Thanks for this! I can say, as a Renovaré staffer, that these potential pitfalls/distortions are certainly on our radar (and, I would posit, were always on Richard and Dallas's radar.) The potential distortions of a movement do not invalidate that movement, and I think you nuance that nicely here.
A few thoughts:
- I totally agree that the growing emphasis on theosis ("participation in Christ over trying harder to be like him") is really necessary and helpful.
-I resist the notion that the Sabbath is only for the affluent/well-employed. (I know that's not exactly what the article claims but let me state it that baldly for the sake of argument.) The God who consistently exhibits the preferential option for the poor also makes quite a big deal out of observing (or receiving the gift of) the Sabbath. But maybe there is something here about how we conceive of the Sabbath (and who we unthinkingly expect to serve us in order to make it happen) - something quite antithetical to the point of the Sabbath to begin with.
- It is true that the spiritual formation conversation ala Foster, Willard, and others is regrettably dominated by white voices. But I would argue that (a) there are plenty of robust formation conversations taking place in communities of color and (b) predominantly white communities are realizing, more and more, how much there is to learn from communities who have different experiences and who may (wonderfully!) use different language and paradigms than their own. So - there's hope!
Looking forward to the follow-up piece. I'm a new subscriber to Fitch's Provocations.
While I agree with your assessments of that branch of American evangelicalism and its development, after leaving that branch as a young adult and then coming back in my 30s, I became part of a reformed world where deep “spiritual formation” was heavily emphasized and I would contend overly rigid in pushback on hyper individualism. The communal aspect is always at risk of becoming performative as well and the demands of the social contracts can become cult like. For example in the Tim Keller Redeemer World, and my own experiences in the PCA denomination, the creeds and confessions were our bread and butter in spiritual formation but could often become places of great conflict. it also provides a layer of certainty and security that passes as deep discipleship. “If I just agree with it all, I’m spiritually maturing and denying myself to follow Jesus.”
Just coming in from the other side of the evangey spectrum if you will. I appreciate your thoughts here and please don’t think I’m saying you’re wrong. I agree. The “solutions” though might take the form of discipleship that also has its own troubles 🙏 I don’t know the answers for sure. I worry about any churches that claim to right now. 👀
Good piece, Dave. Thanks. You have been careful and judicious. I suspect your words will resonate with some but the default to the Self is deeply embedded in the NA imagination so...
Good word, Fitch. I like your remark about affluence. It has been bothering me of late that the SF movement can be a bit bougie and therefore unwittingly elitist - that is, unless you have the time to do XYZ practices and the money to read XYZ books and attend this or that conference or retreat, you probably won't be able to be adequately formed.
We need more reflection around the ordinary means by which God sanctifies our lives - work, marriage (or singleness), church membership, neighborhood, etc - so that we can see with Thomas Merton that the most sanctified among us may in fact be those who have never paid a moment's notice to any of our highbrowed talk of spiritual formation.
I began reading Foster and Willard in the 1990’s and into the next century. I met Richard Foster at a Renovarre event. What interested me was their focus on community over individual spiritual development. What amazed me was how little of there spirit infused wisdom filtered down to small churches, especially in the UMC. I’ve been attempting to rectify that where I serve, but it’s a slow march in the same direction (to paraphrase Eugene Peterson).
Thanks for this, Fitch. Really great stuff. Many of us in the "spiritual formation movement" have long struggled with the individualism and underdeveloped ecclesiology in the movement. A deeper emphasis on communal formation and a robust theology of the church is desperately needed. I'm looking forward to how you develop this. Thanks so much for leading us here.
By way of historical development, I think seeing the modern spiritual formation movement beginning in the 90s may show a little recency bias. Willard's SOTD was first published in 1988 (not 1999) and of course Foster's Celebration of the Disciplines (a work based on Willard's teaching) was first published in 1978. I like to go even further back to "cross-over Catholics" like Merton and Nouwen who were writing about this stuff in the 60s and 70s and who were very influential to many evangelicals at the time.
yo.. bro... shows how late I was to the movement ... and to Dallas ... do you think I'm right that it took off as a movement in relation to the 1990's crest of the mega church evangelical movement??
