This I know experimentally
And when all my
hopes in them and in all men were gone, so that I had nothing
outwardly to help me, nor could tell what to do, then, Oh then, I
heard a voice which said, 'There is one, even Christ Jesus, that can
speak to thy condition,' and when I heard it my heart did leap for
joy. Then the Lord did let me see why there was none upon the earth
that could speak to my condition, namely, that I might give him all
the glory; for all are concluded under sin, and shut up in unbelief
as I had been, that Jesus Christ might have the preeminence, who
enlightens, and gives grace, and faith, and power. Thus, when God
doth work who shall prevent it? And this I knew experimentally.
George Fox,
1647
This is George Fox's description of the
great opening he had turned him from a seeker to a finder and an
itinerant preacher and so led to the Quaker movement. But I want to
focus today on the last sentence, “And this I knew experimentally.”
If we were to paraphrase this into modern English, it would probably
be rendered, “And this I knew experientially.” I think though
that the older word carries with it some useful associations. In
modern English, to know something experimentally implies some kind of
scientific rigor. We know something because we have conducted
experiments and have demonstrated it. But scientific experiments are
really a formalized method of trial and error. One proposes an idea
and then conducts some experiments to see if the idea is true or not.
This is the heart of the scientific method and seems to us far
removed from spirituality.
I think that for Fox, and anyone who
proposes an experiential theology, as Friends do, the element of
experiment is important. Fox came to his opening only after he had
traveled around seeking out the leading lights of his day. He found
that none of the people who he met could answer the questions in his
soul. He found the answers in an inner voice. He heard this voice,
he identified it as the Inner Christ, and he found confirmation in
that his “soul did leap for joy.”
It does not take a lot of introspection
or experience with people to realize that there are a number of
voices speaking in us at any time. Some Christians will quote
Jeremiah 17:9, “The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond
cure. Who can understand it?” to support their idea that we should
trust only in Scripture, because our own hearts are too unreliable.
There is a useful caution here because there appears to be no limit
to human powers of self-deception. But this is not the end of the
story. Paul says in 1 Corinthians 2:13 “And we speak of these
things in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit.”
How are we to know which is the correct
voice to listen to. In John 10:4-5, Jesus says “the sheep follow
him because they know his voice. They will not follow a stranger,
but they will run from him because do not know the voice of
strangers.” How do we come to know this voice. The short answer
is that we conduct experiments. In Galatians 5:22-23, Paul
identifies the fruits of the Spirit. “By contrast, the fruit of
the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity,
faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.” In Matthew 7:15-17
Jesus instructs his followers to judge people by their fruits.
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but
inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits.
Are grapes gathered from thorns, or figs from thistles? In the same
way, every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad
fruit.” This is actually very sound practical advice and it
applies to both inward and outward prophets. If we hear a voice that
we think might be God's, listen and follow it. Then look at the
results. Does it bring forth, in however small a way, any of the
fruits of the spirit, or does it have the opposite effect? This
provides guidance as to the nature of the voice. So by listening and
observing carefully, one can learn to distinguish the Shepherd's
voice from all others.
Likewise, the journals of Quaker
ministers have many stories of their difficulties in learning when to
speak in meeting. Some, like David Ferris, recount the long periods
of their resistance to the voice prompting them to speak. He reports
that it was the fervent prayers of a traveling minister that enabled
him to break through his resistance. John Woolman, on the other had
recounts a story of when he spoke more than he should have and felt
an inward correction. After anguish and prayer, some weeks later he
was led to speak some words in meeting that gave him peace. “As I
was thus humbled and disciplined under the cross, my understanding
became more strengthened to distinguish the language of the pure
Spirit that inwardly moves upon the heart.” In both cases, there
was an inward prompting or correction. Both people also had
encouragement from their community to pursue greater faithfulness.
This is an experimental approach to religion.
For many people, religion has been
taught as something that they have to accept on authority. Sometimes
it is the authority of a book, be it the Bible, the Koran, or the
Torah. Sometimes it is the authority of a person, be it the Pope, an
evangelist, or a pastor. Sometimes the authority is tradition.
Anyone who teaches that ultimate authority rests with any outward
authority and not with the Spirit as heard in the heart is teaching
something less than the full Christian message. Quakers say that you
can hear God yourself . As Robert Barclay says, “It is the
privilege of the Christian to know the Shepherds voice.”
Learning to know this voice is a process and, as in any learning,
there are bound to be mistakes. Knowing that we are all learning,
we need to be gentle with ourselves and each other when mistakes are
made. But as we progress in our discernment we are able to say, as
George Fox did, “And this I know experimentally.”
Blessings,
Will T
Labels: Christian Education, George Fox, John Woolman