MYSTICISM IN THE CONTEMPORARY CHURCH

(PART 1 & 2)

BY

REV. DAVID P. MCAFEE

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT

OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF

APOLOGETICS

SUMMER 2011

DR. ARTHUR JOHNSON

INSTRUCTOR

2

The quest for something more can never ignore, neglect or go beyond the Scriptures;

if it does, something more will always end up in being something less. - John MacArthur

MacArthur’s analysis of the dire importance for the Church to be vigilant against

false doctrine and false practices is surely going unheeded by many today. Experience is

being exalted over Scripture at an alarming rate. Those who point out error based upon

the commands and wisdom of the Word of God are either ignored or labeled as divisive

to church unity. While the contemporary church has been under attack for several

millennia, it is in these latter days, that the attacks have been insidious and pervasive. As

churches in growing numbers depart from sound doctrine and “the faith which was once

for all delivered to the saints,” more are looking east toward ancient mystical

philosophies and concepts to fill the void. Mysticism is the most sinister intruder into the

contemporary Church and it has crept in with a vengeance disguised in many forms.

While it would be next to impossible to detail all of the different aspects of how

mysticism is impacting the contemporary Church, this work will attempt to broadly

define and point out some of the salient features and purveyors of mysticism in the

Church in part one of this work, and then in part two, I will expand more on these aspects

and the biblical response to them.

MYSTICISM DEFINED

Understanding mysticism and the dangers it poses is of paramount importance for the

Church, and while it can be hard to pin down all of its forms and nuances, MacArthur

does an excellent job of fleshing out its characteristics:

Mysticism is a system of belief that attempts to perceive spiritual reality

apart from objective, verifiable facts. It seeks truth through feelings,

intuition, and other internal senses. Objective data is usually discounted,

3

so mysticism derives its authority from within. Spontaneous feeling

becomes more significant than objective fact. Intuition outweighs reason.

An internal awareness supersedes external reality.1

Much earlier than MacArthur however, B.B. Warfield recognized that even the most

basic forms of mysticism can have profound effects upon the doctrinal purity of the

Church. Warfield also points out in his work on Mysticism & Christianity that regardless

of the variations in which mysticism presents itself, there is a specific common element

to each manifestation – the subjective nature of emotional experience. Warfield notes:

Of course mystics differ with one another in the consistency with which

they apply their principle. And of course they differ with one another in

the account they give of this religious sentiment to which they make their

appeal. There are, therefore, many varieties of mystics, pure and impure,

consistent and inconsistent, naturalistic and supernaturalistic, pantheistic

and theistic — even Christian. What is common to them all, and what

makes them all mystics, is that they all rest on the religious sentiment as

the source of knowledge of divine things (emphasis mine).2

It is the goal in mysticism to be united with God or the divine, but Christian mysticism

goes even further by claiming that a deeper internal relationship with God can be

achieved through experiences, or as Richard Foster refers to them, “inward disciplines.”

In Celebration of Discipline, Foster’s magnum opus on “the deeper life,” he explains that

the inward disciplines are meditation, prayer, fasting and study. These categories are

legitimate in their proper context and regular meaning, but Foster’s employment of the

terms goes beyond the biblical authorization (to be explored further in part two of this

project).3

1 John MacArthur, Charismatic Chaos (Grand Rapids Mich.: Zondervan Pub. House, 1992), 35.

2 Benjamin Warfield, The Works of Benjamin B. Warfield. (Grand Rapids Mich.: Baker Book House,

1981), IX:651. 3 Richard J. Foster, Celebration of Discipline : The Path to Spiritual Growth, Rev. 1st ed. (San Francisco:

Harper & Row, 1988). See also Winfried Corduan, Mysticism: An Evangelical Option, (Grand Rapids:

Zondervan, 1991), p.32, where Corduan places mysticism into three categories: panenthetic, monistic and

theistic. Since this work is focused on mysticism in the Church, I will not explain these further. However,

it is helpful to consider the three stages of mysticism as presented by Gary Gilley, This Little Church

4

Mysticism in the Church can be ambiguous, broad and overt, or it can be focused,

narrow, and covert in nature, and for the weak and undiscerning in the Church, the

tentacles that attack objective truth are usually unperceived. From seemingly harmless

statements like “the Lord told me…” to the extra-biblical revelations and declarations of

people like Karen Mains, the common denominator of mysticism in the Church appears

to be based on subjective emotions and/or self-authentication. Mains described in an

article for Christianity Today about her alter ego named Eddie Bishop who romanced her

in her dreams. If this was not enough, she also told of a bizarre vision of a Christ child

that was “within” her who appeared as a drooling, emaciated “idiot child in a torn

undershirt.”4 In promoting her book Keys to a Living Heart, Mains’ website states,

"Our heart is a habitation. There is a mansion in our souls for which we

need to take intimate responsibility." Unfortunately, because of sin, our

hearts consist of "mean rooms, damp basements, narrow hallways,

cramped spaces . . . The place God created to be open to the fresh wind of

his Spirit, the dwelling he desires to occupy in order that it may be

habitable to others, has become boarded, the windows are shuttered, the

blinds drawn. Dust is accumulating. The doors have been padlocked."5

On the surface, Mains’ esoteric allusions might seem harmless except that there is no

biblical basis for most of what she says. What she means by making the habitation of

God being “habitable to others” is unclear but it appears that she means others can dwell

in the same place God does within us. This is of course, contrary to revealed biblical

truth (John 14:17; Rom. 8:9-11; 1 Cor. 3:16; 6:19; 2 Cor. 6:16).

It is not just through the publication of books that mysticism has crept into the

Church. The pervasive influence of television has ushered all kinds of doctrinal error and

Stayed Home: A Faithful Church in Deceptive Times, (Carlisle, PA: EP Books, 2006), p. 115, which, will

be discussed later in part two. 4 John F. MacArthur, Jr., Reckless faith : When the Church Loses its Will to Discern (Wheaton Ill.:

Crossway Books, 1994), 21. 5 http://www.karenmains.com/books.php

5

unbiblical practices into the homes and lives of people through televangelists with little

scrutiny or accountability. This phenomenon is pervasive because it is viewed and

replicated by so many who imitate what seems to be popular and successful practices.

Preachers see other preachers growing churches and prospering financially, but also since

their self-authenticating messages are not proven by Scripture, it creates havoc in the

Church and dilutes the message of the gospel.

A case in point is the practice referred to as “slaying in the Spirit.” The

charismatic preachers who demonstrate this unbiblical practice are authenticated by

participants who fall down in a self-emptying ecstasy where they suddenly lose control of

their faculties at the command or touch of the preacher and are later revived testifying

that it was the power of God at work. Since spectators have no biblical basis for

determining the validity or truthfulness of this subjective event, those who practice this

receive to a degree some amount of personal prestige or authentication even though they

may claim it to be a work of the Holy Spirit. The practice of slaying in the Spirit is just

as unverifiable as contemporary glossolalia or tongues and healings.

Mysticism is not only propagated through teaching, preaching, and books.

Another area in which mysticism is prevalent in churches today can be found in the songs

and worship styles of contemporary evangelicalism. While not all contemporary songs

are unbiblical, many communicate doctrines that are nowhere found in Scripture. And

while this is true also of some older hymns, many contemporary songs are written by

people who have no theological clue as to what they are saying, and they are certainly not

biblically based in objective truth even though they may refer to God or Jesus in some

form. Concerning worship styles, contemporary practices have forsaken legitimate

6

methods in favor of feel-good, experiential, and man-centered entertainment programs

rather than theocentric, time-proven, and biblically-based worship methodologies.

Mysticism’s Violation of Scripture

Mains and Foster both express a teaching, albeit a teaching on steroids, that

emphasizes the idea that we must have a “personal relationship” with God, and many

evangelism programs base their approach on this phrase. However, as Arthur Johnson

succinctly points out, “it may be surprising to some that nowhere in the Bible is a

‘personal relationship’ commanded, recommended or even mentioned.”6 He goes on to

say, however, that the concept is present. Yet, when we consider the biblical references

cited above regarding God’s indwelling presence within the believer, the emphasis on a

“personal relationship” is ambiguously open to abusive interpretations that suggest there

are levels of the Christian relationship to be obtained and experienced. This is the faulty

reasoning of the deeper life teachers.

