The following article will interest only those who wish to learn about sanctification as practiced by those who directly influence us today. This may be too much for those who have not previous studied sanctification and its history. Of all the doctrines of Christianity, sanctification might be the one area which receives the least objective exploration because the sanctification beliefs of every one else is suspect. This is because the evidence of sanctification is nearly always subject to lapses, imperfection, and not working when tried.
Recommending this article by M. J. Sawyer presents some issues for me. His education is from Dallas Theological Seminary. Both the students and faculty of DTS begin with an agenda or presupposition which influences all they produce. It is not only an agenda about certain doctrines but a presupposition of being right and others being wrong. Arrogance might describe the DTS atmosphere. Whether it is their work on English translations or other beliefs, one will do well to enter their topics with discernment.
What M. J. Sawyer presents here is a doctrinal perspective. In this matter he has me at a disadvantage because my research on the groups in this article has been historical and his is doctrinal. There are a few places where I have placed notes because his agenda has driven undocumented assumptions.
-------------------------------------- Wesleyan and Keswick Models of Sanctification
M. J. Sawyer, Ph.D., is Professor at A.W. Tozer Seminary and Director of Sacred Saga Ministries. Dr. Sawyer holds a Th.M and a Ph.D. from Dallas Theological Seminary.
https://bible.org/article/wesleyan-a...sanctification I. Introduction
Much of contemporary Evangelicalism is indebted in some way to John Wesley and his theological understanding of the Christian Life, or Sanctification. Wesleyanism, various varieties of Holiness Theologies, Keswick, Deeper Life, Higher life, Victorious Life Theologies all have their root in Wesley’s teaching concerning the Christian life. II. Wesley and Wesleyanism
A. Wesley & Sanctification
In the theology of John Wesley one finds a new direction, distinct both from Reformed and classic Arminianism Wesley built his understanding of the nature of man solidly upon the Reformed position of original sin, and the subsequent necessity of divine grace for salvation. Here however he parted company with the reformers and injected the doctrine of prevenient grace, (all men have received of the Holy Spirit the ability to respond to God) into his understanding of the doctrine of salvation. Wesley rejected the Reformed concept of election , opting instead for the Arminian concept of conditional election. Thus he joined the Reformed doctrine of the total sinfulness of the individual and the primacy of grace with the Arminian stress on human freedom, with its subsequent moral obligations. But his doctrine of Sanctification was not traditional Arminianism Wesley was also heavily influenced by the mystics. Packer has observed that he superimposed
“on the Augustinianism of the Anglican prayer book and the heaven aspiring High Church moralist in which he was reared a concept of perfection . . . that he had learned from the Greek Patristic sources. “Macarius the Egyptian” . . . and Ephraem Syrus were chief among these. There idea of perfection was not of sinlessness, but of an ever deepening process of all around moral change. To this idea Wesley then added the lesson he had learned form those whom he called the “mystic writers” (a category including the Anglican William Law, the Roman Catholics Molinos, Fenelon, Gaston de Renty, Francis de Sales, and Madame Guyon, the Lutheran Pietist Francke, and the pre-reformation Theologia Gremanica) The lesson was that the heart of true godliness is a motivating spirit of love to God and man; without this all religion is hollow and empty. (Keep In Step with the Spirit,134)
Wesley asserted the primacy of justification, and the assurance the believer could have based upon the righteousness of Christ. However, his Arminian view of election creeps into his view of final salvation. He views the process of Sanctification as one of making the individual worthy of salvation. This process is a work of God, but it is also a work of man. At this point a synergism appears. At one point he explicitly states that good works are a condition of final justification which he regards as necessary for final salvation (Lindstrom, 207) B. Developments within Wesleyanism
As Wesleyanism took root in America, it was institutionalized in the context of the circuit rider and revivalism. This had profound results on the form of the teaching. As early as 1784 Francis Asbury advocated preaching the experience of entire sanctification as one which believers should expect immediately by faith. Revivalism emphasized definable turning points in a Christian’s life as essential. Holiness preaching tended to center around Wesley’s sanctification teaching of a second crisis experience subsequent to justification which was commonly termed entire sanctification. From this followed it followed that it was the duty of those who had experienced entire sanctification to confess it and seek to bring others into this experience.
As Methodism became respectable, there was a call for a return to the pure doctrine of Wesley. In the latter part of the nineteenth century the National holiness Association was born to promote Wesleyan-holiness theology. Three names are prominent in the promulgation of holiness theology: Phobe Palmer; William Boardman; and Hannah Whitehall Smith.
Phobe Palmer’s emphasis becomes key here. Although she says nothing that Wesley did not say a century before, she changes the Wesleyan emphasis subtly, and injects presuppositions foreign to Wesley. Whereas with Wesley the experience of perfection was something to be sought, for Palmer it was vital for continuance of salvation. For Palmer the crisis was vital. Perfection was the beginning of the Christian life and growth in holiness and the focal point of the Christian life. The focus of sanctification tended to be wholly upon a single point of wholehearted commitment, and divorced from any gradual process. “Thus, the moment of death to self and birth to love readily became an end in itself--a goal rather than an essential element in the establishment of a new relationship of freedom and love in the hearts of believers as the Holy Spirit led them from grace to grace in the will of God. (Dieter, 41)
Reread the above paragraph several times to grasp the difference between the 19th century holiness movement and John Wesley. C. Key Propositions
Second Work Of Grace.
For the holiness proponents particularly the second work of grace became vital for retaining one’s salvation. Palmer particularly sees justification as dependent upon the believer’s faithfulness. she states:
“As I ascended the heavenly way, clearer light shone upon my mind, revealing higher duties, requiring more of the spirit of sacrifice, and furnishing yet stronger tests of obedience. but with increasing light, increasing strength was given, enabling me to be answerable to these higher duties: for I had not learned how to retain justification while under condemnation at the same time for neglecting known duties.”
For Palmer the solution lay in sanctification, envisioned as a post conversion crisis. She termed this a crisis because for her the issue was the retention or loss of justification. again she states:
“I saw I could not; I must either make the necessary sacrifices, or I must sin, and by my sin forfeit my state of justification. And here my justification would have ended with me had I refused to be holy.”
Thus, the second work of grace is really the basis of one’s continuance in salvation.
The means of achieving this second work of grace is conceived of as an act of faith akin to the act of faith involved in justification. William Boardman notes:
“Whether the question relates to justification or sanctification, the answer is the same. The way of freedom from sin is the same as the way of freedom from condemnation. . . faith in the purifying presence of Jesus.” (Higher Christian Life, 81)
This same mentality persists to this day. In the Spring of 1986 I attended a Sanctification Conference sponsored by the C&MA in Piedmont CA. The keynote speaker, the president of the denomination began his first sermon with the words, “There are two gospels, the gospel of justification is for the sinner, the gospel of sanctification for the saint.” Justification is seen as delivering from the penalty of sin, sanctification is seen to deliver from the power of sin.
For Boardman, this work of grace is a mystical inauguration into a process:
“In the one, atonement has been made, and the moment it is accepted, pardon is complete; in the other, although the righteousness of Christ is perfect in which the soul is to be clothed, yet the work of unfolding . . . is a work of time and progress.” (40)
Hannah Whitehall Smith propounds the basic teaching of holiness theology by bifurcating justification and sanctification. Her contribution, no doubt reflecting her Quaker background was the injection of a quietism into the process. She envisions the process as an entire surrender to the Lord, and a perfect trust in Him. She envisions three steps to the process:
(1) The Christian must realize the gift of God.
“In order therefore to enter into a practical experience of this interior life, the soul must be in a receptive attitude, fully recognizing that it is God’s gift in Christ Jesus.” (The Christian’s Secret of a Happy Life, 47)
(2) Consecration is necessary.
She states that the soul must be abandoned to God and lie passive in His hands (47) “To some minds the word ‘abandonment might express this idea better than the word consecration. But whatever word we use, we mean an entire surrender of the whole being to God--spirit soul and body placed under his absolute control, for Him to do with us as He pleases.”
(3) Faith then follows surrender.
“Love may be lavished upon us by another without stint or measure, but until we believe we are that we are loved, it never really becomes ours.” (51) She concludes: “In order to enter into this blessed interior life of rest and triumph, you have to take two steps--first entire abandonment; and second absolute faith. (52-54)
While, holiness theologies come in many varieties and with various emphases, they all make the crucial disjuncture between justification, appropriated by faith and securing pardon form sin and sanctification/crisis/second work of grace/baptism by the spirit as a post conversion faith experience which breaks the power of sin. Sinlessness:
In Wesley’s mind sin was primarily voluntary and was thus intimately bound up with the will. In a sermon on 1 John 3:9 speaking of the privilege of sinlessness he defined sin in a wholly voluntary manner.
By sin I here understand outward sin, according to the plain common acceptation [sic] of the word; an actual, voluntary, transgression of the law of God; and of any commandment of God, acknowledged to be such, at the time it is transgressed.
Elsewhere speaking of the nature of sin he declared:
Not only sin, properly so called, (that is, a voluntary transgression of a known law) but sin, improperly so called, (that is an involuntary transgression of a divine law, known or unknown) needs the atoning blood.
I believe there is no such perfection in this life as excludes these involuntary transgressions which I apprehend to be naturally consequent on the ignorance and mistakes inseparable from mortality.
Therefore sinless perfection is a phrase I never use, lest I should seem to contradict myself.
I believe a person filled with the love of God is still liable to these involuntary transgressions.
Such transgressions you may call sin, if you please: I do not, for the reasons above-mentioned. (Works: “A Plain Account of Christian Perfection,” 19 (XI, 396)
Wesley’s hamartiology “emphasized the willful or spiritual dimensions of sin more than the outward (moral) or cognitive (theoretical knowledge) aspects of it. Sinlessness in this context was more a matter of willing God’s will than replicating God’s perfect knowledge, action, or holiness; sin was more a matter of knowledgeable and willful rebellion against God’s will than a failure or lack of conformity to the glory of God.” (John Tyson, Charles Wesley on Sanctification (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986) 257.) Christian Perfection:
John Wesley saw Christian perfection which was available to all believers in this life as a gift from God and to be accomplished in a moment in time
Wesley himself drew up a list of ten propositions concerning perfection which teach a progress-crisis-progress as a model for Christian perfection. In these propositions it can clearly be seen that Wesley does not understand the term teleios in the sense of mature (BAG,187) but rather in the sense of his own definition of sinlessness.
This is “a personal, definitive work of God’s sanctifying grace by which the war within oneself might cease and the heart be fully released from rebellion into wholehearted love for God and others.” (Dieter, 17) This experience has negative and positive benefits. Negatively, it is seen as a cleansing of the heart, which heals the remaining systemic damage from Adam’s transgression. Positively, it, it is a freedom, “a turning of the whole heart toward God in love to seek and to know His will, which becomes the soul’s delight.” (Dieter, 18) Wesley listed the benefits of this sanctification:
Wesleyans claim that they approach Scripture holistically and do not rely on proof-texts for their doctrine, and that the holistic teaching of Scripture, its warp and woof, supports their doctrine of Sanctification. Nevertheless there are several passages which form the matrix of their understanding of the nature of sanctification. These include:
Deut. 30:6 NET
6 The Lord your God will also cleanse your heart and the hearts of your descendants so that you may love him with all your mind and being and so that you may live.
Ezekiel 36: 26-29 NET
26 I will give you a new heart, and I will put a new spirit within you. I will remove the heart of stone from your body and give you a heart of flesh. 27 I will put my Spirit within you; I will take the initiative and you will obey my statutes and carefully observe my regulations. 28 Then you will live in the land I gave to your fathers; you will be my people, and I will be your God. 29 I will save you from all your uncleanness. I will call for the grain and multiply it; I will not bring a famine on you.
Matt. 5:8
Blessed are the pure in heart,
for they will see God.
Matt. 5:48
48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
Rom 2:29 NET
29 but someone is a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is of the heart by the Spirit and not by the letter. This person’s praise is not from people but from God.
Rom 12:1-2 NET
Therefore I exhort you, brothers and sisters, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a sacrifice—alive, holy, and pleasing to God—which is your reasonable service. 2 Do not be conformed to this present world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may test and approve what is the will of God—what is good and well-pleasing and perfect.
Phoebe Palmer a leader in the revival of Wesleyanism in the late 19th century gives a typical holiness exposition of this passage, placing it in the context of the altar of Exodus 29:37. According to Palmer, Christ is the believers altar. Since according to Exodus everything that touched the altar is holy, every Christian who was willing by faith to present himself without reservation as a living sacrifice upon the altar of the finished work of Christ would be entirely sanctified and cleansed from all sin. (Dieter, 39)
2 Corinthians 3:17-18 NET
17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is present, there is freedom. 18 And we all, with unveiled faces reflecting the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another, which is from the Lord, who is the Spirit.
2 Corinthians 7:1 NET
Therefore, since we have these promises, dear friends, let us cleanse ourselves from everything that could defile the body and the spirit, and thus accomplish holiness out of reverence for God.
Gal 2:20 NET
20 I have been crucified with Christ, and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me. So the life I now live in the body, I live because of the faithfulness of the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.
Ephesians 3:14-21
14 For this reason I kneel before the Father, 15 from whom every family in heaven and on the earth is named. 16 I pray that according to the wealth of his glory he may grant you to be strengthened with power through his Spirit in the inner person, 17 that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith, so that, because you have been rooted and grounded in love, 18 you may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, 19 and thus to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, so that you may be filled up to all the fullness of God.
20 Now to him who by the power that is working within us is able to do far beyond all that we ask or think, 21 to him be the glory in the church and in Christ Jesus to all generations, forever and ever. Amen.
Ephesians 5:27 NET
27 so that he may present the church to himself as glorious—not having a stain or wrinkle, or any such blemish, but holy and blameless.
Phil 3:15 NET
15 Therefore let those of us who are “perfect” embrace this point of view. If you think otherwise, God will reveal to you the error of your ways.
1 Thess. 5:23 NET
23 Now may the God of peace himself make you completely holy and may your spirit and soul and body be kept entirely blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Titus 2:11-14 NET
11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all people. 12 It trains us to reject godless ways and worldly desires and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age, 13 as we wait for the happy fulfillment of our hope in the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ. 14 He gave himself for us to set us free from every kind of lawlessness and to purify for himself a people who are truly his, who are eager to do good.
Hebrews 6:1 NET
Therefore we must progress beyond the elementary instructions about Christ and move on to maturity, not laying this foundation again: repentance from dead works and faith in God,
Hebrews 7:25 NET
25 So he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them.
Hebrews 10:14 NET
14 For by one offering he has perfected for all time those who are made holy.
John 8:34-36 NET
34 Jesus answered them, “I tell you the solemn truth, everyone who practices sin is a slave of sin. 35 The slave does not remain in the family forever, but the son remains forever. 36 So if the son sets you free, you will be really free.
John 17:20-23 NET
20 “I am not praying only on their behalf, but also on behalf of those who believe in me through their testimony, 21 that they will all be one, just as you, Father, are in me and I am in you. I pray that they will be in us, so that the world will believe that you sent me. 22 The glory you gave to me I have given to them, that they may be one just as we are one— 23 I in them and you in me—that they may be completely one, so that the world will know that you sent me, and you have loved them just as you have loved me.
Commenting on the John 17 passage, Mildred Wynkoop has noted parallels with Ephesians 4. Jesus had in mind a spiritually unified body of believers that would bring glory to Himself. He died to sanctify them. All other elements of redemption were included but incidental to this. Sanctification was in word and in truth. This “word” obviously not the Scripture primarily, but was found in living fellowship with the living Word, who is himself Truth. The commission was accompanied by a moral fitness--for the unity of the spirit indicated in both passages is moral clear through.(Wynkoop Theology of Love, 320, cited by Dieter, 32)
1 John 1:5 NET
5 Now this is the gospel message we have heard from him and announce to you: God is light, and in him there is no darkness at all.
1 John 1:7-9 NET
7 But if we walk in the light as he himself is in the light, we have fellowship with one another and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. 8 If we say we do not bear the guilt of sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9 But if we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous, forgiving us our sins and cleansing us from all unrighteousness. (note: verse 10 is not referenced: 10 If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar and his word is not in us.)
1 John 2:6 NET
6 The one who says he resides in God ought himself to walk just as Jesus walked.
1 John 3:3 NET
3 And everyone who has this hope focused on him purifies himself, just as Jesus is pure).
1 John 3:8-10 NET
8 The one who practices sin is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was revealed: to destroy the works of the devil. 9 Everyone who has been fathered by God does not practice sin, because God’s seed resides in him, and thus he is not able to sin, because he has been fathered by God. 10 By this the children of God and the children of the devil are revealed: Everyone who does not practice righteousness—the one who does not love his fellow Christian—is not of God.
