Andrews University

Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary

SINLESS SAINTS OR SINLESS SINNERS? AN ANALYSIS

AND CRITICAL COMPARISON OF THE DOCTRINE OF

CHRISTIAN PERFECTION AS TAUGHT BY JOHN

WESLEY AND ELLEN G. WHITE

A Paper

Presented in Partial Fulfillment

cif the Requirements for the Course

THST907, Seminar in Systematic Theology

by

Rolf J. Poehlerl

April 1978

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter

I. JOHN WESLEY AND ENTIRE SANCTIFICATION

II.

Early Influences and Views • Later Teaching • • • . . • • Wesley and the Reformers • •

ELLEN G. WHITE AND CHARACTER PERFECTION

"A Great Reformer" • • • • . • Early Experience and Views • • Later Teaching (Outline Study)

III. PERFECTION OR PERFECTIONISM: THE TWO POSITIONS COM-

Page

1

6

7 10 45

54

56 58 68

PARED • • • • 107

Justification Sanctification Perfection • • • • • • Law and Sin •••• • Humility and Assurance • Freedom and Grace • • • • •

SUM~1ARY AND. CONCLUSION· . ~.. SELECTED~BIBLIOGRAPHY

ii

107 110 112 119 123 125

127

130

INTRODUCTION

The correct understanding and fair evaluation of any theologi-

cal system is greatly enhanced by a careful analysis of the influences

that contributed to its development. Not only does such a study enable

the observer to notice the historical connections and the continuity of

thought which link different theologies to each other; it also leads

to a recognition~of the particularities and novelties by which a system

of thought is distinguished from its precursors. In other words, only

if doctrinal positions are seen within the history of Christian thought--

as continuation of and~r reaction against certain theological trends--

is an adequate and meaningful appraisal possible.

It is this fact which provides the rationale and the need for

an investigation of the Methodist roots of Seventh-day Adventism. At

the time when Seventh-day Adventists arose, Methodists numbered more

than a million, being the largest Protestant denomination in the United

1 States. Many of them were attracted to the teaching of the farmer-

preacher William Miller and joined the Adventists. 2 Thus it is no

IThis number amounted to about five percent of the population. See Edwin S. Gaustad, in The Rise of Adventism: Religion and Society in Mid-Nineteenth-Century America, ed. ~dwin S. Ga~stad (New York: Harper & Row, 1974), p. xiii.

2The most prominent Methodist in the Millerite movement was Josiah Litch; the Signs of the Times of 17 August 1842, p. 20, carried an editorial by him entitled "Perfect Love" which, in typical Methodist manner, sets forth the "blessed doctrine of a perfection in the love of God." For other-Adventist expressions of Methodist_ teaching see C. s. M{inorJ, "Holiness of Heart," Midnight Cry, 20 July 1843, p. [4];

1

2

surprise that quite a few of the pioneers of the Seventh-day Adventist

Church, which arose out of the Millerite movement, were likewise either

Methodists,l or had imbibed Methodist views on sanctification through

the revivalist preaching of the day. They brought with them not only

their religious fervour but also certain theological notions which left

their mark on the developing theology of Sabbatarian Adventism--among

them an Arminian view of the freedom of the will and cooperation, a

strong rejection of antinomianism, and the emphasis on sanctification

and the possibility of moral perfection in this life.

In his M.A. thesis N. F. Pease has confirmed that Methodism

"constituted the immediate background of Seventh-day Adventism_,,2

But he adds another observation which is of crucial significance for

our study. After pointing out that "many of the early adherents to

Seventh-day Adventism were originally Methodists" he continues,

"Especially is this true of Mrs. E. G. White who experienced a Metho-

distconversion, and reproduced the Wesleyan philosophy of salvation

"Prepare to Meet Thy God," Midnight Cry, 3 February 1843, p. 1; and F. G. Brown, "On Entire Consecration," Second Advent of Christ, 12 July 1843, p. 12.

1 Among them were Hiram Edson, John Byington, and Ellen G. White.

2N• F. Pease, "Justification and Righteousness by F~ith in the Seventh-day Adventist Church before 1900" (M.A. thesis, Seventh~d9Y Adventist Theological Seminary [Washington, .D. C.J, 1945), p. 4.' Simi­lar conclusions were reached.by J. Gordon Mac-Intyre who asserted that "the leaders in. the early advent movement were influenced by the doc­trine of Wesley'.! ("An Investigation of Seventh-day;Adventist Teaching Concerning the Doctrine of Perfection and Sanctification". [M.A •. thesis, Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary (Washington, D. C.), 3.949J, p. 39). Mac-Intyre pointed to the interesting fact that during the 1850s the Review and Hera1d, Sabbatarian Adventism's main publication, printed several extracts on Christian perfection and holiness from authors like John Wesley, William Law, and Flavel.

3

d OL 0 hOt 0 "I in almost every etal ln er wrl lngs. If this assertion should

prove true, it might have far-reaching implications for an evaluation

of Seventh-day Adventist soteriology. For it was Ellen G. White's

comments on the subject which, more than any other factor, has in-

fluenced and shaped the church's position on the doctrine of salvation.

And even though Adventists today disagree on their interpretation of

Ellen G. White's soteriological teaching, they seem nonetheless eager

to support their respective--and partly conflicting--viewpoints by

2 citing numerous statements of the prophet.

The question of whether or not E. G. White essentially repro-

duced the Wesleyan soteriology is of decisive significance, since the

Methodist teaching on entire sanctification with its accompanying

eradication of man's sinful nature has been repeatedly criticized as

unbiblical perfectionism--even by Seventh-day Adventists themselves.

For example, Hans K. LaRondelle, who devoted his dissertation to a

dogmatic-ethical study of perfection(ism), rejects Wesley's doctrine

of perfection as an "ethico-philosophical perfectionism" and, therefore,

as "a misconception of Biblical and Christo-centric perfection.,,3

Does it follow, then, that Ellen G. White's soteriology is likewise

of a perfectionist type and, consequently, inadequate? Or are there

lIb i d., P • 27.

2See the material listed in the Bibliography under "Secondary Sources on Ellen G. White" for samples.

3 Hans K. LaRondelle, Perfection and Perfectionism: A Dogmatic-Ethical Study of Biblical Perfection and Phenomenal Perfectionism (Berrien Springs, Mich.: Andrews University Press, 1971), pp. 323, 325. According to LaRondelle, Wesley's view of sinless perfection is based on an unscriptural anthropological and hamartiological dualism (ibid., p. 318, 323) •

4

decisive differences between her position and that o~Wesley which

forbid the designation of her view as t'perfectionism~?' This is the

question Adventist theologians must answer.

By analyzing and comparing the doctrine of Christian perfec-

tion as taught by John Wesley and Ellen G. White, respectively, we

hope in this paper to arrive at an adequate understanding of the close

affinity that exists between the soteriological views of Wesley and

White. At the same time, we must not overlook the dissimilarities and

disagreements between them, if we want to refrain from superficial con-

clusions and inappropriate generalizations. In other words, we must

watch for elements of continuity as well as of discontinuity in compar-

ing the writings of the 19th century American prophetess with those of

the 18th century English reformer.

In order to avoid premature judgments on the issue, we will

largely limit ourselves to a descriptive analysis of the soteriological

positions of Wesley and White (Chapters I and II). For an accurate

evaluation of their respective views presupposes a detailed study of

the Biblical data as well as a rather comprehensive survey of the

various interpretations which these data have received in the history

of the Christian church. However, such a task goes far beyond the

limits of this essay; besides, there is also the danger that the

accuracy of the analysis could suffer from a concealed desire to

d f d th th d f f th t "t" 1 e en e or 0 oxy 0 one 0 e wo POSl 10ns. However, in our

lMany Seventh-day Adventist analyses of the soteriological views of Ellen G. White--or any other, for that matter--seem to have succumbed to this temptation. By starting with the premise of the complete harmony between the teaching of Ellen G. White and that of the Bible, Adventist

5

final chapter (Chapter III), we will compare the two views in terms of

their relative strength and weaknesses in the hope of thereby providing

some answers which can help in drawing the fine but crucial line of

distinction between a correct view of Christian perfection on the one

hand and its unbiblical misunderstanding--that is, perfectionism--on

the other.

writers have tended to read their own (supposedly biblical) viewpoints into the writings of Ellen G. White. This is not to say that there are irreconcilable disparities between the teachings of the prophets and that of the prophet, but it means that serious Adventist scholar­ship must--for the sake of objectivity--analyze the writings of Ellen G. White without presupposing the orthodoxy of their content. Only after such an analysis has been completed, is an evaluation of the views of the prophetess in terms of their harmony with biblical teach­ing appropriate. This--it seems to us--is a corollary of the sola scriptura principle which Adventists strongly endorse.

CHAPTER I

JOHN WESLEY AND ENTIRE SANCTIFICATION

According to John Wesley (1703-1791), the doctrine of entire

sanctification, or Christian perfection, constitutes the very heart of

Methodism and its chief contribution to theology. In 1790, only a

year before his death, he described his doctrine of perfection as "the

grand depositum which God has lodged with the people called Methodists;

and for the sake of propagating this chiefly He appeared to have raised

1 us up." To analyze Wesley's view on perfection means, therefore, to

deal with the raison d'etre of Methodism. However, the history of

Methodism has led to an interesting situation; for, while the doctrine

of perfection has exerted a strong influence on the numerous holiness

movements (particularly in North America), the mainline Methodist

churches have increasingly downplayed this most distinctive doctrine

of Methodism. 2 Some Methodists have even denied certain key aspects

1 John Telford, ed. The Letters of the Rev. John Wesley, 8 vols., Standard Edition (London: The Epworth Press, 1931), 8:238. (Hereafter cited as Letters.)

2For detailed treatments of the history of Methodism and Perfectionism in America see M. E. Gaddis, "Christian Perfectionism in America" (Ph.D •. dissertation, University of Chicago, 1929); Robert Burton Clark, "The History of the Doctrine of Christian Perfection in the Methodist Episcopal Church in America up to 1845" ('Th.D. disserta­tion, Temple University, 1946); and John Leland Peters, Christian Per­fection and American Methodism (New York and Nashville: Abingdon Press, 195~) •

6

7 . 1

of Wesley's view which they regard as untenable.

In our study we will limit ourselves to a presentation of

original Methodism, i.e., to an exposition of the doctrine of

Christian perfection as set forth in the writings of John Wesley, the

founder of Methodism. This is in harmony with our overall intention

to compare the personal doctrinal views of John Wesley and Ellen G.

White, and not those of the movements which grew out of and were so

decisively influenced by them.

Early Influences and Views

Before we proceed to analyze the soteriological views of

Wesley, it is necessary for us to briefly deal with the experiences

and influences in the life of the English reformer, which provide the

context in which his views must be understood. 2 Born into a family

which, coming from a Puritan background, had converted to the Anglican

Church, Wesley was painfully aware of the low religious and moral state

of 18th century England. Under the influence of practical mysticism

(particularly through the writings of William Law, Jeremy Taylor, and

lW. E. Sangster, e.g., presented a critical appraisal of Wesley's doctrine of perfection in which he not only substituted the term "perfect love" for "Christian perfection" but also rejects as dangerous the idea of claiming freedom from all sin and assurance of moral perfection. He also opposes the misconception of sin as merely a thing that can be removed from the human nature (The Path to Perfec­tion: An s~amination and Restatement of John Wesley's Doctrine of Christian Perfection [New York and Nashville: Abingdon-Cokesbury Press, 1943]) •

2For a synopsis of the life and work of John Wesley see Maldwyn L. Edwards, s.v. "Wesley, John," in The Encyclopedia of World Methodism, 2 vols; ed. Nolan B. Harmon (n.p.! The United Methodist Publishing House, 1974).

8

Thomas a Kempis) Wesley became preoccupied with the idea of perfec­

tion already in his mid-twenties. l Convinced that holiness was neces-

sary for salvation, he and his brother Charles sought a mystical, but

nonetheless highly ethical perfection, especially since the days of

the Holy Club at Oxford (1730).

But it was only in 1738--after three disappointing years in

America during which he served as a chaplain in Georgia--that John

Wesley experienced his conversion. While hearing Luther's Preface to

Romans, he suddenly gained what he had never known before, viz., the

assurance of the forgiveness of his sins and of his acceptance with

God. It was to this "Aldersgate experience" that Wesley later dated

the beginning of Methodism, saying that it provided him with the

charter, the compass, and the energy for his life work. Soon he began

a preaching and teaching ministry (mostly in the open air) which he

continued for fifty years and which led him to numerous places all

over England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland. He organized his followers

in "classes" and "conferences" which in turn actively spread the message

by means of lay preaching. Besides, many schools and chapels were

erected under his influence.

Wesley's evangelical revival was strongly influenced by

lIn 1725 Wesley was strongly impressed by reading Jeremy Taylor's Rule and Exercises of the Holy Living and Dying which persuaded him of the need for complete dedication to God in thoughts, words, and actions. A year later Thomas a Kempis' Christian Pattern showed him the need for a religion of the heart. And in 1727-28 he was strongly affected by William Law's Christian Perfection and A Serious Call to a Devout and and Holy Life, which convinced him of the impossibility of half-hearted devotion to God. See John Wesley, Plain Account of Christian Perfec­tion (Chicago and Boston: The Christian Witness Co., [192V) , pp. 1-5. (Hereafter cited as Perfection.)

9

Arminianisml and Moravianism;2 he held close contacts to the Pietists

on the continent. But since the Anglican Book of Common Prayer re-

flected both Calvinistic and Arminian tendencies, and also expressed

the longing for holiness,3 it is not surprising that Wesley never felt

that his teaching contradicted the tenets of the Anglican faith; in

fact, he never meant to found a new church, but intended only to re-

form both the church and the nation from within by reviving the spirit

of true devotion in accordance with the Scriptures. 4 And all through

his life his movement remained within the Anglican communion; only after

his death, in 1795, did the open rupture occur.

In 1739, Wesley published his first tract on Christian Per-

fectiQn, entitled "The Character of a Methodist," in which he describes

the perfect Christian as free from evil thoughts and tempers, whole~

heartedly and perfectly obeying God with a clear conscience. In sermons,

lArminius (d. 1609) questioned the Calvinistic view of the sover­eign grace of God in salvation as expressed in the doctrine of predes­tination. He also asserted that it was possible for believers to per­fectly obey the divine law, but he rejected Pelagianism by basing this possibility entirely on the grace of God.

2The Moravians were the spiritual descendants of Johann Hus and were led by the German Pietists. Gaddis saw in Arminianism and Pietism the two main Continental sources of British and American Perfectionism (p. 520).

3So Frederic Platt, s.v. "Perfection (Christian)," in Encyclo­pedia of Religion and Ethics, ed. James Hastings (New York: Charles ; Scribner's Son, 1913-1922), p. 732. Platt also pointed out that "the Arminian positions were favoured by High Churchmen of the Noujuror type" and that "the Wesleys came by ancestry from that stock" (ibid).

4He once wrote, "Methodism, so called, is the old religion, the religion of the Bible, the religion of the primitive Church, the re­ligion of the Church of England." (The Works of the Rev. John Wesley,· 14 vols. [London: Wesleyan-Methodist Book-Room, 1831J, 7:423. lHere­after cited as Works].)

10

tracts, and hymns he incessantly presented his doctrine of entire sancti-

fication. But his most complete and detailed exposition of his view

is found in his Plain Account of Christian Perfection in which he pre-

sents a historical and theological defense of his position; Wesley

attempts to demonstrate the consistency of his teaching which, he says,

remained virtually unchanged throughout his life.l

It is the essential

accuracy of this claim which allows us to present his doctrine of per-

fection in dogmatic-systematic rather than chronological-historical

fashion. 2

Later Teaching

Wesley's doctrine of entire sanctification cannot, of course,

be described, let alone be understood, in isolation from the rest of

his theology. Hence we will outline, not only his doctrine of justifi-

cation, sanctification, and perfection, but also his views on law and

ISee Perfection, pp. 3, 13, 24, 28, 105. For a detailed his~ torical study of the development of Wesley's soteriology see Orrin Avery Manifold, tiThe Development of John Wesley's Doctrine of Christian Per­fection" (Ph.D. dissertation, Boston University, 1945).

2The principal primary sources on the views of John Wesley are The Works of the Rev. John Wesley, 14 vols (Works); The Letters of the Rev. John Wesley, 8 vols (Letters); Wesley's Standard Sermons, 2.vols., ed. Edward H. Sugden (London: The Epworth Press, 1955-1956 Lhereafter cited as Sermons]); Sermons on Several Occasions, 2 vols. (New York: G.Lane & C. B. Tippett, 1845); and The Journal of the Rev. John Wesley, 8 vols~, Standard Edition, ed. Nehemiah Curnock (London: Robert Culley and Charles H. Kelly, 1909-1916; London.: 'The Epworth Press, 1938 [here­after cited as Journal]). Useful compendia of Wesley's views ate Robert W. Burtf},~r and Robert E • Chiles, eds. A Compendof Wesley's Theology, '(New York and Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1954 [hereafter cited as Com-pend}); and Philip S. Watson, comp. The Message of the Wesleys: A­Reader of Instruction and Devotion, with a Foreword by Ph. S. Watson (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1964). As already mentioned, the best summary ,of Wesley's doctrine of perfection is found in his Plain Account of Christian Perfection (Perfection).

11

sin, humility and assurance, as well as on divine grace and human

freedom; for the latter constitute the foundation on which the super­

structure of his soteriology is built. l

Justification

To treat Wesley's views on justification, sanctification, and

perfection (or entire sanctification) separately, is not merely an

artificial device necessitated by a systematic presentation; rather

it is in full harmony with his own way of thinking, for he not only

distinguished between but sharply separated these terms which he

regarded as expressive of distinct experiences in the life of a

Christian.

Wesley defines justification as "the forgiveness of all our

sins" and "our acceptance with God" on the basis of the righteousness

IFor detailed discussions of Wesley's soteriology see William Ragsdale Cannon, The Theology of John Wesley With Special Reference to the Doctrine of Justification (New York and Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1946); L. G. Cox, John Wesley's Concept of Perfection (Kansas City, Mo.: Beacon Hill Press, 1964); Harold Lindstrom, Wesley and Sanctifi­cation: A Study in the Doctrine of Salvation (London: The Epworth Press, 1950); and W. E. Sangster, The Path to Perfection (1943). For concise introductions to the same subject consult William R. Cannon, "John Wesley's Doctrine of Sanctification and Perfection," Mennonite Quarterly Review 35 (1961): 91-95; Edward W. H. Vick, "John Wesley's Teaching Concerning Perfection," Andrews University Seminary Studies 4 (1966): 201-217; Kenneth Cain Kinghorn, s.v. "Christian: Perfection," in Encyclopedia of World Methodism, 2 vols., ed. Nolan B. Harmon_ (N.p.: The United MethodistH..lblishing House, 1974); Frederic Platt, s.v. "Perfection (Christian)," in Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics; R. Ne"Yton Flew, The Idea of Perfection in Christian Theology: An Historical Study of the Christian Ideal for the Present Life (Oxford: At the Clarendon Press, 1968 [Li tographic reprint of the 1934 edition]), pp. 313-341; H. K. LaRondelle, Perfection and Perfectionism,pp. 309-324; and William Burt Pope, A Compendium of Christian Theology, 3 valse (New York: Phillips & Hunt, 1881; Cincinnati~ Cranst6n & Stowe, 1881), 3:61-99.

12

and the merits of Christ. l And while he affirms that repentance and

faith are necessary conditions for justification,2 he vehemently

denies that either repentance, faith, or good works possess any

3 meritorious value before God. Instead, "we are justifie~ freely

through the righteousness and the blood of Christ. ,,4 In other words,

though our salvation depends on our willingness and desire to accept

the divine mercy offered to us,5 it nonetheless remains, from beginning

to end, an act of grace. Ever since his conversion experience, Wesley

was "clear on justification by faith, and careful to ascribe the whole

salvation to the mere grace of God.,,6

ISermons, 2:445 (Works, 7:44). Cf. ibid., 1:120: "The plain scriptural notion of justification is pardon, the forgiveness of sins."

20n the relationship between repentance and faith he said: "Re­pentance and its fruits are only remotely necessary; necessary in order to faith; whereas faith is immediately and directly necessary to justifi­cation. It remains, that faith is the only condition which is immed­iately and proximately necessary to justification" (Sermons, 2:452). Cannon points out that, for Wesley, "repentance is man's own act effected in conjunction with prevenient grace, which is the possession of every creature" (The Theology of John Wesley; p. 248).

3"In strictness, therefore, neither our faith nor our works jus­tify us, that is, deserve the remission of our sins. But God himself justifies us, of his own mercy, through the merits of his Son only •••• For our corruption through original sin is so great, that all our faith, charity, words, and works, cannot merit or deserve any part of our justification for us. And therefore we thus speak, humbling ourselves before God, and giving Christ all the glory of our justification!' (Works, 8:362-363).,

4perfeotion, p. 101.

5Cannon confirms that, for Wesley, "active human responsiveness in the form of man's willingness to receive, yea, earnest desire to possess, the gift of faith, is the sole condition of his justification" (The Theology of John Wesley, p. 248).

6Ibid ., p. 14. Wesley made this statement in discussing his first tract on perfection (1739). Another time he said, "Grace is the source, faith the condition, of sa1vation lt (Sermons, 1:38).

13

On the other hand, Wesley strongly emphasizes that justifica-

tion, understood as the pardoning of sins and the acceptance of the

penitent soul, always involves the experience of conversion and regen-

eration and, therefore, the transforming work of the Holy spirit in the

believer. In other words, "at the same time that we are ,justified,

yea, in that very moment, sanctification begins."l Just as adoption

(the bestowal of the privileges of sonship) is concomitant with the

new birth, so the forgiveness of our sins is inevitably accompanied

by the transformation of our fallen nature. For, when God remits sin,

he also cleanses and purifies the sinner. In the words of Cox, "for

Wesley there was no justification without an inner change," for "God

does not justify any whom He does not sanctify"; hence, "one who is , 2

declared righteous actually is made righteous at the same time."

But Wesley does not only teach the simultaneousness of

adoption and regeneration, he also gives sanctification logical pre-

cedence over against ultimate justification. As Cox has pointed out,

3 "the believer is reckoned holy because he is holy." For in the words

of Cannon, God "cannot account a person as righteous unless he is in

fact righteous. n4 It should be noted that Wesley refuses to identify

ISermons 2:446 (Works, 7:45), Cf. Sermons 1:45 (Compend, p. 144): "He who is thus justified, or saved by faith, is indeed born again."

2 Pp. 78-79. Cf. Cannon, The Theology of John Wesley, p. 224: "[Wesley] uncompromisingly affirms that a man is not accounted righteous unless he is righteous and that the holiness of Christ is of no avail apart from a genuine personal holiness exemplifying itself in the life of the Christian man."

3 Cox, p. 87.

4 The Theology of John Wesley, p. 249.

14

justification with salvation; instead, he sees in the frii~er only a

means to holiness which is the ultimate condition of redemption. For,

without holiness, "no man shall see the Lord" (Heb 12:14). In other

words, final justification presupposes entire sanctification.

But, while clearly upholding the concomitance of justification

and initial sanctification in the conversion process, Wesley, at the

same time, affirms the logical priority of the forgiveness of sins

over against the regeneration of the sinner. In the sermon on "The

New Birth" he said,

In order of time, neither of these is before the other; in the moment we are justified by the grace of God, through the re­demption that is in Jesus, we are also tborn of the Spirit!; but in order of thinking, as it is termed, justification pre­cedes the new birth.!

This forgiveness of sins and the resulting regeneration by the

Spirit of God entail a radical change in the life of the believer. As

an immediate result, he is set free, not only from the guilt, but also

from the power of sin. Consequently, he will no longer commit outward

sins, i.e., habitual or willful transgressions of the law of God in

either words or deeds. 2 As Cannon has pointed out, Wesley knows of

no "gradual conquest over sinful acts themselves"; instead, "man, in

the very moment that he is justified, is given power over sin and

actually does not commit [known acts of} sin.,,3 Moreover, the believer

is given a new disposition; he is now governed by love which is the new

1 Sermons, 2:227 (Compend, p. 171).

2perfection, p. 15: "Even babes in Christ are so far perfect as not to commit sin." See also Sermons, 1!44-45 (Compend, p. 143).

3The Theology of John Wesley, p. 222. Cf. idem, IIJohn Wesley," pp. 94-95.

15

motivating force of his life and stifles any sinful desire of the

heart. Asked what are "the immediate fruits of justifying faith,"

Wesley answers, Itpeace, joy, love, power over all outward sin, and

power to keep down inward sin."l

But even though the sinful nature is now controlled and sub-

dued so that it can no longer produce its evil fruit, the sinful ten-

dencies of the heart, the root of all sin, actually remain in the

believer. This means that

although we are renewed, cleansed, purified, sanctified, the mement we truly believe in Christ, yet we are not then renewed, cleansed, purified altogether; but the flesh, the evil nature, still remains (though subdued), and wars against the Spirit. 2

Thus the Christian must remain on guard against his sinful temper, un-

holy affection, evil passions, and wrong dispositions of the character;

for pride, lust, self-will and other signs of "inbred sin" are not re-

moved at the moment of conversion. Sin, in other words, "does not

reign, but it does remain.,,3

It is this fact, combined with his identification of salvation

lWorks, 8:276. Wesley defines "inward sin" as "any sinful temper, passion, or affection; such as pride, self-will, love of the world, in any kind or degree; such as lust, anger, peevishness; any disposition contrary to the mind which was in Christ" (Sermons, 2:365 [Compend, p. 173)).

2Sermons, 2:378 (Compend, p. 174). Cf. Cox, p. 87: "Initial sanctification then is that point of beginning in the Christian life when sin is given a deadening blow by the Spirit of God but is not entirely destroyed."

3 Sermons, 2:381 (Compend, p. 179). Cf. ibid., pp. 454-455 (Compend, p. 181), where Wesley admits that "the still continuing ten­dency of the flesh to lust against the spirit," i.e., "the sin remain­ing in our hearts" implies that there is "sin remaining in our lives; still cleaving to all our words and actions."

16

with inherent holiness, which causes Wesley to clearly separate jus-

tification from sanctification and perfection. For the breaking of

the power of sin is only the beginning of the process of sanctifica-

tion which culminates in the removal of all inbred sin at the moment

of entire sanctification, or perfection. l While justification--i.e.,

the forgiveness of our sins and our adoption--as well as regeneration--

i.e., the experience of the new birth--are instantaneous and completed,

sanctification is an ongoing process involving the gradual transforma-

t " f t" t d"' " 2 10n 0 our na ure ln 0 lVlne lmage. "What God does for man in jus-

tification and conversion," writes Cannon, "expresses itself in a holy

character and disposition, free from the hindrances of outward sin,

progressively overcoming all inward desires that are evil, and being

3 led on toward perfect love." In other words, "Justification alone is

partial and incomplete; it must be followed by entire sanctification

of heart and life so that the forgiven sinner is transformed into the

likeness of his Lord.'~

Thus, while it cannot be denied that Wesley upheld the funda-

mental Protestant dicta of sola gratia and sola fide, i.e., of

1 Sermons, 2:240 (Compend, p. 172): "Regeneration, the new birth ••• is a part of sanctification, not the whole; it is the gate to it, the entrance into it. When we are born again, then our sancti­fication, our inward and outward holiness begins; and thenceforward we are gradually to 'grow up in Him who is our Head.'" Cf.Sermons, 2:448: "It is thus that we wait for entire sanctification; for a full salva­tion from all our sins."

2 Cf. Cox, p. 85: "Sanctification comes in degrees, but justi-fication is completed instantly."

3 The Theology of John Wesley, p. 250.

4Ibid •

17

justification by grace through faith alone, he undoubtedly gave them

a somewhat different interpretation by regarding justification as only

the first step on the sinner's way to salvation. For, though he never

wavered in his conviction that "neither our own holiness nor good works

are any part of the cause of our justification," but that we are jus-

tified before God only on the basis of "the death and righteousness of

Christ,,,l he nonetheless regarded the complete sanctification of the

believer as a sine qua non of his final redemption. In other words,

God will only declare those as righteous who have actually reached the

state of perfection. But, as Cannon has pointed out, "if the doctrine

of justification is itself partial and does not embrace the whole of

Wesleyan theology, it is none the less fundamental and furnishes the

basis on which all the other doctrines are built. 1I2 It constitutes

"the solid doctrinal foundation on which the superstructure of sancti­

fication with its apex of perfection rests.,,3

Sanctification

Though the process of sanctification begins at the moment of

justification, Wesley strictly separates the two from each other. Not

only does the one denote an instantaneous, the other a gradual work,

but the latter also describes an external, the former however an

internal, work of grace. Justification, says Wesley,

1 Journal, 2:275 (Compend, p. 140-141).

2 The Theology of John Wesley,p. 120. Cf. ibid., p. 244: "Wesley's doctrine of justification was the source and determinant of all the rest of his theology."

3 Idem, "John Wesley," p. 94.

18

is not the being made actually just and righteous. This is sanctification; which is, indeed, in some degree,. the imme­diate fruit of justification, but nevertheless, is a distinct gift of God, and of a totally different nature. The one implies, what God does for us through His Son; the other, what He works in us by His Spirit. l

This sanctifying work of the Spirit in the believer consists . 2

of "the renewal of our heart after the image of Him that created us,"

i.e., a transformation of character and nature, marked by the conquest

of outward and inward sin, as well as a constant growth in grace, love,

and holiness. On the one hand, the believer becomes increasingly aware

of the sinfulness of his human nature and of the need for a radical . 3

change, as well as of his inability to root out sin from his heart.

On the other hand, he is gradually dying to self and sin and filled

with the fruits of the Spirit, particularly love, which more and more

becomes the only motive of his words and deeds. 4

But, though he is constantly weakening the enemy, the believer

is unable to drive him out. For, while the Spirit is increasingly

cleansing his heart, the desires and tendencies of his evil nature

continue to trouble him, forcing him to constant watchfulness against

1 Sermons, 1:119.

2 Journal, 2:275 (Compend, p. 141).

3 Sermons, 1:329 (Compend, p. 176): "The conviction we feel of inbred sin is deeper and deeper every day. The more we grow in grace, the more do we see of the desperate wickedness of our heart. The more we advance in the knowledge and love of God, • • • the more do we dis­cern of our alienation from God, of the enmity that is in our carnal mind, and the necessity of our being entirely renewed in righteousness and true holiness." Cf. Sermons, 2:388-390 (Compend, p. 179-180).

4 Works, 8!329 (Compend, p. 182): "From the moment we are justi-fied, there may be a gradual sanctification, a growing in grace, a daily advance in the knowledge and love of God."

19

the sin within. This battle against "inbred sin" continues up to

the moment of entire sanctification at which point the believer is

entirely renewed "in the love and image of God."l Only then has his

desire for full restoration in the moral image of God become a reality,

and the deep conviction of inherent sinfulness gives way to the feel-

ing of perfect love.

Thus, Wesley can say that sanctification is "both an instan-

2 taneous and a gradual work." For, while it denotes a gradual and

never-ending process of maturation and growth, it reaches a decisive

point at the moment of entire sanctification, or perfection, when sin

is completely removed from the life of the believer. 3 In the words of

Cox, "sanctification began at regeneration, continued by gradual growth,

reached a new level in the experience of entire sanctification, and then

4 continued progressively afterwards."

Sanctification, for Wesley, is essential to full salvation;

in other words, it "constitutes the prerequisite for final justifica­

tion at the last judgment and for final salvation. 1t5 But this does

not mean that there is any meritorious value to it whatsoever. In

order to "protect sanctification, like justification, from the en-

croachment of human accomplishment and merit," Wesley emphasizes that

Iperfection, p. 51. 2 Letters, 5:215.

3Wesley pointed out that the moment of perfection is "both pre­ceded and followed by a gradual work" and that "one perfected in love may grow in grace far swifter than he did before." (Perfection, p. 104).

4 Cox, p. 85. Cf. Cannon, The Theology of John Wesley, p. 223.

5L · d" 198 1n strom, p. •

20 . . I

it, too, is "the direct gift of God, a peculiar sanctifying grace .. "

And just as with the forgiveness of sins and our acceptance with God,

the transforming work of the Spirit depends on only one condition,

viz., it must be received by simple, trusting faith. Said Wesley,

I have continually testified in private and in public, that we are sanctified as well as justified by faith. • • • Exactlyas we are justified by faith, so are we sanctified by faith. Faith is the condition, and the only condition of sanctification, exactly as it is of justification.2

Perfection

As we have already pointed out, Wesley's teaching on perfection,

or entire sanctification, constitutes his most distinctive contribution

to theology, and the heart of Methodism. He defined it as "love fill-

ing the heart, expelling pride, anger, desire, self-will; rejoicing

evermore, praying without ceasing, and in everything giving thanks.,,3

Hidden in this unpretending definition are the two main characteris-

tics of the state of perfection as perceived by Wesley: the all-

pervasive presence of love in the soul and the complete eradication of

sin from heart and life. As W. B. Pope has pointed out, lithe combina-

tion of the two elements, the negative annihilation of the principle of

sin and the positive effusion of perfect love, is ••• peculiar to

4 Methodist theology as such."

With regard to the former, Wesley explains that, at the moment

of entire sanctification, the believer is delivered "from all inward

I Cannon, "John Wesley," p. 95.

2 Sermons, 2:453 (Compend, p. 182).

3perfection, p. 73. 4 Pope, 3:97.

21

as well as outward sin; from evil desires and evil tempers, as well as . I

from evil words and works."

This means that the sinful human nature, that is, "inbred sin,"

the inherent moral corruption of the soul, the wrong disposition of

the will, the evil tendencies, the depravity of the heart--in short,

the inherited (and acquired) sinfulness of man, is instantaneously

removed. "Christian perfection is that love of God and our neighbor,

which implies deliverance from all sin. 1l2 The believer has now died

to sin, and his character and moral nature are cleansed from all defile-

mente In other words, sin has been annihilated. As a result, the be-

liever will no longer commit any sins--neither outward nor inward; fully

restored to the moral image of God he is free from all sinful thoughts

and tempers (such as pride, envy, anger, contention, and self-will),

as well as evil words and deeds.

Being thus cleansed "from all filthiness of flesh and spirit,"

the believer is entirely sanctified, possessing inherent holiness3

which shows itself in perfect obedience to the law of love. In fact,

Wesley practically identifies perfection with love. "Pure love reign-

ing alone in the heart and life--this is the whole of Scriptural

perfection.,,4 Such love of God and man will be "running through all

1 Works 7 :,237 • 2perfection, p. 40; cf. pp. 32, 52-53, 79.

3Wesley defines IIholiness" as "the life of God in the soul; the image of God fresh stamped on the heart; an entire renewal of the mind in every temper and thought, after the likeness of Him that created it ll

(Journal, 2:90 [Compend, p. 171]).

4perfection, p. 50. Cf. Kinghorn, p. 490 b: "The principal characteristic of Christian perfection is perfect love." In a letter, Wesley pointed to 1 Cor 13 as presenting "the true picture of Christian Perfection" (Letters, 7:120).

22

our tempers, words, and actions"l and control all desires, motives,

and intentions. Free from any inclination to evil, all thoughts

and emotions are pure and holy; for, in a heart filled with love is

no room for evil thoughts and tempers. "Inwardly and outwardly devoted

to God; all devoted in heart and life,,,2 and with Htotal resignation

to the will of God, without any mixture of self-will,,,3 the Christian

lives with the sole intention to obey and please his Lord.

Thus, Wesley's doctrine of perfection is well described as "an

entire deliverance from sin, a recovery of the whole image of God, the

4 loving God with all our heart, soul, and strength." Or, in the words

of K. C. Kinghorn, it denotes Ita state of grace characterized by a

5 heart cleansed from sin and filled with perfect love." But this love

is a gift to be used on behalf of one's fellowmen. "Wesley insisted

that there is no holiness but social holiness;" in other words, "Chris­

tian perfection is not solitary or mystical, it is practical. n6

lIbid., p. 45. teach is perfect love: as Prophet, Priest and and actions."

Cf. l.etters, 4:157-158: "The perfection I loving God with all the heart; receiving Christ King, to reign alone over all our thoughts, words,

2perfection, p. 28. 3perfection, p. 78.

4Letters, 5:215. Cf. Perfection, pp. 106-107: "In one view, it is purity of intention, dedicat~ng all the life to God. It is the giv­ing God all our heart; it is one desire and design ruling all our tempers. It is the devoting, nota part, but all, our soul, body, and substance, to God. In another view, it is all the mind which was in Christ, enabl­ing us to walk as Christ walked. It is the circumcision of the heart from all filthiness, all inward as well as outward pollution. It is a renewal of the heart in the whole image of God, the full likeness of Him that created it. In yet another, it is the loving God with all our heart, and our neighbor as ourselves."

5Kinghorn, p. 489a.

6Ibid ., p. 49Gb. Cf. Peters, pp. 187-188.

23

It is of crucial importance, however, to realize that, for

Wesley, perfect love is measured by devotion and motivation, rather

than by performance. It is the bel'iever's intention that counts, not

his actual accomplishments. l This means that Wesley does not teach

absolute, or infallible, perfection;2 for "absolute perfection belongs

not to man, nor to angels, but to God alone," and "none is infallible,

3 while he remains in the body." Wesley recognizes that man, in his

fallen state, is unable to reach the quality of perfection enjoyed by

the angels or by Adam before the fall. As a result, he makes use of

two different concepts of perfection and a corresponding duality in the terms law and sin. He employs a concept of relative perfection and a concept of absolute perfection. The former is subjective and concerns the intention and will, the latter objective and independent of man's poten~ tialities.4

In other words, perfection, for Wesley, does not remove the

weaknesses, infirmities, and imperfections that are an intrinsic part

of man's fallen human nature. Neither his bodily infirmities, nor his

faulty mind, the natural instincts, lack of knowledge, nor errors of

judgment, are taken away at the moment of entire sanctification. 5

ICf. Cannon, The Theology of John Wesley, p. 241: "Christian perfection, for Wesley, means, therefore, only one thing, and that is purity of motive: the love of God, freed entirely from all the .corrup­tions of natural desire • • • guides unhindered every thought and every action." Kinghorn, p. 490, concurs: "Christian perfection is full de­votion to Christ which is to be expressed in every act. Wesley empha­sizes the element of devotion more than that of performance. •• "

2 Letters, 4: 213: ,It Absolute and infallible perfection?' I never contended for it."

3perfec~ion, p. 103.

4Lindstrom, p. 150. See below, pp. 29-36.

5perfection, p. 14: "They [Christians) are not perfect in

24

But neither are they regarded as sinful in the proper sense, for these

defects, and the mistakes and shortcomings which inevitably result from

them, do not encroach upon the perfect devotion and intention of the

believer. They are involuntary failures and, though they are trans-

gressions of the perfect (Adamic) law, they do not constitute devia-

tions from the law of love as long as "love is the sole principle of

action. ,,1 Hence, Wesley is teaching only the attainability of moral

perfection in contrast to physical flawlessness and intellectual ex-

cellence. In the words of Cox,

Wesley clearly distinguished between the present perfection of soul attainable in this life and the future perfection of human nature attainable in the next life. The first frees the believer from sinfulness of heart~ the second will free him from all the evil consequences of sin.

Since "there is no such perfection in this life as excludes

these involuntary transgressions"--which Wesley regarded to be

"naturally consequent on the ignorance and mistakes inseparable from

morality"--he also refrained from using the term "sinless perfection.,,3

He did this in order to avoid being misunderstood, and because "the

term is not scriptural.,,4 Besides, he says, "It is not worthwhile to

knowledge. They are not free from ignorance, no, nor from mistake. We are no more to expect any living man to be infallible, than to be omniscient. They are not free from infirmities, such as weakness _or slowness of understanding, irregular quickness or heaviness of imagi­nation. Such in another kind are impropriety of language, ungrace­fulness of pronunciation; to which one might add a thousand nameless defects, either in conversation or behavior. From such infirmities as these none are perfectly freed till their spirits return to God." See also ibid., pp. 26-27. Cf. Cox, pp. 168-188.

lIbid., p. 42. 2Cox, p. 102.

3Ibid ., p. 43. 4 Letters, 4:213.

25

contend for a term."l At the same time, however, he did not protest

against its use either. "I do not contend for the term 'sinless,'

though I do not object against it.,,2 Moreover, he maintains that,

whether or not perfection should be characterized as sinlessness, it

certainly means "salvation from sin.,,3

Wesley's view regarding the term "sinless perfection" may

sound somewhat perplexing, and Flew found it "difficult to reconcile

his statements on this point.,,4 However, if one takes adequate account

of Wesley's crucial distinction between "sin, properly so called" and

"sin, improperly so called"--which we will discuss shortly in more

detail--it cannot be said that he is inconsistent on this issue. For,

though he considers it advisable not to use the term "sinless" in

connection with moral perfection, he undoubtedly contends for just that,

viz., sinless perfection of the soul, or freedom from all "sin, properly

so called. 1f Besides, by regarding the expression as "not scriptural"

he did not mean to say "unbiblical" but merely "not employed in

Scripture."

Thus, while it may be said that "Wesley rejects this term as

being less than accurate because of mistakes and defects in the per­

formance of the best Christians, ,,5 it must be clearly understood that,

lperfection, p. 103. 2 Works, 11:428.

3perfection, p. 103. 4Flew , p. 325.

5Kinghorn, p. 489b. Kinghorn's assertion tion "is not 'sinless perfection'" (ibid.), seems into the mind of Wesley than into the thinking of theologians. F. Platt clearly states that Wesley less perfection," though only in reference to the

that Christian perfec­to provide less insight contemporary Methodist does indeed teach "sin­law of love (p. 73la).

26

for him, these inevitable shortcomings do not constitute transgressions

of the law of love and are, consequently, not sins in the proper sense.

Regarding only "voluntary transgression of a known law" as sin, Wesley

does indeed teach a doctrine of "sinless perfection," i.e., of freedom

from known sins and from violations against the law of love. And,

though he also does not dispute "whether sin is suspended or extin­

guished" in the perfect, he nonetheless maintains that "they feel noth-

ing but love," in other words, that they are no longer troubled by any

evil promptings or desires from within.l

At the same time, however--and as a corollary to the unavoidable

weaknesses and shortcomings of his human nature--the believer will al-

ways remain susceptible to temptations. This, in turn, implies the

possibility of his falling back into sin. "There is no such height or .. 2

strength of holiness as it is impossible to fall from." In fact,

Wesley even argues that "it is an exceeding common thing for persons

to lose it more than once, before they are established therein.,,3

lLetters, 4:213: Cf. ibid.: "'But is there not .sin in those that are perfect?' I believe not; but, be that as it may;-they feel none, no temper but pure love." Another time he wrote: "I use the word 'destroyed' because St. Paul does; 'suspended' I cannot find in my Bible" (Letters, 5:204). See also Perfection, p. 104.

2perfection, p. 84. On the same page he also says, "Formerly we thought, one saved from sin could not fall; now we know the con­trary." See also ibid., pp. 74, 78.

3Ibid ., p. 84; cf. p. 104: "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." This shows how strongly Wesley's doctrine of perfection was influenced by his own experience. and that of others. In fact, he even said that, if no one would attain the state of conscious perfection, his scriptural interpretations re_ garding perfection would thereby be proved wrong (Perfection, p. 57).

27

But, for most people, the experience of entire sanctification

does not occur until the moment of death. This is not because of an

unwillingness on the part of God to bestow "the second blessing"

earlier; rather it is due to a lack of desire and expectation on the

part of most Christians. Yet the Holy Spirit performs this special

work of cleansing only on those who earnestly strive for it in self-

denial and obedience. Hence, it is because of a lack of devotion that

the experience of instantaneous sanctification is usually--but unnecces­

sarily--delayed. l

Wesley emphasizes that, once the point of perfection has been

reached, sanctification does not end, but rather continues as before-­

if not with increased intensity. Though "sin is separated from his

soul," the Christian "still grows in grace, in the knowledge of Christ,

in the love and image of God.,,2 This growth will last into eternity

and virtually never end,3 and "one perfected in love may grow in grace

far swifter than he did before.,,4 In other words, there is progress

in perfection, for "Wesley did not teach that holiness was a static con­

dition.,,5

However, until the state of perfection has been reached, the

believer is not finally saved. This is to say that perfection is not

only attainable in this life, but it must be reached by all who are

p. 243.

lIbid., pp. 52, 79, 80.

2Ibid ., p. 52; cf. p. 89.

3Ibid., p. 83. 4Ibid ., p. 104.

5ViCk , p. 213. Cf. Cannon, The Theology of John Wesley,

28

to receive their promised inheritance. For, "none are or can be . . 1

saved but those who are by faith made inwardly and outwardly holy."

At the same time, Wesley regards perfection not as a threat to cause

fear and anxiety, but as a divine promise whose fulfillment the be-

2 liever may joyfully expect. After all, the removal of man's inherent

sinfulness is a second work of grace which, like justification, is a

free gift of God and allows, therefore, for no boastful claims on the

part of its recipients. Thus, at no point in the Christian life is

there any room for the accumulation of human merits. For, just as

"we are justified freely through the righteousness and the blood of

Christ," so "we expect likewise to be sanctified wholly through His

Spirit. ,,3 In the words of Kinghorn, "Christian perfection is a gift

4 of God, resulting from grace alone."

As already said, for Wesley, this gift of perfection, as a

second work of grace, is a prerequisite for final redemption. It is

1 Letters, 5:337. Cf. Peters, p. 182: "Wesley's distinctive contribution~issued from the fa6t that he considered the doctrine as a practical way of life available to and necessary for every regenerate Christian."

2Asked whether a believer who has not yet reached perfection is in a state of damnation, Wesley responded, "He is in a state of grace and in favour with God a'S long as he believes," though "till you are saved from unholy tempers, you are not ripe for glory." But, if you should suddenly die, "I believe you would be saved, because I am persuaded none that has faith can die before he is made ripe for. glory" (Letters, 4:10, 13). Cf. Lindstrom, p. 200: "The Christian need feel no anxiety over his final salvation, if he remains in faith. • • • Perfect sanctification should be regarded as a promise to be fulfilled by God in his own good time."

3perfection, p. 101. Cf. Cannon, "John Wesley," p. 95.

4Kinghorn, p. 489a.

29

looked upon as "a still higher salvation"thanjustification and

initial sanctification. l In fact, as Cox has pointed out, "salvation,

2 perfection, and holiness have the same meaning for Wesley." Thus,

"Christian Perfection, or entire sanctification, is the end of

Wesleyan moral development, the goal of justification itself, and in­

deed the final condition for salvation.,,3

Law and Sin

Wesley's doctrine of perfection can be understood only on the

basis of his hamartiology as well as his idea of the law. As already

pointed out, he distinguished between two categories of sin: "sin,

properly so called," that is, "a voluntary transgression of a known

law," and "sin, improperly so called," that is, "an involuntary trans-

4 gression of a Divine law, known or unknown." In other words, Wesley

differentiates willful and conscious sins from involuntary and uncon-

scious shortcomings and failures. The latter, aeriving from physical

infirmities and intellectual weaknesses, are manifest in defects in

thought, temper, words, and action. But since these mistakes do not

constitute a transgression of the law of love, they are looked upon as

sinless faults. "Nothing is sin, strictly speaking, but a voluntary

Iperfection, p. 46. Cf. Flew, p. 320: "Entire Sanctification is the perfection of the regenerate state. Wesley is at pains to dis­tinguish conversion from the 'Great Salvation.'"

2 Cox, p. 191.

3 Cannon, The Theology of John Wesley, p. 240;cf. ibid., p. 241: "Perfection is the completion of the development of sanctification begun at regeneration."

4perfection, p. 43.

30

transgression of a known law of God. Therefore every voluntary breach

1 of the law of love is sin; and nothing else, if we speak properly."

Apart from proper (since voluntary) and improper (since

involuntary) sins, Wesley speaks also of "original sin" which he

identifies with the inherited sinful nature of man revealing itself in

evil tendencies, wrong tempers, and sinful passions. These he desig-

nates as "inward sins" in distinction to the "outward sins" in word

and deed which result from the former. "Actual sin proceeds from

original; evil works from an evil heart.,,2 As a result of Adam's sin,

"we are all born with a sinful, devilish nature.,,3 In one of his

sermons, Wesley forcefully expressed this conviction of original sin:

Know thyself to be asinner_, and what manner of sinner thou art. Know that corruption of thy inmost nature. • • • Know that thou art corrupted in every power, in every faculty of the soul; that thou art totally corrupted in everyone of these. 4

When a man is converted, two great changes occur in his rela-

tionship to sin: justification, i.e., the forgiveness of his sins,

removes the guilt of sin, while initial sanctification frees him from

the power of sin so that he no longer commits wilful and outward sins.

At the same time, however, the "root of sin," the evil tempers and

1 Letters, 5:322 (Compend, p. 177).

2Works 9:275.

3 Works 8:277. Observing that even children of pious parents are revealing "wrong tempers," Wesley feels constrained to assume that they, too, possess "a natural propensity to evil" (ibid., 9:295.

4 Sermons, 1:155-156. Cf. Vick, p. 212: "Wesley taught empha-

tically the doctrine of total depravity with no attempt to soften its asperity, remove its sting."

31

desires, remain--though controlled and subdued--in his heart. And,

while Christians will not give in to their sinful nature, they are

fully aware, not only of the presence of the inbred sin, but also of

its defiling effects.

These continually feel a heart bent to backsliding; a natural tendency to evil; a proneness to depart from God, and cleave to the things of the earth. They are daily sensible of sin remaining in their heart, pride, self-will, unbelief; and of sin cleaving to all they speak and do, even their best actions and holiest duties. l

However, at the moment of entire sanctification, inbred sin

itself is removed from the heart; besides the guilt and power of sin,

the believer is now set free even from its very being. Consequently,

perfect Christians are no longer troubled by inherent corruption, feel-

ing only love in their heart. In other words, "Wesley taught that man

CQuid be delivered both from sin as a voluntary transgression and from

sin as involuntary principle--both from sin as a symptom and from sin

as disease • .,2

But, at the same time, the Christian is still afflicted by

his inherited infirmities and, therefore, the liability to make mis-

takes and commit involuntary wrongs. These consequences of sin will

not be removed before a man dies, for they are an intrinsic and

inseparable element of his human existence in its fallen state. What

is of crucial importance here is the clear distinction which Wesley

draws between original sin and inherited infirmities. 3 Believing

I Works, 9:292-293. 2 Peters, p. 46.

3Cf . Cox, p. 100: "There is a significant distinction made by Wesley between the sins of the heart, or inward sinfulness, and the weaknesses and infirmities of the body."

32

that holiness and salvation require the eradication of all sin from

the believer, he taught that outward as well as inward sins must be

gone before death. But, in the words of Cox,

mistakes and infirmities are neither accountable sins nor are they fruit from a nature of sin. They.flow from an innocent nature that has suffered in the fall of man. This fallen nature is sinful only in the sense of suffering the consequence of sin. l

Wesley's peculiar hamartiology is closely related to his dis-

tinction between the absolute, or Adamic, law and the law of love.

The law of love, which is the whole law given to us, is the only one branch of that perfect law which was given to Adam in the beginning. His law was far wider than ours, as his faculties were more extensive. Consequently many things might be transgressions of the latter which were not of the former. 2

After the fall it became impossible for man to perfectly obey the moral

law and thereby to reach Adamic or angelic perfection. However, in

spite of his intrinsic weaknesses and inevitable shortcomings, man

can, by the grace of God, live in perfect harmony with the law of love

and, in that sense, reach the state of sinless perfection, or moral

sinlessness. For, while the law of love upholds the same goal of

perfect conformity to every divine injunction,3 it judges man, not on

the basis of his actual performance, but his intention and motivation.

In the words of Cox,

Adam was expected to render a perfect accomplishment in his obedience because he was able to give such. This meant that

lIbid., p. 59; cf. p. 101: "But in no sense could the natural body itself be sinful or keep the soul from purity."

2 Letters, 4!155.

3perfection, p. 89: "Christ ••• has adopted every point of the moral law, and grafted it into the law of love."

