BIBM 648: Christian Spiritual Formation

Bailey 1

Missional Life Initiative

Brent Bailey

BIBM 648: Christian Spiritual Formation

Dr. Samjung Kang-Hamilton

18 November 2011

Revised 1 April 2012

INTRODUCTION AND DESCRIPTION

In the spring of 2011, my coworker and close friend Jordan Bunch asked me to partner with him to lead a cohort of students in the Missional Life Initiative, a new mentoring program intended to help ACU undergraduate students develop sensitivity to God’s work in the world and the ability to actively engage that work. In its pilot year, which began in the fall of 2011, the program began with three cohorts of six to eight students, pairs of graduate student from the ACU Graduate School of Theology serving as leaders for each cohort, and other leadership from ACU faculty and staff. The students committed to various practices over the course of the year, and growth in different competencies (such as self-knowledge, ability to listen, focus on God’s Kingdom, etc.) provided measurements for the efficacy of the program. Recruitment of students took place in the spring and fall of 2011, depending heavily upon word of mouth and existing relationships between the cohort leaders and undergraduate students for this pilot year.

Our cohort had a head start on recruitment, since Bunch had begun mentoring a small community of men in his residence hall throughout the previous school year, beginning in fall 2010. For the Missional Life Initiative this year, our cohort began with nine male students: five had participated in Bunch’s mentoring community the previous year, and four were new to the community. Within this small cohort, there was surprising diversity: Among nine students, there were five different ethnicities represented, two students with prominent physical disabilities, and a mixture of sophomores and seniors. There was also a diversity of faith experiences within the cohort: Only two students had much experience with spiritual disciplines beyond their involvement with Bunch the previous year, five of our students were Bible majors, and one student was relatively new to the Christian faith. (Three of our students did not return to ACU for the spring semester, reducing our cohort down to six students.) While I initially feared this wide heterogeneity would impede the development of relationships and community, especially between the new members and those who worked with Bunch the previous year, the group’s rapid development of rapport and camaraderie laid my fears to rest. After beginning in September, the openness and trust that developed within our group amazed me, and it paved the way for profound experiences of connection and transformation with God and with each other.

THEOLOGY OF SPIRITUAL FORMATION

The process of Christian spiritual formation is directly tied to the nature of God and his interactions with his people throughout history. Arthur Holder offers a definition of Christian spirituality based on Rom 8:14-16, suggesting “spirituality” refers to “the intimate loving relationship between God’s Holy Spirit and the spirit (animating life force) of believers.”[1] Within this framework for understanding spirituality, I understand Christian spiritual formation as a situated process in which believers are enabled to live in more perfect relationship with the Trinitarian God and other people as a result of their interactions with God and people.

The process of formation involves a delicate interaction between the work of God’s Spirit and the contribution of human effort. First, we must recognize the activity of the Spirit, who is the primary agent: “Spiritual theology, as the theological ground for Christian spirituality, must be reconfigured as a theology of the work of the Holy Spirit in the Christian life as a whole.”[2] Yet our spirituality does not end with the Spirit; rather, the Spirit draws us into the eternal relationship between Father, Son, and Spirit in the Trinity: “God the Holy Spirit may thus be identified as fostering Christian spirituality by pouring out within believers a beginning of that transforming state of existence that opens up toward the infinitely sharing life of God.”[3] If the Spirit is to be understood as the real personification of the relationship between Father and Son,[4] then the Spirit is the means by which we can enter into that Trinity relationship by no prerogative of our own. The Spirit initiates, motivates, and enables our interactions with God, and those interactions are the content of our spirituality.

Second, we must not neglect the essential component of active human involvement in the process of formation. Stanley Grenz draws a distinction between “positional sanctification,” a work of the Spirit by which we are brought into “new status” with respect to God, and “conditional sanctification,” which “refers to our present spiritual condition, specifically, to the extent to which we measure up to God’s ideal in our current attitudes and actions…In short, it refers to our character and conduct.”[5] Whereas positional sanctification depends entirely upon the work of the Spirit and exists as a spiritual reality (Acts 15:11; Gal 2:15-21; 2 Thess 2:13), conditional sanctification involves synergy between an individual and the Spirit and is enacted within the present life of the believer (Rom 6:15-23, 12:1-2; Heb 12:14).[6] This second kind of sanctification has nothing to do with a works-based righteousness; instead, it is a result of God’s prevenient sanctifying work, our joining in on God’s process of changing our hearts and minds to conform to his will. This is the arena of spiritual formation in which our active participation is crucial, where we actively place ourselves in positions to encounter God’s transforming work.

The primary means by which we cooperate with the Spirit in our spiritual formation is through practices or disciplines. William Spohn suggests there are three primary components of our involvement in formation: the practical, the affective, and the transformational.[7] The practical realm of formation involves those specific practices that have developed over the course of millennia of Christian history and tradition. The spiritual exemplar is Jesus, from whom we receive examples and teachings of particular practices like prayer (Matt 6:5-13; Luke 22:39-46), solitude (Mark 1:35; Luke 4:42, 6:12), fasting (Matt 6:16-18), and generosity (Matt 6:1-4; Luke 21:1-4). Beyond Jesus, we have received the accumulated wealth of spiritual mothers and fathers who have devoted lifetimes to the pursuit of God in spiritual formation, ranging from the earliest believers to still-living spiritual mentors. In an essay on the interactions between Christian beliefs and practices, Miroslav Volf defines their interrelatedness: “Practices are essentially belief-shaped, and beliefs are essentially practice-shaping.”[8] The specific practices in which we engage should be based on our understanding of God and his work among the world; they should be reflections of our understanding of his eternal truths and of the nature of our relationship with him. Our role in spiritual formation, then, begins with our active engagement in theologically informed practices.

These practices, in turn, become the means by which God’s Spirit can begin to alter our affections, the impulses that tend to determine our feelings and our behavior. N. T. Wright suggests that character formation allows us simultaneously to conform to the will of God and to live in a way that feels authentic to ourselves: “The hard work up front bears fruit in spontaneous decisions and actions that reflect what has been formed deep within.”[9] This seems to be the kind of spiritual training described in various epistles that leads to praiseworthy character and faithful, willing obedience to God instead of burdensome, dutiful obligation (1 Cor 9:24-27; 1 Tim 4:6-8). Like practices, the desired affections are based on the nature of God: “The practices learned in communities of faith testify to the characteristic qualities of God and develop the corresponding affections.”[10] Thus the practices have value as an end, since they draw us into interactions with God; but they also have value as a means, since they may form within us a character that is close to the nature of God. The changing of our affections is part of the process of sanctification through which we are enabled to love God authentically.

The end result of our participation in practices and the reshaping of our affections is complete transformation: “Christian spirituality envisions a fundamental transformation from self-centered existence to theocentric existence.”[11] Transformation is at the heart of God’s work of spiritual formation, since the practices that are so tied to human experience ultimately result in a turning of our attention away from our particular experience and toward the glory of God revealed throughout history. We see evidence of this sort of transformation throughout the scriptures: “I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me.”[12] Although the scriptures include a number of different images for spiritual formation,[13] the sort of transformation discussed seems to be nothing less than a complete refocusing of one’s behavior and affections away from self and towards God, with the result that God receives all glory and praise.

The outcome of this transformation—regardless of whether that transformation is completed in the span of an individual’s present life—is that we become kingdom people, the kind of people who are capable of living within the kingdom of God as inaugurated by the incarnation of Jesus. Jesus’ sermon in Matt 5-7, for example, lays out the sort of behavior to which we are called as a result of the reality of God’s reign, with the expectation that we are to “be perfect” in the same way our “heavenly Father is perfect”;[14] but surely this standard of behavior requires God’s transformative work. As we become the transformed people of God and citizens in his kingdom, we help bring about the reality of God’s reign:

In the Exodus, God’s action of liberation opens up for the freed community new possibilities for life in relationship with God. Likewise, the disciples of Jesus came to understand that the events they had witnessed had also disclosed new possibilities for human life. They came to believe that the possibilities generated were not for one community alone but were offered to the whole of humanity. The church, therefore, may be understood as the community that professes faith in the God who is the source of these possibilities and which, in response, witnesses to them and works to realize them both in its own life and in the wider world. The church is thus the people of the new creation.[15]

God’s work of spiritual formation does not stop at the individual level; rather, God spiritually forms people so that they can be the means by which he brings his kingdom on the earth.

Thus Christian spiritual formation is intrinsically tied to relationship, a consideration of and interaction with something that is foundationally other. The initial “other” is the Trinitarian God, but our interaction with that eternal relationship draws us into other relationships: “As humanity comes to participate more deeply in this trinitarian knowing and loving of all things, it becomes more able to see the divine purpose in all things: a desire to delight the other, to give joy, and to share together in the happiness of mutual life.”[16] If, as defined above, Christian spiritual formation involves increasing participation in the relationship within God, then greater relationality seems to be a natural character development for the person involved in spiritual formation. Grenz identifies the kind of community that results from spiritual formation: “The Spirit’s work in salvation leads to the establishment of community—our enjoyment of fellowship with God, with one another, and with all creation.”[17] It is impossible to conceive of Christian spiritual formation as an individual pursuit, then, because Christian spirituality at its core depends on one’s relationship with God and necessarily involves (or at least comes to involve) other relationships.

