Ecumenical and Traditioned Measurement: Measuring Christian Maturation Across Distinct Traditions of Christian Spirituality

Alexis D. Abernethy

In discussing African American spirituality as a unique tradition of Christian formation, I will share relevant statistics that illustrate some elements of the diversity of African American religious experiences, musings on Christian maturity from an African American perspective, and implications for measuring Christian maturity.

Shawn Strout

Any discussion of Anglican spirituality must begin with the incarnation of the Son of God in the person of Jesus Christ. While Jesus’s passion, resurrection, ascension, and his sending of the Holy Spirit are important in Anglicanism, his incarnation forms the foundation of theology, liturgy, and spirituality. Anglican priest and social reformer Charles Freer Andrews described the centrality of the incarnation:

…I now look at all human life and human history more from the central standpoint of the Incarnation. I think more of the extension of the Incarnate life in wider and wider reaches of humanity, till all is summed up in Christ himself. Rather than starting primarily from the Death of Christ as consequent on the Fall, and regarding the saving of individual souls from punishment due to sin as the one great objective, and viewing all human history as one great mistake, as it were,—one great calamity with one single narrow method or remedy and reconciliation. ³³

The means by which the sacraments mediate the divine has been a source of differing positions within Anglicanism ranging from very Reformed to very Catholic views. These diverse views find commonality in recognizing Christian maturity as being conformity to Christ through corporate worship and social action. ³⁵ While interiorized spirituality has its place in the Anglican tradition, corporate worship is a distinguishing feature. The preface of the first Book of Common Prayer, promulgated in 1549, articulated this principle. “…it may plainly appere by the common prayers in the Churche, commonlye called divine service: the firste originall and grounde whereof, if a manne woulde searche out by the auncient fathers, he shall finde that the same was not ordeyned, but of a good purpose, and for a great advauncement of godliness…” ³⁶

Centuries later, Charles Gore, bishop of Birmingham, would connect corporate worship with social action: “The [new life in Christ] is the life of a body, and the general well-being is therefore the common interest of all the members, for the weakening or decay of one is the weakening and decay of a more or less valuable part of a connected life.” ³⁷ In this essay, Gore continued by listing four indicators of growth toward Christian maturity: “truthfulness and openness,” “self-restraint in temper,” “Labour for the purpose of mutual beneficence,” and “profitable speech.” ³⁸ Thus, it does not suffice for one only to go to church to fulfill one’s Christian duty. Corporate worship, especially in a tradition as broadly diverse as Anglicanism, necessitates care for one’s neighbor.

John Henry Newman, one of the originators of the Oxford Movement, emphasized the need for actions in the pursuit of holiness. While actions do not merit salvation, they do form the heart toward God. ³⁹ The Anglican mystic Evelyn Underhill also recognized the need to care for one’s neighbor: “Though mysticism be indeed the living heart of all religion, this does not mean that religion does, or can, consist of nothing but heart. The Church is a Body with head, hands, feet, flesh, and hard bones: none of them any use, it is true, if the heart does not function, but all needed for the full expression of the Christian spiritual life.” ⁴⁰

Two practices cultivate Christian maturity in Anglican spirituality: corporate reading of Scripture and participation in the sacraments. These practices reflect the Reformed and Catholic tension, which has existed in Anglicanism from the 16th century. Cranmer from the Reformed tradition advocated for reading the Bible: “In the scriptures be the fat pastures of the soul; therein is no venomous meat, no unwholesome thing; they be the very dainty and pure feeding.” ⁴¹ Equally, Lancelot Andrewes, a High Church leader, described the benefits of regular reception of communion: “Whereof, I mean of the partaking of His divine nature, to give us full and perfect assurance, as He took our flesh and became our Brother, flesh of our flesh then, so He gives us His flesh, that we may become His brethren, flesh of His flesh, now; and gives it us now upon this day, the very day of our adoption into this fraternity.” ⁴²

Because Anglican spirituality emphasizes corporate worship leading to social action, barriers to Christian formation would involve this corporate activity. In his “Sermon on Catholic Spirit,” John Wesley offered two barriers to Christian formation: “[Christians] cannot all think alike; and, in consequence of this, secondly, they cannot all walk alike.” ⁴³ In other words, the very strength of Anglican spirituality, its breadth of diversity, can be its greatest barrier. Because Anglicanism does not expect uniformity on nonessential doctrines, it contains widely differing theological positions. Ideally, a spirit of humility and charity permits these differences to exist harmoniously. However, when humility and charity are lacking, corporate conflict arises.

Assessing spiritual maturity in Anglicanism can be challenging due to its diversity. Certainly, active participation in corporate worship would be fundamental to such an assessment. However, one can actively participate in corporate worship without bearing the fruits of the Spirit. Actions for the good of one’s neighbor would be another important measure, but they also can be empty of spiritual maturity. Therefore, Charles Freer Andrews suggests an intuitive rather than a rational approach. ⁴⁴ Sharing personal experiences of the Divine has been a common practice in Anglican spirituality. Through this corporate action, one is not judged by an external authority or an internal monitor but rather by the shared wisdom of the group. A common quotation among Anglicans illustrates this truth: “All may, some do, none must.” Anglican spirituality is invitational, not prescriptive. Therefore, its assessment must recognize that ethos.

William Dillard

The words “prefer nothing to the love of Christ” are found in the Fourth Chapter of The Rule of Saint Benedict and might serve as the title of this summary of Benedictine spirituality. ⁴⁵ This attitude of centering one’s life on experiencing and expressing the love of Christ captures the spirit of the Benedictine influence on priestly formation in the Roman Catholic tradition. I will discuss five significant elements of the formation of Roman Catholic priests, integrating the spirit of the Benedictine tradition within a contemporary American context. This process is one that incorporates the vision of the American Bishops, as articulated in the document Program of Priestly Formation, other formational Church documents, like Pastores Dabo Vobis, for example, and the Rule of Life (of the Seminary). ⁴⁶ The particular systematic approach to priestly formation implemented by each individual seminary in consort with local bishops and religious superiors also contribute greatly. In addition, in the case of seminaries operating within the context of a Benedictine community, The Rule of Saint Benedict. The Rule of Saint Benedict was composed by Benedict of Nursia (born 480 to died 547 AD) in circa 516. It consists in 73 chapters, and it serves as a guide for a Christocentric way of life substantially rooted in Sacred Scripture. This way of life and of formation is characterized by the motto of the Benedictine Order, Ora et Labora (prayer and work). Although The Rule of Saint Benedict and the spirituality that flows from it was intended for a monastic application, it provides a well-balanced and integrated complement to seminary formation for diocesan seminarians as well.

Christian maturity can be characterized within this tradition as a life lived out within the context of community, in an ongoing process of conversion, centered upon relationship with Christ and others. This can be appreciated throughout The Rule, but especially in Chapter 58, where Benedict details the importance of community life and its relationship to personal conversion in the process of Christian maturity. ⁴⁷ Key elements of Christian maturity include a progressive growth in the experience and expression of the love of God and neighbor (conversion of life). It includes a commitment to a life lived in joyful obedience to the will of God in all things. The fifth chapter of The Rule is dedicated to the virtue of obedience, and Benedict associates obedience with the love of Christ above all things. ⁴⁸ Humility is also another essential feature of this tradition and can be expressed as truth in relationship to God, others, and self. Humility can be characterized by the experience of self-awareness, leading to self-acceptance, leading to total self-gift. Benedict offers a lengthy and detailed treatment of humility in Chapter seven and demonstrates the interrelationship of joyful and mature obedience and humility. ⁴⁹ A commitment to stability within a specific community (or diocese) is understood within the Benedictine tradition, as the context where Christian maturity is best able to flourish.

