodenstein (1620-1677) of Utrecht. [12] Using two of Stoeffler’s four markers of Pietism as an organizing principle (the oppositive element and the mutual relationship [13]) this article seeks to show that both divines diagnosed the ills of the church and prescribed ongoing reformation, but did so with different emphases and precision—van Lodenstein accenting the relational and inward, and Spener the systemic and external.

Pietism’s Oppositive Element: Diagnosing Spiritual Sickness

As F. Ernest Stoeffler has noted, characteristic to Pietism is its opposition to the status quo of accommodating the world or remaining spiritually apathetic. Nadere Reformatie ministers such as van Lodenstein saw a need for further and sustained reform in the lives of God’s people that went beyond what the Reformation started but did not complete; they “longed to see the Reformation find flesh in vital godliness, resulting in experiential and practical theology.” [14] Spener himself “was primarily a reformer of Christian life, not a reformer of Christian thought”; his legacy is understood in reference to Christian piety, not doctrine, Tappert notes. [15] Thus both van Lodenstein and Spener went to work on diagnosing the spiritual illnesses of their time in themes consistent with contemporary Pietism: opposition to spiritual deadness and stagnated reform (van Lodenstein) and systemic collapse (Spener).

Van Lodenstein: Source Of The Sickness—Dead Hearts

In his fourth sermon, “Dead Hearts,” van Lodenstein sums up the sickness of his day: “Contemporary Christianity has a head without a heart” (SA, 67)—a disease no doubt advanced by stale orthodoxy and a lulling, outward prosperity. He addressed his listeners from Ezekiel 37:7-8, the vision of the valley of dry bones, which itself addressed “a people who at that time appeared to be dead and no longer seemed to be vibrant and united,” signifying the “wretched condition of God’s people and their inability to revive themselves; but it also showed God’s power to deliver them regardless of how dead they were” (SA, 57-58). Having applied Ezekiel’s vision to the apostasy of the contemporary church in the purity of the gospel by using the progress (vv. 7-8) and stagnated progress (v. 8) of the dry bones, van Lodenstein laments: “Oh where is this life to be found among us? Where are those who have died to themselves and are living unto God?” (SA, 60). The Reformation assembled the dead bones that popery produced, but the light of the Spirit initially present in the Reformation was no longer “found amid our church’s pomp.” Eyes were shut and ears plugged to the knowledge of God. Even severe national crises did not produce fruits of repentance, lively obedience, and self-denial commensurate with those constrained by a love of Christ (SA, 60-65). “No one refrains from even a shred of sin or practices a single virtue in a more spiritual manner than before” (SA, 65). [16]

[W]here is the proper knowledge of God? If our Christians were acquainted with God’s glory, they would fear this God. And where is the fear of God? Furthermore, if they were acquainted with God’s wisdom, they would rely on God. If they were acquainted with His goodness, they would always praise and adore Him. If they were acquainted with His authority, they would obey Him. If they would discern God’s all-sufficiency, they would delight in Him alone, and all love for the creature would diminish. If they discerned God’s almighty operation, they would permit themselves to be wrought upon by Him (SA, 66).

Van Lodenstein did not shy away from mentioning specific sins—the “cesspool of hundreds of offensive actions” such as excess, drunkenness, gluttony, immorality, unrighteous deeds, and polluted communication. “Thus, we perceive the deadness and the corruption of the church from all angles” (SA, 69). Calloused and unrepentant, the people were living as practical atheists. “A Reformed person who has the name but lacks the Spirit differs very little in practice from an atheist” (SA, 72). After diagnosing the causes of this, he told his hearers that all this was not intended to cause despair, but to thank God for what graces were present and humbly wait for Him “to blow His Spirit into the dead bodies so that they might live” (SA, 75).

As a spiritual doctor, van Lodenstein defined the deep source of the problem: dead and unresponsive hearts. Yet he did so as one afflicted with those who are afflicted. “Oh, if only we were to recognize that we are dead indeed! If only I could bring you to the point that you would see how wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked you are (Rev. 3:17); then together we would cry out, ‘Jesus, thou Son of David, have mercy upon me!’ (Luke 18:38)” (SA, 75-76).

