Excerpts from the autobiography of Madam Guyon.

While in Paris, I relaxed and did many things which I should not. I knew the extreme fondness which some had for me, and suffered them to express it without checking it as I ought. I fell into other faults too, as having my neck a little too bare, though not near so much as others had. I plainly saw I was too remiss; and that was my torment. I sought all about for Him who had secretly inflamed my heart. But, alas! hardly anybody knew Him. I cried, “Oh, Thou best beloved of my soul, hadst Thou been near me these disasters had not befallen me.” When I say that I spoke thus to Him, it is but to explain myself. In reality, it all passed almost in silence, for I could not speak. My heart had a language which was carried on without the sound of words, understood of Him, as He understands the language of the Word, which speaks incessantly in the innermost recesses of the soul. Oh, sacred language! Experience only gives the comprehension of it! Let not any think it a barren language, and effect of the mere imagination. Far different—it is the silent expression of the Word in the soul. As He never ceases to speak, so He never ceases to operate. If people once came to know the operations of the Lord, in souls wholly resigned to His guiding, it would fill them with reverential admiration and awe.

I saw that the purity of my state was like to be sullied by too great a commerce with the creatures, so I made haste to finish what detained me in Paris, in order to return to the country. “Tis true, O my Lord, I felt that Thou hadst given me strength enough to avoid the occasions of evil—but when I had so far yielded as to get into them, I found I could not resist the vain complaisances, and a number of other foibles which they ensnared me into.” The pain which I felt after my faults was inexpressible. It was not an anguish that arose from any distinct idea or conception, from any particular motive or affection—but a kind of devouring fire which ceased not, till the fault was consumed and the soul purified. It was a banishment of my soul from the presence of its Beloved. I could have no access to Him, neither could I have any rest out of Him. I knew not what to do. I was like the dove out of the ark, which finding no rest for the soul of her foot, was constrained to return to the ark; but, finding the window shut, could only fly about. In the meantime, through an infidelity which will ever render me culpable, I strove to find some satisfaction without, but could not. This served to convince me of my folly and of the vanity of those pleasures which are called innocent. When I was prevailed on to taste them, I felt a strong repulse which, joined with my remorse for the transgression, changed the diversion into torment. “Oh, my Father,” said I, “this is not Thee; and nothing else, beside Thee, can give solid pleasure.”

One day, as much through unfaithfulness as complaisance, I went to take a walk at some of the public parks, rather from excess of vanity to show myself than to take the pleasure of the place. Oh, my Lord! how didst Thou make me sensible of this fault? But far from punishing me in letting me partake of the amusement, Thou didst it in holding me so close to Thyself, that I could give no attention to anything but my fault and Thy displeasure. After this I was invited with some other ladies to an entertainment at St. Cloud. Through vanity and weak compliance, I yielded and went. The affair was magnificent; they, though wise in the eye of the world, could relish it. I was filled with bitterness. I could eat nothing, I could enjoy nothing. Oh, what tears! For beyond three months my Beloved withdrew His favoring presence, and I could see nothing but an angry God.

I was on this occasion, and in another journey which I took with my husband into Touraine, like those animals destined for slaughter. On certain days people adorn them with greens and flowers, and bring in pomp into the city before they kill them. This weak beauty, on the eve of decline, shone forth with new brightness, in order to become the sooner extinct. I was shortly after afflicted with the smallpox.

One day as I walked to church, followed by a footman I was met by a poor man. I went to give him alms; he thanked me but refused them and then spoke to me in a wonderful manner of God and of divine things. He displayed to me my whole heart, my love to God, my charity, my too great fondness for my beauty and all my faults; he told me it was not enough to avoid Hell, but that the Lord required of me the utmost purity and height of perfection. My heart assented to his reproofs. I heard him with silence and respect, his words penetrated my very soul. When I arrived at the church I fainted away. I have never seen the man since.

I once started to read her book experiencing the depth of Jesus Christ and I can only warn of Madame Guyon. I could not finish it, because it is full of new age thinking and she talks too much of her humility and brokeness. She propagates contemplative prayer as it is practised by catholics and the emergent church.

I know this sounds harsh and we had threads about it before. I may get blasted to bits for this but I do not want to win an argument but my concern is for unsuspecting Christian to be lead astray. I had been led astray by false teaching and I have been backslidded for at least 15 year.

Col 2: 18
Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,
19And not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God.
20Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,
21(Touch not; taste not; handle not;
22Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men?
23Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body: not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh.

She propagates contemplative prayer as it is practised by catholics and the emergent church.

Hopefully a modern translation of her autobiography will come out soon. Reading the early 19th century English is tedious. True, we can read other people’s writings about her – but I believe nothing can compare to reading her own words. Every biographer is going to put some of their own slant into her work, or miss the full impact. Her life story is utterly amazing – especially the depth of her suffering, and the resulting depth of her faith.