For this reason, the presence of a supportive, cooperative community is usually a necessary component of spiritual formation. The scriptures speak of this necessity: “Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your minds, so that you may discern what is the will of God—what is good and acceptable and perfect…Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep. Live in harmony with one another.”[18] Because the process of spiritual formation involves enculturation from the culture of the world into the Kingdom of God, the presence of community provides supportive coworkers who affirm God’s work and God’s presence. William Willimon describes the difficulty of following a Christian ethic on one’s own: “The lone individual, attempting to stand alone, is no match for the subtle and persistent pressures of the empire…It is the church that makes Christian ethics make sense.”[19] Community provides accountability and assurance for the reality of what is unseen, namely, the presence of God and his subtle work among us. Ultimately, the relationships within this community become a living testimony to God’s work of formation, since the process of formation involves God’s Spirit inviting people to experience the relationship between Father, Son, and Spirit and to begin emulating the nature of God in the context of relationship.

PRACTICES

In line with this theological foundation for spiritual formation, when our students committed to participate in the Missional Life Initiative for the course of the year, their commitments (along with those of us who participated in leadership roles) involved dedicating themselves to seven different practices. The practices involve varying degrees of community participation (ranging from individual practices to practices that involve all three cohorts of students) and allow freedom for personalization, that is, choices within certain broad practices to allow students to find which specific disciplines are most effective for them. The seven practices to which the community committed, correlated with Adele Calhoun’s disciplines from the Spiritual Disciplines Handbook, include:[20]

1. Daily time in solitude with God (“Contemplation,” 48-51; “Solitude,” 111-4; “Devotional Reading,” 167-71).
2. Weekly gatherings with the cohort (“Community,” 129-31; “Covenant Group,” 132-4; “Small Group,” 148-50).
3. (Approximately) monthly retreats or gatherings with all three cohorts (“Retreat,” 66-69; “Teachability,” 82-4; “Unplugging,” 85-8).
4. Weekly meeting with a spiritual friend from within the cohort (“Confession and Self-Examination,” 91-4; “Accountability Partner,” 122-5; “Spiritual Friendship,” 151-4).
5. Monthly spiritual direction meeting with a cohort leader (“Spiritual Direction,” 115-7; “Discipling,” 135-7; “Mentoring,” 141-3).
6. Regular Kingdom-oriented service (“Service,” 144-7; “Compassion,” 183-5; “Humility,” 190-2).
7. Regular sacrificial giving or attention to stewardship (“Care of the Earth,” 180-2; “Justice,” 193-5; “Stewardship,” 196-9).

Although I committed alongside the students to participate in each practice, the practices in which I was most directly involved in mentoring the students were the weekly gatherings with the cohort, as Bunch and I led them together, and the monthly spiritual direction meeting with a cohort leader, as I was responsible for coaching four of the students every month.

EXPERIENCE

Our weekly cohort gatherings most closely correlated to Calhoun’s fourth section, “Share My Life With Others,” in which she describes the blessing of community: “In the company of others we make our journey and learn to tell the truth about ourselves. Interacting with others we learn the vulnerability of giving and receiving love.”[21] Our group met weekly for about an hour and a half each week in one of the men’s residence halls on campus where seven of our students lived. The primary purpose of our weekly gatherings was to provide accountability and encouragement for each student as he sought growth through the other six disciplines, so the content of our gathering varied from week to week. Every week, about a third of our time together involved welcoming the students to “check in” by naming their feelings and inviting them to offer words of encouragement to each other. The remainder of our time together typically alternated weekly between prayerful discussion over a topic generated by the lives of the students and the communal practice of a spiritual discipline, intended to introduce the students to the practice of that discipline for use in their daily individual time with God.

Each week, we invited each student to “check in” with the group, using feeling words to describe the most significant circumstances of their lives, before opening the floor for the students to encourage one another. In her description of “Small Groups,” Calhoun offers this practice: “Intentionally opening myself to others and listening to their insights about my life and journey.”[22] As each student was “opening” himself to the others, the other students were asked to remain silent, listening without asking questions. From very early in our time as a community, our students were very upfront with their feelings and life experiences, letting each other in to the most significant movements in their lives and how they saw God at work in those different movements. They were very open about struggles with sin, joyful opportunities, difficulties in relationships, victories in their spiritual journeys, frustrations with God, and many other important life happenings. Students who began the semester with timidity quickly recognized the atmosphere of vulnerability and opened up within a few weeks. Each week, after every student had shared, we would then open the floor for students to spontaneously encourage each other, providing (as Calhoun says) “insights” about each other’s “life and journey.” Our students evinced deep maturity in their abilities to connect with each other and to offer genuine, heartfelt words of encouragement, often prefacing each statement with some variation of, “I love you.” They often shared about similar experiences (“I know how you feel.”), named virtues they saw within each other (“You are always such an encouraging person.”), or offered words of hope (“God is with you through this trial.”). This weekly time of sharing and encouraging contributed to the cohort’s quick harmony and mutual empathy, and it enabled the students to recognize God’s work within their own lives and the lives of their brothers in community.