Spiritual Development According to M. Scott Peck.

We've discussed stages of spiritual development before. And now I want to tell you what I've learned from M. Scott Peck.¹ His stages are a delicious mix of Fowler, Jung, and a hint of gnosis and mysticism, but well blended with years of psychotherapy experience. Or, Dr. Peck's stages of spiritual development are more of a simplification of Fowler, with somewhat of a grounding in Jung (who laboriously studied the ancient gnosis approach to mental healing), and is forged from his own study and experience.

Peck begins his section on spiritual development this way: “Our unique human capacity for change and transformation is reflected in our human spirituality.”² If we turn this statement around, then our spirituality mirrors our capacity for change and transformation. Spirituality is then an indicator of transformability, or it is an index of our transformation. Bear in mind that transformation, for Peck, is healing, and healing is salvation. In Christian parlance, this transformation is a journey toward Christ-likeness. But for Peck it is more than most Christians would expect. That's because Peck defines spiritual healing as an inner, rather than an outer change. And he expects it to take time, and to be difficult. This agrees with the wisdom of at least three thousand years of humanity's search for truth.

The first of four stages of growth Peck labels “chaotic/antisocial.” Estimating that this group includes about twenty percent of the population, Peck describes this group as “utterly unprincipled” and absent of any spirituality. He calls them antisocial because he says that all of their relationships are self-serving. They are chaotic, he says, because they have no governor other than their own will. Those Christians who would later get labeled with the pejorative of “gnostic,” called this group the Hylics. They are materially bound and focused on creature comforts. They are unable get control of their behavior and are constantly in disarray. However, some may gain enough self control to gain high position in business or government, but they are still self-serving. It is only when they realize and admit the utter chaos of their being and cry out for deliverance, that they are able to seek help and accept the discipline of Stage Two.

Peck calls his second developmental stage “formal/institutional.” If you are familiar with James Fowler's Stages of Faith, then you might recognize this as similar to Fowler's Stage Three, which he calls “Synthetic-Conventional.” Peck calls this stage “institutional” because the people here are dependent upon an institution. Whether church, military service, or even prison, people at this stage need formal governance to pull them out of, and to keep them from falling back into the chaos of the previous stage. Also, Peck points out that people of this stage tend to think of God as out-there. Their paternalistic god is “a giant benevolent cop in the sky. This description shares some relationship to the Gnostic's Psychics who were followers of Law and could understand the cosmos (and God) only intellectually. Valentinus, for example, taught that St. Paul intended Psychic when he wrote Jew, and Pneumatics when he wrote Gentile. Pneumatic were, of course, those who sought gnosis and mysticism (see Stage Four below).

The third stage, Peck calls “skeptic/individual.” Again, this matches somewhat with Fowler's Stage Four. It is the stage that I call Wilderness. Peck includes scientifically minded folk in this stage because they are skeptical and seek out answers rather than accept what is given them. However, he points out that a scientist, for example, who sticks to his focused area of study, refusing to grope outside of the well settled and known, is not in this stage but in Stage Two. Skepticism of the institutions of others, while hiding behind the walls of one's own formalities, is not Stage Three, but Two. Stage Three people seek Truth, and if they continue to seek it, they will eventually find it. That is, when they find enough pieces of Truth to glimpse the big picture, they begin to realize that the myths that Stage Two take literally, actually can fit reality and they begin moving on to Stage Four.

Peck's last and fourth stage he calls “”mystical/communal.” While he recognizes that “mystical” has a pejorative connotation in our culture, he uses the word because mystics are recognized as those who are able to see the “cohesion beneath the surface of things.” The mystical view recognizes the interconnectedness between persons, and between people and the rest of creation. But most important to this group and its name, is that mystical has the word mystery at its root. Stage Four mystics are not only fond of solving mysteries, but they are comfortable in a world of mystery. This is important because it separates this group from all others. Stage One folk live in chaos, but are not at all comfortable with mystery. People of Stage Two define away, and build structures around all mystery. Both religious and scientific Stage Two people claim adamantly that all mystery is solved, or it soon will be. While Stage Three members are skeptical of mystery, but also of formality and institutions. And so, Stage Four recognizes both the mystery and the commonality of all creation. This stage seems similar to the group that the ancient gnostics called Pneumatics or spiritual.

Peck admits that there may be something beyond his final stage. Fowler's Stage Five is rather similar to Peck's Stage Four. But Peck's Four seems also to include some of Fowler's Stage Six. Peck ends the chapter with a quote from Paul Vitz saying that: “What Scotty calls Stage Four is the beginning.”

Some who find this essay on M. Scott Peck's definition of spirituality will likely cast it aside as some Christians do with Peck and his teachings. They might point out that Peck failed to live up to his own standards; and they would be correct. However, the draw for me to Peck's writings is not their absolute correctness, proved by the perfect example of the author's life. Instead, they show what one man learned from his many studies and experiences. Failure is often the best teacher. I no longer trust the counsel of those who have not learned from failure, or refuse to admit their own. From my own experience, and from Peck, I've learned that failure to admit and to learn from one's failures is the greatest barrier to spiritual growth and transformation.

Bookmark/Search this post with: