Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
| PentecostalTheology.com
Pneuma 32 (2010) 354-368
Lewi Pethrus and the Creation of a Christian
Counterculture
Joel Halldorf
Department of Teology, Uppsala University, Box 511, SE-751 20, Sweden
Abstract
Tis article presents and analyzes the life and work of Lewi Pethrus (1884-1974), the leader of the Swedish Pentecostal movement. Te argument is that Pethrus created a Christian coun- terculture in the midst of a secularized Western society. Although a radical congregationalist skeptical toward organization, Pethrus spent most of his life building institutions. Te first institutions he created were for the benefit of the spiritual life of Pentecostal congregations and churches. Tese included a publishing house, an edifying journal, a hymn book, and a school for evangelism. During World War II, however, Nazism and Communism made Pethrus attentive to the dangers of secularization. He now began founding institutions that were part of the broader civil society, such as a daily newspaper, a radio station, a bank, and a political party. His goal was to turn Sweden into a Christian society. He did not achieve this, but what he did leave was the legacy of a Christian counterculture.
Keywords
Lewi Pethrus, Swedish Pentecostal movement, politics, civil society, institution building, secular- ization, counterculture
Introduction
On September 4, 1974 the leader of the Swedish Pentecostal movement, Lewi Pethrus, closed his eyes for the last time, hoping to wake up again in the arms of his Savior. Tis marked the end of the immensely active life of the greatest Swedish religious leader of the twentieth century.1 Ten days later Pethrus was
1
Tis is a value judgment, but one that I am not alone in making. Renowned Swedish author P. O. Enquist describes Pethrus as “internationally speaking the only great spiritual leader we have had.” Joel Halldorf, Lewis brev. Urval ur Lewi Pethrus korrespondens (Örebro: Libris, 2007), 10. I would add that Pethrus possibly shares this position with Archbishop Nathan Söderblom, founder of the Life and Work Movement who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1930.
© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2010 DOI: 10.1163/157007410X531907
1
J. Halldorf / Pneuma 32 (2010) 354-368
355
taken to his final resting place in a procession worthy of a statesman: thou- sands of people followed him on the last stretch and the authorities had to close off the streets of Stockholm. Te police officers charged with this job saluted the cortege as it passed by, thereby adding to the presidential feel of the occasion. But is there today, thirty-five years after this grand finale, something left of the heritage from Lewi Pethrus?
Te argument of this article is that Pethrus the revivalist ended up spending his life building institutions and that these institutions became the pillars of a Christian counterculture in the midst of an increasingly secularized western society. Tese institutions have shown a durability over time that far surpasses other aspects of Pethrus’ legacy. His books are hardly read, his sermons seldom listened to, and not even his most important teachings are adhered to within the movement of which he was once in charge.2 But the institutions he built are still standing, and they are stronger than ever.
Life of an Activist
Te patriarch of the Swedish Pentecostal movement reached the impressive age of ninety. For five decades (1911-1958) he was the leader of one of the world’s largest Pentecostal congregations, the Filadelfia Church in Stockholm. His life was one of constant activity, and when visited by his friend and col- laborator Ivar Lundgren a few days before his death, it was the lack of this activity that mostly concerned Pethrus himself, who exclaimed: “Look at this old wreck, lying here to no use.” Te many hours of work, however, did not result in any fortune: after his death, the total value of Pethrus’ assets was esti- mated at the humble sum of 3,000 Swedish crowns (around $400).3 Te rea- son for this meager amount was hardly extravagant habits: the puritan Pethrus
2
I am thinking of initial evidence and the radical congregationalism. Although an official teaching does not exist, the consensus within the Swedish Pentecostal Movement today is that speaking in tongues is not the exclusive sign of baptism in the Holy Spirit. See Dan Salomonsson et al., Andedop (Örebro: Libris, 2007), especially 52-58. Te final blow against the radical con- gregationalism and nondenominationalism of the movement was the forming of a Pentecostal denominational body in 2001 (Riksföreningen Pingst — fria församlingar i samverkan). See Magnus Wahlström, “Omprövning av tidigare principer,” in Pingströrelsen. Händelser och utveck- ling under 1900-talet, ed. Claes Waern (Örebro: Libris, 2007), 332-35.
3
Stockholms stadsarkiv, “Lewi Pethrus boupptäckning.” Pethrus himself said in an interview shortly before his death: “I am a poor man . . . I would consider it a great shame if I died as a rich man. It would be a disgrace to my calling.” Ivar Lundgren, Lewi Pethrus i närbild (Stockholm: Den kristna bokringen, 1973), 62.