In the analysis of the deeper life and mystical teachings, and practices so

prevalent in the contemporary Church today, we must first start from the foundation that

the noble-minded Bereans were accustomed to in Acts 17 by “examining the Scriptures

daily” to see if these things are true or false. Inherent in this practice is the idea that we

must uphold and rely on the inerrancy and sufficiency of Scripture. Mystic teachings and

practices divert the untaught and unstable (those who are not mature in the faith, 2 Pet.

3:16) away from the infallible Word of God and pushes them toward subjective

experientialism. True maturity of faith depends upon knowledge of the objective Word

6 Arthur Johnson, Faith Misguided : Exposing the Dangers of Mysticism (Chicago: Moody Press, 1988),

138.

7

of God and not on the failing tendencies of our emotions and experiences. While we do

not divorce ourselves from emotion, and while we experience things in life that help us to

grow, it is only through Scripture that we can objectively know what God intends for us

to know about Him.

Secondly, we are not to mediate on a subjective God of the creation of our own

minds, but we are given clear instruction to meditate on tangible truths as taught in

Scripture (Josh. 1:8; Ps. 119:15, 48, 78, 148), and on God’s mighty deeds revealed in

Scripture (Ps. 77:12; 119:27; 143:5; 145:5). Our prayers are not to be divorced from the

truth of Scripture, nor are they to be contemplative, but solely a conversation with the

God of the Scriptures. Prayer is not a mindless emptying of ourselves, but it must contain

thoughtful elements of adoration, confession, supplication, and thanksgiving based upon

the knowledge of God as presented in the Bible.

Finally, our worship must be clearly based upon the principles of Scripture alone.

It must reflect a keen understanding of the knowledge of the holiness of God, our

depravity, failure to have access to God apart from the Christ of Scripture, and the

recognition that God is a God of order. Our worship must not be based on subjective

experientialism or on a man-centered approach that seeks to increase numbers through

manipulative techniques, entertainment, or by reducing the worship of God through

worldly compromises. Mysticism, while putting on a face of true worship, is no different

than the strange fire that Nadab and Abihu offered to God. The results of the mingling of

mysticism in the contemporary Church will bring no less of God’s displeasure than it did

to them.

8

MYSTICISM IN THE CONTEMPORARY CHURCH

(PART 2)

BY

REV. DAVID P. MCAFEE

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT

OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF

APOLOGETICS

SUMMER 2011

DR. ARTHUR JOHNSON

INSTRUCTOR

9

Christian meditation, very simply, is the ability to hear God’s voice and obey his word. - Richard J. Foster

I watched in amusement as my wife and granddaughter were cheating at playing

Scrabble by using an online dictionary to assist them with their words. I inquired as to

why they were doing this, to which my wife responded, “We’re making our own rules in

this game so that it will be more fun.” I then realized this was a great analogy of all

mystics – Christian and otherwise. They make their own rules. They redefine their own

words. They establish their own parameters. Everything is subject to the creative

imagination of the mystic rather than the objective word of God. Such is true of Richard

Foster as evidenced by his comment above. Foster, a well-known author and former

pastor, obtained his doctorate in pastoral theology from Fuller Theological Seminary.

Foster’s ambiguous and esoteric language clouds the truth of revealed Scripture going

beyond it into realms that embrace the tenets of eastern mysticism. An example of his

perversion of meaning can be found on his website:

To be sure, the natural order has been affected by the Fall, and it too

“groans” for the restoration that is to come. Yet, even in its present decay

and bondage I thrill to the wonders of majestic trees and soaring birds and

little creatures that scamper about the forest floor, for they are all

continually doing the will of the Father. So, when I tire of the guile and

the avarice and the violence that plague our human existence, I will hike

deep into these mountains. Here, I will watch the will of the Father being

done. Here, the closer I look the farther I am able to see. Here, my soul is

quieted and restored and enlarged. Here, I enter the solitude needed to be

truly present to others when I am with them.7

How Foster can view trees and birds and little creatures doing the will of the Father is not

clear, but as will be discussed presently, his doctrines of inner disciplines, which he refers

7 http://richardjfoster.com/about-richard/

10

to as means of grace, are written in his book, Celebration of Discipline. In actuality, they

bear little difference from the eastern religions.

