Book Briefs: “Spurgeon’s Sorrows: Realistic Hope for those who Suffer from Depression” by Zack Eswine

Spurgeon's Sorrows by Zack EswineChristianity is a religion of the heart, and Evangelicalism especially emphasizes personal conversion and spiritual transformation. Our churches are very good at diagnosing spiritual maladies and confronting the problem of personal sin. But we often stumble in our efforts to help those afflicted by mental anguish, physical suffering and especially depression.

Depression directly contradicts the emotions that Scripture commends, and even commands. We are to “rejoice always” and to “count it all joy.” So a common temptation is to chalk up depression to the category of self-inflicted pain and ultimately reduce it to a sin problem. The conservative tendency to distrust psychologists and especially psychiatrists only adds to the problem.

Author Zack Eswine comments on this tendency:

Religion offers both a challenge and a help to those who suffer mental disorders. This challenge surfaces when preachers assume that depression is always and only a sin. They pour gasoline on the fire and wonder why it rages rather than calms those they try to help. At the same time, studies today confirm that those with mental health challenges simply do much better if they are part of a religious community. (Kindle location, 495)

This contemporary problem is not so contemporary after all. Charles Spurgeon the great Baptist preacher of the nineteenth century, was all too intimately acquainted with this problem. Eswine explores this little known side of the great preacher in his new book Spurgeon’s Sorrows: Realistic Hope for those who Suffer from Depression (Christian Focus, 2014). Spurgeon himself suffered from persistent bouts of depression. He sought medical treatment and at times took sabbaticals to restore his health. He was also never shy about admitting this problem, and his candor led him to be a magnet for those seeking help themselves.

Eswine’s book traces Spurgeon’s history and his approach to discussing this problem and counseling those with the problem. Spurgeon’s own personal thoughts and experience shed’s light on that of many in today’s church.

Eswine writes with care and resists a simplistic approach to the problem. He doesn’t shy away from spiritual considerations either. Spurgeon himself was like that. At times he spoke with great compassion of those afflicted by sorrows and despair, and at other times he challenged them toward greater faith. We are both physical and spiritual beings and no counsel is a one-size-fits-all solution.

Even the darkest pits that depression can lead to were roads travelled by the preacher. He found solace in Elijah and Job and others who like him, had despaired of life and wished to die. Eswine quotes Spurgeon and crafts his book with care, trying to help the wounded and encourage them to find hope in a body of believers.

The book is a bit disjointed and segmented. But that seems intentional, and is written with an eye to what those suffering from depression can withstand. Short chapters, brief thoughts, simple conclusions and applications. Encouraging thought and offering help without a judgemental attitude. One oddity in the book is the author’s repeated use of Spurgeon’s first name. This may be intended to be less off-putting for the depressed reader. It might make “Charles” seem more approachable. I found it jarring and odd, but that may just be me!

There is much that caregivers can learn as well in these pages, and the author’s use of Spurgeon’s insights along with some contemporary authors, provides help in how to deal with those struggling with this problem in our churches today. I recommend the book and hope its message is a blessing and help to many.

Pick up a copy of this book at any of the following online retailers: Amazon, Westminster Bookstore, ChristianBook.com, or direct from Christian Focus.

Disclaimer: This book was provided by the publisher for review. The reviewer was under no obligation to offer a positive review.

About Book Briefs: Book Briefs are book notes, or short-form book reviews. They are my informed evaluation of a book, but stop short of being a full-length book review.

American Christianity and the “Martyr Complex”


A headline from USA Today grabbed my attention this weekend: “Religious family abandons U.S., gets lost at sea.” Yep, you don’t see that one every day. It feeds right into the media frenzy about Christians being crazy freaks. But that isn’t how I was thinking about this news item. Let me quote from the article before I give my thoughts.

A northern Arizona family that was lost at sea for weeks in an ill-fated attempt to leave the U.S. over what they consider government interference in religion will fly back home Sunday.

Hannah Gastonguay, 26, said Saturday that she and her husband “decided to take a leap of faith and see where God led us” when they took their two small children and her father-in-law and set sail from San Diego for the tiny island nation of Kiribati in May….

Hannah Gastonguay said her family was fed up with government control in the U.S. As Christians they don’t believe in “abortion, homosexuality, in the state-controlled church,” she said.

U.S. “churches aren’t their own,” Gastonguay said, suggesting that government regulation interfered with religious independence.

Among other differences, she said they had a problem with being “forced to pay these taxes that pay for abortions we don’t agree with.”

The Gastonguays weren’t members of any church, and Hannah Gastonguay said their faith came from reading the Bible and through prayer.

“The Bible is pretty clear,” she said….

Hannah Gastonguay said the family will now “go back to Arizona” and “come up with a new plan.”

This family’s foolish escapade provides the perfect illustration of the “martyr complex” that seems quite prevalent among American Christians.

Christians think we have it so rough in America. It is unjust that the government permits homosexual marriage or allows abortions. The government requires building permits and safety codes, and encroaches on our liberties in other ways, too. What makes this especially difficult is the perception that America was once a truly Christian nation.

