As we are rooted in Jesus and in the kingdom he proclaims, we are progressively transformed. Jesus is the center of all life and history, both the source and goal of all creation. God shaped this universe as a place where the love and life of Jesus Christ might flourish. Because we are formed in the divine image, we have the capacity to receive and express this life and love. Although human disobedience corrupts the divine image in us, God still forms a people able to love the Lord their God with all their heart, soul, mind, and strength, and love their neighbors as themselves. Jesus makes this possible through his life, death, and resurrection. In him we experience a restored relationship of love with God and one another, and continual transformation into his likeness. We are becoming a reconciled and renewed community – which is both the goal and the substance of life in God’s kingdom. This is the good news we proclaim with joy to the whole world.
Reading this paragraph, I am confused with the disjointed facts about Jesus, God’s kingdom, reconciled and renewed community and the good news. “As we are rooted in Jesus and in the kingdom he proclaims, we are progressively transformed” is a sentence that needs clarification. Does this means that transformation occurs automatically and progressively? What does “rooted” in Jesus and the kingdom means?
This is followed by “Jesus is the center of all life and history, both the source and goal of all creation.” While I agree that Jesus is the center and source, I wonder what is meant by Jesus is “the goal of all creation.” I am mystified by this. Is all creation going to become a Cosmic Christ as Teihard de Chardin suggests? As Karl Rahner so ably informs us about the divine Trinity economy, Jesus stands outside of creation.
Instead of clarifying the previous sentence, the next few are equally puzzling: “God shaped this universe as a place where the love and life of Jesus Christ might flourish.” I am curious in the choice of the words “God shaped” instead of “God created.” In a negative sense, the sentence may be interpreted as that God shaped the universe to fail so that Jesus Christ might flourish. “Because we are formed in the divine image, we have the capacity to receive and express this life and love.” If the “this” refers to the previous sentence, then the divine image enables us to receive and express the love and life of Jesus Christ. “Although human disobedience corrupts the divine image in us, God still forms a people able to love the Lord their God ...” Is there then two groups of people- one that have the life and love of Jesus Christ and the other formed by God with the ability to love him? I do not believe this is what the drafter of this statement meant to say but it is the impression I get while reading The Call to Spiritual Formation.
The point I want to make here is that there is no generally accepted and fully developed theology of Christian spiritual formation. Without a theology of Christian spiritual formation, the movement will continue to stumble and stall. There is a great urgency to develop this theology. A theology of Christian spiritual formation must be Trinitarian in basis, biblical in nature, taking into account the anthropological aspect of the divine image, the human person and persons-in-community, and the redemptive plan of God to restore his original perfect creation. This theology will provide the framework for discussion of the nature, matrix and means of Christian spiritual formation.
In this framework, the rest of the paragraph makes sense,
Jesus makes this possible through his life, death, and resurrection. In him we experience a restored relationship of love with God and one another, and continual transformation into his likeness. We are becoming a reconciled and renewed community – which is both the goal and the substance of life in God’s kingdom. This is the good news we proclaim with joy to the whole world.
The paragraph mentioned a reconciled and renewed community. Might this not be another reason for Christian spiritual formation? What then are the telos or goals of Christian spiritual formation? I will suggest the telos of Christian spiritual formation are:
(1) restoring our relationship with the Godhead;
(2) restoring the imago dei into Christlikeness in our being;
(3) becoming a people of God (laos);
(4) becoming his instruments for his plan of redemption (missio Dei).
A theology of Christian spiritual formation will help us to understand its relationship with discipleship. Some people regard spiritual formation as synonymous with discipleship. I noticed that many authors writing about spiritual formation try to avoid mentioning discipleship. It would have been helpful that this statement on A Call to Spiritual Formation enlightens us as to the difference between spiritual formation and discipleship.
In summary, there is a deep need for a theology of Christian spiritual formation that will be the framework to build the movement on. Otherwise it will become a buzz word, a fad, or a bandwagon for everyone to jump on. A bandwagon that may be heading nowhere fast.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment