April 2, 2010
Two months ago, I decided to commit to a book review, as I had not done so since college. My purpose in writing this review is to expose error, give praise where it is due to the author, and ask honest questions that can help us all understand the author and the subject matter in a more complete way. With any critique of another person’s work comes the natural tendency to slip into a mood of negativity and personal attack. Critics must guard themselves from such human tendencies to ensure rational thought and to affect an argument that rightly demonstrates a counterpoint. It is my hope and prayer that my efforts here will be in accordance with Holy Scripture, be presented to help the body of Christ avoid dangerous error and will speak the truth in love to call sinners and believers alike to repentance and forgiveness in our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. I am not a professional theologian or intellectual. I hold to a Reformed Theology and regard the Bible as the inerrant Word of God.
Why do I take issue with Richard Foster’s book Celebration of Discipline? I do so because of the following four reasons:
- His disregard for scriptural context of verses quoted in the book and the twisting of such verses.
- The beliefs and practices of people recommended as authorities on “Christian” Spiritual Disciplines, whether ancient or contemporary.
- His borderline syncretism of Roman Catholicism and Eastern Religions, the allowance of Satanic influences from the New Age and his inability to offer acceptable warnings.
- The lack of the Gospel.
I will present each chapter individually and then sum up each of the four reasons of contention I mention above. This will not show the book as a whole but point out strong disagreements and also to commend the good portions. I present this with the recommendation that to follow my words, the reader would have access to a copy of Celebration of Discipline 1998 Edition.
Acknowledgments
While not technically the body of a book, I find the acknowledgements (and for that matter, the back cover and inner flaps) of a book to contain clues to the writer’s motives and beliefs. Foster states, “It was through the friendship and teaching of Dallas Willard that I first saw the meaning and necessity of the Spiritual Disciplines. His life is the embodiment of the principles of the book.”
That speaks volumes to me, and to any Christian who knows who Dallas Willard is and what he believes. If you do, you know now the grave importance of exposing the teachings contained within Foster’s book. More about this in the exposition of the Reason Two section
Introduction
I am struck by the story of Foster in
On page 7 Foster writes: “God has given us the Disciplines of the spiritual life as a means of receiving his grace.” There is no Biblical reference to back this claim. He goes on to say they are “God’s way of getting us into the ground; they put us where he can work within us and transform us. Still, no Biblical reference. I would think that if the Bible was going to reveal to us the truth of grace, we would be able to easily find the Spiritual Disciplines listed therein, rather than in the writings of 4th through 17th Century Catholic Mystics.
1. The Spiritual Disciplines: Doors to Liberation
Foster claims on page 1 that the Classical Disciplines purported in the book are “classical because they are central to experiential Christianity. In one form or another, all of the devotional masters have affirmed the necessity of the Disciplines.” Two questions arise from this statement. First, by experiential Christianity does Foster mean real, experienced, true Christianity, or does he mean something else? Second, who are the “devotional masters” and why should we believe or heed their affirmation?
Here lies the greatest contention I have with Foster’s entire thesis. By his own words just spoken, Foster has put forth an affront to Sola Scriptura, an idea that experiential Christianity equals true faith and practice and that the Spiritual Disciplines are an integral original part of the Christian faith. Let’s examine that claim.
If we are to accept that a teaching is an integral part of the Christian faith, it bears out that it would be found in the Scriptures either clearly (such as Christ’s command to proclaim the Gospel) or by drawing accurate conclusions through clear passages (the doctrine of the Trinity). Anything purported to be Spiritual Discipline, let alone a Scriptural truth for practice, should be either clearly taught in scripture or easily deduced as Scriptural through clear Scriptural passages. If it is neither, it cannot be called Scriptural as the Bible alone must be the final authority of practice for the Christian, not one or many men’s opinions.
If said “Spiritual Disciplines” fall outside the clear teachings of Scripture, but remain faithful to the truth of Scripture as a whole, they can certainly be beneficial to the believer, but only inasmuch as they align with Scripture and do not interfere or detract from Scriptural teachings. There is certainly an amount Christian liberty that can be exercised when reading a work such as Celebration of Discipline, but we must align it with scripture. If it comes up wanting, it is safer to discard it than to keep the few morsels of good meat.
