Louis Dallière Apologist For Pentecostalism In France And Belgium, 1932 1939

Louis Dallière: in France Apologist and Belgium, David Bundy* Louis Dalliere (1897-1976) the Pentecostal Movement communion. A competitive, the fact that his training was him all the more unique among “revivals.” A. B. Paul (Germany) and C. an historiographical beginnings of the Pentecostal Reformed Church, 85 for Pentecostalism 1932-1939 Jonathan remained convinced variety of factors, was one of the most remarkable leaders of before World War II. When Pentecostalism came to France and Belgium, Dalli6re was a young intellectual in the Reformed Church of France working for spiritual renewal within that much published academician in his church, in philosophy as well as theology makes those early participants in the Pentecostal In this his only peers were, to my knowledge, L. Parker (Britain). Dalliere has become enigma. Although he was actively involved in the movement in two countries and wrote an analysis of British Pentecostalism, he was removed from Pentecostal (both written and oral) and his participation of many Pentecostal never at ease in the Protestant Church of France. Dalli6re first came into direct contact with the Pentecostal movement in 1932, and it was not until 1939 that he, and others, were forced, by a choose to remain in the Protestant Church or withdraw to form a new communion. This essay will examine Dalliere’s those intermediate to life and ministry during special attention to his apologetic movement. Status Quaestionis because he did not “come out” of the historiography minimalized. Because he theological positions, he was years, 1932-1939, with efforts on behalf of the Pentecostal of French and Belgian Pente- The status quaestionis can discussed the Hollenweger commitments of regulations of the Union de Pri?re. weger, correctly in my opinion The role of Dalliere in the development costalism has just begun to be investigated. be quite brief. Henri Schaerer and Rene de Richmond foundation of the Union de Prière (Prayer Union) centered at Charmes. I then developed briefly the ecumenical and and ecclesial Dalli6re after 1940 while describing in some detail the *David Bundy, Collection Professor of Christian Origins, more, Kentucky. Development Dallière is described by Hollen- as a charismatic pastor within the Librarian and Associate Asbury Theological Seminary, Wil- lHenri Schaerer and Rend de Richmond, Retour historique sur les origines de [‘Union de Priire, exposé le 24 ao0t 1969, Charmes sur Rhône. polycopy. 1 86 Protestantism (and Pentecostalism) Christentum.2 into the Dallière was men- in the study of French of Dalliere in Reformed Church. Much of this research was incorporated Spanish version of Enthusiastisches tioned briefly by George Stotts who chose to focus on the life and ministry of Douglas Scott.3 A major development was the presentation Thooren’s mgmoire on the Union de Prière presented at the Institut de Paris. It is particularly valuable for our discussion because the biographical data is gleaned from interviews with Dalli6re and his contemporaries. Without it our knowledge Catholique details of his life would be minimal.4 and commitments costal concerns of the biographical as by Pente- theologian and reintegrated shows, working for Church.5 F. Lovsky has contributed an analysis of Dalliere’s theological thought. This is a reflection on the significance of ecclesiological considerations in Dalliere’s theology. Lovsky argues that Dalliere cannot be understood as a Pentecostal, but as a “churchman.” This is certainly true of Dalli6re in his later period (after 1939). However, Lovsky frequently indicates, Dalli6re was heavily influenced and theological Tendenzen throughout his life. As shall be demonstrated below, by whatever definition of “Pentecostal” one would choose, Dalliere functioned as a Pentecostal apologist from 1932 to 1939. Even after 1939, he was never completely into the French Protestant Church. As Lovsky unwittingly he remained, “charismatic,” a Pastor and Prayer Union leader renewal of the Protestant Church from the fringes of that in Belgium.6 Like Hollenweger, describe to this Building on the work of these scholars, I have attempted to indicate his role and access his significance for the early Pentecostal movement I have used the term “charismatic” to Dallière.7 There has been some negative response “anachronism” but it appears accurately to hold in tension both the revivalist and ecclesial aspects of Dalliere’s agenda. A summary analysis Spittler (Grand Rapids: Wuppertal: pays Catholique 2Walter J. Hollenweger, “‘Touching’ and ‘Thinking’ the Spirit: Some Aspects of European Charismatics,” in Perspectives on the New Pentecostalism, ed. Russell P. Baker, 1976), 50-54. Walter J. ismo : Historia Hollenweger, El Pentecostal- y doctrinas (Buenas Aires: La Aurora, 1976), 226-229. This is a revision and translation of Enthusiastisches Christentum Rolf (Zurich: Zwingli Verlag; Brockhaus, 1969). 3George R. Stotts, The History of the Modern Pentecostal Movement in France (Ph.D. diss., North Texas State University, 1973), translated as Le Pentecôtisme au de Voltaire (Carponne: Viens et Vois, 1981). – 4Jean Thoorens, L’Union de Prière de Charmes slRh6ne, mémoire de (Institut Paris, n.d.[after 1976]). 5F. Lovsky, “La pensde thdologique du Pasteur Louis Dalliere.” Etudes 53 (1978),171-190. 6D. Bundy, “Pentecostalism in Belgium,” Pneuma 8 (1986), 41-56, esp. 44-45. 7D. Bundy, “Charismatic Renewal in Belgium: A Bibliographic Essay,” EPTA Bulletin 5 (1986), 76-95. theologiques et religieuses 2 87 both as to its function in in the early Finally, an extensive and philosophical work published of Dalli6re’s apologetic French Protestantism historiography of European Dalli6re’s theological before 1932 Charismatic Research has been proffered during the 1930’s and its significance Pentecostalism.8 analysis of was presented at the Fourth Conference on Pentecostal and in Europe, July 11-13, 1987, Gwatt, Switzer- land, and will be published in EPTA Bulletin.9 The present essay builds on that work. During the month of October appeared . to Dalli6re and French Pentecostal movements. sarily mean to as we shall see below, argued dated within the established to describe 1987, the essay of Daniel Brandt on Brandt gives considerable attention of Dalliere’s role in the Belgian and significance, to be “Pentecostal” did not neces- l Dalliere, less at ease with is an attempt Belgian Pentecostalism to the interpretation He minimizes Dalli6re’s arguing that Dalli6re was never a member of a Pentecostal assembly and that to thus understand a “man of the church” is incorrect. However, during the period under consideration, be a member of an assembly or other legally constituted subcultural entity outside the established Protestant churches, that the movement should be accommo- structures and that the leaders of the Pente- costal revivals should be patient with their colleagues the Anglo-Saxon revivalist structures. The use of the term “charismatic” Dalliere on the part of myself and Hollenweger to nuance the sociological analysis of the earlier “revival.” 