In commenting on this passage Wesley based his whole thesis upon his definition if sin as voluntary transgression. (see above), James 1:4 NET
4 And let endurance have its perfect effect, so that you will be perfect and complete, not deficient in anything. E. Critique
Redefinition of Terminology:
The Reformed have for centuries taken Wesley to task for teaching sinless perfection. While this charge is not really accurate, for the reasons shown above, Wesley himself must bear the blame for this charge because of his own redefinition of terms. Packer notes:
It was indeed confusing for Wesley to give the name perfection to a state which from many standpoints was one of continued imperfection. It was yet more confusing that he should define sin “properly so called”, subjectively, as “voluntary transgression of a known law,” rather than objectively, as failure, whether conscious or unconscious, voluntary or involuntary, to conform to God’s revealed standards. It was supremely confusing when he let himself speak of sanctified persons as being without sin (because they were not consciously breaking any known law) while at the same time affirming that they need the blood of Christ every moment to cover their actual shortcomings. Wesley himself insisted that by the objective standard of God’s “perfect law,” every sanctified sinner needs pardon every day; that makes it seem perverse of him also to have insisted on stating his view of the higher Christian life in terms of being perfect and not sinning.
(Note: Packer has condensed the issue of Wesleyan and holiness sanctification so that we see the difficulty in comprehension is with terms.) Unrealistic Theological Rationale:
Wesley at least saw the experience of perfection uprooting and eradicating sinful desire from the heart. His understanding saw this not only as a change in the moral nature but as effecting some kind of a physical change as well. (see Packer 140-141) This thread of Wesley’s teaching has been picked up by such groups as the church of the Nazarene in its teaching of the eradication of the sin nature. Spiritual Elitism:
The injection of a second work of grace into the Christian life also leads to a spiritual elitism on the part of those who have attained this “higher life.” There is a subtle tendency to look down patronizingly upon those who have not had this experience. (One of my former students at Simpson recently told me he was going to write an article entitled, “my life as a second class Christian”!)
(Note: The charge of spiritual elitism is very subjective. My observation of those in the holiness movements is that they are humbly and dedicated to being as Christ like as possible. This is demonstrated in the kindness and grace for those who are not hoiliness.) Dangers of Legalism:
Particularly in the holiness groups, the Wesleyan concept of perfection as perfect love was exchanged for what Wesley called “high-strained” perfectionism which seeks the absolute perfection of God. To achieve this high standard, sin was redefined in terms of external acts and equated with cultural norms e.g. smoking, drinking, dancing, hair length, makeup, movies. Richard Lovelace speaks eloquently to this problem. . “. .. the conscience cannot accept sanctification unless it is based in a foundation in justification. When this is attempted the resulting insecurity creates a luxuriant overgrowth of religious flesh as believers seek to build a holiness formidable enough to pacify their consciences and quiet their sense of alienation from God. (The Dynamics of Spiritual Life, 104,) “The fully enlightened conscience cannot be pacified by any amount of grace inherent in our lives, since that always falls short of the perfection demanded by God’s law. . . such a conscience is forced to draw back into the relative darkness of self-deception. Either it manufactures a fictitious righteousness in heroic works of ascetic piety, or it redefines sin in shallow terms so that it can lose the consciousness of its presence.” (99)
(Note: This is only presuppositions about how holiness is practiced. Holiness has redefined sin, but it does not follow that they do not perceive immoral actions and wrong attitudes as sinful. Holiness groups are focused upon a righteous life.) Problems With Exegesis:
Wesley’s Scriptural proof of his doctrine (see above) consist of either promises and calls to holiness (with affirmations that God will indeed finally deliver his people from sin) or they are statements of accomplished deliverance which the believer possesses now. “Wesley affirms that the promises find fulfillment in total and absolute terms in this life and appeals to declarations, along with the prayers and commands, to buttress his conclusions.” (Packer, 139). In short he falls victim to a totally realized eschatology rather than seeing the tension of an “already but not yet” with reference to the Christian life.
(Note: Again, Packer perceives the issue correctly.)
Protestations notwithstanding . . .
Wesley in his own life did not rely upon justification for his acceptance before God. He looked to his state of Sanctification and there found that he was less than perfect. This caused him doubt of his salvation.
On October 14, 1738 he wrote, “I cannot find in myself the love of God, or of Christ. Hence my deadness and wanderings in public prayer...Again: I find I have not that joy in the Holy Ghost.”
On January 4, 1739 he wrote, “My friends affirm I am mad, because I said I was not a Christian a year ago. I affirm I am not a Christian now. Indeed, what I might have been I know not....Though I have constantly used all means of grace for twenty years, I am not a Christian.”
On June 27, 1766 he wrote to Charles Wesley, “. . . and yet (this is the mystery) I do not love God. I never did. Therefore I never believed in the Christian sense of the word. Therefore I am only an honest heathen.”
(Note: The first two quotes surely fit with the history of the days when John Wesley struggled with belief. The last quote is more of the recognition of being a man of unclean lips. All who have prostrated themselves before the throne of God make this same kind of confession as totally unworthy and dishonest before God.) Comment by P.T. Forsythe :
“It is a fatal mistake to think of holiness as a possession we have distinct from our faith and conferred upon it. That is a Catholic idea, still saturating Protestant Pietism. (see also Dieter, 14.)
(Note: Holiness as a Catholic idea will need to be proven to me. I will place Dieter on my reading list. At least his five views of sanctification will be interesting.)
continued on Post #2
Recommending this article by M. J. Sawyer presents some issues for me. His education is from Dallas Theological Seminary. Both the students and faculty of DTS begin with an agenda or presupposition which influences all they produce. It is not only an agenda about certain doctrines but a presupposition of being right and others being wrong. Arrogance might describe the DTS atmosphere. Whether it is their work on English translations or other beliefs, one will do well to enter their topics with discernment.
What M. J. Sawyer presents here is a doctrinal perspective. In this matter he has me at a disadvantage because my research on the groups in this article has been historical and his is doctrinal. There are a few places where I have placed notes because his agenda has driven undocumented assumptions.
-------------------------------------- Wesleyan and Keswick Models of Sanctification
M. J. Sawyer, Ph.D., is Professor at A.W. Tozer Seminary and Director of Sacred Saga Ministries. Dr. Sawyer holds a Th.M and a Ph.D. from Dallas Theological Seminary.
https://bible.org/article/wesleyan-a...sanctification I. Introduction
Much of contemporary Evangelicalism is indebted in some way to John Wesley and his theological understanding of the Christian Life, or Sanctification. Wesleyanism, various varieties of Holiness Theologies, Keswick, Deeper Life, Higher life, Victorious Life Theologies all have their root in Wesley’s teaching concerning the Christian life. II. Wesley and Wesleyanism
A. Wesley & Sanctification
In the theology of John Wesley one finds a new direction, distinct both from Reformed and classic Arminianism Wesley built his understanding of the nature of man solidly upon the Reformed position of original sin, and the subsequent necessity of divine grace for salvation. Here however he parted company with the reformers and injected the doctrine of prevenient grace, (all men have received of the Holy Spirit the ability to respond to God) into his understanding of the doctrine of salvation. Wesley rejected the Reformed concept of election , opting instead for the Arminian concept of conditional election. Thus he joined the Reformed doctrine of the total sinfulness of the individual and the primacy of grace with the Arminian stress on human freedom, with its subsequent moral obligations. But his doctrine of Sanctification was not traditional Arminianism Wesley was also heavily influenced by the mystics. Packer has observed that he superimposed
“on the Augustinianism of the Anglican prayer book and the heaven aspiring High Church moralist in which he was reared a concept of perfection . . . that he had learned from the Greek Patristic sources. “Macarius the Egyptian” . . . and Ephraem Syrus were chief among these. There idea of perfection was not of sinlessness, but of an ever deepening process of all around moral change. To this idea Wesley then added the lesson he had learned form those whom he called the “mystic writers” (a category including the Anglican William Law, the Roman Catholics Molinos, Fenelon, Gaston de Renty, Francis de Sales, and Madame Guyon, the Lutheran Pietist Francke, and the pre-reformation Theologia Gremanica) The lesson was that the heart of true godliness is a motivating spirit of love to God and man; without this all religion is hollow and empty. (Keep In Step with the Spirit,134)
Wesley asserted the primacy of justification, and the assurance the believer could have based upon the righteousness of Christ. However, his Arminian view of election creeps into his view of final salvation. He views the process of Sanctification as one of making the individual worthy of salvation. This process is a work of God, but it is also a work of man. At this point a synergism appears. At one point he explicitly states that good works are a condition of final justification which he regards as necessary for final salvation (Lindstrom, 207) B. Developments within Wesleyanism
As Wesleyanism took root in America, it was institutionalized in the context of the circuit rider and revivalism. This had profound results on the form of the teaching. As early as 1784 Francis Asbury advocated preaching the experience of entire sanctification as one which believers should expect immediately by faith. Revivalism emphasized definable turning points in a Christian’s life as essential. Holiness preaching tended to center around Wesley’s sanctification teaching of a second crisis experience subsequent to justification which was commonly termed entire sanctification. From this followed it followed that it was the duty of those who had experienced entire sanctification to confess it and seek to bring others into this experience.
As Methodism became respectable, there was a call for a return to the pure doctrine of Wesley. In the latter part of the nineteenth century the National holiness Association was born to promote Wesleyan-holiness theology. Three names are prominent in the promulgation of holiness theology: Phobe Palmer; William Boardman; and Hannah Whitehall Smith.
Phobe Palmer’s emphasis becomes key here. Although she says nothing that Wesley did not say a century before, she changes the Wesleyan emphasis subtly, and injects presuppositions foreign to Wesley. Whereas with Wesley the experience of perfection was something to be sought, for Palmer it was vital for continuance of salvation. For Palmer the crisis was vital. Perfection was the beginning of the Christian life and growth in holiness and the focal point of the Christian life. The focus of sanctification tended to be wholly upon a single point of wholehearted commitment, and divorced from any gradual process. “Thus, the moment of death to self and birth to love readily became an end in itself--a goal rather than an essential element in the establishment of a new relationship of freedom and love in the hearts of believers as the Holy Spirit led them from grace to grace in the will of God. (Dieter, 41)
Reread the above paragraph several times to grasp the difference between the 19th century holiness movement and John Wesley. C. Key Propositions
Second Work Of Grace.
For the holiness proponents particularly the second work of grace became vital for retaining one’s salvation. Palmer particularly sees justification as dependent upon the believer’s faithfulness. she states:
“As I ascended the heavenly way, clearer light shone upon my mind, revealing higher duties, requiring more of the spirit of sacrifice, and furnishing yet stronger tests of obedience. but with increasing light, increasing strength was given, enabling me to be answerable to these higher duties: for I had not learned how to retain justification while under condemnation at the same time for neglecting known duties.”
For Palmer the solution lay in sanctification, envisioned as a post conversion crisis. She termed this a crisis because for her the issue was the retention or loss of justification. again she states:
“I saw I could not; I must either make the necessary sacrifices, or I must sin, and by my sin forfeit my state of justification. And here my justification would have ended with me had I refused to be holy.”
Thus, the second work of grace is really the basis of one’s continuance in salvation.
The means of achieving this second work of grace is conceived of as an act of faith akin to the act of faith involved in justification. William Boardman notes:
“Whether the question relates to justification or sanctification, the answer is the same. The way of freedom from sin is the same as the way of freedom from condemnation. . . faith in the purifying presence of Jesus.” (Higher Christian Life, 81)
This same mentality persists to this day. In the Spring of 1986 I attended a Sanctification Conference sponsored by the C&MA in Piedmont CA. The keynote speaker, the president of the denomination began his first sermon with the words, “There are two gospels, the gospel of justification is for the sinner, the gospel of sanctification for the saint.” Justification is seen as delivering from the penalty of sin, sanctification is seen to deliver from the power of sin.