Holiness (Christlikeness) is a difficult thing to measure within the individual, but its fruits can be seen. The formation of a priest in the Benedictine spirit includes a long, integrated and comprehensive process. This formation includes clear behavioral benchmarks and objectives at every stage of formation. This formation takes place within the context of a formation community and under the direction of a competent formation faculty. ⁵⁰ The process focuses on each person as a unique individual, integrating the four dimensions of formation (spiritual, human, pastoral, and intellectual). ⁵¹ Some of the salient indicators of progress in Christian maturity include the manifestation of docility to the working of the Holy Spirit as expressed by willing and joyful openness to the process of formation and the individual’s awareness and pro-active response to the need for spiritual growth. The consistent demonstration of actions are reflective of a genuine desire and capacity for life-long and self-less priestly service to God and others. In addition, one in formation must express a deep and well developed personal and liturgical prayer life, the desire and ability to minster to others, and a level of emotional and relational maturity that would make such ministry fruitful for both the individual and the community of faith to which he is sent to serve and lead. Benedict gave great attention and emphasis to the life of prayer in Christian formation, both in the context of personal prayer (meditation and contemplation) and liturgical prayer, as described in Chapters 8 through 20 of his Rule. ⁵²

Again, in the Benedictine tradition, Christian maturity is cultivated within the context of community. It is the prolonged interaction with members of the community that will often reveal areas of needed growth and also provide opportunities for that growth to happen. Stability to a particular formation community enables one to face (rather than avoid) areas of needed growth. In this way, Christ acts in the community, making it a lived school for the Lord’s service on both a practical and spiritual level. The formation community additionally provides continual support, guidance, feedback, and professional resources to the individual considering his unique needs. ⁵³ Benedict envisioned monastic life and by extension Christian life and formation as “a school for the Lord’s service.” ⁵⁴ Thereby integrating this idea as an expression of the love of God lived out in the context of community and ongoing conversion. Another unique feature of Christian formation taken from the Benedictine tradition is the idea that priestly formation should be carried out considering the individual history, needs, character, and personality of each seminarian. This can be seen in chapter two of The Rule which is devoted to the qualities of the Abbot. Benedict insisted that the Abbot must understand and adapt his approach to each unique individual of the community depending upon the member’s needs, character, and personality. ⁵⁵

An essential part of the discernment and formation process is the identification of significant barriers to Christian formation, if there are any. These would be identified, assessed, and approached in a holistic way involving the formation community, the formation staff, the individual’s superiors, and the individual himself. In my opinion, barriers to Christian formation would include but are not limited to significant narcissistic characteristics; demonstrated emotional, spiritual, or relational immaturity; the inability to internalize the virtues and values necessary to the life of a priest; a significant lack of docility to the process of priestly formation; the inability to internalize and express mature and joyful obedience, celibate chastity, a spirit of poverty, and the life of personal and liturgical prayer required of a priest and lastly, the inability to articulate appropriate motives for formation leading to ordination and the inability to express and experience the love of God and others.

The Benedictine tradition has existed since the life of Benedict himself, and so its application to the formation of priests has adapted over the centuries. Within the contemporary context, assessment and evaluation of spiritual maturity in seminarians is carried out in a comprehensive and integrated program of formation. The Program for Priestly Formation provides guidelines for priestly formation and how programs for formation are to be conducted. Some of the important elements of assessment and evaluation include regular (biweekly) individual formation and spiritual direction meetings with the individual and his formation and spiritual director, regular meetings of the entire formation faculty to discuss the progress of each individual seminarian, an annual comprehensive evaluation of each seminarian based upon a written document, and a live evaluation session with the seminarian, his formation director, and his superior (at a minimum). This evaluation is augmented by integrated formation reports from the human, pastoral, and intellectual dimensions. These include written evaluations by ministry supervisors and classroom professors for each seminarian. The seminarian also provides written documentation for evaluation comprehensively and on selected areas each year. In addition, the formation program provides guidelines, benchmarks, and objectives for each level of formation based upon The Program of Priestly Formation and the formation program of the seminary.

