CHRISTOPHER GEHRZ, ed. The Pietist Vision of Christian Higher Education: Forming Whole and Holy Persons. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2015, Pp. 236. $26.00 (U.S.)
Is there something distinctive about an approach to Christian higher education rooted in Pietist movement and ethos? This is the central query for Christopher Gehrz and his 14 authors, each of whom has Bethel University connections. This text answers the question with a resolute “yes,” and readers of The Pietist Vision of Christian Higher Education will surely gain greater appreciation for how Pietism enriches the Christian academy.
Following an introduction by Gehrz, The Pietist Vision is organized into four sections. “Part One: Teaching, Scholarship, and Community” explores how “distinctive emphases and practices might be recovered from the history of Pietism and applied to Christian higher education today” (29). David Williams identifies pietism’s emphasis on “new birth” (Wiedergeburt) as a more Pietist conception of faith-learning than the prominent faith-integration model. Katherine Nevins conceptualizes a distinctively Pietist ideal of calling that draws on “common priesthood, loving God and neighbor in attitude and practice, and the irenic spirit characterized by humility of character and openness to correction” (55, italics in original). Jenell Paris explores “love as a lens” for viewing Christian scholarship (67). Phyllis Alsdurf draws on prototypical Pietist figures to ascertain educational ideals, considering Carl Henry’s emphasis on reason and Carl Lundquist’s commitment to “conversional piety and lived experience” (86). Finally, Roger Olson argues that a Pietist approach moves beyond knowledge and skill to include character formation.
“Part Two: Changed People Changing the World” investigates how Pietist scholars engage the world beyond the college. Dale Durie lifts up a “grand vision” of Pietism that bringing glory to God is inextricably linked with influencing the neighbors’ good (109). Christian Collins Winn lifts up four Pietist-inspired dispositions that support civil discourse: a spirit of good faith, humility, love for one’s neighbor, and hopeful commitment to God’s peace. Marion Larson and Sara Shady advocate interfaith engagement on the premise that a full understanding of loving one’s neighbor includes the “religious other” (135).
“Part Three: Responses” aims to balance a “heavy roster of scholars from the humanities and social sciences” (30). Richard Peterson frames scientific disciplines as “hands-on” service in their engagement with human struggles and care of God’s creation (155). Nancy Olen suggests Pietism’s ideal of whole person transformation is pedagogically embodied in nursing education; clinical rotations are experiential learning and nursing students are “present” with broken people.
“Part Four: Problems and Proposals” responds to challenges facing Christian colleges aiming to embody a Pietist identity. Raymond VanArragon effectively troubles the seeming simplicity of a pedagogical emphasis on active faith; intellectual virtues, such as a concern for truth and open-mindedness, can make students susceptible to “corresponding vices,” such as relativism or insufficient attention to truth (168). Joel Ward advocates theological heritage as a more appropriate “missional coordinate for rearticulating organizational identity” than the prevailing orientation toward economic outcomes (180). Kent Gerber, drawing on Anabaptism’s narrative of renewal, lays out a parallel “curation proposal” to collect, communicate, sustain, and extend a Pietist vision (201). Samuel Zalanga raises concern that three specific Pietist convictions are threatened by the market orientation of higher education, specifically commitments to transforming the social order, conversion and spiritual regeneration, and holistic transformation through community.
In his conclusion, Gehrz envisages a theologically-informed approach to institutional innovation. Applying Spener’s classic statement of Pietism, Pia Desideria, which means “Heartfelt Desire for God-pleasing Reform,” Gehrz suggests asking whether particular educational reforms advance the conversion and regeneration of the whole person, help the college bring about the new church, or advance the new world. He raises these questions in a gracious and balanced manner; as one example, he reflects that online education both potentially embraces the Pietist ethos by increasing access to higher education but also may counter Pietist ideals in that the learner is isolated from an “embodied community” (228).
This text is rich with educational implications of Pietism’s theological heritage. In addition to ideas inspired by Pia Desideria, the book reorients education to align both with August Hermann Franke’s motto “For God’s Glory and the Neighbor’s Good” and the concept of imago dei. Specific pedagogies are also framed from a Pietist perspective, including characterizing group laboratory projects as “conventicle-like endeavors” (155) and whole-person education as a “convertative” pedagogy (45). Distinctively pietistic “organizational regeneration” is also envisioned, lifting up practices of small reading groups focused on institutional identity and “visible faculty piety” or faculty modeling (191). The Pietist Vision also effectively responds to the prominent critique that Pietism is “world-denying” (29) and persuasively counters the stereotype many have of Pietism’s anti-intellectualism.
Readers should consider the text as a conversation in progress rather than a coherent culmination of a Pietist vision for Christian higher education. Gehrz identifies gaps in the text up front, naming the absence of the arts, student affairs, and campus ministries. Another hole is general education, which is briefly mentioned but deserves greater attention given its connection to institutional distinctiveness.
Beyond the message that Pietism offers distinct gifts, this text calls Christian higher education to do more than “disseminate information” but also to “transform students—into people who love God with heart, soul, mind and strength and who love their neighbors as themselves” (161). The book is apropos in tone and spirit, not positioned as the “final word” but rather the “beginning of a conversation that is both specific to one institution and widely resonant with sisters and brothers in Christ serving at an array of other colleges and universities” ( 32). This text is a gracious invitation to join the conversation, embodying an irenic spirit in its vivid and enthusiastic descriptions of Pietism combined with charitable respect for differing ideas.