Spiritual Disciplines: A Critique

I see spiritual disciplines like daily offices, meditations etc. as a means not so much of developing my inner self, but as reminders that God is in charge. It is easy to get distracted by the world if you do not have a spiritual routine.

Brief diversion - Double click on comments shows all comments on a long thread, but still truncates the original post to the stub. Is it possible to show the whole post and all the comments? I expect this is a limitation of the software but...

end diversion

RJS,

I think I single clicked but I have the whole post and the comments. I only write this to say it is possible ... I don't really understand how I achieved this nirvana.

Scot, I do worry that the spiritual disciplines get too individualized ... will provide more on how Brazo says Jesus, Paul, James understood life and spiritual life?

Being duly rebuked I return to topic at hand

Scot,

Starting with Jesus - in terms of "Spiritual Disciplines" the only thing I see is a deep prayer life. A spiritual life requires time to pray in solitude - a relationship with God.

Are any other spiritual disciplines actually modeled by Jesus?

In the practice of Jesus - wasn't solitude always for prayer? And other than the wilderness and temptation episode after baptism, is there any evidence that he fasted?

The wilderness episode was formational, not a regular spiritual discipline.

I'm sure 1st century Jewish spiritual practices played the major role in the development of Jesus, but I don't know many resources that have built upon this. Keeping the Sabbath, following the Jewish calendar and Feasts of Israel, wearing Tzizit or fringes (Numbers 15:37-41), Jewish life cycles and rites of passage (birth, puberty, death, etc.), the Shema (see Jesus Creed by Scot McKnight), praying the Psalms, etc. Most of these practices took place within the community and I would think questions of personal spiritual autonomy and development apart from formation within the traditional practices of the community simply didn't exist.

"God has given us the Disciplines of the spiritual life as a means of receiving his grace. The Disciplines allow us to place ourselves before God so that he can transform us."
Richard Foster, Celebration of Discipline, p. 7

Among the displines Foster mentions (some already have been mentioned in the comments): meditation (Ps 119), and study (Deut 11:18, John 8:32, 2 Tim 3:16).

I think John 13-17 gives us an interesting picture of Jesus' particularly Trinitarian spirituality and his desire for his disciples to join in that same abiding, indwelling relationship with the Father and the Spirit that he himself lived. We do see disciplines such as service (Jn 13) and prayer (Jn 17) interwoven into this, but they seem to serve this greater spirituality of union with Jesus and the Father through the Spirit. Just some thoughts.

If Scripture encourages these practices, and since Scripture was insprired by God (Trinity), and the N.T. by the Apostles (or those close to the Apostles), can we not assume they praciticed what they preached without actually having a specific account of them doing them?

P.S. Sorry for the "Your Name" in the Foster quote comment.

"To begin with, the focus in the Bible is almost never on "my" personal, spiritual development and spiritual formation."

I would say the Bible is the story about God and his people. The personal/individual aspect gets magnified greatly with the American lens that values individuality so much.

I see spiritual disciplines as a methodology that we bodily humans have developed of interacting with the spirit world. There is certainly nothing uniquely Christian about most (any?) of them. They are practiced widely across the religious spectrum.

I would love to see you interact with Willard's "The Divine Conspiracy". He says something like, "we do something different with our body in order to be able to do something we are unable to do with direct effort." Disciplines are a means, not an end.

One more note to challenge Scot. You said "He fasted; he practiced solitude; never told others to do the same." Even if we don't have an instance recorded where Jesus told others to do these things, we are told to imitate Jesus in Paul. Furthermore, the Synoptics often give portraits of the disciples, positive and negative, to be instructional for the communities reading these accounts, right? So can't portraits of Jesus be instruction to us even if it isn't a command?

Saying that we don't do it just because Jesus didn't say it resembles those who only focus on the imperative tense, not the indicative, as if the imperative makes it more important (even though we ignore imperatives like greeting all the household churches in Romans 15!).

Am I off?

Doesn't Jesus explicitly avoid fasting while at the same time implying that it is a valid practice that his followers would use later? (Mark 2:18-20 and parallels). In that passage he doesn't explicitly say he doesn't fast (just the disciples), but I guess I've taken it to mean that.

