|

Simon Altaf with Howard Conder on Revelation TV

Its a package take it and be
guaranteed eternity with Him or remain outside
to suffer eternally.
Choice
is clear,
either
you have the Son or you
have nothing!
For they have consulted together with one consent: they are confederate against thee:
Psalm 83:5
|
Dear Defender of
Richard Foster,
Thank
you for your detailed response and follow up regarding the teachings of
Richard Foster. I have studied, pondered, and prayed about your response.
I thank God that you affirm that you are a “washed in the blood believer.”
It is also refreshing that I get such an email in which the writer is really
thinking and using Scripture to reason, exactly as Paul did, rather than
responding with feelings and ad hominim attacks. I did not perceive that
you were attacking me personally, but rather my arguments. I will endeavor
to do the same, as I too champion and hunger for the truth. And though I
still disagree with you, I do admire your articulate arguments...and think
you may be a better defender of Richard Foster's teachings than Richard
Foster himself. You are such a worthy debater, I am going to try to do my
utmost to recruit you...and possibly even minister to you. I'm sure you
will have a response. Based on your statement of truly yearning for the
truth, I hope you will hear me out and that I will make my case with
gentleness and respect, and pray that I succeed in persuading you.
I think we can agree that Richard
Foster quotes or endorses a number of Roman Catholic theologians and
“masters” as Richard Foster calls them. I think you will also agree that
the intent of the book is ecumenical, as this is affirmed by D. Elton
Trueblood who wrote the Foreward in which he states: “The purpose here is
not sectarian but genuinely ecumenical.” (p. x) I think you will also
agree that he quotes a number of Roman Catholics repeatedly, not simply
anecdotally, but as spiritual resources and even giants in the faith. And
perhaps the capper that Richard Foster and Renovare are ecumenical is that
both Roman Catholic Sister Thomas Bernard who actively pursues dialogue with
Buddhism is Director of The Spirituality Centre, CATHOLIC ARCHDIOCESE of Los
Angeles, and Rev. Msgr. Royale M. Vadakind Director, Commission on
ecumenical & inter-religious affairs, catholic archdiocese of Los
Angeles. have sat on RENOVARE'S STEERING COMMITTEE. [emphasis mine]
Perhaps you are familiar with the
contents of the Council of Trent which is binding on all Roman
Catholics, meaning it would be binding on every Roman Catholic teacher that
Foster quotes and promotes. It could be argued that the Desert
Fathers and the Benedictine Order preceded the Council of Trent so that they
are not personally responsible for doctrines that were codified and enforced
by the Roman Catholic Church. This would be only partially correct because
the Roman Catholic Church had long held the views of the Council of Trent.
The Council simply codified these doctrines. But this certainly would not
excuse Ignatius Loyola. And it would not excuse all Benedictines subsequent
to the Council of Trent unless they renounced their vows. Remember this
every time Richard Foster quotes a Roman Catholic teacher or “master” or
“contemplative mystic” as he some times calls them, he would have to know
that they believe and are bound by the Roman Catholic Council of Trent. As
you probably know, the Council of Trent anathematizes (curses) everyone who
is not Roman Catholic and who does not subscribe to the list of doctrines in
that document. For your reference here are some websites which document the
authenticity of the Council of Trent as well as the fact that the current
Pope still upholds the Council of Trent for ALL Catholics:
In
January 1996, Pope John Paul II commemorated the 450th anniversary of the
opening of the Council of Trent by visiting Trento, Italy, and affirming
that Trent's declarations “maintain all their value.” [emphasis mine]
The Council of Trent was conducted by four different popes (Paul III, Julius
III, Paul IV, Pius IV) between the years 1545 to 1565, and had the two-fold
goal of bringing reform to Catholicism and condemning and hindering the
growth of Protestantism. A series of anathemas were issued against
Protestant doctrine. The Index of Prohibited Books was set up, condemning
authors and writings which were deemed anti-Catholic. During the era of
Trent, the barbarous Inquisition was further unleashed against those who
dared to reject Roman heresies.
In 1564 the doctrines of Trent were summarized in a papal bull entitled
The Tridentine Profession of Faith. Dr. Raymond Surburg notes that “all
Roman Catholic clergy and teachers must subscribe to it as well as converts
to the faith from Protestantism. The person subscribing to it must swear
true obedience to the Pope” (The Christian News, July 10, 1995, p.
6).
An
official statement of the doctrines approved at Trent were issued in 1566 in
the Roman Catechism.
The Council of Trent denied every Reformation doctrine, including Scripture
alone and grace alone. Trent hurled 125 anathemas (eternal damnation)
against Bible-believing Christians, including these: [emphasis mine]
“If any
one shall deny that the body and blood together with the soul and divinity
of our Lord Jesus Christ, and therefore entire Christ, are truly, really,
and substantially contained in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist; and
shall say that He is only in it as a sign, or in a figure, or virtually--let
him be accursed” (Canon 1).
“If any one shall say that the substance of the bread and wine remains in
the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist, together with the body and blood
of our Lord Jesus Christ, and shall deny that wonderful and singular
conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the body, and of the
whole substance of the wine into the blood, the outward forms of the bread
and wine still remaining, which conversion the Catholic Church most aptly
calls transubstantiation--let him be accursed” (Canon 2).
“If any man shall say that Christ, the only begotten Son of God, is not to
be adored in the holy sacrament of the Eucharist, even with the open worship
of latria, and therefore not to be venerated with any peculiar festal
celebrity, nor to be solemnly carried about in processions according to the
praiseworthy, and universal rites and customs of the holy Church, and that
he is not to be publicly set before the people to be adored, and that his
adorers are idolaters--let him be accursed” (Canon 6).
“If anyone shall say that the ungodly man is justified by faith only so as
to understand that nothing else is required that may cooperate to obtain the
grace of justification, and that it is in no wise necessary for him to be
prepared and disposed by the motion of his own will ... let him be
accursed” (Canon 9).
“If anyone shall say that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence
in the divine mercy pardoning sins for Christ's sake, or that it is that
confidence alone by which we are justified ... let him be accursed”
(Canon 12).
[emphases mine]
SOURCE: http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/pope-affirms-trent.html
And
here is the document itself:
The Council of Trent
http://history.hanover.edu/early/trent.html
So, no matter how passionate we
Protestants are in proclaiming that we are Christians, Roman Catholicism
according to the Council of Trent would still consider us cursed (eternally
damned) and not saved. And in addition to us Protestants that are cursed
(according to this document), the Roman Catholic Council of Trent would
anathematize Richard Foster because he is a Quaker; and George Fox, the
Founder of the Quakers, whom Foster also quotes. Ironically, this contrasts
Vatican II which says all religions are manifestations of God, and
thus worthy of our study and respect. This is a glaring contradiction which
has never been rectified.
Incidentally, George Fox was
arrested for refusing to take an oath, believing it to be unbiblical.
Another irony is that Richard Foster (a Quaker) sets up oaths and covenants
on his Renovare website. Roman Catholicism collides with what George Fox
and the original Quakers believed and it most certainly collides with the
Council of Trent. As to what Quakers believe and why we should both be
concerned, I invite you to visit this site:
http://www.bible.ca/cr-quakers.htm
Also, in a quote from Al Dager:
“The
history and philosophy of Quakerism are marked by the mystical Early
Quakerism especially was given over to the inducement of trances, violent
shaking, (hence the name 'Quakers'), glossolalia, visions and mindless
ecstasy."” Dager, Media Spotlight p.13)
Violent shaking and mindless ecstasy
is also at the heart of the Toronto Blessing, Alpha Course, i.e., the
“Laughing (and barking like dogs) Movement.” And trances was one of the
spiritual exercises of Ignatius Loyola, whom Foster quotes glowingly. So it
is not surprising that Richard Foster would connect and identify himself
with both John Wimber (The Vineyard) and Ignatius Loyola (Jesuits). And I
can't help but be baffled that Richard Foster (a pacifist Quaker) would
promote Ignatius Loyola who is historically known to have taken up arms to
kill hundreds of thousands of Christians; while George Fox himself, being
the Founder of Quakers, believed as one of their doctrines: “Christians
should not fight with carnal weapons.” This idea gives a whole new spin to
the Scripture in Amos which states: “Can two walk together, except they be
agreed?” Amos 3:3 And does anyone seriously believe that the Roman Catholic
Church would exempt Quakers (i.e., Richard Foster) from all of the rest of
the Protestant Sects during the Reformation in their scourge to purge the
church of such sects? Christians have a case of collective amnesia, or
simply not being aware of what Roman Catholicism really teaches in the still
binding Council of Trent.
Seemingly in accordance with Vatican
II (that all religions are manifestations of God), referenced below is a
documented photo of the Pope kissing the Koran. Richard Foster is promoting
Roman Catholic teachers whose Vicar on Earth (the Pope) embraces still
another daughter of Babyon (Islam), responsible for still millions of deaths
of countless more martyrs for Christ. Richard Foster should not embraces
the teachings of this false religion of Roman Catholicism...and worse
stumble Evangelical Christians to do the same.
Source of Photo of Pope Kissing
the Koran:
http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/popekiss.jpg
EMPTYING THE MIND
In
your email you contend that emptying the mind is NOT what Richard Foster
teaches as his definition of Christian Meditation. Below I explain the
contradiction of Richard Foster's two editions (the 1978 Edition vs. the 25th
Anniversary Edition). You should be aware that emptying the mind is at the
heart of the philosophy of still another Roman Catholic Jesuit monk that
Richard Foster touts, and that is Jean-Pierre de Caussade. Richard Foster
promotes de Caussade in both editions of Celebration of Discipline.
I had always wondered where Richard Foster may have gotten this idea (for
his 1978 Definition of Christian Meditation). Entering into nothingness (“Etre
dans le rien”) is exactly what de Caussade taught. De Caussade also taught
“annihilation of our own spirit”....a parallel idea to entering into
nothingness. The only problem is that there is no such concept of
“annihilation of our own spirit” taught in the Bible. Even for the wicked,
one's spirit is eternal. The difference is where one will spend eternity.
The
idea that “entering into nothingness” or “annihilation of our own spirit” is
what is meant by entering into stillness is a complete distortion of the
true meaning of Biblical text which uses the term “be still” (see my
commentary below on stillness). If this what Richard Foster believes and
promotes (and he does promote Jean-Pierre de Caussade's teachings both in
his books and as a valuable resource on his Renovare website) as Christian,
God help us!
Jean-Pierre de Caussade:
"Etre Dans le Rien"
"...often indeed God places certain souls in this state,
which is called emptiness of the spirit or of the intelligence; it is
also called: being in nothingness (etre dans le rien). This annihilation of
our own spirit disposes wonderfully to receive that of Jesus Christ.
This mystical death of the operations of our own activity renders our soul
apt for the reception of divine operations."
[emphasis mine]
from a letter to Sister
Mary-Antoinette de Mahuet – 1731
“Through the habit of letting drop our useless thoughts one may pass whole
days without thinking at all, as if one has become stupid.”
SOURCE: http://www.geocities.com/brianperkins77/167etredanslerien.htm
Here is another quote from de Caussade that should be troubling:
"So
we follow our wandering paths, and the very darkness acts as our guide and
our doubts serve to reassure us."
Christians should recognize these quotes as none other than Tibetian
Buddhism which teaches that spiritual awakening and the path to
enlightenment is the “realization of emptiness” and in the Zen idea of
“realizing no mind.” It is no wonder that Richard Foster would be such a
devout fan of Thomas Merton who defended and practiced Buddhism and also
extensively quotes Jeanne-Pierre de Caussade. But Jesus said be sure that
the light that is in you is NOT darkness!
Still another quote from de Caussade:
“This fortunate habit keeps me out of danger and, in a
certain way, prevents me thinking, judging or speaking evil of anyone.”
This quote sounds a lot like another myth, circulated even among Evangelical
Christians which says “never say anything about anyone unless you can say
something good.” This philosophy sounds good...and it is certainly a
philosopy that seems right unto man. But the ultimate and fair question is
whether or not it is biblically grounded. The answer is unequivocally no.
There is not one single example in Scripture where anything good was said
about any individual who was determined to be a false prophet or false
teacher.
Furthermore, did Jesus follow de Caussade's advice with the Pharisees whom
he called “brood of vipers”, “white washed sepulchres” and “sons the of
devil?”
Did
Paul follow de Caussade's advice in calling the teachings of Philetus and
Hymenaus “gangrene in the Body of Christ,” or “anyone teaching another
gospel eternally damned” when addressing the Galatians?
Did
Peter follow de Caussade's advice in calling certain men “brute
beasts...slaves of depravity,” “blots and blemishs”, “accursed brood”,
“springs without water...blackest darkness is reserved for them?”
Did
Jude follow de Caussade's advice in calling certain men “unreasoning
animals”, “clouds without rain”, “autumn trees without fruit...twice dead”,
“wild waves of the sea, foaming up their shame”, “wandering stars” and also
calling certain men “blemishes at your feasts” and “for whom the blackest
darkness has been reserved for them?”
Finally, the eschatological ramifications of de Caussade's statement are
staggering, because the Apostle John marks persons as deceivers and
antichrists. How are we as responsible Christians to not correctly beware
of and warn of antichrists without describing them as evil men?
In
the Last Days, are we to not call evil the final Antichrist and his False
Prophet when he comes on the scene in order to not be deceived into taking
the mark of the beast? Paul tells us the evil men will wax worse and worse.
Isaiah tells us “woe to them who call evil good,” while de Caussade tells
us not to say anything evil about anyone. But thank God, none of true
prophets and apostles followed de Caussade's advice if they were good
shepherds guarding the flock from wolves in sheep's clothing and without
cease, warning them to not be deceived!
De
Caussade would have had to remove all of the Scriptures identifying evil men
when he preaches or teaches or counsels. De Caussade's advice directly
collides with Scripture after Scripture and reveals either his lack of
knowledge of Scripture, or willfull ignorance. This is not a matter of
simply hollow and deceptive philosophy, which is damaging enough, but beyond
that, de Caussade's teaching is corrupt, and corrosive to the Body of
Christ. It is not surprising that Richard Foster (and psychologist Larry
Crabb) would quote de Caussade, because this philosophy of seeing Christ in
everyone fits right in with the teachings of the Benedictine Order whose
teachers they often quote. And it fits right in with George Fox, the
founder of Quakers, whom Foster quotes:
“You will say, Christ saith this, the apostles say this;
but what canst thou say? Art thou a child of Light, and hast thou walked in
the Light, and what thou speakest, is it inward from God?” George Fox
It is no wonder that people see
the line being blurred between Eastern and Christian Meditation, if not
morphing them into virtually the same thing! Jesus Christ dwells as
UNAPPROACHABLE Light, whom no man has seen or can see!
