Introduction

I want to begin with two quotations which have a direct bearing on the subject for today. The first is by Walter Wink in Naming the Powers:

Too often our social action has been as devoid of spirituality as our evangelism has been politically innocuous. . . Too much of the time we have drawn on secular models of social change without drawing as well on our own rich fund of symbolism and imagery, liturgy and story. Many dismissed the hymns and gospel songs, the eucharists and prayers of a Martin Luther King, Jr., or Cesar Chaveza as merely shrewd accommodations to the subcultures with which they worked. Such critics did not perceive that these were essential forms of struggle in themselves, that the enemy is not always self-evident, that engaging a Power on its own terms guarantees that the victor, whichever it is, will perpetuate the same terms. They did not address themselves to the transcendent One who alone could work changes which do not themselves bear the seeds of new evils. (p. 117)

Charles H. Kraft related a conversation which Jacob Loewen once had with some of the nationals in Panama regarding values the missionaries had taught them. Sadly, without hesitation they responded, `money.' When pressed as to whether they had actually been told these were the most important values they replied, `No, but this is what the missionaries' actions clearly taught' and what they themselves now wanted. (Elliston, Christian Relief and Development, 1989, p.133).

So the spiritual describes the texture of our total being. It is the distinctly human dimension of our being both individually and socially. We might speak of it as both a transcendent and depth dimension which involves us in relationship to God and to each other -- what the Bible calls the "heart," i.e, the personal depth of our being. It expresses itself most clearly in our self-image which is simply the under side of our God-image; in our motivations, our underlying assumptions and rationalizations. It is expressed in our human cultures.

For a long time the word "spirituality" has been suspect among us, so we must first take time to understand what we mean by it. With our sharp dichotomy between spiritual and the socio-physical we have been suspicious that spirituality may disqualify people for practical, everyday work. You have probably heard the old quip, "He is so heavenly minded that he is no earthly good." For most Protestants "spiritual" was an epithet suggesting an aura of super piety somewhat like "saint" did for Roman Catholics. But in the past decade Roman Catholic writers and authors like Richard Foster have refurbished the concepts of spiritual formation and spiritual disciplines so that they have become more usable. Then, too, New Age spirituality has thrust the term into prominence.

Barbara Hendricks and Thomas Clarke speak of spirituality in the theological sense as "the relationship, in lived experience and reflective understanding (practice and theory), between the human spirit, individual and communal, and the divine spirit, or whatever is conceived... as ultimate in human and cosmic life." Then they add, "Spirituality is distinctively Christian when this relationship is conceived as mediated through the one Mediator, Jesus Christ, and when the divine spirit is understood as the Holy Spirit, poured forth by Father and Son into the heart of each believer, the church, the whole of humankind, and the whole creation" (Toward the 21st Century in Christian Mission, Eerdmans, 1993, 204).

The spiritual dimension is not merely one distinct aspect of our work. It is the transcendent dynamic expressed in all that we do. It is expressed in the basic assumptions and definitions that undergird our work; in the motivation that energizes our work; in the definition of mission that determines our goals and guides our strategies; in the relationships and communication that characterizes our everyday work; and in the transformation we see taking place in our own lives and those whom we attempt to serve.

So we are speaking of spirituality as a kind of ethos, attitude, perspective, or style -- as the basic operating values and attitudes that characterize and give a transcendent dimension to our work. In this mode Wink speaks of a "capitalist spirituality," and the Liberation theologians speak of a "spirituality of liberation" (Segundo Galilea).

Spiritual Formation

Lynn Samaan defines spiritual formation as:

1. Knowing and experiencing God in an intimate relationship,

2. Holistic development towards holiness and Christlikeness, and

3. Obeying God and doing the work of his kingdom" (Elliston, p. 131). This, he says, divides spiritual formation into the "knowing-being-doing components which are so vitally important to any learning or growing process" (ibid.).

When we speak of spiritual formation, we are speaking of what our Anabaptist forebears called Nachfolge Christi, i.e., being formed into the "image of Christ" through "sharing his sufferings" (Phil. 3:10). Or what the Apostle Paul describes in Romans 5:3-5 as the formation of the Christian attitude -- suffering, perseverance, character, and hope grounded in the love of God poured into our hearts. All this he explains is the experience of life as a continual gift of grace and enablement which gives our lives and work an air of joy.