Now, I’m not trying to belittle abortion and the marriage issue. These are important concerns. But do you think that Paul and the early Christians might not have chafed at the treatment they received from the hands of Nero? Were there calls for Christians to vacate Rome? Now, in the face of actual persecution with actual deaths and severe punishments being meted out, I definitely think we have to allow for the “get out of Dodge” option. But American Christians today, for the most part, know nothing of that sort of real persecution.

The mention of persecution, however, brings up a great point. Jesus promised us that in the world we would “have tribulation” (John 16:33). He said we would be “hated by all for [His] name’s sake” (Matt. 10:22). Paul promised us that “through many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God” (Acts 14:22). The word wasn’t to flee for your lives but to stay and “endure to the end.”

It is far easier to set our hopes in a Christian “Geneva,” so to speak. To aim for a “holy huddle till the rapture,” and find solace in a counter-culture society that some might call a cult. It’s easier if everyone you have to interact with thinks like you do, and looks like you do. That’s much nicer than having to deal with the ugly realities of being a light in a dark world. It’s easier to tuck tail and run. But we aren’t called to that. We are called to: “be blameless and innocent, children of God without blemish in the midst of a crooked and twisted generation, among whom [we are to be shining] as lights in the world, holding fast to the word of life” (Phil. 2:15-16).

I don’t have time to more fully develop these thoughts, so I’ll encourage you to read other similar posts on this topic. But while I’m at it, what are your thoughts on this question? Do you feel the urge to hunker down and hide? Is that right or wrong? Am I too harsh on this poor family from Arizona?

Do you now or have you ever believed that homosexuality is a sin?

changeinbeliefAl Mohler sees the writing on the wall. A “new Moral McCarthyism” will soon be asking each Christian this question: “Do you now or have you ever believed that homosexuality is a sin?” Based on our answer, they stand ready to denounce us as backward, hateful bigots.

Mohler’s comments come in the wake of President Obama announcing that Pastor Louie Giglio would pray the invocation at his upcoming inauguration. A quick about face happened when a liberal watchdog group uncovered the fact that Giglio once preached an “anti-gay” message. It turns out that Giglio’s message was standard, orthodox Christian teaching on homosexuality, and hardly anti-gay as such things go. The Christian message has always been that all sinners need salvation, and to be a man or a woman, is to be a sinner. Sin comes in a variety of flavors, and homosexuality is just one of many. Sure some Christians have been more hateful and more vocal about that sin than others, but faithful Christian pastors, have always been careful to condemn the sin, and remind everyone that we are all equally guilty of offending a holy God.

Russell Moore commented on the outcry that the NY Times and others helped to circulate, as follows:

After a couple of days of firestorm from the Left, Giglio announced this morning that he would withdraw.

Here’s why this matters. The statement Giglio made that was so controversial is essentially a near-direct quotation from the Christian Scriptures. Unrepentant homosexuals, Giglio said (as with unrepentant sinners of all kinds) “will not inherit the kingdom of God.” That’s 1 Corinthians 6:9-10. Giglio said, “it’s not easy to change, but it is possible to change.” The Bible says God “commands all people everywhere to repent” (Acts 17:30), the same gospel, Giglio says, “that I say to you and that you would say to me.”

The Christian faith in every expression has held for 2000 years that sexual immorality is sinful. This same Christian faith has maintained, again in every branch, that sexual expression outside of conjugal marriage is sin. And the Christian faith has maintained universally that all persons are sinners and that no sinner can enter the kingdom without repentance. This is hardly new.

The “shock” with which this so-called “anti-gay” stance is articulated by the Left is akin to the Pork Producers Association denouncing a Muslim Imam’s invitation because he is “anti-agriculture” due to Koranic dietary restrictions.

In fact, by the standards of this controversy, no Muslim imam or Orthodox Jewish rabbi alive can pray at a presidential inauguration.

Ed Stetzer wonders how America will respond to this latest example of the shunning of religious people from the townsquare:

This can be an important moment as America, the media, and President Obama’s administration to consider a simple question. Are people of faith no longer welcome as they continue to hold the beliefs they have held since their foundation? Must they jettison their sacred texts and adopt new views to be accepted as part of society? If they do not, will they be marginalized and demonized even as they serve the poor, care for the orphan, or speak against injustice?

Moore doesn’t wonder but declares, “When it is now impossible for one who holds to the catholic Christian view of marriage and the gospel to pray at a public event, we now have a de facto established state church.”

Moore goes on, and I encourage you to read his entire piece on this subject. But I think you get the picture. To even hint that you ever have believed or held that homosexuality is anything but commendable, upright behavior, is to break today’s moral code. If there is no forthright and frank repentance or clarification, then you are out of the “in club.” You are outside the bounds and not fit to speak in the public square. No, not even to merely pray at a public event.

Mohler’s piece explains this point further, and he also demonstrates that Giglio’s withdrawal was more of a dis-invitation than cordial back-out. Giglio was not so much saving face as standing by his principles, and ensuring that this furor dies down so as not to encourage a misunderstanding of the gospel. Maybe Giglio should have made a bigger to-do about his harsh treatment by the McCarthyites. Maybe he should have been firmer. There could be merit to these reflections, but we are not Giglio and don’t need to go there.