PS I am about to read Guyon’s “Experiencing the Depths of Jesus Christ” – and am curious to see why so many heroes of the faith have been touched by her: Wesley, Zinzendorf, Hudson Taylor, and many others.

Diane

From her book "A short and easy method of prayer"

I have mentioned that our direct and principal exercise should consist in the contemplation of the Divine Presence: we should be also exceedingly watchful and diligent in recalling our dissipated senses, as the most easy method of overcoming distractions; for a direct contest and opposition only serves to irritate and augment them; whereas, by sinking down under a sense and perception of a present God, and by simply turning inwards, we wage insensibly a very advantageous, though indirect war with them.

For prayer we look up outside ourselves, not inward.
God is not a "subconscious level" we sink down to. God is a person.

Further in her book she writes

"In speaking of the attainment of perfection, the word Facility is used, because God is indeed found with facility when we seek Him within ourselves."

In her theology she calls everyone including the unconverted to contemplative prayer.

now to the 2nd level, smells almost like freemasonery

"The Second Degree of Prayer
Some call the second degree of prayer, “The Prayer of Contemplation,” “The Prayer of Faith and Stillness,” and others call it, “The Prayer of Simplicity.” I shall here use this latter appellation, as being more just than any of the former, which imply a much more exalted state of prayer than that I am now treating of."

Hello, Hello, huhu, wake up, do not be hypnotized!

God never asks a man to bypass their mind. Never. He always involves man mind, feelings, and will in his interaction with him. He may speak to us in by revelation through is word, yes we may even have an experience as Peter in a trance or Paul. These experiences were never induced by following a method other than by simple communication with God. Prayer is talking to God along his own word, nothing mystic about it. Prayer is a means to meet with God, not a self-deifying mystical practice.

The prophets of Baal induced a trance by dancing around the altar and afflicting themselves. They thought that the more they did to themself the more God (actually Baal) would be obliged to listen. This is the essence of paganism. Elijah prepared and offering and simply waited for God to show up. He obviously did not follow Madam Guyon's book.

Neither did Daniel not David in his prayers.

Sorry, I cannot glean anything from that.

Hi Krispy, I think it was you who once said, would you glean oats from horse dung?

Guyon believed that one should pray all the time, and that in whatever one does, one should be spending time with God.

"Prayer is the key of perfection and of sovereign happiness; it is the efficacious means of getting rid of all vices and of acquiring all virtues; for the way to become perfect is to live in the presence of God. He tells us this Himself: "walk before me, and be thou perfect" Genesis 17:1. Prayer alone can bring you into His presence, and keep you there continually."
From The Short and Easy Method of Prayer

As for eating the fish and spitting the bones....unless you believe you, and you alone, are the one with absolute perfection and all truth then you must do so. Of course most folks believe they are the ones with the most keen ability to determine what is fish and what is bone. Woe unto the one who does not agree with their assesment... regardless of whether their judgement is actually true or not. If they believe it is a bone they will fight to the bitter end for the "principal" of guarding the sheep... when in actuality it is nothing but pride.

The wise judge themselves lest they be judged. The even wiser ask for the judgments of the Lord knowing they can not judge even themselves accurately

If we were as anywhere near spiritually mature as we profess to be then there would be much less judgment on the writings of others... a LOT more introspective quietness knowing that we will one day give account to God for EVERY idle word. Maybe..just maybe... someone might just by some possibility have gleaned a truth from God that we are unfamiliar with... and in fact even adverse to because of our prejudices. However, if we walk in this continual pride we will ever be blind to growing beyond the limitations we are now under.

Solomon101 wrote:
The wise judge themselves lest they be judged. The even wiser ask for the judgments of the Lord knowing they can not judge even themselves accurately

Solomon101 wrote:
If we were as anywhere near spiritually mature as we profess to be then there would be much less judgment on the writings of others... a LOT more introspective quietness knowing that we will one day give account to God for EVERY idle word.

God bless,
Lisa

I own the book "Experiencing the Depths of Jesus Christ", which was systematically burned in France by the ecclesiastical authorities and its author, Jean Guyon, imprisoned. It is remarkably simple and straightforward and bespeaks of an intimacy with Christ I can only dream of. Perhaps this is why Satan hated it so. There is much to glean from the book's simplicity, as the author constantly points to a childlike worship and trust in the Living God who dwells within the believer, and not in some extraneous, invisible vacuum of space above the stratosphere. Because of this, many evangelicals have unfairly dismissed the writings of Guyon and Brother Lawrence and Fenlon as heretical mystics, and though I own both the autobiography of Guyon and the book already mentioned, I have not found any glaring heresy - other than the teachings of the religious system she affiliated herself with, who, ironically was bent on silencing her.

Amen Frank. I am an ex-Roman Catholic myself. You know you're in touch with God when the RCC burns your writings and throws you in prison. Another extremely interesting character was Girolamo Savanarola, a 15th century Dominican friar who began preaching against the corruption of the RCC clergy, and whose street ministry sparked a pre-reformation awakening of righteousness and Holy Spirit conviction. He pre-dated Luther. The RCC burnt him at the stake in 1498 when it could take no more. He was an amazing character. It seems he was sort of an early Roman Catholic version of George Whitefield.

