In two hours I will be leading worship and sharing a message as the capstone of a series on the Fruit of the Spirit. We have been going individually through each of the Fruit for the past nine weeks. This week we will be looking at the context of the Fruit by considering how they stand in contrast to the works of the flesh.
It is difficult to express just how delicate it can be to balance the hard truth of scripture against the attitudes, personalities, and sub-cultures within the church. I am reminded of Rufus Jones’ words as I prepare this morning. In case you’re wondering, I am reading Rufus Jones to help grow my understanding of Howard Thurman, whose works I continue to adore.
The following passage stood out in Jones’ writings this week.
“Most persons are strangely prone to use the ‘principle of parsimony.’ They appear to have a kind of fascination for the dilemma of either-or alternatives. ‘Faith’ or ‘works’ is one of these great historic alternatives. But this cleavage is too artificial for full-rounded reality. Each of these ‘halves’ cries for its other, and there cannot be any great salvation until we rise from the poverty of either half to the richness of the united whole which includes both ‘ways.’ ”
Rufus Jones, The Inner Life (1916)
Jones goes on to lay out the challenge that he faced in his day, which we continue to face today:
“Over against the mystic who glories in the infinite depths of his own soul, the evangelical, with excessive humility, allows not even a spark of native grandeur to the soul and denies that the inner way leads to anything but will-o’-the-wisps. This is a very inept and unnecessary halving of what should be a whole. It spoils religious life, somewhat as the execution of Solomon’s proposal would have spoiled for both mothers the living child that was to be divided. Twenty-five hundred years ago Heraclitus of Ephesus declared that there is ‘a way up and a way down and both are one.; So, too, there is an outer way and an inner way and both are one. It takes both diverse aspects to express the rich and complete reality, which we mar and mangle when we dichotomize it and glorify our amputated half.”
Rufus Jones, The Inner Life (1916)
There’s something beautiful about the way that Jones effectively humbles both the self-absorbed mystic and the dogmatic evangelical which still stands the test of time. What a great turn of phrase: we ineptly and unnecessarily halve something that should have remained whole. To live with only half of what should be a whole is, by nature, a form of spiritual poverty.
Why does this rest foremost in my thoughts as I prepare today? The Fruit of the Spirit should show themselves with a certain level of evidence in our lives both in mystical and evangelical ways. Paul describes the works of the flesh as being an expression of selfish desire.
A purely mystic Christianity that is only interested in navel-gazing while ignoring the needs of others to both have social necessities and spiritual necessities is dangerously at risk of living out of a place of spiritual bankruptcy. Similarly, an Evangelical Christianity that is so concerned with either converting others or providing for the needs of others without ever considering the spiritual aspects of others and of one’s own need for humility is also at risk. The two halves of a Christianity that embraces both should never have been cleaved in two and to the extent that we pursue the Fruit of the Spirit while holding a meat cleaver, we are dangerously at risk.