12 which may be posed with profit. The issue with which this essay seeks to deal is the nature and scope of the apolo- behalf of the fledgling Pentecostal movement in France and Francophone Belgium. The socio-theological life which brought him into the orbit of the new movement, of the previous decade, will be discussed, concerns as they were expressed in France during There are many questions getic framed on the intellectual reflection will the “revivalist” the decade of the 1930’s. structures of Dalli6re’s including as One hopes that, eventually, personal notes al” will be found and that these The sources for this study are somewhat problematic. of the participants in the debates over “reviv- will describe personal and interpersonal ographiques 8D. Bundy, “Early European Scholarly Perspectives on Pentecostalism,” EPTA Bulletin 5 (1986), 4-23. 9D. Bundy, “The Making of a Pentecostal Theologian: The Writings of Louis Dalliere, 1922-1932,” EPTA Bulletin 7 (1988), 40-68. 10Daniel Brandt-Bessire, Considerations historiques, théologiques et bibli- concernant directement ou indirectement le mouvement de pentecôte francophone belge I (1928-1982) (unpublished polycopy, 1987). IConceming the early development of organizational structures of the Assem- bltes de Dieu en France, and an interpretation of their significance, see Stotts, PentecLitisnw, passim. , 12Hollenweger, Touching and Thinking, 50; Bundy, Pentecostalism, 44-45; Charismatic Renewal, 77-82; cfr. Brandt-Bessire, Considerations, 3-5. Bundy, 3 88 perspectives. In lieu of archival materials, the historian must rely on published materials. These are sufficiently candid to raise a caveat. Any reconstruction based on them must be tentative and ready to be informed by discoveries of papers or rare published materials. For example, the crucial periodical, Esprit et Vie (published at Paturages, Belgium) exists in only one complete run, that in the archives of the Protestant Church at Paturages. The equally vital Viens et Vois exists complete only in two private collections. Dalliere contributed to difficulties in analyzing his life by destroying personal papers before his death. The bibliography of French Protestant writers has never been adequately established and that of Dalli6re is no exception. As far as can be ascertained, his first article was published in 1923. The next decade was quite productive as twenty- seven scholarly articles, two short books, one book review, and a French translation of an article by Hocking were published.13 These were all “academic” in nature and circulated among the academics and informed clergy. From 1932 to 1939, Dalli6re wrote primarily for clerical and informed lay audiences. One hundred fourteen publications, including three books, have been identified (see Appendix). This corpus is used in this essay to suggest Dalliere’s perspective on the various issues. Louis Dalliere to 1932.14 Life Structures. It was in Chicago on July 4, 1897 that Dalli6re was bom, the son of an English Anglican mother and a French Catholic father. His father was employed there by a French bank. After the family’s return to France, Dalli6re was baptized as an Anglican in 1901 1 at Nice. There was apparently little family religious involvement until 1907 when the death of a younger sibling brought the family into contact with the Reformed Church and Dalli6re into Sunday School. 15 Shortly thereafter, in 1910, he had an initial conversion experience. Two years later he became an active member of the Reformed Church at St. Germain en Laye (near Paris).16 In 1915, Dalliere experienced a second conversion. Part of that experience was a sense of call to the pastoral ministry. The logical result was enrollment in the Protestant Faculty of Theology at Paris where he 13These works are listed in the appendix and discussed in the text of ‘ Bundy, Making. 14The biographical data regarding Dallière is based on Thoorens, L’Union, 63-74, et passim who interviewed Dallière. The interpretation is my own. Dalliirre’s own testimony was published as “Toi aussi, tu est de ces gens-la?” Esprit et vie 2.23 (avril 1934), 167-169. 15Dallière discussed the influence of his mother on his spiritual development in Toi aussi, 167-169, passim. 16Toi aussi, 167: “De mon pasteur, Edouard Rayroux,…j’avais requ trois choses: la certitude personnelle du pardon des pdchds par l’oeuvre de Jdsus A la croix, et la priisre au nom de Jesus; un amour du coeur pour la personne du Sauveur, une vision de l’oeuvre A faire en France pour ce Jdsus si peu connu aujourd’hui.” 4 89 studied from 1915-1921, receiving his theological formation from figures such as Eugene de Faye, Maurice Goguel and, especially, Wilfred Monod, 17 One year of this period he served in the military.. During 1921, he received his baccalaureat en theologie, began the serious study of philosophy and married Marie-Caroline Boegner, daughter of Pastor Alfred Boegner whose other daughter had married Gabriel Marcel. The relationship with his brother-in-law appears to have been rather influential in the development of Dalliere’s thought. It was Marcel whose articles in Revue de mgtaphysique et de morale brought him into contact with the thought of Josiah Royce, 18 Another in Revue philosophique de France et de l’étranger introduced Dallière to the philosophy of the American William E. Hocking, 19 In 1922, Dalliere and his wife moved to Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S.A., and Dalli6re spent the academic year studying at Harvard with Hocking. He returned to Paris for the year 1923-1924 where he finished a licentiate in theol- ogy2° and began to prepare for doctoral studies. The following year, on January 12,’ 1925, Dalliere was installed as pastor of a small village Protestant Church at Charmes sur Rhone in the Ard6che. The stress of the move to the rural pastorate, and the pressures of the academic program to which he remained committed combined to motivate Dalliere for several very productive years. He continued to work on a doctoral thesis about Hocking. He, as was his established custom, read widely, especially the work of Augustine, St. John of the Cross, John Wesley and Cardinal Newman, without neglecting either the reform oriented French Protestant writers W. Monod, G. Frommel and T. Fallot or his philosophical enquiry. These led him to reflect seriously on the nature of the church and ministry. The pressure of these tasks also crisis of spirituality:21 1 provoked a Dieu, qui est Dieu de la grace, permit aussi mes chutes. Difficultess au dehors, souillures au dedans. Je fus poussé à revenir au pied de la croix, 17Wilfred Monod was influential on Dalli6re during this period. His academic rigor, personal piety and social analysis became models for Dalli?re’s own. Later, the two volume study of the narrative history of prominent revivalists, “La Nue des Temoins”, 2 vols (Paris: Librairie Fischbacker, 1929, 1930), influenced Dalli?re’s of the heritage of Pentecostalism by causing him to revise his of understanding analysis Wesley. It also made him more aware of the diverse French revivalist heritage. 18Gabriel Marcel, “La M6taphysique de Josiah Royce,” Revue de métaphysiqU/! et de morale 25 (1918),337-388, 475-518; 26 (1919), 119-149, 211-246. l9Gabriel Marcel, “W. E. Hocking et la Dialectique de 1’instinct,” Revue Philosophique de France et del’étranger 88 (1919), 19-54. 20Dallière’s thesis for the licentiate was: Peut-on derwntre que l’apôtre Pierre est mort d Rome? Sujet d’un livre récent de H. Lietzmann, Mdmoire de Licence, Facultd Libre de Thdologie Protestante (Paris, 1922), 118 pps. On the basis of this work, Dalli6re “La mort de I’ap6tre Pierre et les rdcentes fouilles de Rome. A propos de published: l’ouvrage de Hans Lietzmann,” Revue d’histoire et de 3 philosophie religieuses (1923), 145-155. 21 Dallière, Toi aussi, 167-169. . 5 90 mais A y revenir avec une experience plus am8re du pdcht, ainsi qu’avec une connaissance plus grande de la vie chrdtienne. Au pied de la croix, tout ce que j’avais compris dans la tdte descendit dans la coeur. Je saisis non seulement ie pardon mais aussi la saintet6 et la communion qui sont donndes A la pure Foi. Ce fut une alliance £temelle, sur laquelle je risquai tout mon être…1ésus, qui m’avais retrouv6 et pleinement fut merveilleuse-ment fidtle. un Depuis ce jour-la le ministere fut conquis guidd pas a pas. Je n’dlais plus bon pasteur ni un mauvais pasteur, mais un serviteur de Jesus pour un Rweil venant de lui. A Decade of Scholarship. During the period 1923-1932, there appeased a steady stream of articles in French philosophical and Protes- tant theological journals. These reveal that Dalli6re’s trajectory as a scholar was remarkably sequential and coherent. After the thesis prepared for the Licentiate in Theology at Paris, Dalli6re published articles on mission (relating to the issues of indigenizing insights received from other cultures), on philosophy, and on the mysticism of St. John of the Cross.22 The latter two essays reflect a set of philo- sophical concerns which Dalliere would later make explicit. He was seeking an alternative to Kantian idealism which, as he understood it, undermined the Christian faith by relativizing experience. Thus when we first encounter Louis Dalliere through his writings, an interpretative framework was already established. He realized that the philosophical structures in which religious questions are posed become determinative for religious experience, theology, church life and mission. He was also convinced, by 1925, that the orientation identified as “Kantian” or “Kantian idealism” had had deleterious effects on the church. Hocking provided a corrective by affirming the trustworthiness of experiential data. In 1926, Dalliere began to explore themes focused around the larger issue of the nature of the church and the renewal of its zeal for ministry and mission. Unlike many renewalists, he did not look at the church as a self-contained, isolated unit. Instead, he struggled continuously with the larger cultural context of the period and its relationship with and influence upon the church. He began with an investigation of conver- sion experiences and their role in theological expression. As in the case of Paul, he argued, it is evident that the socio-cultural experiences of an individual determine the parameters of theological discussion. Thus when Paul’s theology is attacked, it is defended not as a system of . ideas, but as a personal structure.23 22Louis Dalliere, “Lettre d’Amdrique. Reflexions sur l’unitd de et les missions en Chine,” Foi et vie 26.7 I’Eglise (1 avril 1923), 357-367; idem, “M. George Santayana et la tradition philosophique de Harvard,” Foi et vie 23.20, Cahier B (1 dec. 1923), 373-388; idem. “Le mysticisme de Saint Jean de la Croix d’après M. Jean Baruzi,” Revue d’histoire et de philosophie religieuses 5 (1925), 478-485. 23Louis Dallière, “L’anti-judaisme dans la pensde paulinienne,” Revue de l’histoire des religions 93 (1926), 264-278. 6 91 He next dealt with the nature of worship24 and the reality of the community in which worship takes place.25 It is worship which consti- tutes the Christian community and gives it identity as well as empower- ment for ministry. For the individual united within the larger community through the eucharist,26 worship prevents personal and spiritual isola- tion. The act of prayer counteracts determinism.27 In each of these articles, he used philosophical structures adapted from Hocking to argue against “Kantian idealism.” Religion, argued Dalli6re, is nothing if it does not, at a given moment, take life and force in the center of the individual conscience. It is not only a system of beliefs or social structures. It is in fact the object of an experience which has as its theatre the psychological life of the individ- ual. The mystical experience is a valid experience and a valid base on which the individual may reflect concerning religious issues. The church (both diachronically and synchronically) is the context in which a Chris- tian structure is given to the experience. For Dalliere, the issue was the nature of religious authority and the most productive sequence for reflecting on Christian life: experience, metaphysics, dogma and com- prehension.28 He argued that in worship, especially the act of adoration, one returns to the level of experience, transcending the limitations and specificity of dogma and understanding. Adoration is also confirmatory of the reality of the transcendent object of faith since adoration cannot be counterfeited and is impossible unless there is an object worthy of adoration. It is not that God is experienced, but that God is in the experience.29 This led him to reflect on grace. The essay was published as part of a series on the “reality of the interior life.” Dalliere argued that one must guard against an apologetic which emphasizes the fruit of the spiritual life. Grace is not obtained by direct effort, but by seeking God as revealed in Christ. Seeking and encountering God results in an interior 24Louis Dalliere, “La fonction spirituelle du culte,” Foi et vie 29.5 (1 mars 1925), 230-237; idem, “La fonction spirituelle du culte: III. La Loi des intermediares,” Foi et vie 29.7 (1 avril 1926), 351-360. 25Louis Dalliere, “La fonction spirituelle du culte: IV. La Cirne et l’unitd de l’homme,” Foi et vie 29.8 (16 avril 1926), 408-414.. 26Louis Dalli6re, “La resalit6 de I’Eglise,” fiudes “théologiques et religieuses 2 ( 1927), 395-44 1 ; idem. “Qu’est-ce qu’une Eglise?” Foi et vie 30.9 (1 mai 1927), 478- 487 ; idem, “Cartes iddologiques,” Foi et vie 31.8 (16 avril 1928), 428-436.. 27Louis Dalli6re, “La phere et la culte,” Foi et vie 29.6 (16 mars 1926), 295-304. 28Louis Dalliere, “De 1’exp6rience ? la mdtaphysique,” Le Semeur 31.1 (nov. 1928), 1-6, suite dans, Le Semeur 31.2 (déc. 1928), 45-55 ; “De la m6taphysique au Le Semeur 31.3 (jan. 1929), 121-132; idem, “Dogma et intelligence,” Le Semeur 31.4 (fdv. 1929), 205-218. dogme,” 29Louis Dalliere, De 1’e-xpL4rience, 54 et passim. See also, idem. “La doctrine de la rddemption,” Foi et vie 32.10 (1 avril 1930). 481-495. 7 92 does not mean anarchy of life, but participation a balance of prayer and work, conjunction with this reflection of 1929 described above. liberty and releases powers of creativity in the conduct of life. Grace leads to a godly life characterized by in the Christian community, and a piety which excludes doubt about the reality of God.30 It is in that Dalliere had the religious experience devoted to renewal) work on Hocking as, him to be far less optimistic However, he affirmed the concept world as habite dans l’imparfait maintenant, and mission. It requires After 1929, he turned to to present six years of European experience led for ministry with An invitation to lecture at “Foi et vie” (Faith and Life, an association provided an opportunity in dialogue with his former mentor, he discussed issues related to human nature.31 Dalli6re’s about human nature than was Hocking. of Christian perfection. Through the mystical process one becomes more and more like God and acts in the a god without negating any aspect of humanity: “la perfection dans la mesure ou l’imparfait prend le parfait pour l’objet de son culte.”32 This has implications the Christian to be in a creative relationship the world and with other persons. an analysis of French Protestantism idealism-realism antithesis as a diagnostic tool and his understanding for renewal. He argued that the financial shortages at the parish level and the lack of growth were indications internal spiritual problems. Kantian idealism, by its reduction of religion to a sociological phenomenon, had resulted in worship becoming a between individual isolated persons and an abstract God-man-church as a paradigm private exchange God.33 Also, by overemphasizing using his of of theoretical complexity, insisting on groups, and negating had communicated points of distinction between various Christian central doctrines, clergy and Christian intellectuals that religious experience and the practice of spiritual (Gospel) virtues was no longer primary.34 of reflection, write on Augustine,35 Hocking36 and Marcel.37 Each of these, in his Throughout this period Dalliere continued to read and 30Louis Dalliere. “R6alitd de la vie interieure, III. L’état de grace,” Le Semeur 31.5-6 (mars-avril 1929), 358-398; also published as: L’-61at de Grace (Paris: Federa- tion des Etudiants Chr6tiens, 1929). 3lLo?s Dalliere, W.-E. Hocking. La refonte de la nature humaine (L,es Cahiers de Foi et Vie; Paris: Foi et Vie, n.d.[ 1929]), 71 ‘ pps. 32Dallière, W.-E. Hocking, 64. 33louis Dalliere, “L’tglise et la mission,” Le Semeur 32.3 (1930), 149-159. 34Louis Dalli6re, “Le protestantisme de nos jours et la doctrine,” Foi et vie n.s. 32.22 (15 nov. 1930), 1155-1170. 35Louis Dallière, “Notes sur une lecture de SL Augustin,” Foi et vie 30.6 (16 mars 1927), 312-322. 36Louis Dalli?re, W.-E. Hocking. Dalliere also published a French translation of: Willian Ernest Hocking, “Le droit legal A la libertd religieuse,” Le Monde non Chritien 3 (1932), 25-47, original idem. “The Ethical Basis Underlying the Legal 8 93 for re-establishing In addition to noted above, several other influences was his extensive reading literature ence of the Christian mystics. Thirdly, own way, provided support to Dalli6re’s struggle to articulate paradigms a vital effective church and ministry.38 the influence of Hocking and Marcel on Dalli6re, as are to be observed. Firstly, there in contemporary philosophy and theology. Secondly, Dalliere read widely in the Christian classics and devotional and appears to have been particularly The réveil was influences.39 Anglo-Saxon Reformed communitarian revivalism Mahan, Upham) Dieterlen. mentor the reveil, articulated interested in the experi- there was the influence of the ‘ within French Protestantism, the Darbyism, and (Finney, Moody, Torrey, Simpson, provided aspects of by the spirituality. It was reveil in French protestantism. a composite renewal movement shaped by a number of As Dalli6re lamented, many features of the reveil were of foreign origin and, although appropriated and German structures remained apparent. Methodism, (utopian) movement, Ameri- can Wesleyan/Holiness arrived from the west. German revivalism other traditions, especially through the influence of the Blumhardts and Christophe Although Dalli6re, and before him his Parisian Wilfred Monod, reacted against certain individualistic both were strongly influenced through expectations conditioned by this revivalist tradition that Dalliere and experienced spiritual renewal. These same philosophical and theological structures formed in Dalli6re a vision for the church and which prepared the way for acceptance as he understood it: experience based, expressed in commu- and concerned for mission. Analysis. acerbic, critique of the Kantian seduction of the Church and call for overturning those deleterious intellectual commitments a reaction. A reaction was certainly inevitable, but it came from what Christian experience costalism nity, ecumenical, Responses to the Dalliere physique,” contemporaines: of Pente- Dalli6re’s continuous, often finally provoked Right of Religious Liberty as Applied to Foreign Missions,” International Review of Missions 20 (1931), 493-511. 37Louis Dalliere, “Le renouveau rdaliste. Gabriel Marcel et son Journal mdta- Études theologiques et religieuses 5 (1930), 404-421; idem, Gabriel “Figures Marcel,” Foi et vie n.s. 32 (1931), 235-247. 38See Da1lière’s use of these figures in his, “L’Eglise comme fondement de la rdalitd humaine,” Le Semeur 33.4 (fdv. 1931), 202-222, and “Examen de l’idéa1isme,” Éludes theologiques et religieuses 6 {1931), 24-48; 137-160; 351-375. confrontation 39pn the Riveil, see: Robert Turnbull, Le Riveil et les tglises réformées, une dans les annies trente (M.A. Thesis, New York Univeristy, 1980); Jean-Paul Lienhard, Un aspect de l’oecumenisme: Le dialogue entre églises de multi- tude issues de la Rifomw et communautis de professants dites de de “dvangiliques” nies du R4fveil (Mdmoire licence, Université Strasbourg, 1967); Robert Mandrow, Histoire des protestants de France (Toulouse: n.p., passim; Samuel Mours, Un siicle en France 1815-1914, Tome 2, 1871-1914 (Collection “Essais sur 1’histoire du protestantisme franglais,” 2; Flavion: Editions de la librairie des dclaireurs unionistes, 1963), passim. d’ivangilisation 9 94 must have seemed to Dalli6re a surprising source. Criticism did not come from the philosophers, many of whom were also seeking an alter- native to Kant. It came first in an address delivered at a Pastor’s Conference (perhaps by Emile Durand) and published anonymously in the March-April, 1931, fascicle of Le Semeur, the journal of the Feder- ation of University Students.4? The author criticized Dalliere’s ecclesi- ology because he had not discussed and affirmed the “invisible church.” There was also a political dimension to the critique. Linking Dalli6re with Tommy Fallot, theoretician of the French version of “social gospel” and one of Dalli6re’s mentors, the author discounted their commitment to an “evangelical” gospel. The attack was personal and, without doubt, reflected the views of the leaders of the Federation on Dalliere’s work. A second article in the June, 1931, issue of Le Semeur addressed Dalli6re’s paradigm of philosophical and theological analysis.41 In condescending, mocking tones, Jacques Bois argued that the distinction “realism-idealism” -was untrue to the respective philosophical traditions, that it was merely a linguistic fad, that the terms as used by Dalli6re and others had no positive content, and that to suggest philosophical grounds for the. problems of the church is nonsensical. Furthermore, argued Bois, to insist on the “real” is to identify Christianity with a glorification of the physical world. Instead one should seek the “invisible” (for the author, ideal) because that which is “real” is only temporary. It is clear that Bois did not understand the philosophical discussion and that the editors had taken a position against Dalli6re’s vision of a renewed Church. Without doubt, that decision was condi- tioned, at least in part, by their assessment of Dalli6re’s support for and participation in the Pentecostal revivalism in the Ard6che. These activi- ties will be discussed below. Among his colleagues in the Ard6che region where Dalliere pastored, the discussion of renewal continued unabated. Dalli6re was recognized as an effective, articulate, informed renewalist and theoretician of the renewal efforts.42 This would be recognized in his appointment to Montpellier during the 1931-1932 academic year.43 However, the appointment was not renewed, primarily because of growing objections “Redlitt de l’Eglise,” Le Semeur 33.5 (mars-avril, 193 1), 111- 131. Note: this 40Anonymous, may be by Emile Durand. Bois, “‘ld6alisme’ et Christianisme,” Le Semeur 33.7 (juin 1931), 354- 363. 41 Jacques 42Hébert Roux, De la disunion vers la communion. Un itiniraire pastoral et oecuminique (Paris: Le Centurion, 1978). Cf. review by D. Bundy, EPTA Bulletin, 1 (1982), 34-37; and also, G. de Rougement, Source Cachie. Jacqueline Frommel, 1902-1945 (Neuchatel, Paris: Delachaux et Nièstle, 1951), and Henri Schaerer, “Les origines du mouvement charismatique dans 1’Eglise Rdformdc de France,” Revue Réformée 23,2 (1972), 83-90. 43Thoorens, L’Union de Prière, 36-37. 10 95 within the church to Dalliere identification with Pentecostalism and his desire to avoid conflict over the issue.44 Experience of Renewal. The date of the initial contact of Dallière with the Pentecostal movement cannot be ascertained. It was after the spiri- tual crisis of 1929 described above. His response was conditioned by reading Torrey.45 He wrote that he “received the Spirit” on May 28, 1930, “at a time when I did not know the existence of the Assemblies of God or of speaking in tongues.”46 In another document he affirmed “reception of the Spirit” on May 28, 1930 after a “search” of more than twenty months, but that he did not “pray in tongues” until January 13, 1932.47 The second date coincides with the mission of Douglas Scott to Privas. Scott had arrived in France on January 1, 1930.48 Samuel Delattre, pastor of the Eglise Reformee Libre de Privas, aware of the meetings conducted by Scott throughout France, Belgium and French-speaking Switzerland, invited Scott for a three week mission, January 3-20, 1932.49 The meetings were well attended. Jacqueline Frommel, a parti- cipant and pastor’s wife, noted:50 La chapelle etant bond6e, il a fallu ouvrir le temple, huit cents places assises, gens debout dans les couloirs. Cinquante personnes venues, pour la seconde fois, de Saint Fortunat, cinquante de St-Sauveur. Plusieurs pasteurs. L’un d’entre eux a reçu le bapteme du Saint-Esprit pendent cette mission, hier matin. 11 le recerchait depuis un an. Frommel was probably referring to the experience of Dalliere. With participants in the mission coming from a number of parishes in the 44Thoorens,, L7Jnion de Priire, 37. 45D?lir’re, Toi aussi, 168. 46Louis Dalli6re, Circulaire no 9, 1 juillet 1973, cited in Thoorens, L’Union de Prière. 24: “Je suis convaincu d’avoir reru le savais St-Esprit le 28 mai 1930, jour ob je ne pas qu’il existait des Assembl6es de Dieu et un parler en langues.” 47Louis Dalli6re, “Le Revdil et le Renouveau du St.-Esprit,” Retraite 1970, Union de Pri?re, Charmes, cited in Thoorens, L’Union de Priere. 31, note 14: “C’est le 13 janvier 1932 que j’ai reçu le don de prier en langues.” Closer to the event, Dalli?re, Toi aussi. 168, stated: “C’est ainsi que, au cours de l’ann£e 1931, il me fut donn6 de prier avec de faibles soeurs, qui se consacrerent totalement demander ? Dieu le rdveil de la contrde de 1’Ardi’che. A Noel, je reçus la certitude pour t’accomplissement de la que promesse du Saint-Esprit dtait imminent. Au ddbut de janvier 1932, M. Scott, que personne ici ne connaissait, fut Je m’agenouillai dans une reunion ou il envoyd dans une dglise voisine. imposait les mains, selon le Nouveau Testament, pour le bapteme du Saint-Esprit. Environ une semaine aprts, une nuit, etant seul au presbytere, …..(elipsis his) Il y a ici un myst6re sacrd.” 48Stotts, Le Penlecôtisme, 55, 67. 49F. Poulain, “La Campagne de M. et Mme. Scott i Privas,” Le Christianisme au XXe siicle 24 mars 1932, 151-152. Cf. Samuel Delattre, “Une campagne d’évangélisation à Privas,” L’Ami 6,2 (fw. 1932), 26. 50de Rougemont, Source Cachde, 108 (diary of Jacqueline Frommel). 11 96 region, interest was acute among the pastors, most of whom attended the already scheduled “Pastorale” (pastor’s conference). That day (the date is uncertain), a group of about fourteen pastors met to discuss the theological and pastoral implications of the Scott’s mission. Frommel reported the event51 . Nous dtions quatorze, dont quatre femmes de pasteurs. Trois heures durant, nous avons discute dans une atmosphere ouverte et comprdhen- sive, sur les premiers versets du chapitre II des Actes, sur toute la question de Pentecote, sur les dons et les manifestations du Saint-Esprit. Au cours de la seance du soir, nous avons abord6 le sujet de l’imposition des mains et de la gudrison. Dans toutes ces questions, les n’ont coll?gues point de parti pris negatif. Ils constatent les rdsultals. Dalli6re was among those present. He defended, apparently with conviction, Scott’s perspective.52 From Privas, Scott went to Nimes at the invitation of Pastor Bernard de Perrot. Here also, Dalliere supported Scott and added credibility to Scott’s message.53 Delattre then scheduled a second mission at Privas, where a number of pastors apparently chose sides, some for, but the majority against the Pentecostalists.54 The role of Dalliere as apologist and theologian ‘ for the new movement was well established by this time.55 However, the second visit of Scott to Nimes, April 22 to May 1, 1932 crystalized the opposition to his revivalist techniques and theological Tendenzen. On April 25, about 150 pastors, professors and students from throughout southern France gathered at Nimes. The “Pentecostal renewal” was the primary concern. Dalli6re and Scott presented the Pentecostal theological arguments, the former defending the revival on the basis of its biblical orientation and congruence with the practices of Finney, Moody and Torrey.56 Dalliere’s lecture was published, with revisions, in November 1932,57 as well as his reflections on the rela- . ‘ 51de Rougemont, Source Cachée. 108 (diary of Jacqueline Frommel). 52Samuel Delattre, “A propos de la Mission Scott A Privas,” L’Ami 6.3 (mar. 1932), 38. 53C. Saussine, “Mission de M. Scott A Nimes,” Viens et vois 1.2 (mai 1932), 19. Cf. S totts, Le Pentec6tisme, 77. 54F. Poulain, “La deuxiirme campagne de rdveil A Privas,” Viens et vois 1.10 (jan. 1933), 200-201. See also the account 111-112. by Jacqueline Frommel in, de Rougemont, Source Cachie, 55Roux, De la desunion, 53-56, et passim. 56C. Saussine, “M. Scott A Nimes,” Le Christianisme au XXe siède 19 mai 1932, 264; idem. “Mission de M. Scott i Nimes,” Viens et vois 1.2 (mai 1932), 19; anon. “La Chronique de Nimes,” Le Christianisme au XXe siicle 9 juin 1932, 313. For an assessment of the significance of this “pastorale,” see Turnbull, Le Réveil. 45-47, 56. 57Louis Dalli?re, “Le mouvement de Pentec3te,” Le Semeur 35.1 (1 nov. 1932), 1-19. 