For Paul, is "in Christ" his favorite catch-phrase for spiritual life? E.g. he talks about the Corinthians being "mere infants in Christ" (1 Cor 3:1), and he uses the phrase frequently. Is this language about his practiced faith, or is it merely an objective belief (such as, following Christ in faith means "in Christ")?

Keith (9:00 am),

Your comment on the sermon on the mount had occurred to me as well. Jesus doesn't seem to model these practices, but in this passage he assumes that his listeners do them and will continue to do them (fast, pray, give). But is this because the times have not yet changed - his followers are still Jews following Jewish law and practice - or is it a timeless expectation?

I wonder if their relationship with the Holy Spirit was different from ours? Not that it is supposed to be or that theirs was a special dispensation. Neither am I referring to particular manifestations of charismata being the difference. I'm wondering if spending time with Jesus, learning who he was, what life in the kingdom of God was all about and what the role of this mysterious comforter would be when he came was still so fresh to them that, as they were waiting for the Spirit to come, they were ready to receive him. Not perfectly, or in a way not possible for us today but humbly open to receive the presence, power and ministry of the Spirit to form them into the way of Jesus. Perhaps they then took more naturally and by faith the commands to be "filled with the Holy Spirit", or "walk in the Spirit..." etc, because the Spirit was so personal, alive and real to them. I'm not referring to those today who may experience "manifestations" of the Spirit on a Sunday, yet seem to not be that different the rest of the week. I'm speaking of a "life and godliness" that may or may not have been built on a life of practicing the SD's or such Sunday experiences. I wonder if so much of our seemingly well intentioned desire and effort to learn more about theology, learn how to practice the SD's more successfully, try and generate a pentecostal epiphany, etc. are still all our efforts to do what the Blessed Father, Son and Spirit want to "gift" us as we gratefully believe, receive and live as children of God. Perhaps, to become a Spirit filled, Spirit formed man of God I must continue to become a child. I admit I am both drawn to and resist this way. I have seen glimpses of this way of living faith in poorer parts of the world. But overall, I must prefer to keep looking for the "latest and greatest" insight, book or plan to be like Jesus, one that I can implement when I have time and that fits best within my personality and schedule.

Scot,

I'd say we don't abort them, rather we reframe them. I'm reminded of the timeless cliche: the antidote to misuse is not disuse, but proper use. Or something like that.

I don't see this as an either "for yourself", or "for the church" issue. That seems to me a false dichotomy. We practice personal disciplines so we can more fully, deeply give ourselves to being the church.

In evangelicalism (which, as I've already stated previously, is a label that's been stretched almost to meaninglessness now) there is a decided LACK of disciplines, as opposed to an overemphasis.

I think of Dallas Willard's suggestion that rather than asking people "what would Jesus do?" - as if that's the magic solution to right living, we, as the church, should offer classes like "How to Turn the Other Cheek". Because the thing is, just like Michael Jordon shooting jump-shots, much of our spirituality is about honing the skills of our bodily being - bringing it into harmony with our other faculties. There's no short-cut in this process. Repetition is essential in order to condition ourselves to right responses in life.

And Scot, I'd like to suggest one note of clarity: when you say Jesus never told others to practice disciplines, I think its helpful to clarify that we have NO RECORD of him doing that. We don't know for sure he didn't. And, it seems to me, its quite possible that this was personal teaching he might have given to certain disciples, that would not necessarily be considered pertinent to the larger thrusts of gospel-telling - and thus, not recorded.

I remember having a conversation with Frederica Matthewes-Green about this issue. Being Eastern Orthodox she clearly sees the disciplines as essential. And her sense was that evangelicals seem somewhat lost, knowing that they're missing something, and having a desire for a deeper transformative experience, but lacking the tools and the teaching to get there.

I think she has a point.

Alright, I'll take the bait. I wholeheartedly agree that as machines, disciplines of any kind are horrible, but as practical and thoughtful ways of saying "no" to the influence of the world, our flesh and the kingdom of darkness, and simultaneously saying "yes" to God's influence, they are absolutely necessary. Like most things we should approach them intelligently (people ruled by their appitites might want to consider various kinds of fasts, people attached to cash might want to consider aggressive giving, selfish people might want to serve more, etc.), but also humbly--asking God for direction and guidance for what he knows needs done for all. I don't know that we can cut this undertaking thin enough to separate "our personal spirituality" from becoming what God has in mind to become. Because it's personal. And spiritual. And what I am is what I end up spreading to others.

The NT may not ask "how's your spiritual life going", but if we want to use the terms of the NT, one of its absolute favorites is disciple--a disciplined person in a process of transformation towards Christ, taking whatever steps are helpful toward that end. Personal response to this is a must. I share the concern about viewing disciplines as mechanical instead of personal, but I'm more concerned that "Christian" today doesn't implicitly mean "serious apprentice of Jesus"--a person in training, which is the main way the NT talks about what we are invited to be. Paul also expressly spoke of, and I think assumed in many places, a kind of training--similar to athletic training, but for godliness. He told Timothy to "pursue" various virtues and "run" from other vices. How exactly does one "run" from the love of money, or "pursue" hope if not through prayer, giving, meditation on God's purposes and ways, worship of God, obedience, etc.? And Peter talked about "adding" goodness to our faith (and adding knowledge and adding and adding some more)--essentially developing greater and greater character towards Christlikeness. Paul says "whatever is good," etc., "think about these things." He said to pray continually. Let the word of Christ "dwell richly" in you. He told Timothy to study to show himself approved, capable of rightly handling the scriptures. And don't forsake assembling together. None of these things happen by themselves, nor will God do all of it without our conscious cooperation in small but necessary ways toward the implicit goal of disciples. Of course, all this assumes that the goals of God (such as missional agape) are at the heart of what is being taken in and sought by the disciple. But we must take the planks out of our own eye, even to help our neighbor.

In a nutshell, the use of the term "disciples" is thematic, and disciples are "disciplined" people. Christ's invitation to become his disciple sets the tone for much of the NT. We are persons in training. A disciple without disciplines is a misnomer.

An interesting question. And I think that the disciplines have too often been portrayed as an obligation to do vs. a means to an end.

Scot, how do you propose then that Christ-followers place themselves in a place where God can begin to restore humans from the damage of cracked eikons into perfected eikons?

I guess I never thought of the disciplines as something that were designed to merely develop personal spirituality (I'm not even sure what that means). I understand them as something that we practice to grow as disciples of Christ, to become conformed to the image of Christ. This will change the way we act, including our love for God and others. Can we really grow closer to God and not love others more? Maybe, it's about more properly defining spiritual formation and spirituality. Jesus, Paul, etc. didn't practice disciplines to foster spirituality, unless we mean by that walking in step with the Holy Spirit. They practiced disciplines so that they could better live their lives in a way pleasing to God - obeying his commands.

Here's how I've seen/used spiritual disciplines in the past: When I look at Jesus, what are some things HE did to stay in tune with the father? For example, Jesus practiced solitude after he had been with large crowds. OK, I don't know about you, but when I've been bombarded with lots of interaction with folks, I get irritable, I lose my cool, and I need to be away for a while. Or rest/sabbath - we know Jesus practiced the Sabbath. I should do the same, keeping my focus on what I see Jesus focusing on. Prayer? Jesus would withdraw by himself and pray. Fasting? We see Jesus fasting at the beginning of his ministry, but Jesus also "fasted" by leading a very simple life.

So for me, these are examples of how traditional "disciplines" fit into Jesus' life and example, and my life practice.

Why do we eat, sleep and bath everyday? Why do we stay(mostly) in our traffic lanes? Why do we keep certain foods in refrigerators? We have both basic human and cultural ways of living as individuals and persons in community. There are both natural and sometimes unnautural ways we live as human beings in this world. Some have ways, means, practices, customs, etc. that they engage in order to be formed into the kind of person and reality they want to live in. For some its an atheistic world, a Wall Street world, a scientific world, a gang world, a Muslim world, etc. If I want to live in a God-breathed world/reality, especially as Jesus spoke/revealed/lived it, then I will find those ways of knowing, being and doing that will help me stay present to it, just as the 1st century Jew practiced those things ind. and communally that helped them live the Shema and the commnandments. We were created to be creature of ways and habits. I believe it was Lewis that said we are all being formed into something, the question is what?

Jesus practicing the sabbath - he was criticized for picking heads of wheat on the sabbath. Was that practicing the sabbath. Or healing a sick man on the sabbath.

John says we love others because God first loved us. There may be a discipline that strengthens that in us. But sd's haven't ever appealed to me.

Spiritual disciplines and the disciples? I think when Jesus was alive, it consisted of 'being with' Jesus - walking with him, watching, practicing, and learning to do the things he was doing.

Apostle's view (in addition to everything already mentioned)? I still like Paul's view in Galatians - (which, admittedly, was directed at believers who had headed off-track and into slavery to legalism) - that he would labor with them until Christ is formed in them (Gal. 4:19). Disciplines as discipleship/leadership with others? Disciplines that, as Keith quotes Foster, place us before God so the Holy Spirit can 'have at us' - and the result? How about the fruit of the Spirit? And Micah 6:8, James 1:27?

Yes, Scot, loving God and loving others - out of the 'true self' (new person in Christ), the person God created us to be.

It is important as in any interaction to be clear what do we interact with, what do we respond to. In hermeneutics there is a talk about doing EXE-gesis, not EISO-gesis. We have to let the text (the author) set the topic of discussion, not use the text as an excuse/frame to bring our own. Unfortunately it seems a lot of the people who commented here did EISO-gesis with Scott post. So Scott had to come along and remind us WHAT he wants us to talk about (after all, it is his blog !!!).

Scott does not question the importance of spiritual disciplines, only their focus and context in which they are practiced. The key word that we need to center our discussion is “personal”. Is our “personal” ... fill in the blank ... the end, the goal we have in mind when we practice the disciplines or there is something/someone beyond our self that drives us. The Bible challenges and invites us to pull away from a self-centered life to a God-centered one. Our dynamic and strong connection with God is what fuels our formation into the people God had in mind when he created us. “Spiritual disciplines” are great exercises when employed in this context. They help us develop in the right direction.

Something must be pointed out here. “Spiritual disciplines” as exercise are inherently neither good nor bad. They are neutral. What are they used to accomplish is what gives them their value. What is absolutely true is that every single time they are used, by whomever, they are always effective, they produce results (hence the reason they have been practiced for generations and generations by such diverse people). So the question is not, do they work? The better question is what do they help us become? This brings us back to Scott’s point. Are we, in the Christian sphere, practicing these disciplines in a God-centered framework or in a self-centered one? This is an important diagnostic question that is meant to prevent us from shifting away from what we were created to be.

Scot,

I think I'm on the same page with you.

How do ancient practices like the Eastern Desert Fathers fit into this? For instance, on the surface, it seems as if their practices were all about "themselves." How do you learn to love better when you rarely interface with others?

Do you just chalk this up to the idea that "individualism" isn't just North American, but transcends time? Or is it possible that spiritual disciplines are a both/and endeavor where we are engaged in practices that open ourselves up to God that ends up over time impacting both "ourselves" and others and the world?

Michael - I agree. I have a hard time with the desert fathers or some of the monastic practice in light of the mission of the church.

Certainly spiritual disciplines can become self-centered and self-serving. However, they can also provide stability and reminders of our faith in difficult times. I am finding Celtic Daily Prayer from the Northumbria Community invaluable as I go through a forced and uncertain job change in these difficult economic times.

I appreciate the way that Richard Foster's Prayer: Finding the Heart's True Home, is structured to move us from self to God as center and finally to prayer for others. In Celtic Daily Prayer, the scripture readings and the reflections are not self-centered and the morning prayer specifically offers a place for "prayers for others."

Peace,
Randy

I'm sorry, the "Your Name" comment above is from me. I'm still not used to the new posting format.

I think for the apostles, as in the Hebrew Bible and in later Judaism, the emphasis is on deeds of lovingkindness (g'milut chasadim) in every sphere of relationships, with God being the highest relationship. Thus, acting out of love to others and God is the core of praxis.