I think I recall Ravenhill referencing him somewhere in "Why Revival Tarries".

Krispy and Narrowpath, If I were to make a hunch based on what you say, I’d hunch that neither of you have read Guyon’s autobiography! Am I hunching right?

It's just that it seems you are assessing her based on something completely apart from her - what you identify her with.

Diane

Enough to know that I am not interested in "gleaning" anything theological from her.

It’s fascinating how different people glean different things. I admit, I had no idea what to expect when I launched into her story. But what I did see was evidence of fruit of the Spirit. She knew the God of scripture, although she did not have the evangelical lingo that has developed since her time. I could she that was not a theologian, like Luther. Her ideas arose out of her own experiences with man and God – over the course of time. She sounds like a Hebrews 12 testimony. She understandably concluded that suffering (yet not acetism) was a way to know God intimately. I am tempted to challenge that view, yet I wonder how our Christians today would fair under the same kind of suffering she endured. Would they come out as humble and submissive in nature? Would they persist in loving God when life turns against them?

Mind you, I think Luther could have benefited from her story. That may have kept him from getting crusty in his later years – even to condoning the massacre of many Jews (which makes him a devil to many). By the same token, I think the evangelical wing would do well to take a humble approach towards her. Some of their own blind spots are her very strengths – even as the reverse may be true.

In my own church background, one’s spiritual authenticity is highly associated with consent to certain propositional truths. Guyon did not have all those propositional truths lined up as we have today. But, still it seems to be a significant leap to read her as a devil from Babylon – by extracting various statements!

Guyon is a reminder that even in the midst of pervasive religious oppression and ignorance, God can touch down on a life and carry it through some of the worst hostilities imaginable. I was deeply encouraged in spirit by her story - something I did not expect. God is "increased" and I am "decreased".

Diane

Thanks Brothertom,

To the rest of those who hold her in esteem, I have said what I needed to say, it is neccessary to content for true doctrine. Honestly, it does not cause me joy and satisfaction to write these things. My concern is for the souls of those who can be may astray and I have seen many falling away.

The fact that some great saints of the past endorse her does not matter to me. I find her theolgogy very whacky and mystical, I was grieved in my spirit when I read her book.

We cannot take the fact that she was persecuted as qualifiying criteria for her doctrinal soundness.

She does not give a proper presentation of the gospel of Christ, read for yourselves:

from A Short & Very Easy
Method of Prayer

C H A P T E R XI.
ON PERFECT CONVERSION.
"Turn ye unto Him from whom the children of Israel have so deeply revolted." (Isa. xxxi. 6.) Conversion is nothing more than turning from the creature in order to return to God.

It is not perfect (however good and essential to salvation) when it consists simply in turning from sin to grace. To be complete, it should take place from without inwardly.

When the soul is once turned toward God, it finds a wonderful facility in continuing steadfast in conversion; and the longer it remains thus converted, the nearer it approaches and the more firmly it adheres to God; and the nearer it draws to Him, it is of necessity the farther removed from the creature, which is so contrary to Him; so that it is so effectually established in conversion, that the state becomes habitual, and as it were natural.

Now, we must not suppose that this is effected by a violent exertion of its own powers; for it is not capable of, nor should it attempt any other co-operation with divine grace, than that of endeavoring to withdraw itself from external objects, and to turn inwards; after which it has nothing farther to do, than to continue firm in its adherence to God.

2. GOD has an attractive virtue which draws the soul more and more powerfully to Himself, and in attracting, He purifies; just as it is with a gross vapor exhaled by the sun, which, as it gradually ascends, is rarified and rendered pure; the vapor, indeed, contributes to its ascent only by its passivity; but the soul co-operates freely and voluntarily.

This kind of introversion is very easy and advances the soul naturally, and without effort, because God is our centre. The centre always exerts a very powerful attractive virtue; and the more spiritual and exalted it is, the more violent and irresistible are its attractions.

3. But besides the attracting virtue of the centre, there is, in every creature, a strong tendency to reunion with its centre, which is vigorous and active in proportion to the spirituality and perfection of the subject.

As soon as anything is turned towards its centre, it is precipitated towards it with extreme rapidity, unless it be withheld by some invincible obstacle. A stone held in the hand is no sooner disengaged than by its own weight it falls to the earth as to its centre; so also water and fire, when unobstructed, flow incessantly towards their centre. Now, when the soul by its efforts to recollect itself, is brought into the influence of the central tendency, it falls gradually, without any other force than the weight of love, into its proper centre; and the more passive and tranquil it remains, and the freer from self-motion, the more rapidly it advances, because the energy of the central attractive virtue is unobstructed, and has full liberty for action.