Spener: Scope Of The Sickness—Widespread Disease

Long distressed with the condition of the greater evangelical Christian church, Spener too addressed his contemporary situation as a doctor would an ill child’s parents—with a heavy heart: “The precious spiritual body of Christ is now afflicted with distress and sickness” (PD, 31). Whereas van Lodenstein looked to the source of the illness in dead hearts, [17] Spener looked at its scope and spread—to church, clergy, civil authorities, and common people.

Spener first addressed the leaders and pastors of the church by whose hands the problem could be addressed. He offered his treatise to them with hopes of encouraging the advance of “true godliness” through “salutary remedies which conform with the rule of the Word of God.” Reminding shepherds that they will give an account, he called them “to feed the flock which God has bought with his own blood and therefore at a very great price,” and to do their work prayerfully and patiently (PD, 35-38). [18] Like van Lodenstein, Spener’s bedside manner as a spiritual physician was by no means cold. He opens his “Conspectus of Corrupt Conditions in the Church”—in which he addressed church, government, and populace—by quoting Jeremiah 9:1, “O that my head were waters, and mine eyes a fountain of tears, that I might weep day and night for the slain of the daughter of my people” (PD, 39). He contends that “the wretchedness [19] of such people cannot be recalled by a godly soul without profound emotion”—without turning one’s eyes down in both shame but also distress. He found that whatever difficulties the church had endured with pestilence, war, or famine were a blessing if such measures broke a greater slide into spiritual laxity induced by outward prosperity. The church had fared better in persecution: “Then its gold lay constantly in the smelting furnace, whose flames did not permit the accretion of dross or else quickly consumed it” (PD, 41).

Lamenting that “almost everywhere there is something wanting in the church,” Spener turned to address the civil authorities, targeting their sins and their debaucheries, and wondering if any more than a few even knew what Christianity was about. Spending only a page on the civil leaders, he turns his attention to the clergy (43-57) and the common people (57-75). Spener particularly focuses on worldliness and spiritual ignorance in the clergy—not just ignorance as to “the letter of the Scriptures” but being “altogether unacquainted with the true, heavenly light and the life of faith” (PD, 46). The head is full but the heart is empty—a fruit of stale rationalism not unlike what van Lodenstein diagnosed in the Netherlands. Polemics had displaced piety (PD, 49-50). “When men’s minds are stuffed with such a theology which, while it preserves the foundation of faith from the Scriptures, builds on it with so much wood, hay and stubble of human inquisitiveness that the gold can no longer be seen, it becomes exceedingly difficult to grasp and find pleasure in the real simplicity of Christ and his teaching. This is so because men’s taste becomes accustomed to the more charming things of reason, and after a while the simplicity of Christ and his teaching appears to be tasteless” (PD, 56).

Spener’s emphasis addressed many external manifestations of the people’s sins: drunkenness, lawsuits, handling of community property, the service of God, and misusing the sacraments. Presumption concerning salvation was a sickness of the age. “How many there are who live such a manifestly unchristian life that they themselves cannot deny that the law is broken at every point, who have no intention of mending their ways in the future, and yet who pretend to be firmly convinced that they will be saved in spite of all this!” (PD, 64). He closes his diagnosis by contending that though there are shortcomings in the people’s reformation, it does not justify quitting the work of reform as those who despise the blessings of the Reformation. “It was not enough for the Jews to leave their Babylonian exile; they were expected to restore the temple and its beautiful services…. [W]e should encourage one another and promote the work of the Lord ever more earnestly than before” (PD, 73).

One of the main principles of Pietism is its oppositive element—particularly how it opposed spiritual deadness and lethargy, and the status quo of worldliness. Here van Lodenstein and Spener both set themselves against the downward trend of the times, but at different levels: van Lodenstein targets the heart, and Spener, the breadth of the problem. Spener perhaps spends more time on the diagnosis than van Lodenstein, whereas in the spirit of experimental Calvinism van Lodenstein accents what piety looks like. Yet both divines endeavored to replace the likely fruit of “current dry-as-dust orthodoxy” with “a living, vital, and hence affectively satisfying faith.” [20]