One of the principal elements of Benedict’s Rule that gives it such a wide application is that it is based upon and saturated with Sacred Scripture and that it is clearly centered on Christ. The timeless balance, wisdom, compassion, and robust nature of The Rule and the spiritual tradition that springs from it offers an excellent corollary for the formation of the diocesan priest. The school of the Lord’s service envisioned by The Rule clearly provides a very well-integrated basis for encompassing the salient elements of Christian maturity, the indicators and barriers of progress in the Christian life, the environment where formation can best be experienced, and how Christian formation can be evaluated. The Church owes a debt of gratitude to God and his servant, Benedict, for the great gift to the world that that Benedictine spirituality is and will continue to be.

Amos Yong

It is difficult if not impossible to speak comprehensively of the global Pentecostal movement and its spirituality, not to mention the specific aspects of what this article is considering. ⁵⁶ Nevertheless, the following, while horribly generalized, seeks to sketch the spectrum of opinion in ways that should allow those from across the movement to recognize themselves.

How might those in the Pentecostal movement define Christian maturity? On the one side, historic Christian markers would be articulated and embraced, chiefly Christlikeness of demeanor and behavior and display of what the New Testament calls the fruits of the Holy Spirit: “love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control” (Gal. 5:22–23). ⁵⁷ On the other side, Pentecostal spirituality is also characterized by the manifestation of what the New Testament also calls charismatic gifts of the Holy Spirit: “To one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the discernment of spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues” (1 Cor. 12:8–10). While it may be recognized that not every believer expresses or has access to all of these gifts, mature disciples exhibit, often, at least one and usually more than one of these. Further, because “God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers; then deeds of power, then gifts of healing, forms of assistance, forms of leadership, various kinds of tongues” (1 Cor. 12:27–28), advanced believers often also live out their Christian vocations in fulfillment of one or more of these apostolic, prophetic, or teaching “offices,” or their related evangelistic and pastoral counterparts as also enumerated in another list (Eph. 4:11). The point is that on the side of the Pentecostal-charismatic spectrum, maturity is related to ministerial calling and gifting, often backed up by charismatic and spiritual gifts.

All of this is presumed in Pentecostal churches that date back to the Azusa Street Revival in the early 20th century which were informed by adaptations of the theology and practices of late 19th-century pietistic Christianities. Those influenced by more Reformed traditions developed a fourfold gospel of Jesus as (1) savior, (2) healer, (3) Spirit-baptizer, and (4) soon-coming king (codified since, for instance, in the International Church of the Foursquare Gospel), ⁵⁸ while where Holiness movements were pentecostalized, the resulting Holiness-Pentecostal stream included Jesus as sanctifier, this element often preceding Spirit-baptism and therefore becoming what has been called a fivefold gospel. ⁵⁹ Whether four- or fivefold, however, the indicators or markers of maturity were often testimonial witnesses to experiences of Jesus’s works in the lives of believers, each one progressively (if not always sequentially) evidencing greater and greater development. In other words, one obviously always has a testimony about one’s salvation experience, and this has often been allied with experience of bodily healing. In Holiness-Pentecostal churches, this initial work of grace, so to speak, is often followed by a second work of sanctification, with resulting testimonial witness, and then a third work of Spirit-baptism. Fourfold churches, downplaying sanctification, would insist that one’s testimony often involves salvation-healing followed by baptism in the Holy Spirit evidenced by speaking in other tongues. The full Christian life includes these multiple manifestations of the gracious saving-healing-(sanctifying)-baptizing activity of Jesus, with the full redemption awaiting his parousia.

The preceding discussion is of course horribly American-centric, with Pentecostal movements and churches across the global South exhibiting both continuities (due to missiological linkages) and discontinuities (related to contextual and indigenous influences) with these descriptions. ⁶⁰ Keeping in mind, then, that these theological framings derive primarily from North American venues, how yet is Christian maturity thus understood to be cultivated? Through the process of yielding to the prompting of the Holy Spirit, whether that which draws the sinner to repentance on the one side or that which then lures the believer into a deepened relationship with Jesus on the other. The classical Pentecostal tradition called this tarrying, which, drawing from their pietistic forebears, involved waiting at an altar until one was touched in the depths of one’s life by the saving, healing, sanctifying, or baptizing work of Jesus.

Aside from this altar-tarrying yieldedness, the practices conducive to ongoing growth would involve apprenticeship with recognized pastors, church leaders, and mentors, as Jesus’s disciples learned from him. Such apprenticeship would involve practice of the faith, including the spiritual gifts, for instance, gaining in confidence in bearing witness, giving words of wisdom of prophecy, speaking in tongues or interpreting the tongues of others in the congregation. ⁶¹

What are barriers to Christian formation and maturation in the Pentecostal and charismatic movement? To be sure, on the one side, the barriers would be those impediments to full Christian discipleship: self-centeredness rather than openness to Christlikeness. On the other side, however, Pentecostal-charismatic emphases on the gifts brings with them specific obstacles that are, in effect, the flip side of its spirituality. For instance, the sensationalism of the manifestation of these gifts—obvious in how they are often designated as signs and wonders—accentuates a kind of supernaturalistic set of proclivities that ignores the kind of disciplined approach to formation that supports deeply shaped virtues and habits. ⁶² Further, Pentecostal focus on bearing witness often prioritizes verbal testimony that then is separated from the witness borne through lives of discipleship, and this results in an inordinate exaltation of the charismatic gifts of articulation over the fruits of the Spirit that begin with love, what St. Paul also called the “more excellent way” (1 Cor. 12:31b). ⁶³ Last but not least in this regard, elevating the manifestation of gifts as markers of Christian maturity underscores the elitism and triumphalism that comes with such sensibilities and this in turn marginalizes those who are not as charismatically marked as being less mature than others. ⁶⁴ So, on the one hand, the gifts are given by the Holy Spirit to and for each and every member of the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:11), but on the other hand, some are more gifted and therefore blessed, and others less so and less completed. If the Holy Spirit were indeed available to “all flesh” (Acts 2:17), only those characterized by the Spirit’s gifts are moving onward toward maturity.

And if Pentecostal and charismatic Christians have indeed striven “for the greater gifts” (1 Cor. 12:31a), they have been less intentional about developing instruments of assessment and evaluation of what might count as spiritual maturity. A spirituality dominated by the invitation to bear witness to God’s redemptive work in Christ will foreground the vocational call to personal evangelism and to participation in the missio Dei, but this means that other important aspects of how full-orbed discipleship is formed and what their distortions might be are overlooked or dismissed. Further, as a movement born out of the modern world and its own presumed bifurcation between the natural and spiritual, its participants and devotees err on the side of an hyper- and even other-worldly spirituality, effective in reclaiming the multidimensionality of reality but less attentive to how the Holy Spirit might work with material and embodied creatures. ⁶⁵ And while Christianity is increasingly a majority world religiosity, global South Christians continue to react to western technological rationalism and capitalism and do so precisely by embracing Pentecostal-charismatic sensibilities thus perpetuating the binary of history and spirituality. This means that the focus continues to be on the awesomeness of gift-manifestations rather than on critical analysis and discerning Christian formation. The need has never been greater as Pentecostal-charismatic Christians just as often find themselves misled by false prophets and lack the critical capacities to name and discipline such for the protection and edification of their churches and communities. ⁶⁶

Willem van Vlastuin

In this contribution, I listen to voices from the reformed tradition talking about Christian maturity, in particular, to those widely recognized voices emanating from the Reformation, the Further Reformation, and from Puritanism. The post-reformed tradition is characterized by the special attention it pays to the spiritual quality of Christians through the application of the insights of the Reformation. I open by examining how spiritual formation is defined. I then discuss the signs that indicate spiritual progress is being made, after which an examination of how Christian maturity is cultivated or hindered is completed; I close by offering an assessment of the real meaning of spiritual maturity.