"Who
only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto;
whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting.
Amen." I Timothy 6:16
It is
obvious from this passage that Jesus Christ cannot be seen. See an
explanation on concerns about Richard Foster's teaching on this in the
section below on “Astral Travel.”
Ignatius Loyola and the Jesuit Order
Richard Foster defends the teaching of
Ignatius Loyola, founder of
the Jesuit Order, which is responsible for the murder of millions of true
saints, and the persecution of countless more true saints who were running
for their lives. One million poor Waldenses perished in France; nine
hundred thousand orthodox Christians were slain in less than thirty years
after the institution of the order of the Jesuits. (SOURCE:
http://www.the-highway.com/eu_Bennett.html). For more proof that
the Jesuit Order is heretical, here is part of the oath they take:
When a Jesuit of the minor rank is to be elevated to
command, he is conducted into the Chapel of the Convent of the Order, where
there are only three others present, the principal or Superior standing in
front of the altar. On either side stands a monk, one of whom holds a banner
of yellow and white, which are the Papal colours, and the other a black
banner with a dagger and red cross above a skull and crossbones, with the
word INRI,
and below them the words IUSTUM NECAR REGES IMPIUS. The
meaning of which is:
"It is just to exterminate or annihilate impious or heretical Kings,
Governments, or Rulers." SOURCE:
http://www.acts2.com/thebibletruth/Jesuit_Oath.htm
Ignatius was the first general of the Jesuit army. The Jesuit army
infiltrated churches to destroy all that were not related to the mother
church. One of the bloodiest times in the history of mankind, the Jesuits
were probably the most cruel and fierce as they justified torture and murder
for the church. Loyola's spiritual exercises were used by the Jesuits and
they would put themselves into a trance and levitate. The Jesuits were
responsible for the Inquisition. Loyola's JESUIT ORDER under his personal
direction was responsible for the MARTYRDOM OF COUNTLESS NUMBERS OF GOD'S
SAINTS who would not bow the knee to the papal demand for unconditional
obedience. Furthermore, Richard Foster's bent to ecumenism might be
acceptable to many Protestants, but it would be impossible for Ignatius
Loyola to desire unity and embrace the very saints he anathematized and
slew, thinking he was doing God a favor. Richard Foster should not want us
to draw our inspiration from Ignatius Loyola.
Richard Foster quotes and endorses a number of what he calls “Desert
Fathers.” It is no secret that “Desert Fathers” refers to gnostic Roman
Catholic and Eastern Orthodox mystics. Gnosticism is one of the first
major heresies in the church, opposed by both the Apostle Paul and many
early Church Fathers. I point this out in my article on the Enneagram which
is also promoted by Richard Foster. In short, thanks to Thomas Merton (one
of Foster's chief mentors), a number of other Roman Catholic teachers, and
Richard Foster himself, Roman Catholicism has become the Trojan Horse in the
Evangelical Church, gradually nullifying the Reformation and insulting every
saint burned at the stake who could simply have affirmed unity with Roman
Catholicism and saved their lives, rather than thinking and proclaiming Sola
Scripture and by faith alone we are saved. Richard Foster believes that the
Holy Spirit is going to unite Protestants and Roman Catholics. The Holy
Spirit may unite individual true believers, but ecumenical unity with Roman
Catholicism and its teachings can never happen at the expense of truth.
Roman Catholic teachings which place traditions over Scripture are both
Apostate and Pagan...Roman Catholicism can NEVER unite with Protestantism.
Furthermore, Roman Catholicism is a religion of necromancy, in that its
doctrine promotes praying to Mary and a host of other dead saints. It
collides with the Second Commandment that prohibits even having other idols
(statues of saints) before you, let alone praying to them, for God is a
jealous God.
Richard Foster endorses the kind of pray known as “cataphatic spirituality”
which is praying before icons or images of saints (definition). If there
remains any doubt as to the great quantity of Roman Catholic teachers and
ministries Richard Foster advocates, I invite you to read the index in the
copy of Celebration of Discipline that you possess, check the index
of all of Foster's books, and finally, go to his own Renovare website to see
all of the Roman Catholic resources he promotes. His website is:
http://www.renovare.org. Richard Foster needs to mark these
teachers, not promote them!
Now, I would humbly like to address some of the points in your letter:
CHRISTIAN MEDITATION AND THE ALPHA STATE
Defender of Richard Foster's Comment:
Upon
reading and re-reading Chapter 2 (The Discipline of Meditation) in
Celebration of Discipline, 1998 edition (the edition that I happen to own),
I find that your quote is decidedly NOT how Mr. Foster defines Christian
meditation, at least in the book I own. He says on page 17, "Christian
meditation, very simply, is the ability to hear God's voice and obey his
word . . . . It involves no hidden mysteries, no secret mantras, no mental
gymnastics, no esoteric flights into the cosmic consciousness." His
continual emphasis on Christ as the focus of meditation is woven throughout
the entire chapter. There is hardly a sentence that does not echo this
message. Again, on page 20, "What happens in meditation is that we create
the emotional and spiritual space which allows Christ to construct an inner
sanctuary in the heart." You invite me to find one single verse that
supports Mr. Foster's definition. According to the definition he gave on
page 17, every verse that I could find touching on meditation in the Bible
supports it. And yet another example of how Mr. Foster's definition of
meditation is decidedly different from what you portray begins at the bottom
of page 20: "Eastern meditation is an attempt to empty the mind; Christian
meditation is an attempt to fill the mind. The two ideas are quite
different." The two paragraphs on page 21 directly following this quote go
into further detail of the difference, and I suggest you read them again if
you haven't done so lately....
I am
familiar with the New Age teaching on Alpha State, and I am agreement that
it should not be the goal of any truly Christian meditation. In this
instance, I believe the website you reference does a gross injustice to Mr.
Foster by quoting him entirely out of context. Even a casual reading of the
paragraph from which this quote is taken shows beyond a doubt that Mr.
Foster is NOT promoting the Alpha State. Here is the sentence referenced on
that website put into its entire context (from pages 22-23): "If you feel
that we live in a purely physical universe, you will view meditation as a
good way to obtain a consistent alpha brain-wave pattern. But if you believe
that we live in a universe created by the infinite-personal God who delights
in our communion with him, you will see meditation as communication between
the Lover and the one beloved. These two concepts of meditation are complete
opposites. The one confines us to a totally human experience; the other
catapults us into a divine-human encounter. The one talks about the
exploration of the subconscious; the other speaks of 'resting in him whom we
have found, who loves us, who is near to us, who comes to us to draw us to
himself.' Both may sound religious and even use religious jargon, but the
former can ultimately find no place for spiritual reality." (emphasis mine)
How much clearer could Mr. Foster be that he is NOT advocating the alpha
state as the goal but is instead refuting it (along with the pursuit of the
subconscious)?
James Response:
The
passage you present above does make it appear that Richard Foster distances
himself from the “alpha state” and the “unconscious.” I agree with you that
the website you refer to (Lighthouse Trails Research) should have explained
the greater context of the quote they list, because that quote in isolation
(and even in the surrounding paragraphs), as you have noted above, is not
what indicts Richard Foster on this issue. Below I indicate why Richard
Foster in other passages seems to be sympathetic to inducing the Alpha
State. On a side note, Alpha Brain Waves in and of themselves are not
heretical, as they can be measured by equipment known as
electroencephalography which accompany the relaxation state we experience
when we first wake up in the morning, and are used by psychiatrists. Alpha
Brain Wave patterns can be printed out, showing frequencies of a person's
brain similar to what an Electrocardiagram does with heartbeats. But the
issue at hand is whether or not there is a Biblical precedent for trying to
induce this Alpha State, let alone for the purpose of better
communion or union with God. If anything the writer of Psalm 119, in
describing at length true meditation, was trying to keep from going to
sleep in order to remain fully awake because he was on guard duty at
night that he might better concentrate on the statutes and ordinances of the
Lord.
Furthermore, the Alpha State is a passive state. There is not biblical
precedent for being passive while we meditate but quite the opposite, that
we gird up the loins of our mind, we concentrate, focus, become vigilant,
become as alert and circumspect as we can possibly be. Are we to devote
our best for the Lord by practicing a form of Christian meditation in which
we are half-awake/half asleep?...for that is what you are medically when you
are in an Alpha State. Was Jesus half-awake/half-asleep in the Garden of
Gethsemane when he performed the highest form of Christian Meditation known
to man for all history? In fact, Jesus rebuked his disciples that they were
sleeping and not watching with him. Watching meant like when a guard is on
his night watch...fully alert...not half asleep! The reason the Lord want
us to NOT be passive, at least in great part, is because that may open the
doors to demonic entrance. And though not necessarily spiritual at its
onset, being passive certainly becomes very spiritual when one become
possessed by a demonic spirit or opens the door to given heed to such
seducing spirits.
Again, there are contradictions throughout Richard Foster's book on what he
means by meditation and contrary to what he asserts, blurs the line between
Eastern Meditation and Biblical Meditation. Richard Foster on one hand
acknowledges that the Alpha State is purely a medical state of relaxation
and helpful, yet on the other hand seems to tells that it is not desirable
for Christians...why not if it just a perfectly normal cycle of our lives.
So is the Alpha State good for non-Christians and bad for Christians? But
the fact is he does not think it is bad for Christians as we see in his
promotion of other teachers who do promote the Alpha State. (I hope someday
to prepare a chart outlining these contradictions for the sake of clarity).
The problem is that Richard Foster continues to promote Morton Kelsey, a
certified Jungian analyst who is totally submerged in the teaching of the
“unconscious” and says this about the alpha state in suggesting that
Christian and other meditative practices may “go along with alpha and theta
wave activity in the brain...“Alpha waves are apparently induced
in the brain.” Kelsey further states that “these capacities are often
found among Hindu gurus, Zen masters, or anyone who uses deep meditation,
as well as among Christian saints.” Foster can't have it both ways! It
is impossible for a non-Christian or non-believer to meditate in a Biblical
sense, because the natural man understands NOT the things of the spirit.
And Christians have no business meditating like Hindus and Zen masters. In
other words, in terms of physiology, the techniques that Richard Foster and
the teachers he quotes suggest we use to meditate are identical...just that
Christians are supposed to commune with God in this altered state of
consciousness, whereas non-Christians simply achieve the Alpha State. This
is ridiculous. And Richard Foster's definition is not as biblical as it
might appear. Both forms of meditation, Christian and Eastern, according to
Foster, still produce an altered state of consciousness. It is certain he
means this, or he would not refer to the examples of Peter's visions and
Paul's trip to the Third Heaven. Richard Foster alleges that the difference
with Eastern meditation is that it produces that Alpha State (for
non-Christians) and the Western version produces communion with the Lord.
So does this mean the minute a person becomes a Christian they no longer
enter the Alpha State when they meditate? I am certainly not very comforted
by Foster's new definition to receive counsel from him. My counselor is the
Mighty Counselor whose counsel in immutable (UNCHANGING) in definitions!
I
would like to address the other quote of Richard Foster you refer to in
which he states: "What happens in meditation is that we create the
emotional and spiritual space which allows Christ to construct an inner
sanctuary in the heart." Once again, chapter and verse for a biblical
precedent for creating an emotional and spiritual space? Are you suggesting
that during times we aren't meditation that an emotional and spiritual space
does not already exist? And that until we create such a space that Christ's
hands are tied to construct an inner sanctuary of the heart? Well there are
two major problems with this theology. One, every human whether born
naturally or born again already has an emotional and spiritual space...that
comes from human nature and in great part what separates us from animals.
i.e., God created us with body, soul, and spirit. And whatever space is
there, if that is what you choose to call it is already there, and was made
by the Lord, not us! Secondly, the body is the temple of the Holy Spirit
already, so Christ already created the sanctuary. The difference for
Christians is that the temple is occupied by the Holy Spirit the minute they
become believers. Christ does not construct anything in a believer, he
simply occupies what he already created. There is not a new sanctuary
created, except in the sense that as Christians we are New Creations. For
Richard Foster to teach this idea of a new sanctuary created when we
meditates is once again adding to what is written in Scripture.
Then
you quote Richard Foster: “Both may sound religious and even use
religious jargon, but the former can ultimately find no place for spiritual
reality." This statement is simply not correct. Both Biblical
meditation and Eastern meditation involve “spiritual reality.” The
difference is that the former is in fact the spiritual reality of communion
with God, while the latter is spiritual reality of communion with devils
(divination or sorcery). But Christ does not have communion with anyone who
is in an altered state of consciousness, unless initiated by Christ himself
(not us) as in the case of Peter's vision and Paul being transported to the
Third Heaven.
You
have asked me to re-read Foster's page 21 which I have happily done.
Reciprocally, I invite you to read the second paragraph on Page 15 of his
1978 Edition of Celebration of Discipline and ask yourself why he has
contradicted his own earlier definition of Christian Meditation (which you
ought to be able to find at your local public or university library). His
in-depth definition, according to the 25th Anniversary Edition,
from which you quote, includes a need for detachments and even going beyond
detachment (Page 21). And even though there is no Scriptural support for
detachment, Foster invokes Peter of Celles, a Roman Catholic Benedictine
monk, in defending it as Christian meditation...Benedictines who say that
Christ is in everyone (universalism). So if the Benedictines are correct,
then all meditation would be the same...no distinction between Eastern and
Biblical Meditation....because Christ is already in EVERYONE. This would
mean all who practice it would produce an altered state of consciousness, or
the Alpha State. So, Foster in invoking the authority of the Benedictine
Order (which he often does) refutes his own definition that there are two
kinds of meditation.
Richard Foster should not anchor his definition of Christian Meditation on a
Benedictine monk, for the Benedictine Order, being Roman Catholic is
somewhat of an oxymoron. Official Roman Catholic Doctrine anathematizes all
Christians who are not Roman Catholic while contradictory teaching of
Benedictine Roman Catholics see Jesus Christ in everyone. This implies that
they see Jesus Christ in those whom the Roman Catholic Church has cursed.
Peter of Celles (Peter Cellensis)
Richard Foster tells us that part of Christian meditation is obedience (to
Scripture) yet he invokes Peter of Celles (Peter Cellensis) who taught that
the Apocrypha was part of the Canon of Scripture. These books which are
full of errors certainly would not qualify as the texts or traditions Paul
would be using when he reasoned from Scripture.