2. The Discipline of Meditation
This chapter alone will take the most time to cover, simply because it contains so much distortion and error. In fact, it contains the most heresy per page in the entire book, starting with an affirming quote from Carl Jung.
In case you are not aware, Jung developed his processes through contact with two demons named Ka and Philemon, and considered Christianity to be a myth (his claims, not my own). No explanations on Carl are made, just a thrown-to-the-wind quote that says nothing of Jung’s Satanic influence on psychology in general and most certainly the psychology of COD. I would gather that since Foster’s teachings are much in sync with Jung’s theories, it is no mistake or overlooked detail.
On Page 16 Foster says that “It is a continual focus upon obedience and faithfulness that most clearly distinguishes Christian meditation from its Eastern and secular counterparts.” Three points I wish to make from this statement:
1. What else distinguishes it from non-Christian meditation?
2. Eastern and secular are mentioned as if they are two different things. Foster does not explain the difference. I would suggest there is no difference.
3. Are Hindus and Buddhists obedient and faithful to God?
As Ray Youngen puts forth “The premise here is that in order to really know God, mysticism must be practiced--the mind has to be shut down or turned off so that the cloud of unknowing where the presence of God awaits can be experienced. Practitioners of this method believe that if the sacred words are Christian, you will get Christ--it is simply a matter of intent even though the method is identical to occult and Eastern practices.” (A Time of Departing, p. 33, 2nd Edition)
So, what can we learn from Biblical examples of those who sought God in an improper manner? Are the examples of
I constantly hear Christian teachers speak of “practicing the silence” or “meditating on God” or “practicing the presence of God”. I see them use the same examples from the Bible to justify their claims. I recently heard a sermon from Shane Hipps from Mars Hill Bible Church about this topic and the errors he made parallel the eisegeted, de-contextualized and downright twisted scripture passages of Foster when he claims that the Christian must “be willing to go down into the recreating silences, into the inner world of contemplation...where all the masters of meditation beckon us to be pioneers in this frontier.”
Here are the examples that Foster puts forth as Biblical evidence:
Genesis 24:63- “And Isaac went out to meditate in the field in the evening.” Ok, and the context? Isaac traveled back from out of town and he went out to the field toward the evening. While he was out there, he ran into Rebekah, took her back to his tent and she “became his wife”. What proof of Eastern Meditation is this?
1 Kings 19:9-18, the most prooftexted verse that exists for the Contemplative Crowd. Please read the entire passage of 1Kings 19:1-18 before proceeding…Foster simply mentions that “Elijah spent many a day and night in the wilderness learning to discern the still small voice of Yahweh.” Read 1 Kings 19, the entire chapter and tell us where God is to be found in the Centering Silence of Contemplative Prayer. It doesn’t exist! This idea does violence to the text.
What the verse does speak about is Elijah running away to the wilderness, God telling him to eat and drink and journey 40 days to
Where then, may I ask, is Elijah seeking to discern God in the still small voice we keep hearing about, especially since God is talking to him directly? I’m not going to eisegete what I think the phrase “still small voice” means, I will only point out that God didn’t speak to Elijah through the voice in the same manner that he was not in the wind, the earthquake, or the fire. Was Elijah there on
He claims Moses learned how to hear God’s voice and how there was a sense of an intimate relationship, of communion.” Yes, that is mostly likely because Moses had one slight advantage to us. You see, God appeared to him in person AS A PILLAR OF CLOUD. That would be slightly more intimate than what we are relegated to, I admit, but I still fail to see where the Bible speaks of Moses meditating to reach God in the silence.
Then we come to the crowning proof of the “Christianity” of Contemplative Mysticism: The claim that it was practiced by Jesus himself. To make this claim, proponents take multiple clips from the ministry of Jesus and bundle them together without context or (in extreme cases) using half a verse!
Foster claims that Jesus had a habit of withdrawing away from the crowd to a lonely place so he could be with God. The text completely agrees with him! Then Foster makes the same distortion of the text that many do: He claims that Jesus went out and listened to his heavenly father in silence and communed with him. He gives numerous texts to affirm that claim.
Let’s go to the text…
Matthew 4:1-11 says nothing of this claim.
Luke 6:12 “In these days he went out to the mountain to pray.”
Matthew 14:23 “he went up on the mountain by himself to pray.”
