I just finished a fascinating book by D.G. Hart, “The Lost Soul of American Protestantism.” I would highly recommend it. Hart’s thesis is that the problem with American Protestantism is its infatuation with relevance. In fact, he contends the traditional categories of “liberal” and “conservative” are insufficient. Rather, Hart argues that there are “pietistic” and “confessional” Protestants.
The Pietistic Protestants are the equivalent of Hybelspongists. They preach the immediate relevance of Christian faith. In its evangelical, fundamentalist, and revivalist expressions the focus is on individual conversion consisting of “devout feelings and good intentions.” This individual conversion provides immediate benefits for the individual and society. It is the “don’t drink, don’t smoke, don’t dance” crowd. They are moral and sincere in their spirituality, which is all that really matters. They reject historic expressions of Christian faith with their creeds, liturgies, sacraments, catechisms, ceremonies, and ordained ministers. Instead, they opt for what works in the religious sphere. They are pragmatists. They are utilitarian. In its mainline forms, the “devout feelings and good intentions” are played out in the public sphere. It is the Social Gospel at work. It is relevant to the immediate ills of our society. Likewise, they reject the historic expressions of Christian faith. In both the evangelical and mainline expressions the focus is on the relevant, immediate results for the individual and society.
On the other hand, there are Confessional Protestants that retain their Christian identity through their catechisms and creeds, liturgies and ceremonies, preaching and sacraments, and ordained ministry. Confessionalism stresses the pilgrim character of the Body of Christ, which makes it largely irrelevant to the consumers and idealogues of this world. It does not have the energetic activism, moralism, and individualism so prized in our Pietistic Protestant environment. Pietistic Protestantism understands Christianity “as inherently activist and reform minded; it creates virtuous individuals who pursue an equally virtuous society.” The doctrine of Two Kingdoms is lost. Doctrine is lost. The Confessional Protestants have resisted such influences, trying not to have their distinct identity worn away by pietism and revivalism. It seems, however, that they have largely lost the fight. Hart laments that the “soul of American Protestantism” has been lost to the pietists.
D.G. Hart uses, among others, the LCMS as an example of Confessional Protestantism, although he recognizes the constant challenges posed by pietism. At one point he makes this observation, “Individual members of the LCMS, like those in other confessional traditions, have clearly been tempted by the American Protestant habit of applying the Christian faith to temporal circumstances and, no doubt, many have fallen. But if the LCMS as a corporate body has resisted that temptation, a large amount of credit must go to the confessional outlook that regards worship as an exercise wholly irrelevant to the warfare of this world, whether cultural, political, or military.” I’m not sure we have resisted that temptation as much as Hart gives us credit.
As the LCMS continues to preach the need for change to be relevant to the culture, it slips further into this Pietistic Protestantism. It does not take long for one to notice the prevailing trend toward Church Growth Movement tactics and programming; worship that denies the power of the liturgy and sacrament, opting for the sentimental and emotional; preaching that seeks to meet the “here and now” needs of the individual; and a general dismissal of doctrinal purity and instruction as being somewhat obsessive. The Mass is abolished. Vestments are discarded. Creeds are rewritten. Language is forgotten. Hymns are replaced. Ceremonies are abandoned. Pastors become therapists. The urgency of the immediate triumphs the apostolic and orthodox faith inherited from our fathers.
Now I realize that many of my brethren would argue that the need to reach out demands institutional change for the sake of lost people in our society. In fact, I suspect that many of them would proudly agree that they are Pietistic Protestants of a Lutheran kind as they carry their Warren book and hum the latest ditty from Vineyard. After all, we must do whatever we can to get the message out and attract people. I do not doubt their motivations, only their wisdom.
Pietism and Hybelspongism forget the power of Holy Spirit to work through the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Our methodism or revivalism only serves to trivialize the Christian faith. We cannot turn the pearl of great price into a cracker jack prize that makes us happy for the moment. The Body of Christ is a pilgrim people, journeying toward the “resurrection of the body and life everlasting.” We are sustained by Christ in Word and Sacrament in our journey. Our faith is nourished and strengthened in this “other-worldly” and irrelevant community through the gifts of the means of grace. And we are to invite others into the Holy Ark of the Christian Church, always knowing that we cannot manipulate the work of the Holy Spirit. Our liturgy, creeds, catechism, sacraments and such preserve the Gospel for us and the world. We are called to the hard work of catechesis and mystagogy, not the easy alternative of trivialization of doctrine and practice. Enough of a rant for this ordinary Wednesday afternoon. By the way, Hart is not from the LCMS.

4 comments
Comments feed for this article
April 30, 2008 at 10:16 pm
Rev. Eckert
A fine review, Pastor.
You wrote: “D.G. Hart uses, among others, the LCMS as an example of Confessional Protestantism …”
I’m curious how long ago Hart wrote his book, and what kind of contact he had with the LCMS that led him to write this.
Peace in Christ,
Rev. Andrew Eckert
Wellston, OK
April 30, 2008 at 11:38 pm
Myles R. Schultz
Thanks Mason, for the heads up on this book. It sounds like a must have for my stack of “everyone should read” books.
How is it some are able to put in a few words, with clearity, what so many are giving up. I remember encouraging one LCMS pastor to use LSC for confirmation. His response was, “I’m looking for something more relevant.” GRRRRRRRRR!
Rev. Myles R. Schultz
Okmulgee, OK
May 1, 2008 at 1:15 pm
Rick Serina
“I’m curious how long ago Hart wrote his book, and what kind of contact he had with the LCMS that led him to write this.”
Hart published the text in 2002. As to his account of the Missouri Synod, he basically argues that she is not a creation of conversionistic Protestantism, but brought a confessional understanding of the faith with her through emigration and upon organization. He suggests that this line of reasoning was really put to the test with the encroachment of the seeker-sensitive movement in the 1980s, but the CTCR and other voluble parties fell on the side of conserving traditional worship practices (which can obviously be debated some two decades later).
What really struck me about his chapter on Missouri, however, was her initial resistance to other conservative Protestant shibboleths of the day. He uses school prayer as en example and says that, while other conservative Protestants of a revivalistic stripe were turning school prayer (and public bible reading/teaching) into an issue of spiritual degeneration, the Missouri Synod was squarely against it because they did not like how the bible was being taught or the kinds of prayers which were being spoken.
They instead opted for precisely what Luther’s catechisms were intended to do: pastors teaching their people and the people teaching their children. Hence, Hart says, they retained their confession over and against the revivalistic impulse for the immediate conversion in both the individual and society.
Rick Serina
Trinity Lutheran-Albany (TX)
May 13, 2008 at 7:51 pm
Richard
Another good post. I will hunt down the book.
Q. How do you tell a confessional protestant from a pietist?
A. Offer him a beer.
Richard