Spiritual depression is an
issue I have certainly struggled with over the years, and something I know I
will be writing about again here.
Today however, I don’t
want to focus on the issue itself but an area of theology which for me has
often been the trigger for hitting a spiritual low.
What I want to discuss are
the teachings and books that you come across every so often that for one reason
or another, even when read thoughtfully, can feel like they are just too much
to take. The subject matter they deal with, or the conclusions they come to, are
just so strong that your assurance, and therefore your hope can begin to slide.
One occasion that
particularly sticks out in my mind is visiting my friend Matthew in Oxford in
about 2006. We were both sitting reading some very strong Puritan paperbacks in
his room (An Alarm to the Unconverted by Joseph Alleine was one of them I
think). After a period of silent reading and concerned faces all round Matthew eventually
said ‘It steals your assurance, doesn’t it?’. Sadly, I had to agree with him.
Now don’t get me wrong I
agree totally with the necessity of real repentance (importantly motivated by a
correct view of what God has done) and the reality of the cost of discipleship.
And I often lament how much the modern
church often ignores these essentials.
But every so often I have
come across a book or sermon that has pushed these two ideas so far that in all
honesty they lead me to despair.
The first significant
occasion I can remember this happening was as an undergraduate I came across
George Whitefield’s sermon ‘The Almost Christian’. On the whole I think I managed
to grasp and agree with what he was getting at. But at the same time I could
find no basis for ever being sure that you weren’t an ‘almost Christian’. The
unhelpful application I took from it was simply just try harder because you are
probably not saved.
A more extended and no
less scary version of this idea is a full length book by Matthew Meade (1630?–99)
on the idea of the almost Christian.
John Flavel (1627-91)manages
to be scare even more with his 'The Touchstone of Christian Sincerity', which basically leads
to the conclusion that none of what you say or do proves that you either are or
are not a Christian. Any of the fruit in your life may still lead you to being
deceived about your true state before God.
Solomon Stoddard’s (1643-1729)
‘A Guide to Christ’ requires you to pass through so many complicated ‘stages’ of
conversion and humiliation that it left me convinced that never mind me being a
Christian, no one I even knew could possibly be genuinely converted.
John Bunyan at times moves
in a slightly different direction and simply talks about the sheer difficulty
and scarcity of salvation. Just have a look at his ‘The Straight Gate, or Great Difficulty of Going to Heaven’ or if you can find it, one of the most extreme books
I have ever read – an exposition of Luke 13:24 ‘Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will
seek to enter in, and shall not be able.’
Moving to more Pietist
literature we have a book by Daniel Dyke called the ‘Mystery of self-deceiving’.
Having read some of it I can certainly agree with the review:
‘This frightening book
assumes that in order to be able to deal with man’s religious difficulty one
must first understand it fully. It then proceeds to dissect the human heart
fibre by fibre and cell by cell. No corner is left unexplored, no crevice forgotten,
no raw nerve kept mercifully unexposed.’
Ernest Stoeffler, The Rise
of Evangelical Pietism p.74
Here is a little taster
from its opening pages:
‘Many natural men there
are whom God never renewed by his grace, in whom yet he so moderateth and
bridleth many corruptions as pride, lust, cruelty, etc. that they break not
forth. Hence such men deceitfully imagine that they are framed of purer mold,
and are of better nature and disposition, free altogether from such corruptions
because free from the annoyance of them…Lest therefore we deceive ourselves in
this point, it standeth us in hand, diligently to examine whether the rest and
silence of our corruption be from the restraining, or the renewing spirit, from
the grace of God suppressing it, or oppressing it, from want of mind disposed,
or of an occasion to be proposed for the drawing forth of corruption?’
Mystery of Self-Deceiving
p.34
Finally, for a whole
bookshop which seems dedicated to the scariest books you can find check out
here.
So what am I getting at?
Well very basically I find
reading much of this kind of stuff hard. I can’t imagine what it would have
been like at the time it was written.
Clearly there are some
Christians who find this writing encouraging, otherwise these websites
and bookshops wouldn’t exist. But I am afraid it just leads me to be being
seriously discouraged.
It is this kind of
thinking that probably affects my assurance more than anything. After all there
is no clear level to be attained too. How do you know you have repented enough?
Counted the cost enough? It feels as if any realistic basis of assurance is
taken from you.
