Stephenson Spirituality

In this essay I will briefly consider what Christian Spirituality is. Then I will analyse my own spiritual journey within the framework of six traditions identified in this module before selecting the one I think has had the greatest influence for further analysis. That analysis is multi-faceted but I will seek to group the influences in terms of inner life and 'rule' then turn to the more outward influences in Christian community and missio Dei. At the end I will reflect on where this tradition has perhaps left gaps or weaknesses that engaging with other streams may help strengthen.

Alister McGrath defines Christian Spirituality as the result of a process of correlation between theology and personality. ^[1] This resonates for me because on the one hand theology is objective, even if debatable, whereas on the other hand our responses to it and preferences are as myriad as the variations in our personalities and learning styles. However, he also notes that this definition of theology as the academic discipline separate to the life of the church is a relatively recent (post-enlightenment) phenomenon. ^[2] Even though McGrath says this is now widely recognised to be incorrect in academic circles, I believe it remains so in the popular understanding. For that reason, I find Christian Spirituality a more useful term to describe faith life, especially when seeking to engage people not strongly connected to the church.

Richard Foster’s analysis in Streams of Living Water helpfully treats each tradition in exactly the same way readily allowing one to compare and contrast. In particular the concluding section on practicing each tradition makes clear he is not presenting an à la carte menu from which to choose but the contribution each tradition makes to completing our spirituality.

Nonetheless, whilst all traditions start with and flow from Jesus, as McGrath identifies it is not only legitimate but inevitable that people respond and emphasise different aspects. ^[3]

For myself, my dearest and warmest response is certainly for the charismatic tradition. I was only privileged to be part of a charismatic congregation for a few short years due to the life stages. However, it remains the central plank that sustains and renews my spirituality on an ongoing basis. That of course is exactly the point Jesus made to his disciples in John 16:7 that he must go in order that the Holy Spirit might come. The Holy Spirit that would teach, remind and abide in us forever (John 14:16-17,26).

The other tradition that I want to mention is contemplative. Perhaps it is inevitable that it takes time to discover this tradition because in large measure it must be discovered for oneself and takes time to grow into. One of the most striking aspects of Thomas Merton’s journey to being a contemplative, to me at least, was the incremental steps by which he travelled. ^[4] I am not currently expecting to become a hermit but I have always valued the 'general revelation' found in nature and increasingly learn to use it to focus and inhabit my prayer life. The essentialness of prayer that Foster identifies in the contemplative is also something I see God growing in me. ^[5]

Nonetheless, the dominant tradition and continuous thread through my walk has been evangelical and so it must be that one that I focus on here.

The term evangelical derives from the Greek euangelion, the good news that God provided a means for our redemption in the person of Jesus Christ. ^[6] It’s the same root that we get evangelism, telling the good news, from. Nonetheless, evangelism (an action) and evangelicalism (a movement) should not be confused. The latter has an additional political dimension. Evangelicalism in this sense is concerned not only with proclaiming good news but creating a defensive wall around the sheep as in Jesus' metaphor in John 10. When this extends as far as regarding those outside the sheepfold, even in other Christian traditions, as apostate it has likely gone too far.

Foster mildly describes this as a shift of balance from saving grace to censoriousness ^[7] but one cannot avoid the suspicion that there is something inherently divisive about this desire for 'faithful interpretation'. A single schism (between what became Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches) in the first fifteen hundred years of the church has been joined since the Reformation by innumerable splits gaining its very own term 'denomination' (from the Latin for 'name' and 'away'). ^[8]

Evangelicalism is not itself a denomination, being found to varying extents in a whole range of the Protestant denominations. ^[9]

Understandably, the further we move in space and time from Jesus' human ministry the more challenging correct interpretation becomes. I say understandably, since clearly Jesus did not preach on the merits or otherwise of social media or the precise response to war in Ukraine. One response is to seek to cut ourselves off from troubling aspects of culture. This is what McGrath terms 'Christ against culture'. ^[10] He cites 16th century Anabaptists and modern day North American fundamentalist groups as examples. The same sentiment is present in my own part of rural Wiltshire. I’d argue the better, albeit harder, route is to seek to translate Biblical principles to our context.

In my early Christian life, 'Evangelical' was synonymous with 'Christian'. Surely all Christian traditions share the regard for Scripture as God’s special revelation? This may be so, but in Evangelical tradition the regard for Scripture is elevated to even greater importance. In comparison other writings, church tradition, papal edicts and personal experience are all relatively less important or in some cases even suspect. This is the meaning of sola scriptura one of the five great solae of Reformation thinking. Those other things may have value but the value is measured against the benchmark of scripture and certainly not the other way around. Or as Martin Luther pithily put it: 'Who begets his own parent?' ^[11]

The final characteristic of evangelicalism that I want to mention recognises the need for evangelism expressed in such texts as Romans 10:14-15. Indeed 'who can believe if they haven’t heard, hear if they’re not preached to or be preached to if none will go and do it' could be a motto for many an evangelical church. This emphasis on the need for a personal response explains associated practices such as altar calls and encouragement to identify a specific event and time when you became 'born again.'