12 97 tionship between revivals and spiritual experiences.58 Despite his efforts, the consensus of the reports was that the Pentecostal cause fared badly in the discussions and in the subsequent battles in the religious press. Especially hostile were those associated with the already estab- lished renewalist effort, Brigade de la Dr6me.59 Presenting a Vision; Dalliere as Apologist, Summer and Fall, 1932 Dalli6re found himself a peripatetic apologist for the nascent Pente- costal movement, in spite of himself. Earlier, he had given thought to the intellectual aspects of contemporary Christian apologetics, but he was not prepared for the intense personal and political struggles During the summer of 1932, Dalli6re and his wife went to England where two weeks were spent examining the Pentecostal revival. There they met George Jeffreys through whose ministry Marie-Caroline Dalliere also met with Donald . Dalliere apparently experienced healing.61 Gee whose book, Concerning Spiritual Gifts, he translated into French and who he invited to Montpellier for a colloquium at the Faculty of Theology.62 Three publications appeared immediately after this trip: (1) an account of the Pentecostal revival in Britain in Viens et vois; (2) the final version of the Nimes lecture which appeared in Le Semeur (in which he had been attacked for his philosophical views; and (3) a small book.63 These represented Dalliere’s attempt to present the . . 58Louis Dalliere, “Reveils et experiences spirituelles,” Christianisme au XXe siecle 23 juin 1932, 348-349; suite, 30 juin 1932, 358-359; 59nearly every fascicle of French Protestant of the popular periodicals the period 1932-1936 contains some critique Pentecostal movement. published during A number of anti-Pentecostal books and tracts were also published. No one has, to this this point, compiled bibliography. It could provide the basis for an excellent study in period belletristics. 60LOuis Dalli?re, “La Tiche de I’apologdtique,” Foi et vie 31.14 (1 aout 1928), 782-793. This review article of Marc Boegner,Le Christianisme et le monde moderne. Conferences données d Reformee de Passy, 2nd ed. (Paris: Fischbacher, 1928) was part of Dalli?re’s reflection on I’Église the nature of the church and the significance of Fallot for discussions of the church’s response to social problems. Dalli6re would want to argue contra Boegner that the between the church and the world is more than a lack of ability to communicate the gap Gospel in winsome terms, but that it is caused by the philosophical and theological structures of the twentieth century church. ‘ 6lThoorens, Union de Priere, 40. See Marie Dallière’s review: “Rayons de son ! gueri- (Healing Rays, un volume par George Jeffreys),” Esprit et Vie 2.22 (mars 1934), 160-161. 62Donald Gee, Les dons spirituelles introd. et trad. L. Dallière (n.p.: Viens et Vois, 1932). Note: Translation of Concerning Spiritual Gifts (London: Assemblies of God Publishing House, 1928). See Thoorens, L’Union de Priere. 36. 63Louis Dalliirre,”Quelques impressions d’un voyage en Angleterre,” Viens et vois 1.7 (oct. 1932), 134-135; idem, “Le mouvement de Pentecõte:’ Le Semeur 35.1 (1 nov. 1932), 1-19; idem. D’Aplombe sur la Parole de Dieu. Courte étude sur le ‘ 13 98 theological and ecclesiological The Pentecostal throughout French Protestantism, costal movement, the orthodoxy of “Baptism questions. vision of the Pentecostal movement. Movement.64 The issues at Nimes and, indeed focused on the origins of the Pente- of the new movement, and the nature to address these roots. in the Holy Spirit.” Dalli6re attempted He began with a review of historical and theological . Dalliere traced the tradition from Finney, through Moody (who he notes in the Holy Spirit, but appeared to have had an rarely spoke of Baptism “analogous” experience), Torrey particularly insightful), admirable Protestant mystics”). experiences 1900-1905, in the anticipation revival. (whose theological Murray (“one work he found of our most by making spread to Europe, and his influence on and Andrew A. B. Simpson contributed healing central to Christian theology. Dalliere found similar revivalistic Welsh and Madagascar revivals. During the period of revival in the U.S.A. culminated in the Los Angeles “Pentecostal” Dalliere then narrated the story Pentecostalism’s beginning with T. B. Barratt’s visit to the U.S.A., Lewi Pethrus (whose testimony is quoted)65 and Anna Larssen-Bjorner transition from actress to pastor in Copenhagen. He with England, describing briefly a number of influential Smith Wigglesworth, who made the continues persons: Donald Gee, George Jeffreys. He acknowledges Stephen Jeffreys, and the difficulties of the Pentecostal after movement in Germany but is obviously unaware of developments War I. He notes the revival has spread throughout the world but not exclusively, through the instrumentality of British or World primarily, American evangelists. Turning to theology, he states that the Pentecostal movement is that since it is trinitarian, death, bodily resurrection, He reasoned be considered orthodox.67 (eucharist continuation of ministries according “fonci6r-ement une forme orthodoxe du protestantisme.”66 affirms the incarnation, Christ’s expiatory the Second Coming, adheres to the necessity of conversion and has rejected instantaneous entire sanctification, it is to Pentecostalism and baptism). Baptism is only to Ephesians professes two sacraments for believers. It argues for the 4. Because of adher- Réveil de Pentecôte (Valence: Imprimerie Charpin et Reyne, 1932). 64Dalli£re, Le mouvement de penlecôte, 1-19. 65Dalli?re does not indicate the sources of the testimonies quoted or of the histor- ical data provided. Pethrus, in the text cited here (pp. 2-4), indicated he was stimu- lated to seek the Baptism in the Holy Spirit by reading Finney’s biography and the works of A. J. Gordon. 66Dalli£re, Le mouvement de pentecôte. 6. 67DaUi6re, Le mouvement de pentecôte. 6: “Le mouvement de Pentecôte a rejetd avec raison la doctrine non scripturaire de la sanctification totale et instaneande. 11 donc la sanctification par la foi, donnde par une communion de plus en plus intime avec le Christ glorifid, mais qui n’exclut jamais, ni la possibilitd thdorique d’une chute, ni la necessitk constante de veiller et de prier.” preche 14 99 considering the movement ence to these cardinal points of Christian theology, there is for heretical or sectarian. of the that for the doctrine, literature of the Old Testament, being filled with the Spirit. costal theology, that one affirms The remainder of the essay (pp. 8-19) is devoted to a presentation Pentecostal doctrine of “Baptism in the Holy Spirit.” Dalli6re argues the Acts Pentecost narrative is only part of the biblical foundation a foundation which includes the prophetic and historical and the Gospel allusions to Christ’s He notes the argument used against Pente- receives the Holy Spirit at conversion, but that the Pentecostal perspective, rooted in Torrey, Finney and the Catholic mystical tradition, is different. There is a second experience available which gives believers the same communion with God and the Pentecost. during deeper relationship study considered at same power to convert souls as was available to the 120 assembled Conversion is the beginning of a period of preparation, which the baptized person grows in grace and readiness for a with God. This growth occurs through prayer, Bible and participation in worship. At the moment of “Baptism in the Holy Spirit,” speaking in tongues is the “general rule” but not required. The testimony of Donald Gee is cited (pp. 11-13) as illustrative of the experience of tongues but that Finney’s “waves of electricity” and Torrey’s “visions” served similar functions in their spirituality. The results of this for the believer are (1) “perfect joy in God;”68 (2) a new impulsion for growth in grace or sanctification Dalliere suggests experience (3) gifts of the Spirit. Dalliere summarized offered two observations: his discussion (1) the gift is a permanent laying on of hands. but passionate monograph (fruit of the Spirit); and of the “gifts of the Spirit” and of tongues is not identical with the in prayer; (2) “the gift of healing of healing, especially by the there were shifts in the discus- central. The last chapter, evidence presented, suggests animated controversy. sign of tongues, the gift being a facility and “69 supernatural faculty Squarely on the Word. D’Aplorrcbe sur la Parole de Dieu is a small in which Dalliere once again articulates his vision for the Pentecostal revival. Many of the issues are identical to those of the Nimes address. However, sion during the intervening months. The issue of “sect” had become with its call to action on the basis of the the polarization of the increasingly 68This “joy” is described in terms of spiritual communion or assimilation into God. It is the religious vision of Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Gregory of and Nyssa, Wesley. 69Dalli?re, Le mouvement de pentecôte, 18: “De meme le don des guerisons est une facultd surnaturelle et permanente de guerir, specialement par 1’imposition des mains. Ce don sert en particulier ? 1’6vangdliste qui confirme sa parole en ou pays paien athde par les guerisons…. Ce don ne doit pas etre confondu avec la pri?re pour la guerison. 15 100 or revival” tion of from a sectarian activity: (1) of the “sect renewal.7° Drawing on his earlier presenta- Nimes. He expands a revival The volume begins with a discussion of the implications issue for spiritual and ecclesial Finney’s analysis of revivals, Dalli6re summarizes the pluriform revivalist heritages delivered at the analysis here by suggesting three criteria for distinguishing a revival is a movement of the Church and for the Church, a sect is a movement outside the Church and against the attention to the fundamental doctrines of the Church, a sect focuses on a specific point of doctrine; and, (3) a revival within Christianity, a sect the opposite. If a sect (like Darbyism, Adventism, etc.) then “it Church; (2) a revival draws produces a current of love Pentecostalism becomes is indefensible. “71 Pentecostalism is not to be understood as a one doctrine movement. He affirms, that according to the criteria suggested, Pentecostalism is a revival. 72 The Person and ‘work of He cites a note by Frank origins.73 Noting the his book oriented “official history” phenomena in India, Dalliere then takes up the issue of Pentecostal influence of the Welsh revival and of R. A. Torrey, especially of the Holy Spirit,74 he observes that because revivalist history often is lost in institutionally the origins and predecessors the movement are difficult to ascertain. Bartleman published in the Elim Evangel about Azusa Street.75 He notes that certain Pentecostal are not explained by Bartleman’s oft repeated and argues that the influence of A. B. Simpson On the basis of these observations, three points: because the Church has forgotten unlike other revival movements, China and Madagascar historiographical effort, has been overlooked.76 (1) Any apparent history; (2) Pentecostalism, have a founder, as is demonstrated development he makes strangeness of supernatural gifts is its own biblical and revivalistic does not by its simultaneous and unrelated in many areas of the world; and (3) the revival should not be rejected because of its origins outside Europe and among the lower classes 70Dallière. D’Aplombe sur la Parole de Dieu, 1-9. 71 Dallière. D’Aplom6e sur la Parole de Dieu, 8-9: “En effet, si ce mouvement constitue purement et simplement une nouvelle secte, il est inddfendable; et c’est bien ce que l’on veut dire quand on le baptise du nom barbare de pefliecdtisme.” 72Dalliere, D’Aplombe sur la Parole de Dieu, 9. 73Dalliere, D’Aolombe sur la Parole de Dieu, 10-15. 74R. A. Torrey, The Person and Work of the Holy Spirit (New York: Fleming Revell, 1910). 75Dalli6re, D’Aplombe sur la Parole de Dieu, 11-12. 77Dallière. D’Aplombe sur la Parole grlces pldnitude 76Dalli6re, D’Aplombe sur la Parole de Dieu, 12. de Dieu, 12-15: “Les gens les plus pauvres et les moins influents ont, de tous temps, etc les premiers A rdcevoir les plus chrdtiennes. II a Dieu grandes toujour plu A qui choisit les choses faibles pour confon- dre les fortes de faire entrer les petits et les ignorants un peu avant les autres, dans la de ses graces. 16 expansion focuses almost exclusively Tidings and Belgium detail the “headquarters” the profoundly joyful George Jeffreys, and pleased be accompanied noted that Jeffreys, fruits of the Spirit) into the doctrine generations. He agrees that 101 Dalliere time to the which draws heavily on and mission.? During his visit he was impressed by and that the was He lamented that, in the was used to designate a second paradigm revivalists of earlier As in the Nimes address, Dalli6re devotes considerable of the Pentecostal movement. For this material, on Europe, Stanley Frodsharn,78 unspecified articles by Donald Gee in Redemption and The Elim Evangel, as well as his own experience in France Dalliere’s recurring observation is of the close relationship between the life of the local church, evangelization Dalliere focuses on the Elim movement in England.8? He describes in and Bible School in Clapham, London, as well as the worship in the Tabernacle. and contented worship. He was also intrigued by that he had understood that Pentecostal graces should by firm biblical discipline, “latter rain” was given that souls might be added to the Church. He as an evangelist a leader within his church, “man of action more than a theoretician.” 81 French churches, the title, “evangelist,” class pastor with no theological training. The practical structures of the revival (the realization of the gifts and draw their force from the “Four Square Gospel:” Jesus saves, Jesus heals, Jesus baptizes in the Holy Spirit and Jesus is coming soon.82 Dalliere ties each aspect of this theological of the historic church and notes especially the congru- ence with the thought and practice of Anglo-Saxon the theological expressions of the movement are lacking in intellectual sophistication, vital foci of the Christian tradition. The tenor of the chapter on “Baptism in the Spirit” is more defensive than the discussion in the Nimes address.83 It is evident that the analysis of the Brigade de la Ðrôme, borrowed from the German Gemeinschafts- which argued that “gifts and fruits” were for first century C. E. Christians only and that current expressions were counterfeits and some impression Against this position, Dalliere argues that the biblical texts in time or space. Texts which would appear to describe the cessation of gifts need to be read in their biblical context. Nor is sanctification to be considered bewegung, demonic, was making Church. present no frontier but argues that they do express on the French Protestant a fulfillment of the biblical Stanley Publishing House, 1928). Frodsham, With Signs Following, 2nd ed. (Springfield: Gospel ‘ 79Cf. Dalliirre’s concern for French Protestantism expressed in Ltglise et la mission and Le Protestantisme de nos jours cited above. 