33

he not only was prompted by perfect love but must perform the acts of obedience without a flaw. Fallen man on the other hand could never perform a perfect, flawless obedience to the absolute law, although it continues as a goal before him. But he can keep the law of Christ which requires.a pure love. .One can render a loving obedience even though the performance is imperfect. l

This distinction between the absolute moral law with its

demand for flawless performance (to which the unfallen creation is

subject), and the relative law of love with its requirement for flaw-

less motivation (which applies to fallen man), enabled Wesley to admit

the impossibility of infallible perfection on the part of man without

lessening the validity of the divine statutes.

"At every point, in every turn of his thought," writes Flew,

2 "he lays all possible stress on the fulfilment of the moral law."

Yet this attitude does not betray a legalistic mind but the insight

that sanctification--the transformation into the moral image of God--

inevitably implies obedience to God's commands. For, the moral law is

"an incorruptible picture" of God; it is "the face of God unveiled;

God manifested to his creatures"; it is "the heart of God disclosed to

man," and "a copy of the eternal mind, a transcript of the di~ine nature.,,3

1 Cox, p. 142. Cf. Platt, p. 73la: "Perfect love is the one law stated in the gospel to which we are now subject in the Christian dispensation; this is not a mitigated law, but a higher law than that contained in ordinances; it is the only law possible for us to obey and by which we can be judged. Because it is the royal law, the law of Christ, obedience to it constitutes Christian perfection in the Methodist sense." See also Kinghorn, p. 490.

2 Flew, p. 332.

3 Works, 5:438-39. Cf. Cannon, The Theology of John Wesley, p. 249: "The character of God is set forth in terms of the moral law, which is the eternal expression of his holiness."

34

Thus it is not surprising that Wesley--who regarded personal holiness

as a sine qua non of salvation--considered perfect conformity to the

law of God of paramount importance. Consequently, he was also concerned

"1 to avoid the appearance of antinomianism which he strongly opposed. In

his view, "grace in no wise destroys the law as the standard for obe.;;.

dience; it enables one to give a loving obedience to the whole moral " 2

law."

Both Wesley's view on the two laws and his distinction between

proper and improper sins, or sinful and sinless faults, allowed him

simultaneously to reject the term "sinless perfection"--if it is used

in reference to the absolute moral law--and to accept it--if it is re-

lated to the law of love. In this way, he adjusted the idea of per-

fection to the possibilities and limitations of fallen man; this, in

turn, was accompanied by a similar adjustment of the concepts of law

and sin. Lindstrom has rightly observed that "this adaptation of the

idea of the law is one of the basic conditions for his doctrine of

perfection"; the same also applies to his view on sin. 3

Because of the importance and peculiarity of Wesley's hamar-

tiology and his idea of the law, any critical evaluation of his doc-

trine of perfection must begin at this point. On the one hand, it must

be asked whether the distinction between the absolute moral law and the

lCf. Peters, p. 62: "His passionate advocacy of holiness was designed to obviate antinomian ism and to check the constant tendency to rest in a relative spiritual impotency." See also Cannon, The Theology of John Wesley, pp. 146-147.

2 Cox, p. 141-42.

3Lindstrom, p. 146; cf. p. 148.

35

law of love is feasible and defensible. In the first place, it tends

to make a subjective feeling the criterion for conformity to God's law;

but it seems doubtful whether human consciousness can serve as an

accurate guide in this matter. In the second place, Wesley is forced

to admit that our non-moral infirmities prevent us from obeying even

the law of love in an absolutely impeccable way;l if neither of the

two laws can be perfectly obeyed, the distinction between them becomes

of little use.

On the other hand, Wesley's hamartiology is likewise open to

serious questions. Flew criticized what he perceived to be "an inade-

quate analysis of the nature of sin." In the first place, he pointed

out that the distinction between voluntary and involuntary transgres-

sions is difficult to carry through without contradictions. "The stress

on the consciousness and deliberate intention of the agent is the most

formidable defect in Wesley's doctrine of the ideal." After all,

~many otherwise good people are unconscious of their own selfishness";

and is not "unconscious hypocrisy" the essence of Pharisaism? In the

second place, Flew criticized Wesley for tending to speak of sin as a

substance, or a thing, which may be instantaneously removed from man.

But, he asks, "How can he be delivered in an instant from that which

he himself is?,,2

LaRondelle has pointed out that Wesley's "hamartiological

IJournal, 4:471 (Compend, p. 177): "As long as we live ••• we are liable to mistakes • • • and a mistake may occasion my loving a goodman less than I ought; which is a defective, that is, a wrong temper." Cf. Perfection, p. 72.

2 Flew, pp. 332-35; cf. pp. 326-27.

36

dualism" and, therefore, his soteriology were "rooted in the substan-

tial dichotomy of his anthropology" on the basis of which Wesley sharply

distinguished between physical/mental and moral perfection. l This led

him to believe that the inherited infirmities of mind and body are not

intrinsically related to the corruption of the soul. Consequently, he

assumed that the sinful nature, or original sin, might be entirely re-

moved from a body marked by the consequences of sin. "Wesley did not

associate sinfulness, or evil nature, either as a part of the body or

as intrinsic to the human nature. This evil is that which is removable

without destroying either the body or basic human nature.,,2 It seems

that Wesley's doctrine of perfection has its weakest point in his teach-

ing on law and sin which lies at the very foundation of his soteriology.

Humility and Assurance

When the belief in the possibility of the eradication of inbred

sin is combined with the notion that only known and voluntary trans-

gressions of the moral law are sins in the proper sense and that per­

fection is characterized by "feeling only love," it is but natural to

assume that a Christian may, and will, be conscious of this experience-­

and, consequently, be able to bear witness to it. Hence, it does not

surprise that--in the words of Gaddis--Wesley saw in Christian perfec-

tion a challenge to all Christians, "to reach, by Divine aid, a state

of conscious moral perfection or maturity in this life.,,3 However,

1 LaRondelle, pp. 317-18; 322-23.

2 Cox, p. 59.

3Gaddis, p. 16.

37

the latter admitted that there are only few, if any, indisputable . 1

examples of it.

This assurance of entire sanctification Wesley regarded, not

merely as an obscure feeling, but as a conviction which God himself--

by means of "the testimony of the Spiri t"--impresses upon the be-

liever's mind. "As, when we were justified, the Spirit bore witness

with our spirit, that our sins were forgiven; so, when we were sancti-

2 fied, he bore witness, that they were taken away." This inner cer-

tainty of the entire transformation of the moral nature into the image

of God will, however, be accompanied by outward evidences accessible

to the observer. Among these "proofs" of entire sanctification Wesley

lists exemplary behavior (particularly blamelessness in words and

3 actions) and an account of the time and manner of the change. In

other words, perfection will be known "by the witness and by the fruit

of the Spirit.,,4 Yet, Wesley also admits that there is no absolute

proof for this experience and that there will not necessarily be an

outward difference between those entirely sanctified and those not yet

cleansed from all sin. 5

Iperfection, p. 36.

2 Works, 11:420. Cf. Sermons, 2:345: "By the testimony of the Spirit, I mean an inward impression on the soul, whereby the Spirit of God immediately and directly witnesses to my spirit, that I am a child of God. It Though this statement was made in reference to justifi-cation, the nature of the witness of the Spirit is the same in the case of entire sanctification.

3perfection, p. 46. Thus, when some believers in London claimed to be perfect without showing a corresponding change in their behavior, Wesley flatly denied the validity of their claim (ibid., pp. Bl-93).

4Ibid ., p. 75. 5Ibid ., pp. 46, 49.

38

But should a Christian ever speak of this experience? Wesley

is aware of the danger that a public profession of holiness may turn

out to be little more than boastful self-glorification. But, at the

same time, he sees nothing wrong in humbly witnessing to what God, in

his grace, does for his children. In fact, he considers it a duty of

those entirely sanctified to confess the enjoyment of the second

blessing, and thereby to glorify God, but also as an encouragement to

others to earnestly seek full salvation. However, he advises Chris­

tians not to boast of their experience and to speak of it "in the most

inoffensive manner possible."l But, what if someone falsely claims

entire sanctification without actually possessing it? Wesley is not

particularly troubled by this possibility. As long as such a person

"feels nothing but love," he says, "he is in no danger" having made

only a "harmless mistake. 112

Wesley did not regard the claim of having reached the state of

holiness and moral perfection as presumptuous and dangerous, for he

believed to have provided sufficient safeguards which--if applied-­

would effectively prevent Christians from any tincture of pride or

self-sufficiency. In the first place, he emphasized that even the per­

fectly sanctified Christian is still liable to temptations; in other

words, perfection is "amissible, capable of being 10st,,,3 Secondly,

he stressed that those who are perfect continue to be subject to their

lIbid., pp. 45, 94.

2Ibid ., p., p~ 56.

3Ibid ., p. 104.

39

bodily infirmities, errors of judgment, and involuntary mistakes.

And, thirdly, he pointed out that perfection does not remove the need

for "the atoning blood" of Christ; for, though these defects and short­

comings are not sins in the proper sense, they still require divine for­

giveness since they are "deviations from the perfect law."l

This idea, according to which Christians who are sinless (in

the proper sense) still need Christ as their High Priest and Mediator

for their shortcomings, which Wesley is at great pains to classify as

not sinful (in the proper sense), this view has puzzled many interpre­

ters. It has been described as IIcurious,,,2 but also as "realistic.,,3

In any event, it reflects Wesley's concern to show that even "the most

perfect have continual need of the merits of Christ" and that "none

feel their need of Christ like these; none so entirely depend on Him.,,4

For, not only do our "sins, improperly so called" require atonement,

but "all our blessings, temporal, spiritual, and eternal, depend on

His intercession for us."S In addition, those who have been set free

from the very being of sin still need Christ as their Advocate "on

account of their coming short of the law of love. For every man

living does so.,,6 Wesley can even say that "they still need Christ as

their Priest, to make atonement for their holy things"; for "even

ISee Perfection, pp. 41-44, 71-74.

2Vick , p. 208. 3Kinghorn, p. 489b.

4perfection, p. 42.

SIbid., p. 43.

6Ibid ., p. 72.

40 . 1

perfect holiness is acceptable to God only through Jesus Christ."

Thus, it is not surprising when he concludes that "all may have need

2 to say daily, 'Forgive us our trespasses. '"

There can be no question that Wesley's doctrine of perfection

leaves--if properly understood--no room for pride, self-sufficiency,

boasting, or the notion of merit. Instead, in Wesley's view, it would

lead to an ever increasing humility and deepening repentance, based on

the recognition of one's utter helplessness and unworthiness, and con-

3 stant dependence on grace. Cannon rightly observed that

the sum and substance of the Wesleyan doctrine of repentance of believers, therefore, is nothing more than a profound recog-nition of human weakness, of man's utter dependence on God's 4 grace, and a sincere consciousness of humility and of gratitude.

At the same time, however, it cannot be denied that the claim

to have reached a state of sinless moral perfection remains extremely

lIbid., p. 71.

2 Journal, 4:471 (Compend, p. 177). Cf. Perfection, pp.42, 73-74. In one of his letters, Wesley wrote: "Thus much is certain: they that love God with all their heart and all men as themselves are scripturally perfect. • • • But then remember, on the other hand, you have this treasure in an earthen vessel; you dwell in a poor, shattered house of clay, which presses down the immortal spirit. Hence all your thoughts, words, and actions are so imperfect, so far from coming up to the standard (that law of love which, but for the corruptible body, your soul would answer in all instances), that you may well say till you go to Him you love: Every moment, Lord, I need the merit of Thy death." (Letters, 4:208.)

3 See especially Sermons, 2:379-81, 388-90, 454-55 (Compend, pp. 178-82).

4 Cannon, The Theology of John Wesley, p. 141. Cf. Lindstrom, pp. 156-57: "Wesley links up the idea of humility with his conception of perfection. • • • With perfect sanctification humility comes to an even greater degree than before to mean man's sense of total depen­dence on God."

41

dangerous, and that the question of the consciousness of entire sancti-

fication constitutes one of the major stumbling-blocks of Wesley's

idea of perfection. Flew even saw in this issue "the supreme diffi­

culty in any exposition of Wesley's doctrine."l He criticized Wesley.'s

idea of assurance for its tendency to lead to pride--which the "unlovely

self-sufficiency" of many of those who claimed perfection amply demon-

strates--and because man cannot know himself well enough to claim that

God has already uprooted and destroyed all indwelling sin. 2

In his critical appraisal of Wesley's doctrine of perfection,

Sangster likewise considered it "a dangerous thing for anyone to say

that they are freed from all sin," and this for three reasons. First,

because "the worth of such a witness depends on their sensitivity of

conscience,"--thereby reducing such a claim to a subjective expression

of one's consciousness in distinction from a factual observation.

Secondly, because "it does not harmonize with a 'moment by moment' life"--

for, since such a statement is valid only at the moment it is uttered,

it is practically worthless. And, thirdly, because "it is shaped in

ignorance, for no man knows what is in him"--and what future temptations

may induce him to sin. Besides, "pride and presumption so easily attend

this claim" leading to a kind of self-induced spiritual blindness.

Sangsters concludes, "The idea that one has already achieved [perfec-

tion] becomes, therefore, an impediment to spiritual progress." For

"God can still work in the heart of a man conscious of need; but those

1 Flew, p. 328. Cf. Peters, p. 186: "The real critical feature in Wesley's formulation of the doctrine is his teaching that holiness or perfection may be actually and consciously attained."

2Ibid ., pp. 336-37.

42

unconscious of it make themselves incapable of progress even in the . 1

hands of the Almighty."

In the light of this strong but well taken criticism it seems

all the more significant that Wesley himself never claimed to have

attained, that is, to have experienced the "second blessing" resulting

in a state of inherent holiness and morally sinless perfection. Thus,

he demonstrated in his life what he had intended to convey in his

teaching, namely, an awareness of the utter sinfulness of man and his

complete dependence on the grace of God who alone possesses true per-

fection and holiness.

Freedom and Grace

Two of the most important elements of Wesley's thought, which

have also decisively influenced his soteriology, are his Arminian view

on the freedom of the will and his sublime doctrine of grace. Both

stand in a creative tension with each other, and their presence in his

theology has led to a highly ethical view of religion2 which, at the

same time, did not succumb to the legalistic tendencies which often

accompany the rejection of antinomianism. In other words, Wesley was

able to avoid the pitfall of stressing the human element in the pro-

cess of salvation to the neglect of the divine; nor did he allow his

high view on grace to conceal the fact that man is called to react

to the salvific acts of God.

1 Sangster, pp. 164-67.

2Cf . Cannon 1 IIJohn Wesley," p. 94: "There is no other theolo;" gian in the entire range of Christian history who was any .more con­cerned with the direct relationship between Christianity and morality than was John Wesley."

43

Wesley rejected the Calvinistic tenets of preaestination and

~nconditional election;l Instead, he maintained that man possesses -2

the freedom to accept or refuse the grace of God offered to him. In

fact, due to his self-limitation, God "cannot save a man apart from

that man's willingness to be saved.,,3 However, because of the total

corruption of human nature, this ability itself is the result of the

4 prevenient grace of God given to every man. Thus, man is not seen

as merely the passive recipient of God's mercy, but ratAer as a being

called to actively respond to the divine grace in repentance, faith,

and obedience, and to cooperate with his Creator in the work of redemp-

tion. As Pope has pointed out, Wesley's teaching is characterized by

"its remarkable blending of the divine and human elements in the pro­

cess of entire sanctification. IIS This concept of cooperation between

God and man in salvation is clearly set forth in Wesley's writings.

Wrote he,

We allow it is the work of God alone to justify, to sanctify,_ and to glorify; which three comprehend the whole of salvation.

IFor his reasons, see Sermons on Several Occasions, 1:13-19.

2In his sermon "What is Man?" is a power of self-determination ••• assisting me, I have a power to choose I am free to choose whom I will serve; to continue therein even unto death."

(1788), Wesley said: "[Liberty} Through the grace of God

and do good, as well as evil. and if I choose the better part,

3 Cannon, The Theology of John Wesley, p. 249;cf. p. 2S0~_

"Wesley shies away from the Augustinian conception of total depravity in which man's freedom is denied." See also idem, "John Wesley," p. 94.

4 Cf. Cannon, "John Wesley," p. 94: "The gift of_responding to divine mercy is inherent in the constitution of every human being. This is prevenient grace."

5 Pope, p. 97.

44

Yet we cannot allow, that man can only resist, and not in any wise 'work together with God'; or that God is so the whole worker of our salvation, as to exclude man's working at all. l

But--as this quotation also shows--"Wesley was not attempting

to establish the absoluteness of human freedom. The basis of his teach-2 ing is n~t the natural ability of man but the grace of God." For man

can~ot believe and obey--or even repent--without the grace of God who

works salvation in him through the Spirit. Hence, Wesley was "careful

to ascribe the whole salvation to the mere grace of God,,,3 stressing

that "all true faith, and the whole work of salvation, every good thought,

4 word, and work, is altogether by the operation of the Spirit of God."

This means that our good works "belong wholly to God, because they

5 proceed from Him and His grace."

Thus, "obedience and holiness are considered necessary to final

1 t " b t th h . t· "" f . ,,6 sa va lon, u ey ave no merl orl0US slgnl lcance. Man is given

1 Works, 10:230-231. 2Vick , p. 205.

3perfection, p. 14.

4Works, 8:49. Cf. Starkey, p. 139: "Wesley affirms that the Holy Spirit is the triune God immanently present in human life to effect man's redemption. This Holy Spirit works freely, immediately as well as mediately, universally, and persuasively through the responsible co­operation of man, as a dynamic enabling Christians to li¥e in_the holi~ ness and righteousness of love like unto that which is in Jesus Christ. This is in essence the work of the Holy Spirit in the theology of John Wesley."

5perfection, p. 101. Cf. Sermons on Several Occasions, 1:482: "Good works ••• , good tempers, or good desires, or good purposes and intentions ••• are the streams only, not the fountain. They are the fruits of free grace, and not the root. They are not the cause, but the effects of it. Whatsoever good is in man, or is done by man, God is the author and doer of it."

6L" d t #0 212 ln s rom, p. • Cf. Cannon, "John Wesley," pp. 94-95.

45

no credit whatsoever for what the grace of God accomplishes in his

life. Indeed, as Platt has pointed out, "the doctrine of a complete

deliverance from all sin was regarded as the logical and experimental

outcome of the proclamation of a free, full, present salvation as the

-f f - - ,,1 g1 t 0 grace to every pen1tent S1nner. We may conclude therefore

with Peters that Wesley's theological system presents "a vital synthe-

sis combining a qualified pessimism regarding the nature of man with

2 an unqualified optimism in the possibilities of grace." Or, as Cox

briefly, but accurately, said, "Wesley's teaching is a doctrine of

grace. ,,3

Wesley and the Reformers

Now that we have come to the end of our analysis of Wesley's

doctrine of entire sanctification, it may be well to ask, Does Wesley's

doctrine of perfection repudiate or confirm the teaching of the

Reformation? In order to find an answer to this question, we will

briefly compare the results of our study with the Protestant position

as set forth by Luther and Calvin.

For the Reformers, justification was synonymous with salvation;

in other words, it was the highest state a man could ever hope to reach

in this life. It denoted the forgiveness of a man's sins as well as

the judicial declaration of his righteousness. This is to say that

I Platt, p. 730b.

2peters, p. 66; cf. p. 43: "It is this high doctrine of grace which makes possible in a single system a synthesis of total depravity and Christian perfection. tf

3 Cox, p. 189.

46

God, in a legal transaction, declares a man as righteous--in spite of

his sinfulness--and treats him as such, in exchange for having treated

Christ as a sinner--in spite of his holiness. However, since he re-

mains a sinful human being all through his life, the believer is daily

in need of justification, forgiveness, and regeneration. He is, in

the words of Luther, semper iustificandus.

Wesley significantly departed from this position by consider-

ing justification--which, together with regeneration, he regarded as

I completed at conversion, and not as an ongoing process --to be only

the beginning of man's salvation, that is, a first step towards the

goal of his ultimate redemption. In other words, it is only a means

which creates the condition for (entire) sanctification and enables

man to comply with the divine standard of righteousness. For holiness

of heart and life is the condition of final justification. (Initial)

justification is, therefore, limited to the pardoning of the sinner

and his acceptance with God, but it does not mean the unconditional

imputation of perfect righteousness to the believer; for, God does not

declare a man holy unless and until he is holy. Consequently, while

Wesley regarded justification as the foundation of the Christian's

life, it was nonetheless the doctrine of (entire) sanctification which

dominated his theology.

The Reformer's position on justification implied that perfection

is only imputed to the believer; in other words, while the perfect

1 Cf. Cannon, The Theology of John Wesley, p. 223: "Wesley_

abandons the Reformation conception of r~9~n~ration land justification] as continuing throughout life and as never actually reaching completion .. "

47

righteousness of Christ is legally ascribed to him, it does not become

the inherent possession of man. For all men are, and remain, sinners

and holiness is, consequently, never fully realized in this life. In

the words of Kinghorn,

Luther and many of the other Reformers regard perfection as only a perfection of faith. That is, the believer can never be made actually righteous; he~may only by accounted 50.,,1 --

As Cox has pointed out, "in general his [Wesley's) concept

of initial sanctification and its progress is not too different from

the general Protestant view." However, "he deviated from the Reformed . 2

view most at the point of entire sanctification or present perfection."

For "Wesley insisted on a real change in the believer, and that the

justified is righteous and must be righteous to see God.'~ In other

words, he considered entire sanctification a higher state of righteous-

ness than justification and the final condition of salvation. While

he regarded the extrinsic righteousness of Christ as the believer's

title to heaven, it is only his intrinsic holiness which provides the

required fitness for heaven. Ceasing to be a sinner (properly speaking),

the sanctified believer has become inherently holy. Thus, "while

Methodism does embrace a doctrine of imputed righteousness, she also

lKinghorn, p. 490a. Cf. Platt, p. 732b: "The one sense in which Christian perfection is acknowledged in the standards of the Refor­mation ••• is perfection by imputation. This assumes that his status as perfect as well as his $tatus as justified is for the Christian be­liever completed in Christ, and applied to him as a free gift in the covenant of grace. His perfection is the imputed righteousness of Christ. • • • It is the perfection of Another reckoned to the elect believer."

z Cox, p. 88.

3 Ibid., p. 83.

48

teaches the doctrine of imparted righteousness; that is, by the grace

of God man can actually be·made righteous."l

Cannon has rightly observed that

the Reformers' refusal to say that man is inherently right­eous in this world, as against Wesley's insistence that he righteous, is really of ultimate significance. That man is not righteous, and cannot be righteous means that his final salvation depends on something totally different from moral attainment and personal purity. On the other hand, th~t.man can be righteous and indeed must be righteous if he is to be Christian means that his final salvation includes moral attainment and personal purity as essential elements. With­out inherent personal holiness, Wesley says, no man can see God. 2

Thus, one can hardly avoid concluding with LaRondelle that "Wesley in

his position on inherent holiness or righteousness goes fundamentally

beyond Luther and Calvin.,,3

Our study has shown the aecisive influence which Wesley's view

on law and, particularly, sin exerted on his soteriology. It does not

surprise, therefore, if we find that Wesley and the Reformers also

considerably differ with regard to their respective hamartiology and

their notion of the law. According to the Protestant position, sin is

lKinghorn, p. 490a. Cf. Lindstrom, pp. 136-37: "To Wesley per­fection was an attainable and higher stage in the Christian life after forgiveness and new birth. To Luther on the other hand forgiveness, which at the same time meant the transformation of man, was in itself the highest expression of the Christian life. He saw the ethical change of man's will as an incomplete beginning. • • • To the Refor­mers perfection was perfection in faith, but to Wesley it was an inherent ethical perfection in love and obedience. • • • Both Calvin and Luther thought inherent ethical perfection came only with death, Wesley that entire sanctification could be realized during life on earth."

2 Cannon, The Theology of John Wesley, p. 225.

3LaRondelle, p. 320.

49

a reality so deeply ingrained in the human nature that it will never

be removed during this life. Though it does not reign over the be-

liever, it nonetheless remains, not only in his body, but in his soul

as well. This view has found classical expression in Luther's dictum

simul iustus et peccator according to which the Christian is, at the

same time, fully righteous in Christ, and fully sinful in himself. Con-

sequently, "perfection is never realized in the present life; in no

case is sin entirely subdued; the most advanced believer daily needs

to pray for the forgiveness of sins to which guilt attaches."l

Over against the Reformers "who only theoretically distinguished

between sins as acts, and original Sin or sinful nature as the well­

spring of sinful promptings,,,2 Wesley carefully differentiated man's

sinful nature (original sin) from "proper" sins--in thought and feel­

ing (inward sins) as well as words and deeds (outward sins)--and "im-

proper" sins, that is, involuntary transgressions of the moral law due

to man's weakened physical and mental powers. Regarding inbred sin

(man's inherited tendencies to evil) as affecting only the moral

nature--especially the will--but not the physical nature of man, Wesley

considered it possible for the believer to be entirely freed from his

inherited sinfulness while living in his present body weakened by the

results of sin.

In other words, "Wesley radically rejects the Reformation

position that original sin or sinful nature is indissolubly connected

I Platt, p. 732a. Cf. Cannon, "John Wesley," p. 92.

Z LaRondelle, p. 318.

50

1 with the human body." As a result, the Christian may become fully

righteous, not only in Christ (by imputation), but also in him$elf

(by impartation). This means that he ceases to be a sinner--properly

speaking--having attained to a state of perfection, for his unavoidable

mistakes and shortcomings do not contaminate his soul with guilt. For,

though they require the atoning blood of Christ, these involuntary

transgressions are not "sins, properly so called."

In the opinion of LaRondelle, "Wesley's problematic hamar-

tiology does not reach the profundity of the religious sin concept of

2 the Reformers." However, the fact that Wesley himself never claimed

to have reached the state of "sinless" perfection may indicate that,

in his own life, the awareness of sin was as deep-seated as it was

among the 16th century Reformers, though they differ considerably in

their doctrinal views.

As regards the law, the Lutheran and Calvinistic position

considers any deviation from the moral standard sinful and maintains

that fallen man is unable to conform to its demands. "For the Refor-. . 3

mers, the moral law is an absolute ideal which we can never fulfill."

With Wesley, on the other hand, the law is the expression of the divine

character; since (entire) sanctification--i.e., complete moral trans-

formation into the divine image--is the prerequisite for salvation,

"absolute conformity unto the pattern of Christ" is offered to every

4 man. However, due to the infirmities of our human nature, God does

lIbid., p. 322. 2Ibid ., p. 323.

