Censorious Thoughts, final

Jonathan Edwards lived through a very tumultuous time in New England.  He witnessed a working of the Spirit of God we call the First Great Awakening.  With this work of the Spirit, there came immense criticism and immense distortion.  He served us well in how to make charitable judgments of the work of God in others.  He wrote on Religious Affections  and "The Distinguishing Marks of a Work of the Spirit of God."  The latter is brief, the former is a massive treatise well worth the study.  I see now that Edwards was leading others to make sober and charitable judgments . . .  here is how these thoughts may apply today.

Let me start by saying I am aware Edwards could contend for the faith as much as anyone.  From what I read of Edwards he did not do that in a way of personal attack. He was passionate for truth and gracious.   I also know that Edwards was an innovator for his day -- integrating new philosophy with his Puritanism.

It was Edwards who helped me years ago in assessing the charismatic movement.  I was raised in a context of extreme criticism of the movement and its theology.  Tongues were of the dvevil!  But I had a sense that there was more to it than that -- that the charismatics I knew had a boldness and generosity and faith that I envied.  How could that not be a work of God?  Edwards pointed out that no work of God is ever pure and that there were certain marks of the Holy Spirit that showed his hand. 

In Religious Affections, he has two sections -- first, what are NOT necessarily signs of the Holy Spirit and second, what ARE signs of his work.  The first section is masterful soul reading.  Edwards simply shows that there are certain experiences in people's lives which prove nothing -- they may or may not be signs.  He lists things like extreme emotion, bodily excitement, the appearance of love to God, etc.  Here is the key -- Edwards is not critiquing these signs, he is simply pointing out that they neither disqualify nor qualify a work as being from God.

This was important in Edwards day since there were many critics of the work of God.  They picked at the extremes and said this cannot be of God.  Edwards, in a sense, defends the movement by asking its critics to be more discerning of the good and by asking the fanatics to focus on the right things.

His second section describes the marks of God's Spirit in someone's heart -- a delight in the beauty of God, a submission to his word, a humble spirit, etc. This material is probing and helpful.

What is most helpful about Edwards is that, in his works on revival,  he consistently calls for charitable judgments.  He does not think the presence of sin disqualifies a work as being from God.  He says sin will stain every work.  That you can see flaws and sin in the work does not make it invalid.  My impression is that Edwards, rather than standing on the side sniping at the work, got alongside the work and sought to see it bear the best fruit. 

I have found this so helpful.  In more than 25 years in ministry I have observed many new works of God.  Almost invariably they bring severe criticism pointing out all that is doctrinally wrong or morally compromised in them.  The response is defense; the fruit is bitterness, slander, division.  What Edwards helps me do is get off out of my arrogant heart and see what God is doing.  I am learning to ask - is the work of the Spirit here, despite its flaws?  is this something only God can do?  Is there repentance, growth in godliness, a humble spirit that responds to Scripture, a Christ-centeredness??  Are there conversions based on the solid proclamation of the Gospel? 

I am always advocating for this as it was a significant point of repentance for me and one I still labor over.  Charitable judgments do not come easily.  I now find it hard to make charitable judgments of those who critique others!  I find it easy to be dismissive, condescending, and careless in my criticism. I find the blogosphere to be ripe with unnecessary critiques and I have offered some as well.  I find it very challenging to see a work of God in others, whether my wife or children or members or other churches, and get behind it in prayer and do whatever part I may play to fan the flame into its fullest and most godly expression.  I do know that criticism and fault finding is not a means of grace to the other person. 

One final point, I also do not know that Edwards ever "congratulated the awakening."  He saw its great significance but it does not seem he had a sense of self-importance.  I am not sure what else to call it.  It is remarkable that many of the new movements of our day engage in "pre-writing" history. "This is a revolution that will change the church."  Whether it is the Emerging Church or the Seeker movement, the growth of the charismatic world, or with various tools for evangelism, small groups, etc -- the advocates are always sending out press releases about their significance. I think we should let history evaluate significance and just go about our work.  I think I should do my part to further God's work wherever I see it and realize that if someone is preaching the Gospel we are on the same team. 

Edwards has helped me so much with this and his life was an example, in part, of not being censorious.