Yes. I would agree. My own story had me starting off with a spiritual formation emphasis in the 80s only to be seduced (quite willingly) by the excitement of leading a mega church throughout the 90s. Our movement away from that (Renovation of the Church - 2011) began in 2000 and took almost a decade to deconstruct and reconstruct. Losing 1500 people in the process (often as a result of our own foolishness). So I have no quibble with your dates as to the movement reaching critical mass in the 90s and the first decade of the century. I was just wanting to throw in my two cents about the origins of the movement. But your critiques are right on. Keep going.
To my Wheaton Roommate... Dave, that is good stuff. But I am not sure that the movement devolved as is never came to become fully evolved. Dallas always maintained until the end of his ministry that he had never found a church that had the Great Commission as its true charter or as part of its plan for ministry..."teaching disciples to do everything that Jesus commanded" or obedience for Christlike insides. Not practices, spiritualities, even spiritual formation language and teaching but simply disciples who increasingly though stumblingly put on the character of Christ. And if that has happened it probably doesn't get media attention or has it developed enough to have made a mark we can yet see. And he was clear that when such a life is entered it is not self centered or worldly but cares for the poor and is lived in communities of Christlikeness. It is Jesus alive on the earth. I am sure that there are many who are living this out. I have met them and their communities. But they are rare. The life Dallas presented and the Gospel he proclaimed was too demanding in the eyes of those who heard it and it was never very fully embraced but as Dallas once commented to me...he felt like Ezekiel who sang love songs of God's love and people swooped rather than were set on living it.
I know like a mustard seed some work is going on that is rich, full and fruitful but we probably can't see it. When the church in some place does live it out... Dallas says we won't be able to miss it. It will shine. I am hoping for that. Keith Meyer
I wonder if something missing from this is “à la carte” or “smorgasbord” spirituality where people pick and chose the best of different spiritualities (Frasciscan, Ignatian, Benedictine, etc.) such that spirituality is just another consumer exercise. One thing evangelicals are good at is marketing faith and once something becomes popular we market the hell out of it. After all why not make money off of people trying to be better Christians.
Thanks for this provocation David. I will come back to it for careful re-readings over the next several months, and am curious to read your next article on the topic.
The topic is apropos for me as I am in early phases of on MA where my 'working title' is "an MA in corporate spiritual formation through liturgical theopoetics". I am exploring grassroots approaches for a local congregation to foster its own spiritual health, theological vision and expression of mission...
My metaphorical understanding of the concerns you raised is the gravitational pull bodies exert upon each other is a function of mass. Culture at large is voluminous. A small local congregation's ability to counter the gravitational pull is by having density... a density grown through congregational 'ownership' of theology, spirituality and mission, which occurs (I think) from a corporate culture that encourages imagination, exploration and expression.
Great read. My criticism (probably too harsh of a word) of the modern spiritual formation movement is that the one leading the spiritual formation is the author of a product they are selling. Instead of being spiritually formed to benefit your neighbor and community, you are being spiritually formed by a person you've never met for the betterment of yourself.
I think this disconnection from an actual real life mentor, and a community where you can gauge your growth makes this less about the type of spiritual formation Jesus was attempting with his disciples in more like a correspondence life coaching course.
My Wheatie roommate... Good stuff. My two cents...The "Great Omission" still stands as the great experience of the church and the spiritual formation movement though full of new language and practices and teaching...faitlure to "teachthose (baptized into the life of the Trinity) to do all I have commanded" was often to Dallas' chagrin, missed or co-opted. Dallas to the end of his life maintained the he had not found a church that had this as its charter and life with a fully engaged plan. OBEDIENCE to Christ (not disciplines to become so) to become a person who is like Him in all ways of life and communities of the same were always Dallas' bottomline. This was almost always missed and so a "devolution" is not a factor since in my opinion there are few places that get this in fullness. It is too demanding for most though Dallas maintained it was the truly easiest life. The love of God with heart, mind, soul & strength and your neighbor as yourself (neighbor including Roman soldier oppressors & the poor among you). I repeat, devolution is impossible when there was no significant purchase of the life changing Gospel. Now that I say that... Jesus works in ways not seen often immediately or on the radar of our media. A mustard seed planted by this movement won't in my opinion be seen in our churches but in some new form of church to be revealed in time. So it is too early and too unseen to measure in my opinion. I wrote in CT/Leadership that though now proclamation of the Gospel was being supplemented by proclamation of demonstration, there was still little if any demonstration. That is still true though I hope I'll be surprised by a mustard shoot of truly Christlike disicples and groups in the future of the Body of Christ in the North America as a result of Dallas' work. Love you bro! Keith
Thank you for your insightful comments. That is one of my concerns about the spiritual formation movement- individualism. Working in a non-North American context, I have seen how it has influenced the spiritual formation movement here. I always maintain that spiritual formation is personal not individualist. To me, spiritual formation is personal. communal, and missional.