3 Cannon, The Theology of John Wesley, p. 226.

4Ibid •

51

not require perfect obedience to the Adamic law but only to the law

of love.

Another important distinction between the 16th century Refor­

mers and Wesley has to do with the question of the freedom of the will.

While the former believed in predestination and the bondage of the

will, the latter based his theology squarely on the Arminian position

which rejects predestination, upholds the freedom of the will and the

will and the universality of redemption, and regards salvation as

dependent on man's willingness and desire to accept the offer of grace.

In other words, grace is not offered to those unconditionally elected

by God but rather indiscriminately to every human being. But only those

who actively respond to the divine initiative will be saved. Conse­

quently, Wesley placed much emphasis on the notion of man's coopera­

tion with God.

At the same time, however, Wesley fully upheld the Protestant

dicta of sola gratia and sola fide, and strongly rejected the idea

that man's response to God's redemptive activity possesses any meritor­

ious significance. "The initiative of God is stressed by Wesley with

the same zeal that the Reformers displayed in stressing it, and

Augustine before them. No credit is given to man, none whatever, not

even in the apprehension of grace by faith, for faith itself is the

gift of God."l

We started out by asking whether Wesley's doctrine of perfec­

tion repudiated or confirmed the witness of the Reformation. Our brief

survey has shown that we cannot answer with a simple Yes or No, but

1 Cf. Cannon, "John Wesley," p. 94.

52

that we must give a qualified answer. On the one hand, Wesley upheld

the basic Protestant position that man is saved by grace through faith

aJ,one; on the other hand, the Catholic, Anglican, and Moravian influences

in his life left their indelible mark on his theology, leading him to

soteriological and hamartiological positions which stand in considerable

tension, and partly even contradiction, with the views of the 16th cen­

tury Reformers.

Wesley himself was fully aware of the fact that his soteriology

was, in a sense, the product of an eclectic approach which chose those

elements from the Protestant and Catholic traditions which, to him,

seemed best to harmonize with Scripture and experience. He declared,

for example, that no one had grasped more accurately the doctrine of

justification than had the Protestant Reformers, but that they, at the

same time, had failed to comprehend the truth of sanctification. In

contrast, he maintained that Catholics had entirely misunderstood

justification but that they had correctly understood the meaning of

sanctification.

Wesley's claim that it was the God-given function of Methodism

to achieve the true harmony and balance between both of these views,

and that the doctrines of justification and sanctification had now

been placed in their proper relationship and perspective, is the crux

of the Methodist soteriology. For, it must be asked whether the

alloying of these various elements can withstand their inherent tensions

without leading to a falsification of the biblical doctrine of right­

eousness by raith. Whatever the answer to this question may be, it

cannot be denied that Wesley's doctrine of perfection is "an original

53

and unique synthesis of the Protestant ethic of grace with the Catholic . 1

ethic of holiness."

IGeorge C. Cell, quoted in LaRondelle, p. 324. Cf. Cox, pp. 18-19; and Cannon, "John Wesley," p. 93.

CHAPTER II

ELLEN G. WHITE AND CHARACTER PERFECTION

More than sixty years after the death of the prophetess and

co-founder of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, there does not yet

exist a comprehensive historical and systematic study of the soter­

iology of Ellen G. White (1827-1915), and this in spite of the fact

that her writings have decisively influenced the development of

Seventh-day Adventist theology and continue to be regarded as an author­

itative interpretation of the biblica1.revelation. One of the reasons

for this unfortunate situation lies certainly in the voluminous nature

of her writings which have been estimated to comprise about 100,000

pages. This fact makes an exhaust-ive study very time-consuming, es­

pecially since Ellen G. White's literary products cover a period of

seventy years (1845-1915) and require a careful historical approach

which does not disregard the theological development that took place

during her long life and ministry.

It cannot, therefore, be the purpose of this chapter to fur­

nish a comprehensive analysis of the soteriological views of Ellen G.

White. However, any discussion of her teaching which, for lack of

opportunity, is based on a selected number of quotations gathered from

her books and articles, is in danger of leading to a somewhat distorted

view. This impression is confirmed by the fact that the current--and

partly contradictory--interpretations of her views can all be supported

54

55

by lengthy collections of quotes from her writings. It is for this

reason that we present our discussion of Ellen G. White's soteriologi­

cal teaching only in outline form, i.e., by arranging a sufficient

number of divergent statements topically and prefacing them with some

descriptive summaries.

But, before we do so, we will take a closer look at the early

experiences and views of Ellen G. White in so far as they are touching

on our topic. This is important for two closely related reasons. In

the first place, Ellen G. White came (as we have already pointed out)

from a Methodist family and experienced what N. F. Pease has called "a

Methodist conversion." Therefore, no systematic presentation of

Ellen G. White soteriology can afford not to pay attention to her

early experiences which decisively influenced the thinking of the

young prophetess. Secondly, from her autobiographical accounts as

well as from the soteriological statements which occur in her earliest

writings (1845-1851) it appears that her early views--based to a large

degree on her extended conversion experience--contain in a nutshell

what she later expressed in hundreds and thousands of pages throughout

the rest of her life. This is not to deny the possibility and even

factuality of a theological development during her long ministry; but

it is to say that the conversion experience of Ellen G. White-­

similarly to that of Paul, Augustine, Luther, Wesley, and others-­

furnishes, in a sense, the key to a correct understanding of her views.

We will begin our discussion of Ellen G. White's view on perfec­

tion by briefly referring to her remarks on John Wesley which provide

some basic insights, not only with regard to her evaluation of the

56

18th century Reformer, but also into her own thinking.

"A Great Reformer"

In the eyes of Ellen G. White, John Wesley was--like Wycliffe,

Huss, Luther, Melanchthon, Zwingli, Tyndale, Zinzendorf, Whitefield,

and others--a "great reformer or teacher" called by God to lead in the

work of building the church of God, defending the Christian faith, and

witnessing to the power of the word of God. l More specifically, in

illustrating the point that "in every generation God has a special

truth and a special work" for his church, she refers to John Wesley

as "preaching Christ and His righteousness in the midst of formalism,

sensualism, and infidelity_,,2 This statement already seems to indi-

cate a certain affinity between the soteriological views of the 18th

century Reformer and the 19th century prophetess.

That this is no precipitate conclusion can ae seen by a look

at The Great Controversy where Ellen G. White--in a chapter dealing

with the "Later English Reformers" (pp. 245-264)--devotes twelve pages

3 to a discussion of the two Wesleys. Refraining from any kind of

1 Ellen G. White, Gospel Workers (Washington, D. C.: Review and Herald, 1948), p. 34. Cf. idem, The Story of Patriarchs and Prophets As Illustrated in the Lives of Holy Men of Old (Mountain View, Cali­fornia: Pacific Press, 1958), p. 404; idem, The Acts of the Apostles in the Proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ (Mountain View,_ California: Pacific Press, 1958), p. 598; and idem, Education (Moun­tain View, California: Pacific Press, 1952), p. 254.

2Ellen G. White, Christ's Object Lessons (Washington, D. C.: Review and Herald, 1941), pp. 78-79.

3E11en G. White, The Great Controversy Between Christ and Satan; The Conflict of the Ages in the Christian Dispensation (Mountain View, California: Pacific Press, 1950), pp. 253-264; cf. pp. 385-386, 396, 609.

57

criticism, she describes them as "light bearers for God" (p .. 253)

called by Him (p. 264), led by His Spirit (p. 257), protected by

angels (p. 258), and exemplary in faith, devotion, and humility (p. 264).

She likewise commends the early Methodists for their evangelistic zeal

and steadfastness in persecution, calling them "a people whose only

fault was that of seeking to turn the feet of sinners from the path

of destruction to the path of holiness" (p. 259).

In speaking of the teaching of John Wesley, Ellen G. White

depicts him as restoring "the great doctrine of justification by faith,

so clearly taught by Luther" which had been almost lost sight of and

replaced by "the Romish principle of trusting to good works for sal-

vation" (p. 253). But he also came to see "that true religion is

sealed in the heart, and that God's law extends to the thoughts as

well as to the words and actions." In other words, he was "convinced

of the necessity of holiness of heart, as well as correctness of out-

ward deportment" (p. 254). However, he regarded a holy life not "as

the ground, but the result of faith; not the root, but the fruit of

holiness" (p. 256). In short,

Wesley's life was devoted to the preaching of the great truths which he had received--justification through faith in the aton­ing blood of Christ, and the renewing power of the Holy Spirit upon the heart, bringing forth fruit in a life conformed to the example of Christ (p. 256).

In addition, Ellen G. White especially commends Wesley for his

steadfast opposition to the monstrous errors of antinomianism and his

emphasis on the unchangeable validity of the moral law (pp. 260~264).

"Wesley declared the perfect harmony of the law and the gospel" '{ p. 263).

and, "while preaching the gospel of the grace of God," he "like his

58

Master, sought to 'magnify the law, and make it honorable.'tI And she

concludes, "faithfully did he accomplish the work given him of God

and glorious were the results which hewas;permitted to behold" (p. 264).

From these statements one must conclude that Ellen G. White is

believed to be in basic harmony with the soteriological views of John

Wesley, particularly his notion of justification by faith, the necessity

of sanctification, and the importance of the moral law. At the same

time, however, her seemingly unqualified endorsement of Wesley's teach-

ing must be seen in relation to the conspicuous absence of any mention-

ing of the doctrine of entire sanctification or perfection, the notion

of the two laws, the peculiar hamartiology, and the idea of assurance

of holiness. How Ellen G. White related to these is of crucial im-

portance and needs to be determined in the following.

Early Experience and Views

During the summer of 1851, James White published the first book-

let containing visions of his wife Ellen, most of which had previously

been printed on leaflets or in periodicals. Ellen G. White prefaced

the little book with a brief sketch of her early experience, the first

1 autobiographical document from her pen. In this statement she re-

lates how, after her early conversion and baptism in the Methodist

Episcopal Church, she became uncertain of her readiness for the Second

Coming which--upon hearing William Miller preach--she expected for the

imminent future.

lEllen G. White, A Sketch of the Christian Experience and Views of Ellen G. White (Saratoge Springs, N.Y.; 3ames White, 1851), pp •. 3-5. The statement was first published in the Second Advent Review and Sabbath Her­ald Extra, 21 July 1851, pp. 1-2, and was later incorporated in Early Writings of .S!len G. White (Washington, D.C.: Review & Herald, 1882,. 1945), pp. 11-13. .

59

I then felt that I was not holy, not ready to see Jesus •• I knew that I must have a great work done for me to fit me for heaven. t~y soul was thirsting for full and free salvation, but knew not how_to obtain it •••• I was hungering and thirsting for full salvation, an entire conformity to the will of God. Day and night I was struggling to obtain this priceless treas-ure this blessing. •

After a long struggle, "the blessing of God" finally came upon

her during a prayer meeting in Portland. "I could not be satisfied

till I was filled with the fullness of God. Inexpressible love for

Jesus filled my soul." For six months after that night "my soul was

daily drinking rich draughts of salvation." But when, during a Metho-

dist class meeting she told, "what a fullness I enjoyed through be-

lieving that the Lord was coming," the class leader objected, since

she did not "give the glory to t~ethodism." Soon afterwards the whole

family was expelled from the Methodist Church because of their

Millerite beliefs.

Did Ellen G. White experience the "second blessing"--Wesleyan

style--and achieve holiness and perfect love, or was it an Adventist

conversion similar to, but yet distinct from the former? It should be

noted that young Ellen was striving, not for conversion (in the Wesleyan

sense), but for "full salvation" and the "blessing" which would lead

her into "entire conformity to the will of God." In order to find out

more about this, we have to compare this brief autobiographical state-

ment with later ones which deal with this experience in greater depth.

In 1860 Ellen G. White published her first autobiography in

which she elaborates on her early experience. l From her account it is

lsPiritual Gifts: vol. 2: My Christian Experience, Views and Labors in Connection with the Rise and Progress of the Third Angelts Message (Battle Creek, Mich.: l. White, 1860), pp. 7-30.

60

clear that she had fully surrendered her life to God previous to her

baptism ("I resolved to give myself unreservedly to the Lord.") and

had received assurance of forgiveness, "peace of mind," and "rich

blessing" from God. It is also clear that it was "the Second Adven­

tist meetings in Portland" and her firm faith in the:imminent parousia

which led to her intense spiritual struggle over "sanctification" and

"holiness of heart." After being baptized, she "longed to be sancti­

fied to God. But sanctification was preached in such a manner that I

could not understand it, and thought that I never could attain to it,

and settled down with my present enjoyment." But then she attended

the Adventist meetings and became terrified with the thought of not

being ready for the imminent coming of Christ. "I was hungering and

thirsting for holiness of heart," she writes, looking for "this bless­

ing" which would give her assurance of acceptance when the Lord would

soon appear in the clouds of heaven. Finally, "the blessing of God"

came upon her. "I had at last found the blessing I had so long sought

for--entire conformity to the will of God." As a result, she now could

rejoice in the advent hope. "But I could not give the glory to Metho­

dism, when it was Christ and the hope of his soon coming, that made me

free."

This account seems to yield two important conclusions. First,

it appears that Ellen Harmon was thoroughly immersed in Methodist

thinking and, after her conversion, sought to somehow (and sometime)

attain to entire sanctification and holiness of heart, in other words,

the second blessing. But, secondly, it is also obvious that, after

she finally achieved what she had so long sought for, she did not consider

61

her experience to fit the Methodist pattern regarding the second

blessing. But where was the difference? Did it simply lie in the

fact that the Advent message had been the agent that accelerated the

experience? Or was there also a distinction with regard to the mean-

ing of the experience itself?

The answer possibly lies in the "Biographical Sketch" which

Ellen G. White wrote in the 1870s and which is found in Testimonies

1 for the Church, Vol. I, and also, with some modifications, in the

Life Sketches of Ellen G. White. 2 We quote at length from this document

which contains her most detailed account of her life and experience

previous to her first vision in December 1844. Speaking of the time

after her baptism, she writes,

(For some time I felt a constant dissatisfaction with myself and my Christian attainments, and did not continually realize a lively sense of the mercy and love of God. Feelings of discouragement would come over me, and this caused me great anxiety of mind.)

In June, 1842, Mr. Miller gave his second course of lectures (at the Casco Street church) in Portland. I felt it a great privilege to attend these lectures, for I had fallen under dis-. couragements and did not feel prepared to meet my Saviour ••••

I believed the solemn words spoken by the servant of God, and my heart was pained when they were opposed or made the subject of jest. I frequently attended the meetings, and believed that Jesus was soon to come in the clouds of heaven; but my great anxiety was to be ready to meet Him. My mind constantly dwelt upon the sub­ject of holiness of heart. I longed above all things to obtain this great blessing and feel that I was entirely accepted. of God.

Among the Methodists I had heard much in regard to sanctifi­cation (but had no definite idea in regard to it. This blessing seemed away beyond my reach, a state of purity my heart could never know). I had seen persons lose their physical strength under the influence of strong mental excitement, and had heard this pro­nounced (to be) the evidence of sanctification. But I could not comprehend what was necessary in order to be fully consecrated to God. My Christian friends said to me: 'Believe in Jesus NOW!

IMountain View, California: Pacific Press, 1948, pp. 9-58.

2Mountain Vie~, California: Pacific Press, 1915, 1943, pp. 17-63.

62

Believe that He accepts you NOW!' This I tried to do, but found it impossible to believe that I had-received a blessIng which, _it seemed to me, should electrify my whole being. I wondered at my own hardness of heart in being unable to experience the exalta­tion of spirit that others manifested. It_seemed to me that I was different from them and forever shut out from the perfect joy of holiness of heart.

My ideas concerning justification and sanctification wer.econ­fused. These two states were presented to my mind as separate and distinct from each other; yet I failed to comprehend the -difference or understand the meaning of the terms, and all the explanations of the preachers increased my difficulties. I was unable to claim the blessing for myself, and wondered if it was to be found only among the Methodists, and if, in attending the advent meetings, I was not shutting myself away from that which I desired above all else, the sanctifying Spirit of God ••••

I felt that I could claim only what they called .justifieation •. In the word of God I read that without holiness no man should see God. Then there was some higher attainment that I must reach before I could be sure of eternal life. I studied over the subject con­tinually; for I believed that Christ was soon to come, and .feared He would find me unprepared to meet Him. Words of condemnation rang in my ears day and night, and my constant cry to God was, 'What shall I do to be saved?' (Emphasis supplied).l

This account confirms the conclusion we had already reached on

the basis of Ellen G. White's first autobiography, namely, that young

Ellen--stirred by the thought of soon having to meet the coming King

of glory--was earnestly striving for "holiness of heart" and the

assurance of having reached the "higher attainment" necessary for full

salvation, in other words, entire "sanctification" or the second

"blessing." But she apparently had no clear conception of Wesleyan--

or any other--soteriology. All she desired was the conviction of

being "fully consecrated to God" and "entirely accepted" by him. How-

ever, she assumed that an overwhelming personal experience, accompanied

ITestimonies, 1:21-23 passim; cf. Life Sketches, pp. 26~29, passim. The parenthes~s indicate where the latter version deviates from the former by inserting additional material.

63

by physical manifestations, was required as evidence for this bless-

ing; and, since she "could claim only ••• justification," she became

discouraged and despondent.

In this state of mind she had two dreams, as a result of

which "the beauty and simplicity of trusting in.God began to dawn"

upon her soul. And when she confided her sorrows and perplexities to

an Advent preacher, he comforted and encouraged Ellen by pointing her

to the love of God and his pitying tenderness for his children which

long "to draw them to Himself in simple faith and trust."l Finally,

"the blessing of the Lord descended" upon her during an evening prayer

meeting. Speaking of the "great change" which then took place in her,

she says,

(Faith 'now took possession of my heart. I felt an inexpressible love for God, and had the witness of His Spirit that my sins were pardoned.) My views of the Father were changed •••• My heart went out toward Him in a deep and fervent love. Obedience to His will seemed a joy; it was a pleasure to be in His service. No shadow clouded the light that revealed to me the perfect will of God. I felt the assurance of an indwelling Saviour ••••

For six months not a shadow clouded my mind, nor did I neglect one known duty. My whole endeavor was to do the will of God, and keep Jesus and heaven continually in mind •••• Old things had passed away, all things had become new. There was not a cloud to mar my perfect bliss. I longed to tell the story of Jesus' love •••

• • • My entire being was offered to the service of my Master. Let come what would, I determined to please God, and live as one who expected the Saviour to come and rewar.d the faithful. I felt like a little child coming to God as to ni¥ father, and asked Him what He would have me to do. Then as my duty was made plain to me, it was my greatest happiness to perform it. • With the smiles of Jesus brightening my life, and the love of G0d .. in my heart, I went on my way with joyful spirit.

I had at length received the blessing so long sought,.: an entire conformity to the will of God. (Emphasis supplied.}2

ISee Testimonies, 1:27-30; Life Sketches, pp. 33-37.

2Testimonies, 1:31-35, passim; Life Sketches, 39-43, passim.

64

Through this experience Ellen G. White came to realize that

sanctification, manifested in full consecration to God, presupposes

only one thing, namely, "simple faith and trust. u This corrected her

misunderstanding of the requirements for receiving "this great bless-

ing." But what is most striking in reading this account is the fact

that the description of this event and its results appear to be almost

exactly What could be expected from a Methodist who had reached the

state of perfection as described by Wesley. It is, therefore, of

great significance that, as we have seen before, Ellen did not praise

Methodism for her experience, but ascribed it directly to the Advent

hope.

The belief that Christ's coming was near had stirred my soul to seek more earnestly for the sanctification of the Spirit of God. • •• I felt compelled to confess the truth, that it was not through Methodism that my heart had received its new bless­ing, but by the stirring truths concerning the personal appear­ing of Jesus. Through them I had found peace, joy, and perfect love. l

But there is yet another interesting fact to suggest that Ellen

Harmon's experience did not entirely fit the pattern of the Nethodist

teaching on perfection. For, in her account, she describes her ex-

perience simply as "true conversion" which brought an end to her

"great suffering under the conviction of sinn and led to both a clear

understanding of "the plan of salvation" and "the joy of being accepted

of God.,,2 Besides, she places the assurance of the forgiveness of her

sins and of "an indwelling Saviour" side by side as if there was no

decisi ve difference be,tween them. From this it appears that Ellen did

1Testimonies, 1:33-35; Life Sketches, pp. 40-43.

2Testimonies, 1:37; Life Sketches, p. 46.

65

not consider sanctification to be a higher stage in the Christian

experience than justification, but that she instead regarded the ex-

perience of entire surrender and conformity to God's will simply as a

I sign of true justification and acceptance with God.

On the other hand, it is undeniable that from childhood, Ellen

G. White was strongly influenced by the Methodist concern for holiness

of heart and life, and that she considered sanctification an indispen-

sable prerequisite for salvation. Speaking of the preparation of the

Millerites for the Second Coming, she writes,

We carefully examined every thought and emotion of our hearts, as if upon our deathbeds. • • • We felt that need of internal evi­dence that we were prepared to meet Christ, and our white robes were purity of the soul, character cleansed from sin by the aton­ing blood of our Saviour. (Emphasis supplied.)Z

And again,

With diligent searching of heart and humble confessions, we came prayerfully up to the time of expectation. Every morning we felt that it was our first work to secure the evidence that our lives were right before God. (We realized that if we were not advancing in holiness, we were sure to retrograde.) Our interest for one another increased; we prayed much with and for one another •••• The joys of salvation were more necessary to us than our food and drink. If clouds obscured our minds, we dared not rest or sleep till they were swept away by the consciousness of our acceptance with the Lord. (Emphasis supplied.))

These sentences clearly support our contention that the early

10fcourse, one must not overlook the fact that Ellen G. White wrote this account about thirty years after the events took place, and that it may, therefore, reflect her later views. But the perfect har­mony that exists between her various autobiographical statements deal­ing with this issue supports the assumption that her later account presents an accurate description of her early experience.

2T t' 0 1 51 LOf Sk h es lmonles, : ; 1 e etc es, pp. 56-57.

3Testimonies, 1:55; Life Sketches, pp. 60-61.

66

experience of Ellen G. White played a decisive'role in the formation

of her soteriology. For "purity of soul," a "character cleansed from

sin,tt advancement "in holiness," the "joys of salvation" together with

"humble confessions" and the need for "the atoning blood of our Saviour"--

these expressions are not only typical for her writings, but also ex­

pressive of her deep concern for a sanctified Christian life marked by

deep humility and faith in the merits of Christ. In other words, they

express in a nutshell what Ellen G. White emphasizedi in similar form,

throughout her life.

How early th~ tone was set for Ellen G. White's soteriology

can also be seen by looking at her earliest writings during the first

years after the disappointment of 1844. Her first vision of December,

1844, depicted the saints as crying out in view of the returned

Saviour, "Who shall be able to stand? Is my robe spotless?" to which

Jesus gives the comforting--and, at the same time, demanding--answer,

"Those who have clean hands and pure. hearts shall be able to stand, my

grace is sufficient for you."l The same thought was repeated in the

Broadside of January, 1849, which also warned that, when Jesus will

have finished his atoning ministry for his people in the most holy

place of the heavenly sanctuary, he "will step out from between the

Father and man. H2

What this meant was further explained in an article in the

Present Truth of September, 1849, where Ellen G. White wrote that, when

Jesus leaves the sanctuary, "then there will be no Priest in the

lEarly Writings, p. 16.

2Ibid ., pp. 58, 36.

67

Sanctuary to offer" the sacrifices, confessions, and prayers of un­

believers "before the Father's throne." On the other hand, "all the

transgressions of Israel" will by then "be blotted out and they [the

saints] will be sealed." This implied, however, that they must reach

"the standard" of "Bible holiness," and "get victory over the tempta­

tions of Satan." "It is no small thing to be a Christian, and be

owned and approved of God," she declares, but promises that God "will

give us grace and strength to overcome, and to break the power of the

enemy." In view of the shortness of time and the approaching kingdom

she exclaims, "0, let us live wholly for the Lord," but she also adds

that, "if we trust wholly in God, we can overcome every temptation, and

through his grace come off victorious."l

These early statements confirm our conclusion that, right from

the beginning of her ministry, Ellen G. White consistently emphasized

the importance of a pure and holy life as a condition of final accep­

tance with God. In addition, she left no doubt regarding her convic­

tion that entire devotion to God would--by the grace of God--lead to

victory over "every temptation" of Satan. Thus, there can be no ques­

tion as to the close affinity between the early experiences and views

of Ellen G. White and the Wesleyan emphasis on holiness and sanctifi­

cation which she had imbibed from Methodism during her childhood and

youth. What remains to be seen is how these early views developed

into her later teaching and continued to exert ~ decisive influence

on Ellen G. White's soteriology in general and her notion of character

perfection in particular.

IIbid., pp. 46-48, passim.

68 [I}

Later Teaching (Outline Study)

In order to adequately understand Ellen G. White's doctrine of

character perfection, it is necessary to have a clear conception of

her teaching on justification and sanctification, law and sin, humility

and assurance, and freedom and grace. By looking at all of these issues,

we will be able to put her emphasis on moral perfection in its right-

ful place and proper perspective. Of course, it cannot be our purpose

to be exhaustive in any of these areas; but we will present a sufficient

number of divergent quotations so as to enable the reader to gain an

adequate insight into the soteriological views of Ellen G. White. In

referring to her works we will use the standard abbreviations as found

in the Comprehensive Index to the Writings of Ellen G. White (1962).

I. Justification

1. Is a work of grace.

Grace is unmerited favor, and the believer is justified without any merit of his own. . Christ is the great depositary of justify­ing righteousness and sanctifying grace (1 SM 398).

The thought that the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us, not because of any merit on our part, but as a free gift from God, seemed a precious thought (1 SM 360. See also 7 Be 929).

2. Is the condition of salvation: It is our title to heaven.

The righteousness by which~e are justified is imputed; the righteousness by which we are sanctified is imparted. The first is our title to heaven the second is our fitness for heaven (MYP 35).

3. Is the highest place which man can ever hope to attain.

When the sinner reaches the cross, and looks up to the One who died to save him, he may rejoice with fullness of joy; for his sins are pardoned. Kneeling at the cross, he has reached the highest place to which man can attain (RH 29 April 1902).