THE INNER DISCIPLINES

MEDITATION

Meditation is the first of Foster’s four inner disciplines but as mentioned

previously, Foster’s definition of meditation would be foreign to Joshua when he was

commanded by God to meditate on the book of the law (1:8), and it would also be foreign

to the newly anointed kings of Israel who were to write down the law in a book (their

personal copy) and read it every day (Dt. 17:18-20). As is the case with all of Foster’s

Disciplines, the meaning we would normally understand for each discipline is much

different than his.

The idea that Christian meditation is the means to hear God’s voice and obey His

word is nowhere to be found in Scripture. Foster openly states that Christian and Eastern

religions’ practice of meditation are “worlds apart,” and notes that while the latter is an

“emptying of the mind” the former is a “filling of the mind.”8 The question then arises,

“filling the mind with what?” We will answer this by reviewing some of Foster’s

particularly odd and subjective statements:

1. Christian meditation leads us to the inner wholeness necessary to give ourselves

to God freely (p. 21).

How can meditation lead us to inner wholeness? What relationship does inner

wholeness have with submission to God? What is wholeness? If it is to be interpreted as

being made complete by the atonement of Christ as the Bible tells us (Col. 2:10), then, it

8 Foster, Celebration of Discipline, 20.

11

would appear that Foster is suggesting meditation adds to the work of Christ in helping us

to have better access to God. But Paul tells us that we not only have access to the Father

in one Spirit through the Son, but we have confident access through faith and not through

the effort of meditation (Eph. 2:18; 3:12).

2. Often meditation will yield insights that are deeply practical, almost mundane.

Instruction will come on how to relate to your wife or husband, or how to deal

with this sensitive problem or that business situation. It is wonderful when a

particular meditation leads to ecstasy, but it is far more common to be given

guidance in dealing with ordinary human problems. Meditation sends us into our

ordinary world with greater perspective and balance. (p. 21)

How is it that we are instructed or given guidance during the practice of meditation?

Foster claims that meditation brings us into “actual” contact with God. If as Foster has

already suggested, and we can hear God’s voice in meditation, then this would be

understandable, but no where in Scripture are we told that we hear God’s voice during

meditation. It is clear however, that Foster considers meditation to produce an out-of-

body type experience (ecstasy), which is obviously new age thinking. As noted in part

one of this paper, the Bible teaches us to meditate only upon God’s word, His holy

attributes, and His mighty deeds.

3. We can descend with the mind into the heart most easily through the imagination.

(p. 25)

Here Foster appears to emphasize the western mindset that the heart is separate and

distinct from the mind – a concept that is foreign to Biblical and Jewish thought. But he

goes even farther by suggesting that the imagination is a useful tool to access the heart.

This is completely subjective in its basis and practice. Apart from children’s fantasies,

the imagination when employed usefully, assists us in our creative functions with regard

to design and the arts, but has no contributing value in meditation, because as we have

12

noted, meditation must be focused solely upon the objective truth of God’s word.

Employing imagination in meditation subjectively takes us into realms of thought that are

based upon the mind of man rather than the mind of God. One could go so far as to say

that man, in his fallen nature, when using his imagination to conjure up thoughts in

meditation apart from biblical truth, is actually building an image in the mind that is

tantamount to idolatry, and even subject to Satanic influence. Foster answers the concern

about human manipulation and self-deception by throwing oneself into “utter dependence

upon God in these matters” and “seeking to think God’s thoughts after him” (p. 26), but

this is simply excusing faulty and non-biblical reasoning by relegating a man-centered

and dangerous concept to trust that God will work out the details. It is foolish to think

that God would be pleased to intervene in a practice of meditation that is contrary to what

His word authorizes.

