Sacred Reading (Lectio Divina)

As we have seen in the last two Think on These Things articles, “Spiritual formation is viewed by a growing number of evangelicals as an ancient ministry of the church, concerned with the ‘forming’ or ‘shaping’ of a believer’s character and actions into the likeness of Christ.” [1]   Spiritual formation is distinguished from biblical discipleship primarily by its source of authority and its methodology.  On the one hand, discipleship as defined by the Bible turns to the Word of God as the final and ultimate authority over all matters of life and godliness.  This means that if one truly desires to be a follower of Jesus Christ, he will turn to the inspired Scriptures to determine both truth and how to “observe all that I [Christ] commanded you” (Matt 28:20).  Spiritual formation pays lip-service to Scripture but the true source behind the movement is the extrabiblical teachings and experiences of those in the past who supposedly have discovered the “secret” of deeper intimacy with God. Bruce Demarest says it this way: “For our help, [in the context of growth in the Spirit] we can turn to our Christian past – to men and women who understood how the soul finds satisfaction as we grow in God, and how His Spirit finds a more ready home in us.” [2]   Richard Foster and Gayle Beebe concur: “Through their reflections, the great saints witness to the work of the Holy Spirit and, when we study them, guide our spiritual life as well.” [3]   While Scripture is referenced by spiritual formation leaders, it is Scripture filtered through the experiences and insights of the “spiritual masters,” as they are often called, that set the pace in spiritual formation. 

From the above comments, and those of others with similar views, we clearly see that spiritual formation is different from the typical understanding of discipleship.  Professor Demarest informs us that the difference lies not only in divergent authoritative sources but also in methodology and technique.  He declares that some past saints have discovered “certain spiritual practices were highly effective in nurturing the inner man.  These practices came to be known as the art and ministry of spiritual formation, a form of discipleship we are rediscovering today.” [4]   These practices are usually called “spiritual disciplines” and are the supposed means by which we become more like Christ. There are dozens of these disciplines, drawn almost entirely from Roman Catholic mystics and contemplatives throughout church history, which are being touted as essential to our spiritual life; however, the two foundational disciplines as recognized by all spiritual formation adherents, are prayer and Scripture.  

No evangelical would ever question the value of prayer and the Word in the process of sanctification.  But, as we are seeing, when the spiritual formation devotees speak of these disciplines they mean something entirely different from what Scripture does.  Prayer to those promoting spiritual formation does not reference biblical prayer but contemplative prayer which we explained in our last paper.  Similarly, when spiritual formation enthusiasts promote the reading of the Bible they mean something very unlike the traditional actions of reading, studying and applying of the Word of God to our lives.  Foster agrees that “reading and studying and memorizing and meditating upon Scripture have always been the foundation of the Christian Disciplines.  All of the Disciplines are built upon Scripture. Our practice of the Spiritual Disciplines is kept on course by our immersion in Scripture.” [5]   I have no argument with Foster’s comment about the Word; it is what follows that is problematic.  The breakdown comes in a seemingly innocent remark that completes Foster’s quote, “So we must consider how we can ourselves come to the Bible.” [6] It is how we approach the Bible, what we believe is its purpose, and how we understand its interpretation that marks the distinction between biblical discipleship’s and spiritual formation’s use of Scripture.    Continue at Gary Gilley

IMAGE

Spiritual Formation

Almost everyone on the cutting edge of Christianity is talking about spiritual formation.  From books to magazine articles to sermons to seminary courses, spiritual formation is a hot topic.  What is spiritual formation?  What does it teach?  Is it something to embrace, ignore or fight?  With this edition of Thing on These Things I want to begin an examination of these questions and more.  Lord willing, all of the TOTTs articles in 2012 will be devoted to detailing and evaluating some aspect of what some have called the “Spiritual Formation Movement.”  In this lead article I intend to offer a definition of spdisiritual formation, trace its origins, mention a few of its practices, illustrate its recent popularity, and briefly identify its strengths and dangers.