69 [2}

Through His sacrifice, ,human beings may reach the high ideal set before. them, and hear at last the words, "Ye are complete in him," not. having your own righteousness, but the righteousness that He wrought out for you. Your imperfection is no longer seen; for you are clothed with the robe of Christ's perfection (MS 125, 1902) • (7 BC 907.)

4. Is the imputation of the righteousness and perfection of

Christ to the penitent sinner.

It was possible for Adam before the fall, to form a righteous character by obedience to God's law~ But he failed to do this, and because of his sin our natures are fallen, and we cannot make ourselves righteous. Since we are sinful, unholy, we cannot per- . fectly obey the holy law. We have no righteousness of our own ~ith which to meet the claims of the law of God. But Christ has made a way of escape for us. He lived on earth amid trials and tempta~ tions such as we have to meet. He lived a sinless life. He died for us, and now He offers to take our sins and give us His right­eousness. If you give yourself to Him, and accept Him as your Saviour, then, sinful as your life may have been, for His sake you are accounted righteous. Christ's character stands in place of your character, and you are accepted before God just as if you had not sinned (5C 62).

Every soul may say: "By His perfect obedience He has satisfied the claims of the law, and my only hope is found in looking to Him as my substitute and surety, who obeyed the law perfectly for me. By faith in His merits I am free from the condemnation of the law. He clothes:me with His righteousness,. w,t"dch answers all the demands of the law. I am complete in Him who brings in everlasting right­eousness. He presents me to God in the spotless garment of which no thread was woven by any human agent"'(l 5M 396).

The law demands righteousness, and this the sinner owes to the law; but he is incapable of rendering it. The only way in which he can attain to righteousness is through faith. By faith he can bring to God the merits of Christ, and the Lord places the obedience of His Son to the sinner's account. Christ's righteousness is accepted in place of man's failure, and God receives, pardons, justifies, the repentant, believing soul, treats him as though he was righteous, and loves him as He loves His 50n. This is how faith is accounted righteousness; and the pardoned.soul goes on from grace to grace, from light to a greater light (15M 367).

They had repented,. they had accepted the righteousness,.of Christ. They were therefore standing before God clothed with the garments of Cod1sright~ousn~ss. . . . Every sin of which they had been guilty was forgiven, and they stood before God as chosen and true, as innocent, as perfect, as though they had never sinned (TM 40).

70

In ourselves we are sinners; but in Christ we are righteous. Having made us righteous through the imputed righteousness of Christ, God pronounces us just, and treats us as just. He looks upon us as His dear children (15M 394).

[3J

5. Requires repentance, faith, and obedience; but they possess

no meritorious value.

Christ perfected a righteous character here upon the earth, not on His own account, for His character was pure and spotless. but for fallen man. His character He offers to man if .he will accept it. The sinner, through repentance of hissins t faith in Christ, and obedience to the perfect law of God, has the righteousness of Christ imputed to him; it becomes his righteousness, and His name is recorded in the Lamb's book of life. He becomes a child of God, a member of the royal family (3 T 371).

Faith is the condition upon which God has seen fit to promise pardon to sinners; not that there is any virtue in faith where­by salvation is merited, but because faith can lay hold of the merits of Christ, the remedy provided for sin (15M 366).

When we repent of our sins, we must believe that He accepts and pardons us. Faith is the gift of God, but the power to exercise it is ours. Faith is the hand by which the soul takes hold upon the divine offers of grace and mercy (PP 431).

6. Justification, more properly speaking, conversion and re~

generation, involve a decisive change in character and attitude.

The old nature, born of blood and the will of the flesh, cannot inherit the kingdom of God. The old ways, the hereditary tenden­cies, the former habits, must be given up; for grace is not inherited. The new birth consists in having new motives, new tastes, new tendencies. Those who are begotten unto a .new life by the Holy Spirit, have become partakers of the divine nature, and in all their habits and practices they will give evidence of their relationship to Christ. When men who claim to be Christians re­tain all their natural defects of character and disposition, in what does their position differ from that of the worldling? They do not appreciate the truth as a sanctifier, a refiner. They have not been born again (6 BC 1101).

[The converted Christian] has a new mind, new affections, new interest, new will (2 T 294).

In the unregenerate heart there is love of sin and a disposition to cherish and excuse it. In the renewed heart there is hatred of sin and determined resistance against it(GC 508).

71 {4}

This faith must express on our part supreme preference, perfect reliance, entire consecration. Our will must be wholly yielded to the divine will, our feelings, desires, interests, and honor identified with the prosperity of_Christ's kingdom and the honor of His cause, we constantly receiving. grace from Him, and Christ accepting gratitude from us (5 T 229).

No conversion is genuine that does not radically change the heart, the character, every line of conduct (ST 17 July 1901).

7. Leads to, and implies, sanctification and perfection.

To be pardoned in the way that Christ pardons, is not. only to be forgiven, but to be renewed in the spirit of our mind. ~ • • The image of Christ is to be stamped upon the ~ery mind, heart, and soul (RH 19 August 1890).

The moment the sinner believes in Christ, he stands in the sight of God uncondemned; for the righteousness of Christ is his: Christ's perfect obedience is imputed to him. But he must co­operate with divine power, and put forth his human effort to sub­due sin, and stand complete in Christ (FE 429).

But while God can be just, and yet justify the sinner through the merits of Christ, no man can cover his soul with the garments of Christ's righteousness while practicing known sins, or neglecting known duties. God requires the entire surrender of the heart, and before justification can take place; and in order for man to retain justification, there must be continual obedience, through active, living faith that works by love and purifies the soul (1 SM 366).

His righteousness He would impute to man, and thus raise him in moral value with God, so that His efforts to keep the divine law would be acceptable (1 SM 273).

That which God required of Adam in paradise before the fall, He requires in this age of the world from those who would follow Him--perfect obedience to His law. But righteousness without a blemish can be obtained only through the imputed righteousness of Christ (RH 3 September 1901).

Through the merits of Christ, through His righteousness, which by faith is imputed unto us, we are to attain to the perfection of Christian character (5 T 744).

8~ Is concomitant with conversion and the new birth, and

these take place at the beginning of the Christian life. However, they

also continue throughout life.

72 [5]

The nearer we come to Jesus, and the more clearly we discern the purity of His character, the more clearly shall we see the ex~ ceeding sinfulness of sin, and the less shall we feel like exalt­ing ourselves. There will be a cont:inual reaching out of the soul after God, a continual earnest, heart-breaking confession of sin and humbling of the heart before Him. At every advance step. in our Christian experience our repentance will deepen (AA 561) •

• repentance is a daily, continued exercise, lasting until mortality is swallowed up of life (5T.26 Nbvember 1894).

Every living Christian will advance daily in the divine life. As he advances toward perfection, he experiences a conversion to God every day; and this conversion is not completed until he attains to perfection of Christian character,. a full preparation for the finishing touch of immortality (2 T 505).

Genuine conversion is needed, not once in years, but daily (OHC 215) •

I hope and pray that you may be clothed with the righteousness of Christ daily (RH May ~ 1899).

II. Sanctification

1., Is a work· 0f grace.

Grace is unmerited favor, and the believer is justified without any merit of his own. • • • Christ is the great depositary of justifying righteousness and sanctifying grace (1 SM 398).

The grace of Christ transforms the character (MB 118).

The heart must be renewed by divine grace, or it will be in vain to seek for purity of life. He who attempts to build up a noble, virtuous character independent of the grace of Christ is building his house upon the shifting sand (PP 460).

2. Is a prerequisite for salvation: it is our fitness for

heaven.

The righteousness by which we are justified is imputed; the righteousness by which we are sanctified is imparted. The first is our title to heaven, the second is our fitness for heaven (MYP 35).

We must be transformed by the grace of God or we shall fail of heaven (4 T 557).

73 [6J

3. Is the impartation of the righteousness of Christ which re-

suIts from 'the imputation of his righteousness to be repenting sinner.

Through the merits of Christ, through His righteousness, which by faith is imputed unto us, we are to attain to the perfection of Christian character (5 T 744).

By the wedding garment in the parable is represented the pure, spotless character which Christ's true followers will posess •• It is the righteousness of Christ, His own unblemished character, that through fa'ith is imparted to all who receive Him as their personal Saviour. • • • This robe, woven in the loom of heaven, has in it not one thread of human devising. Christ in His humanity wrought out a perfect character, and this character He offers to impart to us •••• By His perfect obedience He has made,it possible for every human being to obey God's commandments. When we submit ourselves to Christ, the heart is united with His will, the mind becomes one with His mind, the thoughts are brought into captivity to Him; we live His life. This is what it means to be clothed with the garment of His righteousness. Then as the Lord looks upon us He sees, not the fig-leaf garment, not the nakedness and deformity of sin, but His own robe of righteousness, which is perfect obedience to the law of Jehovah. • •• The wedding garment, provided at infinite cost, is freely offered to every soul. By the messengers of God are presented to.us the right­eousness of Christ, justification by faith, • • • (COL 310-12 passim, 317).

4. Is the transformation from unholiness to holiness which

implies separation from sin, and the implanting of Christ's nature in

the soul.

The fountain of the heart must be purified before the streams can become pure. • •• The Christian's life is not a modifi­cation or improvement of the old, but a transformation of nature. There is a death to self and sin, a new life altogether (DA 172).

It is through the impartation of the grace of Christ that sin is discerned in its hateful nature, and finally driven from the soul temple (1 SM 366).

The sanctification of the soul by the working of the Holy Spirit is the implanting of Christ's nature in humanity (COL 384).

Sanctification means habitual communion with God (7 Be 908).

74 [7J

5. Is not instantaneous, but progressive: it is a continuous

work which requires daily growth and slow but constant advances.

The Bible teaches that sanctification is progressive. The Christian will feel the promptings of sin, but he will keep up a constant warfare against it. Here is where Christ's help is needed. Human weakness becomes united to divine strength (4 SP 300).

Sanctification is a progressive work; it is not attained to in an hour or a day, and then maintained without any special effort on our part (2 T 472).

Sanctification "is a continual growth in grace" (I T 340).

The work of transformation from unholiness to holiness is a continuous one. Day by day God labors for man's sanctification, and man is to cooperate with Him, putting forth persevering efforts in the cultivation of right habits (AA 532).

We shall attain to the full stature of men and women in Christ Jesus only as the result of a steady growth in grace (5 T 105).

6. Is the work of a lifetime.

There is no such thing as instantaneous sanctification. True sanctification is a daily work, continuing as long as life shall last (SL 10).

Man may grow up into Christ, his living head. It is not the work of a moment, but that of a lifetime. By growing daily in the divine life, he will not attain to the full stature of a perfect man in Christ until his probation ceases. The growing is a continuous work (4 T 367).

Sanctification is not the work of a moment, an hour, a day, but of a lifetime. It is not gained by a happy flight of feeling, but is the result of constantly dying to sin, and constantly living for Christ. Wrongs cannot be righted nor reformations wrought in the character by feeble, intermittent efforts. It is only by long, persevering effort, sore discipline, and stern conflict, that we shall overcome. We know not one day how strong will be our conflict the next. So long as Satan reigns, we shall have self to subdue, besetting sins to overcome •••• Sanctification is the result of lifelong obedience (AA 560 f).

Day by day the sanctifying influence of the Spirit of. God almost imperceptibly leads those who love the ways of truth toward the perfection of righteousness, till finally the soul

75

is ripe for the harve t, the lifework is ended, God gathers in His grain. There s no period in the Christian lLfewhen there is no more to learn, no higher attainments to reach. Sanctification is the work of a lifetime. First the blade, then the ear, .then the full corn in the ear, then the r~pen­ing and the ha~~~st; for when the fruit is perfect, it is ready for the sickle (2 SP 244).

[8J

7. Means constant growth and advancement toward perfection and

holiness.

The work of sanctification must go on, not by impulse, but by steady, healthful advances, progressing toward per­fection (RH 5 March 1895).

The ideal of Christian character is Christlikeness. Thereis opened before us a path of constant advancement. We have an object to gain, a standard to reach, that includes everything good and pure and noble and elevated. There should be con­tinual striving and constant progress onward and upward toward perfection of character (8 T 64).

We are not yet perfect; but it is our privilege to cut away from the entanglements of self and sin, and advance to perfection (AA 565).

8. Means constant growth and advancement in perfection and

holiness.

Every day we may advance in perfection of Christian character (MH 503).

Through obedience comes sanctification of body, soul, and spirit. This sanctification is a progressive work, and an advance from one stage of perfection to another (ML 250).

The germination of the seed represents the beginning of spiritual life, and the development of the plant is a beautiful figure of Christian. growth. As in nature, so in grace; there can be no life',without growth. The plant must either grow or die. As its2g~Qwth is silent and im­perceptible, but continuous, so is the development of the Christian life. At every stage of development our life may be perfect; yet if God's purpose for us is fulfilled, there will be a continual advancement(COL 65f.).

If you are right with God today, you are ready if Christ should come today. What we need is Christ formed within ••• the righteousness of Jesus Christ (MS 36, 1891;1 HP 227).

76

III. Perfection

1. Is a free gift of God's grace.

The law requires righteousness--a righteous life, a perfect character; and this man has not to give. He cannot meet the claims of God's holy law. But Christ, coming to the earth as man, lived a holy life, and developed a perfect character. These He offers as a free gift to all who will receive them (DA 762).

[9J

2. Means the repenting, confessing, and forsaking of all sin;

the putting away of sin; dying to self and sin.

No repentance is genuine that does not work reformatiQn. The righteousness of Christ is not a cloak to cover uncon­fessed and un forsaken sin; it is a principle of life that transforms the character and controls the conduct. Holiness is wholeness for God; it is the entire surrender of heart and life to the indwelling of the principles of heaven (DA 555, 556) •

Sins that have not been repented of and forsaken will not be pardoned and blotted out of the books of record, but will stand to witness against the sinner in the day of God (GC 486).

In the time of trouble, if the people of God had unconfessed sins to appear before them while tortured with fear and anguish, they would be overwhelmed; despair would cut off their faith, and they could not have confidence to plead with God -for deliverance. But while they have a deep sense of their unworthiness, they have no concealed wrong$ to reveal. Their sins have gone beforehand to judgment and have been blotted out, and they cannot bring them to remembrance (GC 620 202; cf. GC 425).

The fountain of the heart must be purified before the streams can become pure. • •• The Christian's life is not a modifi­cation or improvement of the old, but a transformation of nature. There is a death to self and sin, and a new life altogether (DA 172).

It is through the impartation of the grace of Christ that sin is discerned in its hateful nature, and finally driven from the soul temple (1 SM 366).

3. Means the cutting away of hereditary and cultivated ten-

dencies to wrong, defects, faults, imperfections and deficiencies from

the character, the correction of weak points, and the crucifixion and

77 [10]

destruction of the old nature, and the purification of the heart and

character from sin.

Through faith in Christ, every deficiency of characte~.may. be supplied, every defilement cleansed, every fault corrected, and every excellency developed. "Ye are complete in Him"--Col 2:10 (Ed:257).

The word destroys the natural, ear~nly nature, and imparts a new life in Christ Jesus (DA 391).

Self--the old disobedient nature--must be crucified, and Christ take up His abode in the heart (ST 26 July 1905).

When the grace of God takes possession of the heart, it is seen that the inherited and cultivated tendencies to wrong must be crucified. A new life, under new control, must begin in the soul (MYP 68).

Then the redeemed will be welcomed to the home that Jesus is preparing for them. • • • Every sinful tendency, every imper­fection, that afflicts them here, has been removed by the blood of Christ, and the excellence and brightness of His glory, far exceeding the brightness of the sun, is imparted to them. And the moral beauty, the perfection of His character, shines through them, in worth far exceeding this outward splendor. They are without fault before the great white throne, sharing the dignity and the privileges of the angels (SC 126).

We must realize that through belief in Him it is our privilege to be partakers of the divine nature, and so escape the corruption that is in the world through lust. Then we are cleansed from all siR, all defects of character. We need not retain one sinful propensity •••• As we partake of the divine nature, hereditary and cultivated ten­dencies to wrong are cut away from the character, and we are made a living power for good. Ever learning of the divine teacher, daily partaking of His nature, we cooperate with God in overcoming Satan's temptations (7 BC 943).

When He [Jesus Christ} comes He is not to cleanse us of our sins, to remove from us the defects in our characters, or to. cure us of the infirmities of our tempers and aispositions •• No work will then be done for them to remove their defects and give them holy characters. The Refiner does not then sit to pursue His refining process and remove their sins and their cor­ruptions. This is all to be done in these hours of probation. It is now that this work is to be accomplished for us ..•. (2 T 355 f).

78 [Ill

4. Means daily battle, constant warfare, and determined and

persevering efforts against sinful promptings, tendencies, inward sin

and outward evil; self(ishness); temptation; sin; wrong traits of

character; corruption of the heart; evil inclinations and propensities.

Each day he [the Christian] must renew his consecration, each day do battle with evil. Old habits, hereditary tendencies to wrong, will strive for the mastery, and against these he is to be ever on guard, striving in Christ's strength for victory (AA 477).

A constant battle must be kept up with the selfishness and corruption of the human heart (5 T 397).

So long as Satan reigns, we shall have self to subdue, besetting sins to overcome; so long as life shall last, there will be no stopping place, no point which we can reach and say, I have fully attained. Sanctification is the result of lifelong obedience (AA 560 f).

Christ has given us no assurance that to attain to perfection of character is an easy matter. It is a conflict, a battle and a march, day by day (SD 198).

We must strive daily against outward evil and inward sin, if we would reach perfection of Christian character (RH 30 May 1882).

From the cross to the crown there is earnest work to be done. There is wrestling with inbred sin; there is warfare against outward wrong. The Christian life is a battle and a march (RH 29 November 1887).

Paul was ever on the watch lest evil propensities should get the better of him. He guarded well his appetites and passions and evil propensities (6 BC 1089).

The Christian will feel the promptings of sin, but he will maintain a constant warfare against it (GC 469).

5. Means constant and perfect control, conquest, subjection

of; mastery and victory over; the ruling and overcoming, and the com~

plete recovery from the power of evil propensities, passions, tempers,

habits, sinful desires, tendencies; lust, self; natural inclinatibns;

temptations; sin.

79 ,,[12]

God's ideal for ,His children is higher than the highest human thought can reach. "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your father which is in heaven is perfect" (Matt. 5:48). This command is a promise. The plan of redemption contemplates our complete recovery from the power of sin. He came to destroy the works of the devil,and He has made provision that the Holy Spirit shall be imparted to every repentant soul, to keep him from sinning (DA 311).

Christ came to this world and lived the law of God~ that man might have perfect mastery over the natural inclinations which corrupt the soul (MH 130 f).

Through the plan of redemption, God has provided means for sub~ duing every sinful trait, and resisting every temptation, however strong (1 SM 82).

The propensities that control the natural heart must be subdued by the grace of Christ, before fallen man is fitted to enter heaven (AA 273).

Christ has given His Spirit as a divine power to overcome all hereditary and cultivated tendencies to evil, and to impress His own character upon His church (DA 671).

To bear the cross of Christ is to control our sinful passions, (4 T 627).

6. Means freedom from sin; no more committing of inward and

outward sin; ceasing to sin; cleansing from all sin and defilement;

sinlessness in thought, feeling, words, and action; human (moral) nature

cleansed from sin.

And as we cooperate with Him, and live in harmony with His law, He will cleanse our natures from sin, and impart to us His righteousness (RH 16 July 1908).

God designs that everyone of us shall be perfect in Him, so that we may represent to the world the perfection of His character. He wants us to be set free from sin, ••• (ML 15).

The Son of God was faultless. We must aim at this perfection and overcome as He overcame, if we would have a seat at His right hand (3 T 336).

But the prince of darkness found nothing in Him [Christ}; not a single thought or feeling responded to temptation (5 T 422).

80 [13]

Now, while our great High Priest is making the atonement for us,.we should seek to become perfect in Christ. Not even by a thought could our Saviour be brought to yield to the power of. temptation. • • • .This is the .condi tion in which· those must be found who shall stand in the time of trouble (GC 623).

Christ died to make it possible for you to cease from sin (RH 28 August 1894).

Everyone who by faith obeys God's commandments, will reach the condition of sinlessness in which Adam lived before his trans­gression (ST 23 July 1902).

Then we are cleansed from all sin, all defects of character. We need not retain one sinful propensity (7 BC 943).

Has it [the light from heaven] discovered to us our imperfec­tions of character? and has it perfected us so that we cease to sin? (Ms 19a 1886).

7. Is perfection of the soul; perfection of the character; per-

fection of the moral and spiritual nature; not perfection of the flesh

(i.e., of his physical and mental/intellectual nature).

If those who speak so freely of perfection in the flesh, could see things in the true light, they would recoil with horror from their presumptuous ideas. • •• Let this phase of doctrine be carried a little further, and it will lead to the claim that its advocates cannot sin; that since they have holy flesh, their actions are all holy. What a door of temptation would thus be opened! (25M 32 faJ).

Much may be done to restore the moral image of God in man, to improve the physical, mental, and moral capabilities. Great changes can be made in the physical system by obeying the laws of God and bringing into the body nothing that defiles. And while we cannot claim perfection of the flesh, we may have Christian perfection of the soul (25M 32 fb]).

When human beings receive holy flesh, they will not remain on the earth, but will be taken to heaven. While sin is forgiven in this life, its results are not now wholly removed (25M 33 [cJ).

In his efforts to reach God's ideal for him, the Christian is to despair of nothing. Moral and spiritual perfection, through the grace and power of Christ, is promised to all (AA 478).

Moral perfection is required of all (COL 330).

81 [14J

8. Means the entire transformation of the character and moral

nature into the likeness of Christ; the total cleansing of the heart

and soul; Christlikeness; the restoration of the moral image of God;

the partaking of the divine character and nature.

The ideal of Christian character is Christlikeness. There is opened before us a path of constant advancement. We have an ,object to gain, a standard to reach, that includes everything good and pure and noble and elevated. There should be continual striving and constant progress onward and upward toward perfection of character (8 T 64).

Not one of us will ever receive the seal of God while our ch~rac~~ ters have one spot or stain upon them. It is left with us to remedy the defects in our characters, to cleanse the soul temple of every defilement (5 T 214).

The transformation of character must take place before His coming. Our natures must be pure and holy,. (OHC 278).

The ripening of the grain represents the completion of the work of God's grace in the soul. By the power of the Holy Spirit the moral image of God is to be perfected in the character. We are to be wholly transformed into the likeness of Christ (TM 506).

The sanctification of the soul by the working of the Holy Spirit is the implanting of Christ's nature in humanity (COL 384).

Christ says: ••• I will transform YO,ur weak, sinful nature into the divine image, giving it beauty ?ndperfection (KH 106:).

9. Means the cultivation of ri-gJl't habits ,the 'having new

desires and tendencies and .a holy temper, the carrying out of our own

impulses, being one mind and will with God.

Day by day God labors for man's sanctification, and man is to cooperate with Him, putting forth persevering efforts in the cultivation of right habits (AA 532).

When we submit ourselves to Christ, the heart is united with His heart, the will is merged in His will, the mind becomes one with His mind, the thoughts are brought into captivity to Him; we live His life. This is what it means to be clothed with the garment of ~is righteousness (COL 312).

When self is merged in Christ, love springs forth spontan­eously. The completeness of Christian character is attained

82

when the impulse to help and bless others springs constantly from within (COL 384).

If we consent, He will so identify Himself with our thoughts and aims, so blend our hearts and minds into conformity to. His will, that when obeying Him we shall be but carrying out our own impulses (DA 668).

10. Means a holy heart, holiness, purity.

As the sinner, drawn by the power of Christ, approaches the uplifted cross, and prostrates himself before it, he becomes a new creature in Christ Jesus. Holiness finds that it has nothing more to require (COL 163).

[15J

As we meditate upon the perfections of the Saviour, we shall desire to be wholly transformed and renewed in the image of His purity. There will be a hungering and thirsting of soul to become like Him whom we adore (SC 89).

All may now obtain holy hearts, but it is not correct to claim in this life to have holy flesh (2 SM 32).

11. Means perfect love, means perfect obedience and entire

conformity to the will of God.

True sanctification means perfect love, perfect obedience, perfect conformity to the will of God (AA 565).

It is our lifework to be reaching forward to the perfection of Christian character, striving continually for nonformity to the will of God (4 T 520).

The condition of eternal life is now just what it always has been, ••• perfect obedience to the law of God, perfect righteousness (SC 62).

No one who truly loves and fears God will continue to trans­gress the law in any particular (ML 250. See also 2 T 169-70; KH 131; COL 68, 360).

12. Means entire dedication, complete surrender of heart

and life, and perfect submission to God.

He holds up before us the highest ideal, even perfection. He asks us to be absolutely and completely for Him in this world as He is for us in the presence of Cod (AA 566).

To have the religion of Christ means that you have absolutely surrendered your all to God, and consented to the guidance of the Holy Spirit (MYP 30).

83 [16]

It may take time to attain perfect submission to Cod's.will, but we can never stop short of it and be fitted for heaven. True religion will lead its possessor on to perfection (3 T 538).

The righteousness of Christ is not a cloak to cover unconfessed and unforsaken sin; it is a principle of life that transforms the character and controls the conduct. Holiness is wholeness for God; it is the entire surrender of heart and life to the indwelling of the principles of heaven (DA 555, 556).

13. Means the perfection of Christ and results from the im-

puted perfection of Christ.

The Lord requires perfection from His redeemed family. He expects from us the perfection which Christ revealed in His humanity (CG 477).

The proud heart strives to earn salvation; but both our title to heaven and our fitness for it are found in the righteousness of Christ (DA 300).

It is the righteousness and perfection of His Son, who takes upon Himself our sins, our defects, our weaknesses, which God accepts; and through faith in the merits of the blood of a crucified and risen Saviour we are prisoners of hope. Christ's righteousness becomes our righteousness, if we sustain a living connection with Him (RH 18 December 1888).

As they have become partakers of the righteousness of Christ, and their characters are found to be in harmony with the law of God, their sins will be blotted out, and they themselves will be accounted worthy of eternal life. • • • Christ will clothe His faithful ones with His own righteousness, that He may present them to His Father "a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing"--Ephesians 5:27 (GC 483 f).

Through the merits of Christ, through His righteousness, which by faith is imputed unto us, we are to attain to the perfection of Christian character (5 T 744).

But that which God required of Adam in paradise before the fall, He requires in this age of the world from those who would follow Him--perfect obedience to His law. But right­eousness without a blemish can be obtained only through the imputed righteousness of Christ (RH 3 September 1901) •

• • • whatever of virtue humanity possesses, it exists only in Jesus Christ, the world's Redeemer (RH 22 December 199b).

14. Is a mark to be reached, a standard to be attained.

84 [17J

Are we striving with all our power to attain to the stature of men and women in Christ? Are we seeking for his fullness, ever pressing toward the mark set before us--the perfection of His character? When the Lord's people reach this mark, they will be sealed in their foreheads. Filled with the Spirit, they will be complete in Christ, and the recording angel will declare, "It is finished" (6 BC 1118).

The ideal of Christian character is Christlikeness. Thereis opened before us a path of constant advancement. We have an object to gain, a standard to reach, that includes everything good and pure and noble and elevated. There should be continual striving and constant progress onward and upward toward perfec­tion of character (8 T 64).

15. Is possible in this life.

Perfection of character is attainable by everyone who strives for it. This is made the very foundation of the new covenant of the gospel (1 SM 212).

We can overcome. Yes; fully, entirely. Jesus died to make a way of escape for us, that we might overcome every evil temper, every sin, every temptation, and sit down at last with Him (1 T 144).

Jesus revealed no qualities, and exercised no powers, that men may not have through faith in Him. His perfect humanity is that which all His followers may possess, if they will be in subjection to God as He was (DA 664).

Abundant grace has been provided that the believing soul may be kept free from sin; for all heaven, with its limitless resources, has been placed at our command (1 SM 39:4; cf. pp. 223-24).

Some few in every generation from~,Adam resisted his Satan's every artifice and stood forth as noble representatives of what it was in the power of man to do and to be--Christ working with human efforts, helping man in overcoming the power of Satan. Enoch and Elijah are the correct representatives of what the race might be through faith in Jesus Christ if they chose to be. Satan was greatly disturbed because these noble, holy men stood untainted amid the moral pollution surrounding them, perfected righteous characters, and were accounted worthy for translation to heaven (RH 3 March 1874).

16. Is necessary in this life; it is required of all.

The Lord requires perfection from His redeemed family. He ex­pects from us the perfection which Christ revealed in His humanity (CG 477).

85

It may take time to attain perfect submission to God's will, but we can never stop short of it and be fitted for heaven.

[18J

True religion will lead its possessor on to perfection (3 T 538).

Moral perfection is. required of all. Never should we lower the standard of righteousness in order to accommodate inherited or cultivated tendencies to wrongdoing. We need to understand that imperfection of character is sin (COL 330).

A well~balanced character is formed by single acts well per­formed. One defect, cultivated instead of being overcome, makes the man imperfect, and closes against him the gate of the Holy . City. He who enters heaven must have a character that is without spot or wrinkle or any such thing. Naught that defileth can ever enter there. In all the redeemed host not one defect will be seen (MYP 144).

We plead with you to perfect holiness in the fear· of. the Lord. It is perfection-that, is required; and nothing'short of per­fection will ~nableyotl to see tbe .King in his beauty. When you are all ready, having overcome your sins, having put away all your iniquity from you, you are in a condition to receive the finishing touch of immortality. • When the Lord shall come in the clouds of heaven • • • no atoning blood then pleads in your behalf to wash away the stain of sin. Just as you then are, you will remain. • • • The impure cannot then obtain per­fection of Christian character. No work of purification can then be performed. Opportunity is now given you to improve and become perfect this side of the Judgment. You must obtain a moral fitness here to meet your God (RH 12 April 1870. See also DA 311, AH 16; AA 478, 2 T 355).

17. Is a prerequisite for the sealing and translation.

Not one of us will ever receive the seal of God while our characters have one spot or stain upon them. It is left with us to remedy the defects in our characters, to cleanse the soul temple of every defilement. Then the latter rain will fall upon us as the early rain fell upon the disciples on the Day of Pentecost (5 T 214).

I also saw that many do not realize what they must be in order to live in the sight of the Lord without a high priest in the sanctuary through the time of trouble. Those who receive the seal of the living God and are protected in the time of trouble must reflect the image of Jesus fully (EW 71).

While the investigative judgment is going forward in heaven, while the sins of penitent believers are being removed from the sanctuary, there is to be a special work of purification, of putting away of sin, among God's people upon earth (GC 425).

86 [19J

But while they have a deep sense .of their unworthiness, they have no concealed wrongs to reveal. Their sins have gone beforehand to judgment and have been blotted out, and they cannot bring them to remembrance (GC 620).

When the character of Christ shall be perfectly reproduced. in His people, then He will come to claim them as His own (COL 69. See also 6 BC 1118, GC 623, 3 SG 134).

18. The righteous will have to live through the time of trouble

without a mediator/intercessor. But their character will remain spot-

less for eternity.

When He [Jesus) leaves the sanctuary, darkness covers the in­habitants of the earth. In that fearful time the righteous must live in the sight of a holy God without an intercessor •• (GC 614; cf. p. 425. See also 3 SG 134, GC 620, SR 403).

When the decree goes forth and the stamp is impressed, their character will remain pure and spotless for eternity. • • • All who receive the seal must be without spot before God--candidates for heaven (5 T 216).

19. Is not static, but dynamic. It means growth that will

continue throughout eternity; it is a process. It is not reached before

death or end of probation.

Perfection of character is a lifelong work, unattainable by those who are not willing to strive for it in God's appointed way, by slow and toilsome steps (5 T 500).

High and holy attainments are within our reach. Continual pro­gress in knowledge and virtue is God I s purpose for us. •.• • Every day we may advance in perfection of Christian character (MH 503).

Man may grow up into Christ, his living head. It is not the work of a moment, but that of a lifetime. By growing daily in the divine life, he will not attain to the full stature of a perfect man in Christ until his probation ceases. The growing is a con­tinuous work (4 T 367).

A character formed according to the divine likeness is the only treasure that we can take from this world to the next. And in heaven we are continually to improve (COL JJZ).

It is our life-work to be reaching forward to the perfection of Christian character, striving continually for conformity to the

87 [20]

will of God. The efforts begun upon earth will continue through eternity (4 T 520).

Through ceaseless ages to advance in wisdom, in knowledge, and in holiness, ever exploring new fields of thoughtt ever finding new wonders and new glories, ever increasing in capacity to know and to enjoy and to love, and knowing that there is still beyond us joy and love and wisdom infinite--such.is the object to which the Christian's hope is pointing (CT 55. See also SC 109, GC 621-622, COL 65, Ed 105-106).

IV. Sin and Law

Sin

1. Because of Adam's sin, all men are born with inherent sin-

ful propensities, inclinations, tendencies to sin; i.e., inbred or

indwelling sin.

In what consisted the strength of the assault made upon Adam, which caused his fall? It was not ind~~lling sin; for God made Adam after His own character, pure and upright. There were no corrupt principles in the first Adam, no corrupt propensities or tendencies to evil (1 BC 1083).

Because of sin his [Adam's] posterity was born with inherent propensities of disobedience. But Jesus Christ was the only begotten Son of God. He took upon Himself human nature and was tempted in all points as human nature is tempted. He CQuld have sinned; He could have fallen, but not for one moment was there in Him an evil propensity (5 BC 1128).

At its very source human nature was corrupted. And ever since then sin has continued its hateful work, reaching from mind to mind. Every sin committed awakens the echoes of the original sin (RH 16 April 1901).

The inheritance of children is that of sin. As related to the first Adam, men receive from him nothing but guilt and the sentence to death (GC 475).

Because of his [Adam's] sin our natures are fallen, ••• we are sinful, unholy (SC 62).

There is in his nature a bent to evil, a force which, unaided, he cannot resist (Ed 29).

Our hearts are naturally sinful, ••• (2 T 710).

88

The tendencies of the natural heart are downward (4 T 587).

Temptations from without find an answering chord within the heart, and the feet turn imperceptiR~y toward evil (8 T 312).

There is wrestling with inbred sin; there is warfare against outward wrong (RH 29 November 1887, See also GC 508, 4 T 496, 3 T 343, OHC 215, 6 BC 1089, PK 82, MH 451-55, 5 T 604-605).

[21J

2. These evil propensities are part of our fallen nature and

will not be removed during this life though they may be kept under con-

stant and perfect control.

The Christian will feel the promptings of sin, but he will main­tain a constant warfare against it (GC 469 f).

The fallen nature of Adam always strives for the mastery (RH 25 October 1892).

God has provided means for subduing every sihful trait~ and resisting every temptation, however strong (1 SM 82).

Christ came to this world and lived the law of God, that man might have perfect mastery over the natural inclinations which corrupt the soul (MH 130 f).

[We may] overcome every evil temper, every sin, every tempta­tion (1 T 144).

We need not retain one sinful propensity. • • • As we partake of the divine nature, hereditary and cultivated tendencies to wrong are cut away from the character, and we are made a living power for good (7 BC 943).

Whatever may be our inherited or cultivated tendencies to wrong, we can overcome through the power that He is ready to impart (MH 175 f).

Man is never brought into such a position that yielding to evil becomes a matter of necessity. No temptation or trial is permitted to come to him which he is unable to resist (PP 332. See also PP 421, COL 331, 4 T 299, 439, 2 T 710, MH 451-55).

3. The sinful promptings of the heart represent inward tempta-

tions which--if repulsed and rejected--are not regarded as (accountable)

sins.

89 [22J

Temptation is enticement to sin, and proceeds from. Satan and from the evil of our own hearts (MB 116).

Temptations from within and from without •••• (9 T 222).

In the battle with inward sin and outward temptation, even the wise and powerful Solomon was vanquished (PK 82).

When assailed by temptation, steadfastly resist the evil promptings (MYP 112).

[We may} overcome every evil temper, every sin, every tempta­tion (1 T 144).

Temptation is not sin (5 T 426).

There are thoughts and feelings suggested and aroused by Satan that annoy even the best of men; but if they are not cherished, if they are repulsed as hateful, the soul is not contaminated with guilt, and no other is defiled by their influence(RH 27 March 1888).

4. Inward sin consists in tolerating, cherishing and consenting

to evil thoughts and feelings and unholy desires.

There is no sin in having temptations; but sin comes in when temptation is yielded to (4 T 358).

When impure thoughts are cherished, they need not be expressed byword or act to consummate the sin (4 T 623).

The sin of evilspeaking begins with the cherishing of evil thoughts. • • • An impure thought tolerated, an unholy desire cherished, and the soul is contaminated. • • • Every unholy thought must be instantly repelled. • • • No man can be forced to transgress. His own consent must be first gained (5 T 177).

5. God holds us responsible even for sins of omission.

In the books of heaven our lives are as accurately traced as in the picture on the plate of the photographer. Not only are we held accountable for what we have done, but for what we have left undone (RH 22 September 1891).

Opposite each name in the books of heaven is entered with terrible exactness every word, every selfish act, every unfulfilled duty, and every secret sin, with every artful disembling. Heaven-sent warnings or 'reproofs neglected, wasted moments, unimproved oppor­tunities, the influence exerted for good or for evil, with its far­reaching results, are all chronicled by the recording angel (GC 482).

90 [23J

6. Yet the Christian commits repeatedly misdeeds, trans-

gressions, errors, mistakes, missteps, wrongs, and short-comings, etc.

We should remember that our own ways are not faultless. We make mistakes again and again. • • • No one is perfect but Jesus. Think of Him and be charmed away from yourself (KH 136).

We should remember that all make mistakes; even men and women who have had years of experience sometimes err; but God does not cast them off because of their errors (ST 21 May 1902).

If in our ignorance we make missteps, Christ does not leave us (COL 173).

We shall fail often in our efforts to copy the divine pattern. We shall often have to bow down to weep at the feet of Jesus, because of our shortcomings and mistakes; but we are not to be discouraged; we are to pray more fervently, believe more fully, and try again with more steadfastness to grow into the likeness of our Lord (1 SM 336 f).

Even if we are overcome by the enemy, weare not cast off, not forsaken and rejected of God. No; Christ is at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us (SC 64).

7. However, he does not knowingly and wilfully commit sin;

he does not cherish sin, but hates it.

In the unregenerated heart there is love of sin and a dis­position to cherish and excuse it. In the renewed heart there is hatred of sin and determined resistance against it (GC 508).

When we are clothed with the righteousness of Christ, we shall have no relish for sin; for Christ will be working with us. We may make mistakes, but we will hate the sin that caused the sufferings of the Son of God (1 SM 360).

Jesus is acquainted with every heart that is humble, meek and lowly. These have trials and make mistakes, but they are broken­hearted because they grieve the Saviour who loved them and died for them (TM 129).

Whoever is seen to abhor sin instead of loving it, whoever re­sists and conquers those passions that have held sway within, displays the operation of a principle wholly from above (GC 505 f).

If a man is born of God, he will ••• not wilfully transgress the law of God in thought, or word, or action. • • • Even those

91

who are striving in sincerity to keep the law of God, are not always free from sin. Through some deceptive temptations, they are deceived, and fall into error (ST 30 April 1896).

[24)

If one who daily communes with God errs from the. path, if he turns a moment from looking steadfastly unto Jesus, it is not because he sins willfully; for when he sees his mistake, he turns again, and fastens his eyes upon Jesus, and the fact that he has erred, does not make him less dear to the heart of God (RH 12 t4ay 1896 (:::FL 118J).

The willful commission of a known sin silences the witnessing voice of the Spirit and separates the soul from God ([SL 66) MYP 114).

Even one wrong trait of character, one sinful desire cherished, will eventually neutralize all the power of the gospel (5 T 53).

8. God weighs the motives, not simply the accomplishments.

The righteousness of Christ will not cover one cherished sin. A man may be a law-breaker in heart; yet if he commits no out­ward act of transgression, he may be regarded by the world as possessing great integrity. But God's law looks into the secrets of the heart. Every act is judged by the motives that prompt it (COL 316).

The approval of the Master is not given because of the great­ness of the work performed, but because of fidelity in all that has been done. It is not the results we attain, but the motives from which we act, that weigh with God. He prizes goodness and faithfulness above all else (GW 267).

Law

9. God requires perfect conformity to the moral law which is

the transcript of his character.

It was possible for Adam, before the fall, to form a righteous character by obedience to God's law. But he failed to do this, and because of his sin our natures are fallen, and we cannot make ourselves righteous. Since we are sinful, unholy, we cannot perfectly obey the holy law (SC 62).

But that which God required of Adam in paradise before the fall, He requires in this age of the world from those_who would follow Him--perfect obedience to His law. But righteousness without a blemish can be obtained only through the imputed righteousness of Christ (RH 3 September 1901).

92 [25J

The conditions of eternal life, under grace, are just what they were in Eden--perfect righteousness, harmony with God, perfect. uniformity to the principles of His law. The standard of charac­ter presented in the Old Testament is the same that is presented in the New Testament (MB 116).

The righteousness of God is absolute. His people be (15M 198).

As God is, so must

Righteousness is obedience to the law (15M 367).

10. God requires Adamic perfection; i.e., perfect obedience to

the moral law as in Eden.

That which God required of Adam before his fall was perfect obedience. to His law. God. requires now what He required of Adam, perfect obedience, righteousness without a flaw, without short­coming in His sight. God help us to render to Him all His law requires (25M 380 f).

The Lord requires no less of the soul now than He required of Adam in paradise before he fell--perfect obedience, unblemished righteousness. The requirement of God under the covenant of grace is just as broad as the requirement He made in paradise~­harmony with His law, which is holy, and just, and good •• God requires of His child perfect obedience (RH 1 November 1892).

11. The law reaches our inward feelings and motives as well as

our outward acts.

God's law reaches the feelings and the motives, as well as the outward acts. • The books of heaven record the sins that. would have been committed had there been opportunity (ST 31 July 1901).

When the grace of God takes possession of the heart, it is seen that the inherited and cultivated tendencies to wrong must be crucified. A .new life, under new control, must begin in. the soul. All that is done must be done to the glory of God. This work includes the outward as well as the inward man •. The entire being, 'body, soul, and spirit,. must be brought into subjection to God, to be used by Him as an instrument of righteousness (MYP 68) •

12. The law can be perfectly obeyed by man.

By His life and His death, Christ proved that God's justice did not destroy His mercy, but that sin could be forgiven t and that the law is righteous, and can be perfectly obeyed. Satan's charges were refuted (DA 762).

93 [26J

v. Humility and Assurance

Humility

1. We cannot equal the perfection of the character of Christ--

but we must copy and resemble it in our sphere.

[Christ1 is a perfect and holy example, given for us to imitate. We cannot equal the pattern; but we shall not be approved of God if we do not copy it and, according to the ability which God has given, resemble it (2 T 549).

[Christ possessed an] infinitely perfect character (6 T 60).

Our work is to strive to attain in our sphere of action the perfection that Christ in His life on the earth attained in every phase of character. He is our example (KH 130).

As God is perfect in His sphere, so man is to be perfect in his sphere (MM 112 f.).

He tells us to be perfect as He is, in the same manner. We are to be centers of light and blessing to our little circle, even as He is to the universe (MB 77).

None need fail of attaining, in his sphere, to perfection of Christian character (AA 531).

2. True Christians will always retain a deep sense of their

unworthiness, corruptibility, weakness, and frailty. They will show

no self trust.

Perfection through our own good works we can never attain. The soul who sees Jesus by faith, repudiates his own r!ghteousness. He sees himself as incomplete, his righteousness as insuffi~ cient, his strongest faith as feebleness, his most costly sacri­fice as meager, and he sinks in humility at the foot of the cross. But a voice speaks to Him from the oracles of God's word. In amazement he hears the message, ItYe are complete .. in Him. It Now all is at rest in his soul. No longer must he strive to find some worthiness in himself, some meritorious deed by which to gain the favor of God (5T 4 July 1892).

Thus when the servant of God is permitted to. behold the glory of the God of heaven, as He is unveiled to hum,anity,and realizes to a slight degree the purity of the Holy One of Israel, he will make startling confessions of the pollution of his soul, rather than proud boasts of his holiness.... .As humanity, with its

94

weakness and deformity, was brought out in contrast with the perfection of divine holiness, and light and glory, he felt altogether inefficient and unworthy (4 BC 1139, 1140).

[271

The first thing to be learned by all who would become workers together with God is the lesson of self-distrust; then they are prepared to have imparted to them the character of Christ (DA 250) •

All who are truly sanctified, will have a similar _experience. The clearer their views of the greatness, glory, and perfection of Christ, the more vividly will they see their own weakness and imperfection. They will have no disposition to claim a sinless character; that which has appeared right and comely in _themselves will, in contrast with Christ's purity and glory, appear only as unworthy and corruptible. It is when men are separated from God, when they have very indistinct views of. Christ, that they say, "I am sinless; I am sanctified" (SL 38).

The righteous, in their distress, will have a deep sense of their unworthiness, and with many tears will acknowledge their utter unworthiness, and like Jacob will plead the promises of God through Christ, made to just such dependent, helpless, re­penting sinners (3 SG 132).

They cannot bring to mind any particular sins, but in their whole life they can see but little good. Their sins had gone before­hand to judgment, and pardon had been written (2 SG 135 /cf. GC 618-620/).

3. Christians will always retain a deep sense of the sin-

fulness of their own nature, of their defects and imperfections, and

of sin. They do not feel holy and perfect (though they may be).

There can be no self-exaltation, no boastful claim to .freedom from sin, on the part of those who walk in the shadow of Calvary's cross. They feel that it was their sin which caused the agony that broke the heart of the Son of God, and this thought will lead them to self-abasement. Those who live nearest to Jesus discern most clearly the frailty and sinfulness of humanity,and their only hope is in the merit of a crucified and risen Saviour (GC 471) •

None of the apostles and prophets ever claimed to be without sin. Men who have lived the nearest to God, men who would sacrifice life itself rather than knowingly commit a wrong act, men whom Cod had honored with divine light and power, have confessed the sinfulness of their nature. They have put no confidence in the flesh, have claimed no righteousness of their

95 [28J

own, but have trusted wholly in the righteousness _of Christ. So will -it be with all who behold Christ. The nearer we come ,to Jesus, and the more closely we discern the purity of His character, the more clearly shall we see the exceeding sinfulness of sin, and the less shall we feel like exalting ourselves. There will _be a continual reaching out of the soul after God,a continual earnest, heart-breaking confession of sin and humbling of the heart before Him. At every advance step in our Christian experience our repen­tance will deepen. We shall know that our sufficiency is in Christ alone and shall make the apostle's confession our own: flI know that in me (that is, in my flesh) dwelleth no good thing" (AA 561).

No one who claims holiness is really holy. Those who are regis­tered as holy in the books of heaven are not aware of the fact and are the last ones to boast of their own goodness (5T 26 Feb~ ruary 1885).

Those who are indeed purifying their souls by obeying the truth will have a most humble opinion of themselves. The more closely they view the spotless character of Christ, the stronger will be their desire to be conformed to His image, and the less will they see of purity or holiness in themselves. But while we should realize our sinful condition, we are to rely upon Christ as our righteousness, our sanctification, and our redemption (5 T 471 f).

Apart from Christ we have no merit, no righteousness. Our sin­fulness, our w~akness, our human imperfections make it impossible that we should appear before God, unless we are clothed in Christ's spotless righteousness. We are to be found in Him, not having our own righteousness, but the righteousness which is through Christ(RH 20 December 1892).

Through His sacrifice, human beings may reach the high ideal set before them, and hear at last the words, "Ye are complete in him,rt not having your own righteousness, but the righteousness that He wrought out for you. Your imperfection is no longer seen, for you are clothed with the robe of Christ's perfection n1S 125, 1902 [7 Be 907).i

4. Even perfect Christians remain sinful beings, sinners. The

soul remains marred.

It was possible for Adam before the fall, to form a righteous character by obedience to God's law. But he failed to do this, and because of his sin our natures are fallen, and we cannot make our­selves righteous. Since we are sinful, unholy, we cannot perfectly obey the holy law. We have no righteousness of our own with which to meet the claims of the law of God (SC 62).

The righteous, in their distress, will have a deep sense of their unworthiness, and with many-tears will acknowledge their utter

96

unworthiness, and like Jacob will plead the promises of God through Christ, made to just such dependent, helpless, re­penting sinners (3 SG 132).

[29J

Abundant grace has been provided that the believing soul may be kept free from sin; for all heaven, with its limitless resources, has been placed at our command. • • •

In ourselves we are sinners; but in Christ we are righteous. Having made us righteous through the imputed righteousness of Christ, God pronounces us just, and treats us as just. He looks upon us as His dear children (1 SM 394).

When human beings receive holy flesh, they will not remain on the earth, but will be taken to heaven. While sin is forgiven in this life, its results are not now wholly removed (2 SM 33).

The Lord may and does forgive the repenting sinner; but though forgiven, the soul is marred (DA 302).

Though forgiven, the soul is marred •• the soul bears the scars (FE 195).

Through all time

5. The Christian will always be faced with temptations. He

will always have to fight against self and sin.

So long as Satan reigns, we shall have self to subdue, besetting sins to overcom~; so long as life shall last, there will .be no stopping place, no point which we can reach and say, I have fully attained. Sanctification is the result of life-long obedience (AA 560, 561).

We 'have no reason to fear while looking to Jesus, no reason to doubt but that He is able to save to the uttermost all that come unto Him; but we may constantly fear lest our old nature will again obtain the supremacy (1 SM 336 f).

Each soul inherits certain un-Christlike traits of character. It is the grand and noble work of a lifetime to keep under con­trol these tendencies to wrong. • • • So long as we are in the world, we shall meet with adverse influences. There will be provocations to test the temper; and it is by meeting these in the right spirit that the Christian graces are developed (IHP 231).

There are hereditary and cultivated tendencies to evil that must be overcome. Appetite and passion must be brought under the control of the Holy Spirit. There is no end to the warfare this side of eternity (CT 20. See also MH 452-53).

97 [30J

6. Christians will never claim to be sinless or perfect

(though they may be so), free from sin, holy, to have fully attained,

or that they cannot sin.

Those who are really seeking to perfect Christian character will never indulge the thought that they are sinless. Their­lives may be irreproachable, they may be. living representatives of the truth which they have accepted; but the more they disci­pline their minds to dwell upon the character of Christ, and the nearer they approach to His divine image, the more clearly will they discern its spotless perfection, and the more deeply will they feel their own defects (SL 7).

If those who speak so freely of perfection in the flesh, could see things in the true light, they would recoil with horror from their presumptuous ideas. In showing the fallacy of their assumptions in regard to holy flesh, the Lord is seeking to prevent men and women from putting on His words a construction which leads to pollution of body, soul, and spirit. Let this phase of doctrine be carried a little further, and it will lead to the claim that its advocates cannot sin; that since they have holy flesh, their actions are all holy. What a door of temptation would thus be opened! (25M 32).

But if there was anyone who could hope to be justified in claiming perfection of character, it was Paul; but we hear from his lips no presumptuous boasting. • • • Not one may claim to be perfect •• Sanctified lips will never give utterance to such presumptuous words. • • • Those who see the far-reaching claims of the law of God, those who realize that it is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart, will not presume to make the boast of sinless­ness, and venture to declare, "I am perfect, I am holy" (ST 23 May 1895, (pp. 5-6]).

We cannot say, "I am sinless" till this vile body is changed and fashioned like unto His glorious body •. But if we constantly seek to follow Jesus, the blessed hope is ours of standing before the throne of God without spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing, complete in Christ, robed in His righteousness and perfection (KH 361).

7. Humility and repentance will increase with sanctification.

The closer we come to Christ the less holy we will feel.

We may always be startled and indignant when we hear a poor, fallen mortal exclaiming, "I am holy: I am sinless!" Not one soul to whom Cod has granted the wonderful view of His great­ness and majesty, has ever uttered one word like this. On the contrary, they have felt like sinking down in the deepest

98 DV humiliation of soul, as they have viewed the purity of God~ and. contrasted with it their own imperfection of life and character. One ray of the glory of God, one gleam of the purity .of Christ, penetrating the soul, makes every SP9tOf defilement painfully distinct, and lays bare the deformity and defects of the human character. • •• He loathes himself, as he views the greatness, the majesty, the pure and spotless character of Jesus Christ (RH 16 October 1888).

