Recently someone asked me to comment on Facebook on a quotation from a Puritan. I told her I found the quotation troubling enough to make a blog post out of it. Here, finally, is the promised post.
My friend said, “When I read this quote, I thought it was true and couldn’t refute it, which is why I posted it – I thought it was okay. At the same time I had doubts, and that’s why I asked you about it. It’s typical of the preaching I heard in my old church. For many years I primarily read Puritan books like this.”
So what was it? It was a paragraph from a piece called “Seven Inferences from the Great Suffering of Jesus Christ,” by Puritan Thomas Brooks. But before I offer commentary on his work, I’d like to ask you to read it without commentary. (The original was all one paragraph, but I’ve split it into three for easier reading.)
The quotation
Let the sufferings of our Lord Jesus Christ, work us into a gracious willingness to embrace sufferings for His sake, and cheerfully and resolutely to take up His cross and follow Him. Did Christ suffer, who knew no sin—and shall we think it strange to suffer, who know nothing but sin? Shall He lie sweltering under His Father’s wrath—and shall we cry out under men’s anger?
Was He crowned with thorns—and must we be crowned with rose-buds? Was His whole life, from the cradle to the cross, made up of nothing but sorrows and sufferings—and must our lives, from the cradle to the grave, be filled up with nothing but pleasures and delights? Was He despised—and must we be admired? Was He debased—and must we be exalted? Was He poor—and must we be rich? Was He low—and must we be high? Did He drink of a bitter cup, a bloody cup—and must we have only cups of consolation?
Let us not think anything too much to do for Christ, nor anything too great to suffer for Christ, nor anything too dear to part with for such a Christ, such a Savior—who thought nothing too much to do, nor too grievous to suffer—so that He might accomplish the work of our redemption! He left Heaven for us—and shall not we let go of this world for Him? He left his Father’s bosom for us—and shall not we leave the bosoms of our dearest relations for him? He underwent all sorts of sufferings for us—let us as readily encounter with all sorts of sufferings for Him.
Note that it seems evident that Thomas Brooks is talking about the suffering that comes from living for Christ (persecution, leaving relatives, undergoing hardships), rather than suffering because of illness or catastrophe.
Many modern-day Western Christians, the ones who don’t actually undergo a whole lot of suffering, might believe this is an excellent piece to be heartily commended, and might even wonder what my problem is.
But the problem is that while there are Scriptural and good parts to this section, there are also some teachings that can be used insidiously.
So I want to dissect it. I’ll start with the middle paragraph, because that’s the easiest.
***
***
Note: Some of these same concepts are addressed in Untwisting Scriptures that were used to tie you up, gag you, and tangle your mind, in the chapters in which I tackled the topic of giving up your rights.
***
Go here to download your free Guide, How to Enjoy the Bible Again (when you’re ready) After Spiritual Abuse (without feeling guilty or getting triggered out of your mind). You’ll receive access to both print and audio versions of the Guide (audio read by me). I’m praying it will be helpful.
So true: “Christians should help other Christians who are suffering instead of simply telling them to keep suffering.”
This is what I have been thinking for some time, and finally saying it out loud. Both extreme ‘prosperity doctrine’ and extreme ‘misery doctrine’ have caused callousness and indifference. If compassion is not actively practiced, it is always easier to blame suffering people for some sin or lacking on their part, instead of actively praying and helping.
My prayer is to be someone, who would actively seek to be an agent of God’s grace and blessing and treat others the way I woud want to be treated.
This is so important. Thank you, NGI.
I stayed in an abusive marriage way too many years because of the wrong teachings on suffering. You have spoken the truth. May others be freed by it.
I’m so sorry, Amy, and I pray that this will change.
Is not this statement an exaggeration? “Was His whole life, from the cradle to the cross, made up of nothing but sorrows and sufferings?” No, actually the Lord had many ordinary and even pleasant and sometimes joyful moments. And then Brooks uses this false premise to shame those who want something in addition to sorrows and suffering. Indeed, the shaming tone is pervasive in this passage by Brooks with precious little Bible teaching, since I see no quotations from the BIble.
The is another part of the Bible that works against this idea that we should welcome all sufferings. That is the prominence of lamenting in the Bible, including in the Psalms, in the Prophets, and I think even Jesus has some laments in the Gospels.
Yes, excellent. There is so much to refute this wrong theology of suffering.
Jesus had many joyful moments and I believe He enjoyed good fellowship with the boys 🙂
The (too common) thought that He only had trouble and never any happiness is contrary to what we see in the light of the New testament.
I believe the wrong concept comes mainly from the prophecy in Isaiah 53, where He is called the ‘man of sorrows’, but that refers to His suffering and dying for us at the end of His eartly ministry, NOT the over all tone of His life.
Yes, thank you!
Good stuff.
As you shared, Rebecca, there are many who STILL teach that suffering for the sake of suffering is somehow godly. Yet, there were also times recorded in Scripture when Jesus removed Himself from the presence of those who sought to kill Him and laid down His life willingly, but only for an eternal, redemptive purpose.
With regard to how this teaching applies to abuse specifically, some might also appreciate, “Suffering Love: A Redemptive Force or an Enabling One?” which further refutes these types of “worm theology” doctrines.
http://www.hurtbylove.com/love-a-redemptive-force-or-an-enabling-one/
Thank you for identifying the unbalanced teachings of the Puritan!