For Boardman, this work of grace is a mystical inauguration into a process:
“In the one, atonement has been made, and the moment it is accepted, pardon is complete; in the other, although the righteousness of Christ is perfect in which the soul is to be clothed, yet the work of unfolding . . . is a work of time and progress.” (40)
Hannah Whitehall Smith propounds the basic teaching of holiness theology by bifurcating justification and sanctification. Her contribution, no doubt reflecting her Quaker background was the injection of a quietism into the process. She envisions the process as an entire surrender to the Lord, and a perfect trust in Him. She envisions three steps to the process:
(1) The Christian must realize the gift of God.
“In order therefore to enter into a practical experience of this interior life, the soul must be in a receptive attitude, fully recognizing that it is God’s gift in Christ Jesus.” (The Christian’s Secret of a Happy Life, 47)
(2) Consecration is necessary.
She states that the soul must be abandoned to God and lie passive in His hands (47) “To some minds the word ‘abandonment might express this idea better than the word consecration. But whatever word we use, we mean an entire surrender of the whole being to God--spirit soul and body placed under his absolute control, for Him to do with us as He pleases.”
(3) Faith then follows surrender.
“Love may be lavished upon us by another without stint or measure, but until we believe we are that we are loved, it never really becomes ours.” (51) She concludes: “In order to enter into this blessed interior life of rest and triumph, you have to take two steps--first entire abandonment; and second absolute faith. (52-54)
While, holiness theologies come in many varieties and with various emphases, they all make the crucial disjuncture between justification, appropriated by faith and securing pardon form sin and sanctification/crisis/second work of grace/baptism by the spirit as a post conversion faith experience which breaks the power of sin. Sinlessness:
In Wesley’s mind sin was primarily voluntary and was thus intimately bound up with the will. In a sermon on 1 John 3:9 speaking of the privilege of sinlessness he defined sin in a wholly voluntary manner.
By sin I here understand outward sin, according to the plain common acceptation [sic] of the word; an actual, voluntary, transgression of the law of God; and of any commandment of God, acknowledged to be such, at the time it is transgressed.
Elsewhere speaking of the nature of sin he declared:
Not only sin, properly so called, (that is, a voluntary transgression of a known law) but sin, improperly so called, (that is an involuntary transgression of a divine law, known or unknown) needs the atoning blood.
I believe there is no such perfection in this life as excludes these involuntary transgressions which I apprehend to be naturally consequent on the ignorance and mistakes inseparable from mortality.
Therefore sinless perfection is a phrase I never use, lest I should seem to contradict myself.
I believe a person filled with the love of God is still liable to these involuntary transgressions.
Such transgressions you may call sin, if you please: I do not, for the reasons above-mentioned. (Works: “A Plain Account of Christian Perfection,” 19 (XI, 396)
Wesley’s hamartiology “emphasized the willful or spiritual dimensions of sin more than the outward (moral) or cognitive (theoretical knowledge) aspects of it. Sinlessness in this context was more a matter of willing God’s will than replicating God’s perfect knowledge, action, or holiness; sin was more a matter of knowledgeable and willful rebellion against God’s will than a failure or lack of conformity to the glory of God.” (John Tyson, Charles Wesley on Sanctification (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986) 257.) Christian Perfection:
John Wesley saw Christian perfection which was available to all believers in this life as a gift from God and to be accomplished in a moment in time
- Christian Perfection is that love of God and our neighbor, which implies deliverance from all sin.
- That this is received merely by faith
- That it is given instantaneously, in one moment.
- That we are to expect it, not at death, but at any moment; that is, now is the accepted time, now is the day of this salvation
Wesley himself drew up a list of ten propositions concerning perfection which teach a progress-crisis-progress as a model for Christian perfection. In these propositions it can clearly be seen that Wesley does not understand the term teleios in the sense of mature (BAG,187) but rather in the sense of his own definition of sinlessness.
- There is such a thing as perfection: for it is again and again mentioned in Scripture.
- It is not so early as justification: for justified persons are to “go on to maturity.” (Heb. 6:1)
- It is not so late as death; for St. Paul speaks of living men that were perfect (Phil. 3:15)
- It is not absolute. Absolute perfection belongs not to man, nor to angels, but to God alone.
- It does not make a man infallible: None is infallible, while he remains in the body.
- It is sinless? It is not worthwhile to contend for a term. It is ‘salvation from sin.’
- It is ‘perfect love.’ (I John 4:18) This is the essence of it; its properties, or inseparable fruits, are, rejoicing evermore, praying without ceasing, and in everything giving thanks. (I Thess. 5:16, etc.)
- It is improvable. It is so far from lying in an indivisible point, from being incapable of increase, that one perfected in love may grow in grace far swifter than he did before.
- It is amissible, capable of being lost; of which we have numerous instances. But we were not thoroughly convinced of this, till five or six years ago.
- It is constantly both preceded and followed by a gradual work.” (WORKS: “A Plain Account of Christian Perfection,” 25 (XI, 441-42)).
This is “a personal, definitive work of God’s sanctifying grace by which the war within oneself might cease and the heart be fully released from rebellion into wholehearted love for God and others.” (Dieter, 17) This experience has negative and positive benefits. Negatively, it is seen as a cleansing of the heart, which heals the remaining systemic damage from Adam’s transgression. Positively, it, it is a freedom, “a turning of the whole heart toward God in love to seek and to know His will, which becomes the soul’s delight.” (Dieter, 18) Wesley listed the benefits of this sanctification:
- To love God with all one’s heart and one’s neighbor as oneself;
- To have the mind that is in Christ;
- To bear the fruit of the Spirit (in accordance with Gal. 5);
- The restoration of the image of God in the soul, a recovery of man to the moral image of God, which consists of righteousness and true holiness”; 5.Inward and outward righteousness, “holiness of life issuing from the heart”;
- God’s sanctifying of the person in spirit, soul and body; The person’s own perfect consecration to God;
- A continuous presentation through Jesus of the individual’s thoughts, words and actions as a sacrifice to God of praise and thanksgiving;
- Salvation from all sin. (Wesley, sermon “On Perfection”, Works 6, 413-15.)
