To What End? The Telos of the Disciplines.

It seemed an inauspicious beginning. Last November, in an effort to revive this long dormant blog, I offered a simple post on being an Apprentice of Jesus. That post did not contain a single reference to any spiritual disciplines. The omission was not intentional, but it wasn’t an oversight either. A vague sense of discomfort plagues me when I start to write or teach about spiritual disciplines, rules (or ways) of life, or any of the elements contained in an otherwise welcome renewal of interest in spiritual formation. At least it was vague until I remembered an article by James Bryan Smith written for the September 2022 issue of Christianity Today magazine.. Smith was Dallas Willard’s teaching assistant for his courses at Fuller seminary and worked with Willard and Richard Foster in launching the Renovaré ministry in the late 1980s. Smith’s article was “Dallas Willard’s 3 Fears About the Spiritual Formation Movement.”

According to Smith:

“[Dallas] worried that the focus would be on the practice of the spiritual disciplines themselves rather than on what they were intended to do. Dallas felt this would naturally degenerate into a focus on technique—on the how and not the why of the spiritual exercises. Dallas also feared that churches would co-opt interest in spiritual formation as a tool for church growth—and that, because it likely would not lead to numerical growth, leaders would then relegate formation to one of many departments in a church rather than viewing it as central to their mission. Finally, he was concerned that the growing number of formation ministries would compete with each other—rather than cooperate—in order to validate their work and ensure their survival.”

On the second and third of Dallas Willard’s fears, I may offer some thoughts in a later post. However, the first fear listed raises an important question: what exactly is the “why” of the spiritual exercises? To begin to answer that question, one can look at the consequences focusing primarily on the “how” of the disciplines. Fortunately, Smith address this in another Willard quote:

“In one of our last conversations together, I asked Dallas what would be at stake if his fears became reality. His answer: ‘A lack of transformation into Christlikeness.’”

But is it possible that such transformation is less the goal of the disciplines than it is the effect of seeking that goal? Another of Smith’s recollections give us a hint.

“Dallas taught that disciplines such as prayer, solitude, and Scripture memorization are only one part of the formation process. The second part is the work of the Holy Spirit, and the third is learning how to see life’s trials and events in light of God’s presence and power. One of Dallas’s fears—something he essentially predicted—was that interest in the practice of the disciplines, while essential, would eclipse the other two parts.”

These parts are not three unconnected activities, but three interconnected aspects of the work of apprenticeship. The work of the disciplines is something we do. The way we see our life “in the light of God’s presence and power” is something that grows in us as we become more aware of God’s involvement in our lives. However, the work of the Holy Spirit is God’s sovereign work – which is not to say that we have no part to play in that work. The work we do is in creating space in our lives for the Spirit of God to take up residence and produce the fruit of the Spirit: love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. Or in other words, the character of Christ.

The disciplines are the essential tool in creating this space. And, oddly enough, preparing to go to sleep is a good analogy for the process. Philosopher Jamie Smith addresses this in his book Imagining the Kingdom. Throughout the book Smith intersperses brief insets under the title of “To Think About.” Drawing on some writing by philosopher Maruice Merleau-Ponty, Smith writes:

I cannot “choose” to fall asleep. The best I can do is choose to put myself in a position that welcomes sleep. I want to go to sleep, and I’ve chosen to climb into bed – but in another sense sleep is not something under my control nor at my beck and call. “I call up the visitation of sleep by initiating the breathing and posture of the sleeper … There is a moment when sleep ‘comes,’ settling on this imitation of itself which I have been offering to it, and I succeed in becoming what I was trying to be.” (Phenomenology of Perception, Merleau-Ponty, P 189-90, emphasis added.) Sleep is a gift that requires a posture of reception – a kind of active welcome. What if being filled with the Spirit had the same dynamic? What if Christian practices are what Craig Dykstra calls “habitations of the Spirit” precisely because they posture us to be filled and sanctified? What if we need to first adopt a bodily posture in order to become what we are trying to be? (James K.A. Smith. Imagining the Kingdom (Grand Rapids, MI, Baker Academic, 2013), p. 65)

This is an idea and image worth exploring and it raises both further questions and further concerns. The concern that is foremost in my own thinking is the communal context of the Christlike life. Throughout the New Testament the primary context of Jesus’ teaching, and that of Paul and the other New Testament writers, is the corporate nature of discipleship. The “lone ranger” kind of discipleship/apprenticeship is a figment of our western imagination, it cannot be found in the Scriptures.

From that New Testament perspective I can only be a disciple in the context of a community of disciples. I can only be an apprentice in the context of a community of apprentices. This brings to my mind a book by the Rev. Dr. Alison Morgan, Following Jesus. While the book is a valuable tool for any group of apprentices, it is the secondary title that caught my imagination: The Plural of Disciple is Church. If that’s true, and I believe it is, then I come back at last to my revisionist version of Inigo Montoya: “Church! You keep saying that word. I do not think it means what you think it means!”

Reconnecting: The Apprentice Part

In an ongoing effort to render this old blog site habitable, a few items of furniture need to be brought into the sunlight again for a thorough cleaning. The first piece of furniture relates to the choice of its name: The Apprentice Priest.

Why Apprentice?

Today apprentice is not a synonym for disciple – but that’s because being an apprentice isn’t what it used to be. Unlike the reality show version of apprentice, modern apprenticeship is a step towards professional status in a trade. It does not involve living with one’s instructor or observing their lifestyle and character. 

I picked up the practice describing myself as an apprentice from Dallas Willard. He well may be the source of the current adoption of apprentice as an alternative to disciple. But apprentice is probably popular because it is new. Human culture will undoubtedly be able to drain it of substantial meaning as we did with Christian and disciple. Christian and Christianity are terms that come loaded with a great deal of baggage that has little to do with what we read in the New Testament. While I am happy to be known as a follower of Jesus or an apprentice of Jesus, I prefer not to accept the term Christian until I understand what associations it has for the person with whom I am speaking.

Disciple has its own problems. Alison Morgan reports: “In 2011 the Anglican Diocese of Gloucester conducted a survey among its clergy, asking what they regarded as the most important elements of discipleship. The survey reported widespread agreement across the diocese: clergy from all contexts and traditions selected ‘Bible study’ as the foremost activity of a Christian disciple, followed by ‘prayer.’ There was no suggestion that discipleship should involve any element either of ministry or lifestyle; indeed, ‘personal morality’ was rated bottom of the seventeen options offered, along with ‘witness’ and ‘faith at work.’”[1]  

Morgan later observes: “Jesus wasn’t training theologians; he was training practitioners, and the primary context of training was not the classroom but the community.’[2] This is consistent with Dallas Willard’s contention that “The term ‘discipleship’ has currently been ruined so far as any solid psychological and biblical content is concerned.”[3]

On the other hand, apprentice has an advantage over the other terms. Christian is rarely used to imply any relationship except that between Christ and the individual believer. However, to be an apprentice, you usually have to be apprenticed to someone. One can be a disciple of anyone, living or dead. But one can only apprentice oneself to a living person. Therefore, to be an apprentice of Jesus means a) that He is alive, b) He is accessible in relationship, and c) that relationship is capable of growing, evolving, and deepening.

Being an apprentice of Jesus the Christ is where I want to be. Sharing some of that journey’s failures and successes is one reason I’m resurrecting The Apprentice Priest. And the “priest” part of this? Maybe in a couple of weeks, I’ll have more to say.


[1] Alison Morgan, Following Jesus: The Plural of Disciple is Church, ReSource, c. 2015, p. 44

[2] Ibid, p. 48

[3] Dallas Willard, The Great Omission p. 53