Daniel was a devoted servant of the Most High. His long life was filled up with noble deeds of service for His Master. His purity of character and unwavering fidelity are equaled only by his humility of heart and his contrition before God. We .repeat, the life of Daniel is an inspired illustration of true sancti­fication (SL 39).

He who is truly penitent does not forget his past sins, and grows careless about them as soon as he has obtained forgiveness. On the contrary, the clearer the evidence he has of divine favor, the more he sees to regret in his past life of sin. He loathes, abhors, and condemns himself. • • • He renews his repentance toward God ••• and finds that repentance is a daily, continued exercise, lasting until mortality is swallowed up of life (5T 26 November 1894).

It is not only at the beginning of the Christian life that this renunciation of self is to be made. At every advance step heavenward it is to be renewed. All our good works are dependent on a power outside of ourselves. Therefore there needs. to bea continual reaching out of the heart after God, a continual, ear­nest, heartbreaking confession of sin and humbling of the soul before Him. Only by constant renunciation of self and depen­dence on Christ can we walk safely.

The nearer we come to Jesus and the more clearly we discern the ~aritY-Df His character, the more clearly we shall discern the exceeding sinfulness of sin and the less we shall feel 1ike exalting ourselves. Those whom heaven recognizes as holy ones are the last to parade their own goodness. • • • At every advance step in Christian experience our repentance will deepen (COL 159f.).

The closer you come to Jesus, the more faulty you will appear in your own eyes (5C 64).

8. The claim to sinlessness, holiness, or perfection is clear

evidence of the contrary; it is presumptuous and dishonours God.

Why is it that so many claim to be holy and sinless? It is be­cause they are so far from Christ (Ms 5, 1885).

99 [32J

••• the claim to be without sin is, in itself, evidence that he who makes this claim is far from holy. It is because he has no true conception of the infinite purity and holiness of God or of what they must become who shall be in harmony with His character; because he has no true conception of the purity and exalted loveliness of Jesus,and the malignity and evil of .sin, that man can regard himself as holy. The greater the distance between himself and Christ, and the more inadequate his concep­tions of the divine character and requirements, the more righteous he appears in his own eyes (GC 471ff.-473).

If those who speak so freely of perfection in the flesh, could see things in the true light, they would recoil with horror from their presumptuous ideas (25M 32).

Not one may claim to be perfect. • • • Sanctified lips will never give utterance to such presumptuous words (ST 23 May 1895).

• • • let not God be dishonored by the declaration from human lips, "I am sinless; I am holy." Sanctified lips will never give utterance to such presumptuous words (AA 561f.).

Assurance

9. Do not claim salvation (llonce saved--always saved").

It is essential to have faith in Jesus, and to believe you are saved through Him; but there is danger in taking the. position that many do take in saying, "I am saved" (15M 373).

We are never to rest in a satisfied condition, and cease to make advancement, saying, "I am saved." When this idea is entertained, the motives for watchfulness, for prayer, for earnest endeavor to press onward to higher attainments, cease to exist (15M 314).

Those who accept the Saviour, however sincere their conversion, should never be taught to say or to feel that they are saved. This is misleading. Everyone should be taught to cherish hope and faith; but even when we give ourselves to Christ and know that He accepts us, we are not beyond the reach of tempta-tion. '. • :-. Those who accept Chris t, and in their first confi.,.. dence say, I am saved, are in danger of trusting to themselves. They lose sight of their own weakness and their constant need of divine strength. They are unprepared for Satan's devices, and under temptation many, like Peter, fall into the very depths of sin. We are admonished, "Let him that thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he fall." 1 Cor. 10:12. Our only safety is in constant distrust of self, and dependence on Chri~t (COL 155).

100 [33J

10. Do not be fearful and distrustful! You can have assurance

of eternal life.

The apostle Peter has had a long experience in the things of God. His faith in God's power to save had strengthened with the years, until he had proved beyond question that there is no possibility of failure before the one who, advancing by faith, ascends round and round, ever upward and onward, to the topmost round of the ladder that reaches even to the portals of heaven (AA 533).

At times a deep sense of our unworthiness will send a thrill of terror through the soul, but this is no evidence that God has changed toward us, or we toward God. No effort should be made to rein the mind up to a certain intensity of emotion. We may not feel today the peace and joy which we felt yesterday; but we should by faith grasp the hand of Christ, and trust Him as fully in the darkness as in the light. • • • An unyielding trus't, a firm reliance upon Christ, will bring peace and assur­ance to the soul (SL 90).

The acceptance of the Saviour brings a glow of perfect peace, perfect love, perfect assurance (COL 420).

It is not God's will that you should be distrustful, and torture your soul with the fear that God will not accept you because you are sinful and unworthy (FL 102).

Through the imputed righteousness of Christ, the sinner may feel that he is pardoned, and may know that the law no more condemns him, because he is in harmony with all its precepts. It is his privilege to count himself innocent when he reads and thinks of the retribution that will fall upon the unbelieving and sinful (SO 240).

Through faith in His blood,all may be made perfect in_Christ Jesus. Thank God that we are not dealing with impossibilities. We may claim sanctification. We may enjoy the favor of God. We are not to be anxious about what Christ and God think of us, but about what God thinks of Christ, our Substitute. Ye are accepted in the Beloved. The Lord shows, to the repenting, believing one, that Christ accepts the surrender of the soul, to be molded and fashioned after His own likeness (2 SM 32, 33).

VI. Freedom and Grace

rreedom and Cooperation

1. Freedom of choice is given to every man. Man is a free

moral agen t.

101

Every man is free to choose what power he will have to rule over him (DA 258).

To deprive man of the freedom of choice would be to rob him of his prerogative as an intelligent being, and make him a mere automaton. It is not God's purpose to coerce tbe will. Man was created a free moral agent. • • • He is never brought into such a position that yielding to evil becomes a matter of necessity. No temptation or trial is permitted to come to him which he is unable to resist (PP 33If.).

You cannot change your heart, you cannot of yourself give to God its affections; but you can choose to serve Him. You can give Him your will; He will then work in you to will and to do according to His good pleasure (SC 47).

All are by their own choice deciding their destiny (Ed 178).

[34J

The will is the governing power in the nature of man, the power of decision, or choice. Every human being possessed of reason has power to choose the right •••• Everyone may place. his will on the side of the will of God, may choose to obey Him, • • • (Ed 289).

In the work of redemption there is no compulsion. No external force is employed. Under the influence of the Spirit of God, man is left freetb choose whom he will serve. In the change that takes place when the soul surrenders to Christ, there is the highest sense of freedom. The expulsion of sin is the act of the soul itself. True, we have no power to free ourselves from Satan's control; but when we desire to be set free from sin, and in our great need cry out for a power out of and above ourselves, the powers of the soul are imbued with the divine energy of the Holy Spirit, and they obey the dictates of the will in fulfilling the will of God (DA 466).

2. Cooperation with God is required of all who are saved by

grace.

God does nothing for man without his cooperation. . From first to last man is to be a laborer together with God. Man's efforts alone are nothing but worthlessness; but cooperation with Christ means a victory (1 SM 379-82 passim).

The work of gaining salvation is one of copartnership, a joint operation. There is to be cooperation between God and the repentant sinner. This is necessary for the formation of right principles in the character. Man is to make earnest efforts. to overcome that which hinders him from attaining to perfection. But he is wholly dependent upon God for success. Human effort of

102

itself is not sufficient. Without the aid of. divine power it avails nothing. God works and man. works. .• • • .God wishes us to have mastery over ourselves. But He cannot help us without our consent and cooperation (AA 482).

To make God's grace our own, we must act our part. His .grace is given to work in us to will and to do, but never as a substitute for our effort (PK 487).

[35J

Man's part is to lay hold by faith on the merits of Christ, and cooperate with the divine agencies in forming a righteous character (FE 430).

God alone can give us the victory. He desires us to have the mastery over ourselves, our Qwn will and ways. But He cannot work in us without our consent and cooperation. The divine Spirit works through the faculties and powers given to man. Our energies are required to cooperate with God (MB 142).

As the will of man cooperates with the will of God, it becomes omnipotent. Whatever is to be done at His command maybe accomplished in His strength. All His biddings are enablings (COL 333).

Grace

3. Salvation is by grace alone; it is a free gift.

We owe everything to grace, free grace, sovereign grace. Grace in the covenant ordained our adoption. Grace in the Saviour effected our redemption, our regeneration, and our adoption to heirship with Christ (6 T 268).

It is only through the unmerited grace of Christ that any man can find entrance into the city of God (COL 394).

We should continually realize that we do not deserve grace because of our merit, for all that we have.is God's gift (FE 457).

All the merit, all the moral dignity, of men has been theirs simply in and through the merits of Jesus Christ (FE 331).

4. Salvation depends on the imputed and imparted righteous-

ness of Christ.

Our only ground of hope is in the righteousness of Christ imputed to us, and in that wrought by His Spirit working in and through us (SC 63).

103 (36)

Both our title to heaven and our fitness for it are found in the righteousness of Christ (DA 300).

5. There is no merit whatsoever in what we do. For all we

can do we can do only through grace.

All the good qualities that men possess are the gift of-God; their good deeds are performed by the grace of God through Christ. Since they owe all to God the glory of whatever they are or do belongs to Him alone; they are but instruments in His hands (pp. 717).

There is not a point that needs to be dwelt upon more earnestly, repeated more frequently, or established more firmly in the minds of all, than the impossibility of fallen man meriting anything by his own best good works. Salvation is through faith in Christ alone. • • • Let the subject be made distinct and plain that it is not possible to effect anything in our standing before God or in the gift of God to us through creature merit. Should faith and works purchase the gift of salvation for anyone, then the Creator is under obligation to the creature •••• Salvation, then, is partly of debt, that may be earned as wages. If man cannot, by any of his good works, merit salvation~ then it must be wholly of grace, received by man as a sinner because he receives and believes in Jesus. It is wholly a free gift •••• Justification is wholly of grace and not procured .by any works that fallen man can do. The Lord Jesus imparts all the powers, all the grace, all the penitence, all the inclination, all the pardon of sins, in presenting His righteousness forman to_grasp by living faith--which is also the gift of God. If you would gather together everything that is good and holy and noble and lovely in man, and then present the subject to the-angels of God as acting a part in the salvation of the human soul or in _merit, the proposition would be rejected as treason •••• And any. works that man can render to God will be far less than nothingness. My requests are made acceptable only because they are laid upon Christ's righteousness. The idea of doing anything to merit the grace of pardon is fallacy from beginning to end (MS 36, 1890).

6. Grace alone can enable man to overcome his sinful tenden-

cies and to develop a Christlike character, and to perfectly obey the

law of God.

The "New covenant" was established upon "better promises"--the promises of forgiveness of sins and of the grace of God to renew the heart and brtng it into harmony with th~ princip19s of God's law (PP 372).

104

To all men this covenant of grace offered pardon and the assisting grace of God for future obedience through faith in Christ. It also promised them eternal life on condition of fidelity to God's law (PP 370).

What need of divine grace to direct every step and show us how to perfect Christian characters! (3 T 542).

[371

While we yield ourselves as instruments for the Holy Spirit's working, the grace of God works in us to deny old inclinations, to overcome powerful propensities, and to form new habits. As we cherish and obey the promptings of the Spirit, our hearts are enlarged to receive more and more of His power, and to do more,and better work (COL 354).

7. All that God requires may be accomplished through grace.

God makes no requirement without making provision for its fulfillment. Through the grace of Christ we may accomplish everything that God requires (COL 301).

In his efforts to reach God's ideal for him, the Christian is to despair of nothing. Moral and spiritual perfection, through the grace and power of Christ, is promised to all (AA 478).

The Lord has shown me that His grace is sufficient for all our trials; and although they are greater than ever before, yet if we trust wholly in God, we can overcome every temptation, and through His grace come off victorious (2 SG 289f.).:

8. At no point of his experience does the Christian outgrow

his dependence on grace.

Our only safety is to be shielded by the grace of God every moment (3 T 324).

We must have new grace and fresh strength daily in order to be victorious (3 T54l).

Nothing can be done without His grace (TM 319).

All that man can do without Christ is polluted with selfish­ness and sin. It is the grace of Christ alone, through faith, that can make us holy (SC 59-61).

At no point in our experience can we dispense with .the assis­tance of that which enables us tumake the first start. Divine grace is n~~d~d at the beginning, divin~ grac~ at every step of advance, and divine grace alone can complete the work (TM S07f.).

105 [38]

9. Christ's perfect holiness atones for our short-comings,

deficiencies, and transgressions.

When it is in the heart to obey God, when efforts are put forth to this end, Jesus accepts this disposition and effort as man's best service, and He makes up for the deficiency with His own divine meri t (ML 250).

Christ looks at the spirit, and when He sees us carrying our burden with faith, His perfect holiness atones for our short­comings. When we do our best, He becomes our righteousness (1 SM 368).

When through faith in Jesus Christ, man does according to the very best of his ability, and seeks to keep the way of the Lord by.obedience to the ten commandments, the perfection of Christ is imputed to cover the transgression of the repentant and obedient soul (FE 135).

When Satan tells you that the Lord will not regard you with favor,because you have sinned, say, "Jesus gave His life for me. He suffered a cruel death that He might enable me to resist tempta­tion. I know that He loves me, notwithstanding my imperfection. I rest in His love. God has accepted His perfection in my behalf. He is my righteousness, and I trust in His merits" (ST 13 August 1902) •

Jesus loves His children, even if they err. • •• When they do their best, calling upon God for His help, be assured the serviee will be accepted although imperfect. Jesus is perfect. Christ's righteousness is imputed unto them, and He will say, Take away the filthy garments from him and clothe him with change of raiment. Jesus makes up for our unavoidable deficiencies (Letter 17a 1891).

10. Christ adds His perfection to our works, efforts, prayers,

religious services, confessions, praise, thanksgiving, worship,

obedience, to make them acceptable to God.

The religious services, the prayers, the praise, the penitent confession of sin ascend from true believers as incense to the heavenly sanctuary, but passing through the corrupt channels of humanity, they are so defiled that unless purified by blood, they can be of no value with God. They ascend not in spotless purity, and unless the intercessor, who is at God's right hand, presents and purifies all by His righteousness, it is not acceptable to God (1 SM 344).

106

He holds before the Father the censer of His own merits, in which there is no taint of earthly corruption. He gathers into this censer the prayers, the praise, and the confessions of His people,and with these He puts His own spotless right­eousness. Then, perfumed with the merits of Christ's propi­tiation, the incense comes up before God wholly. and entirely acceptable. Then gracious answers are returned.

Oh, that all may see that everything. in obedience, in penitence, in praise and thanksgiving, must be placed upon

[39]

the glowing fire of the righteousness of Christ. The fragrance of this righteousness ascends like a cloud around the mercy seat (1 SM 344).

The incense, ascending with the prayers of Israel, represents the merits and intercession of Christ, His perfect righteous­ness, which ;through faith is imputed to His people, and which can alone make the worship of sinful beings acceptable to God (PP 353).

When He sees them lifting the burdens, trying to carry them in the lowliness of mind, with distrust of self and with complete reliance upon Him, He adds to their work His perfection .and sufficiency, and it is accepted of the Father. We are accepted in the Beloved. The sinner's defects are covered by the per­fection and fullness of tf1eL.ord our Righteousness (Letter 4, 1889) •

Man's obedience can be made perfect only by.the incense of Christ's righteousness, which fills with divine fragrance. every act of obedience (AA 532. See also TM 93, SO 22, GC 421).

CHAPTER III

PERFECTION OR PERFECTIONISM: THE TWO POSITIONS COMPARED

Now that we have completed our analysis of the respective

soteriological views of John Wesley and Ellen G. White, we should be

sufficiently prepared to present a critical comparison between Wesley's

doctrine of entire sanctification and White's teaching on character per­

fection. In order to avoid needless repetition, we will limit our­

selves to a brief discussion of the basic agreements and disagreements

that exist among them on the one hand, and between them and the Pro­

testant Reformers of the 16th century on the other.

Justification

Both Wesley and White fully agree with the Reformers in main­

taining that salvation is a work of divine grace, a free gift that man

accepts by faith; faith constitutes the condition of his justification,

but it is not the cause of it. In other words, while faith--which is

closely related to repentance and obedience--is a sine qua n£n of

man's salvation, it possesses no meritorious value whatsoever. In­

stead, redemption is made possible by virtue of the righteousness and

the merits of Christ alone. This concept is well summed up in the

famous Protestant dicta sola fide, sola gratia, sola Christo.

In addition, Wesley and White also are in harmony with the

views of the Reformation in declaring that justification is concomitant

107

108

with conversion and regeneration and, consequently, involves a trans­

formation of man's attitude and character; that is, an inner change

wrought by the Spirit of God. Thus, the work of God for us (justifi­

cation) is accompanied by a work of God in us (sanctification), though

forgiveness has priority over against regeneration. But, while the

believer possesses a new disposition, that is, a renewed mind, holy

affections, and a sanctified will, the inherited sinful tendencies of

his fallen nature remain (though subdued) in his heart. This is to say

that sin remains (though it does no longer reign) in the Christian even

after his justification and regeneration. In the words of Paul, the

flesh constantly opposes the spirit. Therefore, sanctification is a

continuous process which is only initiated in the conversion experience.

However, it is of crucial importance to realize that Wesley

reduces justification to the act of forgiveness and thereby to man's

(preliminary) acceptance with God which is sharply distinguished from

sanctification and perfection as the ultimate condition of (final)

salvation. White, on the other hand, rejects this clear-cut distinction

between various stages of the Christian's religious experience, and

identifies justification with salvation. In other words, while Wesley

regards justification as only partial and incomplete, that is, as a

first step toward salvation, White clearly sides with the Reformers in

regarding it as the highest stage which the Christian can reach in

this life. Wesley's view is based on the notion that justification as

the divine declaration of man's righteousness must be preceded by

sanctification as the process in which man actually and experientially

attains to a state of inherent holiness. White, however, upholds the

109

Reformation position according to which justification as the imputa­

tion of the perfection of Christ to the believer precedes sanctifica­

tion as the impartation of Christ's righteousness to man.

At the same time, however, it is clear that White--similarly

to the Reformers--recognizes only the logical priority of justification

over against sanctification, but denies its chronological precedence.

This conclusion is supported by the fact that, in her writings, she

makes no rigid separation between the concepts of the imputation and

the impartation of the perfection of Christ to the believer, respec­

tively. Thus, for her (objective and external) justification seems to

be distinguishable but inseparable from (subjective and internal)

sanctification. In other words, White sides with Wesley in emphasizing

the radical change that takes place when a person is truly converted.

Though she does not go as far as did Wesley who claimed that the con­

verted Christian commits no more outward sins (in word and deed)--White

was realistic enough to recognize that sanctification is a slow pro­

cess accompanied by frequent failures and shortcomings--she nonetheless

maintained that true justification implies a decisive transformation of

man's mind, will, and emotions. In that sense, perfection is regarded,

not merely as an objective and external reality but, at the same time,

as a subjective and internal experience. This explains why, unlike

Wesley, White speaks of perfection not simply as of a goal to be

reached, but also as of a state to be improved. In other words, the

. Christian--according to White--grows in perfection (as an attitude)

towards perfection (as a performance).

But, while White agrees with Wesley in asserting that the

110

converted Christian is motivated by new attitudes, desires, and inten-

tions (and, consequently, will no longer commit wilful sins), her

refusal to dichotomize between justification and sanctification leads

her to reject Wesley's view according to which justification and re-

generation are completed at the time of a man's conversion. Instead

she upholds the notion of the Reformers that repentance, justification,

regeneration, and conversion are a never ending and daily experience,

an ongoing process which continues throughout life. In the words of \01

Luther, man is and remains semper iustifican~~. Thus, it seems

that, while White follows Wesley in denying the chronologic~ priority

of justification (imputed perfection) over against sanctification

(imparted perfection) but rather emphasizes--more than did the Reformers--

that salvation requires objective/external as well as subjective/

internal holiness, at the same time,she sides with the Reformers in

both upholding the logical priority of imputed over against imparted

righteousness and in rejecting the Wesleyan notion of the inferiority

of justification (initial salvation) to sanctification (final salva-

tion) •

Sanctification

The close affinity between Wesley and White with regard to

their soteriological positions can be most readily observed in their

respective views on sanctification. Apart from the fact that Wesley

regards sanctification as gradual as well as instantaneous and as only

a process of growth toward perfection while White considers it as only

gradual and as a growth in as well as toward perfection--apart from

III

this difference there exists virtually total harmony between them on

this issue. Indeed, it is this common emphasis on sanctification

which--together wit~ their total agreement regarding the notions of

grace and freedom--provides the strongest bond of union between the

soteriological views of Wesley and White and also accounts for their

common deviation from the traditional Protestant emphasis on justifi­

cation as outlined above.

Both Wesley and White regard sanctification as an internal

work of grace which leads to a complete transformation of man's

character and moral nature into the divine image. This involves an

increasing sin~consciousness, a constant battle against inbred sin, a

progressive work of cleansing and purification from and overcoming of

sin, a daily death to self--in brief, a constant battle of the spirit

against the flesh. But, though the enemy is weakened more and more,

he is not completely driven out; for the inherited (and acquired)

sinful tendencies of the fallen nature continue to strive for the

mastery in the believer's life. On the positive side, sanctification

denotes a process of maturation which implies constant growth in love

and holiness and the being filled with the graces and fruits of the

Spirit. In other words, sanctification is the impartation of the

righteousness of Christ and a daily advance toward the goal of per­

fection. This experience is not only progressive, but actually never

ends; this is to say that it lasts a whole lifetime and continues

throughout eternity--even after sinless perfection has been reached.

So far, there is little which would indicate a deviation from

the position held by the 16th century Reformers. However, both Wesley

112

and White go yet a step further by declaring sanctification to be a

prerequisite of final salvation. Though they vehemently reject the

notion that sanctification possesses any meritorious significance be­

fore God but rather speak of it as a gift of grace, they nonetheless

strongly maintain the view that sanctificatidA provides the necessary

fitness which is a sine qua non for the believers' entrance into the

heavenly abode. It is by regarding the impartation of the righteous­

ness of Christ to the believer as a condition of salvation in addition

to the judicial imputation of perfection that Wesley and White seem to

deviate from the classical Protestant view.

Perfection

That this deviation from the views of Luther and Calvin is

more than simply one of emphasis becomes clear when we look at the

doctrine of perfection itself. For, though Wesley and White do not pro­

claim a notion of absolute or infallible perfection, they nonetheless

regard moral perfection--understood as a quality of character, a

religious-ethical state consisting in moral likeness to God--as not

only possible in this life but also necessary for salvation. Again,

while they reject a static conception of perfection but rather regard

it as a dynamic and, in addition to this, highly social and practical

experience, they nonetheless define it as a standard to be attained

and as a mark or goal to be reached by all believers.

That Wesley and White explicitly limit perfection to the moral

nature of man and deny the possibility of physical or mental/intellec­

tual perfection in this life certainly serves as an important moderating

113

element in their doctrine. They also leave no doubt as to the nature

of this "relative perfection" as a work of grace, a divine gift freely

bestowed on those who believe. Besides, they regard their doctrine,

not as a threat arousing fear, but rather as a promise which inspires

faith. In addition, their call for full devotion, complete surrender,

entire dedication, and perfect submission to God and His will as the

(only) condition for this experience adequately reflects the biblical

ideal of the Christian's relationship to God.

But, having said all this, it remains a fact that both Wesley

and White go substantially beyond the classical Protestant position by

regarding personal holiness, that is, the restoration of man into the

moral image of God, an indispensable condition of salvation. What makes

their position regarding the renewal of man's character or moral nature

particularly offensive to many is the use of terms like "freedom from

sin," "salvation from sin," or even "sinlessness" in describing the

nature of Christian perfection. To maintain that the believer can and

must reach a stage where he not only no longer commits outward sins

(in word and deed) or inward sins (in thought and feeling), but also

where his sinful propensities are removed, cut away, or even destroyed,

leaving his moral nature in a state of purity--all this seems to reflect,

not the biblical notion of justification by faith, but rather a moral­

izing perfectionism.

However, before a final judgment should be rendered on the

soteriology of Wesley and White, it is of crucial importance to clearly

see the differences that exist between their (admittedly similar)

notions on Christian perfection, differences which--however insignificant

114

they may appear in the light of their common defense of the idea of

"sinless perfection"--are decisive enough so as to raise the question

of whether or not the boundary line between biblical perfection and

unbiblical perfectionism may lie somewhere between them.

While Wesley regarded entire sanctification as a second work

of grace clearly distinct from the experience of regeneration and,

indeed, a higher state than justification, White rejected this notion

of an instantaneous second blessing after justification and maintained

instead that sanctification is only gradual but, at the same time,

closely allied to the experience of conversion so that the justified

believer has already then attained to the highest possible state of

the Christian life; therefore, he grows not only towards but also in

perfection ever since. Furthermore, while Wesley believed that a point

of entire sanctification can (consciously) be attained (long) before

death, White strongly denies that any such place can be reached during

this life. However, she maintained that perfection of character is a

prerequisite for the sealing of the final generation of Christians who

will have to live through the "time of trouble" immediately preceding

the parousia while there is no more Mediator in the heavenly sanctuary.

Thus, it seems that in the eschatological setting of the sanctuary

doctrine White's view on perfection comes closest to that of Wesley.

Since perfection for~White is not merely a point to be reached

but also a state to be lived in, it is not lost as a result of a

believer's shortcomings and mistakes. In this way, White is able to

avoid Wesley's notion according to which perfection can repeatedly be

lost and regained, a concept which renders the whole idea of "having

115

attained" rather m~aningless. By regarding holiness as both imputed

and imparted durinb and following the conversion experience, White does

not succumb to Wesley's questionable view on this point which derived

from his understanding of perfection as not being imputed at justifica-

tion but rather imparted only at some later time.