Peter of Celles (and thus Richard
Foster) is even wrong about his idea of detachment. Peter of Celles refers
to “emptying of evil” to describe Christian meditation. But the example he
gives is the demoniac that Christ delivered from evil spirits. Now it is
true that this is one case where I would agree that emptying the mind could
be biblically defended. But there are two major problems with Foster
(quoting Peter of Celles) using this as an example of Christian Meditation.
One, the demoniac was not meditating to empty himself of the demons, it was
Christ initiating it and performing the miracle of deliverance. Two, if
this is Christian meditation, then Christians would be exorcising their own
demons and this would assume that they can be possessed. Show me just one
Scripture in the New Testament where a Christian was ever possessed by a
demon! Christians would have already replaced the demon(s) with Christ to
occupy the house, so that seven other spirits more evil than the first could
NOT return.
Even though Richard Foster seems to
have altered his original view of “emptying the mind in order to fill it...”
from his 1978 edition, he again contradicts himself by promoting Peter of
Celles' idea of “emptying of evil” by the very example he gives regarding
the demoniac. Christians may, in fact, be detached from evil spirits when
we are delivered from darkness into light and become saved, and at that
point become attached to Jesus (though that is a peculiar term to use). But
once we are attached, we are permanently attached to Jesus. We don't
“attach” ourselves to him every time we perform Christian meditation.
Karen Mains
Karen Mains is a member of the Board of Renovare (Richard Foster) and
promotes mysticism and the teachings of occultist Carl Jung. The books of
Jennifer Westwood (whom Karen Mains quotes below) are sold in Insight
Metaphysical Bookstore and her publisher is Gaia (as in earth goddess).
If there
remains any doubt that Karen Mains promotes Carl Jung and inculcates her own
teaching with Carl Jung, here is a quote from rapidnet:
" Her "spiritual director," a
Catholic nun and Jungian psychotherapist, confirms what her evangelical,
inner-healing therapist friend and "unofficial spiritual mentor" told her:
"Your male-self is certainly wooing you." Karen Mains explains, "... this
indeed is my male-self, the animus that I need to complement my female
being, the anima. This psychological concept of the male-within-the-female
and the female-within-the-male was developed by Carl Jung, but it has always
seemed exceptionally scriptural to me." Mrs. Mains notes Jung's perspective
"that for spiritual and psychological health a person must have a harmonious
and friendly relationship with his or her unconscious" and adds, "Through
the insistent initiation of the Holy Spirit, I am being forcefully guided to
make rapprochement with my inner, deepest self." [What incredible
self-delusion! The Holy Spirit's work and Jung's anti-Biblical concepts
couldn't be more contrary to each other. Much of what Jung taught was
derived from his own personal spirit guide, a demon named Philemon. (See
America: The Sorcerer's New Apprentice for Jung's heavily demonized
background.)]
In a later Jungian session with her "spiritual director" at Cenacle, a
Catholic contemplative retreat center, Mrs. Mains tells of a drastic change
in the entity which has been appearing in her mind. In graphic detail, she
describes an "idiot-child sitting at a table with other people ... totally
bald head lolled to one side ... drooling ... six, seven or eight years of
age ... emaciated and malnourished ... sad, huge eyes ... This is my
idiot-child, the idiot-self of my self." Her "spiritual director" has her
close her eyes and "see the child again." She does so and begins to
communicate with the image who surprises them both by revealing that it is
the "Christ child." [!!] (This is right out of the book, The Occult Christ,
by Ted Andrews.) Mrs. Mains ponders the thought that the young man and the
idiot-child are both Jesus Christ who has "been attempting to woo me because
an essential part of my identity in Him has been expelled from my adult
development." We find that this "Christ child," whom she is instructed to
always take with her, is her "spiritual authority" [classic New Age
terminology for "spirit guide"] which she is "afraid of having" and has
"rejected not only [as] a part of myself, but a part of myself that is
Christ."
There are three possibilities concerning Karen Mains and her spirit guide:
(1) What she has written is the promotion of her own agenda through a
vehicle which she self-characterizes: "Mains, you have a wacko creative
imagination"; (2) Her penchant for introspection and symbolism have swept
her into the delusionary world of the experiential and hopelessly
subjective. This is pure Jungian hokum, nothing more; or (3) One and two
have led her down the path to New Age shamanism, where, under the guise of
psychological concepts and symbolism and through the occult practice of
guided imagery, she has been in communication with a spirit guide -- in fact
a demon appearing as an angel of light! From what she writes in this book,
it appears that the third possibility is the reality in the life of Karen
Mains. Indeed, with Jung's "christ" come Jung's demons. (Reported
in/excerpted from the 3/94 The Berean Call and/or Media Spotlight, Vol. 15,
No. 1, pp. 5-7. For another independent review of Lonely No More, see
Michele Witchell's article in the July/August 1994, Contender's Journal:
"The Fruit of a Psychological Gospel.") [Lonely No More was also advertised
as a gift-giving book in Chapel of the Air 's 1994, 50-Day Spiritual
Adventure Journal booklet.]" SOURCE:
http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/exposes/mains/adventure.htm
Here are
two quotes from Karen Main's own website hungrysouls.org, in case there is
any doubt about her ecumenical eastern meditation, New Age centering, and
mystical leanings:
"Sacred journeys are as old as human cultures. They evolved from the ritual
paths of tribal societies; from the sacred ways of classical Greece, Egypt,
and the East; and from the flowering in the Middle Ages of the great
religious pilgrimages that still flourish."
Sacred
Journeys by Jennifer Westwood
A
Pilgrimage to the Sites of the Spanish Mystics
"Travel to distant places
has a way of opening a path inward, to possibility, to memory, even. After a
while, the physical experience of travel somehow becomes less significant
than the inner transformations we undergo when, by moving through space,
bumping against strangeness and being changed by it, we somehow become more
of who we are meant to be." - Abigail Seymour
One of
Richard Foster's greatest champions is Agnes Sanford, whose book is laced
with Carl Jung theology. All of these teachers are inextricably tied to
depth psychology and the “unconscious” So for you to say that Richard
Foster is opposed to the “subconscious” is factually untenable. I would
also like to add this about Richard Foster and Roman Catholic mystic Thomas
Merton, whom Richard Foster holds in the highest regard, which I have
included in my book on Rick Warren entitled “Who's Driving the Purpose
Driven Church?” (available in November 2004):
Richard Foster opens his 25th Anniversary Edition chapter on meditation with
a quote from Carl Jung, a known occultist whose ideas are also promoted in
Rick Warren’s
Purpose Driven Life
book. Richard Foster still promotes the same false teachers in his current
edition as he does in his 1978 edition. These include Carl Jung disciples
Agnes Sanford and Morton Kelsey (a trained Jung analyst). Richard Foster
also quotes and/or lists as valuable contemplatives such universalists as
George Fox and Thomas Kelly, as well as pantheists such as Julian of
Norwich, John of the Cross, Madame Guyon, and Meister Eckhart. Finally,
Richard Foster promotes Shalem Prayer Institute founder Tilden Edwards who
states: “This mystical stream [contemplative prayer] is the Western bridge
to Far Eastern spirituality.” Rick Warren should not knowingly give five
stars to Richard Foster’s book as a good spiritual resource on his
pastors.com
website. For a more complete study on Richard Foster’s teaching that Rick
Warren promotes, please refer to a documentary I wrote,
“Spiritual Formation, Richard Foster, and Renovare: Renovare Analyzed for
Biblical Soundness and Found Wanting”
(www.cephas-library.com/purposedriven/renovare_errors_in_renovare_analysed_and_discussed_
part_1_of_2.html).
In his
Critical Issues Commentary,
Bob DeWaay has written an
informative article which discusses Richard Foster, entitled “Contemporary
Christian Divination” (July/August 2004) which can be
found at
www.twincityfellowship.com/cic/downloads.php.
For other excellent resources which discuss Richard Foster’s teachings,
visit these web sites:
www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/richardfoster.htm
www.thenowage.org
www.withchrist.org/MJS/renovare.htm
www.seekgod.ca/renovare.htm
www.cephasministry.com/new_age_richard_foster.html
While a growing number of evangelical Christians and Christian
leaders do, in fact, promote and believe that Richard Foster’s teaching
is biblically solid, there is great concern over his examples of astral
travel technique, summoning down a spirit and calling him Jesus,
and praying and meditating with vain repetitions. Richard Foster also
promotes Buddhist sympathizers Thomas Merton and Henri Nouwen.
For Thomas Merton:
. . . Foster considers Thomas Merton’s book
Contemplative Prayer
“a must book” . . . and credits his [Merton’s] books as being filled
with “priceless wisdom for all Christians who long to go deeper in
the spiritual life.”
Merton expressed views such as “I see no contradiction between
Buddhism and Christianity. . . . I intend to become as good a Buddhist
as I can.”
—Ray Yungen,
A Time of Departing
(Lighthouse
Trails Publishing, 2002), p. 75
Here is another quote from Thomas Merton, one of Richard Foster most quoted
“masters”:
“I believe that our renewal consists
precisely in deepening this understanding and this grasp of that which is
most real. And I believe that by openness to Buddhism, to Hinduism, and
to these great Asian traditions, we stand a wonderful chance of learning
more about the potentiality of our own traditions, because they have
gone, from the natural point of view, so much deeper into this than we have.
The combination of the natural techniques and graces and the other things
that have been manifested in Asia and the Christian liberty of the gospel
should bring us all at last to the full and transcendental liberty which is
beyond mere cultural differences and mere externals -- and mere this or
that.”
- Thomas Merton, Polonnaruwa.
I
would also like to point out that Richard Foster does teach “mantras.” That
is what prayer centering entails in terms of technique. And why it is
“hidden” is because it professes to provide information only available
through these experiences and techniques and vain repetitions.
Madeleine L'Engle
Regarding your quote of Foster: “no esoteric flights into the cosmic
consciousness”....no cosmic consciousness? Again we have another
contradiction, because Richard Foster quotes and secures the endorsement of
his friend Madeleine L'Engle who states on Page 205 of the same 25th
Anniversary Edition of Celebration of Discipline that you quote: “If
everybody in this country could read—and heed---this book, what a
difference it would make to the planet---nay, to the cosmos”?
So
let's look a little deeper into what Madeleine L'Engle believes and teaches
to see if she is a valuable resource for Christian spirituality...let alone
be a candidate for being a Spiritual Director:
Madeleine L'Engle:
"'The Message' is so good it leaves me breathless. Eugene
Peterson has done for the U.S. and the late 20th century what J.B. Phillips
did for Great Britain and the middle of the century - and even more!"
"She is author-in-residence and assistant librarian at
the Cathedral of St. John the Divine in New York City, where she also serves
as lay preacher." (Smith, p. xi)
"L'Engle herself uses twentieth century mystics to help
her in meditation and contemplation." (Smith, P.16)
In her endorsement of
Foster's book, L'Engle writes on page 205: "'Celebration of Discipline' won
me when it was first published ... Indeed, his offerings to us of the joy of
discipline will help us to seek the kingdom of God in a more joyous and less
moralistic way..."
Note: She must have
overlooked Matt.6:33 - But seek ye first the kingdom of God AND HIS
RIGHTEOUSNESS...
a. Atonement
"In forensic terms, the atonement means that Jesus had to
die for us in order to atone for all our awful sins, so that God could
forgive us. In forensic terms, it means that God cannot forgive us unless
Jesus is crucified and by this sacrifice atones for all our wrongdoing. But
that is not what the word means...It means exactly what it says, at-one-ment...There
is nothing about crime and punishment in the makeup of that that word. It simply means to be at one with God." (Smith, p.174, quoting L'Engle,
"Stone for a Pillow", p.22-23) [emphasis mine]
b. Bible
"These marvelous mysteries could not be understood in
the language of literalism, or inerrancy, and all such attempts to restrict
the glory are deadly indeed." (Smith, p.162, quoting L'Engle, "The
Mythical Bible", television program, "The Chicago Sunday Evening Club," Oct.
1991) [emphasis mine]
"The Bible is not a moral book.
It is not an
ethical book. It is a magnificent story book. It doesn't give any answers,
it just tells more stories." Smith, p. 161, quoting L'Engle, interview in
"The Door", December 1986, p.25) [emphasis mine]
c. God
"If we accept that God is within each of us, then God
will give us ... the courage to accept the responsibility of being
co-creators." (Smith, p.42, quoting L'Engle,
'And It Was Good', p.19) [emphasis mine]
"From her feminist perch, she takes aim at the male
gender of God, calling Him 'the paternalistic male chauvinist pig Old
Testament God'." (Smith, p. ix, quoting
L'Engle, 'The Irrational Season', p.159) [emphasis mine]
d. Judgment
"The judgment of God is the judgment of love, not of
power plays or vindication or hate." (Smith, p.176, quoting L'Engle, "Stone
for a Pillow," p.117)
e. Salvation
"I know a number of highly sensitive and intelligent
people in my own community Who consider as a heresy my faith that...(God)
will not rest until all of creation, including Satan, is reconciled to him,
until there is no creature who cannot return his look of love with a joyful
response of love." (Smith, p.175-6, quoting
L'Engle, 'The Irrational Season, p. 97) [emphasis mine]
f. Second Coming
"The Second Coming is the redemption of the entire
cosmos, not just one small planet ... All will be redeemed in God's fullness
of time, all, not just the small portion of the population who have been
given the grace to know and accept Christ." (Smith, p.176, quoting L'Engle,
"Stone for a Pillow," p.117)
g. Sin, morality
"In spite of what she says to the contrary, Madeleine
L'Engle's writings do contain, promote, and teach a whole gamut of New Age
topics, philosophies, and techniques, including, but limited to: magic,
divination, spirit guides, crystal balls, mediums, fortune telling, spells,
monism, pantheism, nature worship, Zen meditation, lesbianism, graphic
fornication, cosmic consciousness, druids, human sacrifice, demons, dragons,
runes,...astral travel and on and on. These are all elements of the occult,
which she has put in a box and marked 'for Children'." (Smith, p.40)
"Moralism belongs to the old
law and old covenant. Jesus Christ ... overturned the laws of moralism."
(Smith, p.169, quoting L'Engle, "The Irrational Season", p. 102)
Source: http://watch.pair.com/message2.html
So
what does Madeleine L'Engle think of the Da Vinci Code book which
tries to refute the truth of Christ and Biblical teaching?
“I just read “The Da Vinci Code," which had some
fascinating things in it. I liked that whole central section about
Christianity when it postulates that Jesus was a very strong character and
that he and Mary Magdalene were lovers and had a child.” [emphasis mine]
“The Da Vinci Code” is fun.”[emphasis mine]
In response to the
following questions in an interview:
Did you see there are
several books coming out refuting “The Da Vinci Code”?
“That’s silly. It takes too much energy to be against
something unless it’s really important... .”
What are you against? “Narrow-mindedness.
I’m against people taking the Bible absolutely literally, rather than
letting some of it be real fantasy, like Jonah.
You know, the whole story of David is a novel … Faith is
best expressed in story.” [emphasis mine]
“Well, the Fundalets [fundamentalist Christians] want a closed system, and I
want an open system.” [emphasis mine]
Now
just in case you might be thinking that Richard Foster is simply quoting
Madeleine L'Engle's endorsement of his book, but that he does not endorse
her as a teacher, I invite you to read where Renovare quotes L’Engle very
positively [Renovare’s Perspective magazine, April 1997 - Vol. 7, No. 2 -
page 4] Source:
http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~emcd/index31.htm
http://www.renovare.org/readings_perspective_07_2_pg_4.htm
(primary source)
This
is just the beginning of the abominable and heretical statements she makes
about and in her book Wrinkle in Time. The Church of Saint John the
Divine is an appropriate place for her. But she has no place in Evangelical
Christianity who doesn't even view the Bible as history but simply stories.
Madeleine L'Engle wants an “open system”.... she is one more false teacher
that Richard Foster promotes!
***************
Richard Foster claims the “masters” in the Traditions of Christianity
practiced Foster's version of contemplative prayer methods. But certainly
none of the Apostles did, nor did they advocate that we do. Certainly Jesus
even forbade vain repetitions. And to say that Christians in the last
hundreds of years have missed out is an insult to every Christian who simply
obtained everything God had for them by the normal cognitive process of
reading and obeying Scripture, and praying. Scripture is sufficient; there
is not some mystical technique we have to learn from masters whose teachings
were laced with false teaching. Secondly, Foster promotes a host of
teachers that, in fact, DO teach what Foster says Christian meditation is
not. Finally, if Christian mediation is exactly how Richard Foster defines
it in his latest definition, which is: “Christian meditation, very simply,
is the ability to hear God's voice and obey his word...” well I can do that
by simply reading and obey God's word....and so could every Christian in the
last several hundred years without Richard Foster and without any of the
“masters” he promotes who are mostly dead; he says we need their help to
facilitate disciplines (page xiii in the Introduction of Celebration of
Discipline). Why isn't Richard Foster obeying God's word which forbids
promoting false teachers?
ON IMAGINATION
Defender of Richard Foster's Comment:
In
regards to the place imagination plays in meditation, you'll have to forgive
me for once again disagreeing with your stance. If you look up the Hebrew
word that is predominantly used for meditate in the Old Testament (hagah)
you will find (ironically enough, perhaps) that one of its primary
translations is "to imagine". And in reference to a verse that you quote
quite frequently to combat Mr. Foster's use of imagination (2 Corinthians
10:5), it is also helpful to go back to the original wording. The word
translated "imagination" in the King James Version in that verse is the word
logismos in Greek. When you look at the meaning of that word, it actually
means computation, reasoning, or thought. It is the word from which we
derive our English word for logic. It's pretty clear by an examination of
the exact word that God inspired in that verse that the verse doesn't really
fit your usage of it.
James' Response
I am
not opposed to imagination; it is one of God's gifts to mankind. Once
again, it is quite ironic that if “imagination” in Greek means computation,
reasoning, or thought, that Richard Foster would publish a definition of
Christian Meditation in his 1978 Edition of Celebration of Discipline that tells us to empty our mind in order to fill it. It is further ironic
that he would quote Jean-Pierre de Caussade (25th Anniversary
Edition) in developing his idea of Christian Meditation who tells also tells
us to empty our mind and enter into nothingness. But imagination has
God-ordained boundaries and makes vain strongholds of imagination off
limits, when exercised as divination (an abomination to the Lord). So let's
see if Richard Foster crosses those boundaries, rendering him a false
teacher in going beyond what is written.
ASTRAL TRAVEL
So,
can't we call Jesus down from Heaven and even go visit him in Heaven?
The
Bible teaches that Jesus Christ must remain in Heaven UNTIL the restoration
of all things. Here is the proof in Christ's own words:
“A
little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye
shall see me, because I go to the Father. Then said [some] of his disciples
among themselves,” John 16:16
In
other words, Jesus' Disciples would not see him while he was in the grave,
and then a little while between His Resurrection and His Ascension (40
Days). Then when Jesus ascended, they would not see him. That seems
crystal clear to me.
“For
there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great
signs and wonders; insomuch that, if [it were] possible, they shall deceive
the very elect. Behold, I have told you before. Wherefore if they shall
say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, [he is] in
the secret chambers; believe [it] not. For as the lightning cometh out of
the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the
Son of man be.” Matthew 24:23-27 KJV
&
The
Apostle Peter:
“He (Jesus Christ) must remain in heaven until the time comes for God
to restore everything, as he promised long ago
through his holy prophets.” Acts 3:21 NIV (emphasis, underline and
parenthesis added)
So
the only way Jesus Christ can no longer be in heaven, but on the earth, is
when he has restored everything. So my question for Richard Foster is “has
Jesus Christ restored everything yet?” Of course, not. So, he can't have
returned yet! That can't happen until his glorious return when he sets up
his Father's Millenial Kingdom.
Paul
warned the very first Christians about false teachers saying the Jesus
Christ has ALREADY come. This could refer to either gnosticism in which
Jesus Christ did not bodily resurrect or ascend into Heaven but only
spiritually. But it would also apply to his returning only
spiritually...that he would never return physically. But the truth is that
EVERY EYE WILL SEE HIM WHEN HE RETURNS...the whole earth being engulfed in
white light...even the dark side of the earth will be lit up like day time
in that day. (See Zechariah 14:6)
It
could not be made more abundantly clear that Christ cannot return to the
earth, unless HE initiates it as he did with the Apostle Paul, and will not
return until the last day. The Apostle Peter confirms this when he says:
“And though you have NOT seen Him, you love Him, and though you do NOT see
Him now,” I Peter 1:8.
Jesus Christ himself tells us:
“In my Father's house are many
mansions: if [it were] not [so], I would have told you. I go to prepare a
place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come
again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, [there] ye may be
also. “John 14:2-3
So
until that place is prepared AND PRESENTED to the Bride of Christ or the
Church (The New Jerusalem, see Revelation Chapter 20), Jesus makes it
perfectly clear that he can be there in that place, BUT WE CAN'T, yet!
Right?
But according to Richard Foster:
“As you enter the story, not as a passive observer but as
an active participant, remember that since Jesus lives in the Eternal Now
and is not bound by time, this even in the past is a living present tense
experience for Him. Hence, you can actually encounter the living Christ
in the event, be addressed by His voice and be touched by His healing
power. It can be more than an exercise of the imagination; it can be a
genuine confrontation. Jesus Christ will actually come to you.” Source: Richard Foster: “Celebration of Discipline”, 1978, Page 26.
[emphasis mine]
Now
defenders of Richard Foster say that Foster was not really calling Christ
down to the earth, but only in his (our) imagination. But if Christ is not
bound by time or space, then Christ would not be restricted from showing up
literally. So when we call Christ down, does Jesus then decide whether or
not it will simply be in our imagination, or literally? Well Jesus did
decide. IT WILL NOT BE LITERALLY....UNTIL THE PLACE HE GOES TO PREPARE FOR
US IS BROUGHT TO US WHEN HE RETURNS!!!! BUT THAT WILL NOT BE UNTIL THE END
OF THIS PRESENT AGE!
Richard Foster has removed this passage from his current 25th
Anniversary Edition (the one you have). From what I read Richard Foster has
given no explanation as to why he removed the above passage, except a rather
vague reference towards the beginning of the book (Acknowledgements, page
vii: “Over the years numerous persons have written to encourage, challenge,
correct, and stimulate my thinking. In addition, many have talked with me
in person about their own strivings, learnings, and growings. All of these
people and more have taught me much about the spiritual life and have
contributed to this revision.”) Richard Foster needs to specifically
clarify and renounce the above concept, if in fact he has changed his views.
Jesus
Christ also tells us:
“Then
said Jesus unto them, Yet a little while am I with you, and [then] I go unto
him that sent me. Ye shall seek me, and shall not find [me]: and where I
am, [thither] ye cannot come. Then said the Jews among themselves,
Whither will he go, that we shall not find him? will he go unto the
dispersed among the Gentiles, and teach the Gentiles? What [manner of]
saying is this that he said, Ye shall seek me, and shall not find [me]: and
where I am, [thither] ye cannot come?” John 7:33-36 [emphases mine]
The
Jews could not find him and Jesus said no one could find him. Then remember
what Jesus said at the Last Supper?
“But
I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until
that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.” Matthew
26:29
When
Jesus said “I will not drink with you again until my Father's Kingdom,”
there is no way we could summon him down. But I haven't seen him do this
and there is no recorded event in history since he ascended where anyone
else has been seen “drinking anew with Christ.” And it is very simple why.
HE IS NOT HERE YET!
So if
Richard Foster originally wrote that we could conjure down a physical Jesus
at our will who will literally talk to us in a literal encounter, why not
also drink of the fruit of the vine with him also? Well the answer is
simply “that day” has not arrived and can not arrive until Jesus Christ
set's up his Father's kingdom. Jesus also tells us that we would fast while
the Bridegroom is away. So isn't he still away? Richard Foster gives
biblical examples of fasting, but I can't help but wonder why he didn't
include that quote from Jesus. Because if Richard Foster could call down
the Bridegroom at will and have the incarnate Jesus in his presence, you
would NOT be fasting, because Jesus is PRESENT and there is no need to
mourn!
So,
let's look at Scripture once again:
“And
Jesus said unto them, Can the children of the bridechamber mourn, as long as
the bridegroom is with them? but the days will come, when the
bridegroom shall be taken from them, and then shall they fast.
Matthew 9:15 [emphasis mine]
“Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took
their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom.” Matthew 21:1
Richard Foster suggested that he can usher down the Bridegroom (Jesus
Christ) when Richard Foster decided are the appropriate times. But there is
only ONE time that will occur, and that day and hour is in the Father's
hands and known only to Him (NOT US).
Jesus
said:
“I
tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of
man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?” Luke 18:8 [emphasis
mine]
Now
this is a clear reference to Christ's coming in glory at the end of the
age...he does not come down before then as Richard Foster postulates...and
that is at least two thousand years.
Jesus
also said in reference to that day:
“But
of that day and hour knoweth no [man], no, not the angels of heaven, but my
Father only.” Matthew 24:36 See also Mark 13:32
But
Richard Foster knows when Jesus comes down and often through Christian
meditation? From the above Scriptures it doesn't sound a whole lot like
Jesus is leaving the door open for myriads of visitations from him until the
end of the Age. Now Richard Foster would concede that there is a final
return of Jesus Christ in the flesh. The question is how many times he
believes we can induce a trance to make him appear prior to His final
return.
Richard Foster suggested not only that we could summon Christ down, but we
could rapture ourselves from Earth to Heaven at will over and over to meet
Christ and return to the earth:
“In your imagination allow your spiritual body, shining
with light, to rise out of your physical body (in other words..astral
travel)....Imagine your spiritual self alive and vibrant, rising up through
the clouds and into the stratosphere. Observe your physical body (out of
body experience), the knoll, and the forest shrink as you leave the earth.
Go deeper and deeper into outer space until there is nothing except the warm
presence of the eternal Creator...With time you will be able to distinguish
readily between mere human though that may bubble up to the conscious mind
(i.e., from the unconscious...I thought you said Foster opposed the
unconscious)....when is it time for you to leave, audibly thank the Lord for
His goodness and return to the meadow.”Source: Richard Foster: Celebration of Discipline, 1978, Page 27-28 [parenthesis and emphasis
added]
The
only example of anything like this happening was with the Apostle Paul,
which some use to defend astral travel. But whether Paul was taken away
whether in body or spirit, HE DID NOT KNOW. And this was only at the
Lord's initiative, NOT Paul's. Not once does Scripture record that we
can astral travel at our own initiative. So what Richard Foster wrote went
WAY beyond what is written...the very thing the Bible warns against!
In
our culture we have been saturated with UFO and Out of Body Experiences in
cults, but I never dreamed that a professed Christian would be teaching
these kinds of ideas! Since Jesus Christ cannot be summoned in the manner
Richard Foster described, the Jesus he would summon would not be Jesus
Christ, but another Jesus.
Richard Foster is usurping the authority of the Father and authority not
given to him. Richard Foster turns eschatology completely on its ear with
his subjective experience-based ideas of moving us and Jesus forwards and
backwards in time without any of the critical boundaries prescribed by Jesus
Christ himself as well as his Apostles, truly rendering Scripture a
backseat, if any seat in the car, to his Traditions of the Roman Catholic
Church, Eastern Orthodox Church, the Aquarian Gospel of Jesus Christ, and
Christ Consciousness combined.
**************************
POWER OF IMAGINATION AND THE SUBCONSCIOUS
Here
are some more statements in Richard Foster's 1978 Edition of Celebration
of Discipline:
“Anyone who can tap the power of imagination can learn to
meditate.” page 16
Chapter and verse for that idea please? If Scripture is our source for the
content of our Meditation, which is the law of the Lord, his statutes, and
his ordinances...already clearly recorded for all to see and read, why do
you need your imagination to determine what they might be saying. I don't
have to imagine one single statute of the Lord, I have but to simply read
them!
“It may even provide us with meaningful insights by
helping us get in touch with our subconscious mind.” (Richard Foster,
Celebration of Discipline, 1978, Edition, Page 17 AND Richard Foster,
Celebration of Discipline 25th Anniversary Edition, Page
22) [emphasis mine]
If
Foster is denouncing Eastern Meditation and only promoting Biblical
Meditation, then why does he say it can provide us with meaningful insights
and help us get in touch with our subconscious? Eastern meditation is
divination and prohibited in Scripture, so how could insights gained by
practicing it be meaningful? Christians should not practice both Eastern
and Biblical Meditation. And why would you want to get in touch with your
subconscious, unless you believe there is such a thing, as Freud and Jung
believed....and a host of their disciples that Foster does promote and
quote?