Oh, great. The delay in posting my first comment tricked into redoing it :-)

I just finished a course on Spiritual Formation; found these two books helpful when thinking about the spiritual disciplines - "Dissident Discipleship" by David Augsburger and Glen Scorgies "A Little Guide to Christian Spirituality: Three Dimensions of Life with God". Both books discuss three dimensional spirituality at some point - God and me, God and others, God and the world (my paraphrase). Augsburger was particular helpful - there are a number of helpful references on blogs if you want to do a search.

Deb

you mentioned jesus, peter, paul, james, and john, which is terrific, but we also have this larger portion of scripture called the old testament. proverbs says quite a bit about personal spirituality, psalm one speaks to the individual (the person/man who does not walk in the way of the ungodly), other psalms offer lots for individuals (as well as the community of faith), etc. etc. i think we as westerners lose sight of the community all too often, but sometimes when we fight against spiritual disciplines, characterizing them as "machine-like" and such, we may be in danger of minimizing personal responsibility.

i say this, of course, as someone who DOES NOT keep a spiritual journal, or pray at specified times for specified amounts of time, or keep talley marks for evangelistic encounters lol. but, i try not to use phrases like "machine-like" for those who do. those same people might look at "all those books" you keep writing in "machine-like" fashion and scratch their heads.

just some thoughts, thanks for the thought-provoking blog

Scot,

Great post ... lots of good comments.

Thanks to Derek Lehman (starting at 4:10) for saying what I was thinking as I read. The point of spiritual disciplines in the New Covenant is to faithfully keep covenant (practice hesed) with God and with each other/the Body of Christ/neighbors. Faithful hesed is essentially the Jesus Creed -- loving God and loving others -- but it is firmly grounded in relationship.

This kind of relationship calls each other to responsibility. It stand behind and encourages. It defends and provides for those in need. It allows the Spirit to knit individuals (parts) into one Body (church) so that the world will know we are Christians by our love for one another. Too bad this is so hard to do, eh? ;^/

Our disciplines must be grounded in authentic relationship if they are to result in "doing justice, loving mercy (hesed), and walking humbly with our God."

Thanks for the conversation starter, Scot ... and to the Jesus Creeders for the thought-provoking comments. It is such a shame that so many of us want to formula-ize everything.... Sigh :^(

while i share the same concern that the disciplines have become too individualized and benefit driven... i struggle with concluding they are to be done with no personal motive.

we see Jesus, Paul and James eating and drinking, but there is no emphasis on those things for the sake of enjoying their taste or the nourishment they provide. yet, we acknowledge that the tastebuds in our mouths are gifts from God that serve to bring pleasure to an activity that we need to regularly participate in to receive energy to love Him & others in tangible ways. certainly it would be gluttonous to eat purely or mainly for enjoyment. but i cannot separate the enjoyment from the activity.

an aging friend of ours is fond of saying that she no longer lives to eat, but eats to live. by "living" see refers to the ability both to enjoy life and more of it... but also to serve and help others. must we negate one?

having said all this... i acknowledge a time in my life when it seemed G*D took away all pleasure in order to help me follow him more purely. it was a dark night to be sure. but when he raised me from it, i began to look at life differently... with a greater freedom and better appreciation for his beyond me-ness. i had lived for intimacy... and still do in many ways thrive on it. yet now, i recognize that in that intimacy and friendship, i still am a man who must follow, obey & serve. the disciplines are not, however, something i necessarily stop and go do. i can no more separate them from my relationship of love with him than i can my tastebuds from eating a butterscotch sundae.

First, a correction - Jesus is alive - not just was alive (I was referring to his life on earth....well, you get the point.)

Then, I agree with QB - placing ourselves before God is not to become individualistic or more-like-a-Pharisee - it is to learn to hear God's voice, learn God's ways, and follow Jesus. I like the 'Jesus Creed' linking to the Old Testament and to Lectio Divina....I need to ponder that!

That said, I need to approach the disciplines with a conscious focus on us/we/community - not me/I/mine like it is my penchant to do.

Thanks for raising the question, Scot.