A Mutual Relationship: Bound To God

Pietism’s defining feature of a living, vital, and satisfying faith is bound up in relationship with God as opposed to theological identity. Spener’s orthodox critics charged him with “doctrinal laxity” for not taking a stronger stand against Reformed theology, [21] but his emphases appeared anthropological and theocentric, as indicated by his language of medieval spiritual mysticism (“new man,” “inner man, “union of Christ with the soul”) and emphasis on regeneration. [22] Leading Pietism scholar Martin Schmidt noted that in Spener’s work was “an impressive attempt to define Christianity and the church anthropologically (from man’s point of view) without sacrificing the absolute power of God. It was an attempt to view Christian existence single-mindedly from its goal, its eschaton, its perfection.” [23] Van Lodenstein, who “embraced more individualization” stemming from a personal crisis with the lack of reform in both church and society, was influenced by the mystics himself, though his biblical and Reformed commitments kept him from “aberrant forms of mysticism.” [24] “He stressed the need for a personal experience of God…. His mystical tendencies served his views of sanctification, for he believed that believers are led to the inner chamber of God’s love, not for an ecstatic experience, but to equip them to serve.” [25] Van Lodenstein and Spener accented an inner life with God over and against doctrinal polemics and theological formulation. For van Lodenstein, relationship is the very foundation and life of spiritual piety; for Spener, relationship is implicit in the means of grace and an obedient walk.

Van Lodenstein: Possessed Body And Soul By God

For van Lodenstein, the life of the self-denying faith to which Christians are called is entirely bound up with a relationship to God. His Spiritual Appeal opens with a two-part address on the doctrine of mortification (“Belonging to God Involves Self-Denial”), wherein he grounds self-denial in belonging to Christ, who as Prophet, Priest, and King calls His subjects to be prophets, showing forth praises of Him (1 Peter 2:9); priests, offering their bodies and souls to Him; and kings, subduing their lusts, desires, minds, and wills before Him (SA, 33). This mortification is not carried out alone but in being possessed by God. In his first sermon from 1 Corinthians 6:19-20, van Lodenstein preaches to professors of the faith: “Everyone lives unto and loves himself, not giving it any thought that he belongs to God.” He defines what it means to belong to God: “that we possess nothing for ourselves but that everything is for the Lord. A stairway does not exist merely for itself, but for those who walk on it; likewise, a Christian has not been created to exist for himself, but for God and for the purpose of serving Him” (SA, 34).

In his second sermon, from 2 Corinthians 5:14-15, van Lodenstein drew out the relational implications relative to Christ and His work. Redemption brings the sinner into a saving relationship wherein “we should neither live for ourselves nor seek ourselves, but that everything is for God. He who dies to himself in Christ, lives in Christ” (SA, 41). As a servant to a lord, so is the Christian to the great King; he is in Christ, who became a servant for our sakes—“to be captured, spat upon, mocked, beaten, and ultimately crucified so that He could draw His people out of the kingdom of self and translate them into God’s sovereign domain” (SA, 42). He came as the second Adam to redeem those fallen in the first Adam and make them friends with the Father. “This is how we are rendered fit to serve God again, and such service constitutes our happiness…. How, then, can one be a Christian and live so much for himself?” (SA, 45).

For van Lodenstein, this relational aspect extended beyond just King and servant, but it was an intimate relationship. This is no more clearly highlighted than when His relational presence is withdrawn from the believer’s life. His eighth sermon, “The Bride’s Charge to the Daughters of Jerusalem,” draws on the Shulamite’s words, “I charge you, O daughters of Jerusalem, if ye find my beloved, that ye tell him, that I am sick of love” (Song 5:8). “We could define the health of the soul as a flame that, through Jesus, proceeds from heaven and is ignited in us by the Holy Spirit. When the Lord Jesus is absent, this flame is quenched; however, when He is present, the soul’s life consists in delighting in His sweet fellowship” (SA, 127).

This is a call to be sick for the Lord’s departed presence when a lively and mutual relationship with Him falls cold and absent. In the fifth sermon of Spiritual Appeal, van Lodenstein lamented God’s departure from the church as evidenced by 1) the absence of God’s glory and majesty as normally found in Christian fruit; 2) the “lack of spirituality” and prevalent carnality; 3) a missing fear of God; 4) a waning love for, or 5) entire absence of, God’s truth; 6) the advance of the ungodly; 7) the impugning of God’s glory by national and ecclesiastical authorities; 8) the persistence and stubbornness of Christians in their sins even despite national calamities; and 9) the departed beauty, stagnating love, little self-denial, and rare eminence found among the daughter of Zion (83-89). Here in the eighth sermon, van Lodenstein calls attention to the experiential reality of this loss: “I am sick of love.”