Spiritual formation is defined as the mortification of the old sinful nature and the vivification of the new nature in Christ. ⁶⁷ We see an ambivalence about the ratio of mortification and vivification in the reformed tradition. On the one hand, this tradition is characterized by a deep pessimism about human nature and the possibilities of renewal. The Heidelberg Catechism explains that “even the holiest have only a small beginning of this obedience.” ⁶⁸ In his Institutes, Calvin explains that the concept of mortification “reminds us how difficult it is to forget our former nature (…) that to be ranked among his sons there must be a destruction of our ordinary nature.” ⁶⁹ Although he acknowledges the progress of spiritual renewal, he qualifies this as “wavering and limping and even creeping along the ground.” ⁷⁰

On the other hand, the post-Reformation tradition placed more emphasis on the aspect of vivification than the Reformation movement. This movement agrees with the insights of the Reformation by speaking about a “continual and irreconcilable war” but expects that the “regenerate part” will overcome and that the lusts of the body of sin are “more and more weakened and mortified; and they more and more quickened and strengthened in all saving graces, to the practice of true holiness.” ⁷¹ This more positive approach to Christian life in the post-Reformation tradition goes hand in hand with an explicit focus on the practice of true holiness.

The practice of true holiness is indicated by the concept of spiritual fruits, ⁷² a concept which goes back to the biblical image of the vine and branches in John 15. The classic The Christian’s Reasonable Service by Wilhelmus à Brakel has nearly two volumes dedicated to several aspects of the Christian life. ⁷³ When describing interpersonal relationships, these fruits include humility, meekness, mercy, gentleness, patience, peaceableness, compassion, moderation, and, above all, love. Jonathan Edwards understood all these fruits as expressions of love. ⁷⁴ These fruits, or the several aspects of love, are also the markers and indicators of the process of spiritual formation.

Next, every Christian reaches a different level in this process of spiritual formation. The use of the words “more and more” in the Westminster Confession confirms this difference of levels in the practice of spiritual renewal. In the same context of interpretation, À Brakel wrote a chapter about spiritual growth in which he refers to 1 John 2:13 to distinguish between spiritual fathers, young men, and little children. ⁷⁵ He explains that some Christians grow rapidly, others remain small, and still others progress more steadily.

To clarify the different levels, he makes preliminary remarks explaining that gifts, moral life, and the experience of special comfort in difficult circumstances do not, as such, indicate spiritual maturity. What is characteristic of Christian maturity is having a gracious disposition which expresses itself in an increase of spiritual light, a persistent and steadfast fellowship with God, a conscious use of Christ by faith, a pure sort of engagement to honor God, and an increased manifestation of grace. Christians are maturing when they exhibit a sensitivity to sin, have a desire for spiritual virtues, persevere when they encounter powerful opposition, and when they proceed in a virtuous life showing wisdom, determination, faith, and zeal.

Christians, on a regular basis, have to scrutinize the way they spiritually proceed and behave. The outcome of this self-scrutiny points the way to how spiritual maturity can be cultivated. À Brakel acknowledges that all spiritual growth is the fruit of the Spirit. To effectuate this spiritual growth, the Spirit uses the Word, prayer, examples, tribulation, and prosperity. ⁷⁶ The importance of prayer is apparent from the fact that, in addition to the reference he makes to it in the chapter on Christian maturity, À Brakel devotes two chapters to prayer, ⁷⁷ before he treats the Lord’s Prayer. ⁷⁸ Besides his chapter on prayer, he also has a chapter on fasting, watchfulness, solitude, spiritual meditation, singing, and reciting vows as means of growing in grace.

Although À Brakel treats the Lord’s Supper in a previous volume about the Christian doctrine, it is telling that he does not recommend using this sacrament to reach spiritual maturity. The importance of attending public worship is scarcely mentioned in his description of the different ways a Christian might progress; this may imply a more individualistic understanding of spiritual maturity with a view of its corporative aspect. On the whole, this approach underlines the personal dimension of spiritual maturity.