2
356
J. Halldorf / Pneuma 32 (2010) 354-368
ordered salted herring the few times he and his wife Lydia went out to eat at a restaurant.4 Secular media loved to cast Pethrus as a greedy con man reaching for the money of his pious followers, but when everything is counted and accounted for quite a different picture emerges.5
Te truth is that Pethrus very seldom got paid — or, to be more precise, allowed anyone to pay him. Of course he had his salary from the Filadelfia Church, but Pethrus seems to have been deliberately careful not to accumulate any significant wealth. Had he wished do to so, this would definitely have been possible. But it is telling that Pethrus held the position as editor-in-chief for the daily newspaper Dagen for almost twenty-five years without any salary, and that he accepted no honorarium whenever he visited and preached in a congregation other than his own. In 1958 he left his position as head pastor of the Filadelfia Church and lived off a very humble retirement. To the ever active Pethrus, retirement, of course, did not mean less activity; instead, it was during the last fifteen years of his life that he launched some of his boldest projects. His faith in these was unfaltering — but again, they rarely paid him a nickel.
During his long and restless life, Pethrus found time and energy to start — among other things — one weekly periodical (Evangelii Härold),6 one daily newspaper (Dagen),7 one radio station (IBRA — International Broadcasting Association),8 two publishing houses (Förlaget Filadelfia and Lewi Pethrus förlag),9 one folk high school (Kaggeholm),
10
and, last but certainly not least,
4
Halldorf, Lewis brev, 291.
5
Tis was also the accusation delivered by his former coworker Sven Lidman in the infamous conflict between the two. Halldorf, Lewis brev, 146-99. Dan-Erik Sahlberg, Pingströrelsen och tidningen Dagen (Uppsala: Swedish Society of Church History, 1977), 113-18. Nils-Eije Stävare, “Ökat engagemang i samhällsfrågor,” in Pingströrelsen. Händelser och utveckling under 1900-talet , ed. Claes Waern (Örebro: Libris, 2007), 160-72. For a brief presentation of Lidman’s life in English, see David Bundy, “Lidman, Sven,” in International Dictionary of Pentecostal Charismatic Movements, ed. Stanley M. Burgess and Eduard van der Maas (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2002), 839.
6
Sahlberg, Pingströrelsen och tidningen Dagen, 25-27. David Bundy, Visions of Apostolic Mis- sion (Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, 2009), 388-98.
7
Sahlberg, Pingströrelsen och tidningen Dagen, especially 86-106.
8
Nils-Eije Stävare, “En mediemedveten väckelserörelse,” in Pingströrelsen. Verksamheter och särdrag under 1900-talet, ed. Claes Waern (Örebro: Libris, 2007), 329-31. Olof Djurfeldt, “Mis- sionsintresset växte i förnyelseväckelsen,” in Pingströrelsen. Händelser och utveckling under 1900- talet, ed. Claes Waern (Örebro: Libris, 2007), 202-4.
9
Sahlberg, Pingströrelsen och tidningen Dagen, 29. Lundgren, “Pingstvännerna in i partipoli- tiken,” in Pingströrelsen. Händelser och utveckling under 1900-talet, ed. Claes Waern (Örebro: Libris, 2007), 234.
10
Stävare, “Ökat engagemang i samhällsfrågor,” 140-45.
3
J. Halldorf / Pneuma 32 (2010) 354-368
357
a political party (Kristen Demokratisk Samling — today Te Christian Democrats).11 Te story of the founding of the radio station IBRA serves as an appropriate initial glimpse into the character of Pethrus and the conditions under which he was working. It did, in fact, represent the first attempt to break the Swedish state’s monopoly with regard to radio broadcasts. At this time private organizations were not allowed to broadcast in Sweden. Te Pen- tecostals did receive some airtime on the state radio, but after mentioning in a broadcast a woman who had been healed from cancer they became completely banned from this venue in 1948. Tis discrimination motivated Pethrus to found IBRA, which placed transmitters abroad and tried to reach Swedish listeners through them.12 After his retirement from the Filadelfia Church, Pethrus directed more of his energy toward projects of this kind. Te story of Lewi Pethrus is very much the story about the revivalist who built institu- tions.
Enthusiasm and Organization
Te Pentecostal revival of Azusa Street was marked by enthusiastic worship and speaking in tongues. Te daily press was not slow to criticize and ridicule the small group for precisely these features; Pentecostalism challenged the good taste of its time.13 Te ecstatic worship collided with a culture that upheld Victorian ideals such as control, dignity, and a stoic posture toward life at large. Tis was also true in Sweden, which was hit by the revival in the winter of 1906-1907.14 Te sports page often provides a good window into the col- lective consciousness of a time period, and in an article covering the soccer tournament of the Olympic Games in Paris in 1924, the writer complains about the team from Uruguay, who, before the game, greeted the audience with “guttural screams and stretched arms.”15 It should come as no surprise
11
Lundgren, “Pingstvännerna in i partipolitiken,” 227-31.
12
Olof Djurfeldt, “Missionsintresset växte i förnyelseväckelsen,” 202.
13
Cecil M. Robeck, Jr., Te Azusa Street Mission and Revival (Nashville, TN: Tomas Nelson, Inc., 2006), 1f, 87, 134, 187, 200-204, 210.
