Meanwhile, where argument had failed to bring unity, change in individuals was having some effect. The beginnings noted by Hamilton at Høsbjør continued at all levels. Professor Mowinckel, the leading Norwegian Old Testament scholar of the day, was seen by conservatives as the very incarnation of the Devil, and his books always aggravated dissension within the Church. Primarily a man of science, a sincere seeker after truth wherever it should lead him, he had little vital personal faith. He saw that faith at work in the people at Høsbjør, and decided that he wanted the 'pearl of great price'. With characteristic honesty, he realised that he would not find it unless he was ready to give up everything for it; and he had two great loves, his new country house and the book which, after years of work, he had just finished. In the end he told God that he was willing to give them up if God asked it. Immediately, the thought came: 'Keep the house; burn the book.' He did so. No one knows exactly what the book contained because, having had orders to destroy it, he felt he should not talk of it: but there can be no doubt that it would have increased the disunity of the Church.29 From this time, the fundamentalists changed their attitude towards Mowinckel.

Speaking at an Oxford Group meeting in Copenhagen on 31 March 1935, Bishop Berggrav explained: 'I must admit that I did not entirely approve of the methods of the Oxford Group to begin with, but when I saw how God had used it in Norway, especially in the life of my own family, I had to change my whole attitude. What is now happening in Norway is the biggest spiritual movement since the Reformation.'*

(* Kristeligt Dagblad, 2 April 1935. The last sentence is omitted from the paper's account of the Bishop's speech in the morning session, but is in contemporary typescripts of his speech and was referred to during a meeting later in the day by the chairman, Kenaston Twitchell, reported in the same article.)

In the following year Berggrav, in a long article in Kirke og Kultur, noted some 'obvious facts' about changes in Norwegian life during the preceding year: '1. A new atmosphere has been born, a change in the whole situation of the spiritual life of the country. Not only is there more room for the eternal, there is also a greater longing for it... 2. God's name is mentioned not in a new way, but by new people… Now unexpected people have begun to proclaim God's power in their lives. God has become alive. 3. The whole question has changed from being secret and impersonal to becoming open and personal. There has been a "Nicodemus period" with regard to the deepest inner questions. Now they are discussed on the streets...*

(* Writing in Kirke og Kultur (7 August 1984) on The Oxford Group in Retrospect after 50 Years, Stephan Tschudi, former Rector of The Practical Theological Seminary of Oslo University, recalled: 'Many of those gripped had very little knowledge of Christianity. But they recognised themselves in the gospel accounts of men and women who followed the Master - without any dogma. And they looked with astonishment at people who seemed to know all about Christianity without it having any visible effect on their lives.')

223