This cultivation of spiritual maturity also raises the question about what the significant barriers to spiritual formation may be. In Calvin’s Institutes, we notice that love for this earth is an important hindrance in the pursuit of the Christian life. ⁷⁹ Human beings have the tendency to seek their happiness on this earth. This attitude enables them to excuse an immoderate use of moderate things which closes their hearts to the heavenly reality that is spiritually exercised. ⁸⁰

In the Heidelberg Catechism, a special focus is placed on the sins of the mouth. ⁸¹ Christians should “not give false testimony against anyone, twist no one’s words, not gossip or slander, nor condemn or join in condemning anyone rashly and unheard.” These are “the devil’s own works, under penalty of God’s heavy wrath.” Believers must defend and promote their neighbor’s honor and reputation to continually receive God’s Spirit.

The ever-practical À Brakel also wrote a chapter on spiritual backsliding. ⁸² He explains that special sins, neglect of the exercise of faith, psychological depression, and laziness in the use of the means to reach spiritual maturity are causes of this declension. It is clear that he is warning Christians against backsliding and intends the description of this reality to promote spiritual formation.

This brings us to the final question about the main indicator employed to assess mature Christianity. In this context, John Calvin’s indicators are telling: “Let us hold as fixed, that no man has made much progress in the school of Christ who does not look forward with joy to the day of death and final resurrection.” ⁸³ In the next chapter, he writes that this implies: “that those in narrow and slender circumstances should learn to bear their wants patiently, that they may not become immoderately desirous of things, the moderate use of which implies no small progress in the school of Christ.” ⁸⁴ It is easy to see that these indicators are the reverse of the main hindrances against spiritual renewal referred to in Calvin.

This is an approach that indicates the importance of Christian hope. It appears that mature Christians are conscious of Christ’s glory in his kingdom and its future revelation. This leads to the paradoxical insight that mature Christians are conscious that real maturity belongs to the eschaton. Apparently, a mature Christian does not have a consciousness about his own maturity, but longs for it. ⁸⁵

Distinctives across five traditions

These five summaries provide a case study for whether a uniform measure of Christian maturation is feasible across diverse spiritual traditions. While there is much to compare and contrast, we (Porter and Wang) briefly highlight a few main distinctives. In his reflection on Pentecostal spirituality, Yong stresses gifts of physical healing, a second-baptism of the Holy Spirit, speaking in tongues, and tarrying at the altar. Certainly, all of these would be important to measure in some way to get at uniquely Pentecostal markers of maturity. But Strout’s summary of Anglican spirituality mentions none of these and instead focuses in on the sacrament of communion, corporate reading of Scripture, and active love of neighbor. No doubt Pentecostals would want to affirm these Anglican emphases, but apparently not with the same priority and significance given by Anglicanism. And it is far from clear that Anglican spirituality would generally embrace the Pentecostal distinctives. Add to these traditions, Abernethy’s discussion of some unique elements from the breadth of African American spirituality. Abernethy highlights emotionally informed corporate worship, lament, forgiveness, and an essential concern for social justice. Dillard notes that the Benedictine tradition centers on joyful obedience to God’s will in all things, humility understood as self-gift, spiritual direction, and a commitment to stability within Christian community understood as a “school for the Lord’s service.” While no doubt the other traditions would want to “Amen!” much in these descriptions of African American and Benedictine spiritualities (and vice versa), it says something important about these traditions that certain themes emerge in one summary and not in the other. Reformed spirituality, as depicted by van Vlastuin, focuses in on the depth of human depravity, the fruits of the Spirit, and the means of the Word, prayer, and baptism. Notably, van Vlastuin’s primary historical source, Wilhelmus à Brakel, does not see the Lord’s Supper as related to spiritual growth and rarely mentions corporate worship, which places à Brakel’s version of Reformed spirituality in tension with the other traditions canvassed. While some themes clearly re-emerge across the summaries (surrender to God, Scripture, prayer, etc.), how these are conceived within the context of each tradition will no doubt be different. While more careful examination of similarities and differences is needed, our case study seems clear: there are distinct features of Christian maturity across diverse spiritual traditions that make a uniform measure of Christian maturity difficult to countenance. Where do we go from here?