14
For an updated examination of the arrival of Pentecostalism in Sweden, see Jan-Åke Alvars- son, “Pingstväckelsens etablering i Sverige,” in Pingströrelsen. Händelser och utveckling under 1900-talet, ed. Claes Waern (Örebro: Libris, 2007), 11-45. For a slightly different version, in English, see Bundy, Visions of Apostolic Mission, especially 247-314.
15
“. . . med gutturala skrik och armsträckningar” Quoted in Jesper Högström, Blågult (Stock- holm: Offside/Norstedts, 2006), 38.
4
358
J. Halldorf / Pneuma 32 (2010) 354-368
that a culture that tried to ban the carnival even from the sports arenas had little sympathy for the rapturous Pentecostal revival.16
Freedom and spontaneity were crucial virtues in the young Pentecostal revival.17 A preacher was not allowed to stand before his crowd with a manu- script; a small note with keywords, possibly, but preferably nothing but the Bible and an open heart.18 In order to be “led by the Spirit” all obstacles to inspiration had to be cleared away. In the imagery of the Pentecostals, the Spirit was a flowing river and the goal was to be carried by this river — not to try to build dams to control and tame its power. Te revival was, in a meta- phor used by Sven Lidman, the poet of the Swedish Pentecostal movement, a hot lava stream, and the worst thing that could happen was that it turned cold and solidified. “All which has life grows and develops” — these words by Lewi Pethrus himself were printed as the motto of the movement in its hymnbook Segertoner (“Hymns of Victory,” edited by Pethrus, of course).19 Woe unto that man (or woman) who dared to try to bind and control this free-flowing “life in the Spirit.” Formal organization was viewed as at best unnecessary, at worst — and more likely — destructive.
Tis way of thinking permeated the Pentecostal revival internationally, but the Swedish Pentecostals came to the conclusion that this necessitated an abso- lute denunciation of formal denominational structures.20 According to them such an organization ran the risk of stifling the Spirit, and further, the Bible
16
For a carnivalistic perspective on Pentecostalism, see Cheryl Bridges Johns, “What Can the Mainline Learn from the Pentecostals about Pentecost,” in Fruitful in this Land, ed. André Droo- gers, Cornelis van der Laan, and Wout van Laar (Zoetermeer: Uitgeverij Boekencentrum, 2006), 93-99.
17
Grant Wacker, Heaven Below. Early Pentecostals and American Culture (Cambridge, MA/ London, England: Harvard University Press, 2003), 28-32.
18
Ibid., 114. Pethrus condemned written sermons; however, he himself did not preach with- out any prepared, written support but used brief outlines. See Sune Fahlgren, Predikantskap och församling (Örebro: ÖTHrapport, 2006), 248, 255.
19
In Swedish the motto reads “ Allt som har liv, det växer och utvecklas.”
20
For an updated study on Pethrus’ ecclesiology, see Fahlgren, Predikantskap och församling, 237-73. Lewi Pethrus’ radical congregationalism, including his influence on American Pentecos- talism in this respect, has been outlined by Joseph R. Colletti, “Lewi Pethrus: His Influence upon Scandinavian-American Pentecostalism,” Pneuma: Te Journal of the Society for Pentecostal Studies 5 (1983): 18-29. In the USA the Scandinavian Pentecostals formed the Scandinavian Independent Assemblies of God in 1918 (in 1922 the name was changed to Independent Assem- blies of God after a merge with Fellowship of Christian Assemblies). Tey embraced a radical congregationalism similar to the Swedish Pentecostals “back home”; this was why they did not join the Assemblies of God. But they were still criticized by Pethrus: even an organization emphasizing radical congregationalism was, after all, an organization. Halldorf, Lewis brev, 38-44. See also Joel Halldorf, “Kriser, konflikter, kallelse. Nya perspektiv på Lewi Pethrus
5
J. Halldorf / Pneuma 32 (2010) 354-368
359
said nothing about any ecclesial organizations above or even beside the local congregation.21 Tese theological arguments were couched in a specific his- torical context. In 1913 Pethrus was expelled from the Swedish Baptist Union, an experience that left him somewhat traumatized. It made him aware of the dark side of church politics. His own definition of a denomination was related to this kind of “denominational discipline,” and he defined it as a body that “includes and excludes congregations.”22 Tis formed a nondenominational stance that also gave the Swedish Pentecostals an opportunity to disagree with, and thus distance themselves from, the Örebro Mission, a Baptist movement that accepted tongues as an (albeit not the) evidence of the baptism in the Holy Spirit.23 Instead of joining these, the Pentecostals encouraged Christians who agreed with them to leave their denomination and come out into what they called “glorious freedom.”24
Tis denunciation of denominational structures did not mean that each Pentecostal congregation was to be separated and isolated from the others. Unity among Christians was as important to Swedish Pentecostals as it had ever been among radical evangelicals since at least the time of Moody.25 Pethrus and his followers saw independence as a road to unity — to a deeper unity in the spirit, not a superficial one through organization.26 In 1919 Pethrus pub- lished a book titled De kristnas enhet (“Unity among Christians”), in which he
amerikaresa,” Tro & Liv 67, no. 5 (2008): 4-19 for Pethrus’ continuing effort to influence Amer- ican Pentecostalism in this regard.