“Historically no group has stressed the need to enter
into the listening silences more than the Quakers.” page 17
Well
the Quakers are a very recent sect or stream of Christianity...that is if
you can even presume their doctrine is Orthodox Christianity. So for almost
eighteen hundred years, Richard Foster seems to imply that Christian group
or denomination has taught and stressed this allegedly Christian doctrine.
Again this is assuming that “listening silences” is even taught in
Scripture...which I will address below your commentary on silence.
“It is impossible to learn how to meditate from a book.”
Page 26
Really? Isn't the Bible a book? Isn't Psalm 119 a book (or scroll) which
defines meditation? Without this book (the Bible) we would not have a clue
how to meditate. We not only learn how to meditate from Psalm 119 and the
rest of Scripture, but we meditate on Psalm 119. Besides this, the
Scriptures that talk about meditation say to meditate on his laws and
statutes. But laws and statutes were written down in a book. So this
statement by Richard Foster is nonsense as well as contradictory to his own
advocacy of telling us to, in fact, use Scripture to meditate.
“Lotus position of Eastern religion is simply an example
of posture.” Page 21
It
would be a stumbling block to others if they saw us imitating pagans in
terms of posture. Following the same techniques of vain repetitions will
still produce the same altered alpha-state of consciousness.
“The inner world of meditation is most easily entered
through the door of imagination. The imagination is stronger than
conceptual thought and stronger than will.” Page 22
Where
in Scripture does it say that imagination is stronger than will? Using your
logic, when you state:
“(2 Corinthians 10:5), it is also helpful to go back to
the original wording. The word translated "imagination" in the King James
Version in that verse is the word logismos in Greek. When you look at the
meaning of that word, it actually means computation, reasoning, or thought.”
that
Foster really means reasoning or thought, then plug that into his sentence
above it would then read “reasoning and thought are stronger than
will”...but this becomes absurd and nonsensical, because reasoning and
thought are what produce the will. Foster has it backwards. Fantasy or
imagination does not rule the will, the will rules the imagination. But
irrespective of which definition Richard Foster means as a method to perform
Christian meditation, it is the false teachings inherent in his imagination
and the false teachers he cites to justify it that we must cast down. Don't
we use our will to cast down vain strongholds of imagination? Isn't
conceptual thought required to have the mind of Christ? When Richard
Foster published his first edition defining Christian Meditation as emptying
the mind in order to fill it, did he seriously believe that Christ emptied
his mind in order to fill it when he meditated? And if we are to have the
mind of Christ, likewise, that we are to empty our minds in order to fill
them? Isn't girding up the loins of our minds the greater power to contain
the dam of imagination? What power to you suggest we use to hold every
thought captive...yes even thoughts of imagination?
“In learning to meditate, one good place is with our
dreams.” Page 23
This
sounds like Foster is a Jung disciple. Once again, chapter and verse.
“Having practiced for some weeks with two kinds of
meditation listed above (centering down and breath prayers), you will want
to add the meditation upon Scripture.” Page 25
Well
first of all, centering down and breath prayers are found nowhere in the
Bible. Secondly, even if they were you don't add meditation, YOU BEGIN WITH
MEDITATION UPON SCRIPTURE..not add it later.
Defender of Richard Foster's Comment:
ON ENTERING SILENCE:
“Revelation 3:20 and Psalm 46:10 ("Be still and know that I am God.")
specifically support the above-quoted sentence from page 20, especially if
you look at the meaning of the Hebrew word that is translated in English as
"be still" (to uproot or remove [by implication, opposing thoughts and
feelings]).”
James' Response:
What
you are referring to in your defense of being “still” is Richard Foster's
teaching (and many other mystics) on “Silence.” So I would like to now
refer to my article and debate with Dr. John Stoll in which I address and
oppose the teachings of Thomas Keating, Basil Pennington and Brennan
Manning...three more teachers that Foster quotes and integrates into his own
teaching on meditation.
Thomas Keating:
"God speaks through the prophets, but
he speaks better in silence."
No, that is not Scriptural. In fact
it contradicts this Scripture, as the Apostle Paul would beg to disagree
with Thomas Keating:
Rom 10:17 So then faith [cometh] by
hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
Hbr 11:6 But without faith [it is]
impossible to please [him]: for he that cometh to God must believe that he
is, and [that] he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
So you can't even obtain faith in
silence; it is impossible to please God until you first hear. You can not
hear if it is silent, that is an oxymoron!
Here is a quote from Basil Pennington
and Thomas Keating in their book Finding Grace at the Center:
We should not hesitate to take the
fruit of the age-old wisdom of the East and “capture” it for Christ. Indeed,
those of us who are in ministry should make the necessary effort to acquaint
ourselves with as many of these Easter techniques as possible...Many
Christian who take their prayer life seriously have been greatly helped by
Yoga, Zen, TM and similar practices...” pp.5-6
“In order to guide persons having
this experience [divineoneness], Christian spiritual directors many need to
dialogue with Eastern teachers in order to get a fuller understanding.”
And still another from Basil
Pennington:
"Love is God's Being" - by M. Basil
Pennington, O.C.S.O. 03/09/00
"When we go to the
center of our
being and pass through that center into the very center of God we
get in immediate touch with this divine creating energy. This is not
a new idea. It is the common teaching of the Christian Fathers of the Greek
tradition. When we dare with the full assent of love to unleash these
energies within us not surprisingly he initial experience is of a flood
of chaotic thoughts, memories, emotions and feelings. This is why
wise spiritual Fathers and mothers counsel a gentle entering into this
experience. Not too much too fast. But it is this release that allows all of
this chaos within us with all its imprisoning stress to be brought into
harmony so that not only their might be peace and harmony within but that
the divine energy may have the freedom to forward the evolution of
consciousness in us and through us, as a part of the whole, in the
whole of the creation."
Now this is quite an amazing
statement considering that you (David Muyskens) state: “It would be tragic
if some Christians were held back from receiving the gift of contemplative
prayer because they were frightened that it was New Age.” David Muyskens,
January 27, 2004
Yoga, Zen, and TM are not New Age? So
much for light not having fellowship with darkness, so much for coming out
from among them, so much for you can not simultaneously drink from cup of
demons and the cup of the Lord, so much for the Scripture “if it does not
speak to the law and the prophets there is no light in them,” so much for
Jesus Christ's own words that a thornbush can not produce figs!
More quotes from Thomas Keating:
"For the centering prayer
practitioner, regular practice of "contemplative" prayer sets in motion a
dynamism of "divine psychotherapy, organically designed for each of us, to
empty out our unconscious and free us from the obstacles to the free flow of
grace in our minds, emotions, and bodies."
1 As this
false self
is dismantled, we come to see our true Self, the center of which, so say
proponents, is God-"God and our true Self are not separate. Though we are
not God, God and our true Self are the same thing."
2
1. Thomas Keating,
Open Mind,
Open Heart (Amity, New York: Amity House, 1986), p. 93.
2. Koller, "But Is It Prayer?", p.
13, quoting Father Thomas Keating. 13. Koller, p. 13.
"if you are
aware of no thoughts, you will aware of something and that is a thought. If
at that point you can lose the awareness that you are aware of no thoughts,
you will move into pure consciousness." Abbot Thomas Keating
More
quotes from Basil Pennington:
"in
centering prayer we go beyond thought and image, beyond the senses and the
rational mind, to
that center of our being where God is working a wonderful work," says Father
Pennington "just sitting there, doing nothing. Not even thinking some
worthwhile thoughts or making some good resolutions-just being." Basil
Pennington
"When we go
to the center of our being and pass through that center into the very center of God we get in immediate touch with this divine creating
energy. This is not a new idea. It is the common teaching of the
Christian Fathers of the Greek tradition. When we dare with the full assent
of love to unleash these energies within us not surprisingly he
initial experience is of a flood of chaotic thoughts, memories,
emotions and feelings. This is why wise spiritual Fathers and mothers
counsel a gentle entering into this experience. Not too much too fast. But
it is this release that allows all of this chaos within us with all its
imprisoning stress to be brought into harmony so that not only their might
be peace and harmony within but that the divine energy may have the
freedom to forward the evolution of consciousness in us and through us,
as a part of the whole, in the whole of the creation."
"Love is
God's Being" - by M. Basil Pennington, O.C.S.O. 03/09/00
BRENNAN MANNING:
PRAYER CENTERING Review
As mentioned above, the key to
spirituality, according to Manning, is a special type of prayer which he calls
"contemplative prayer" or "centering prayer."
For the uninitiated, this may not seem
ominous. It may sound like what God calls us to do in His Word. It is not. It is
ominous. It is a practice derived from Eastern mysticism.
In The Signature of Jesus, Manning
writes, "The task of contemplative prayer is to help me achieve the conscious
awareness of the unconditionally loving God dwelling within me" (p. 211). He
also says, "What masters of the interior life recommend is the discipline of
'centering down' throughout the day" (p. 94).
Manning attempts to head off the charge
that centering prayer comes from Eastern mysticism and the New Age movement by
saying:
A simple method of contemplative prayer
(often called "centering prayer" in our time and anchored in the Western
Christian tradition of John Cassian and the desert fathers, and not, as some
think, in Eastern mysticism or New age philosophy) has four steps (p. 218).
He instructs the reader in the practice
of centering prayer, which is a type of contemplative wordless "prayer" a
technique that involves breathing exercises and the chanting of a sacred word or
phrase. Manning begins "the
first step in faith is to stop thinking about God at the time of prayer" (p.
212)! What biblical support is there for this idea?
The second step, according to Manning, is
to "without moving your lips, repeat the sacred word [or phrase] inwardly,
slowly, and often" (p. 218). Once again, where is the biblical support for this
practice? None is cited, because none exists.
The third step concerns what to do when
inevitable distractions come. The answer is to "simply return to listening to
your sacred word. Gently return your mind to your sacred word" (p. 218).
Finally, "after a twenty-minute period of
prayer [which Manning recommends twice daily] conclude with the Lord's Prayer, a
favorite psalm, or some spontaneous words of praise and thanks" (p. 219). While
he doesn't say how long this concluding recitation or spontaneous words might
last, it seems he only expects this to be a minute or two, since the Lord's
Prayer and most of the Psalms are short and easy to read in a minute or so. This
concluding recitation seems to be an afterthought, something put in to make the
"prayer" seem Christian. Yet even this fourth part is biblically suspect. Jesus
said, "And when you pray, do not use vain repetitions (babblings) as the heathen
do" (Matt 6:7). Any routine prayer repeated each prayer session will soon fall
into the category of "vain repetition," even if it is Scripture. The Lord's
Prayer is a sample of the way we should pray, and not some prayer we should
memorize and repeat back to God daily.
The instruction utilizes odd jargon such
as the "false self" and "crucifixion of the ego" and a curious mix of spiritual
and psychological terms. To understand his language one would need to have a
more candid overview of centering prayer, which I found in an unusual-for me,
not for New Agers-non Christian source called Gnosis Magazine. The following is
a condensation of the article titled "From Woundedness to Union" (Gnosis, Winter
1995, pp. 41-45). The author is a Ph.D. who was tutored by the inventors of
centering prayer:
Thomas Keating and Basil Pennington [who
Manning credits for teaching him this prayer form] were exploring how to achieve
a more concentrated experience on the general model of a Zen sesshin, having
been quite experienced in sesshins. During these experiments they came upon a
form of meditation from which tears, repressed memories, deep intuitions all
came to the surface in a jumble, along with a sense of catharsis and bonding
among the participants.
From his years as abbot, Keating
recognized that this technique accelerated the sensitizing of the unconscious
which is the goal of the contemplative life. He recalls, "I saw people going
through in ten days what it might have taken twenty years to go through at a
monastery." He believes that this unloading of the unconscious is a purification
process at work to which he attaches traditional Christian terminology as the
struggle against sin. This is called "Divine Therapy."
The main goal is to dismantle the "false
self," the needy, driven, unrecognized motivations behind untransformed human
behavior. They suggest the false self as a modern equivalent for the traditional
concept of original sin. The "true self" is buried beneath the accretions and
defenses. A huge amount of healing has to take place before our deep and
authentic quest for union with God is realized. This, in essence, constitutes
the spiritual journey.
The most fruitful connection here [for
the author of the article] is the linking of the "dark night" of the traditional
apophatic path and the psychological process, the "darkness" of the psyche. If
psychoanalysis represents "cataphatic therapy"-using words, concepts, and
awareness to illuminate the darkness of our inner ground-centering prayer
presents a kind of "apophatic psycho therapy" ("apophatic" meaning that which
points one towards the ineffable, beyond all words, concepts, and forms).
Periods of psychological ferment and
destabilization are signs that the journey is progressing, not failing. The
results can often be horrifying to ourselves. As trust grows in God and practice
becomes more stable, we penetrate deeper and deeper down to the bedrock of pain,
the origin of our personal false self. In response to each significant descent
into the ground of our woundedness, there is a parallel ascent in the form of
inner freedom, the experience of the fruits of the spirit and beatitude.
By interweaving the contemporary language
of psychological healing with the traditional language of Christianity a new
synthesis is born.23
Chapter seven is entitled "Celebrate the
Darkness" (a title that is decidedly not only unbiblical, but even antibiblical;
darkness is always presented negatively in Scripture, see, for example, 2 Cor
6:14; Eph 5:8, 11; 1 Thess 5:4-5; 1 Pet 2:9; 1 John 1:5-10). Manning writes "the
ego has to break; and this breaking is like entering into a great darkness.
Without such a struggle and affliction, there can be no movement in love" (p.
145). He goes on,
With the ego purged and the heart
purified through the trials of the dark night, the interior life of an authentic
disciple is a hidden, invisible affair. Today it appears that God is calling
many ordinary Christians into this rhythm of loss and gain. The hunger I
encounter across the land for silence, solitude, and centering prayer is the
Spirit of Christ calling us from the shallows to the deep (p. 149).
In centering prayer the word sin becomes
a religious word attached to a method of psychological therapy, and the biblical
presentation of true moral guilt is omitted.24 It is a system completely open to
the manipulation of the inventors who feel the liberty to use the biblical
language any way they see fit. Manning attempts to give it the validity of
tradition by saying that it is has been rooted in Catholic monastic practices
since the 5th century: "It is a comfort to know that this is a path that others
have tracked before us" (p. 149).
The practice of centering prayer is
expanding in many parishes and is now moving beyond Catholic boundaries as many
are coming to it from the Recovery Movement. The Catholic Church does not have
an official position on this form of prayer, but some Catholic scholars refute
the mind-emptying techniques. They also call for psychological studies because
of the reported occurrences of depression among practitioners of New Age type
meditation.