4. Foster discusses the time, place and posture of meditation, and then suggests

among other things that one might find it “helpful to ponder a picture of the Lord

or to look out at some lovely trees or plants” and then he continues, “regardless

of how it is done, the aim is to center the attention of the body, the emotions, the

mind, and the spirit upon ‘the glory of God in the face of Christ’ (2 Cor. 4:6).” (p.

28).

Again, this type of practice amounts to projection or idolatry by focusing on images

created in the mind. Pondering a “picture of the Lord” (which we do not have) is no

different than meditating on a tree or plant because they are images created in the mind of

man. Paul clearly states in Romans 1:23 that man has a tendency to “exchange the glory

of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and

four-footed animals and crawling creatures.” These are the things that bring not the

pleasure and guidance of God, but His divine wrath. Paul goes on to say that when man

13

does this, he exchanges “the truth of God for a lie” and worships and serves the creature

rather than the Creator (v. 25). Yet, this is an insidious doctrine that has crept into the

Church through people who ignore, neglect or distort the truth of God’s word only to

deceive the unlearned and unstable.

Teachings like those of Foster and Mains should be rejected as wholesale doctrines of

demons (I Tim. 4:1), because they pervert the truth of Scripture and oppose God’s

command not to make graven images and bow down to them. Idolatry is a sin of the

heart and mind and this is the kind of meditation that Foster advocates. Notice that Paul

in the passages of Romans 1:24, 26 and 28 delivers idolaters to the lusts of their hearts,

their degrading passions and the depravity of their minds “to do those things which are

not proper.” The Church should take particular warning to those who advocate these

kinds of doctrines and mark them out for discipline or removal from the Church, but

instead, many embrace them because they mingle their teaching with Scripture just

enough to appear to be true. This is how subjective experience is exalted over the

objective knowledge of the truth of the word of God.

PRAYER

With regard to prayer, Foster makes a distinction between a prayer of guidance

and a prayer of faith but he does not explain how these two are different. He indicates

however, that if we are still, we will learn not only who God is, but how his power

operates.9 This is just another example of how what is known about God is not only from

the Bible, but from our experience of God as well. This can be seen in the teachings of

Henry Blackaby as put forth in his series entitled Experiencing God. According to

Blackaby, we can know God and determine God’s will by finding out where God is at

9 Ibid., 39.

14

work and joining him there. While Blackaby would not deny that we learn about God

from the Bible, as could probably be said of Foster, but like Foster, he also de-

emphasizes the objectivity of the Bible while adding the value of experience. “We come

to know God as we experience Him. God reveals Himself through our experience of Him

at work in our lives.”10

This in essence makes personal revelations binding, but also

something that must be obeyed (infallible). For Blackaby, the revealed word of God

must be supplemented by personal experience in order to know Him and His will. This

opens the door for all kinds of prejudicial misunderstandings of who God is and what He

has revealed His will to be, and appears to be no different in outcome than what the

imagination does for us.

According to Foster, “imagination often opens the door to faith” and he continues

by applying this to the resolution of problems by saying, “if God shows us a shattered

marriage whole, or a sick person well, it helps us to believe that it will be so.”11

This

kind of projection in prayer visualizes a work of God that is no different than conjuring

Him up like a genie in a bottle, and in a sense, forcing Him to work at the whim of the

person praying. So, like meditation, Foster employs prayer as a means to an end which

we will see is precisely how he views all of the inner disciplines – and fasting is no

different, although he denies it.

FASTING

“To use good things to our own ends is always the sign of false religion. How easy it is

to take something like fasting and try to use it to get God to do what we want…fasting

10

Henry Blackaby and Claude V. King, Experiencing God. (Broadman & Holman Pub, 1990), 9. 11

Foster, Celebration of Discipline, 41.

15

must be God-initiated and God-ordained” Foster says.12

But the question becomes, how

do we know when God is initiating and even ordaining a fast? As discussed previously,

it is readily apparent that Foster views the inner disciplines as a means to an end. The

end in this case, is to achieve through human effort a higher level of spiritual life.