21
Sahlberg, Pingströrelsen och tidningen Dagen, 32. Rodhe Struble, Den samfundsfria försam- lingen och de karismatiska gåvorna och tjänsterna (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1982), 66-71.
22
Quoted in Bertil Carlsson, Organisationer och beslutsprocesser inom Pingströrelsen (Järna: Eget förlag, 1973), 30. Pethrus described the treatment of him and his congregation by the Baptists as an “eye-opening experience.” Quoted in Struble, Den samfundsfria församlingen och de karismatiska gåvorna och tjänsterna, 78.
23
Struble, Den samfundsfria församlingen och de karismatiska gåvorna och tjänsterna, 36-48.
24
Ibid., 20, 37.
25
Regarding the ecumenical impulse of early Pentecostalism, see, for example, Allan Ander- son, Spreading Fires: Te Missionary Nature of Early Pentecostalism (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2007), 9, 49, 282, 293f. For the strive for unity in the young Swedish Pentecostal movement, see Ulrik Josefsson, Liv och över nog. Den tidiga pingströrelsens spiritualitet (Skellefteå: Artos & Norma bokförlag, 2005), 295-310. On ecumenism, including the absence thereof, in the history of the Swedish Pentecostal movement, see Björne Erixon, “Från Pethrus till Petrus,” in Pingströ- relsen. Verksamheter och särdrag under 1900-talet, ed. Claes Waern (Örebro: Libris, 2007), 393- 403. See also Bundy, Visions of Apostolic Mission.
26
Tis can be compared to the critique by Azusa Street pioneer Frank Bartleman, who clai- med that the division in the revival was due to “organized church,” “human manipulation,” and “party spirit.” See Anderson, Spreading Fires, 282.
6
360
J. Halldorf / Pneuma 32 (2010) 354-368
outlined the road to this fuller, nondenominational unity. Te sense of unity was to be established through a number of unofficial links among the congre- gations. According to Pethrus this had been the model of the early church, in which the travels and the letters of the apostles created a sense of oneness among the congregations scattered throughout the Roman empire. Pethrus claimed that it was possible to connect to this model in the twentieth century: “If Christ’s congregations in our time would allow themselves to be connected by these biblical links, then human organizations will become superfluous, and we will realize how relaxed while at the same time efficient this biblical unity is.”27 Te travels of the apostles were repeated in the mutual visits of pas- tors in one another’s congregations, and the apostolic epistles had their equiv- alence in the common literature — particularly the weekly periodical Evangelii Härold (“Te Gospel Herald”).28
Tus, despite the absence of an official denominational structure, the Swed- ish Pentecostals stuck together. And especially important for this investigation is the fact that their model of unity was based on institutions, albeit not denominational ones. Institutions may have represented a rigidity at odds with the cherished ideals, but they were nonetheless necessary. It was empha- sized, however, that the existing institutions had to be anchored in local congregations and not in a denominational board. Te local congregation was the core institutions of the Swedish Pentecostal movement, which were almost always anchored to the Filadelfia Church in Stockholm, led by Pethrus himself.
When an institution was created it was, in fact, usually Pethrus who person- ally had taken the initiative. In 1912 he founded the publishing house Filadel- fia; in 1914 he edited and published the hymn book Segertoner; in 1915 he launched the periodical Evangelii Härold; and that same year he started a school for the training of evangelists. Trough these and several other institu- tions the identity of the Swedish Pentecostal movement was formed and con- solidated.29 Te lack of a denominational structure created a condition by which the Filadelfia Church controlled all major institutions — and Filadelfia was, in turn, controlled by Pethrus. Whether intended or not, the result of the Swedish Pentecostals’ ideals of freedom and liberty was a concentration of
27
Lewi Pethrus, Samlade skrifter, vol. 4 (Stockholm: Häroldens tryckeri, 1958), 169. “Om Kristi församlingar i denna tid vill låta sig sammanbindas med dessa bibliska förbindelselänkar, så skall de mänskliga organisationerna bli alldeles överflödiga, och vi skall komma att inse, huru ledig men på samma gång effektiv denna bibliska sammanhållning är.”
28
For an overview, see Struble, Den samfundsfria församlingen och de karismatiska gåvorna och tjänsterna, 48-53.
29
Sahlberg, Pingströrelsen och tidningen Dagen, 29-32.
7
J. Halldorf / Pneuma 32 (2010) 354-368
361
power in the hands of one man, that of the great institution builder Lewi Pethrus.30
Te Creation of a Christian Counterculture
As has been shown above, Pethrus was building institutions from the very beginning. Te first institutions he created had their basis in the congregation and were also aimed at forming the spiritual life not only of the congregation in Stockholm but of all Pentecostal congregations that made use of what these particular institution produced. Te songbook Segertoner was, for example, used in congregational services and revival meetings, and the periodical Evan- gelii Härold was full of edifying articles and printed sermons. Tese institu- tions shaped the spiritual life of the Swedish Pentecostal movement, and Pethrus’ thesis was that this spiritual formation would bind the movement more closely together.
Time would show, however, that Pethrus’ seemingly limitless energy demanded vaster ambitions. Hymn books and evangelist schools were, of course, important, but Pethrus’ perspectives broadened and he constantly threw himself into new projects, preferably in uncharted areas.31 During the 1940s he gradually turned his attention from the life of the congregation toward society. He now started to build institutions that were to be part of the broader civil society. Pethrus’ new direction has been interpreted by scholars as an attempt to influence society at large.32 Tis interpretation of Pethrus’ greater social involvement as a kind of evangelism is consistent with how Pethrus
30
Bertil Carlsson, Organisationer och beslutsprocesser inom Pingströrelsen. In a quite frank letter to Pethrus from his sickbed (after the auto-train accident), David DuPlessis makes a similar observation regarding the Scandinavian Pentecostals in America. He refers to pastors in America who avoid cooperation with “what they call ‘the Swedish Independents’, because they consider that there is as much over-lording in that group as in organized groups, with the disadvantage that there are now regulations to curtail the power of the leaders as there are in the organized groups.” Letter from David DuPlessis to Lewi Pethrus, November 13, 1948, Stockholm: Rik- sarkivet, “Lewi Pethrus Collection.”
31
And when he felt prevented by the board of the Filadelfia Church from going through with his project he left the church to start anew in the USA. In a letter to his son Oliver Pethrus in Chicago he wrote: “I really would want to try and achieve something in a new location. As things are here [in Stockholm] there are hardly any possibilities for developments, since the brothers [in the board] are afraid to do anything, especially because of the economy.” Quoted in Halldorf, “Kriser, konflikter, kallelse,” 5.
32
See Sahlberg, Pingströrelsen och tidningen Dagen and Carl-Gustav Carlsson, Människan, samhället och Gud. Grunddrag i Lewi Pethrus kristendomsuppfattning (Lund: Lund University Press, 1990), 122-32.
8
362
J. Halldorf / Pneuma 32 (2010) 354-368
himself described and motivated his work in the public square. Although I believe this to be correct, I also want to suggest that this perspective can be complemented by another.33 Pethrus wanted to influence society, but it is important to note that he did so by creating something distinct, namely, a Christian counterculture. Tis counterculture was not Pethrus’ ultimate goal, nor did he believe in the possibility of turning all Swedish citizens into born- again Christians.34 His ultimate goal was to make Sweden once again a Chris- tian nation: “I want to give Sweden the Christian democracy,” as he himself put it.35 To achieve this, Pethrus worked to extend the Christian sphere beyond the congregation and its weekly services. In the end, he did not manage to rechristianize Sweden, but his work de facto resulted in the creation of a Chris- tian counterculture. I will spend the latter part of this essay arguing this point, and I will also demonstrate that Pethrus created this counterculture using the same means as he did when building and consolidating the Swedish Pentecos- tal movement: institutions.
Pethrus’ turn toward society was motivated by a development within Pente- costalism as well as in society in general. A few decades after its inception, the apocalyptic fervor of the Pentecostal revival seemed to wane. Jesus did not return as quickly as the Pentecostals had expected, and it appeared that they had to remain in the world (although certainly not of it) for some time. From the beginning the Swedish Pentecostals had a great social work in Stockholm, and “the lice-pastor” Lewi Pethrus was very much involved in this.36 But now putting band-aids on a bleeding society did not seem to be enough. A more significant change was needed. And Pethrus was, as always, pragmatic. Te political development in Europe after World War I made him aware of the difficulties of trying to lead a Christian life and, certainly, to spread the gospel
33
For Pethrus’ description of Christian political involvement as an attempt to save the secular world and thus as a response to Jesus’ commandment to love one’s neighbor, see Lewi Pethrus, Brytningstider–Segertider (Stockholm: Lewi Pethrus förlag, 1969), 63f, 69f.
34
Carl-Gustav Carlsson, Människan, samhället och Gud, 164.
35
Quoted in ibid., 165. See also 188-90. Compare this to Fahlgren, Predikantskap och försam- ling, 269f ,where Fahlgren ties this ambition to Pethrus’ promotion of “Christendom” already in the 1930s. Fahlgren argues that this shows an influence on Pethrus from German liberal theology (see also 253f).
