Chapter Four: Lay-Activity in the Light of History

LAY-ACTIVITY IN THE LIGHT OF HISTORY

IN THIS discussion we are concerned mainly with lay-activity in its narrower and more specific sense, namely lay-preaching and personal work in soul-winning.

Lay-preaching and lay-leadership in public worship is old. We find it exercised in the Old Testament times. The Jewish synagogue came into existence shortly after the return from the Babylonian captivity. At this time there was a spiritual awakening in Israel, synagogues were built, one or more in every village and city, where the people gathered for worship on the Sabbath Day and also in the week. And as a rule the worship in these synagogues was led by laymen. Elders were chosen for such leadership. The ruler of the synagogue exercised much liberty; he did not always lead the worship himself, but often called on other laymen to lead. Up to as many as seven would be called on at one meeting. If a rabbi or priest was present, he would be asked to pronounce the benediction. We are told that the rabbi was offended, when the people crowded the synagogue to hear a layman, while he would deliver his lecture to a handful of people in a synagogue nearby.

In the New Testament times we find, that no sooner had the mother-church at Jerusalem been established, when lay- activity grew out of the vigorous Christian life that characterized the Apostolic Church. Seven elders or deacons were chosen to assist the apostles. They were men “of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom.” Their work was to care for the poor and needy; but they also preached the Word of God. Stephen and Philip were mighty lay-preachers. And when the persecution broke out in Jerusalem the Christians were “scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria—and went everywhere, preaching the Word” (Acts 8:1 and 4).

The Savior has sanctioned lay-activity by word and deed. He sent out seventy lay-preachers, two and two together, on short missionary visits into the villages. He emphasized again and again the needs of the personal testimony. He says to His followers: “Ye are the light of the world, the salt of the earth.” “Ye are my witnesses.” “Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father, which is in heaven.” “Whosoever confesseth me before men, him will I confess before my Father in heaven.”

The apostles emphasized the priesthood of believers. The Apostle Peter writes in his first epistle 2:5 and 9: “Ye also are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.” “Ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood.” Paul made frequent use of laymen and urged the believers to prophesy “that all may learn.” The Thessalonians were told to “edify one another.” He urged upon the Colossians to “let the Word of God dwell in them richly in all wisdom, teaching one another and admonishing one another” in the worship of their assemblies. Peter exhorts the Christians: “As every man hath received the gift, even so minister the same, one to another, as good stewards of the manifold grace of God. If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God.”

Paul speaks in his epistles of these laymen, as “co-laborers.” Many prominent lay-preachers are mentioned in the book of Acts and the Pauline epistles, as Barnabas, Timothy, Titus, Silas, Agabus, Apollos and others. Titus was left by Paul in Crete to “ordain elders in every city.” Timothy was stationed at Ephesus by Paul to see to it that certain men “teach no other doctrine.”

And it is noteworthy that this early lay-activity was carried on in close touch with the mother-church at Jerusalem and under the direction and supervision of the apostles.

But as the church gradually became more and more formalistic and the clergy became an organized group that took over the authority in the church, lay-activity gradually decreased until the preaching of laymen was silenced. The church became a priest-ridden institution. The apostolic church life and activity gave way to a dead Catholicism. However, church history tells us that in places elders continued to be elected in the congregations according to the practice of the early church even one hundred years after Christianity became a state religion. The church historian, Bang, describes a public worship in Milan, Italy, while Ambrose was bishop there, where “the deacons took part with free prayer, supplication, intercession and thanksgiving.”
But the Papacy soon put an end to lay-preaching and praying in public worship. In the period between 300 and 600 a marked distinction developed between clergy and laity. All preaching was restricted to the clergy and charity work became institutional, instead of congregational as it was in the Apostolic Church.

Then followed the dark middle ages up to the Reformation. Here and there appeared a few rays of light as forerunners of the Reformation revival. History relates how some devout laymen with courage of their convictions ventured to raise their voices in protest and testimony against the corruption of the priesthood, and endeavored to lift up the torch of the saving truth. In France, Peter Waldus and his followers, known as the Waldenses, preached in the streets, in houses and even in the churches. And when expelled from their homes and their country, they traveled two and two through Southern France, and into Switzerland and Northern Italy, preaching the Word. In England Wycliff sent out laypreachers, who went from place to place opening the Scriptures, that their leader had translated into the language of the people. In Italy St. Francis of Assisi, a layman, was a powerful preacher and founded the order of preaching monks called the Franciscans. In the early part of the 15th century John Huss preached in Bohemia and fearlessly attacked the sins of the priesthood and the false teachings and practices of the church. There were several forerunners of the Reformation, hut they were silenced.