I take your point about the homeless and the teaching of the Christian Sabbath. I believe the principles of the Sabbath may be used with the homeless or, in my situation, ten migrant workers sharing a single room in a dangerous neighbourhood.
I am looking forward to your further ideas on the spiritual formation movement.
I would 100% agree with these, have seen this in my own life. I found Willard and Foster a while back and was very engaged for a while with them, but eventually found that on its own it wasn't enough. Ideally churches would pursue the disciplines collectively, or together, so it isn't just about self-improvement.
I think you make some real important points here. Among them, the two that stand out for me, are the point of spiritual formation and its detachment from community.
If the point of spiritual formation is only one’s own self-enrichment, then it is no more than a self-help practice. The point, or AIM of spiritual formation must always be, in my opinion, formation into the likeness of Jesus Christ in order to fulfill his mission in the world.
Doing spiritual formation outside of the presence of Christian community allows one to make it whatever they want it to be. Thus, there is no direction or accountability for remaining true to the correct aim.
Thanks for this! I can say, as a Renovaré staffer, that these potential pitfalls/distortions are certainly on our radar (and, I would posit, were always on Richard and Dallas's radar.) The potential distortions of a movement do not invalidate that movement, and I think you nuance that nicely here.
A few thoughts:
- I totally agree that the growing emphasis on theosis ("participation in Christ over trying harder to be like him") is really necessary and helpful.
-I resist the notion that the Sabbath is only for the affluent/well-employed. (I know that's not exactly what the article claims but let me state it that baldly for the sake of argument.) The God who consistently exhibits the preferential option for the poor also makes quite a big deal out of observing (or receiving the gift of) the Sabbath. But maybe there is something here about how we conceive of the Sabbath (and who we unthinkingly expect to serve us in order to make it happen) - something quite antithetical to the point of the Sabbath to begin with.
- It is true that the spiritual formation conversation ala Foster, Willard, and others is regrettably dominated by white voices. But I would argue that (a) there are plenty of robust formation conversations taking place in communities of color and (b) predominantly white communities are realizing, more and more, how much there is to learn from communities who have different experiences and who may (wonderfully!) use different language and paradigms than their own. So - there's hope!
Looking forward to the follow-up piece. I'm a new subscriber to Fitch's Provocations.
While I agree with your assessments of that branch of American evangelicalism and its development, after leaving that branch as a young adult and then coming back in my 30s, I became part of a reformed world where deep “spiritual formation” was heavily emphasized and I would contend overly rigid in pushback on hyper individualism. The communal aspect is always at risk of becoming performative as well and the demands of the social contracts can become cult like. For example in the Tim Keller Redeemer World, and my own experiences in the PCA denomination, the creeds and confessions were our bread and butter in spiritual formation but could often become places of great conflict. it also provides a layer of certainty and security that passes as deep discipleship. “If I just agree with it all, I’m spiritually maturing and denying myself to follow Jesus.”
Just coming in from the other side of the evangey spectrum if you will. I appreciate your thoughts here and please don’t think I’m saying you’re wrong. I agree. The “solutions” though might take the form of discipleship that also has its own troubles 🙏 I don’t know the answers for sure. I worry about any churches that claim to right now. 👀
good word!!! thx.
Good piece, Dave. Thanks. You have been careful and judicious. I suspect your words will resonate with some but the default to the Self is deeply embedded in the NA imagination so...