36
Te story behind this expression is that the wife of a coworker regularly cleaned Pethrus’ clothes from lice when he returned from work among the poor. It is told in Lewi Pethrus, Medan du stjärnorna räknar (Stockholm: C.E. Fritzes Bokförlag, 1953), 221f. For the social work of the Swedish Pentecostal movement, see Arthur Sundstedt, Pingstväckelsen — och dess vidare utveck- ling (Stockholm: Normans förlag, 1971), 77-84, or Curt Karlsson, “Från fattigbjudning till sjukhuskyrka,” in Pingströrelsen. Verksamheter och särdrag under1900-talet, ed. Claes Waern (Öre- bro: Libris, 2007).
9
J. Halldorf / Pneuma 32 (2010) 354-368
363
in a nation hostile to Christianity. Nazi Germany and the communist Soviet Union provided dire warnings of the possible development of godless nations.
In Sweden the battle was not against blood-thirsty dictators but against the advancing secularization that was no less worrying to Pethrus. In his book Idag lek, imorgon tårar (“Play today, cry tomorrow”) from 1942, Pethrus wrote on topics such as the city night-life, immoral movies, juvenile crime, and eroti- cism. Te puritan, moralistic tone of the book might appear trifling, especially in light of the raging world war — why care about the length of skirts when the Nazis are establishing concentration camps all over Europe? Paradoxically, however, it can be read as Pethrus’ response to these very events: during World War II he became attentive to the strength of the destructive forces of secular- ization.37 It could, in the long run, destroy the Swedish people, Pethrus claimed.38 In other words: immoral movies signaled a godlessness that might lead to Nazism if no one tried to stop it.
To change the course of society you had to become involved with it, and this was what Pethrus now aimed to do. But as noted above, his involvement had the character of extending the Christian sphere. Christian activities should no longer be limited to the spiritual life of the congregation. Pethrus wanted to influence society by creating distinctively Christian institutions that were part of the civil society: a Christian culture, a culture of the people for the people, to counter the secularism that Pethrus believed was imposed on the Swedish people from the rulers above.39 Paradoxically, this project gained speed after the most significant setback of his career. Pethrus had struggled for years to convince the board of his congregation of the value of having their own newspaper. Eventually he gave up and decided to move to America, where he hoped to find new outlets for his energy.
Instead, this step threw Pethrus into a depression. After a few months in the USA he decided to return to Sweden, and the decision alone seemed to revital- ize and strengthen him.40 “He was not the same when he came back, as when he left” one of his coworkers later wrote, and added, “It was almost as if he had been renewed.”41 After his return, Pethrus’ activism reached new heights as he worked untiringly to create the institutions that were to form the pillars of his
37
Sahlberg, Pingströrelsen och tidningen Dagen, 72f, 88. Fahlgren, Predikantskap och försam- ling, 238f.
38
Carl-Gustav Carlsson, Människan, samhället och Gud, 145f.
39
Ibid., 147-50.
40
Halldorf, “Kriser, konflikter, kallelse.”
41
Adrian Holmberg, Filadelfiaförsamlingen i Sverige (Stockholm: Nybloms, 1980), 211.
10
364
J. Halldorf / Pneuma 32 (2010) 354-368
Christian culture: a newspaper, a radio, a bank, a folk high school, and a political party. In the world Pethrus set out to create, the faithful were not only Pentecostals in the church on Sundays — they could also express their Chris- tian identity when reading the morning paper, going to the bank, listening to the radio, being educated, and even when voting. Tey were invited to embody a Christian culture in the midst of a secular society.
Political Involvement
Te real breakthrough on this path, and the basis for the following institu- tions, was the founding of the daily newspaper Dagen in November 1945. Tis institution would also be the one that cost Pethrus the most in terms of money, sweat, and tears. After his return from America in 1941 Pethrus soon realized that the board of the Filadelfia Church would still not support his struggle to found a daily newspaper and that he would have to try to do it without them.
Tis meant that his newspaper project had to be situated outside the sphere of the local congregation, a pragmatic decision since his own would not back him, but also a significant deviation from his earlier principles according to which the local congregation was the nucleus of all other institutions. Pethrus felt forced to go private. He formed a newspaper board consisting of influen- tial Pentecostals — pastors and businessmen — personally close to him and who, of course, supported his project.42 Pethrus himself became the editor in- chief, a position he would hold for the rest of his life. Te financial circum- stances of the paper were extremely poor; there was just barely enough money to launch the newspaper, and after only a few weeks bankruptcy was threaten- ing. Hard work, thriftiness, and the aid of businessman Karl G. Ottosson saved the paper — many times.43
Just as he had hoped, Dagen gave Pethrus a voice in the public square. He could participate in the debates on his own terms and was able to defend both Pentecostals and Christians in general against attacks in the secular media. Tis came in handy when healing evangelists William Freeman and William Branham visited Sweden in 1950. Freeman in particular was heavily criticized in the secular media and defended by Pethrus in Dagen.44 But Pethrus wanted
42
Sahlberg, Pingströrelsen och tidningen Dagen, 95, 101-5.