Four paths forward with measuring Christian maturation

With the commonalities and distinctives of these traditions in mind, how do we move forward with measuring Christian maturation? We (Porter and Wang) conclude with four plausible routes and a call for further discussion around these or other options.

The first route to consider is that, despite the real differences between spiritual traditions, there remains a common, ecumenical core to Christian maturation that can be distilled and measured. This ecumenical approach abstracts away from the particularities and stresses what holds true for any and all Christian spirituality: neighbor-love, prayer, humility, faith, hope, the fruit of the Spirit, the body of Christ, worship, service, and so on. The careful development of tools that assess qualities, practices, and outcomes such as these is a route worthy of continued exploration and refinement. But, again, the main liability is that such a route will inevitably miss unique features of certain spiritual traditions and/or will overemphasize others, thereby privileging certain traditions and skewing the results.

A second approach is to tradition the measurement of Christian spirituality. Just as many have called for making one’s theological or ecclesial tradition more explicit in integrating Christianity and psychology, it would be sensible to think that measurement of spirituality also needs to occur in a tradition-specific manner. ⁸⁶ This route fits with calls for more contextually situated (emic) measurement methods in psychology of religion and spirituality. ⁸⁷ Of course, particularizing measurement to the nuances of contexts presses deeper questions of psychometrics. For instance, if the best way to accurately measure Pentecostal spirituality is to develop a Pentecostal measure and the best way to accurately measure Benedictine spirituality is to develop a Benedictine measure, what about the distinctions within Pentecostalism and Benedictine spirituality? Do we need a distinct measure for more contemplative and more active Benedictines? Do we need a distinct measure for Holiness Pentecostals and Third-Wave Charismatics? How custom-tailored do we need to get? Moreover, this route of measurement will not help test general hypotheses of Christian formation across traditions. Nonetheless, there is something to be said for valuing the particularities of distinct Christian contexts.

A third obvious route to consider would be a mixed-methods approach to measurement that utilizes a combination of general, ecumenical assessment tools as well as more tradition-specific measurement. For instance, one could easily tailor a self-report measure with special subsections that are validated specifically for Roman Catholic, Protestant, Anglican, or Eastern Orthodox populations. Perhaps other tradition-specific distinctions could be developed as well (e.g., Benedictine, Charismatic, Nazarene, etc.). The obvious benefit of this approach is that it gets the best of both worlds.

A final approach to consider would be measurement based on a meta-theory of the actual dynamics of Christian maturation, giving space to variation and diversity in which the principles inherent in these dynamics might be embodied or expressed in different cultural and social-political contexts. In a previous article, we and our colleagues referred to this as a meta-theory of spiritual change which we described as the “attempt to offer a fairly abstract, higher-level conceptualization of spiritual, characterological, and moral change that could be fleshed out with specific details and emphases according to the particularities of various Christian traditions and denominations. This meta-theory is not so much a particular theology of positive change as it is an attempt to provide an integrative, higher-order framework under which various tradition-specific theologies would fall. We are attempting to operate at the level of genus of which there would be a wide variety of species.” ⁸⁸ The central idea of this approach is that there is a unity to the actual dynamics of Christian maturation which the plurality of Christian spiritualities approximate and embody to varying degrees. That is to say, in the understanding and practice of, for instance, Pentecostal spiritual maturity, Benedictine spiritual maturity, African American spiritual maturity, Southern Baptist spiritual maturity, Ignatian spiritual maturity, and so on, each tradition approximates in varying degrees the larger actuality of Christian maturity. Therefore, the idea is not to look for a common core that distinct spiritual traditions share or to tradition measurement, but rather to look for the actual nature of Christian formation and test for that. This is not to abstract away from the particularities of any one tradition—a view from nowhere—but to develop a particular, situated theory of how Christian maturation occurs and test for maturation on the basis of that theory. It could turn out that this meta-theory appears more Reformed or more Orthodox or more Benedictine, but whatever its contours, the goal of measurement is to assess the conditions and practices that actually lead to growth and those that do not. In this way, measurement is a form of testing theories and hypotheses based on those theories as it often is in other arenas of social-science research.