Last time I attended our Bible Study group, we had a very good discussion about various ways of being religious. I talked about the studies of a psychologist of religion, William James, who argues that two different ways of being religious exist.
We talked about those ways. How I clearly belong to one of the ways. How others clearly belong to the other. How both are equally justified. How ways lying in between the poles he argues for probably exist. And how it is fruitful to not only know one’s own way of being religious, but the ways of those around you as well.
It all started because of a discussion about pietism. Do you know what that is?
Well, it is a religious trend that developed in the Lutheran Northern Germany back in the early 17-hundred. It is a trend that develops as an antithesis to Lutheran orthodoxy.
The Lutheran orthodoxy is a trend where only the Bible is a valid point of reference. Tradition is irrelevant as well as common sense and feelings. All that matters is whether one’s arguments derived directly from holy scripture.
The Lutheran pietism – as an antithesis – emphasizes one’s feelings. To pietists, one’s arguments did not matter much if they did not derive from a deeply and heartfelt connection to God. Scripture was of less importance.
The Lutheran pietism developed in various ways throughout the early 17-hundred, but what made us talk about it at the Bible Study – and what in general distinguish many of the pietistic theologians – is the way pietism and pietists talks about what could seem like a second baptism. Or what in Danish is called ‘igjenfødelse’.
(I suppose the English translation of this word would be Born-Again-Christian, but I am unsure if this is a Christian denomination that has developed in its own way in North America, and because of that I want to refrain from using that term. Rather, I go with the Danish term, ‘igjenfødelselse’, that is limited to the pietistic movement in Denmark in the 18th hundred.)
What is ‘igjenfødelse’ then? It is a term that describes how many Christians’ experiences or go through an event or a part of their lives where they in particular feel the presence of God. Something that feels so strong to them that it almost becomes a second baptism to them.
To some pietists, their ‘igjenfødelse’ can be narrowed down to an exact date – even time – where they truly felt the presence of God which altered their way of being Christian going forward.
To other pietists, ‘igjenfødelse’ was not to be understood as such a single event. Rather, ones ‘igjenfødelse’ was a path towards God, that included several steps: Penance, grief, then repentance followed by faith.
We might not be aware of pietism today, but in our Danish church we have a tradition that derives directly from that period of time in church history. Can you guess what tradition it is?
It is confirmation. Introduced by royal decree in 1735, confirmation is the institutionalization of what pietists described as an ‘igjenfødelse’.
As an institutionalization of something that transforms an individual, it might seem a little contradictive. But as a ritual, confirmation is a good compromise through which the pietist idea of an ‘igjenfødelse’ is institutionalized without being made a sacrament – a second baptism.
Any way. Back to what we talked about at the last Bible Study I attended. Now, the above discussion of pietism led us to another talk about two different ways of being religious. Two ways that the psychologist of religion, William James, argues for.
In his book, The Varieties of Religious Experiences, from 1902, William James examines historical persons and their description of their ways into Christianity. And what James finds notable is that it seems that two major ways can be argued for:
The first way he calls ‘once-born’ which describes people who seem to have a religious experience which changes their lives completely. They are ‘igjenfødt’ as the first group of pietists – that is how the dots connect – and what is notable about these people is that they do not seem to question their faith going forward at all. Their faith seems solid due to their religious experience.
In this group, James argues that a person like the apostle Paul belongs. At least, Paul never seems to question God from the day he regained his sight – an episode described in Acts.
The second way he calls ‘twice-born’ which describes people who truly do believe yet seem to have doubt throughout their spiritual lives. This way of being spiritual shares similarities to the second group of pietists since they did not – even though they valued it – give the same emphasis to their ‘igjenfødelse’. Rather, faith – and the daily battle in keeping it – was at the centerpiece.
In this group, James argues that a person like Martin Luther belongs. At least one of his mantras was ‘sin boldly’. To Luther – even though he had an important religious experience the day he was almost hit by lightning (that was his ‘igjenfødelse’) – he struggles throughout his life in believing that God truly will forgive him despite of his sins.
Now, some of you are probably wondering why I shared all of this with you in my sermon today. And rest assured; it is not simply something I did to give a little lecture in church history. Rather it was something I did to tell you all, that I as your pastor without doubt belong to the first group that James describes – the once-born.
And as I told the people at the Bible Study I attended; this is something that I must be very aware of if I am to be a good pastor toward – not only once-borns like me, but twice-borns as well.
For instance, if we look at the Biblical readings for today. These are readings that appeal to me a lot since I am once-born:
The Old Testament reading is about a steadfast belief in a supporting God. The New Testament reading is about people finding faith on a specific day. And the Gospel reading states that the sheep of Jesus will never be snatched out of the Father’s hand.
In the texts we find no doubt. Rather we find a steadfast faith. We find religious experiences. We find all the things that appeal to a once-born. At least if you ask a once-born like me.
But how are the texts understood through the eyes of a twice-born? Now, this is not something that I naturally would be able to give an answer to. Only through an awareness of the difference between the various ways of being religious am I to give an answer to that question.
To a twice-born the Old Testament reading might only make sense when read together with psalms describing a prayer about God giving comfort. Only then does the full picture of faith seem sincere. And the New Testament readings would probably be read emphasizing Saint Peter. After all he is a classical twice-born since he throughout the Gospel moves from one standpoint to another.
As you see, the way we understand biblical readings varies a lot depending on our way of being religious. None of the understandings is wrong just as none of the ways is better than the other.
What is important though – at least to me as your pastor since I must be able to proclaim for and work with all of you – is that we are aware of the fact, that being faithful is not the same to everyone. Yet we are all members of the same body despite our differences. Something that I hope we will be able to see as the strength and blessing that it is making Christ church a mosaic.
In the name of our Lord, Jesus Christ, amen.