Mark 1:35 “And rising very early in the morning, while it was still dark, he departed and went out to a desolate place, and there he prayed.”
Luke 5:16 “But he would withdraw to desolate places and pray.”
Matthew 17:1-9 This is the account of the transfiguration, where God himself speaks to the disciples. Note the similarities with Elijah’s story.
Matthew 26:39 “And going a little farther he fell on his face and prayed, saying”
The burden of proof remains on Foster to prove that Jesus sat in the Lotus position and monitored his breathing, repeated a mantra, and waited for God’s “still small voice”. What we do see is Jesus constantly getting away from the fray of his ministry to pray to the Father, to speak with Him, and to do so alone. The Greek word indicates he was petitioning God the Father actively.
So where then is the Biblical proof for his explanation of the first Spiritual Discipline?
On page 18 Foster claims that the early church “learned to live on the basis of hearing God’s voice and obeying his word.” I would suggest a better explanation is they learned by listening to the Holy Scriptures taught by the apostles who had firsthand knowledge of Jesus. They had the authority to proclaim this truth as firsthand witnesses to the resurrection. It was this power, the power of the Holy Spirit in the lives of these men, that catapulted the first century Church forward, not an esoteric divination of God’s will.
Page 19 claims “it is a sad thing the Contemporary Christians are so ignorant of the vast sea of literature on Christian Meditation by faithful believers throughout the centuries!” Since this list is not contained in the book, I had to go searching. First I went back to the Introduction, where Catholic Mystics are named. I then went to the Renovaré reading list which can be found at http://www.renovare.us/buyresources/product and also at http://www.dwillard.org/resources/RecReading.asp where I found a plethora of heretical and heterodox authors, along with few authors that would be considered orthodox and Reformed in teaching. In addition, one could jump ahead to p. 72 for an exhaustive list. My question is why should we be listening to counter-Reformation Catholic Mystics to live out our faith in Jesus Christ as our Savior and King? I honestly do not know.
On page 20-21, Foster describes the difference between Eastern and Christian meditation. He states that Christian meditation goes past Eastern meditation in emptying a person of self, and replacing it with God. There is a filling of the mind rather than an ultimate emptying of it. What Foster does not make differentiation upon is the method necessary to obtain the first half, the emptying. I see no caveat preventing a full on Buddhist or Hindu method to achieve this. Some would scoff at me for suggesting such a thought, but keep reading the book…
Next Foster calms our fears by stating that, as Thomas Merton suggested, meditation is easy. See more on Merton later in this paper. On page 22-23, Foster defends meditation as being simply psychological manipulation. The difference between Christian and secular meditation is how you believe it will work. If you don’t believe in God, you will see it as a good Alpha-brainwave facilitator, “but if you believe in an infinite God, you will see it as communication between the Lover and the beloved”. Mr. Foster, from the Bible- book, chapter, verse, please?
On page 23 I found an amazingly dangerous statement:
“The inner reality of the spiritual world is available to all who are willing to search for it. Often I have discovered that those who so freely debunk the spiritual world have never taken ten minutes to investigate whether or not such a world exists, Let me suggest we take an experiential attitude towards spiritual realities… we do not despair or label the whole business fraudulent…The fact that so many are unwilling to do so betrays not their intelligence but their prejudice.”
I’ve heard this tactic before. It is the second oldest lie in existence after “Did God really say?” It is the tactic of “try it, you will like it!”
May I suggest that those who have been saved out of the New Age movement would take serious issue with Fosters encouragement? These believers all have one thing in common: their assertion that meditation is very real, that you will make contact with “the spirit” (whether you are a believer or not), that anyone can do it, and most importantly and most deadly- it is immediately addicting. The term “Spiritual Crack” was mentioned.
Page 25- “We can descend with the mind into the heart most easily through the imagination…most of us need to be more deeply rooted in the senses. We must not despise this simpler, more humble route into God’s presence. Jesus himself taught in this manner, making constant appeal to the imagination, and many of the devotional masters likewise encourage us in this way. Teresa of Avila says…as I could not make reflection with my understanding I contrived to picture Christ within me.” It would seem from this straightforward statement that God’s word is not sufficient, that we need to use our imagination to conjure up an idol for ourselves to meditate upon. Foster defends this statement on p. 26 by stating that God can sanctify and utilize the imagination because of the incarnation of Christ to “teach us about the unseen world of which we know so little about”. Mr. Foster, from the Bible- book, chapter, verse, please?