An experiential relationship with God is the “health of the soul.” First, it is the foundation of a working love. “When Jesus touches the heart, He ignites in it a great flame of love that breaks forth in a mighty way.” Second, it feeds the soul; when relationship with God is absent, the soul hungers and seeks fulfillment. “This is not a sickness that makes the soul bedridden, but rather a sickness that keeps the soul occupied and active” (cf. Matt. 5:6). Third, it justifies and waits upon God. “Though her love was fervently inclined toward heaven, she did not excuse her suffering.” Fourth, it endures opposition. “True love for the Lord Jesus is nourished and sustained by all the opposition we encounter along the way…. Wherever the love of Jesus is active, all resistance, just like oil, will only cause the fire to burn the more.” Last, its absence is a bitter thing. “To miss Jesus is a grievous matter for a soul that has tasted His love” (SA, 129-130).

For van Lodenstein, relationship is crucial in a lively life of faith bound up with God in Jesus Christ, and this relationship involves a depth that transcends a mere master-servant relationship. “We belong a thousand times more to God than a slave belongs to his master. We belong to Him with every fiber of our being; we are God’s absolute possession as to both body and soul” (SA, 40).

Spener: A Profitable Use Of The Means Of Grace

As noted already, Spener identified a leading ill in the church as the absence of an experiential acquaintance with the “true heavenly light and the life of faith” in the clergy (PD, 46). In his treatise, Spener does not emphasize relationship with God as explicitly as van Lodenstein; it is there implicitly, for the most part.

First, it is implicit in the means of grace. Having diagnosed the church’s ills, Spener saw the possibility for better days coming in two ways: the salvation of the Jews (Rom. 11:25-26) and the fall of papal Rome (PD, 76-77). Because the church cannot wait for those events to occur, the church must be active. Here Spener quotes Lutheran clergyman Erasmus Sarcerius (1501-1559) at length on “the ways and means of promoting and preserving real and true religion.” Sarcerius led his statement by saying, “Where the Word of God is neglected, real and true religion collapses. Where this collapses, no one can or will be saved” (PD, 79). Later, Spener wrote, “Thought should be given to a more extensive use of the Word of God among us,” for “faith must be enkindled through the gospel, and the law provides the rules for good works and many wonderful impulses to attain them” (PD, 87). The Scriptures play a central role—both in public exposition and private reading (PD, 88-89). “This much is certain: the diligent use of the Word of God, which consists not only of listening to sermons but also of reading, meditating, and discussing (Ps. 1:2), must be the chief means for reforming something…. If we succeed in getting the people to seek eagerly and diligently in the book of life for their joy, their spiritual life will be wonderfully strengthened and they will become altogether different people” (PD, 91).

The second aspect for reform for Spener, in which relationship is implicit, was “the establishment and diligent exercise of the spiritual priesthood…according to which not only ministers but all Christians are made priests by their Savior, are anointed by the Holy Spirit, and are dedicated to perform spiritual-priestly acts” (PD, 92). Citing Luther, Spener contended “all spiritual functions are open to all Christians without exception,” though the exercises of the public means of grace are normally given to ministers. The presence of the Holy Spirit is necessary to carry out spiritual duties.

The remainder of Spener’s recommendations for reform in the church are related to external matters such as the obedient practice and diligent application to holiness of life, proper behavior in religious controversy, the proper training of ministers, and the production of practical sermons that feed “faith and fruit” (PD, 115). Spener does end his section on “Proposals to Correct Conditions in the Church” by asserting that these means and activities are to awaken 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” (PD, 117). Applying similar advice to baptism, the Lord’s Supper, and so forth, he said it is not “enough to worship God in an external temple, but the inner man worships God best in his own temple, whether or not he is in an external temple at the time” (PD, 117).