“Fasting can bring breakthroughs in the spiritual realm that will never happen in any

other way.”13

This seems to indicate that benefits of fasting, at least in Foster’s mind,

even exceeds the other disciplines. And thus we can see that although he states on one

hand that fasting is not a means to an end, on the other hand, he is attributing a power to

accomplish that end.

STUDY

In study there are two “books” to be studied: verbal and nonverbal. Books and lectures,

therefore, constitute only half the field of study, perhaps less. The world of nature and,

most important, the careful observation of events and actions are the primary nonverbal

fields of study. The principal task of study is a perception into the reality of a given

situation, encounter, book, etc. We can go through a major crisis, for example, without

any perception of the real nature of the tragic situation. But if we carefully observe and

reflect upon what occurred, we can learn a great deal.14

Foster’s explanation of Study appears to be as nebulous as his presentation of meditation.

In defining study, Foster provides these four steps: repetition, concentration,

comprehension, and reflection. In his four steps of study, Foster states that “We must

realize that sheer repetition without even understanding what is being repeated does

affect the inner mind.” He goes on to say that “It is not even important that the person

believe what he or she is repeating, only that it be repeated. The inner mind is thus

trained and will eventually respond by modifying behavior to conform to the

12

Ibid., 54. 13

Ibid., 60. 14

Ibid., 64.

16

affirmation.”15

The practice Foster refers to is called Lectio Divina or divine reading.

Some have asserted that A.W. Tozer was involved in this practice, but that has been

refuted by people more acquainted with Tozer’s work.16

This practice should raise all kinds of red flags for the Christian reader. Foster,

again, is promoting a practice that renders meaning as of no value to study. By merely

repeating something learned, the repetition itself is life and mind changing. This is no

different than eastern mysticism where mantras are used to empty one’s mind.

Foster doesn’t say too much that is problematic about concentration other than

that it centers the mind. If he is talking about the mind focusing on something, as

opposed to being distracted by something else, that is one thing, but his meaning is not

clear. Comprehension according to Foster, focuses on the knowledge of the truth that

comes after repeating something over and over again and experiencing that “eureka”

moment when understanding “catapults one into a new level of growth and freedom.”

Where comprehension defines what one is studying, reflection defines the significance of

the study. While Foster states that reflection helps us to see things “from God’s

perspective,” he all-the-while places the study of both verbal and non-verbal books

outside of biblical literature above Scripture. So much for the inner disciplines and their

not so subtle subversions of Scripture; we shall now turn to the outward disciplines.

15

Ibid., 65. 16

Berean Call is an apologetics website that would ordinarily be quick to point out this error.

http://www.thebereancall.org/book/export/html/8169

17

The Outward Disciplines

SIMPLICITY

According to Foster, simplicity is an inward discipline with an outward

manifestation. Simplicity means “to live out what Thomas Kelly calls, ‘the Divine

Center.’” I have no problem with the idea of living simply, but what does Foster mean

when he refers to simplicity, and what does Thomas Kelly mean by “the Divine Center?”

In his chapter on Inward Simplicity: The Divine Center, Part I, Foster recounts how he

was deeply influenced by Thomas Kelly’s book, Testament of Devotion which he read

while waiting to catch a plane in a Washington, D.C. airport. Thomas Kelly was a

Quaker mystic of the early twentieth century. Apparently, troubled by the complexities

of life, its obligations and stresses, Foster realized that the way of escape would be to a

different reality which he had not known. He later refers to the divine center as God, and

capitalizes “center” as he refers to it in this way.17

In order to achieve simplicity one must respond to the demands of life from the

divine center. In explaining what simplicity is, Foster puts forth the idea that we have

“many selves.” In fact he says, “within all of us is a whole conglomerate of selves.”

These selves are interests that vie for our time and attention, and in order to deal with

them, we must approach them from the divine center which really appears to be an

approach of balance or equilibrium. Simplicity does, however, include the idea of

removing things from life that weigh us down like anchors.

17

Richard Foster, Freedom of Simplicity, 1st ed. (New York NY: HarperPaperbacks, 1998).