On page 26 Foster affirms my hypothesis: “It is impossible to learn how to meditate from a book. We learn to meditate by meditating.” So, I would ask again, if it isn’t in the Bible, and no apostle taught it, why are we learning about it, and why are you so eager to have us jump in with both feet?
On page 28 Foster encourages us to “ponder a picture of the Lord, or to look out at some lovely trees and plants for the same purpose…to center the attention of the person upon the glory of God in the face of Christ.” 2 Corinthians 4:6 was referenced. Read all of that Biblical passage in context, and Foster’s scripture twisting to suit his purposes is evident. In addition, he should have read just above where Paul exhorts the Corinthians: “But we have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways. We refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God's word, but by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to everyone's conscience in the sight of God. And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled only to those who are perishing. In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.”
Ignatious of Loyola, the infamous Counter-Reformationist is quoted on page 29. His methods infiltrate this entire book. To read Richard Foster is to read Loyola.
Page 31. “A third kind of contemplative prayer is meditation on creation. Now this is no pantheism, but a majestic monotheism in which the great Creator of the universe shows us something of his glory through his creation…all the beauty of a flower to sink deep into your mind and heart. Listen to the birds; they are the messengers of God. (Birds are angels?)…sometimes God reaches us profoundly in these simple ways if we will quiet ourselves and listen. (No Biblical reference given). Foster is correct that this is not pantheism; it is panentheism which is logically consistent with the “divine spark” error of the Quakers. It is subtle and easily debated away, but nevertheless dangerous.
Foster encourages the use of “palms up/palms down” when meditating. You should not be surprised that this type of meditation motion is practiced in Nia Technique to channel energy flow, and also in Tai Chi.
Page 32: “Thomas Merton writes that the person who has meditated on the Passion of Christ but has not meditated on the extermination camps of
3. The Discipline of Prayer
There are many good and accurate statements in this chapter about prayer except for two points.
First, His ascertain that the Apostle Paul gladly announces that we are co-laborers with God; that is, we are working with God to determine the outcome of events. “It is Stoicism that demands a closed universe, not the Bible.” 1 Corinthians 3:9 is referenced. Foster again takes a single verse out of context and builds upon it (pun intended in light of the context) which leads to an Open Theism logic in the next few pages.
Second, Foster’s conclusion that asking “if it be God’s will” is not always the right way of praying is troubling. He encourages us to be more direct in our praying because Jesus never prayed for others in this way. May I suggest it is because he is God and he knew better? May I also suggest that this is the same error the Word-Faith movement commits and are condemned for it?
What Foster does say well is that prayer is not easy for man to do in himself, but that he gets the desire to pray from the Holy Spirit and it is Him who drives us. It is the transforming of the passions through prayer that help to grow us as Christians. It should be the daily normal posture of the Christian to live a life of constant prayerfulness.
4. The Discipline of Fasting
I was honestly challenged by this chapter, as Foster lays out a reasonably sound defense for the practice, citing Biblical examples and remaining grounded in Biblical evidence. I was shown that fasting does have a place for the Christian. I have only two contentions with the chapter.
The first comes on page 52 where he calls Dispensationalism a heresy. Beg your pardon, Richard, but why is it heretical? Is it because the thought of it refutes your ideas (and those of Dallas Willard) of the Kingdom Gospel? I will not dwell on the subject, but it is troubling to hear.
The second comes on page 60 when Foster asserts, without Biblical citation, that “Fasting can bring breakthroughs in the Spiritual realm that will never happen in any other way. It is a means of God’s grace and blessing that should not be neglected any longer.” Foster’s Catholic Mysticism is showing true in this statement. I would urge all those who fast to be certain that the “spiritual breakthroughs” that occur are in line with clear Scriptural truths and not simply hallucination brought on by low blood sugar. Remember what Dickens said about doubting the senses: “a little thing affects them. A slight disorder of the stomach makes them cheats.” Make certain your breakthroughs line up with God’s clear word and are not simply the still small voice of your rumbling stomach…or worse.