Conclusion

Van Lodenstein and Spener called attention to the problem of spiritual deadness and the need for a wholehearted living unto God, comprising a deep relationship with Christ, active self-denial, and fruits of obedience. Van Lodenstein looked toward the heart and an inward, vital relationship with God as chief means toward employing true piety; Spener saw the scope of the problem in his day and called for a return to God’s Word, faithful preaching and preachers, and faithful walking. Self-denial was crucial to van Lodenstein’s “system” of piety; but that self-denial was tightly joined to a relationship with God through the Lamb. “We will never render to God and the Lamb more honor than when we deny, crucify, and mortify ourselves” (SA, 43). Spener saw the systemic fruits of mere external religion—how attendance to pure form could breed false security when not attended with fruitful obedience. “Do you let [the public hearing of the Word] penetrate inwardly into your heart and allow the heavenly food to be digested there, so that you get the benefit of its vitality and power, or does it go in one ear and out the other?” (PD, 66). This kind of carnal security led to his own lament: “Although our Evangelical Lutheran church is a true church and is pure in its teaching, it is in such a condition, unfortunately, that we behold its outward form with sorrowful eyes” (PD, 67).

What can we learn from these two pietistic divines? First, that piety is faith in God lived out—an antidote against the easy believism that plagues the broader church, and a flame for the cold formality and lethargy that can overtake the most biblical and conservative churches.

Second, that it is important to maintain sanctification as distinct but not separated from justification. Today there is a strong focus on returning to the doctrine of justification, and we certainly should cherish the objective accomplishment of Christ’s work and the gospel promises as the bedrock for our spiritual existence—for our acceptance before God, fuel for sanctification, and primary grounds for assurance. Justification must be protected and emphasized. But we can so suffer from a stunted view of our calling to live actively as pilgrims and strangers by the Spirit and grace of Christ, who lives and reigns.

Third, that we must embrace a heavenward perspective—prone as we are to not running the race, not looking to Jesus the Author and Finisher of our faith (Heb. 12:1-2), and not looking “for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God” (Heb. 11:10). In an opinion piece for the New York Times entitled “The Decline of Evangelical America,” John Dickerson contends that the church today has traded off its simple calling—to be pilgrims and strangers:

I believe the cultural backlash against evangelical Christianity has less to do with our views—many observant Muslims and Jews, for example, also view homosexual sex as wrong, while Catholics have been at the vanguard of the movement to protect the lives of the unborn—and more to do with our posture. The Scripture calls us “aliens and exiles” (1 Peter 2:11), but American evangelicals have not acted with the humility and homesickness of aliens. [26]

The church needs to be homesick—and sick with love when God withdraws His special presence from her. Pietists such as van Lodenstein and Spener call the church back to ongoing reformation and to her other-worldly identity as the heaven-bound bride of Christ prepared to join the Bridegroom for all eternity. In a day when we are so easily drawn to love everything but Christ for His work past at the cross, present in the Spirit, and future in the consummation, we too need to heed the call to live and long for heaven, and the church must proclaim the glories of the eschatological age as our present interest and future hope:

It is the task of the Church to disturb men, to make them homesick for another world, to uproot their attachments to “this age” and to make them heirs of the “coming age,” to call them out like Abraham of old from man’s highest civilisation to become “pilgrims and strangers on the earth,” seeking the city which hath foundation[s], whose builder and maker is God. It is quite easy to lose this unique, this distinctive, mission in the quite legitimate effort to minister to the whole man. [27]

Pietists such as van Lodenstein and Spener teach us something of this pilgrim perspective. Van Lodenstein said it well: “In short, we must eat in order to live, and we must live in order to live to God” (SA, 44).