4. All our care should therefore be directed towards acquiring the greatest degree of inward recollection; nor should we be discouraged by the difficulties we encounter in this exercise, which will soon be recompensed on the part of God, by such abundant supplies of grace, as will render it perfectly easy, provided we are faithful in meekly withdrawing our hearts from outward distractions and occupations, and returning to our centre, with affections full of tenderness and serenity. When at any time the passions are turbulent, a gentle retreat inwards to a present God, easily deadens them; any other way of opposing rather irritates than appeases them.

I can imagine when she left this life she was embraced by her Savior as she entered into Eternity with Him.

I cant imagine Him going over all the points that is written here about her first, second or third.

No, it was a union of love and what matters more than love for our Savior and His love for us. Nothing at all.

Narrowpath,

Thank you for these refreshing quotations. It restored my soul just reading them. It reminds me of the writings of William Law one of my favorite authors about the life hid with Christ in God an expression guyon also uses in her writings. So far all that was written to criticise this dear saint reflects nothing but ignorance and lack of spiritual understaning.

If any one has not experienced the life hid with Christ in God, and longs despreratly after this life, how can such claim to be saved?

For those who are confused by many false accusations made about this saint, perhaps this quotation by her could answer the following questions.

What was the gospel she believed in?

What did she mean by finding inwardly what we can not find outwardly?
Was that " eastern mysticism " or was it a refrence to searching the heart for the image of God that can be restored to the creature through faith in Christ rather than the outward austerities and practices.

And finally, Why did the Catholic church persecute her?

Hope this solves some grievous misunderstanings.

The quotation begins here,

""This divine wisdom is unknown, even to those who pass in the world for persons of extraordinary illumination and knowledge. To whom then is she known, and who can tell us any tidings concerning her? Destruction and death assure us, that they have heard with their ears of her fame and renown. It is, then, in dying to all things, and in being truly lost to them, passing forward into God, and existing only in Him, that we attain to some knowledge of the true wisdom. Oh, how little are her ways known, and her dealings with her most chosen servants. Scarce do we discover anything thereof, but surprised at the dissimilitude betwixt the truth we thus discover and our former ideas of it, we cry out with St. Paul, “Oh, the depth of the knowledge and wisdom of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out.” The Lord judgeth not of things as men do, who call good evil and evil good, and account that as righteousness which is abominable in His sight, and which according to the prophet He regards as filthy rags. He will enter into strict judgment with these self-righteous, and they shall, like the Pharisees, be rather subjects of His wrath, than objects of His love, or inheritors of His rewards. Doth not Christ Himself assure us, that “except our righteousness exceed that of the scribes and pharisees we shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.” And which of us even approaches them in righteousness; or, if we live in the practice of virtues, though much inferior to theirs, are we not tenfold more ostentatious? Who is not pleased to behold himself righteous in his own eyes, and in the eyes of others? or, who is it that doubts that such righteousness is sufficient to please God? Yet, we see the indignation of our Lord manifested against such. He who was the perfect pattern of tenderness and meekness, such as flowed from the depth of the heart, and not that affected meekness, which under the form of a dove, hides the hawk’s heart. He appears severe only to these self-righteous people, and He publicly dishonored them. In what strange colors does He represent them, while He beholds the poor sinner with mercy, compassion and love, and declares that for them only He was come, that it was the sick who needed the physician; and that He came only to save the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

O thou Source of Love! Thou dost indeed seem so jealous of the salvation Thou hast purchased, that Thou dost prefer the sinner to the righteous! The poor sinner beholds himself vile and wretched, is in a manner constrained to detest himself; and finding his state so horrible, casts himself in his desperation into the arms of his Saviour, and plunges into the healing fountain, and comes forth “white as wool.” Then confounded at the review of his disordered state, and overflowing with love for Him, who having alone the power, had also the compassion to save him—the excess of his love is proportioned to the enormity of his crimes, and the fullness of his gratitude to the extent of the debt remitted. The self-righteous, relying on the many good works he imagines he has performed, seems to hold salvation in his own hand, and considers Heaven as a just reward of his merits. In the bitterness of his zeal he exclaims against all sinners, and represents the gates of mercy as barred against them, and Heaven as a place to which they have no claim. What need have such self-righteous persons of a Saviour? they are already burdened with the load of their own merits. Oh, how long they bear the flattering load, while sinners divested of everything, fly rapidly on the wings of faith and love into their Saviour’s arms, who freely bestows on them that which he has so freely promised!

How full of self-love are the self-righteous, and how void of the love of God! They esteem and admire themselves in their works of righteousness, which they suppose to be a fountain of happiness. These works are no sooner exposed to the Sun of Righteousness, than they discover all to be so full of impurity and baseness, that it frets them to the heart. Meanwhile the poor sinner, Magdalene, is pardoned because she loves much, and her faith and love are accepted as righteousness. The inspired Paul, who so well understood these great truths and so fully investigated them, assures us that “the faith of Abraham was imputed to him for righteousness.” This is truly beautiful for it is certain that all of that holy patriarch’s actions were strictly righteous; yet, not seeing them as such, and being devoid of the love of them, and divested of selfishness, his faith was founded on the coming Christ. He hoped in Him even against hope itself, and this was imputed to him for righteousness, (Rom. 4:18, 22,) a pure, simple and genuine righteousness, wrought by Christ, and not a righteousness wrought by himself, and regarded as of himself.

You may imagine this a digression wide of the subject, but it leads insensibly to it. It shows that God accomplishes His work either in converted sinners, whose past iniquities serve as a counterpoise to their elevation, or in persons whose self-righteousness He destroys, by totally overthrowing the proud building they had reared on a sandy foundation, instead of the Rock— Christ.""

I just wanted to give a warning here for those who do not believe in the indwelling on the Holy Spirit in the believer, also called " the Baptism of the Holy Spirit" you will find Madam Guyon's writings mystic and difficult to understand. It will be like trying to describe a beautiful sunset to a blind man.

The other issue about her being a Maryist to the end of her life. That is understandable considering her background. This maybe a shocking truth to some but God is not too concerned about changing our denominations or minor beliefs as much as He is about a heart relationship with Him.
One of the greatest books i have ever read was written by a Chatholic and titled "As By a New Pentecost" that talked about an event called "The Daquesne Weekend" that marked the beginning of the Catholic Carismatic movement where a bunch of Catholic students were baptised with the Holy Spirit.
I do not doubt the genuiness of it although almost all continued to be Catholic and retained their beliefs about Mary. In fact the baptism in many ways enforced their Catholocism in that it brought the sacraments to life and they considerd Mary a type of every Spirit baptised believer, her Magnificant his or her motto.

I do not say this to belittle doctrine but what I see in Christendome is a fulfillment of the fortold prophecy of our Lord that people will kill you believing that they are doing God a favor.

We may try to brush this off attributing its fulfillment to Muslims persecuting Christians in other countries or the persectution of the last day, but if we are honest we can easily see that its fulfillment had aften been and still is within Christendome.

krispy,

If you believe in the indwelling of the Holy Spirit then the warning is not for you.

Pure and simple.

Then perhaps you and I are talking about two different things, while people may receive the Spirit in different ways yet there are common factors that involved in every single genuine Holy Spirit baptism.

1) The love of God poured in the heart in great measure.
2) Love for Christ and great appreciation in His work.
3) Great burden for the lost.
4) Boldness in witnessing.
5) Effectivness in witnessing and ability to communicate spiritual truth with the lost without scheming or preparing.
5) Ease in and great desire for prayer where communion with God becomes unbroken.
6) Things of the earth becomes dim and ceacing of personal ambition.

In all, great joy, love, peace, and all the fruits of the Spirit not the person trying to force them out or manifactoring them but they come out with natural flow.

This is the baptism of the spirit Iam talking about. I know for sure that not everyone here has it, or rather have Him. In fact, very very few people do.

"On January 1, 1739, John and Charles Wesley, George Whitefield and Benjamin Ingham attended a love feast held at Fetter Lane in London. Whitefield had been a Holy Club member at Oxford. At Fetter Lane, the Wesley brothers, Whitefield and Ingham ‘fellowshipped in the Spirit’. John wrote of the incident that followed in his Journal. He wrote,

“At about three in the morning, as we were continuing instant in prayer, the power of God came mightily upon us insomuch that many cried out for exceeding joy and many fell down to the ground. As soon as we were recovered a little from that awe and amazement at the presence of His majesty, we broke out with one voice, ‘We praise Thee, O God, we acknowledge Thee to be the Lord.’”

KRISPY STATED TO UNTOBABES- "That comment was very condescending". and "do you realize how arrogant that sounds?", and then threatens, "Be careful how you respond to my statement".

I RESPOND- I think she meant to differentiate between those who embrace the "baptism in the Holy Spirit" and accompanying experiences with those who have not received it and do not embrace it. I think that is clear because she stated "Baptism in the Holy Spirit". Of course I agree with you, and am sure UntoBabes...and everyone here... understands that the Holy Spirit comes to live INSIDE a person at at the time of a true conversion experience. However, those are two entirely different experiences. That's why it seems she clearly did not mean it as you took it. I think you probably knew that already though.

The lady started a thread with the intent of blessing others and possibly discussing with some how they have grown from the writings of Madam Guyon. How foolish of her!!! You can't do that on the forums! We have people that want to argue about virtually everything and willingly hijack threads and turn them into disputes that simply turn everyones elses stomach. They can not let an opportunity pass to jump in and throw stones at someone. They do it virtually every time!

If you want to "bash" someone you admittedly know very little about.. you said you mostly knew about Guyon only from others...that's not the way you, or any of us, want to be treated is it? You know that old thing about, "doing unto others as we would have them do unto us"...God really meant it.