Luther re-stated and strongly emphasized the long-neglected scriptural doctrine of the universal priesthood of believers. He gave the laity the Bible in their own language, introduced popular education and encouraged lay-activity, as far as it was possible in those days, when the common people were in a state of alarming ignorance. In his sermon on St. Stephen’s Day he says: “Here the question arises, whether a layman may also preach. The example of Stephen clearly indicates that anyone may do so, wherever there are those who will hear, but not when the apostles themselves are present.” In another place he says: “A Christian impelled by brotherly love, regards the distress of poor souls, does not wait for instructions or letters of authority to be given him by princes or bishops, since necessity breaks all laws. Love is in duty bound to help, where there is no one else to do so.” But Luther was hampered in using laymen as he did not have those properly qualified. Ignorance was dense and general. He saw first the need of educating the Christian laity. He says: “It were well, if we had the right kind of people to begin with, to divide a city into four or five districts and to assign to each district a pastor and several deacons, who would supply it with preaching and distribute alms, visit the sick and see to it that no one suffered want. But we do not have the persons for it. I therefore fear to undertake it, until our Lord shall make Christians.”

From this time on, lay-activity was more and more recognized and advocated in the church of the Reformation.

In the struggle against rationalism in the 18th and 19th centuries Christian laymen played an important part. Already in the latter half of the 17th century the Pietists with Spener
and Francke as leaders, there arose a mighty lay movement in the church to counteract the dead orthodoxy and formalism that had crept into the Lutheran church of Germany. An intense and general study of Scripture by the laity was revived, and the vital truths were applied so as to result in genuine piety and Christian service. New stress was laid on the doctrine of the universal priesthood of believers. From the Halle institutions went forth Spirit-filled men as teachers, lay- preachers as well as pastors. Pietism fostered a great missionary zeal; sending out from Halle into the Foreign field such consecrated and courageous men as Ziegenbalg, Plutschau, Schultze, Schwartz, Callenberg and Zinzendorf.

Pietism, as represented by Spener and Francke, was a return to the vital, practical, and scriptural religion of the apostolic church and was not intended to ever develop into a separatistic movement, but to act in the congregations as a leaven in the lump. But unfortunately, partly driven to it by the stubborn and bitter opposition of rationalistic leaders and an external religion in the church on the one hand, and because of the extreme sensationalism and unchurchliness by later pietistic leaders on the other hand, it lost much of its wholesome influence by becoming sectarian and separatistic. However, the pietistic movement exerted a powerful influence in the struggle against rationalism and formalism ever since the Reformation. The leaders of Pietism have always stressed the development of the spiritual gifts and lay-activity both in its congregational and institutional aspect. Lay-leaders like Johan Kiesling, Christian Zeller, Johan Oberlin, Johannes Falk and others wielded a mighty influence in various fields of Christian service in Germany and Austria in the 18th century. In Scotland, David Nasmuth, the founder of City Missions, and others headed a lay movement. Hans Nielsen Hauge, the “Spener of the North” was the God-sent Christian layman, to champion the cause of the pietistic movement and lay-preaching in Norway.

But the one who was first to organize and systematize lay- activity in the Lutheran Church according to the life-principles laid down in Scripture and practiced by the Apostolic Church, was Johan Heinrich Wichern, “The Father of Inner Mission.” He re-stated the cardinal doctrine of the universal priesthood of believers, and advocated the vital need of awakening, fostering and utilizing spiritual forces of the laity into channels of Christian service. He sought to enlist the entire body of believers to co-operate in close touch with the church authorities. He says: “When we speak of the general priesthood of the believers, we have in mind the privilege that all believers have of direct access to the Father through Christ, and in Christ’s Name at all times to worship and serve God, thus bringing Him their life and entire person as a sacrifice. But the offering of such a sacrifice as an act of faith in the Son of God, transforms the believer into a fountain of blessing, in whom is fulfilled the gracious promise, that out of his life shall flow rivers of living water. The congregation thus becomes a congregation of priests, a royal people of God, in which each one who has received the witness of God, himself becomes a witness of the life that God gives.” Wichern, like the earlier Pietiests, met with the opposition of the ecclesiastic authorities, and was looked upon as an advocate of a movement disloyal to the church. But he gained the support and wholehearted co-operation of such devout and able leaders in the church as Fliedner, Löhe, Bodelschwing, Stocker and others in the early 19th century, and the movement swept over all of Lutheran Germany. The deaconate was revived on New Testament basis. This gave rise to a trained and well- educated laity, which engaged in organized lay-activity, both congregational and institutional. Deacons and deaconesses were trained and employed in large numbers in the colonies of mercy established at Bielefeld, Kaiserswerth, Neuendetelsau and other deaconess institutions, from which proceeded an army of deaconesses and deacons, well-trained for the ministry of mercy. Many of them assisted in preaching, teaching and personal soul-winning work.

Lay-preaching was advocated strongly by Wichern in his Denkschrift. He says: “The Gospel must be preached from the housetops. It must be freely offered in the market places, on the streets, if the masses cannot be reached in any other way. Our church must have its itinerant preachers and colporteurs. The Word must be made effective in sermon, in conversation and in printed form. Such preachers would co-operate with the settled pastors.”

In suggesting such itinerant lay-preachers Wichern had in mind the evangelists of the Apostolic Church (Acts 21:8; Eph. 4:11; 2 Tim. 4:5) who, as traveling missionaries, were assistants to the apostles and mainly under their direction, went about from place to place, preaching the Gospel. This ideal was only in part, realized.

Laymen formed groups and associations to realize this plan. Again they were opposed as being disloyal to the church, lax in doctrine and separatistic, while others regarded this tendency as a wholesome leaven in the congregations. A blessed service was rendered by these devout laymen and women in the 19th century in Sunday Schools and Bible Classes, and by distribution of the printed Word. However, the lay-activity in recent years in Germany has mainly been confined to institutional work of mercy through the well-organized colonies of mercy and mother-houses. There is some preaching and personal work done in the various activities of the local churches by laymen.

In Great Britain lay-activity developed at first mainly along practical ministry of mercy, in institutions, city missions, orphanages and prisons. In the great spiritual revival brought about by the preaching of Whitefield and the Wesleys in the 18th century, lay-preaching was greatly developed. Wesley instituted a system of itinerant lay-preaching. He met every year in conference with these itinerant preachers. Though unordained, these men were not unlearned. Out of this movement grew the establishment of the Sunday School by Raikes and the Salvation Army. ForeignMissions received a tremendous impetus. Bible and tract societies were also organized.

Again we find that the established church opposed this vital movement, which nevertheless became the saving agency in quickening and utilizing the spiritual forces of church communities.
This pietistic type of religion was transplanted to America and found a mighty expression in the Great Awakening. A wave of revivalism swept over the Reformed churches in America in the nineteenth century under the powerful ministry of Charles G. Finney and later of Sam Jones and D. L. Moody. A vigorous lay-activity followed as a result.

In the Scandinavian countries lay-activity developed along quite different lines and, to begin with, consisted mainly in lay-preaching and in the participation of lay-Christians with testimony and prayer in smaller groups and public meetings. Rationalism held sway in the state-church of Denmark, Norway and Sweden.

Hans Nielsen Hauge under God became the Spirit-filled and fearless leader against dead orthodoxy and formalism in Norway. Hauge and his co-workers traveled throughout Norway in the last half of the eighteenth and the first part of the nineteenth century, preaching the Gospel and earnestly applying it in all its simplicity and in his effective way. People were converted in large numbers. Groups of pious lay-people gathered in meetings, and the revival spread irresistibly, braving the most vigorous opposition by the church and state authorities. Many were fined and imprisoned. Hauge himself was imprisoned for ten years. George Brandes, Danish critic, says: “Hans Nielsen Hauge introduced Christianity into Norway.” There is considerable truth in this blunt statement. The clergy bitterly opposed and persecuted him. However, Bishop Johan N. Bruun in Bergen met the persecutors with this retort: “It is your duty to preach just what Hauge is preaching.”

