C. S. Lewis in Mere Christianity likened the historic Christian faith to a hallway “out of which doors open into several rooms.”[1] He argued that these rooms are various denominations or theological traditions. The confessional distinctives are to be found in the rooms, not in the hallway. Yet, in case a reader is tempted to stay in the hallway, Lewis reminds us: “[I]t is in the rooms, not in the hall, that there are fires and chairs and meals. The hall is a place to wait in, from which to try various doors, not a place to live in.”[2] I am thankful for Lewis inviting us into the hall. I have personally been impacted by his apologetics in Mere Christianity. And at least for me, his approach worked. I did not stay in the hall. Instead, I found a hearty meal with the room that had “Free Will Baptist” on the door.
While Lewis sought to use this analogy for apologetic approaches, I want to borrow his language and metaphor to describe a healthy and shared Christian spirituality. Lewis was not seeking to offer a reductionistic defense of the Christian faith in Mere Christianity. Instead, he offered an intellectually stout defense of the faith. Likewise, I am not interested in offering a weakened view of Christan spirituality but instead one that is robust and broadly evangelical.
Mere Spirituality
In seeking to offer a healthy and robust view of Christian spirituality that can be a starting point across various theological distinctives, I want to propose a constellation of three important Christian convictions. Like Lewis, I do not think these convictions signify the end of a healthy or complete view of Christian spirituality. Instead, I think they are a sound starting point for people who want to promote a richer and more biblical approach to Christian spirituality. One can begin with these suggestions and grow deeper with Christ in his or her own confessional beliefs. These convictions include: (1) a rich theological anthropology, (2) a committed Protestant soteriology, and (3) an unwavering view of Scripture’s sufficiency.
First is a rich theological anthropology.[3] Much could be said on this subject, but two points for now will suffice. One, a “mere spirituality” should emphasize man’s bearing the image of God (imago Dei). As Scripture explains, the imago Dei is the grounding for human worth and dignity; it sets humanity apart from the rest of creation. Thus, any Christian spirituality worth its salt must rightly emphasize man’s unique position in God’s creation.
Two, evangelicals would do well to emphasize that mankind is both body and soul. Most derelict approaches to spiritual formation, in my opinion, begin with misunderstanding on this point. People either think of man in a purely spiritual (soul) perspective, which fails to account rightly for man’s embodied existence, both now and in the eschaton; or they focus too much on man’s habits as an embodied creature in a manner that fails to account for man’s immaterial side . One side sees man as only a soul and reinforces a latent Gnosticism, while the other side ends up being nothing more than a baptized naturalism. Instead, a healthy view of spirituality rightly emphasizes both “parts” of mankind, noting that he is both body and soul.
Rightly emphasizing both body and soul means that our discipleship practices engage the whole person. We preach and pray and fast and worship knowing we are interacting with people who are not just bodies or souls but both. That means our outer habits and our inner life are both important. We rightly emphasize that are souls can be affected by the things we physically watch and hear, and our physical life can be enriched by biblical spiritual disciplines. With respect to a healthy spiritual life, we are whole people. Consequently, we should emphasize a wholistic approach to Christian spirituality.
Second is a committed Protestant soteriology.[4] I have avoided using the word “reformed” here because of the wide range in which that word is used—although “reformed” is largely what I mean. Specifically, a healthy spirituality includes a clear understanding of total depravity, justification by faith, and sanctification and glorification. While space in this post does not allow a full exploration of how this point implicates spiritual formation practices, I will give one example to illustrate my point.
We must rightly balance justification and sanctification to avoid lopsided spiritual practices. If a believer realizes they are justified in Christ—that he is positionally righteous in the eyes of the Father—then he will avoid any attempt at works righteousness. And yet if one rightly emphasizes sanctification, he will avoid antinomianism and seek to display loving obedience to God as he seeks to grow closer to Him day-by-day. Knowing we are justified before the God of the universe alleviates us from feeling the impossible pressure of earning our own salvation. Likewise, knowing we are called to work out our own salvation in fear and trembling (Philippians 2:12) keeps us from a “set it and forget it” kind of approach to our Christian faith.
Third is an unwavering view of Scripture’s sufficiency. Years ago, the question for evangelical Christians was whether the Bible was inerrant. While some still debate the question, many have settled on their side of the line. “Evangelicals” (a rather contested term) have largely declared that the Bible, as God’s Word, is both inerrant and infallible, or give lip service to the doctrine at least. Yet, while (we) evangelicals often say out of one side of our mouths that the Bible is inerrant, we betray it out of the other by not demonstrating its sufficiency. James Montgomery Boice rightly stated over a decade ago, “Inerrancy is not the most critical issue facing the church today. The most serious issue, I believe, is the Bible’s sufficiency.”[5] It is still true today that we contradict our statements on inerrancy by our methods that reject the Bible’s sufficiency.
We betray the Bible’s sufficiency when we say it is God’s Word but fail to live under its authority in our day-to-day lives. When it comes to our spirituality, we see this betrayal when people feel a need to “add on” to the Bible’s commands on one side or to ignore its commands on the other. For some people, they feel like they need to do more than what the Bible gives, inventing practices to make themselves feel more apparently spiritual than what the Bible itself commands. For others, they feel the need to dismiss the clear commands of the Bible in light of cultural pressure and the spirit of the age—ignoring what the Bible otherwise makes very clear.
Conclusion
Ultimately, I am convinced that theology should drive methodology. What we believe theologically will orient how we approach our spiritual practices and discipleship programs. So much more could be said about healthy approaches to Christian discipleship and spiritual formation. But my prayer is that those seeking to find a “deeper walk” with the Lord are not tempted toward extreme spiritual practices that actually lead to malforming the disciple of Christ. Instead, my genuine prayer is that these three Christian convictions would serve as a hallway leading to a rich walk with Christ our Lord.
By rightly emphasizing what mankind is, we will avoid trying to do things that God never intended for us to do or to be lopsided in our spiritual formation. Committing to Protestant soteriology will strengthen our resistance against the temptation to earn our salvation through spiritual practices. Lastly, by trusting not only in the Bible’s inerrancy but also its sufficiency, we will have a clear guide and light to know how to mature in Christ. Here is our “mere spirituality.” May we start here, not remaining in the hallway but going on from here to find food and warmth in the fires and meals of our particular confessions.
[1] C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (New York: HarperCollins, 2001), xv.
[2] Lewis, Mere Christianity, xv.
[3] Two wonderful books concerning the intersection of Christian spirituality and theological anthropology are Kelly M. Kapic, You’re Only Human: How Your Limits Reflect God’s Design and Why That’s Good News (Grand Rapids: Brazos Press, 2022); and Ranald Macaulay and Jerram Barrs, Being Human: The Nature of Spiritual Experience (Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 1998).
[4] Matthew Bingham’s A Heart Aflame for God: A Reformed Approach to Spiritual Formation (Wheaton: Crossway, 2025) is a wonderful resource for this subject.
[5] James Montgomery Boice, Whatever Happened to The Gospel of Grace? Rediscovering the Doctrines That Shook the World (Wheaton: Crossway, 2009), 72.
Recent Comments