Instead, I think we should ponder why this takes us by surprise. Some aren’t surprised, but most are. We have been lulled to sleep by the compatibility of Protestant Christianity with America’s self-help capitalist gospel. We have been sold a bill of goods by well-intentioned practitioners of the American Christian cult. The cult that equates freedom and democracy, lady liberty and all she stands for, with the cross of Christ and the Bible’s gospel. No, the America which once taxed Baptists for not participating with the official state church in Massachusetts and elsewhere, the public which reveled in the printed tabloid’s lurid details of the public sex-lives of Alexander Hamilton and other leaders, and the humanistic upper class which once embraced Charles Finney and Billy Sunday’s religious appeal to reform the brutish man’s spirit by taking away his brandy — that is much like the America we find today who so readily condemns anyone who doesn’t embrace moral relativism and the libertarian virtue of the time.

Christianity in America today is far less persecuted and far more lightly treated than it has been in most other times and places around the world. We have enjoyed an exceptional period of freedom and ostensible public respect. But such a time is soon to end. Now fewer Americans believe homosexuality is a sin, than those who don’t. And this drastic change in the public’s perception has come about in just a few short years. Meanwhile, the church has hemmed and hawed and often evolved in its views along with the culture and our current president. But as Mohler reminds us, the time for thin-skins and hesitation is past. We risk having no gospel at all, if we do not address homosexuality as sin.

So even as the faithful determine to not give in to culture’s demands on this front, we should be mindful, as Joe Carter reminds us, that Jesus has promised us that the world will hate us. We shouldn’t be surprised. And in light of such a knee-jerk tendency to be alarmed over any expression against homosexuality, we Christians should be especially careful in how we phrase our answer to their incessant question. We will too readily be misunderstood. Christians need to stand against homosexuality, but not as a goal in itself. We need to stand for morality, but not bereft of the grace and mercy which make Christianity unique. We must be resolute but not compassionless.

Christians everywhere, in pulpit or pew, in the office cubicle or the backyard party, need to be ready for “the question.” We can’t be afraid to “come out of the closet” with our views on this vitally important matter. Being ready means being informed, and we should be well read on the condition of homosexuality, and armed with careful and Christian reflection as to its cure. We need most of all to know the gospel and how it speaks to people everywhere, straight and gay. And we need to be broken and humble rather than cocky, defensive or stand-offish. We need to be the very heart and mind of Jesus when it comes to answering this question. We need to speak His words, in His manner and with His winsomeness. May our careful speech woo the lost to Christ. And may the darker these days get help us to draw closer to the light of truth and be ever more effective as an outpost in this sin-darkened world (Phil. 2:15-16).

Jonathan Edwards on the Problem of Evil

With the recent tragedy at Newtown Connecticut, the problem of evil is on everyone’s mind. How could such an evil act be perpetrated? How could God allow such evil? Would a loving God really allow the deaths of 20 innocent children?

Tragedies like this, and the questions it raises, lead meany people to blame God. Others point to this problem as evidence that a true God does not exist. Or they reshape their thoughts about God. He is nice and helpful and all, but limited. Like an old grandfather, he is saddened by our losses and didn’t want this to happen. He was just unable to prevent it – or worse, he didn’t see it coming.

In contrast to such man-centered thoughts, the Scripture’s teaching on evil and suffering is that God permits it, and works behind it, to accomplish His purposes. For those who love God and believe in Him (the elect), God works everything together for their good (Rom. 8:28). And ultimately, God “works all things according to the counsel of his will” (Eph. 1:11). God “does according to his will among the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay his hand or say to him, ‘What have you done?'” (Dan. 4:35). He “has made everything for its purpose, even the wicked for the day of trouble” (Prov. 16:4). And Amos 3:6 declares soberingly, “Does disaster come to a city, unless the LORD has done it?”

If God is truly sovereign, then, why did He choose to allow such sin and suffering in this world? Theologians refer to this as “the problem of evil.” Why does evil exist, in such poignant and powerful measure as displayed so chillingly just this last week? This question is not merely for theists. What explanation can atheists give to this puzzling question? They would have to explain how evil, as a category, can exist without a holy God. If there is no God, than who’s to say what evil is?

Ultimately, Jonathan Edwards has perhaps the clearest answer that I have found. I delve into his thought a bit in this article, but here I want to share a quote I recently included in my SS class this past Sunday. May it help clarify your thinking on this point, and see how truly great and glorious God really is.

God’s awful majesty, his authority and dreadful greatness, justice, and holiness… would not shine forth as the [other parts of divine glory] do, and also the glory of his goodness, love, and holiness would be faint without them; nay, they could scarcely shine forth at all… There would be no manifestation of God’s grace or true goodness, if there was no sin to be pardoned, no misery to be saved from. No matter how much happiness he might bestow, his goodness would not be nearly as highly prized and admired…. and the sense of his goodness heightened. So evil is necessary if the glory of God is to be perfectly and completely displayed

[quoted in Chosen for Life by Sam Storms (Crossway, 2007), pg. 186-187]

As a follow up to this thought, here are some earlier articles of mine along these same lines.