The reason why spiritual formation must be spoken of in terms of "suffering" is that our cultural formation has warped our outlook on life. Hendricks and Clarke call it "cultural deformation." Their caution is worth quoting.

Too often the language of religious and spiritual formation tends to become bland and abstract. In contrast, mission bearers in the twenty-first century from technologically developed countries such as the United States must in their spiritual formation counteract the powerful cultural deformation affecting potential future missionaries. When this is done, then formation is understood in continuity with the biblical, and specifically the Pauline, themes of reformation, conformation, and transformation. . . (Phillips and Coote, 1993, p. 204).

There are different spiritual systems -- mysticism (Hinduism), humanism (Buddhist, western individualist), personal theism (Christian), and each has its own style. While it is dangerous to generalize too broadly, each system has its distinctive ambience. For example, while Christian mysticism has some things in common with Hindu and Buddhist mysticism, it has its own distinct rationale and ethical character which can lead to quite different human relationships and responses to need. Christian humanism based on agape is quite different in its theological rationale and style from Buddhist humanism based on gnosis (Pieris, Love Meets Wisdom, 1988). And these basic differences elicit a different spiritual and ethical responses.

As background for our consideration of Christian spirituality it may be helpful to give the general characterizations of some of the major spiritual systems. Hinduism, one of the oldest, is many faceted, but it is held together by a deep mystical sense of the unity of divine and human, and of a karmic order to the universe. Karma is in the strictest sense a fate or destiny that is determined by previous lives in the cycle of reincarnation, and justifies things as they are. Historically Hindu spirituality has downplayed the significance of historical existence and has dampened the urge to social ethical responsibility and reform. We might speak of it as karmic spirituality.

Buddhism began as a reform of Hindu polytheism and developed its own humanistic spirituality. In the intervening millennia it has developed into many diverse religious patterns similar to Hinduism. (One might compare it to Protestantism's relation to Roman Catholicism.) In its original form it focused responsibility for one's individual condition on oneself. In the words of the Buddha, "I teach only two things: the cause of human sorrow and the way to become free from it."

Buddhism has developed an ascetic and gnostic spirituality which stresses self-discipline and compliance with thing-as-they-are. The spiritual goal is enlightenment, i.e., the self-realization that individual historical existence is merely a blip on the cosmic computer screen, a wave on the cosmic ocean. The enlightened one achieves nirvana, or reunification with the whole. This reunion and bliss is salvation. While Amidha Buddhism views the Buddha as a savior (bodhisattva), and some modern Buddhist sects have taken a commendable interest in humanitarian and peace work, such spirituality is not integral to the movement. Peace in this tradition has a countenance quite different from shalom.

Jewish and Islamic religions have developed a much more formalistic spirituality based upon Divine Law (Torah or Sharia). Indeed, one of the major criticism of Christianity by Muslim scholars is that it has no clearly defined moral law and forms. Theirs is a spirituality of strict obedience to divinely established divine patterns of behavior. Like Christianity, Judaism and Islam have also produced their mystics, but they do not characterize the general spiritual pattern.

All of these religious systems understand religion as a cultural product and adapt naturally to a tribal, or civic spirituality. But Shintoism, and to some extent Confucianism, are civic spiritual systems by basic definition and character. In anthropological terminology they are totemic systems. Shintoism, for example, is very tolerant of different religious expressions but demands civic conformity to its myth of the divine nation. (When Robert Bellah defined American "civil religion" and its demands upon the individual, he extrapolated from the patterns of the civil religion of Japan.)

We could continue these descriptions of diverse systems indefinitely, but perhaps we have established the basic point that all spiritualities are not of the same genre. On the other hand, however, we must caution that within these systems there are many similar and overlapping patterns. This is important for those who are engaged in cross-cultural service, and experience the religious ethos at the popular level. There is a kind of human substratum of religiosity that has much in common whether the cultural pattern is predominantly Buddhist, Islamic, Jewish, or Christian. Nevertheless, the dominant cultural spirituality often dictates different ethical responses even when the religious patterns seem similar.

When I speak of the spiritual dimension I am assuming the Christian spirituality in which a personal Creator-God is related to us as sustainer, savior, dynamic guide and enabler. Since this broad definition could also include a Jewish or Muslim spirituality, we need to note the distinctive characteristics of Christian spirituality more precisely.

Every theological tradition will have its own list of distinguishing characteristics. Mine grows out of my understanding of the Anabaptist-Mennonite perspective on the Bible, our historical experience as a minority social group, and our cross-cultural experiences in mission. I would list the following six as essential.

(1) Christian spirituality begins with a profound sense of grace. The beatitudes of Jesus begin with "Blessed are those who know they are poor" (NEV). Jesus is prophet and teacher-example, but before that he is savior-friend -- God's initiative. Christian service begins in gratitude to God for his gracious calling and enablement which gives meaning and fulfillment to our lives. In the words of Paul, Christian missioners know themselves to be "debtors to all humankind" because of the grace they have received.

(2) This sense of unearned blessing received as gift is the root of a spirit of compassion which identifies with all the needy. Such compassion is more than mercy or pity. It is more than altruism -- sharing, perhaps out of pity, from that which is rightfully mine. Compassion (the Latin to suffer with) means feeling with, empathy, identification, experiencing life from the perspective of the impoverished. Roman Catholic writers speak of this as "a preferential option for the poor." This is not to say that there are no compassionate people in other religions. Only that compassion is essential to Christian spirituality, and grows out of a sense of grace rather than self-achievement.

(3) It is a spirituality of discipleship to the nonviolent Jesus. This, as Walter Wink points out, places one in direct opposition to the "domination system" of the world which operates under the assumption that "redemptive violence" is the way of peace and justice. He translates "Blessed are the meek" as "Blessed are the nonviolent." As our forbearers knew well, the call to discipleship is a call to take up the cross, to be sent out into the world as "lambs in the midst of wolves."

We must make explicit the essential character of this discipleship because it is often misunderstood as simply following the example of Jesus. In our modern western culture the goal of learning is to become independent, and even to excel the teacher. But a disciple of Jesus never becomes independent of the teacher. For us Jesus is more than model. He is Master. A disciple is an intern or apprentice, a learner. In biblical terms we remain disciple-apostles, servant-representatives of Christ. And his Spirit is the enabling guide who remains in charge of the mission on which we have been sent. Thus a disciple spirituality is characterized not only by commitment to follow the example, but by constant dependence upon the Master.

Speaking of spiritual formation for mission Barbara Hendricks describes this kind of disciple internship well.

Learning to relate to God, to oneself, to other persons, and to society, with both the tender compassion and the firm justice inherent in the gospel, is a whole way of life whose paradigm is the story of Jesus, Lamb of God and Lion of Judah, Servant of Yahweh who does not break the crushed reed or quench the wavering flame, but who will not waver or be crushed until true justice is established on earth (Isa. 42:3-4). (Phillips and Coote, 1993, 211)

(4) Christian spirituality emphasizes praxis -- action in obedience to Jesus Christ as "Lord" rather than doxis , i.e., intellectual or mystical piety (Matt. 7:21-23). Jesus' parable of the Good Samaritan contrasts the compassionate action of the Samaritan to the orthodox piety of the priest and Levite. -- Koyama suggests that "it is better to be merciful in the name of Buddha than to be cruel in the name of Christ. It is better to become a neighbor with a Samaritan theology than . . . to desert the beaten victim with a Jewish theology." (Quoted from Bosch, p.37)

(5) At the heart of Christian spirituality is the concept of "gospel," or evangel. Thus we might call it an evangelical spirituality. The impulse to universality and mission is implicit and intrinsic to Christian spirituality. Service is not merely a good work. Servanthood and sharing the good news of the new possibility in Christ are at its very center.

