A Revival Of Mysticism

Rev. J.W. Deenick. Trowel & Sword. March 1964

Preamble: As the charismatic movement was expanding in the early 1960s, Rev. Deenick wrote this article to warn Reformed members of the dangers of seeking experiences outside of the light of Scripture. He warns us that we cannot live a healthy spiritual life that is not anchored in the clear teachings of Scripture – a healthy reminder 60 years later on. So how does this article stand generations later? Should we be seeking a deeper experience of God? Is Rev. Deenick’s definition of mysticism too narrow or too broad? I would suggest that the opposite danger of mysticism, is rationalism. In a Christian setting this where we look at Scripture in a hard rationalistic light without being amazed by the mystery of God, faith and regeneration that Scripture reveals to us. We fail to apprehend a God who is, ultimately, beyond human understanding. God’s work of salvation is  still, in many senses, a mystery. Calvin was called the reformer of the Holy Spirit. Kuyper wrote his wonderful devotions on the Holy Spirit: “The Work of the Holy Spirit.” Both men understood that God’s work is an amazing wonder that, at best, we can only faintly grasp. But as Rev. Deenick reminds us, it grows out of our understanding of Scripture. So how do we read this article 60 years later in this post Christian era? Are there new dangers, new challenges and new perspectives that we need to be alert to? 

A Revival Of Mysticism

With pentecostalism and related trends in christian thinking a curious type of Mysticism has re-emerged. The methodist type.

I will have to explain what I mean by mysticism and what by the methodist type of it. 

When we speak of mysticism we do not mean christian piety as the Bible teaches it. Paul wrote to Timothy: “Train yourself in godliness”. This godliness or piety in which every christian should daily train himself and that lives with the written Word of God is well to be distinguished from mysticism.

Mysticism is something quite different. It is a spiritual movement nearly as old as human history and by no means limited to the christian era or to the christian sphere. There is a muslim and a buddhist mysticism, and during the middle ages mysticism flourished in the Roman church. After the Reformation various types of mysticism began to disquiet the protestant world.

Mysticism is a counterfeit piety. It is a complex movement but it always dreams of a special and direct relationship to God or to the gods; an exclusive fellowship with the divine, and it describes the way in which the miracle of spiritual illumination, extasis (Greek) is to be received.

THE RISK OF TAKING UP THE SUBJECT 

I am aware that by raising the subject I am in danger of being misunderstood. Yet that cannot always be avoided. The issue itself cuts right through the heart of our christian life.

People complain that what we lack in the churches today is a living christian piety. That is true. Nothing seems to be less popular than piety. People hate the very word. They delight in extremes. They either live on the very fringe of the church in utter coldness or are carried away by the growing storm of spiritual enthusiasm. Mere christian piety is too commonplace and too unexciting.

In that situation the church faces the problem that mysticism offers itself as a substitute for piety. It is therefore that we should learn carefully to distinguish between the one and the other. Because particularly as Reformed churches we have to stand for – and to practice – that plain christian godliness that the New Testament teaches and with which the christian panel beater, accountant and doctor serves his Master.

TWO TYPES OF MYSTICISM

In Reformed circles a certain type of mysticism is very well known. You could call it a “Calvinistic” type of mysticism, although it has nothing to do with Calvin or with Calvinism. It has merely developed in Calvinist surroundings. It dreams of a very special relationship between God and the exclusive number of His elected few, “one from a city, two from a tribe”. It contends that in this special relationship moments of divine illumination are experienced, but this blessing cannot be obtained through human exertion; it can only be received by grace; it is given to the chosen few, so that all that a “believer” can do is wait and hope (against hope) that somewhere the Lord may open a little door of salvation for him and snatch him away “as a firebrand plucked out of the burning”. This type of mysticism is well versed in the Scriptures and has an appearance of godliness. But it has misled many a “seeking soul”, denying thousands of christians the assurance of salvation. It made men trust in their spiritual experiences rather than in the promises of God.

There is however another type of mysticism in protestant circles, the methodist type, and on the high waves of pentecostalism it seems to come in like a flood. Many a protestant christian lets himself be carried away in the surf. It is an exciting experience, they say, to be lifted up high on the crest of the waves of the Spirit. This second type of mysticism is “arminian” in its approach, although we cannot blame Arminius for it. Its roots go far deeper, and further back in history. It dreams of a deeper spiritual life and of illuminations by the Holy Spirit far brighter than such as the ordinary and carnal christian could possibly experience. But, in distinction to what we found above, this type of mysticism teaches that the believer may condition himself for receiving the blessing. That is why I call it the “methodist” type, although it is far older than methodism. Even outside the christian world the buddhist mystic knows of the conditions he will have to meet before he will find the blessings and delights of spiritual extasis. This trend returns here: if you follow the prescribed method and pay the demanded price (it is not to be got cheaply) you will receive the blessing. But if your prayers have not been answered and the blessing or the healing is not received, it is because you did not meet the conditions.