8°Dalli£re, D’Aplombe sur la Parole de Dieu, 21-31. 8lDalliirre, D’Aplombe sur la Parole de Dieu, 25. 82Dalli6re, D’Aplombe sur la Parole de Dieu, 32-40: 83Dalli6re, D’Aplombe sur la Parole de Dieu, 4147. ‘ 17 102 “Pentecost” paradigm. Furthermore, he asserts, charges of innovation or heresy by opponents are untenable. One need only examine the lives of Augustine, Theresa of Avila, Vincent de Paul, and Pascal. He concludes that, “the existence of the Pentecostal revival raises serious problems to which the leaders of the Christian churches must provide solutions of truth and wisdom.”84 Dalli6re noted that whether one likes it or not, a Pentecostal movement exists in France made up primarily of converts from Catholicism, free thought and communism. These conversions, he argued, should be celebrated. Furthermore, many in the Protestant churches are being influenced by the movement, in both theology and worship. The questions raised by the Pentecostals concerning “baptism in the Holy Spirit” are not going to disappear. As well the monopoly on pastoral services is broken and laypersons will have increasing choices. The moral and spiritual laxity of the clergy must be transformed and a charismatic ministry encouraged. The ecumenical problem must also be faced: are persons with a “Pentecostal” experience to be permitted to remain in the Church or will the response of the Church require another organization?85 Dalli6re’s vision for the Pentecostal movement is that it be a revival within the Church, that it be theologically orthodox, mission oriented and ecumenical. He found in his first contacts with the movement the matrix which he had desired for in his decade of research on the “ideal” Christian church. Defining the New Reality, 1933-1939 Throughout the period from 1933 until March 1939, Dalli6re labored to express in concrete terms the nature of the new movement, its new reality. He was fighting against two tendencies, that of the French Protestant Churches to draw theological and ecclesiological boundaries which would exclude the revival and that of the English band leader turned evangelist, Douglas Scott, who wanted to establish a new denomination on the English and American models.86 Dalli6re wanted the revival to expand and energize the churches. It was a very busy period of writing, negotiation, evangelism, and pastoral work. Dalliere had earlier decided to cease work on his dissertation at Paris, commit his life to pastoral ministry, adopt a child and cease writing for the academic world.87 His writing, published exclusively in Esprit et Vie. was directed at an informed lay audience. Let us now examine that work as it progressed year by year. 84DaJIière, D’Aplombe sur la Parole de Dieu, 48: “L’6xistence du R6veil de Pentsc3te souleve de graves probl8mes auxquels les dirigents des dglises chretiennes se doivent de donner des solutions de veritd et de sagesse.” 85Dallière, D’Aplombe sur la Parole de Dieu, 48-54. , 860n Scott, see Stotts, Le Pentecotisme. 87Bundy, Making, passim; Thoorens, L’Union de Prière, 37. 18 inevitable Pentecostal revival 103 meetings. He started Esprit et Vie 1933. When Dalli6re first came into contact with Henri Theophile de Worm, Protestant Pastor at Paturages, Belgium, is uncertain.88 It was that they should meet, both being heavily involved in the and both having lifelong commitments to the Protes- tant Church. De Worm had edited a regional renewalist periodical Son de nos Cloches (1929-1932). This cooperative venture failed because of De Worm’s reporting of Pentecostal in May 1932. Dalli6re’s first contribution was an article on the “laying on of hands” in March 1933.89 The second contribution, the “total gospel” presented the theological an essay on concerns of the Pentecostal issue in met at the revival.9? . Pentecostalism increasingly Protestant circles. A synod Paris-Auteuil, June 20-23, 1933, reports of earlier regional costalism. decision of for local parishes to encourage Dalliere responded nature of the church.92 became a political/theological of the Eglise Reformee Evang6lique to consider the issue and to hear synods which had also dealt with Pente- Despite the efforts of Pastor L. Teulon and Dalliere, the synod was negative. The decision mentioned the need more spiritual life but warned to guard 1 against anything which might produce division or become sectarian.91 with articles on the revival, sanctification and the “Revival” argued Dalli6re is implicit in the solution to the inevitable “formal- ism” of conversion, sanctification, concept “new birth” and is the only an established tradition. “Revival is a spiritual matrix including in the Holy Spirit and participation baptism (juin 1933), 880n De Worm, see Verlinden, Histoire. 136-167; Bundy, Pentecostalism, 45-46. 89Louis Dalli?re, “L’imposition des mains,” Esprit et Vie 2.11 (mars 1933), 55-58. 90Louis Dalliere, “Un ?vangile total,” Esprit et Vie 2.13 (mai 1933), 72-73; 2.14 79-81. Le Riveil, 62. The text of “Ddcision XXXVIII du Synode Nationale des 9 ITumbull, tglises Reformdes tvangdliques, Paris-Auteuil 1933, au sujet des Mouvements de Pentecote et d’Oxford” is as follows: plus Le Synode, frappe de la gravitd exceptionnelle des ou nous vivons, demande aux tglises de travailler de tout leur temps pouvoir A devenir des foyers de en plus lumineux de vie spirituelle; .. Et convaincu qu’elles ne peuvent trouver cette vie que dans la communion avec le Christ, I’obéissance à la Parole de Dieu et la fidelitd A leur passd, leur rdcommande de se garder de tout ce qui risquerait de donner naissance en elles i? des divisions et A des mouvements sectaires qui, détruisant leurs forces et ruinant leur activite, les rendraient incapables de remplir leur mission dans le monde. 92Louis DaI1ière, “Pourquoi le R6veil?” Esprit et Vie 2.16 (aoot 1933), 95-97; 2.18 (oct. 1933), 111-112; idem. “La sanctification,” Esprit et Vie 2.17 (sept 1933), 103-104; idem. “L ‘Église de Jésus Christ,” Esprit et Vie 2.19 (nov. 1933), 119-120; idem, “La sanctification et I’argent,” Esprit et Vie 2.19 (nov. 1933), 127. 19 104 in a “church of the revival.”93 In the article on sanctification, Dalliere argued against any absolutizing of the “sanctified life” as had happened in the Anglo-Saxon revivals, while insisting on its centrality in the Christian life.94 In the essay on the church, Dalli6re restated previously expressed concerns about the church and presented a vision for what a “church of the revival” might be:95 1. Les membres de 1’6glise sont unis par t’amour de Jesus. Ils obeissent A ses commandements pour se rapprocher les uns des autres. se r6ciproquement, s’encourager en commun i I’amour ceux pardonner connaissent pour qui ne pas encore J6sus. 2. Ils se fortifient par le culte d’adoration (et de Sainte-C?ne), les groupes d’dtude biblique, les Ils reunions de prière. prdparent des reunions d’dvangdlisation et d’appel. 3. Dans I’