43
Ibid., 107-12.
44
Halldorf, Lewis brev, 202-86. Djurfeldt, “Missionsintresset växte i förnyelseväckelsen,” 178-80. Due to this conflict Dagen increased its stock of subscribers by 60 percent. Sahlberg, Pingströrelsen och tidningen Dagen, 120.
11
J. Halldorf / Pneuma 32 (2010) 354-368
365
to do more than just defend the Christian faith. In 1954 he used Dagen as a platform for an offensive attack on “the enemies of Christianity” in society. Together with the Lutheran priest and Social Democrat Åke Zetterberg and the liberal congressman Axel Gustafsson, Pethrus targeted “the dirty literature” and the atheistic media while supporting the teaching of Christianity in schools.45
Pethrus’ direct political involvement meant a decisive break with the atti- tudes of the young Pethrus. Sahlberg has characterized the early Pentecostal movement in Sweden as “apolitical.”46 During these early years time and resources were exclusively directed inward in order to organize and build up this growing movement. Further, the belief that the return of Christ was imminent made attempts to achieve results by time-consuming means such as party politics less appealing. During these years Pethrus himself had explicitly warned the Pentecostals of getting involved in politics.47
Tis attitude began to change in the 1930s, when both Pethrus and Sven Lidman became involved in local political work. Tese were private involve- ments on a small scale, but from the 1940s onward Pethrus lead the Pentecos- tal movement toward a greater political awareness and involvement. Tis new direction met a significant opposition from within the movement, with many pastors criticizing Pethrus for taking such a course. Most significantly, Pethrus’ colleague and friend Sven Lidman turned against him in 1948, partly due to this development.48
But Pethrus would not be halted. Te political campaign initiated through Dagen in 1954 grew, and in the spring of 1955 Pethrus held his first public political meeting in Stockholm in order to promote Christianity and protest against the degrading forces in society. Te meeting attracted fifteen thousand people. Pethrus realized that the Pentecostals alone were unable to achieve what he now was working for, and he reached out ecumenically to create a united Christian front. In October 1955 he contacted Sven Danell, newly appointed bishop in the Swedish Lutheran Church. Together they gathered a
45
Magnus Wahlström, “Kampen mot avkristningen,” in Pingströrelsen. Händelser och utveck- ling under 1900-talet, ed. Claes Waern (Örebro: Libris, 2007), 384.
46
Sahlberg, Pingströrelsen och tidningen Dagen, 34f. Wahlström, “Kampen mot avkristningen,” 378.
47
Wahlström, “Kampen mot avkristningen,” 378f. At the same time, as Wahlström points out, even the early Pentecostal movement was political in the sense that it represented values that embraced the whole of life and that they also wanted to spread through society. Tis included social work and protests against the use of alcohol. In a wider sense of the word, the congrega- tions can be said to represent a politics in themselves.
48
Carlsson, Människan, samhället och Gud, 205-15. Halldorf, Lewis brev, 145-99, especially 149.
12
366
J. Halldorf / Pneuma 32 (2010) 354-368
dozen Christian members of parliament to discuss actions against the forces of secularization. In the spring of 1956 “Christian Societal Responsibility” (Kristet Samhällsansvar, KSA) was formed, with Danell as chairman and Pethrus as vice chairman. Tis was a political lobby group whose chief aim was to promote Christian candidates from across the party lines for the parlia- ment. Dagen became the primary voice of the new organization.49
In the end KSA reached very limited results, but this did not stop Pethrus from taking his political engagement further. In 1964 — at the age of eighty — he founded the political party the Christian Democratic Coalition (Kristen Demokratisk Samling, KDS; today the Christian Democrats). Again Pethrus became the vice chairman, while this time Lutheran priest Birger Ekstedt chaired the party. Te party needed 4 percent of the vote to be represented in parliament, but in the election of 1964 the numbers were a meager 1.8 per- cent.50 Te political work did pay off in other ways, however. In 1958 Ove Gransmoe, a Conservative and a member of the Filadelfia Church in Stock- holm, became the first Pentecostal in parliament, and in 1959 he was followed by Fridolf Wirmark from Örebro, who was a Social Democrat.
For the Christian Democrats the breakthrough finally came in 1991, when the party reached 7.1 percent and took part in a coalition to govern the coun- try. Now three Pentecostals, all sons or daughters of Pentecostal pastors, were included in the government: Inger Davidsson, Mats Odell, and the party chairman, Alf Svensson.51
Conclusion
Trough the creation of various institutions, Lewi Pethrus managed to build a distinct and strong Christian counterculture. Tis culture served as a frontier against the secularization of the Swedish society, and ultimately the goal was to transform the society as a whole. But it also acted as a haven for the faithful to inhabit — a Christian island in a secular ocean. Institutions function as the pillars of a culture, and it was by creating Christian alternatives to the secular institutions that Pethrus worked to establish his Christian counterculture. When the Swedish Pentecostals were banned from the state radio, they responded by starting their own radio station, thereby challenging the state’s radio monopoly. When the congregations had trouble borrowing money from
49
Sahlberg, Pingströrelsen och tidningen Dagen, 183f, 205-11. 50
Wahlström, “Kampen mot avkristningen,” 384-86. 51
Ibid., 387.