In Search of a Definition

When the average person speaks of spiritual formation they assume that it is a modern or trendy synonym for discipleship.  Throughout church history, in obedience to the Lord’s command found in the Great Commission (Matt 28:19-20), the church has dedicated itself to the task of making disciples, or followers of Jesus Christ. Perhaps growing weary of using the same word all the time, some more creative people have substituted other words such as mentoring, although that word is taken out of a secular context rather than a biblical one.  Mentoring usually implies a one-on-one effort in which a more mature Christian is training a less mature believer as in, “I was mentored by Joe.”  I think the word mentoring, simply because of its implications, common use, and background, is not the best word to describe what Scripture calls “making disciples.”  When we examine the New Testament we find that disciple making is not the prerogative of individuals only, but also of the church.  That is, disciples are made not by one-on-one relationships so much as by the ministry of the fuller body of Christ.  While we can all point to special people in our lives who have been instrumental in our spiritual growth, and while we should all be actively involved on some level in discipling others, and while most dedicate their discipling efforts to a few people, potential disciples need the balance of the wider membership of the church to become the followers of Christ that the Lord intends (Eph 4:11-16; 1 Cor 12).  It is best, it seems to me, to stay with the biblical terminology which serves us well in understanding the task before us.  Continue at Gary Gilley

The Desert Fathers - Borrowing From the East

Source: Ray Yungen

Catholic priest William Shannon in his book, Seeds of Peace, explained the human dilemma as being the following:

This forgetfulness, of our oneness with God, is not just a personal experience, it is the corporate experience of humanity. Indeed, this is one way to understanding original sin. We are in God, but we don't seem to know it. We are in paradise, but we don't realize it.1

Shannon's viewpoint defines the basic underlying worldview of the contemplative prayer movement as a whole. One can find similar quotations in practically every book written by contemplative authors. A Hindu guru or a Zen Buddhist master would offer the same explanation. This conclusion becomes completely logical when tracing the roots of contemplative prayer. Let us look at the beginnings of this practice.

In the early Middle Ages, there lived a group of hermits in the wilderness areas of the Middle East. They are known to history as the Desert Fathers. They dwelt in small isolated communities for the purpose of devoting their lives completely to God without distraction. The contemplative movement traces its roots back to these monks who promoted the mantra as a prayer tool. One meditation scholar made this connection when he said:

The meditation practices and rules for living of these earliest Christian monks bear strong similarity to those of their Hindu and Buddhist renunciate brethren several kingdoms to the East ... the meditative techniques they adopted for finding their God suggest either a borrowing from the East or a spontaneous rediscovery.2

Many of the Desert Fathers, in their zeal, were simply seeking God through trial and error. A leading contemplative prayer teacher candidly acknowledged the haphazard way the Desert Fathers acquired their practices:

It was a time of great experimentation with spiritual methods. Many different kinds of disciplines were tried, some of which are too harsh or extreme for people today. Many different methods of prayer were created and explored by them.3

Attempting to reach God through occult mystical practices will guarantee disaster. The Desert Fathers of Egypt were located in a particularly dangerous locale at that time to be groping around for innovative approaches to God, because as one theologian pointed out:

[D]evelopment of Christian meditative disciplines should have begun in Egypt because much of the intellectual, philosophical, and theological basis of the practice of meditation in Christianity also comes out of the theology of Hellenic and Roman Egypt. This is significant because it was in Alexandria that Christian theology had the most contact with the various Gnostic speculations which, according to many scholars, have their roots in the East, possibly in India.4

Consequently, the Desert Fathers believed as long as the desire for God was sincere--anything could be utilized to reach God. If a method worked for the Hindus to reach their gods, then Christian mantras could be used to reach Jesus. A current practitioner and promoter of the Desert Fathers' mystical prayer still echoes the logical formulations of his mystical ancestors:

In the wider ecumenism of the Spirit being opened for us today, we need to humbly accept the learnings of particular Eastern religions ... What makes a particular practice Christian is not its source, but its intent ... this is important to remember in the face of those Christians who would try to impoverish our spiritual resources by too narrowly defining them. If we view the human family as one in God's spirit, then this historical cross-fertilization is not surprising ... selective attention to Eastern spiritual practices can be of great assistance to a fully embodied Christian life.5

Do you catch the reasoning here? Non-Christian sources, as avenues to spiritual growth, are perfectly legitimate in the Christian life, and if Christians only practice their Christianity based on the Bible, they will actually impoverish their spirituality. This was the thinking of the Desert Fathers. So as a result, we now have contemplative prayer. Jesus addressed this when he warned His disciples: "And when you pray, do not
use vain repetitions, as the heathen do." (Matthew 6:7) Read the rest HERE