Good word, Fitch. I like your remark about affluence. It has been bothering me of late that the SF movement can be a bit bougie and therefore unwittingly elitist - that is, unless you have the time to do XYZ practices and the money to read XYZ books and attend this or that conference or retreat, you probably won't be able to be adequately formed.
We need more reflection around the ordinary means by which God sanctifies our lives - work, marriage (or singleness), church membership, neighborhood, etc - so that we can see with Thomas Merton that the most sanctified among us may in fact be those who have never paid a moment's notice to any of our highbrowed talk of spiritual formation.
I began reading Foster and Willard in the 1990’s and into the next century. I met Richard Foster at a Renovarre event. What interested me was their focus on community over individual spiritual development. What amazed me was how little of there spirit infused wisdom filtered down to small churches, especially in the UMC. I’ve been attempting to rectify that where I serve, but it’s a slow march in the same direction (to paraphrase Eugene Peterson).
Thanks for this, Fitch. Really great stuff. Many of us in the "spiritual formation movement" have long struggled with the individualism and underdeveloped ecclesiology in the movement. A deeper emphasis on communal formation and a robust theology of the church is desperately needed. I'm looking forward to how you develop this. Thanks so much for leading us here.
By way of historical development, I think seeing the modern spiritual formation movement beginning in the 90s may show a little recency bias. Willard's SOTD was first published in 1988 (not 1999) and of course Foster's Celebration of the Disciplines (a work based on Willard's teaching) was first published in 1978. I like to go even further back to "cross-over Catholics" like Merton and Nouwen who were writing about this stuff in the 60s and 70s and who were very influential to many evangelicals at the time.
yo.. bro... shows how late I was to the movement ... and to Dallas ... do you think I'm right that it took off as a movement in relation to the 1990's crest of the mega church evangelical movement??
Yes. I would agree. My own story had me starting off with a spiritual formation emphasis in the 80s only to be seduced (quite willingly) by the excitement of leading a mega church throughout the 90s. Our movement away from that (Renovation of the Church - 2011) began in 2000 and took almost a decade to deconstruct and reconstruct. Losing 1500 people in the process (often as a result of our own foolishness). So I have no quibble with your dates as to the movement reaching critical mass in the 90s and the first decade of the century. I was just wanting to throw in my two cents about the origins of the movement. But your critiques are right on. Keep going.
To my Wheaton Roommate... Dave, that is good stuff. But I am not sure that the movement devolved as is never came to become fully evolved. Dallas always maintained until the end of his ministry that he had never found a church that had the Great Commission as its true charter or as part of its plan for ministry..."teaching disciples to do everything that Jesus commanded" or obedience for Christlike insides. Not practices, spiritualities, even spiritual formation language and teaching but simply disciples who increasingly though stumblingly put on the character of Christ. And if that has happened it probably doesn't get media attention or has it developed enough to have made a mark we can yet see. And he was clear that when such a life is entered it is not self centered or worldly but cares for the poor and is lived in communities of Christlikeness. It is Jesus alive on the earth. I am sure that there are many who are living this out. I have met them and their communities. But they are rare. The life Dallas presented and the Gospel he proclaimed was too demanding in the eyes of those who heard it and it was never very fully embraced but as Dallas once commented to me...he felt like Ezekiel who sang love songs of God's love and people swooped rather than were set on living it.
I know like a mustard seed some work is going on that is rich, full and fruitful but we probably can't see it. When the church in some place does live it out... Dallas says we won't be able to miss it. It will shine. I am hoping for that. Keith Meyer
I wonder if something missing from this is “à la carte” or “smorgasbord” spirituality where people pick and chose the best of different spiritualities (Frasciscan, Ignatian, Benedictine, etc.) such that spirituality is just another consumer exercise. One thing evangelicals are good at is marketing faith and once something becomes popular we market the hell out of it. After all why not make money off of people trying to be better Christians.
Thanks for this provocation David. I will come back to it for careful re-readings over the next several months, and am curious to read your next article on the topic.