We witness a revival of this type of mysticism. It confuses the evangelical world and obscures the biblical truth that the christian lives by faith alone. It is necessary therefore that a reformed believer learns to see the marks by which it Is recognised.

It is only very seldom, of course, that we meet pure mysticism – of whatever type in evangelical circles. But we do meet old remnants and new beginnings of it nearly everywhere. We sometimes meet it in evangelical brothers whom we love and honour for their work’s sake. Further down I will mention the names of Torrey, Grubb and Wells, men who have been and are used of God as missionaries and evangelists. Yet, if the clarity of the evangelical, or rather the Reformed witness is at stake it would be wrong not to try to discern the trends.

THE MARKS

1. Mysticism tends to trust and to delight in spiritual experiences rather than live by faith in the written Word of God. It tends to consider faith as no more than one of the conditions that need to be met before the deeper and higher experiences of the Spirit will be received. These higher and deeper experiences give the christian his real standing in the Kingdom and make him a fruitful worker for Christ

In biblical piety this is different. The man of God lives by faith alone in the promises of Scripture and so he battles by faith alone. That battle leads him through thousands of experiences and blessings – some of them very precious, deeply moving and sanctifying his heart and life – it leads him through trials, defeats and triumphs. But he will never base his assurance or joy upon the experience of triumph, nor will he let himself be robbed of his assurance by the experience of defeat. He desires no other ground to stand on than the promises of God and he stands upon them foursquarely by faith alone.

The mystic believer however depends for his assurance and joy upon what he has experienced. Thus he has little or nothing to hold on when after the experience of defeat and failure his heart despairs. He will pity and bemoan himself rather than glory in the promises of God.

2. Mysticism – in the Arminian methodist sphere – will tend to prescribe precisely how the deeper spiritual life is to be experienced and the blessings are to be received.

In his book on “The Holy Spirit” R.A. Torrey devotes a chapter to the question: how the baptism with the Spirit is to be obtained, in which he gives an exposition of the four steps that are needed to prepare a christian’s heart for the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.

In an article on: “Be filled with the Spirit”, Robert J. Wells tells that once he approached God in prayer in this way: “Lord, I believe that you did something for D. L. Moody. You will do it for me if I am willing to meet the conditions that are laid down in Your Word”, and further in his article he points to the four steps – different somewhat from Torrey’s four steps – needed in order to meet God’s conditions. Finally I refer Norman Grubb in his booklet “Touching the invisible”. In a chapter on: “How to obtain guidance from the Holy Spirit”, he explains that in his experience there is a special way of preparing yourself for the reception of such guidance, not coming from the Scriptures but directly from God, and that four preparatory steps create the condition in which the guidance may come, or rather will come, as promised.

How different is all this from the simplicity of a life by faith alone in which the believer has full confidence in God that He through his Spirit heaps blessing upon blessing, grace upon grace, and guidance upon guidance on such believers as have never really met one condition and have never succeeded in climbing the spiritual stepladder of the conditions for the higher level life. By faith he trusts that God will always and everywhere guide him through the Scriptures and fill him through the means of grace and so enable him to his appointed task. He knows that God’s arm is not shortened nor His grace limited.

3. There are more marks of mysticism on which we could enlarge, as I may do later. I merely mention then now.

Mysticism will tend to preach the christian and his experiences, rather than the gospel and its promises. Mysticism competes with romanticism in story telling.

Mysticism has no real interest in reforming the church. It tends to form little churches within the church.

Mysticism has little interest in the training of the ministry or in the soundness of doctrine. Spiritual experience binds together more than unity of faith.

And finally mysticism tends to distinguish between two or more types of christians: the carnal and the spiritual christian, the filled and the unfilled christian, the initiated and the uninitiated christian. The Bible knows of no such distinction. The Bible knows about christians and unbelievers, but not of christians in various degrees of illumination.

CONCLUSION

Several of the statements I have made would need more careful, scriptural evidence than I have opportunity to offer within the limits of this article. If readers desire more such evidence they could ask me for it through the “Question Box”. For now this should suffice.

Mysticism, we found, is no substitute for true piety. In fact there is no substitute for it. We need the very thing itself. We are not in need of a revival of mysticism, but we ARE in need of a revival of that christian piety that lives with God as He speaks through His Word day by day. Professor Runia wrote a series of articles on this in our paper. Our own hearts and the churches need to be revived in this point.

It would not be a revival as spectacular as the ones in which mysticism got involved, But it could be more solid and lasting. 

J.W. Deenick

We look forward to receiving feedback about any of our posts. We also encourage you to share our posts with family, friends and acquaintances; in fact anyone you think may appreciate and/or benefit from the knowledge and wisdom handed down to us from the past.   To view previous posts visit our website at www.tsrevisited.com

Don’t forget to “Like” the article. It helps to spread the word to a wider audience.