The pietistic revival movement of Hauge was vigorously followed up by a number of able laymen, who deserve a place in this important period of Norway’s church history. We may mention here a few: Lars Kyllingen, Haugvaldstad, Ole Sivertsen, Elling Eielsen, Anders Haave, Iver Gabestad, Per Nordsletten, Daniel Arneson, and J. Traasdahl.

Hauge was always loyal to the church and warned his followers against any schismatic agitations. He says: “Furthermore I admonish you hereafter as formerly not to separate yourselves from the Lutheran Church.”

At first the laymen’s movement in Norway found expression mainly in holding revival meetings in the homes, where a local layman or an itinerant lay-preacher would preach, and as a rule he would ask someone to open and to close the meeting with prayer. These lay-preachers would travel from community to community and preach without pay, except what friends might give them. Testimony and prayer-meetings as we have them were not conducted at that time. They developed later.

In recent years the lay-forces of Norway have organized into several factions, like the “Indremission,” “Kinamission,” and “Landsmissionen.” To begin with, these were quite antagonistic towards each other. Schools have been built by these organizations for the education of lay-preachers and evangelists. Many of these traveling preachers are now salaried. This new development in lay-activity seemed to have disturbed greatly and supplanted the former free and unsalaried lay-preaching and has occasioned much criticism.

Rosenius, who was the leader of the Pietistic movement in Sweden, whose preaching was more of the gentle, evangelical type, greatly influenced the lay-preaching in Norway, which had been more stern and legalistic. Traasdahl, especially, was the leading representative of the Rosenian type among the recent lay-preachers in Norway.

The lay-activity of the Inner Mission societies in Norway today is exerting a powerful and wholesome influence upon the spiritual life in the church. Their preaching and methods of soul-winning are sound and scriptural.

In Denmark during the last century Kristen Madsen was the outstanding lay-preacher. He was assisted by the farmer boy, Peder Laursen, Rasmus Ottesen, and Rasmus Sorensen. Here also the pietistic 1aymovement met with stubborn resistance.

Grundtvig, and later Vilhelm Beck, the founder of the Inner-mission movement, to a great extent made the pietistic cause popular in large portions of the Danish Lutheran Church.
In Sweden the pietistic lay-activity received a permanent backing through the “evangeliske fosterlandsstiftelse” (1856), which also established a mission school to train workers.
The lay-activity in America among our Norwegian Lutherans has an interesting history. They were lay-preachers, who laid the foundation of the Lutheran church life in the pioneer days of our Norwegian settlements. Elling Eielsen and Claus Clausen and Gunnar Graven, who later became a pastor in the Hauge synod, were the pioneer lay-preachers. Lars Dahle says concerning Graven: “Of all lay-preachers I have had an opportunity to hear in my long life, no one has made such an impression on me as Gunnar Graven.”

The first beginnings of Lutheran church work in America among the Norwegians date back to 1836. The State church of Norway did nothing for the early settlers here. Nor were the first steps to gather them for worship taken by any clergyman. It was a lay-movement to begin with. Among the first settlers there were some pious laymen, friends of Hauge, who began to gather the people in the homes for worship. Among these were Ole Olson Hetletvedt, a school teacher, who was the first one to visit the various communities to conduct meetings. Bjørn Hattlestad came to America in 1836 and preached to the settlers. Later, Peder Asbjørnson came to assist him. In the Muskego settlement Even Hegg gathered the people for worship in his barn. Here Claus L. Clausen was later ordained to the ministry, and became the first pastor of the Muskego congregation, Muskego, Wis.

For several years these and other devout laymen baptized, taught and preached and distributed Bibles and Christian literature.

The lay-preacher, who wielded the greatest influence among the early settlers was Elling Eielsen from Voss. As a young man he was converted in one of the Haugean revivals and traveled throughout Norway preaching as a fervent spiritual son of Hauge for seven years. He also preached in Sweden and Denmark, where he was imprisoned for his Master’s sake. He was unafraid, stern and quite self-willed, which often invited friction between him and his fellow-Christians. He lacked the tact and considerateness and patience of Hauge. He came to America in 1839 and preached his first sermon in Chicago to a group gathered in the home of an English speaking lady. Then he settled in the Fox River settlement in Illinois, where he made his headquarters. But he traveled extensively visiting the various settlements in Illinois, ‘Wisconsin, Texas, Minnesota and South Dakota.