The result of this mystical practice is
that the practitioner becomes less interested in objective spiritual knowledge
found in the Bible and more interested in the subjective experience which is
found through centering prayer. This may account for the antagonistic attitude
toward traditional forms of faith. Manning speaks of "several local churches I
have visited, [in which] religiosity has pushed Jesus to the margins of real
life and plunged people into preoccupation with their own personal salvation"
(p. 193). Of course, centering prayer requires no interest whatsoever in one's
own personal salvation since it presupposes that all are already saved. That is
what we discover when we "center down." Manning's attitude toward the Bible
seems to be markedly different from that of Calvin and Luther, for example, or
of anyone who has a high regard for it as the very Word of God:
I am deeply distressed by what I only can
call in our Christian culture the idolatry of the Scriptures. For many
Christians, the Bible is not a pointer to God but God himself. In a
word-bibliolatry. God cannot be confined within the covers of a leather-bound
book. I develop a nasty rash around people who speak as if mere scrutiny of its
pages will reveal precisely how God thinks and precisely what God wants (pp.
188-89).
In The Signature of Jesus Manning rarely
cites Scripture. Why should he, when the truly important knowledge of God comes
from his experience of centering down and not from the Bible? Remember "God
cannot be confined within the covers of a leather-bound book." While Manning
would acknowledge that some elementary truths of God can be found by reading the
Bible, intimate knowledge of God only comes through centering prayer.
Source:
http://www.faithalone.org/journal/1997ii/Caddock.html
BRENNAN MANNING Review by Jackie Alnor:
http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/manningreview.htm
Brennan Manning does extensive seminars
with Richard Foster. Here is an excerpt of Brennan Manning's teaching:
In Discipleship Journal Issue 100 1997
page 78 in an interview, Brennan Manning recommends William Shannon’s book,
Silence on Fire and Thomas Keating’s book on centering prayer, Open Mind, Open
Heart. In Silence on Fire, Shannon blasts the Christian, Biblical God. Page 109,
110 “This is a typical patriarchal notion of God. He is the God of Noah who sees
people deep in sin, repents that He made them and resolves to destroy them. He
is the God of the desert who sends snakes to bite His people because they
murmured against Him. He is the God of David who practically decimates a people
…He is the God who exacts the last drop of blood from His Son, so that His just
anger, evoked by sin, may be appeased. This God whose moods alternate between
graciousness and fierce anger. This God does not exist.”
James
Sundquist Response to Dr. John Stoll Regarding Psychology, etc.:
There are several statements in your
letter I would also like to challenge:
It is astonishing to me that you would
say that these people are not integrating Carl Jung into their books and
teaching. Carl Jung has been a vast influence, initially in Roman Catholic
mysticism and gnosticism. In fact it was prevalent in Roman Catholicism BEFORE
it was brought to Evangelical Christianity. This in common knowledge which you
can prove with your own website search of Catholic Retreat Centers who are great
devotees and promoters of Carl Jung. Even the various authors promoting this
movement such as Richard Foster's books are laced with quotes from Carl Jung.
You state that centering prayer is NOT
using a repetitive mantra. Well this may be the case for you, but it collides
with the observed practices in a host of Christian meditation retreat centers
and the actual prescriptions offered by leaders of the movement.
You have correctly quoted Scripture. But
you have not made any connection with the term “centering” and those Scriptures.
There is not one single example of the practice in Scripture. Not not one single
example. Your example of Christ commanding us to pray secret in our prayer
closes says nothing about being silent, only to not be seen or heard by others.
Secondly, if it is so important to be in isolation to pray, then why are you
then promoting group techniques? Furthermore, show me one Scripture where God
“goes deeper than conversation”, Show me one Scripture that says we are any
closer to God in silence than we we confess our faith with our lips, or when
Jesus prayed to the Father to the sweating of drops of blood, or Daniel's
prayer? It is amazing to me that all of you who promote this “contemplative
prayer” think you are closer to God than all of the persecuted and martyred
saints throughout the ages who did not practice this form of prayer...that
somehow they missed out. What you are proposing is that somehow a very
subjective (and untested by the testing of the spirits to see if it be of God)
is superior to the objective Word of God. This is particularly true when the
Scriptures themselves declare that Scripture is already sufficient to the
perfecting of saints (sanctification)...that we already lack nothing. Sola
Scriptura was sufficient for the Apostle Paul and he told us it was
sufficient...nothing deficient....lacking nothing. If we lack nothing without
“prayer centering” then what can this practice add? Are you saying that prayer
centering is a way to open our hearts that could be achieved by reading the
Scripture and praying the same way the rest of the saints have always prayed?
There is no presence of God when two or more are gathered in his name without
even practicing “centering prayer?” God is not already present in a believer by
virtue of his simple obedience to Christ's commands such as the Great Commission
(which the Desert Fathers did NOT practice), by simply praising his name (The
Lord occupies the praises of his people)? “Centering Prayer” is not listed as
one of the Gifts of the Holy Spirit, and yet a Christian does not have the
presence of God until they practice Centering Prayer?” If this is true, then
there is no presence of God in all the Gifts of the Holy Spirit that are listed
in Scripture. But that idea is absurd. Without God's presence in the Gifts of
the Holy Spirit, what Christian would even want them and of what value would
they be to the Church?
ENTERING SILENCE
Psalm 62 You state: “It is the quiet
prayer the Psalms speak of ("For God alone my soul waits in silence" Ps. 62)”
You have quoted the Revised Standard
Edition.
So just to be sure, regarding which
translation conveys the actual words and meanings, let's see what Psalm 62:1
says in the original Hebrew:
My soul (nephesh) waits (duwmiyah
{doo-me-yaw'} ). Yes the word does mean keeping silent vs. making noise. But
its meaning is the same is the same word used in
Psa 39:2 which states: I was dumb
0481 with silence
01747, I held my peace
02814 , [even] from good
02896; and my sorrow
03511 was stirred
05916 .
When the word “duwmiya” is used, it
simply means to refrain from speaking, speechless, keep quiet. It is not a
license to enter in some form of mystical meditation. (See Strongs Concordance
Number 01747.)
But even more crucially, is the rest of
the verse you did not quote (“from him cometh my salvation”), because this
reveals what the whole chapter is really all about, and that is what the
Psalmist David was talking about what he was waiting for...and that is his
salvation. In fact the whole rest of Chapter 62 is talking about salvation...and
the expectation of Christ's coming to save him ultimately. The Psalm even ends
with the assurance that God will reward man according to his works whether they
are wicked or righteous. Even if David were waiting “in silence” he is
waiting for his salvation, not simply a subjective experience of practicing the
presence of God. Or in other words “back off” or “stand aside” and “don't
get in the way of” or become a participant in what God alone can do. Finally we
are not even told that Psalm 62:1 is a prayer as you state (though we certainly
could pray that verse)!
"Be still, and know that I am God," Ps.
46:10,
Once again, there is nothing in the
context of this Psalm to suggest the author was praying. If anything the Lord
was trying to do what he did with Job and that is to get him to pay attention to
everything the Lord is doing and has done in Creation and Judgment..man was not
being credited for contributing to some sort of dialogue with God. This Psalm is
almost a reprimand to mankind. This “be still” was analogous to trying to get a
fidgety child to “sit still” and pay attention...or in modern day vernacular
“chill out” or “don't get so stressed out” or as Scripture says elsewhere “be
anxious for nothing.” God was simply telling man to stand in awe and behold all
that GOD was doing including the devastation he caused on the earth. This can be
clearly seen in verse 8 where he states:
“Come, behold the works of the Lord, what
desolations he hath made in the earth? This is not “prayer centering.” What
possible role did man have in this activity?
More proof from Biblical scholars
regarding what “be still” means in Psalm 46:
http://cana.userworld.com/cana_Meditation_Psalm.html
Psa 131:2 Surely I have behaved and
quieted myself, as a child that is weaned of his mother: my soul [is] even as a
weaned child”
Once again this quieting oneself is just
like what Psalm 46 is asking us to do. In fact this verse even reinforces that
Psalm 46 by trying to get the child weaned off of behaving like a child and
simply behaving more like an adult. But it has nothing to to with “centering
prayer” and just like with Psalm 46 there is nothing in this chapter to even
suggest the author is praying.
Finally I would like to respond to your
use of Ephesians 3:16,17, and 19. First allow me to put these quotes:
Eph 3:16 That he would grant you,
according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might by his
Spirit in the inner man;
Eph 3:17 That Christ may dwell in your
hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love,
Eph 3:18 May be able to comprehend with
all saints what [is] the breadth, and length, and depth, and height;
Eph 3:19 And to know the love of Christ,
which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fullness of God
Now I will agree with you that this
passage is a prayer because Paul states that it is in verse 14 when he says “for
this reason I kneel before the Father.” We are also not left in the dark what
Paul was referring to that we might be filled to the measure of fullness of
God.” The impression created in vast majority of proof texts in “Christian
Meditation and “Centering Prayer” is that some new information or elevated state
of consciousness is going to be achieved which all other Christians who don't
practice it will not attain. But Paul tells in this very chapter who would
received these riches (all Christians) and even what they would receive. It is
essential that when Paul write a phrase such as “for this reason” , of King
James renders it “for this cause” you have to go back to the earlier part of
that passage to see what the reason was that he was referring to, or what cause.
Well Paul tells us immediately prior in Verse 13. So, what reason does Paul give
for kneeling before the Father. He says “so all the rest of the Christians in
Ephesus won't get discouraged because of Paul's suffering. There is no
mysterious altered state of consciousness that you are going to experience in
your inner being. Paul goes further as you go back even further in passage.
There are not some new found riches yet to be discovered by “centering prayer”
as you seem to imply. Paul tells us what theses riches are when he declares that
it was the mystery of Christ which was not made known yet to the Gentiles in
previous generations. In other words, what was hidden is now revealed in
Christ. BUT IT IS ALREADY REVEALED...”and to make it plain to everyone the
administration of this mystery” (Verse 9).
Now this is not to say there are not
riches yet to be revealed, as Paul in other place says”:
“But as it is written, eye hath not seen,
nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God
hath prepared for them that love him.” I Corinthians 2:9
But these are riches that we will obtain
when we are resurrected in our glorified bodies...not before, and certainly not
acquired by means of “prayer centering” or the type of meditation described in
your movement. Paul would agree that we should no longer be as a child but
become mature. But this maturation comes through sanctification of his Word so
that we won't be tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine and cunningly
devised myths and fables dreamed up by Gnostics and Mystics and their
descendants that Paul himself opposed.
SOURCE: http://rock-to-salt.cephasministry.com/christian_meditation_vs_centering_prayer.html
Here is
an excellent article entitled:
Visualization
and Imaging
http://www.cornerstonemag.com/pages/show_page.asp?207
Defender of Richard Foster's Comment:
Even if I
agreed with you on every other point, I would have to most strongly disagree
with you here. This particular point of attack is entirely groundless. If you
are the author of the website you reference, I would strongly suggest that you
remove Mr. Foster's quote from that page because the use of the quote indicates
that Mr. Foster supports something when, in fact, what he actually said is
directly in opposition to it.
James' Response:
This issue regarding the website is
addressed above. I have discussed this with the writers of the website and
hopefully they will clarify it. But again, my greatest concern is that Richard
Foster promotes teachers such as Morton Kelsey who has devoted an entire book to
defending the ideas of Carl Jung who is one of the founding fathers of
unconscious (subconscious) occult theology.
Morton Kelsey on Carl Jung:
"It is
ironic that after I had three years in seminary and several more studying the
devotional masters, it took a Swiss psychiatrist to suggest this possibility
[imaging] to me. It was C. G. Jung who showed me that such practices can work
today, and that irnages not only open one to the depth of oneself, but also
beyond to the world of psychoid realities where one is able to come into contact
with the realm of God Himself ' "
SOURCE:
http://www.cornerstonemag.com/pages/show_page.asp?207
Kelsey has now proceeded in his latest
book Sacrament of Sexuality to approve of the normalization of homosexuality.
Now Richard Foster does clearly
indicate in his book that the only acceptable sexual relations is between a man
and a woman who are married. Knowing this, it makes it all the more confusing,
if not alarming, that Richard Foster would hold Morton Kelsey in such high
regard. Morton Kelsey's views on homosexuality should come as no surprise,
given Jung's teaching on blurring the lines in sexual boundaries. In other
words, Jung believed that all human beings are bisexual. Jung compounded his
perversion by promoting evolution in this very personality theory by believing
that these male/female archetypes were derived from when humans were animals.
But there is no reconciliation or balancing of male/female opposites because God
created man and then woman as separate entities (“male and female he created
them”) and even condemned any attempt by man to blur this line or create an
appearance of blurring or crossing the line such as androgyny. I might consider
renouncing my position if Richard Foster did not advocate the teachings of
Morton Kelsey who does promote the alpha state. I might consider renouncing my
position on Richard Foster if he repented of his advocacy of Roman Catholic
Mystic, Universalist, and Buddhist, Thomas Merton. And this is just the
beginning of the trainload of false teachers that Richard Foster quotes,
endorses, promotes, and secures endorsements, and then imports them into a host
of unsuspecting evangelical churches.
Here are
more examples of New Age Teachers besides MADELEINE L'ENGLE who are quoted often
and embraced by RICHARD FOSTER:
“THOMAS MERTON:
This man was a Trappist monk who became a Hindu/Buddhist. Basically his beliefs
and orientation was not Christian. He was a co-worker with the New Age leader of
global power, Barbara Marx Hubbard, who formed the global New Age organization
“Committee for the Future.”
ELIZABETH
O’CONNOR: Her books include praise of the original candidate for the post of Lord Maitreya
of the New Age, Jidda Krishnamurti. He remained an occultist until his death,
although he refused the position of world teacher and leader. O’Connor praised
New Age centers of “spiritual” learning!
AGNES
SANDFORD: "For now we know that we have within us another mind than the conscious, and
that this unconscious mind is not disconnected from life but is connected
with the mind of the race: the collective unconscious (this is a direct glean
and term coined by Carl Jung himself). Therefore we can 'pick up' thoughts
and impressions from another or from life, outside ourselves or from the
memories of the race. Now into this collective unconscious, into these
race memories (also from Carl Jung who meant Evolution when he used this
term), Jesus Christ entered...”
[emphases and parenthesis mine]
SOURCE:
http://www.cornerstonemag.com/pages/show_page.asp?207
Based on this association, Richard
Foster is not distancing himself from the “unconscious” (subconscious).