The conversion experience of Augustine chosen by Foster to provide his historic representation of the evangelical tradition is apt indeed. Having spent his entire adult life immersed in ideas and thinking deeply about them, the moment of conviction in that garden in Milan arrives suddenly, if not unexpectedly, in response to a brief scripture chosen at random. At least, Augustine believes it to have been random, who can say if God intervened in power or his subconscious had already been aware of that verse in Romans. ^[12]

^[13]

Though I had not thought of it in these terms before, that mirrors my own conversion experience. Having been a church attender for a couple of years, part push from my mother, part pull from the youth fellowship, I found myself at the church weekend away. The preacher had as his passage Romans 8 and at the time, far less now, very little stuck with me besides v34 the offer of an intercessor, sitting at the right hand of God the father. As I recall he painted quite a vivid picture of a courtroom scene, with charges laid and Jesus interceding for me. The offer was presented, I knew my need and I wanted that advocate, so when the call was made to respond I did.

What happened here? I would not have described myself as a seeker (even if I had known that language). I was largely there for a weekend away with friends, though I did choose to engage with the talks, which not everyone did. Looking at Romans 8 now, it is not at all obvious to me that this is the key message, but that phrase of an intercessor, sat at the right hand of the father, is what seized my attention on that day.

The other particularly evangelical aspect of this history is that a call was made. I’ve no idea how many people in the room that day had heard many such calls before. It seems likely most would have, you do not have to be around evangelical churches for long before you hear words along that lines of: 'If you’ve never given your life to Jesus, don’t leave here today without doing business with God.' Citing Jesus' own example in Matt 4:17 to 'Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near', Foster identifies this as a key characteristic of the evangelical tradition. ^[14]

Many times over the years I have heard Isaiah 55:11 quoted by evangelical preachers as the proof that God’s will and authority is all encapsulated between the covers of a Bible. I certainly believe all scripture is God-breathed and suitable for teaching and correcting (2 Tim 3 16:17). And to open the eyes and ears of a non-believer to the good news seems to me to be miraculous each and every time. But I personally become uncomfortable when 'the word' in the sense of scripture as opposed to be person of Jesus Christ is imbued with mystical power, what Foster refers to as 'bibliolatry'. ^[15]

When it comes to practicing the evangelical tradition Foster hits the nail squarely on the head with his opening comment that it is not knowing what to do, but doing it.

Inevitably for the 'religion of the Bible', he starts there. Every evangelical has been taught from [spiritual] childhood the essential necessity to have a 'quiet time' of Bible-reading and prayer on a daily basis. Yet, in our self-centred and individualistic lives, I doubt there are many of us who do not fall short of our aspirations. As a night owl mid-to-late evening was a great time for me, providing the peace and quiet as well as head-space to focus. Somewhere along the line, perhaps related to marrying a lark, evenings ceased to work. Eventually I bowed to the inevitable and after some experimentation found a way to make mornings work. Not quite the 'No Bible, no breakfast' that our Melbourne pastor related from his own upbringing, but once the school run is done, or these days, children have left for school, that same quiet peace is available.

At least one pastor I have known always gave the impression that reading the Bible on its own was sufficient, though I know he loved (and loves) reading a vast number of books of commentary, bibliography and any number of other kinds too. For me this has never worked. Aside possibly from the Psalms, I don’t think there is much of the Bible I have been able to read without the assistance of someone else’s analysis, background or at least thought provoking questions. Considered rationally, it cannot be a surprise that a twenty-first century resident in one of the wealthiest and most industrialised nations on earth lacks the cultural and historical context to readily decipher the Old or even New Testaments. However, my church experience has certainly made me think of this as some kind of deficiency in me for a long time. With that said, I do wonder in awe at the way that God managed to provide a single revelation of himself that can address equally well nomadic herders in the Ancient Near East and internet savvy consumers of today.

The other area Foster identifies as a practical suggestion is to take time to get to know those who live around us. Reflecting on my own experience, I was dismayed to realise this has very frequently been an afterthought or entirely absent from my experience living in the evangelical tradition. Whilst some particularly Reformed or Calvinist beliefs may place low importance on evangelism, ^[16] I think most fellow church members I have known have been held back either by insecurity in their beliefs or by personal disposition reluctant to be involved in something they see as very bold or extrovert. I, myself, probably have some of both of these. Straying into the charismatic stream for a moment, I could also point to an early analysis of my gifts that identified teaching, administration and giving/hospitality. But of course, these can each be applied to both discipling the existing church or evangelising the not-yet church. Perhaps, just like a personal rule-of-life, discipline and application are the watch words. In taking time and interest to know people in a meaningful way, we cannot fail to present Christ to these people, leaving the work of convincing them to the Spirit.

So to conclude, my experience of the Evangelical tradition has been broadly positive. I have been blessed by sound, biblical teaching and received a faith I am happy is both orthodox and rational, which as a scientist is important to my personality. At the same time, I do long for a greater focus on what unites that what divides, seeing much wisdom in Peter’s advice: "Above all, maintain constant love for one another, for love covers a multitude of sins." (1 Peter 4:8).

Having been exploring a little of the contemplative tradition in recent years I certainly see how this can bolster my prayer life. What I can say is that my toe-in-the-water appears to yield both greater focus in my own walk and engagement with those in the church community too and want to go deeper into it.

Finally, I have felt challenged by the assumption I find implicit in Foster that all of us can participate in and benefit from all traditions.