(6) In summary it is a spirituality of agape based upon the Jesus paradigm of incarnation. The Beatitudes are a good description of this new paradigm. It is a spirituality of cross and resurrection, not crusade and conquest. In his Waterbuffalo Theology Koyama calls missionaries from a crusading mentality to a crucified mind, and he reminds us in another volume that there is "no handle on the cross."

Special Parameters of a Missionary Spirituality

For those whose special calling is to be representatives of the God-movement and catalytic agents of peace and justice there are a number of spiritual qualities that are essential.

Let me begin with an observation by Michael Reilly who writes out of a Roman Catholic setting. He says, "The missionary is one whose interior life is oriented to non-believers, to those who do not profess faith in Jesus Christ. It is this orientation which determines his life style and spirituality. . . . The missionary is one who intends . . . to bring all people to explicit awareness of God's loving plan for them, and one who works to establish the goals of God's Mission of shalom so that humankind may both enjoy them and praise their source" (Spirituality for Mission, 1978, 237-38).

Such an orientation implies and requires a deep respect for those who differ from us -- respect both for the persons and their cultures. The old militant attitude which viewed the pagan cultures and their representatives as the demonic enemy is totally inappropriate. Jesus did not view Judaism or Hellenism as the enemy, but "Satan," the spiritual foe of all humanity. The "enemy" is a common opponent and despoiler of both the servant-evangelists and those whom they are attempting to evangelize! And in any case, if those whom we try to serve become hostile, we are commanded to "love your enemies."

Further, respect implies appreciation for the values of other cultures, and the willingness to contextualize the expression of Christian spirituality. For example Lynn Samaan details some Muslim concepts of holiness that are quite commensurate with Christian ideals, such as "humility, regular prayer life, fasting, alms giving and concern for the poor; a life of sacrifice and suffering; a power to heal, deliver from demons (jinns) and miracles; memorization and meditation on the Word of God." Then he adds, "A Christian called to work among an Islamic people has a responsibility to carefully learn the forms of spirituality and then diligently adjust to these forms as daily habits of life and worship." (Elliston, 1989:140)

In that same context he observes, "Protestant Christian missionaries have often failed to identify spiritually with the various peoples and cultures, and as a result failed to incarnate the gospel for them in a manner the local people understand. Instead of representing holiness, they often represent materialism, immorality, pride, arrogance, insensitivity, and secularism" (ibid.).

In this connection we should note that Christian service is a reciprocal and mutual activity. That is, it is not something that the strong and mature do to and for the weak and ignorant. To be authentically Christian it must be a mutually shared experience of development and transformation. The service experience continues to be a formative part of the worker's spiritual development. And this is inevitably, indeed, necessarily, a reciprocal spiritual development involving both receiving as well as giving.

We might speak of this as a kind of dialogical relationship, of listening and responding. For service workers this "dialogue" is seldom academic. Rather they must enter into the religious culture of the poor which engages them at a very personal level. At this level one is not so much discussing ideas as sharing aspirations, hopes and fears, and one's response will grow directly out of her/his "spirituality" whatever its depth or lack of it. To be authentically Christian such a dialogical relation requires in the worker a counterpoint spirituality in which the melody of the gospel intertwines with the melodies of culture.

Finally, David Bosch points out that "true Christian spirituality is not to be found in the superhuman and miraculous, but in the commonplace." In his seminal work, A Spirituality For the Road, he writes:

"In 2 Corinthians, however, Paul argues that true Christian spirituality is not to be found in the superhuman and the miraculous, but in the commonplace. Our problem is that we have even turned the commonplaces of the gospel into something romantic and folksy. We have provided the cross with a halo and changed the stable of Bethlehem into something idyllic and sentimental. This view misses the terribly mundane and ordinary nature of these images. Likewise, the criteria for missionary service and spirituality are not in magnificent and romantic accomplishments, but in ordinary daily existence. So Paul opposes the impressive arsenal of his opponents with down-to-earth weapons: patience, truth, love, weakness, service, modesty and respect. Under no circumstances should people be bulldozed with the gospel, for it ceases to be the gospel when foisted upon people. It is possible to be unaggressive and missionary at the same time. It is, indeed, the only way of being truly missionary." (Bosch, 1979, pp. 32-33)