Wesleyans claim that they approach Scripture holistically and do not rely on proof-texts for their doctrine, and that the holistic teaching of Scripture, its warp and woof, supports their doctrine of Sanctification. Nevertheless there are several passages which form the matrix of their understanding of the nature of sanctification. These include:
Deut. 30:6 NET
6 The Lord your God will also cleanse your heart and the hearts of your descendants so that you may love him with all your mind and being and so that you may live.
Ezekiel 36: 26-29 NET
26 I will give you a new heart, and I will put a new spirit within you. I will remove the heart of stone from your body and give you a heart of flesh. 27 I will put my Spirit within you; I will take the initiative and you will obey my statutes and carefully observe my regulations. 28 Then you will live in the land I gave to your fathers; you will be my people, and I will be your God. 29 I will save you from all your uncleanness. I will call for the grain and multiply it; I will not bring a famine on you.
Matt. 5:8
Blessed are the pure in heart,
for they will see God.
Matt. 5:48
48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
Rom 2:29 NET
29 but someone is a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is of the heart by the Spirit and not by the letter. This person’s praise is not from people but from God.
Rom 12:1-2 NET
Therefore I exhort you, brothers and sisters, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a sacrifice—alive, holy, and pleasing to God—which is your reasonable service. 2 Do not be conformed to this present world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may test and approve what is the will of God—what is good and well-pleasing and perfect.
Phoebe Palmer a leader in the revival of Wesleyanism in the late 19th century gives a typical holiness exposition of this passage, placing it in the context of the altar of Exodus 29:37. According to Palmer, Christ is the believers altar. Since according to Exodus everything that touched the altar is holy, every Christian who was willing by faith to present himself without reservation as a living sacrifice upon the altar of the finished work of Christ would be entirely sanctified and cleansed from all sin. (Dieter, 39)
2 Corinthians 3:17-18 NET
17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is present, there is freedom. 18 And we all, with unveiled faces reflecting the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another, which is from the Lord, who is the Spirit.
2 Corinthians 7:1 NET
Therefore, since we have these promises, dear friends, let us cleanse ourselves from everything that could defile the body and the spirit, and thus accomplish holiness out of reverence for God.
Gal 2:20 NET
20 I have been crucified with Christ, and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me. So the life I now live in the body, I live because of the faithfulness of the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.
Ephesians 3:14-21
14 For this reason I kneel before the Father, 15 from whom every family in heaven and on the earth is named. 16 I pray that according to the wealth of his glory he may grant you to be strengthened with power through his Spirit in the inner person, 17 that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith, so that, because you have been rooted and grounded in love, 18 you may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, 19 and thus to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, so that you may be filled up to all the fullness of God.
20 Now to him who by the power that is working within us is able to do far beyond all that we ask or think, 21 to him be the glory in the church and in Christ Jesus to all generations, forever and ever. Amen.
Ephesians 5:27 NET
27 so that he may present the church to himself as glorious—not having a stain or wrinkle, or any such blemish, but holy and blameless.
Phil 3:15 NET
15 Therefore let those of us who are “perfect” embrace this point of view. If you think otherwise, God will reveal to you the error of your ways.
1 Thess. 5:23 NET
23 Now may the God of peace himself make you completely holy and may your spirit and soul and body be kept entirely blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Titus 2:11-14 NET
11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all people. 12 It trains us to reject godless ways and worldly desires and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age, 13 as we wait for the happy fulfillment of our hope in the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ. 14 He gave himself for us to set us free from every kind of lawlessness and to purify for himself a people who are truly his, who are eager to do good.
Hebrews 6:1 NET
Therefore we must progress beyond the elementary instructions about Christ and move on to maturity, not laying this foundation again: repentance from dead works and faith in God,
Hebrews 7:25 NET
25 So he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them.
Hebrews 10:14 NET
14 For by one offering he has perfected for all time those who are made holy.
John 8:34-36 NET
34 Jesus answered them, “I tell you the solemn truth, everyone who practices sin is a slave of sin. 35 The slave does not remain in the family forever, but the son remains forever. 36 So if the son sets you free, you will be really free.
John 17:20-23 NET
20 “I am not praying only on their behalf, but also on behalf of those who believe in me through their testimony, 21 that they will all be one, just as you, Father, are in me and I am in you. I pray that they will be in us, so that the world will believe that you sent me. 22 The glory you gave to me I have given to them, that they may be one just as we are one— 23 I in them and you in me—that they may be completely one, so that the world will know that you sent me, and you have loved them just as you have loved me.
Commenting on the John 17 passage, Mildred Wynkoop has noted parallels with Ephesians 4. Jesus had in mind a spiritually unified body of believers that would bring glory to Himself. He died to sanctify them. All other elements of redemption were included but incidental to this. Sanctification was in word and in truth. This “word” obviously not the Scripture primarily, but was found in living fellowship with the living Word, who is himself Truth. The commission was accompanied by a moral fitness--for the unity of the spirit indicated in both passages is moral clear through.(Wynkoop Theology of Love, 320, cited by Dieter, 32)
1 John 1:5 NET
5 Now this is the gospel message we have heard from him and announce to you: God is light, and in him there is no darkness at all.
1 John 1:7-9 NET
7 But if we walk in the light as he himself is in the light, we have fellowship with one another and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. 8 If we say we do not bear the guilt of sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9 But if we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous, forgiving us our sins and cleansing us from all unrighteousness. (note: verse 10 is not referenced: 10 If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar and his word is not in us.)