It would be nice if untobabes could have this thread left alone so she or others could discuss it without having a blitz of critics wrecking their ability to do so. If you want to bash her then go start a "Madame Guyon Bashing Thread" and have at it! No one will care. I won't post on it to defend her...that would be hijacking your thread.

Really... please have manners and class. Don't hijack this and every thread and turn it into an argument . It happens far, far to often. I have been considering never visiting here again for that very reason. You can not have virtually any discussion without a self appointed "expert" jumping in, hijacking the thread and turning it into an argument. The moderators have posted several threads that showed a dismay at this same thing recently.

By the way.... before you continue accusing those who taught about "looking inward" in prayer you might be wise to first do a good bit of Biblical research on it. At least if you want to know the full truth and not only what you know as the truth today. WHERE does the balance (as in ALL New Testament) scripture say The Holy Spirit and Jesus reside? Where is Jesus temple now? What is the hope of glory? Does Jesus truly live IN our hearts? Didn't you take great offense when it was implied the Holy Spirit might not be IN some people on the forum ( a misunderstanding addressed in the beginning of the post). You will be surprised to find the answers to these questions if you honestly search them out. If you will , as Greg has said, "Play the ball .. not the man".

Many have found that it was not Guyon's theology that was so inferior as that her relationship with Christ was so much more intimate than theirs it brought them under conviction. Rather than asking why their relationship was lesser and taking steps to change that they simply took the easy route and attacked her. Fix ourselves first. Pull the log out of our own eye first.

Seems there are a great many loggers around that are far, far more concerned with the sawdust in another's eyes.

I really like what you are saying Solomon. I don't know much about Ms Guyon but have always respected references to her because so many books I have read held her in high regard.

It makes me think of Phil 2:3 "let every man esteem others as greater than ourselves". When we approach others from our "lofty" place of "know it all", "been there done that bought the hat", we really miss a chance to grow in grace and the knowledge, and lowliness, of our Lord Jesus.

Russell

Thank you Solomon for this word.

Many in Christendome hate any one who embraces suffering as a path to sanctification and Guyon has obviously emphasized that aspect as much as the Apostles did.I believe that is the main thing that offends people, but think I will take your advice and resign here. That is really what I wished from the beginning.

God bless you brother.

In response to you UntoBabes. Following your comments on suffering. Richard Wurmbrand wrote things that even he thought were "out there" but he said I wrote them as it was, and as we thought, and experienced at the times of torture, so that others could see the truth and depths of Christ.

I am sure we "under-value" character wrought through suffering.

Russell

If folks would actually read Guyon's works with an open mind before they rush to judgements I think much of the controversy would evaporate. However, isn't that true in a great many other endeavors as well?

Imagine - there will no doubt be some in heaven who hold to dispensationalism!

In all seriousness, it is easy to see blind spots of another denomination while overlooking or diminishing our own. Thankfully God knows the heart. I appreciate Guyon because that is just what she had: a heart deeply surrendered to Jesus Christ. I think one would have to superimpose something else onto her words to perceive otherwise.

But then again, there is a legitimate reason for concern. Many of our wonderful biblical terms have taken on new meanings when in the hands of unbelievers - be they apostates, new agers, liberals, conservatives, etc. And then faith means something different, Jesus is someone different, sin is something different, contemplation is something different… salvation is something different..

I wonder what there is about Guyon’s writings that might lead to such a suspicion. I haven’t seen any reason for suspicion yet – other than the significant distant in time and cumbersome quality of the old English. We don’t use a lot of words she uses. English has changed a lot since her story was translated. Also, in her day there was no such thing as evangelicalism as we know it, so we surely can’t expect her to talk our kind of lingo.

I just re-read her “Short and Easy Method of Prayer”, this time purposely sifting for theological flaws. I still say she’s rather on target – as far as an understanding the dynamics of communion with God. It’s mystical – but the right kind of mysticism – the kind that is dreadfully lacking in evangelicalism.

As far as the movement or methods she created -I know little about that, but if I consider the demise of virtually every movement that has ever existed in Christianity - I would not doubt that her's befell the same fate.

Diane

A statement I have been meditating on recently says..

"What looks good on earth looks very different in heaven. What makes you a king here will often be a stumbling block to keep you from being a king there. God has a different set of history books than those we keep on earth".

It seems a certainty that we will all be very , very surprised by who we actually see in heaven. We will quite possibly be just as surprised by those who are not there that were sure would be. We only see the outward. God sees the heart. That heart may be very different in His all knowing gaze than in our limited ability to see through a glass darkly.A persons actions do not always reveal the inner man. Many do good deeds for evil motives. Paul said some even preached the Gospel in his day just to irritate him!

Good thoughts for me to ponder coming out on several posts. Thanks guys and girls.

Krispy said:

You can not ignore the Bible just because you FEEL sympathy for someone who suffers for what they believe in.

Krispy, Surely no one here would disagree with you! I just don’t understand why, at this point, there is a need to suggest that empathy (or sympathy) might mean ignoring scripture. Why should people be suspiciously guilty of biblical violation if they FEEL for Catholic martyrs? And why should people like Guyon be guilty by association – with the Catholic Church. There was no other church in her day, and everybody was Catholic.

I am reminded of the Hebrides revival of 1948: The conservative pastors condemned the revival based on association: It was happening in the liberal churches – and no good thing could possibly come out of there. Had the ministers taken more time to check it out, they would have discovered that their prayers were indeed being answered – even if in the “enemy” denomination.

Krispy, I'm not sure if I'm reading you right. Still, I hope you return, because you have a gift for keeping threads alive – and lively!

Diane

We know that Madame Guyon's writings had a deep spiritual impact on the lives and ministries of many of the saints that preached the cross as the way to union with God and fruitfulness. One of these dear saints was Jessie Penn Lewis who wrote about how Guyon's teaching on the cross reveloutionized her life and ministry.

"Let me, as I close, just give a word of personal experience. I was quite a babe in the consecrated life when God began to teach me these things. I remember once I was utterly sick with the joy of being used by Him to win one soul. The joy was so great that I said, "Oh Lord, I really cannot bear it"! He said so softly in reply, "How could you bear to be used to win five hundred?" And then He said, "Will you part with all that keen 'joy' which exhausts you, and just let me have you and use you to others with nothing for yourself?" I saw the wisdom of this, and said, Yes, Lord, and then found that I could go through marvellous scenes of blessing to others, which once would have quite overwhelmed me with 'joy', without any exhaustion of my fragile frame! The secret of a fruitful life is, in brief, to pour out to others and want nothing for yourself; to leave yourself utterly in the hands of God, and not care what happens to you. I owe also a good deal to the books of Madame Guyon, and the way she showed the path to the life in God. The first time I read her life it deeply moved me. I was at the vicarage at Richmond (Surrey) in Mrs. Evan Hopkins' room. I was quite a young Christian. I had never heard of Madame Guyon, but in that room I picked up her Life, and asked if I might have it to read. I was just at the height of a glorious experience of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. The glory of the Lord's conscious presence with me was so unspeakably sweet that it was most difficult to bring the mind to the ordinary affairs of life. But as I read the book, I clearly saw the way of the Cross, and all that it would mean. At first I flung the book away, and said, No! I will not go that path, I shall lose my 'glory' experience.

But the next day I picked it up again, and the Lord whispered so gently, "If you want deep life and unbroken communion with God, this is the way". I thought, Shall I? No! And again I put the book away. The third day I again picked it up. Once more the Lord spoke"If you want fruit, this is the path! I will not take the conscious joylife from you, you may keep it if you like; but it is either that for yourself, or this and fruit. Which will you have?" And then, by His grace, I said "I choose the path of death for fruitfulness", and every bit of conscious experience closed. I walked for a time in such complete darkness-what Guyon describes as the 'darkness' of faiththat it seemed as if God did not exist. Again by His grace I said "Yes, I have only got what I agreed to", and on I went. I did not know what the outcome of this would be until I went to take some meetings, and then I saw the 'fruit'. It was just as if the people had been soaked in a life tide from heaven! It was not a case of individual blessing-the people were all submerged in a flood-tide of life from God which quickened them, released them, and brought them out into a new life. I did not need to speak personally to them. There seemed nothing to do, but to give the message as God gave it to me, and the Holy Ghost did the rest. From that hour I understood, and knew intelligently, that it was 'dying' and not 'doing', that produced spiritual fruit. May God open our eyes to see the path, and to consent to follow Christ in His call to go with Him into the earth to die and thus bring forth fruit that shall remain for eternity."

From "The Centrality of the Cross" by Jessie Penn Lewis.

If we would only judge ourselves, we would be too busy to find fault with other saints who have been used a hundred thousand times more for Jesus Christ than we ever will be. It's so easy to sit in our comfortable chairs and press a button that instantly "submits" an accusation, a criticism, an anathematizing missle. If only our eyes could be opened to see how these missles turn back around on ourselves and damage our own walks. This is why many of us have no life, no grace to overcome sin, no authority, no love, no humility or meekness, no heart purity or life-transforming unction in our own walks or in Christian ministry. We secretly harbor personal ambition in the forums, doctrinal agendas, the honor of men, the applause of the theologically astute.

Many of us writing these things are enslaved to internet pornography, we lust with our eyes in public, we secretly have issues with God because of unanswered prayer. Since there is no passion in discussing the lovely things of God that promote divine humility and pure exhaltation of Christ, we gloat over topics that tear down saints who joyfully had what we cannot have.

I realise this is a hard word, but it is truth, and if I sought to win your respect and honor, I would cease to be a servant of God and an effective moderator. I am not judging anyone's salvation on SermonIndex, but I have noticed reoccuring bad fruit. Please examine yourselves. You do not have to agree with Mde Guyon, or me, or anyone for that matter. But you should do it in a way that preseves your godly integrity and seeks to preserve the peaceable bond of charity. Others are watching.