5. The Discipline of Study
Page 63 is evidence of Foster’s ability to proof text like a cult leader when he explains Jesus’ statements about the “truth setting you free” from John 8:32. He never explains that the truth is contained in Christ Jesus, and in the Word of God (as if there was much difference).
Page 64 encourages the use of the rosary (Catholicism) or the prayer wheel (Buddhism). This is not surprising given his praise for Catholic Mysticism and Buddhism summed up in the person of Thomas Merton.
Also on p. 64, Foster makes the statement that “in study there are two books to be studied: verbal and non-verbal. Books and lectures (the Bible?) are only half or less of the total. The world of nature and the careful observation of events are the primary non-verbal fields of study…if we carefully observe and reflect upon what has occurred, we can learn a great deal.” This is a perfect exhortation to move to the Loyola method and away from God’s word.
In a baffling lack of discernment, Foster states on p. 64-65 that the first step in Study is repetition. I agree wholeheartedly that the Christian must hide God’s word in their heart and the only logical way is through repetition. Foster then goes on to state that the “repetition is the key, not the understanding of the repetition”. “It is not even important that the person believe what is being repeated, only that it is repeated. The inner mind is then trained…” This is a perfect example of a work’s based Catholic Mystic Pietism. The mentality of doing something because it is necessary to your salvation and sanctification, not because it has any rooting in reality or truth is evident by this logic. This is a perfect example of missing the point.
I commend Foster’s urging on p. 68 that one cannot understand all of the New Testament without understanding the Old Testament. Bravo, Richard. He then moves directly to page 69 where he takes 2 Timothy 3:16 and states that “the central purpose of [God’s Word] is not doctrinal purity but inner transformation. We come to the Scripture to be changed, not to amass information.” Mr. Foster is half correct and completely wrong. We come to the Scripture because it is the solid, unchanging, Word of God for faith and practice. It will most certainly change us through God’s Holy Spirit, and He will certainly impart his truth to us through his Word, but to say that the central purpose is not accurate doctrine is foolishness. The ultimate irony is that in the very next chapter Paul rebukes Richard for what he is teaching. Why else would we study God’s words if not to have right doctrine for correct faith and practice? Foster is showing his postmodern colors quite clearly here.
On pages 69-71 Foster teaches us about the best methods to study scripture. His focus is specifically against the study of the Bible in Church, and focused on an individual study. He encourages auditing classes at a university or seminary as this is where you will find a teacher who “dispenses life as well as information”. How about your pastor, or elders? He then encourages Catholic Centers of private retreat, which fits perfectly with practicing the monkery that defines the Devotional Masters with whom Foster has based his doctrine. It is a dangerous path we tread when we isolate ourselves from other more learned and mature Christians. It is directly in contrast to Paul’s teaching to the early churches.
On page 71-72, after encouraging reading the Bible, he then moves to the aforementioned list of “experiential classics in Christian literature”. These include several great sources like Luther, Calvin, Lewis, and several not-so-great sources like á Kempis, Pascal, Bonhoeffer, and several heretical nightmares like Brother Lawrence, George Fox, Juliana of Norwich, and Francis de Sales. Worse yet, he recommends pagan mystics who founded Taoism and Zoroastrianism!
6. The Discipline of Simplicity
On page 84 I see an apparent contradiction in lauding the Devotional Masters and condemning asceticism. I find no difference in the two from Foster’s perspective despite his straw-man depiction of asceticism being evil and simplicity being Godly. I cannot see the difference when confronted with the Desert Fathers.
I can, however, see past this contradiction to Foster’s genuine desire that Christians be less materialistic and the purity and freedom this will bring. I completely agree that we (and I too) are distracted by Western consumerism and this distraction is in many ways sinful. I cannot agree that the better model is the Catholic Monastery.
Foster’s use of Kierkegaard as an example of proper perspective from p. 86-87 is another example of de-contextualized prooftexting to prove his point. Interesting that Kierkegaard’s ideology is extremely influential in postmodern Christianity, an appropriate soil to grow the same heretical ideals of truth, individual experience, and “inner voice” rationality.
I must applaud Foster on his good ideas on how to de-clutter your life with regards to materialism.
7. The Discipline of Solitude
On page 97, Foster again reiterates Jesus’ purposeful escape to be alone and hear the “Whisper better”.