Eielsen stands as the most typical representative of the low-churchly and pietistic tendency in firm opposition to the high-churchly and formal tendency represented by the traditional state-church Christianity. Because of the severe persecution of Hauge and the opposition he himself had met from the state church, Eielsen became a radical opponent to high-churchly views and practices.

Another layman, Clausen, who had early in life been converted and during his stay in Norway came in contact with the friends of Hauge, came to America in 1843, four years later than Eielsen. He was called to the Muskego settlement to serve as teacher in religion, but was soon ordained on call to become the first pastor of the Muskego congregation. He was a Dane and, although a pious Christian, yet with a more high-churchly background, he became the typical leader for the more high-churchly tendency. Eielsen was present at the first meeting held by Clausen on coming to Muskego and after the meeting they took a walk together and discussed “whether they could work together or part.” They could not agree, and here began the first split of the Lutheran forces among the Norwegians in America. Eielsen did not hesitate to go and preach anywhere, whether they had any pastor or not, as long as he was invited by one or more. Clausen respected churchly order, but Eielsen did not. In this respect, Clausen and Eielsen could not agree. Eielsen gathered small groups in the various settlements and was known to speak of them as pious Christians, who “belonged to us,” while the others he considered as the worldly group. Two other laymen from Norway joined him, Ole Andrewson and Paul Anderson, who later were ordained to the ministry. Eielsen, too, was ordained in 1843 and served congregations in Illinois, Jefferson Prairie, Wis., and Chicago. He was instrumental in organizing what is known as Elling’s synod in 1846 and was its first president.

The parting of these two lay-leaders occasioned the formation of two separate synodical organizations, representing the two spiritual tendencies that have always in larger or lesser degree, manifested themselves in the post-apostolic Christian Church, namely the conservative tendency that lays a one-sided emphasis on baptism and religious training and pure doctrine, coupled with elaborate ceremonies and liturgical forms in public worship, on the one hand, and the low-church tendency, that in addition to holding on to the pure doctrine emphasizes spiritual awakening and a definite expression of spiritual life in word and deed, and favoring free and simple forms of worship.

Later, there were other divisions in the church in this country, occasioned by controversies over questions of doctrine and practices; but under it all one can see these two tendencies, clashing more or less as the underlying and real cause of the controversies.

Since the church union movements of late years have united several of these synods, we find the same characteristic views asserting themselves in the new organizations. Though agreed in doctrine, we find the high-church and the low-church tendencies represented in pastors and congregations. There need be no antagonism between them. They should supplement one another and co-operate in effecting a well-balanced churchliness and exercise of spiritual life. We need a proper and clear emphasis on orthodoxy in doctrine, and we need to emphasize the pietistic life-principles in our church-life and service. The two combined and duly emphasized will avoid the harmful extremes, dead orthodoxism and formalism on the one hand and a superficial and unsound emotionalism (sværmeri) on the other hand. Lay-preaching has been encouraged and has performed a vital and valuable service in this country among our people. In the earlier organizations, known as Elling’s synod, the Norwegian Augustana synod, the Hauge synod, The Conference, the low-church views and practices and pietistic life-principles were the controlling influences. And lay-activity was freely practiced and encouraged. In recent years the Hauges synod, the Lutheran Free Church and United Lutheran Church, representing this tendency, and lay-preaching was extensively exercised in the congregations. Laymen were sent out into congregations, where they were invited to hold meetings. It was quite generally practised in those days, that the different circuits would choose one or more laymen of good report and well-qualified to serve as emissaries or evangelists. They were recommended to the congregations in the circuit. In the local congregation the spiritual gifts of the lay-forces were made use of in the various congregational activities. Prayer-meetings were held where men and women took part with free prayer and testimony.

In the course of time, the laymen organized a number of Inner-mission societies for the purpose of assisting more helpfully the pastors and congregations in awakening and fostering the spiritual gifts. A blessed service has been rendered our churches by these auxiliary organizations of the Christian laity.