It sounds like you’ve been exposed to so much bad theology that you automatically read bad theology into whatever people say. Instead of titling it “A small argument with a Puritan about suffering”, you should have titled it “A small argument with myself when I take puritans to mean something other than what they are actually saying”.
But I guess it sells books, even if it’s not an honest representation of the person you’re quoting, so there’s that.
Instead of making ad hominem accusations against me, perhaps you could tell me where my understanding in this post is faulty.
My comment wasn’t ad hominem against you. Do you understand what ad hominem attacks are? My comment was against your false claims about the intent and meaning of what Brooks wrote. If you had simply written that people today can sometimes take words like his in a wrong way or to extreme and unbiblical lengths, and then moved on to potentially false understandings, you would have been fine. Instead your article shows ignorance of Brooks, Puritans in general, and for sure the meaning of what he wrote. You don’t even seem to know the book the quote is from. It’s actually from a book he wrote called, “The Golden Key to Open Hidden Treasures.” I’m guessing the book you refer to is a modern reprint of only a small portion of his actual book.
Help abused women. Use words that Puritans like Brooks wrote, telling us how some might understand them. Tell us how modern ministers sometimes expect wrong things from the abused, enabling abusers. All of that is good. But to attribute your own angst and experience regarding the misuse of suffering to Brooks is wrong. As you correctly noted at first, “ Thomas Brooks is talking about the suffering that comes from living for Christ.”
Brooks is NOT talking about worm theology, or self-effort to accomplish holiness; nor does he suggest we never make a noise when something bad happens. You’re pretty much wrong on everything you are reading into what he says, though much of what you say needs to be said to certain groups. Reading careful 17th century writings as if they mean the same as a lazy 21st century way of speaking is a bad idea. His words flat-out do not mean what you claim.
We ARE Biblically called to embrace suffering for his sake. We ARE called to readily encounter with all sorts of suffering for his sake. It is your lack of understanding that is wrong here, and those you’ve encountered who would suggest bad things to control the abused who are at fault – not the words of Brooks.
Maybe “ad hominem” wasn’t the right term (I thought I knew what it meant, but maybe I don’t, haha). What I was referring to was the conclusion you drew that I wrote this blog post so I could sell books. (That was incorrect, and the income I get from the books I write based on my blog posts–one in 2016 and one in 2021–compared to the hours spent in the work I do is very small indeed.) You’re also reading “angst” into my writing?
However, regarding Thomas Brooks, I receive your rebuke and correction and am willing to allow that perhaps Brooks meant something very different from what his words conveyed to the leaders of this woman’s church (whom she references) and to the woman herself. I will edit the article accordingly. Thank you.
Yeah. That conclusion/insinuation was unwarranted. To be honest, if I’d realized the article was written by a lady I probably wouldn’t have responded. Ladies usually seem to me to be more loose than precise in the way they write and more devotional. I came here from another link and probably wrote that with some angst of my own. Lol. I’m too used to ministers (male) who don’t care enough to get anything right other than what they want to push down others’ throats. You seem to be an honest enough person and didn’t deserve the hostile manner I wrote it in.
I want my writing to be precise, and appreciate when people point out that it isn’t.
I don’t mean that as an insult, BTW. For example, women in abusive churches will probably notice an issue long before a typical man. The man will have his nose in the weeds, examining an individual statement and whether it technically says something wrong; whereas a woman would generally get a quick sense of the potential spirit and flow of attitude towards certain things, this decrying a statement made because she might see how wrongly it would be used and applied because of a wrong focus the church has. Women reading what you wrote (again, IMO) probably aren’t focusing on Brooks’ theology but hearing and knowing the way that ignorant people misuse him and small statements made to justify their doing wrong and bullying others into accepting abusive behavior.
It’s a different way of operating and you’re ministering to people with a different way of looking at it. They’re not concerned with whether technically the statements he made are true in the sense he uses them, with knowledge of his theology and practice, but whether taken alone as a quote they lead to bad behavior by ignorant teachers who jump on statements like this.
Thank you, and that’s true, but I also want to be accurate.
Basically I’m saying I’m guilty of
Proverbs 18:13
13 He that answereth a matter before he heareth it,
it is folly and shame unto him.
I didn’t look closely enough at who you were and what you were about before commenting.
Now this one made me laugh out loud. Truly. God bless you, Matthew.
BTW, I can respect what you’re doing to encourage the abused. It’s needed. I can also respect your attempts to be sure people don’t look at quotes like this and think they ought to enable abusive situations. Many would no doubt use words such as this to wrong ends. It is only the false accusations against Brooks regarding what HE is saying that I have issue with.
I’m editing the article to indicate that this is the way the material is interpreted to be used against the oppressed.
Well, thank you for that.
Codependents have a thing with suffering. We feel like we have to suffer because we deserve it or for the sake of others. We often “stay in harmful situations for far too long.” It can kill a healthy faith and it can kill our ability to suffer in the right ways. I think we all need discernment about which burdens are ours to pick up and which are not, when suffering is merited and when we need to walk away from a situation. When we need to deny ourselves and when it’s ok to nourish ourselves.
Thank you, Rebecca, for analyzing this piece of Puritan writing.
Thank you, David. I’ve seen what looks to me like unquestioning acceptance of the Puritans, almost as if their writings are on the same level as Scripture. But they are not, and their writings deserve (like all of ours) to be held up to the light of God’s Word.