*EDIT (12/21/2011): This was in response to a post that was deleted by its author.

Steve, when you give your opinion, you've made a judgment whether you see it that way or not. You've made about 7429 judgments so far in this forum, the way I judge it :)

Brother, you don't always have to be a lightning rod, you don't always have to attract a firestorm of attention to yourself. When you make a stalwart, dissenting judgment on a person like Guyon or Wesley or whomever, you're going to bring down heat. And you know this very well.

As for me not meeting 99% of the people here, of course, you are right. But why even go there? Did Paul the Apostle have to meet the Cornithians in the flesh to rightfully establish his conviction that they were carnal? No, he knew from the reports of what he read that there was bickering, factions, flesh...and he judged the whole in the spirit as God authorized. We are not to judge according to the outward appearance, which makes me glad actually that I have not met anyone from here (other than Greg Gordon) face-to-face. All we need to do is read the daily report.

And the report is a preponderance of striving, accusing, criticising. The person who engages regularly (after reading enough reports, you begin to pick up the patterns) in debates, strife and contentions usually does it because of a deeper issue, a discontentment with their own identity in Christ. It's a stronghold. They thrive off all the attention, off getting a rise from others, and they pride themselves with being fearless enough to speak the plain truth where others would shy away because of political correctness. But it's all a facade to those who can discern, and it bespeaks of a life out-of-kilter. I'm not saying this is you, brother; if you chose to own it it is your business. I don't know you, never met you, can't see into your heart -- or anyone else's for that matter.

Brother, I just read the report. My ministry here is to moderate, and what is moderation but balance? The imbalanced person is fixated on drawing attention to his or herself as they go to an extreme. In other words, they purposefully protrude to tempt the lightning.

Compare this protrusion with Paul's exhortation of meekness in I Thess 4:11: "Study to be quiet and to do your own business." Let everyone on SI earnestly heed this direction, and seek God for more grace to "study" meekness and refrain our tongues from castigating the differing views of other believers.

"Who is a wise man and endued with knowledge among you? let him shew out of a good conversation his works with meekness of wisdom. But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth. This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish. For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work. But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy. And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of them that make peace." (James 3:13-18)

In my observation of people, what they like and do not like it becomes very obvious not all like, enjoy or appreciate the same thing. Even when it comes to preachers, writers or ordinary individuals. Some are more passive, others are more aggressive and most fall in the middle between these two extremes.

We are not all made alike. Some are the eye, some are the feet, the liver, the ear, the appendix - all have different functions but all are essential for the life of the body, even those parts that do not seem to be necessary. So it is with the body of Believers - God placed them in the body for our edification. 1Corinthians 12, 14.

Having said all this, Jesus warns us of tares in Matthew 13: they look like wheat but are hard to discern until the fruit matures. To root them out before harvest means you will destroy the wheat as well. Now in life who are the tares? the wheat? Is my well-being dependent upon a tare next to me? But who is the tare?

In this discussion of Madame Guyton, I see where some love her and others raise red flags. This variety of opinions exist for other church leaders, be they Martin Luther, Martin Luther King,Jr., Calvin Zwingli, John Calvin, etc. Most historians will agree they have contributed to man's freedoms. But in God's eyes, did they? How did they stand before God? These people are all dead and buried and have to answer to God. We cannot change that. This business belongs to God.

May I suggest that we look to the WORD and allow it to be the final authority for life and if there are some who appreciate Guyton, so be it, but if you do, also recognize that the brother or sister who does not may have legitimate reasons for their opinion? Is this too much to ask?

You do not have to agree with Mde Guyon, or me, or anyone for that matter .

What a revelation! It’s liberating! Actually, while I was on a walk today, I had an “aha” moment – a revelation that arose out of this very thread. It relates to what Brother Gordon is saying here.

It was this: God’s ability to use a writer is not necessarily contingent on that person’s merit or lack thereof. God is not bound by it. So if a brother or sister gets absolutely nothing out of Guyon, it is not for me to question or judge that. I should graciously accept that! If God uses her in MY life, that doesn’t mean others must find her equally inspiring. And regarding any author or whatever- I have no right judge others as inferior just because they get nothing out of something that is dear to me. Conversely, if I get nothing out of an author, but the other person does, I have no right to mock that person’s judgment - based on my OWN subjective experience with that author.

This is not about relativism - which asserts that I have my truth, you have your truth, and each is true for us. It is about surrendering the obsessive need to form a value judgment on everything and everyone. That is not necessary. God is the judge; so we can give up that "calling". And he uses cracked pots anyway.

That may not sound particularly clever – but for me, this is a big moment in my faith journey. When I wrote my earlier posts, I was not in this space – not at all. And now I regret some of my comments.

Praise God for a place to wrestle out these things. Praise God for the untidiness of it all. Surprising discoveries come out of it – for the glory of God.

Diane