The Norwegian Synod represented the high-church type of Christianity among us. They made use of their laymen in certain congregational activities such as teaching in Sunday School, conducting reading services, singing in choirs, and so forth, but they did not encourage lay-preaching. If a layman came to them and was found well-qualified to preach the Word of God, he was ordained to the ministry after a longer or shorter stay at the theological seminary.
Since the union in 1917, lay-activity has had full sanction by the church and continued under proper supervision and leadership. The joint resolutions on lay-activity agreed to in the union are the following:

In the articles of union the Norwegian Lutheran Church at the organization meeting in 1917 adopted the following resolution regarding lay-activity:

“In order to avoid any possible misunderstanding in the case, the conferring church bodies sanction the Christian lay- activity, as it is described in the union report, and that it be fostered. It shall not be regarded as unchurchly or fanatical, that people come together for united prayer and effective work for an awakening and spiritual life.”

Since the union in 1917, I have observed many encouraging signs to prove that the union was a step in the right direction. In many congregations of the former Norwegian synod prayer- meetings are being conducted and our evangelists and lay-preachers are being invited to hold revival meetings, something unheard of before the union.

Another development, which augurs well for the Lutheran Church of the future is the closer inter-relation and co-operation between the various Lutheran church bodies brought about by the organization of the American Lutheran Conference. Prejudice, intolerance, and quibbling over non-essentials are gradually giving way to a larger emphasis upon all that we Lutherans have in common, and the need of uniting our spiritual forces to meet effectively the mighty wave of apostacy, modernism and materialism of today.

These pietistic lay-forces in the different Lutheran church bodies seek to find each other. Thus we find today the various Inner-mission societies and the recently organized “Indremissionsforbund” containing members from the Lutheran Free Church, the Norwegian Lutheran Church and the Lutheran Brotherhood, working in harmony. There may be a difference of opinion between some as to the kind of control should be exercised over lay-activity in order to avoid any unsound and unchurchly development in the church.

We need to encourage a scriptural and harmonious co-operation of our Spirit-filled and Spirit-led clergy and laity.

Whenever there has been a movement in the church to restate and revive the doctrine of the priesthood of believers, and awaken the spiritual life during periods of worldliness and cold formalism in the church, it has nearly always been championed by some Spirit-filled layman, for instance Francis of Assisi, Peter Waldus, Finney, Hauge, Eielsen, Moody and others. Even the great Lutheran Reformation started with a devout layman, Martin Luther, while he as a devout Augustinian monk, sought and found peace in the saving truths of the Gospel.

The spiritual lay-forces among us furnish a wholesome leaven in the church. Our lay-leaders are united in the main and vital purpose and principles of a pietistic evangelical Christianity.
There may be some far-fetched radicalism here and there, but by tactful and sympathetic co-operation on the part of clergy and laity the genuine Lutheran piety will be preserved under the guidance of the Holy Spirit so as to find a sound, scriptural and blessed expression of Christian faith-life and service of love.

If the lay-activity shall be preserved and be made the largest possible blessing, we need to develop a new generation of devout lay-preachers, who speak the language of the land and who are able to preach the Word in a clear, plain and convincing manner. Our future lay-preachers will need a certain amount of practical training in how to preach and how to handle the Bible truths, besides being mature and consecrated men of God, feeling the urge of the Holy Spirit to preach the Word and win souls for Christ.

To our young men, who are going out as pastors we would say: be prepared to work together with the laymen and thus gain their confidence. If you meet with any radicalism or any unsound views, you will be enabled to direct, correct and lead them. They will listen to your advice, because they have confidence in you as a layman’s friend.

Our Lutheran Church, scriptural in doctrine and, so far, free from the contagion of modernism, need to apply the saving truth to the hearts of men, and pray for an outpouring of the Holy Spirit that we may have a deeply consecrated and surrendered clergy and laity, separated from the weakening and contaminating ‘ways and pursuits of the world.

Let me close with a paragraph from the venerable and pious Lutheran father, the late Dr. G. H. Gerberding in his last book, “Reminiscent Reflections”: “I fear that dead orthodoxism which is satisfied and glories in possessing the pure doctrine. As my books and my teaching show, no one can prize and love true, sound, scriptural doctrine more than I do. But to my sorrow I know and have too often noted that it is possible to have the true doctrine in the head and to have, at the same time, a heart as cold’ as a hail-stone.—I fear those ministers among us who seem to be terribly afraid of Pietism. They do not explain the distinction between false and true Pietism. To have ever a greater and deeper measure of the latter is surely one of our greatest needs. Indeed it is the very essence, the heart and life of true Lutheranism. God give us more of it!”