13
J. Halldorf / Pneuma 32 (2010) 354-368
367
the banks, Pethrus persuaded them to start their own “Pentecostal bank” (Allmänna Spar- och Kreditkassan). In 1944 Pethrus started the folk high school Kaggeholm, and toward the end of his life he suggested turning this into a university with its own divinity school.52 On top of this he founded a daily newspaper, a Christian political lobby group, and, finally, a political party. Te consequence of all this was that the Pentecostals could express and let their Christian identity be shaped not only by Sunday services, but also when reading the morning paper, going to school, listening to the radio, visit- ing the bank, and even voting.
Pethrus’ achievements in this area have few equivalents in Sweden. Until the year 2000 the Swedish Lutheran Church was a state church. Tanks to their position the Lutherans were given benefits despite the ongoing secularization. Consequently, there seems to have been less need within this denomination to engage in the creation of an alternative Christian culture. Pethrus’ work rather resembles the way the Roman Catholic Church has acted in countries in which it has lost its privileged position.
Two things make Pethrus’ work along these lines particularly interesting. First, the fact that he was the leader of a movement fundamentally critical toward institutions, yet his whole movement, including the creation of this counterculture, is based on institutions. Second, the fact that he became involved in politics. Te original skepticism toward political involvement was not a unique feature of the Swedish Pentecostal movement. Te same hesita- tion existed among the white branch of American Pentecostalism, and in the USA the breakthrough for evangelical involvement in politics came in the late 1970s, with the Pentecostals hopping on the bandwagon a decade or so later.
Pethrus received a lot of inspiration from America, but in this respect he seems to have been at least twenty-five years ahead.53 On a personal level this can be understood as a result of Pethrus’ pragmatism, his untiring activism, and, not least, his visionary ability. Culturally the Pentecostals in the USA may have been held back by the strong American tradition of separating religion and politics — whereas Sweden, in contrast, is by tradition a country in which church and state have previously cooperated in creating a good society. Also,
52
Göte Olingdahl, “Pingströrelsen och den teologiska högskoleutbildningen,” Tro & liv 67, nos. 2-4:(2008).
53
Pat Robertson’s ambition, as described by Amos Yong, to “re-evangelize a secular culture of decadence” is, for example, similar to that of Pethrus. Yong also characterizes Robertson as a Pentecostal. But Robertson’s rise on the political scene came only in the 1970s. See Amos Yong, In the Days of Caesar: Pentecostalism & Political Teology — Te Cadbury Lectures 2009 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2010), chapter 6.1.3 (forthcoming).
14
368
J. Halldorf / Pneuma 32 (2010) 354-368
since Sweden did not experience the split between fundamentalists and social gospel advocates, the Swedish Pentecostals retained their social involvement throughout the twentieth century. Tis involvement later served as a spring- board for political engagement.54 It might be that their story in this respect more resembles that of the black evangelical churches of America, who also were able to retain a strong social perspective and who became politically involved from the 1950s. Another aspect is the fact that the Swedish Pentecos- tal movement was more successful than its American counterparts in the years 1910-1950 and thus sooner reached a higher level of respectability in society.
55
Let me conclude by returning to the question in the opening paragraph. What is today, thirty-five years after his death, the heritage of the man who led the Swedish Pentecostal movement through seven decades? No one has taken over Lewi Pethrus’ leadership position, and younger Pentecostals might not even know his name. Most of his books are no longer in print, and many points that he himself emphasized are today no longer taught among the Pen- tecostals: Te radical congregationalism was abandoned in 2001 when a denomination was formed, and the teachings about the baptism in the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues have today assumed other than their traditional forms. But while these aspects of his fading heritage are all but vital, a thriving legacy emerges if we turn to the institutions he created. For the second time in history the Christian Democrats form part of the government, IBRA is broad- casting in one hundred languages worldwide, and the daily newspaper Dagen holds a strong position and is becoming more respected in broader circles. Trough one of the many ironies of history, it is in his institutions that the revivalist Lewi Pethrus is most alive today.
54
Toward the end of his life, Pethrus expressed that he saw continuity in his political engage- ment from his youthful involvement in the union up to the foundation of the Christian Demo- crats. In the same interview as this was stated, he described his social work among the poor, the homeless, and the alcoholic as the common denominator in everthing he had done. Lundgren, Lewi Pethrus i närbild, 51, 141.
55
Before World War II, and probably a while after as well, the Swedish Pentecostal movement viewed itself as superior to the American Pentecostal movements in terms of both doctrine and numbers. Halldorf, “Kriser, konflikter, kallelse.”
15