I suppose a sensible step
forward when looking at all of this is that the context needs to be remembered.
These writers obviously did not set out to purposely lead people to despair. As Bunyan says to his readers: 'this book is not prepared to take away true grace from any'. They just wanted to ensure you were definitely converted. When it comes to sincerity of heart they took it very
seriously, and they were absolutely right to. They wanted to leave no
possibility at all for false conversion. But at the same time I can’t help
feeling that perhaps in seeking that end they may have pushed things too far. I
get a sense that any sort of actual sanctification is in reality unobtainable,
and even if you have experienced something it is more than likely false and
simply a trick of your own corrupt bias or indeed the devil. And to begin to
think that way is obviously very discouraging.
But at the same time I
need to be careful. Three things:
Firstly, I know from
experience that quite often I’m too slow to really understand what they are
saying at times. I can sometimes focus far too much on just one statement and
then miss the bigger picture of what they are trying to convey. Many of these
books and sermons are enormous and are very heavy throughout. Just reading a
few pages can easily lead you to the wrong conclusions.
Secondly, I need to
remember the culture of the time too. A Philip Yancey book would never have
reached these hard men of the past.
Thirdly, I love these guys
– they are some of the best ever. I know that I will read their books and
sermons for the rest of my life. The vast majority of what they say is
massively helpful.
And this leads me to the other
side of the coin. While many of the Puritans and Pietists and those who
followed them have lots of this ridiculously introspective stuff, they also
have a wealth of unbelievably encouraging publications too.
Take ‘A lifting up for theDowncast’ by William Bridge, or ‘Come and Welcome to Jesus Christ’ by John
Bunyan as just two examples. These are books that in the very strongest of
terms encourage you to never give up. They couldn’t fail to warm the heart of
even the most despairing Christian. And there are many more like them.
Have a look at Jonathan
Edwards ‘The Religious Affections’. I know for sure that plenty of what he has
written can be very strong and scary, just look at these sermon titles. But in
terms of gaining real biblical assurance, this book cannot be missed. I found
it to be a real antidote to getting lost and overwhelmed when trying to gain real biblical assurance.
(It is a massive book, so
for a bit of a taster of its main teaching have a look at this amazing sermon.
Definitely one of my favourites ever.)
So, my conclusion.
I want finish with a
question. I am well aware that so much of today’s post-evangelical church culture pushes
easy believism and so much of the wrong thinking that goes with it; but in trying to respond to this is it possible to make the narrow way too
narrow?
Thankfully I think I have
discovered that I am not the only person to have considered this issue before.
The Scottish preacher
James Fraser (1639-98) complained that part of the reason for his lack of
assurance during the first three years after his conversion was that the devil
was determined to make him doubt ‘by proposing false marks, and making me to imagine
grace to be another thing than indeed it was; and by inconsiderate reading of
marks of sanctification given in good books, some of which I found afterwards
not well cautioned.’
Am I a Christian? p.5-6
John MacArthur talks of ‘A
chronic uncertainty that leads to a preoccupation with oneself, one’s fears,
and one’s failings. It results in a vacillating, feeble faith. That tendency plagued
the church in earlier ages, and sadly there are still whole denominations today
where true, settled assurance is almost unheard of.’
and
‘Some older books make
assurance dependent on such high standards of personal holiness that they
render real certainty virtually unobtainable.’
Foreword to Donald S.
Witney, How can I be sure I am a Christian? p.7-8
Looking back again to
Pietism, Mark Talbot helpfully points out that they can sometimes be guilty of
an “experientialism” that undermines confidence in salvation by grace alone, individualism
that encourages followers to approach the Scriptures in naïve, undisciplined
and even dangerous ways, and perfectionism that tempts people to substitute
legalism and moralism for the “biblically-authorized . . . means of grace."
Roger E. Olson commenting
on the analysis of Mark R.Talbot in Pietism: Myths and Realities p.4
Also at times Pietism
‘exhibited little glow and less humaneness. The Christian way was set forth as
the way of rigid and merciless self-analysis in the mirror of the Word and
under the glare of the white light of Godly logic.’
F. Ernest Stoeffler, The
Rise of Evangelical Pietism p.75
This whole issue is
obviously such a difficult balance, but it is vital we get it right. I hope the
brief thoughts above in some way begin to make sense of such a difficult area of
theology.
RJRIII
1. It has to flow