On page 98, we hear that Solitude and Silence are spiritual disciplines, again without scriptural basis. We are told that Thomas á Kempis, Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Thomas Merton got it right and that we must know the transforming power of silence if we are to know solitude. I would suggest that the verses he quotes from James and Proverbs are talking about proper speech, not a vow of silence as is present in the monkery of the former authors.
Page 102-104 talks about John of the Cross’ “Dark Night of the Soul”. I’m sorry, but I cannot get behind the spiritual mysticism and counter-Reformation ideas of John of the Cross. I reject him outright because of this alone, and I reject his doctrines as they are experiential instead of Biblical.
8. The Discipline of Submission
I have no problems with this chapter. It is generally sound, and I do not see the need for any questions or comments.
9. The Discipline of Service
A good chapter, as it answers several of the prevalent “yes, but” questions and concerns many Christians have.
10. The Discipline of Confession
On page 146 the statement is made that “the followers of Jesus Christ have been given the authority to receive the confession of sin and to forgive it in his name. John 20:23 is referenced. Although I agree with this, I question whether Jesus was saying this to all of us, or was he speaking to just the disciples? Let’s be careful to not confuse that our “forgiving of sins” is not made true by our actions, but because of the true repentance of the person and the truth of God’s promises. We are only professing forth what we witness, not in the same way that the Catholic Church believes that confession to a priest is the only proper way of receiving the dispensation of God’s grace and forgiveness.
The remainder of the chapter is good, but I find another eisegeted scripture on page 156. “It is best to accompany the prayer with the laying on of hands which is an elemental teaching of the Bible and is a means through which God communicates his life-giving power.” That is not in Hebrews 6:2. He then quotes Agnes Sanford who purports the “Healing of Memories” heresy. By her own admission, she is a Universalist. She gained her inspiration from Theosophy and Carl Jung.
11. The Discipline of Worship
On p. 162 Foster speaks of the “shekinah of the heart”. What is that? I can’t find the specific term in Strong’s or Vines. How does God’s shekinah glory, or Bat Kol, or Ruach Elohim relate to this?
Also on page 162 Foster speaks of “Catching a vision from Brother Lawrence and Frank Laubach. More about brother Lawrence later, but be aware that Frank Laubach has conjured the idea of “Flash” or “Swish” prayers as if prayer was some sort of occult entity that we can use on people to make them more positive and upbeat.
Page 163 is indescribable. You must simply read the page for yourself. I have no idea where it comes from or what it means. It is pure New Age vision questing.
It was inevitable that p. 168 would be the beginning of the praise of the Charismatic movement, or a Foster puts it, “The mightiest stirring of praise in the twentieth century. Through [the Charismatic Movement] God has breathed new life and vitality into millions.” Seriously? Why would you consider a great departure from sound doctrine and an overemphasis on emotional exstacy as proof of spirituality a good thing? Why would you applaud a movement that has invited in charlatans and seducing spirits of demons to openly prowl the church unabated by sound doctrine?
On page 169 the spiritual gift of tongues is mentioned as a reason why feelings are a part of worship. “It helps us to move beyond mere rational worship into a more inward communion with the Father. Our outward mind may not know what is being said, but our inward spirit understands. Spirit touches spirit.” My rebuttal comes from 1 Corinthians 14. Foster has either never read it, or is eager to dismiss it, as are most Pentecostals. Foster would understand how self centered his statements are in the light of this chapter of Scripture.
12. The Discipline of Guidance
On page 176, Foster claims that there has been good teaching on guidance through angels, visions, dreams, signs, and more, but we have had heard little about how God leads through his people. I completely disagree with him! He has spent 175 pages talking about Catholic Mystics, the very heights of Sola Ecclesia and individual interpretation! He goes on to say that Matthew 18:19-20 shows that God assures us that when people are genuinely gathered in his name that God’s will can be discerned. That is not the point of the verse. The verse simply says that when a group of believers join together, God is with them. It says nothing of some mystical power of the group to discern God’s will.