The topic is apropos for me as I am in early phases of on MA where my 'working title' is "an MA in corporate spiritual formation through liturgical theopoetics". I am exploring grassroots approaches for a local congregation to foster its own spiritual health, theological vision and expression of mission...
My metaphorical understanding of the concerns you raised is the gravitational pull bodies exert upon each other is a function of mass. Culture at large is voluminous. A small local congregation's ability to counter the gravitational pull is by having density... a density grown through congregational 'ownership' of theology, spirituality and mission, which occurs (I think) from a corporate culture that encourages imagination, exploration and expression.
Great read. My criticism (probably too harsh of a word) of the modern spiritual formation movement is that the one leading the spiritual formation is the author of a product they are selling. Instead of being spiritually formed to benefit your neighbor and community, you are being spiritually formed by a person you've never met for the betterment of yourself.
I think this disconnection from an actual real life mentor, and a community where you can gauge your growth makes this less about the type of spiritual formation Jesus was attempting with his disciples in more like a correspondence life coaching course.
thanks for speaking into this my bro... these dynamics .. when I see them ... trouble me ...DF
The Soul of Desire - Curt Thompsobn
https://seminarynow.com/programs/soul-of-desire?utm_source=Seminary%20Now&utm_campaign=184884accc-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2023_10_16_05_02_COPY_03&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_-fc357940b9-%5BLIST_EMAIL_ID%5D
The Tension of Telling the Truth by The Allender Center on October 13, 2023
https://theallendercenter.org/2023/10/the-tension-of-telling-the-truth/
My Wheatie roommate... Good stuff. My two cents...The "Great Omission" still stands as the great experience of the church and the spiritual formation movement though full of new language and practices and teaching...faitlure to "teachthose (baptized into the life of the Trinity) to do all I have commanded" was often to Dallas' chagrin, missed or co-opted. Dallas to the end of his life maintained the he had not found a church that had this as its charter and life with a fully engaged plan. OBEDIENCE to Christ (not disciplines to become so) to become a person who is like Him in all ways of life and communities of the same were always Dallas' bottomline. This was almost always missed and so a "devolution" is not a factor since in my opinion there are few places that get this in fullness. It is too demanding for most though Dallas maintained it was the truly easiest life. The love of God with heart, mind, soul & strength and your neighbor as yourself (neighbor including Roman soldier oppressors & the poor among you). I repeat, devolution is impossible when there was no significant purchase of the life changing Gospel. Now that I say that... Jesus works in ways not seen often immediately or on the radar of our media. A mustard seed planted by this movement won't in my opinion be seen in our churches but in some new form of church to be revealed in time. So it is too early and too unseen to measure in my opinion. I wrote in CT/Leadership that though now proclamation of the Gospel was being supplemented by proclamation of demonstration, there was still little if any demonstration. That is still true though I hope I'll be surprised by a mustard shoot of truly Christlike disicples and groups in the future of the Body of Christ in the North America as a result of Dallas' work. Love you bro! Keith
Thank you for your insightful comments. That is one of my concerns about the spiritual formation movement- individualism. Working in a non-North American context, I have seen how it has influenced the spiritual formation movement here. I always maintain that spiritual formation is personal not individualist. To me, spiritual formation is personal. communal, and missional.
I take your point about the homeless and the teaching of the Christian Sabbath. I believe the principles of the Sabbath may be used with the homeless or, in my situation, ten migrant workers sharing a single room in a dangerous neighbourhood.
I am looking forward to your further ideas on the spiritual formation movement.
I would 100% agree with these, have seen this in my own life. I found Willard and Foster a while back and was very engaged for a while with them, but eventually found that on its own it wasn't enough. Ideally churches would pursue the disciplines collectively, or together, so it isn't just about self-improvement.
I think you make some real important points here. Among them, the two that stand out for me, are the point of spiritual formation and its detachment from community.
If the point of spiritual formation is only one’s own self-enrichment, then it is no more than a self-help practice. The point, or AIM of spiritual formation must always be, in my opinion, formation into the likeness of Jesus Christ in order to fulfill his mission in the world.
Doing spiritual formation outside of the presence of Christian community allows one to make it whatever they want it to be. Thus, there is no direction or accountability for remaining true to the correct aim.