Seen by
some churches as being “spiritual” Sandford taught a form of Catholic/Hindu
mysticism. Her books are used by the Luciferian theosophical society, as her
mysticism is ancient occult practice.
EVELYN
UNDERHILL: She authored Practical Mysticism. Another expression of Hindu/Catholic
“spiritual” exercises.
MEISTER
ECKHART: A Catholic New Ager who was denounced because of his heretical and pantheistic
teachings. These included that man is God, that nature itself is Divine, and
that evolution and reincarnation are pantheistic realities. Meister Eckhart,
along with the apostate ex-priest of the Catholic Church, Matthew Fox and David
Spangler ( New Age teacher of nightmare beliefs ) are lauded darlings of the
Catholic/ New Age syncretism in the 1990s! Their beliefs, like Foster himself,
are nothing less than ‘refined” versions of witchcraft and shamanism, very old
and very demonic.
MARTIN
BUBER: A Jewish mystic who has succumbed to the New Age delusions.
HARVEY
COX: This man studied at Harvard to become a theologian. He teaches and is an
activist for the syncretism of all religions (Catholic, Protestant and the
world’s indigenous and occultic religions.)”
SOURCE:
(Source: http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/Foster_Expose.htm)
“American
Baptist (Harvard) professor Harvey Cox is a notorious modernist. In his book The
Secular City he claimed that "the world, not the church, is the proper focus of
Christian life" and "the world of politics is a primary sphere of God's
liberating work today" (Richard Quebedeaux, The Worldly Evangelicals, Harper and
Row, 1978, p. 19). In his book The Feast of Fools, Cox refers to Jesus Christ
as a harlequin and a clown. Cox does not believe that followers of pagan
religions are on their way to Hell. He was a speaker at the World Congress
for the Synthesis of Science and Religion in India in 1986. The conference was
arranged by a Hindu organization.”
SOURCE:http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/sbcreaffirms.htm
Defender of Richard Foster's Comment:
I have
taken quite a bit of time to study what you have said because I do not wish to
be taken captive by any hollow or deceptive philosophy or anything that sets
itself up in opposition to the kingdom of God. Thank you for illuminating areas
of potential concern for me. I feel that my beliefs and convictions have only
been strengthened by the study that your comments prompted.
James' Response:
I am glad
you have taken quite a bit of time to study what I have said. I have spent
hundreds of hours and several years studying Richard Foster and other spiritual
formation mysticism teachers and psychology which has virtually taken over
Evangelical Christianity and the Church. But I mainly have studied the Bible
for much of the 50 years I have been a Christian. It has not been difficult to
spot error, with this foundation, because I simply immediately see a red flag
every time I read a statement or concept which does not line up with the plumb
line of Scripture. Well all I can say is that I hope that you are now convinced
that it is Richard Foster who possesses and promotes hollow and deceptive
philosophies contrary to Scripture.
Defender of Richard Foster's Comment:
May the
Lord continue to bless you. I pray "that your love may abound more and more in
knowledge and depth of insight, so that you may be able to discern what is best
and may be pure and blameless until the day of Christ, filled with the fruit of
righteousness that comes through Jesus Christ--to the glory and praise of God."
(Php 1:9-11)
James' Response:
I have
the same pray for you, that the Lord would bless you personally. But as to
teaching, to be pure and blameless, we both must not believe in or promote false
teachers, but rather mark them and warn God's sheep regarding them. And just
like with Psychology, the other Trojan Horse in Christianity, Richard Foster's
promotion of Mysticism is not like promoting a single cult leader, but rather
doctrines of demons and seducing spirits whose name is “legion, for we are
many.” By his own testimony, only his community of these teachers has grown
(from 1978 Edition to the present Celebration of Discipline). A
remarkable statement (on page vii of the book that you have) that does not
actually comfort anyone who was hoping that he had truly repented of his earlier
definition of “Christian meditation as emptying the mind.” And to my knowledge
there is no public record of his renouncing his earlier position and there
certainly was not any rescinding of his views in his last correspondence with me
or Ray Yungen, when we confronted him about his views.
So my
question is how many false teachings must Foster espouse and how many false
teachers must he parade before us before we say “enough already”? At what point
do we say we must come out from among them? At what point do we admit by
bringing his teachings into our homes and into the house of God that we are
sharing in his sins and ruining whole households of God? At what point do we
cease to promote him and begin to mark him as a false teacher and warn the rest
of the sheep of His pasture?
FALSE TEACHERS WHO ENDORSE CELEBRATION OF DISCIPLINE
Quoted by
Richard Foster in his 25th Anniversary Edition of Celebration of
Discipline:
Jamie
Buckingham [late]:
Third Wave, Latter Rain teacher, and
Shepherding Movement leader, who formerly sat on Foster's Renovare Board of
Reference
Buckingham claimed, the still small voice of God told him he would live to be a
hundred. He died of cancer in 1992. Jamie Buckingham was a very significant
leader of the very destructive Shepherding Movement.
Jamie Buckingham's statement defending UPC:
UPC BELIEVES IN THE TRINITY?
The
November 1987 issue of Moody Monthly contained several articles on the cults.
These articles by noted discernment authors discussed the Mormons, the
Unification Church, the New Age Movement, and the United Pentecostal Church.
Noted charismatic author, Jamie Buckingham, in the January 1988 issue of
Charisma & Christian Life called the authors of the Moody Monthly articles
"heresy hunters" and likened them to "sharks" and defended the United
Pentecostal Church. He stated: "My UPC friends, who disdain the term 'Jesus
Only, ' tell me they really do believe in the Trinity."
Is
Jamie Buckingham correct? Does the UPC believe in the Trinity?
Thomas Weisser, a UPC minister, wrote in After the Way Called Heresy: "Damnable
heresies started entering in. The greatest of these is the Trinitarian Doctrine.
This doctrine is not found in Scripture!...Its wording was borrowed from
paganism" (page 4). Dr. Enroth questioned Charisma: "Is he [Jamie Buckingham]
familiar with that church's version of the Doxology: 'Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God
Almighty, God is ONE person; there is no Trinity. Amen.'?"
If Jamie
Buckingham does not do deeper studies into those he defends, he may next be
endorsing the Jehovah's Witnesses, the Mormons, or New Age Channelers!
(Dr.
Ronald Enroth and C.F. Staff) The Colossian Fellowship P.O. Box 12933
Seattle,
Wa., U.S.A. 98111
"As members of this [church] family we are commanded by our
Father not to backbite, criticize, accuse or condemn. If we have a difference
with out brother (doctrinal or personal) we are to go directly to him - or keep
our mouth shut. There is no excuse for public condemnation of another in the
Body" Jamie Buckingham, Source: ['The First and Last Word', reprinted in Logos
Journal 11 [Sept. - Oct., 1981], p40] as quoted by Dan McConnell.
“No
excuse for public condemnation?” So much for the Apostle Paul opposing Peter IN
PUBLIC! So much for Matthew 18 which AFTER you have gone privately to the
brother, you go publically before the congregation. And so much for publically
warning any congregation about the false teachings of anyone who calls himself a
brother. And so much for being a good Berean and Paul's words to the Galatians
when Paul called on them to hold even him accountable for what he taught,
marking such a false teachers! Finally, I can't help but wonder why Jamie
Buckingham did not take his own advice to refrain from criticizing a brother
or ministry that questioned the doctrine of the UPC.
"[P]ure doctrine is important. But who among us is qualified
to define it? ... [S]ince we can't decide, let's quit backbiting each other's
ministries" Jamie Buckingham, Source:['Who Defines "Correct Doctrine"?'
Charisma, March 1981, p11, as quoted by Dan McConnell]
If we
can't decide pure doctrine, then how was Timothy able to know and test true vs.
false teachings in order to maintain pure doctrine? As to “who among us is
qualified to define”....any good Berean could do that. And isn't that why we
have elders in the body in order to help rightly divide the truth in order to
protect the sheep from false teachers and false brethren? Isn't that why we
have the Gift of the Holy Spirit known as “Discerner of Spirits”? If we don't
really know what doctrine is, then how could we possibly know what to adhere to?
How was Jamie Buckingham able to determine that the UPC was doctrinally sound
and that those who opposed the UPC were wrong, if he did not even know himself
how to define pure doctrine in order to rightly divide the truth.
It's not
very encouraging to know that Richard Foster has secured Jamie Buckingham's
endorsement of his book and teaching, as well as having listed Jamie Buckingham
as a key figure in his Renovare organization.
Tony Campolo:
Campolo's Campus Appearance Called Into Question
A
Christian group is asking an Assemblies of God Bible college in Pennsylvania to
drop a frequent guest chapel speaker because of his heretical beliefs. But the
school's president is defending his decision to invite a man who holds to
universalist theology and an unbiblical view of homosexuality....Campolo, a
well-known media commentator on religious, social and political matters, often
preaches with his wife in homosexual-affirming churches, where he has stated
that the homosexual "did not choose homosexuality," but is rather "a victim
either of biological accident or someone else's folly."...Michael Marcavage,
director of the Philadelphia-based group Repent America, says Valley Forge
Christian College is ignoring the scriptural command to mark and avoid false
teachers. "Through the years, obviously, Tony Campolo has promoted many
unbiblical doctrines," Marcavage says. "This goes back to his book A Reasonable
Faith in which he developed the false concept that Christ lives in all human
beings regardless whether they are Christian."
VFCC
president Meyer says he has never read the book, but believes Campolo's views
are often taken out of context or misunderstood. "I have heard him share
regarding the core tenets of the gospel and what it means to be a Christian by
having Jesus as Lord and Savior,"... "He declares that there's a biological
basis for homosexuality” -- and he has stated that “we cannot expect such a
person to change his orientation."...
Source:
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/9/212004a.asp
For more information on Tony Campolo's
teachings go to:
http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/exposes/campolo/campolo.htm
Gary Collins:
A
psychologist who believes you can integrate the Bible with Psychology in
Psychotherapy. See
http://www.psychologydebunked.com/sundquistreview.htm
Also see
the site on the general teachings of Gary Collins:http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/exposes/collins/general.htm
Leighton Ford:
LEIGHTON
FORD CONFUSED ABOUT THE GOSPEL - Evang. Leighton Ford declared that individuals
"should preach the gospel," but they shouldn't "be so negative as to refuse to
endorse or work with those who belong to a group that proclaims a different
gospel."(8/98 Fund. Digest)
Madeleine L'Engle:
Already
discussed above
Eugene
Peterson:
WHAT
KIND OF MESSAGE IS “THE MESSAGE” BIBLE?
By
Berit Kjos
http://www.despatch.cth.com.au/Articles_V/The_Message_E_Petersen_text.htm
and
The Message: The Mystical Bible
http://watch.pair.com/message2.html
Eugene
Peterson also is the New Testament Editor for:
RENOVARÉ
Spiritual Formation Study Bible
Dallas
Willard
Dallas
Willard is a featured Renovare speaker and team member, and is a general editor
for:
RENOVARÉ
Spiritual Formation Study Bible
John &
Paul Sanford:
Disciples
of Agnes Sanford discussed above as leaders of “inner healing” movement
See article Inner Healing,
Christian of Occult?:
http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/Psychology/inheal.htm
Peter Wagner:
Apostle of Manifest Sons of God
See:
http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/wagnerquotes.html
Macrina Wiederkehr:
A
Benedictine Order teacher:
“I understand that God is Someone who has taken the time to
sit on a quilt with me waiting for beauty. She is a Mother of Presence.
I need only invite her into my moments of leisure. Her presence will empower my
presence.” [emphasis mine]
I invite
you to read the testimony of a former Benedictine Nun who was told to burn her
King James Bible when she joined the Order:
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-r010.html
John
Wimber:
Founder
of Vineyard and major influencer of Laughing Movement, and Board Member of
Renovare before his death.
http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/exposes/wimber/general.htm
Richard Foster declares
Wimber's apostolic role
and claims that "John speaks with the confidence of one who is living out of the
divine center." That "Divine Center" is an Eastern mysticism term, meaning "God
is a universal consciousness, residing within everyone, guiding them on the path
to evolutionary perfection."
Now it is
unimaginable to me that that by now any true Christian could defend the entire
teachings of Richard Foster, with all of the contradictions and the false
teachers he promotes or who promote him. Now I have only addressed some of the
teachers Richard Foster has listed on his Renovare site. I could write another
book going through and revealing the false teachings of a host of other names
Foster has listed on his site as valuable resources. But just in case there may
be some holdouts, here is a quote from Richard Foster on in his 25th
Anniversary Edition of Celebration of Discipline, Page 72:
“In addition to studying the Bible, do not neglect the study
of some of the experiential classics in Christian literature....Nor should we
forget the great body of literature by men and women from many walks of life.
Many of these thinkers have unusual perception into the human predicament.
Writers like Lao-tse of China and Zarathustra of Persia.”
What
Foster failed to tell us was the Lao-tse (Lao-tze) is credited with being the
founder of Taoism and that Zarathrustra was a false prophet and founder of
Zorastrianism...both of which are pagan off-shoots or daughters of the
Babylonian mystery religion...the antithesis of Christianity! Taoism is where
we get the I Ching, another ancient form of Divination, forbidden in the Bible,
as well as the Yin-Yang idea, both philosophies of which were later championed
by none other than Carl Jung himself whose disciples are laced throughout
Foster's works and Renovare website. Foster goes on to say “One word of caution
is in order. Do not be overwhelmed or discouraged by all the books you have not
read.” When his word of caution should have been towards the false teachers he
just promoted! There was a time when Orthodox Evangelical Christians and
churches would never have permitted Roman Catholicism to its pulpit. But now
thanks to Richard Foster (and many others such Psychologist Dr. Larry Crabb),
who isn't even a Catholic, many of the the Babylonian and Pagan Doctrines and
teachers of Roman Catholicism are now embraced whole-heartedly. But I pray that
it will not be so with you! Richard Foster, who has a Doctorate in Pastoral
Counseling introduces Christians to many disturbing elements, mixing Scripture
with the wisdom of the world, while the Apostle Paul tells us that God uses the
wisdom of the world to confound the wise. We are now being asked to submit the
sheep of His Pasture to the counsel of three false religions....Roman
Catholicism, Taoism and Zorastrianism.
SUBJECTIVE VS. OBJECTIVE RIGHTEOUSNESS
Richard Foster's False Teaching on Sanctification:
"This includes both objective righteousness and subjective
righteousness. In this book we are dealing with the issue of subjective
righteousness (or sanctification if you prefer another theological term), but it
is important to understand that both are gracious gifts from God. And, in fact,
the Bible does not make the clear division between objective and
subjective righteousness that theologians are accustomed to draw,
simply because the biblical writers would find it ludicrous to talk of having
one without the other." Richard Foster, Celebration of Discipline, 2002, Page
6.
The
fact is know nothing of righteousness without the OBJECTIVE standard of
Scripture. Now I can't help but wonder if Richard Foster ever read the
following Scriptures:
“In those
days [there was] no king in Israel, [but] every man did [that which was]
right in his own eyes.” Judges 17:6
“There
is a way that seemeth
right unto a man, but the end thereof [are] the ways of death.” Proverbs
16:25
In
other words, the way that seemeth right is subjective righteousness. Subjective
righteousness is not true righteousness at all but rather unrighteousness.
It is
amazing to me that Richard Foster would be quoting Romans to build his case for
subjective righteousness, for it says:
“For
they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish
their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the
righteousness of God.” Romans 10:3 [emphasis mine]
In
other words, like ancient Israel that Paul was referring, tried to establish
their own subjective righteousness rather than obey God's objective
righteousness.
“There
is none righteousness, no not one.” Romans 3:10
Well
wouldn't there be a host of people who are subjectively righteous? The
Pharisees were righteous in their own eyes (subjective righteousness)...so
doesn't that count?
The
Apostle Paul, prior to his conversion, certainly subjectively thought he was
righteous. In fact, even to the point of boasting. But what did he say? He
counted it ALL LOSS:
“Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in
the law, blameless.” Philippians 3:6
“Yea
doubtless, and I count all things [but] loss for the excellency of the
knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all
things, and do count them [but] dung, that I may win Christ,” Philippians 3:8
[emphasis mine]
“And be
found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but
that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by
faith: Philippians 3:9 [emphasis mine]
Richard
Foster has correctly stated that righteousness is a gift from the Lord, as the
Bible certainly says that in Romans. But Richard Foster has not only
incorrectly defined subjective righteousness by calling it sanctification, he is
not telling the truth when he says that the writers of the Bible do not
distinguish between objective and subjective righteousness. Foster's statement
fully explains why he is so ecumenical and is happy that he has expanded his
community without changing his views...so much for his recent definition of
Christian meditation not supposed to have collided with his 1978 Edition of Celebration of Discipline. Once subjective righteousness is fair game, then
one can believe and promote almost anything. So when subjective collides with
objective...who trumps whom? In Roman Catholicism with the host of Roman
Catholic teachers he promotes, Tradition trumps Scripture. But for true
Christians Scripture is the absolute standard by which we test all teachings!
Foster
is wrong on two fronts. One, subjective righteousness is not the definition of
sanctification. Two, the bible makes perfectly clear subjective vs. objective
righteousness. Objective righteousness is our standard for ALL behavior.
Regarding
Subjective vs. Objective Righteousness, I invite you to read Pastor Bob DeWaay's
two articles which clearly prove that Richard Foster's definition of
sanctification is completely in error, biblically:
Chasing Subjective Religious Experience
http://www.twincityfellowship.com/cic/articles/issue61.htm
In fact,
as Pastor Bob DeWaay pointed out to me. Subjective righteousness is not just
viewing one self righteous in his own eyes in a positive sense, but even
condemning oneself subjectively vs. against the objective standard of
Scripture. So subjective righteousness can produce both invalid high self worth
as much as it can produce invalid low self worth.
Pastor
Bob DeWaay:
Subjective and objective, as they are normally used in English, have to do with
that which exists independent of one’s thoughts or mind and that which exists
internally in one’s mind.
See
Definition of “Subjective”:
http://www.hyperdictionary.com/search.aspx?define=subjective
If Foster
is using the normal meaning of these terms, then “subjective” righteousness is
how righteous one considers himself or how righteous one feels and objective
would be how righteous one really is (again perhaps he is thinking of other
categories, but I have no way of knowing if he is). Assuming he means objective
and subjective in the normal English meanings, then he is wrong:
“Little
children, let us not love with word or with tongue, but in deed and truth. We
shall know by this that we are of the truth, and shall assure our heart before
Him, in whatever our heart condemns us; for God is greater than our heart, and
knows all things.” I John 3:18-20
Here John
anticipates someone who is objectively doing right, but subjectively sensing
condemnation. God is the final judge, but the objective (loving in deed and
truth) is more important than the subjective (our heart condemns us).
There are
other examples:
LUK 18:9
And He
(Jesus) also told this parable to certain ones who trusted in themselves that
they were righteous, and viewed others with contempt:
This
anticipates people who have a subjective idea they are righteous when in fact,
objectively they are not.
A
righteous person might struggle with feelings of condemnation, an unrighteous
person might have false assurance that he is righteous.
Why
the Church Lacks Discernment Part 1
Written by Bob DeWaay
http://www.twincityfellowship.com/cic/articles/issue30.pdf
Also see
my debate with Dr. John Stoll opposing his teaching that the Myers-Briggs
Temperament Indicator can be used to help sanctify marriage and life. In it I
list the Scriptures which define Sanctification. In no sense of the word is
sanctification determined by subjective righteousness but by objective
Scripture! It is not hard to see why Richard Foster promotes so many Roman
Catholic teachers because their Catechism teaches subjective righteousness and
sanctification (the perfecting of the saint) can only be fully achieved in
Purgatory.
http://rock-to-salt.cephasministry.com/john_stoll_vs_james_sundquist_pt_2.html
and
Divination Finds Further
Expression In The Evangelical Church
by Orrel Steinkamp, The Plumbline,
Volume 9, No. 3, June/July
http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/divinationfindsfurtherexpression.html
DEFINITION OF “SANCTIFICATION” ACCORDING TO EASTON'S BIBLE DICTIONARY:
“Sanctification -
involves
more than a mere moral reformation of character, brought about by the power of
the truth: it is the work of the Holy Spirit bringing the whole nature more and
more under the influences of the new gracious principles implanted in the soul
in regeneration. In other words, sanctification is the carrying on to perfection
the work begun in regeneration, and it extends to the whole man (Rom. 6:13; 2
Cor. 4:6; Col. 3:10; 1 John 4:7; 1 Cor. 6:19). It is the special office of
the Holy Spirit in the plan of redemption to carry on this work (1 Cor. 6:11; 2
Thess. 2:13). Faith is instrumental in securing sanctification, inasmuch as
it (1) secures union to Christ (Gal. 2:20), and (2) brings the believer into
living contact with the truth, whereby he is led to yield obedience "to the
commands, trembling at the threatenings, and embracing the promises of God for
this life and that which is to come."
Perfect
sanctification is not attainable in this life (1 Kings 8:46; Prov. 20:9; Eccl.
7:20; James 3:2; 1 John 1:8). See Paul's account of himself in Rom. 7:14-25;
Phil. 3:12-14; and 1 Tim. 1:15; also the confessions of David (Ps. 19:12, 13;
51), of Moses (90:8), of Job (42:5, 6), and of Daniel (9:3-20). "The more holy a
man is, the more humble, self-renouncing, self-abhorring, and the more sensitive
to every sin he becomes, and the more closely he clings to Christ. The moral
imperfections which cling to him he feels to be sins, which he laments and
strives to overcome. Believers find that their life is a constant warfare, and
they need to take the kingdom of heaven by storm, and watch while they pray.
They are always subject to the constant chastisement of their Father's loving
hand, which can only be designed to correct their imperfections and to confirm
their graces. And it has been notoriously the fact that the best Christians have
been those who have been the least prone to claim the attainment of perfection
for themselves.", Hodge's Outlines.”
So not
only is true sanctification only objective (vs. subjective), it is the office of
the Holy Spirit!
Speaking
of offices, where in Scripture is the office of spiritual director in the
Church? I see elders and deacons. Richard Foster states on Page 185 of the 25th
Anniversary Edition of spiritual directors: “He is not a superior or some
ecclesiastically appointed authority.” Does anyone seriously believe that in
the Roman Catholic Church that any one but that person's priest, bishop above
him, and archbishop above him, and cardinal above him, and Pope above him could
have spiritual authority or direction over that individual? A large percentage
of all the masters of spiritual disciplines that Foster quotes are all Roman
Catholic. Who is he kidding? I can't believe that one pastor in an Evangelical
Protestant Church did not stand up and point this out to Richard Foster in at
least one of the large numbers of churches he presents his seminars. Then
imagine (something Foster loves to do) that their roles could ever be
reversed...that an ordinary member of a Roman Catholic Church were to become the
spiritual director for an archbishop, or correct him, or rebuke him if
necessary, or even remove him. In the U.S. we have witnessed first hand how
virtually impossible it is to remove a wayward priest or archbishop, in light of
the pedophile scandal. The Pope simply transferred Archbishop Law from Boston
to Rome. Now, even if there we such a thing as a Spiritual Director, and he had
an ounce of sense, he would “spiritually direct” the Pope to defrock the
Archbishop and tell the Pope himself to step down for not renouncing the Council
of Trent and a host of later unbiblical encyclicals such as the Immaculate
Conception. Now gullible protestants are bringing these teachers into their
churches. Protestant churches teach (or should be teaching) Sola Scriptura.
Roman Catholicism teaches Scripture plus Tradition.....hmmmm....where have I
heard Scripture plus Tradition before? Richard Foster, of course. He wants us
to practice the Traditions of the Roman Catholic mystics, then tells us that all
Christians used to do these disciplines. In Roman Catholicism, when Scripture
and Tradition contradict each other, Tradition trumps Scripture. I wonder if
Richard Foster tells this to every Evangelical Protestant Church he speaks?
Richard Foster tells us we don't learn to meditate from a book, then tells us
the Scripture tells us how to meditate. Then he tells us that Scripture alone
is not sufficient, we need the masters from time of old to instruct us how to do
it. Of course he would have to say that because millions of saints who had just
the Bible, somehow thought they could meditate with Scripture alone (Sola
Scriptura). Then he tells us that Christ did not end his prayer with “thy will
be done” in praying for others, implying that he was only referring to himself.
This is very strange exegesis indeed, because that would imply that “thy will be
done” would not necessarily apply to others. But wouldn't thy will be done
apply to both himself and others? But I John 5:14 does make that stipulation
when it says: “that if we ask ANYTHING (anything would have to include others as
well as self), ACCORDING TO HIS WILL.
In
conclusion,
“And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that
man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed. Yet count [him] not
as an enemy, but admonish [him] as a brother.” II Thessalonians 3:14-15
This
verse in the above epistle is in great part referring to Chapter 2:15 and
Chapter 3:6 which state:
“Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions
which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.” II Thessalonians
2:15
“Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus
Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly,
and not after the tradition which he received of us.” II Thessalonians 3:6
Now these
traditions are the teachings of Scripture (not Roman Catholic Tradition). The
Epistles and Gospels were circulated among all of the churches, so all Scripture
was binding on all Christians...not just the Thessalonicans.
Richard
Foster has now released his Renovare Bible. On his website he promotes the
following:
THE
RENOVARE SPIRITUAL FORMATION BIBLE
On Richard Foster's website:
"We need a Bible that will lead us step-by-step into the glorious and terrifying
“with-God
life” which, like Ariadne’s thread,
weaves its way throughout Scripture."
SOURCE:
http://www.renovare.org/documents/study_Bible_Sampler.pdf
Ariadne's
Thread and the Labyrinth in Classical Mythology
Ariadne was the
daughter of King Minos of Crete. Minos had Daedalus build a Labyrinth, a house
of winding passages, to house the bull-man, the Minotaur, the beast that his
wife Pasiphae bore after having intercourse with a bull. (Minos had refused to
sacrifice a bull to Poseidon, as the king promised, so the god took revenge by
causing his wife to desire the bull--but that's another story.) Minos required
tribute from Athens in the form of young men and women to be sacrificed to the
Minotaur.
Theseus, an
Athenian, volunteered to accompany one of these groups of victims to deliver his
country from the tribute to Minos. Ariadne fell in love with Theseus and gave
him a thread which he let unwind through the Labyrinth so that he was able to
kill the Minotaur and find his way back out again.
Ovid says that
Daedalus built a house in which he confused the usual passages and deceived the
eye with a conflicting maze of various wandering paths (in errorem variarum
ambage viarum) (Metamorphoses 8.161):
"so Daedalus
made the innumerable paths of deception [innumeras errore vias], and he
was barely able to return to the entrance: so deceptive was the house [tanta
est fallacia tecti]" (8.166-68).
The Labyrinth
project on the World Wide Web
is designed to allow you to make your own Ariadne's thread through the maze of
information available on the Internet. And you will always be able to find your
way back by choosing the "Return to Labyrinth Home Page" link at the end of each
Labyrinth document.
SOURCE:
http://www.georgetown.edu/labyrinth/info_labyrinth/ariadne.html
The
departure from these teachings by Richard Foster and the host of teachers he
promotes is the reason we must withdraw from them.
“If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine,
receive him not into [your] house, neither bid him God speed: For he that
biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.” II John 2:10-11
Thomas
Merton, Morton Kelsey, Basil Pennington, Benedictine Monks, Ignatius Loyola,
Brennan Manning, Isaac Pennington, Basil Pennington, Madeleine L'Engle, Thomas
Keating, Harvey Cox, Agnes Sanford, Madame Guyon, John of the Cross, Evelyn
Underhill, Thomas Kelly, Tilden Edwards, William Vaswig (also of Renovare who,
like Foster learned his meditation from Agnes Sanford and a great admirer of
occultist Carl Jung and his “sitting in silence” therapy), Karen Mains, Lynda
Graybeal, Jean-Pierre de Caussade, Meister Eckhart, George Fox, Henri Nouwen,
Teresa of Avila, Brother Lawrence (who also taught the emptying of the mind),
Julian of Norwich, Siang Yan Tan (psychologist), Lao-Tse (Taoism), Zarathrustra
(Zorastrianism) and a host of other “masters” or “spiritual directors” (past or
present) of the Traditions of Discipline that Richard Foster promotes and
endorses do not bring this doctrine, so none of them, or their teachings should
be brought into our houses or houses of worship. And by doing so, we do become
partakers of their evil deeds....yes false doctrine is evil deeds. We must
command them as Paul did Timothy to the Ephesians to “Not teach false doctrines
any longer!”” Richard Foster's teachings whether or not he says otherwise, are
a blend of Eastern mysticism and gnosticism...another Jesus and another gospel.
Oh foolish Americans, who hath bewitched you?
|
|