On page 185 we learn that “in the Middle Ages, not even the greatest saints attempted the depths of the inward journey without the help of a spiritual director…today the concept is hardly understood, let alone practiced, except in the Roman Catholic monastic system. That is a tragedy, for the idea of the spiritual director is highly applicable for the contemporary scene.” First, Foster does not give examples of these great saints. He is borderline on committing two errors of logic; the Appeal to Authority and the Appeal to Antiquity. Foster’s argument should be disregarded as speculation until he can give examples that affirm 1. An exhaustive list of all Middle Age saints. 2. His assertion that they attempted the depths of the inward journey. 3. The spiritual director is a Biblical construct.
Foster then gives the purpose of the spiritual director: “He is the means of God to open the path to the inward teaching of the Holy Spirit…He leads by the force of his own personal holiness.” I don’t know where this aligns with Scripture, as he gives no Scriptural reference, only a mention that A Benedictine mystic once said it. First, I would suggest that in no way does the pastor open any paths, as it is the Holy Spirit that does as He wills. Second, I don’t know how a spiritual director could lead by the force of his personal holiness, since he has none. He has only the imputed righteousness of Christ, as is taught in such places as Romans 3, 10, and Philippians 3. His personal piety is irrelevant. His life lived well is not the Gospel.
On page 187, Virgil Vogt is quoted as saying “If you cannot listen to your brother, you cannot listen to the Holy Spirit.” I ask, Why?
Page 188 has the most direct yet clever Roman Catholic assertion in the entire book:
“There must always be the outward authority of Scripture as well as the inward authority of the Holy Spirit. In fact, Scripture itself is a form of corporate guidance. This sounds a great deal like the Roman Catholic teaching of Partim-Partim Sufficiency- Part of God’s special revelation is contained in the Scripture, and part is contained in tradition. I suggest this is what Foster is pushing towards given many of his great spiritual directors are Catholic mystics., It is not a Biblical affirmation that would show that the Holy Spirit can and only works in the life of the believer to bring about action consistent with Holy Scriptures.
13. The Discipline of Celebration
A fun (pun intended) chapter. We, as Christians should not be afraid to celebrate with vigor to the glory of the Lord. We should not forget about the festivals and Holy Days. We should not be afraid to make a joyful noise and use any instrument to do so!
Summary: Reason One
As I have stated throughout this text is the constant disregard to context and proper exegetical teaching from the Bible. I have given many examples of such error, and have attempted to explain each. My concern is that due to that clear fact that the “Spiritual Disciplines” of the book are not all taught in the Bible, it is Foster’s direct intent to teach error. The error he teaches is not only ancient, it has an endgame of ecumenism and subjectivism. It is heresy and it must be exposed.
Summary: Reason Two
The associations and quotations in Celebration of Discipline are sufficient to give us serious pause to forward Foster’s ideas.
Foster is the founder and minister of Renovaré. This foundation is an international, New Age, ecumenical and egalitarian organization that emanates from the religious traditions of Quakerism and the Jesuit Catholics, whose message is that today's Church is missing out on some wonderful spiritual experiences that can only be found by studying and practicing the "meditative" and "contemplative" lifestyle "of early Christianity." In actuality, Renovaré espouses the use of the early pagan traditions of guided imagery and visualization, astral projection, "Zen" prayer techniques for meditation and Jungian psychology all as means of obtaining "personal spiritual renewal" in the lives of believers.
The New Geneva Study Bible affirms: “Believers are not absorbed into deity, nor do they become divine. Rather, they have received the Holy Spirit and are sons of God (John 1:12; Romans 8:9-21). As such they are being conformed to the likeness of Christ (Romans 8:29) and the image of God in them is being renewed in true righteousness.”
Thomas Merton is quoted or referenced at least ten times in this book. Merton was a Catholic monk who became closely involved with Buddhism. To say that he syncreted it with Christianity is no exaggeration. He claimed it was so. Not only does he give witness to his spiritual breakthroughs while gazing at the Buddhas (from his Asian Journal), but he spent the last measure of his life playing the apologist for the truth contained in Buddhism. This is possible due to the Vatican II decree of Nosta Aetate, the exhortation that “prudently and lovingly, through dialogue and collaboration with the followers of other religions, and in witness of Christian faith and life, acknowledge, preserve, and promote the spiritual and moral goods found among these men, as well as the values in their society and cultures.”