18

SOLITUDE

The second outward discipline is solitude. Foster tells us that “Jesus calls us from

loneliness to solitude,” but he never provides a reference from the Bible for that

statement.18

Solitude is more a state of mind and heart than it is a place. This is the point

where Foster relies on John of the Cross’ “dark night of the soul” stating that it is not a

time of punishment but a freedom bearing experience in which we draw near to the

divine Center. “It is a hush, a stillness, so that he may work an inner transformation upon

the soul.”19

What seems to be confusing here, is that Foster quotes John of the Cross who

says,

…the darkness of the soul…binds the imagination and impedes it from

doing any good discursive work. It makes the memory cease, the intellect

become dark and unable to understand anything, and hence it causes the

will also to become arid and constrained, and all the faculties empty and

useless. And over all this hangs a dense and burdensome cloud which

afflicts the soul and keeps it withdrawn from God.20

This would appear to be a negative thing, but Foster states this is an experience that

should be welcomed and it is from this point that Foster seems to move into the teaching

of self-denial that becomes more readily apparent in his teaching on submission.

It would seem that Foster earlier encouraged the use of the imagination in the

inner disciplines, but now he calls for a total shutdown, a silence in which all physical,

emotional, psychological and even spiritual senses are silenced. Why? Apparently,

before God can perform His deep surgery on the soul, the “anesthetic must take effect.”

18

Foster, Celebration of Discipline, 96. 19

Ibid., 102. 20

Kieran Kavanaugh and Otilio Rodriguez, trans., The Collected Works of St. John of the Cross (Garden

City, NY: Doubleday, 1964), 363.

19

It is at this point that “Bible reading, sermons, intellectual debate – all fail to move or

excite us.”21

Again, Foster is elevating subject experience over the word of God.

SUBMISSION

According to Biblical Discernment Ministries, it is in the discipline of submission

“that we receive our heaviest dose of psychobabble, including: ‘self-fulfillment,’ ‘self-

actualization,’ ‘loving ourselves,’ and mutual submission within marriage.”22

But

actually, Foster says some good things in his section on submission. Noting that many in

the Church today demand their own way, and this is even true in family relationships,

Foster states that we have a terrible burden which is our obsession to demand our own

way. Foster provides seven acts of submission which appear to be innocent:

1. Submission to the Triune God

2. Submission to Scripture

3. Submission to our family (a commitment to listen)

4. Submission to our neighbors (neighborliness, sharing)

5. Submission to the believing community (serving the Church universal)

6. Submission to the broken and despised (cross-life)

7. Submission to the world (responsible environmentalism)

SERVICE

The final outward discipline is service, and like his section on submission, I see

no real problem with most of Foster’s comments here. However, he remarks that “true

service comes from a relationship with the divine Other deep inside. We serve out of

whispered promptings, divine urgings.”23

Referring to God as the divine Other has

implications that seem to detract from the personal aspect of God. The eastern orthodox

refer to God as “the Holy Other” because He is so holy and so other that He is not able to

21

Foster, Celebration of Discipline, 103. 22

http://www.inplainsite.org/html/richard_foster_and_renovare.html 23

Foster, Celebration of Discipline, 128.

20

be known. 24

As for the “whispered promptings” and “divine urgings,” I cannot discount

the leadership of the Holy Spirit if that is what he means. Finally, his teaching on service

seems to borderline of self-abasement where he states, “The strictest daily discipline is

necessary to hold these passions in check. The flesh must learn the painful lesson that it

has no rights of its own. It is the work of hidden service that will accomplish this self-

abasement”25

Paul tells us that “self-made religion and self-abasement and severe

treatment of the body, are but of no value against fleshly indulgence.” (Col 2:23 NAS)

THE CORPORATE DISCIPLINES

The corporate disciplines of confession, worship, guidance, and celebration

appear to have numerous ideas related to Roman Catholic Doctrine, and for the sake of

brevity, I will only mention a few issues.