Notes

1. The period of Pietism includes what Richard A. Muller identifies as the transitional phase (1685-1725) from high orthodoxy (“the era of the full and final development of Protestant system”) to late orthodoxy (a period of deconfessionalism). In this transitional period, some “theologians became increasingly wary of the traditional dogmatic results of exegesis belonging to the preceding period and also the use of traditional philosophical assumptions in theology,” and thus moved toward emphases found in Pietism or the Nadere Reformatie (Dutch Further Reformation). Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics: The Rise and Development of Reformed Orthodoxy, Ca. 1520 to Ca. 1725 (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2003), 1:80-81; see also 1:133.
2. Experience, notes Herman Bavinck, “achieved special status in pietism, which, in reaction to orthodoxy, stressed that divine truth not only had to be accepted by intellectual consent but experienced and lived through in the heart.” Reformed Dogmatics, ed. John Bolt, trans. John Vriend (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2003), 1:533.
3. F. Ernest Stoeffler, The Rise of Evangelical Pietism (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1971), 2.
4. Stoeffler, The Rise of Evangelical Pietism, 2-5.
5. Theodore G. Tappert, “Introduction,” in Philip[p] Ja[k]ob Spener, Pia Desideria, ed. and trans. Theodore G. Tappert (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1964), 1.
6. Stoeffler, The Rise of Evangelical Pietism, 10-13.
7. Stoeffler, The Rise of Evangelical Pietism, 13-15.
8. Stoeffler, The Rise of Evangelical Pietism, 16-17. Calvin defined pietas in his Institutes as that “reverence joined with love of God which the knowledge of His benefits induces.”
9. Stoeffler, The Rise of Evangelical Pietism, 17.
10. Stoeffler, The Rise of Evangelical Pietism, 20.
11. Stoeffler, The Rise of Evangelical Pietism, 22-23. On the fourth point, Stoeffler writes: “The ‘ism’ must assert itself against a dominant pattern” (The Rise of Evangelical Pietism, 22). That is, there could be a Pietism in English Puritanism, Stoeffler argues, because Pietism stood against certain standards of faith and practice found in the established church, whereas in the Church of Scotland no stream of Pietism is found because the church generally embraced pietistic principles.
12. References to these works appear inline and abbreviated with page numbers following. Pia Desideria (“Pious Wishes”) is abbreviated as PD; A Spiritual Appeal to Christ’s Bride, ed. Joel R. Beeke, trans. Bartel Elshout (Grand Rapids: Reformation Heritage Books, 2010), is abbreviated as SA.
13. The space for this article cannot accommodate a study of these divines’ use and view of Scripture, nor their implementation of religious idealism, though both ground their treatises in God’s Word and call their readers to a wholehearted, biblical faith.
14. Joel R. Beeke, “Introduction,” in A Spiritual Appeal to Christ’s Bride, 23f.
15. Tappert, “Introduction,” in Pia Desideria, 25-25.
16. Self-denial is central to van Lodenstein’s view of piety. His book begins with two sermons on that topic.
17. He also considered God’s withdrawing His presence from the church, of which dead hearts is an outworking.
18. This quote is an excellent reminder of the pastor’s call: “Let us remember that in the last judgment we shall not be asked how learned we were and whether we displayed our learning before the world; to what extent we enjoyed the favor of men and knew how to keep it; with what honors we were exalted and how great a reputation in the world we left behind us; or how many treasures of earthly goods we amassed for our children and thereby drew a curse upon ourselves. Instead, we shall be asked how faithfully and with how childlike a heart we sought to further the kingdom of God; with how pure and godly a teaching and how worthy an example we tried to edify our hearers amid the scorn of the world, denial of self, taking up of the cross, and imitation of our Savior; with what zeal we opposed not only error but also wickedness of life; or with what constancy and cheerfulness we endured the persecution or adversity thrust upon us by the manifestly godless world or by false brethren, and amid such suffering praised our God” (PD, 36-37).
19. Both van Lodenstein and Spener use this term wretched in their addressing the problems of the age. Van Lodenstein uses it to describe the state of God’s people in Ezekiel, with an obvious connection to his own time.
20. Stoeffler, The Rise of Evangelical Pietism, 11.
21. Tappert, “Introduction,” in Pia Desideria, 26.
22. Tappert, “Introduction,” in Pia Desideria, 27.
23. Quoted by Tappert, “Introduction,” in Pia Desideria, 27-28.
24. Beeke, “Introduction,” in A Spiritual Appeal to Christ’s Bride, 26-28.
25. Beeke, “Introduction,” in A Spiritual Appeal to Christ’s Bride, 28-29.
26. John Dickerson, “The Decline of Evangelical America,” New York Times, December 15, 2012, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/16/opinion/sunday/the-decline-of-evangelical-america.html?_r=0 (accessed December 15, 2012).
27. Donald G. Miller, “Biblical Theology and Preaching,” Scottish Journal of Theology 11, no. 4 (December 1958), 395.