When the Dalai Lama is comfortable with your beliefs, you have failed to present the Gospel. This is exactly what happened after Merton’s visit to
Merton was deep into Mariolatry, considering that “It is through her hands all graces come because God has willed that she thus participate in his work for the salvation of men. ... She is the Mother of the supernatural life in us. Sanctity comes to us through her intercession. God has willed that there be no other way” (The Seven Storey Mountain, p. 251). Merton is also quoted as saying “I’m deeply impregnated with Sufism” and the more damning, “I endeavor to be the best Buddhist I can be.”
Dallas Willard is a near spiritual twin to Richard Foster. Is Dallas Willard even a Christian? Let his own words tell you: Recently at a service at Menlo Park Presbyterian Church, Dallas Willard was interviewed. When asked about what happens to a devoted practitioner of another religion at the judgment, he answered that the devout Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, all, no matter where they are or what they do who deserve to be saved, will be saved. This is because God looks at the heart. You have to love “god” and love their neighbor as themselves. That is who will be saved. “It is not about having correct beliefs about him.”
That is not good news! Didn’t Jesus say in Matthew 15 that out of the heart comes all sorts of evil? Who of us deserves to be saved? Romans 3:10 is clear: NO ONE.
When asked if Jesus is indeed “the way, truth, and life, no one comes to the Father, but by Him”, Willard answered, “That is not about Jesus, it is about God- there is a difference and we must be sure of who he is talking.” He intentionally drives a wedge between Jesus and his divinity. “Jesus does not come to us in the same form as all Christians think. This may happen through other [religious] thought.”
When asked about why would God send people to hell, he answered” I don’t think he sends anyone to hell. Anyone who, in his considered opinion, who can stand heaven will get in. People send themselves to hell.”
When asked whether or not believing that Jesus is the Christ is necessary for salvation, he answered, “We do not become righteous by having the correct beliefs, we become righteous by trusting God and living from Him. The best way to do this is to have confidence in Christ and learn about him.” Which apostle taught this? I hope Willard is simply practicing sophistry.
Madame Guyon was a 16th century Catholic Mystic. Foster mentions his experience of “the sweet sinking into Deity” as practiced and described by Madame Guyon. This woman believed that she had telepathic and empathic abilities, and wrote under direct inspiration of God. She taught that we can know of God by “passing forward into God,” going into a mindless, meditative state where we can get in touch with the Christ within the self, merge with that Christ and be lifted into ecstasy. This is all from her autobiography.
Henry Nouwen (mentioned in the bibliography) in his book Here and Now is quoted as saying “The God who dwells in our inner sanctuary is the same one who dwells in the inner sanctuary of each human being.”
There are many other notable Catholic Mystics who are mentioned in this book (I do not wish to list them all, as this letter would be volumes). They all have one thing in common: They believe that the subjective mysticism they practice is not only a better way to commune with God than trusting in His Holy Word, they believe that only by practicing this mysticism can one truly understand and commune with God.
Summary: Reason Three
Coincidentally enough, the New Age movement gained much ground in the 1970’s around the same time Foster was writing Celebration of Discipline. Interesting that C. Peter Wagner notes that in the final “Celebration” section that, “the late 1970’s [was] when God was just beginning to move the Church in
As Bob DeWaay recently stated, “The Bible nowhere describes an inward journey to explore the realm of the spirit. God chose to reveal the truth about spiritual reality through His ordained, Spirit-inspired, biblical writers. What is spiritual and not revealed by God is of the occult and, therefore, forbidden.”
Summary: Reason Four
I can imagine the obvious answer to “Why can’t I find the Gospel in Celebration of Discipline?” is that Foster is writing to a Christian reader. My problem with that answer comes from reading its 210 pages and not hearing a clear presentation of the Gospel. I would think that it would at least make an appearance by accident. Why can I learn from neo-Gnostics, pagans, and Satanists but not about the only truth that really matters? This is unfortunate and typical of liberal Christian theology abandoning Sola Scriptura and theologizing without the use of the Bible.
Given these four reasons, and the examples given throughout this review, I cannot recommend this book to any Christian for use in spiritual development and training. It has ideas that are dangerous as they draw the reader away from truth and into subjectivity.
I leave you with the wisdom of Colossians 2:6-10:
Therefore, as you received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in him, rooted and built up in him and established in the faith, just as you were taught, abounding in thanksgiving. See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ. For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, and you have been filled in him, who is the head of all rule and authority.
No comments:
Post a Comment