CONFESSION

Foster’s penchant to quote from all manner of mystical sources is evident

throughout his whole book, but apparently Lutheran pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s

writings indicate certain sympathies with Rome in his writings:

“Our brother…has been given to us to help us. He hears the confession of

our sins in Christ’s stead and he forgives our sins in Christ’s name. He

keeps the secret of our confession as God keeps it. When I go to my

brother to confess, I am going to God.26

Bonhoeffer’s incredible statement reflects more than a “mutual, brotherly confession” as

Foster asserts, but the idea that a brother can stand in the place of Christ as both confessor

and intercessor is in contradistinction from the Holy Spirit as our intercessor in Romans

26-27 where Paul states,

24

http://danielpatto.com/2011/02/01/the-god-confusion/ 25

Foster, Celebration of Discipline, 131. 26

Ibid., 146.

21

And in the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not

know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us

with groanings too deep for words; 27

and He who searches the hearts

knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He intercedes for the saints

according to the will of God. (NAS)

…and also of Christ as our intercessor in verse 34 where, “Christ Jesus is He who died,

yes, rather who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us.”

It is in the context of church discipline and accountability that James encourages us to

“confess our sins to one another and pray for one another” (James 5:16), but there is no

indication that a brother is a divinely appointed intercessor that has the power to forgive

sins in place of Christ.

WORSHIP

It is in Foster’s discussion of the discipline of worship that he makes more bizarre

statements that are totally unfounded by Scripture. In reference to the presence of God in

worship Foster asks, “How do we cultivate this holy expectancy? It begins in us as we

enter the Shekinah of the heart.”27

What is the Shekinah of the heart? It is a mystery

beyond Scripture and Foster gives us no clue of how we get there. Later Foster gleefully

states that “those who have once tasted the Shekinah of God in daily experience can

never again live satisfied without ‘the practice of the presence of God.’” And again, he

coaches the reader into visualization practices meant to precede a worship service where

the reader is told to “Picture the Shekinah of God’s radiance surrounding them” (the

leaders of the church).28

These are just examples of the contrived and convoluted

mystical blather of someone who exalts eastern mysticism and extra-biblical doctrine

over the objective authority of Scripture. At this point there is no good reason for

27

Ibid., 162. 28

Ibid., 163.

22

belaboring the remaining disciplines of guidance and celebration since they amount to

more of the same experiential inner sanctum revelry. Richard Foster clearly has

impregnated his false doctrine not only with eastern mysticism and extra-biblical rhetoric,

but he has shown that he has no confidence that the Scriptures are sufficient for the

Christian walk. Paul attests to the sufficiency of Scripture by saying “All Scripture is

inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in

righteousness; 17

that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.”

(2Ti 3:16-17 NAS)

As we have seen throughout this work, mysticism has infiltrated the Church

through the teachings of people like Karen Mains and Richard Foster and a whole host of

others who have crept in disguised as sheep. But their teachings reveal them to be savage

wolves, who like the false teachers that Jesus warns us about (more than once), will

deceive “if possible even the elect.” Our hope and confidence is that Jesus Christ

Himself will protect His Bride, but we nonetheless must be vigilant to teach the truth and

warn brothers and sisters so they are not mislead.

23

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Blackaby, Henry, and Claude V. King. Experiencing God. Broadman & Holman Pub,

1990.

Foster, Richard. Freedom of Simplicity. 1st ed. New York NY: HarperPaperbacks, 1998.

Foster, Richard J. Celebration of Discipline : The Path to Spiritual Growth. Rev. 1st ed.

San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1988.

Johnson, Arthur. Faith Misguided : Exposing the Dangers of Mysticism. Chicago: Moody

Press, 1988.

Kavanaugh, Kieran, and Otilio Rodriguez, trans. The Collected Works of St. John of the

Cross. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1964.

MacArthur, Jr., John F. Charismatic Chaos. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Pub. House, 1992.

MacArthur, Jr., John F. Reckless faith : When the Church Loses Its Will to Discern.

Wheaton Ill.: Crossway Books, 1994.

Warfield, Benjamin. The Works of Benjamin B. Warfield. 10 vols. Grand Rapids: Baker

Book House, 1981.