But the most decisive difference between Wesley's and White's

doctrine of Christian perfection comes to light when one looks at

their respective views regarding the place of sin in the sanctified

life. For Wesley, entire sanctification involves the removal of inbred

sin and inherent corruption, the annihilation of man's sinful nature

with its sinful promptings and evil tendencies. In other words, deliver-

ance from all sin and the cleansing of the moral nature is understood

as involving not only salvation from outward and inward sins, but also

the experience of liberation from inherent, or original sin. As a

result, the perfect Christian is no longer the battle field for the

fight of the flesh against the spirit, for he is now free from any

inclinations to evil. In other words, he has truly become a sinless

saint who possesses inherent perfection being free from any sin

consciousness and filled with the feeling of perfect love. However,

one must add that, for Wesley, holiness consists in perfect motivation, I

not in flawless performance; it is purity of intention, not unrivaled

accomplishment. For the continued presence of non-moral defects, weak-

nesses, infirmities, and shortcomings make the rendering of "Adamic

perfection" impossible. Perfection, therefore, consists not in

perfect obedience to the absolute moral law, but only to the law of

love.

116

White, on the other hand, is strongly opposed to the concept

of inherent perfection in the Wesleyan sense. Not only is she repeatedly

emphasizing that all human perfection is actually Christ's perfection

which is graciously imputed--and, consequently, imparted--to the be­

liever so that "his" holiness is in fact "His.1I But she also cate­

gorically denies that original sin is removed at any time during the

Christian life. It is true that she hardly ever uses the term "origi­

nal sin"--and then only in reference to Adam's historic fall. It is also

true that occasionally she speaks of the removal and the cutting away

of the sinful propensities from the sanctified character. But these

statements must be seen in the light of the clear references which

speak of the daily battle and constant warfare which the most advanced

Christian has to fight against inbred sin. White flatly rejects the

idea that a Christian may ever attain to a state of holiness during

this life when the flesh is no longer opposed to the spirit. Though

the believer may develop a perfect character and become a partaker of

the divine (moral) nature, he is continuously in need of exercising

perfect control over the flesh, conquering his sinful passions, sub­

jecting the evil propensities, and resisting the inner temptations of

his sinful nature. In other words, while he may no longer commit

sins--outwardly or inwardly--he must constantly be on guard against

the inherent sinfulness of his fallen nature which constantly strives

for the mastery.

White's deviation from Wesley with regard to the precise nature

of sinless perfection is due, in part, to her distinction between

inherent and inward sin. Wesley, for all practical purposes, identified

117

the two and, therefore, was led to conclude--with the Reformers--that

acts of inward sin (in thought and feeling) will not cease until and

unless original sin is annihilated in man. White, on the other hand,

maintained that it is possible for a Christian to refrain from com­

mitting acts of inward (as well as outward) sin even while the human

nature continues to b~ corrupted by sinful promptings. This position,

however, leads to a paradoxical situation, for it requires that the

(admittedly) sinful tendencies of the human heart--that is, original

or inbred sin--are considered (only) as temptations--that is, as not

sinful in the sense of burdening the soul with guilt. For sin re­

quires the (cognitive, emotive, and voluntative) assent of man, in

other words, his "Yes" to the allurements of temptation--independent

of whether it approaches him from without or within.

As a result of this distinction, White1s perfect Christian

combines the sinless perfection of the soul with an ever increasing

sin-consciousness; his perfect character does not remove the sinfulness

of his fallen nature. In other words, he is simul iustus et peccator.

However, this phrase does not have exactly the same meaning for White

as it had for Luther. According to the latter, the believer is only

declared righteous while continuing to be a sinner due to his inheri­

tance as well as by reason of his sinful acts which inevitably arise

from it. For White, however, the perfect Christian is righteous, not

only in a forensic sense, that is, objectively, but also subjectively,

for he ceases to commit acts of sin. But, at the same time, he

remains a sinner since his soul is marred by inherited (and acquired)

tendencies to sin. Like an alcoholic who, though he may have learned

118

to overcome his urge to drink, will always remain an alcoholic by

virtue of the irremovable weakness resulting from his former habit,

the Christian will always remain a sinner, though,by the grace of God,

he may have learned to resist the inclination to sin. Thus, White's

ideal Christian may be described as a sinless sinner whose new desires

and tendencies are in constant control of the evil impulses of the

heart. Though the presence of the latter make it impossible for him

to be entirely perfected in his moral nature, he nonetheless will

render perfect obedience to the moral law of God; through entire con­

formity to the will of God he will achieve that Christlikeness of

character which he must have in order to be finally counted among the

redeemed.

Thus, it seems that in spite of the affinity between the soterio­

logical views of Wesley and White there are some seemingly minor but

actually crucial differences between their respective positions. What

is interesting to note in this context is the fact that,at these points

of disagreement with Wesley, White moves closer to the traditional

Protestant position, thereby avoiding--or at least giving less reason

for--the charge of teaching perfectionist views.

However, in some respects she actually goes beyond the exacting

views of her spiritual progenitor. In the first place, she tends to

speak of perfect obedience rather than of perfect love as did Wesley.

This is not to say that either of the two saw any intrinsic tension

between these concepts; in fact, they sometimes used these terms inter­

chang~ably. But it ~how~ that the more concrete category of divine law

was as important to White's doctrine of perfection as was the rather

119

vague concept of feeling love to Wesley's. Secondly, while Wesley

clearly distinguishes between Christian perfection (which is relative)

and Adamic perfection (which was absolute), White apparently sees no

difference between the kind of obedience that was required of Adam

before the fall and that which is expected of us. But, at the same

time, she stresses the idea that even our best works are so defiled by

the corruption of our nature that th~y must be covered with the perfect

righteousness of Christ in order to be acceptable to God. Finally,

while Wesley denied that anyone during the old Covenant had achieved

the state of perfection,l White repeatedly points to Enoch and Elijah

as examples of what the grace of God may accomplish in perfecting the

character of those who commit their lives unreservedly to him.

It seems fair to conclude that, while sharing the spirit of

Wesley's highly ethical view of the Christian religion, White had an

even deeper understanding of the incomparable divine perfection. This

led her to present the demands of the law of God with uncompromising

clarity, and it also made her realize the impossibility of achieving

the sinlessness of our human nature in its fallen state.

Law and Sin

We have already referred to the notion of sin as held by

Wesley and White, respectively. Both agree that, as a result of Adam's

fall, man is born with inherited tendencies to sin, i.e., original or

inbred sin. But, while his close association of inward and inbred sin

causes Wesley to postulate the removal of both from the sanctified

Iperfection, p. 15.

120

Christian life, White denies that man's sinful nature can be removed

before the resurrection--though it can and must be perfectly controlled

and constantly subdued. In other words, sin does no longer reign, but

it (always) remains.

The crucial difference between these two positions consists,

therefore, in the fact that, while White regards sinfulness as intrin­

sic to man's fallen human (physical, mental, and spiritual) nature and,

consequently, as irremovable and coexistent with a perfect character,

Wesley, on the other hand, by associating sinfulness only with the moral

nature of man, argues for its removability from the fallen human nature

before the resurrection. As a result, he removes all non-moral in­

firmities, weaknesses, and shortcomings from the category of sin.

Moreover, he distinguishes between the two categories of proper and

improper sins, regarding only voluntary transgressions of a known law

as sin in the proper sense, while considering all unknown or uncon­

scious transgressions, involuntary failures, and shortcomings (as well

as all other non-moral defects or mistakes) as not sinful in the

proper sense. It is only by thus adjusting his concept of sin that

Wesley can defend his view of Itfreedom from sin" as well as his notion

of "perfection" which simply denotes purity of intention, not of per­

formance, in other words, perfection of motivation (love), but not of

accomplishment.

On the other hand, White relates perfection only to the

character, but not to the nature of man. True, she does not always

~l~arly distinguish b9tw99n th9s9 two terms and sometimes seems to

use them interchangeably, but for her to speak of a perfect moral nature

121

does not imply the removal of man's inherited sinfulness (or inbred

sin). Man, therefore, always remains a sinner in this sense. At the

same time, however, White too is forced to distinguish between two

types of sin in order to uphold the doctrine of "character perfection."

Thus, she distinguishes inbred sin (manifesting itself in sinful

tempers, passions, affections, and self-will) from inward sin (which

implies the toleration and consent of man's reason, emotion, and will

to these evil promptings). Only the latter defile the soul with guilt,

while the former are merely regarded as temptations; but "temptation

is not sin." In other words, sin--understood as the transgression of

a divine law--does not consist in having--that is, in being plagued

with--evil thoughts, feelings, and desires; rather it occurs only

when inbred sin is not immediately repelled and rejected but cherished,

indulged, and accepted.

Thus, it seems clear that both Wesley and White have to adjust

their notion of sin in order to be able to defend and maintain their

respective views on perfection. This may be seen as an impoverishment

of the strong sin-consciousness of the Protestant Reformers of the

16th century, but it should not be overlooked that this apparent re-

duction is due to the well-intentioned emphasis on sanctification

which characterizes the teachings of both Wesley and White. l Moreover,

it has become clear again that White differs from Wesley in a number

IHowever, the fact that a strong emphasis on sanctification (which implies a clear awareness of the seriousness of sin) tends to lead to a weakened understanding of the utter sinfulness of the human nature, should serve as a warning that one's desire for holiness is always in danger of falling prey to the most serious consequence of sin: the inability to recognize one's true state before God.

122

of crucial points which not only bring her into closer proximity with

the Reformers but also serve to keep her view within the evangelical

context of the biblical balance between the serious nature of sin and

the urgent call to holiness.

That White was less inclined to compromise the radicality of

the distinction between man's sinfulness and God's holiness than was

Wesley can also be seen in reference to their respective notions of

the law. While both agree in their rejection of antinomianism and

strongly defend the validity of the moral law--the transcript of God's

character and an expression of the divine holiness--as the standard

for obedience, Wesley reduces man's obligation from perfect obedience

to the absolute moral law (which fallen man cannot fulfill) to perfect

conformity to the law of love (which does not require Adamic perfec­

tion). White, on the other hand, refuses to adjust the view of the

moral law to man's fallen state but maintains instead that perfect

obedience to the moral law--and, consequently, Adamic perfection--is

required of all. By maintaining the identity between the moral law

and the law of love she is not only able to avoid Wesley's moral

and hamartiological dualism, but she also implicitly points to both

the limits of Christian perfection and, thereby, to our constant

need of the merits of Christ which make up the inevitable deficiency

of even the best of our accomplishments. Here again White stands closer

to the position of the Reformers than does Wesley; and, we think, also

closer to the biblical view.

123

Humility and Assurance

Another crucial difference between Wesley and White regarding

the doctrine of perfection comes to light when one deals with the

issue of humility and assurance. With regard to the first of these two

terms, both fully agree in rejecting all forms of pride and boastful

self-sufficiency as a clear sign of a serious lack of holiness. In

addition, they also agree that temptations are a constant reality

which always imply the possibility of falling into sin. Moreover, a

true Christian will not only shy away from pride and false self­

confidence, but also and always retain a deep sense of his unworthiness,

helplessness, corruptibility, frailty, and weakness. In fact, his

humility and dependence on God will constantly increase with his sancti­

fication. Therefore, even the perfect Christian should daily ask for

forgiveness and will never claim to be saved once and for all. At

the sam~ time, however, he will not remain fearful or distrustful of

his salvation but can have perfect assurance of being a redeemed child

of God.

Up to this point Wesley and White fully agree; but here their

unanimity ends. For Wesley goes on to claim that the perfect Christian

has lost his former sin-consciousness having instead become aware of

his state of moral perfection. This is not merely a subjective feel­

ing of holiness, but an inner certainty, a conviction which he has

gained through the testimony of the Holy Spirit. As a result, the be­

liever not only can rightly claim to have attained to holiness, but he

is even required to humbly witness to this new reality. Moreover t

since all sinfulness has been removed from his life--the battle with

124

self and sin having given way to the feeling of perfect love--he no

longer is in need of repentance for his sinfulness--though he does well

to continue to ask for forgiveness by reason of his unworthiness and

frailty.

There is no point in the entire doctrine of perfection with

all its ramifications at which White disagrees stronger with Wesley

than here. She utterly rejects the Wesleyan notion that Christian

humility is compatible with the claim to holiness or that there are

sufficient safeguards to prevent such a witness from deteriorating into

concealed self-glorification. Instead, she maintains that Christian

humility under no circumstances allows for the claim to sinlessness or

perfection. For the closer we come to God the more do we realize the

sinfulness of our nature as well as our inability to attain to the

divine standard of Christ's perfection. Thus, the very pretension

of holiness is undeniable evidence to the contrary. Those who have

achieved character perfection will, therefore, never claim it; instead

they will retain a deep sense of their imperfection, defects, and sin­

fulness. Rather than feeling holy, their sin-consciousness will in­

crease and their repentance will constantly deepen. For, behind the

holiness which they reflect in their lives, there lies the reality

of the constant battle with their old nature, the human self. All

of this leads White to conclude that the claim to holiness and per­

fection--even if it is clothed in the garb of humility--is utterly

presumptuous and clearly dishonors God.

All we need to add to this is that, however we may distinguish

between Christian perfection and unbiblical perfectionism, the issue

125

of humility and assurance belongs to the clearest indicators of where

the line has to be drawn between the two. By taking the position

she did, White established strong safeguards against the perfectionist

tendencies which characterize Wesley's doctrine of entire sanctification

which otherwise exerted a profound influence on the soteriology of

the Adventist prophetess.

Freedom and Grace

While we met sharp disagreements between Wesley and White on

the issue of humility and assurance, we find them in perfect harmony

regarding their positions on freedom and grace. Both reject the doctrine

of unconditional election and predestination--so firmly upheld by the

Reformers--maintaining instead the Arminian view of the freedom of the

will (which sees in man a free moral agent able to choose between

accepting or rejecting the offer of divine grace) and of the possibility-­

and requirement--to cooperate with God in His redemptive activity for

and in man. Therefore, they both see salvation as being in some sense

dependent on our willingness to accept God's gracious gift.

At the same time, however, they both strongly affirm--with the

Reformers--that salvation is by grace alone, that is, a free gift

which cannot be earned or deserved in any way. Therefore, all our

confessions, obedience, good works, and holiness of character, possess

no meritorious value whatsoever; rather, they are all freely given to

us and utterly underserved. Thus, just like justification, sanctifica­

tion and perfection are signs and results, not of human merit, but of

divine mercy. Consequently, the believer is always dependent on the

126

righteousness and merits of Christ which are both imputed and imparted

to him. For the all-powerful grace of God will not stop short of

radically transforming the life of those who open themselves to its

influence.

In order to remove any doubt with regard to their conviction

that the believer lives in constantly--and increasing--dependence on

the grace of God and the atoning blood of Christ, both Wesley and

White maintain that Christ's holiness not only atones for our--moral

as well as non-moral--transgressions, short-comings, and deficiencies,

but that even man's holiness is acceptable to God only by virtue of the

perfection of Christ who "makes atonement for holy things." Not only

are all our blessings dependent on his intercession before the Father,

but our obedience and efforts, our best works, and even our worship and

prayers of confession, praise, and thanksgiving--they all are acceptable

to God only if, and because, Christ adds to them the fragrant incense

of His own perfect righteousness. For man, in his fallen state, is

unable to reach that perfection which alone can secure our acceptance

with God--the incomparable splendor of the righteousness of Christ.

Thus, whatever one may think of certain aspects of the soteriological

views of Wesley and White, it cannot be denied that their doctrine of

Christian perfection rests on a deep theological conception of the

grace of God--a conception which was nourished and strengthened by

their religious experience which lay at the foundation of their long and

fruitful ministry.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

It has been our purpose in this essay to demonstrate the close

affinity as well as the disagreements between the soteriological views

of John Wesley and Ellen G. White, particularly with regard to the

doctrine of Christian perfection. By expressing their respective

views in the two--somewhat generalizing--phrases "sinless saints" and

"sinless sinners"--which must be understood in the light of our dis­

cussion in this paper--we have attempted to crystallize what we per­

ceive to be the fundamental elements of both continuity and discon­

tinuity in the writings of these two post-Reformation reformers.

In an attempt to summarize in a nutshell the various positions

of Wesley, White, and the Reformers regarding Christian perfection we

might say that, while Wesley and White disagree with the Reformers in

maintaining the possibility (and even necessity) of "sinless" perfec­

tion of character, White sides with the Reformers in denying the possi­

bility (and necessity) of the removal of man's inherent sinfulness

(inbred sin) during his fallen state. In other words, while the

Reformers refuse to sharply distinguish between original and actual

sin (so that he who is a "sinner" will automatically be involved in

"sinful" acts), White opposes the idea that the inevitable sinfulness

of our human nature--which she maintains in opposition to Wesleyts "sin­

less saint"--implies the necessity of actually breaking the law of God;

instead, she asserts that Christians--while remaining "sinners" by

127

128

nature--may (and must) develop a perfect character, that is, the

"sinless" perfection of the soul.

Thus we are led to the conclusion that White's position stands

somewhere between the views of Wesley on the one hand and those of

the Reformers on the other. Since there can be little doubt that Wesley's

doctrine of Christian perfection contains a number of elements which

are clearly perfectionistic in character--in the sense of a misrepresen­

tation of the biblical notion of perfection--the question which remains

to be asked is whether White's doctrine of character perfection is

sufficiently close to the views of the Reformers so as to avoid the

charge of perfectionism or whether it participates in the Wesleyan

errors and must, therefore, be judged with it. The final evaluation

of White's view lies, of course, outside the realm of historical re­

search and can only be given on the basis of a penetrating analysis of

the biblical data themselves.

This evident fact, however, implies another insight whose

obviousness is frequently buried beneath strong commitments to eccle­

siastical traditions, namely, that the norm of orthodoxy rests,

neither in the 16th century Reformers nor in the 19th century prophetess,

but in the Scriptures themselves. Therefore, disagreements between the

former do not eo ipso allow us to pronounce judgments on their respec­

tive truth content. Neither must agreement with the interpretation of

Luther and Calvin be made a precondition of orthodoxy, nor must White

be treated as the final court of appeal. Only on the basis of bibli-

~al exegesis and theology, therefore, can we properly approach the

question of which of the two positions comes closer to the biblical mes-

sage.

129

In concluding we only mention two questions which need to be

discussed in such a context and which, in our opinion, lie at the very

heart of the problem. The first has to do with the proper relationship

between justification and sanctification. What does it mean to distin­

guish but not to separate these two concepts and the reality for which

they stand? The other is the question of whether or not Christian

perfection--in its true, biblical sense--implies sinlessness in any

form. Does justification remain essentially an objective, external event

or does it affect the Christian life in such a way that victory over

sin and perfection of character become actually possible? While we should

not expect to settle these questions once and for all (at least the his­

tory of biblical interpretation and of theology warns us against unjus­

tified optimism), we must never cease to take them serious in our en­

deavor to be faithful to the Gospel of Jesus Christ who came to restore

all things.

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

A. On Wesley (and Methodism)

I. Primary Sources

Burtner, Robert W., and Chiles, Robert E., ed. A Compend of Wesley's Theology. New York and Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1954.

Curnock, Nehemiah, ed. The Journal of the Rev. John Wesley. 8 vols. Standard Edition. London: Robert Culley, vol. I; Charles H. Kelly, vols. 2-8; 1909-1916. Reprinted London: The Epworth Press, 1938.

Sugden, Edward H., ed. Wesley's Standard Sermons, 2 vols. London: The Epworth Press, 1955-1956.

Telford, John, ed. The Letters of the Rev. John Wesley. 8 vols. Standard Edition. London: The Epworth Press, 1931.

Watson, Philip S., comp. The Message of the Wesleys: A Reader of In­struction and Devotion. Foreword by Ph. S. Watson. New York: The Macmillan Co., 1964.

Wesley, John. Plain Account of Christian Perfection. Chicago and Boston: The Christian Witness Co., [19211.

Sermons on Several Occasions. 2 vols. New York: G. Lane & C. B. Tippett, 1845.

The Works of the Rev. John Wesley. 14 vols. London: Wesleyan­Methodist Book-Room, 1831.

II. Secondary Sources

Books

Cannon, William Ragsdale. The Theology of John Wesley with Special Reference to the Doctrine of Justification. New .York and Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1946.

Cox, L. G. John Wesley's Concept of Perfection. Kansas City, Mo.: Beacon Hill Press, 1964.

130

131

Flew, R. Newton. The Idea of Perfection in Christian Theology: An Historical Study of the Christian Ideal for the Present Life. Oxford: At the Clarendon Press, 1968. (Lithographic Reprint of the 1934 edition.)

LaRondelle, Hans K. Perfection and Perfectionism: A Dogmatic-Ethical Study of Biblical Perfection and Phenomenal Perfectionism. 2nd ed. Andrews University Monographs Studies in Religion, vol. 3. Berrien Springs, Mich.: Andrews University Press, 1975.

Lindstrom, Harald. Wesley and Sanctification: A Study. in the Doctrine of Salvation. London: The Epworth Press, 1950.

Peters, John Leland. Christian Perfection and American Methodism. New York and Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1956.

Pope, William Burt. A Compendium of Christian Theology: Being Analyti­cal Outlines of a Course of Theological Study, Biblical, Dogmatic, Historical. 3 vols. New York: Phillips & Hunt; Cincinnati: Cranston & Stowe, 1881.

Sangster, W. E. The Path to Perfection: An Examination and Restate­ment of John Wesley's Doctrine of Christian Perfection. New York and Nashville: Abingdon-Cokesbury Press, 1943.

Starkey, Lycurgus M., Jr. Wesleyan Theology. 1962.

The Work of the Holv Spirit: A Study in New York and Nashville: Abingdon Press,

Articles

Cannon, William R. "John Wesley's Doctrine of Sanctification and Perfection." Mennonite Quarterly Review 35 (1961): 91-95.

Edwards, Maldwyn L., s.v. "Wesley, John" in The Encyclopedia of World Methodism, 2 vols. Edited by Nolan B. Harmon. N.p.: The United Methodist Publ. House, 1974.

Kinghorn, Kenneth Cain, s.v. "Christian Perfection," in The Encyclopedia of World Methodism, 2 vols. Edited by Nolan B. Harmon, N.P.: The United Methodist Publ. House, 1974.

Platt, Frederic, s.v. "Perfection (Christian)," in Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, 12 vols. Edited by James Hastings. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1913-1922.

Vick, Edward W. H. "John Wesley's Teaching Concerning Perfection," Andrews University Seminary Studies 4 (1966): 201-17.

132

Unpublished Material

Clark, Robert Burton. "The History of the Doctrine of Christian: Perfection in the Methodist Episcopal Church in America up to 1845." Th.D. Dissertation, Temple University, 1946.

Gaddis, M. E. "Christian Perfectionism in America." Ph.D. Disserta­tion, University of Chicago, 1929.

Manifold, Orrin Avery. "The Development of John Wesley's Doctrine of Christian Perfection." Ph.D. Dissertation, Boston University, 1945.

B. On Ellen G. White (and Seventh-day Adventism)

I. Primary Sources

De Witt-Youngbert, Verlene, arr. Perfection: Quotations from the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy. San Pedro Sula, Honduras: By the Author, [1970}.

Nichol, Francis D., ed. The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary. 7 vols. Washington, D.C.: Review & Herald, 1953-1957.

White, Ellen G. The Acts of the Apostles in the Proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Mountain View, California: Pacific Press, 1911.

Christ's Object Lessons. Washington, D.C.: Review & Herald, 1900, 1941.

The Desire of Ages: The Conflict of the Ages Illustrated in the Life of Christ. Mountain View, California: Pacific Press, 1898, 1940.

Early Writings of Ellen G. White. Washington, D.C.: R~view & Herald, 1882, 1945.

Education. Mountain View, California: Pacific Press, 1903, 1952.

Fundamentals of Christian Education: Instruction for_the --------Home, the School, and the Church. Nashville, Tenn.: Southern

Publishing Association, 1923.

The Great Controversy Between Christ and Satan: The Con­flict of the Ages in the Christian Dispensation. Mountain View, California: Pacific Press, 1888, 1950.

133

Life Sketches of Ellen G. White. Mountain View, California: Pacific Press, 1915, 1943.

The Ministry of Healing. Mountain View, California: Pacific Press, 1905, 1942.

Present Truth and Review and Herald Articles, 6 vols. Washington D.C.: Review & Herald, 1962.

The Sanctified Life. Washington, D.C.: Review & Herald, 1937.

Selected Messages from the Writings of Ellen G. White, 2 vols. Washington, D.C.: Review & Herald, 1958.

Signs of the Times Articles, 4 vols. Mountain View, California: Pacific Press, 1974.

Steps to Christ. Mountain View, California: Pacific Press, n.d.

The Story of Patriarchs and Prophets as Illustrated in the Lives of Holy Men: of Old. Mountain View, California: Pacific Press, 1958. I

Testimonies for the Church, 9 vols. Mountain View, Cali­fornia: Pacific Press, 1948.

Testimonies to Minister and Gospel Workers. Mountain View, California: Pacific Press, 1962.

II. Seconda-ry Sources

Books

Douglass, Herbert E.; Heppenstall, Edward; LaRondelle, Hans K.; Maxwell, C. Mervyn. Perfection: The Impossible Possibility. Nashville, Tennessee: Southern Publishing Association, 1975.

Articles

Gane, Erwin R. "Christ and Human Perfection in the Writings of E. G. White." Ministry (Supplement) n.d.: 5-16 [29-40).

Heppensta1l, Edward. "Some Theological Considerations of Perfection." _Ministry (Supplement) n.d.: 17-23 141-471.

134

Olsen, Robert W. "Outline Studies on Christian Perfection and Original Sin." Ministr~ (Supplement) n.d.: 24-30 [48-54}.

Shuler, J.L. liThe Remnant Sinless--When? How?" Ministry, October­November 1969, pp. 9-12, 27-29.

Unpublished Material

Bieber, F •. W. "An Investigation of the Concept of .Perfectionism as Taught in the Writings of Ellen G. White." M. A. Thesis,. Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary, Washington, D.C., 1958.

Bohr, Harold. "Ellen G.White's Teaching on Sinless Perfection." Paper, Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary, Andrews University, 1971.

MacIntyre, J. Gordon. "An Investigation of Seventh-day Adventist Teaching Concerning the Doctrine of Perfection and Sanctifica­tion." M. A. Thesis, Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary, Washington, D.C., 19*9..

Pease, Norval Frederick. "Justification and Righteousness by Faith in the Seventh-day Adventist Church before 1900. 11 M. A. Thesis, Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary [Washington, D.C.}, 1945.

"Perfection." A Manuscript by the Defense Literature Committee of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1965.