1 John 2:6 NET
6 The one who says he resides in God ought himself to walk just as Jesus walked.
1 John 3:3 NET
3 And everyone who has this hope focused on him purifies himself, just as Jesus is pure).
1 John 3:8-10 NET
8 The one who practices sin is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was revealed: to destroy the works of the devil. 9 Everyone who has been fathered by God does not practice sin, because God’s seed resides in him, and thus he is not able to sin, because he has been fathered by God. 10 By this the children of God and the children of the devil are revealed: Everyone who does not practice righteousness—the one who does not love his fellow Christian—is not of God.
In commenting on this passage Wesley based his whole thesis upon his definition if sin as voluntary transgression. (see above), James 1:4 NET
4 And let endurance have its perfect effect, so that you will be perfect and complete, not deficient in anything. E. Critique
Redefinition of Terminology:
The Reformed have for centuries taken Wesley to task for teaching sinless perfection. While this charge is not really accurate, for the reasons shown above, Wesley himself must bear the blame for this charge because of his own redefinition of terms. Packer notes:
It was indeed confusing for Wesley to give the name perfection to a state which from many standpoints was one of continued imperfection. It was yet more confusing that he should define sin “properly so called”, subjectively, as “voluntary transgression of a known law,” rather than objectively, as failure, whether conscious or unconscious, voluntary or involuntary, to conform to God’s revealed standards. It was supremely confusing when he let himself speak of sanctified persons as being without sin (because they were not consciously breaking any known law) while at the same time affirming that they need the blood of Christ every moment to cover their actual shortcomings. Wesley himself insisted that by the objective standard of God’s “perfect law,” every sanctified sinner needs pardon every day; that makes it seem perverse of him also to have insisted on stating his view of the higher Christian life in terms of being perfect and not sinning.
(Note: Packer has condensed the issue of Wesleyan and holiness sanctification so that we see the difficulty in comprehension is with terms.) Unrealistic Theological Rationale:
Wesley at least saw the experience of perfection uprooting and eradicating sinful desire from the heart. His understanding saw this not only as a change in the moral nature but as effecting some kind of a physical change as well. (see Packer 140-141) This thread of Wesley’s teaching has been picked up by such groups as the church of the Nazarene in its teaching of the eradication of the sin nature. Spiritual Elitism:
The injection of a second work of grace into the Christian life also leads to a spiritual elitism on the part of those who have attained this “higher life.” There is a subtle tendency to look down patronizingly upon those who have not had this experience. (One of my former students at Simpson recently told me he was going to write an article entitled, “my life as a second class Christian”!)
(Note: The charge of spiritual elitism is very subjective. My observation of those in the holiness movements is that they are humbly and dedicated to being as Christ like as possible. This is demonstrated in the kindness and grace for those who are not hoiliness.) Dangers of Legalism:
Particularly in the holiness groups, the Wesleyan concept of perfection as perfect love was exchanged for what Wesley called “high-strained” perfectionism which seeks the absolute perfection of God. To achieve this high standard, sin was redefined in terms of external acts and equated with cultural norms e.g. smoking, drinking, dancing, hair length, makeup, movies. Richard Lovelace speaks eloquently to this problem. . “. .. the conscience cannot accept sanctification unless it is based in a foundation in justification. When this is attempted the resulting insecurity creates a luxuriant overgrowth of religious flesh as believers seek to build a holiness formidable enough to pacify their consciences and quiet their sense of alienation from God. (The Dynamics of Spiritual Life, 104,) “The fully enlightened conscience cannot be pacified by any amount of grace inherent in our lives, since that always falls short of the perfection demanded by God’s law. . . such a conscience is forced to draw back into the relative darkness of self-deception. Either it manufactures a fictitious righteousness in heroic works of ascetic piety, or it redefines sin in shallow terms so that it can lose the consciousness of its presence.” (99)
(Note: This is only presuppositions about how holiness is practiced. Holiness has redefined sin, but it does not follow that they do not perceive immoral actions and wrong attitudes as sinful. Holiness groups are focused upon a righteous life.) Problems With Exegesis:
Wesley’s Scriptural proof of his doctrine (see above) consist of either promises and calls to holiness (with affirmations that God will indeed finally deliver his people from sin) or they are statements of accomplished deliverance which the believer possesses now. “Wesley affirms that the promises find fulfillment in total and absolute terms in this life and appeals to declarations, along with the prayers and commands, to buttress his conclusions.” (Packer, 139). In short he falls victim to a totally realized eschatology rather than seeing the tension of an “already but not yet” with reference to the Christian life.
(Note: Again, Packer perceives the issue correctly.)
Protestations notwithstanding . . .
Wesley in his own life did not rely upon justification for his acceptance before God. He looked to his state of Sanctification and there found that he was less than perfect. This caused him doubt of his salvation.
On October 14, 1738 he wrote, “I cannot find in myself the love of God, or of Christ. Hence my deadness and wanderings in public prayer...Again: I find I have not that joy in the Holy Ghost.”
On January 4, 1739 he wrote, “My friends affirm I am mad, because I said I was not a Christian a year ago. I affirm I am not a Christian now. Indeed, what I might have been I know not....Though I have constantly used all means of grace for twenty years, I am not a Christian.”
On June 27, 1766 he wrote to Charles Wesley, “. . . and yet (this is the mystery) I do not love God. I never did. Therefore I never believed in the Christian sense of the word. Therefore I am only an honest heathen.”
(Note: The first two quotes surely fit with the history of the days when John Wesley struggled with belief. The last quote is more of the recognition of being a man of unclean lips. All who have prostrated themselves before the throne of God make this same kind of confession as totally unworthy and dishonest before God.) Comment by P.T. Forsythe :
“It is a fatal mistake to think of holiness as a possession we have distinct from our faith and conferred upon it. That is a Catholic idea, still saturating Protestant Pietism. (see also Dieter, 14.)
(Note: Holiness as a Catholic idea will need to be proven to me. I will place Dieter on my reading list. At least his five views of sanctification will be interesting.)
continued on Post #2
Comment