University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The history of the sanctification doctrine in the Methodist Episcopal Church and Methodist Episcopal Church South

(USC Thesis Other)

The history of the sanctification doctrine in the Methodist Episcopal Church and Methodist Episcopal Church South

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content TEE HISTORY OF TEE SAECTIFIOATIOE DOCTEIEE IE TEE IvïETÏÏODISÏ EPISCOPAL CHURCH AEL METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH SOUTH A Thesis Presented to the Department of Religion University of Southern California In partial fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts By Robert Herman White May 27, 1929 UMI Number: EP65020 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. DissettaMbn Pubhshsng UMI EP65020 Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346 This thesis^ having been approved by the special Faculty Committee^ is accepted by the Council on Graduate Study and Fesearch of the University of Southern C alifornia, in p a rtial fulfillm ent of the requirements fo r the degree of ...... Secretary D ean C0ETEE%8 Chapter Page I. Introduction. ............... 1 II. John Lesley’s Teaching on Sanctification......... 2 III- Bancti.fi cat ion in Early Methodism......... 12 IV. General Conference Pastoral Addresses...... 16 V. The Bishops' Views on Sanctification............ 23 VI. The Editors' Views on Sanctification........... 35 VII. The Views of Leaders other than Bishops and Editors................ 39 VIII. The Theologians ' Views on Sanctification....... 47 IX. The Origin of the Free Methodist Church........ 64 X. The holiness Movement in the Southwest........ 82 XI. Sanctification in Southern California......•••• 94 XII. Methodist Freedom of Thought................... 104 XIII. Conclusion..................................... 108 Bibliography......................... ..Ill IliTROLUCTIOh CHAPTER I The movement originating with John Wesley is the most remarkable religious phenomenon of modern times. Starting from the Holy Club at Oxford, the movement has girdled the globe with millions of Methodists. So remarkable was the genius of the movement in both its experiential and organizational aspects that there is scarcely a community in the English speaking world without its Methodist Church. Wesley, in the most unbelieving century of the Christian Era, brought an experiential religion to the hungering multitudes. Wesley and his followers taught the people that they could know God in the forgiveness of sins. Personal assurance of acceptance with God was heralded far and near by local preachers, exhortera, class leaders, and the omnipresent itinerant. Hot only forgiveness of sins was offered to the poor, but perfect love was offered; perfect love which promised deliverance from inbred sin; perfect love which would cast out all fear, and perfect love that promised unbroken fellowship with God and complete deliverance from the inner warnings of the heart. Since Wesley's day, Biblical Criticism, Evolution and the Hew Psy chology have wrought momentous changes in religious thought. Ho doubt the doctrine of Wesley's theology most affected by the thought of the modern world is the doctrine of entire sanctification as a second blessing; this doctrine, the Methodist Church has largely reinterpreted The purpose of this thesis is to show the changes that have taken place in Methodist thought and practice with reference to the doctrine of entire sanctification and to show how it has been interpreted and to show the results of this interpretation in teaching and practice. 2 JOEH WESLEY'S TEACEIHG OH ENTIRE SANCTIFICATION CHAPTER II_ llesley taught, not absolute, nor angelic, nor Adamic, but Chris tian Perfection. Each sphere of being has its own moral limits: God alone has absolute perfection; the angels have a perfection of their own above that of humanity, at least the humanity of our sphere. Unfallen man represented by Adam occupied a peculiar sphere in the Divine economy with its own relations to the Divine government, its own perfection, called by Wesley Adamic Perfection. Fallen, but regen erated man has his peculiar sphere as a subject of the mediatorial economy, and the highest practicable virtue (whatever it may be) is the perfection possible only to human beings, Christian Perfection. Christian Perfection is a state in which all the normal qualities of the Christian are permanently or v/ith more or less continuity possessed with proper completeness. And this spiritual strength and power over and against sin being sanctification, so in the complete ness of spiritual strength and power it is not improperly called entire sanctification. Perfection is not perfection according to the absolute moral law; it is perfection according to the special remedial economy introduced by the atonement, in which the heart, being sanctified, fulfils the law of love and its involuntary imperfections are pro vided for by that economy without the imputation of guilt, as in the case of lunacy and all irresponsible persons. The only question, then, can be, is it possible for good men so to love God that all their conduct, inward and outward shall be swayed by love? That even their involuntary defects be swayed by love? Is there any such a thing as the inspired writer calls the ’ ’Perfect Love which casts out fear? Mr Wesley believed there was that it is the priv ilege of all saints, and that it is attained by faith. "I want you to be all love’ \ he wrote: He further writes: This is the perfection I believe and teach; and this perfection is consistent wâth a thousand nervous disorders, which that high- strained perfection'is not. Indeed, my judgment is thatf in this case particularly) to overdo is to underdo; and to set perfection too high is to drive it out of the’ world. Man in the present state can no more attain Adamic perfection than angelic perfection. The perfection of which man is capable, while he dwells in a corruptible body, is complying with that command,'My son give me thy heart'. It is the loving God his lofd with all heart, with all his soul, with all his mind.^ Such is Wesley's much misrepresented doctrine of Christian Per fection. Vfesley taught that this sanctification is usually gradual, but may be instantaneous; like justification, it may be received by faith. One year before he died, Wesley wrote to Dr. Adam Clarke: Dear Adam: The account you sent me of the continuance of the work of God in Jersey gives me great satisfaction. To retain the grace of God is much more than to gain it. And this should be strongly urged on all who have tasted the grace of perfect love. If you can prove that any of our preachers or leaders, either directly or indirectly, speak against it, let him be a preacher or leader no longer. I doubt v/hether he should continue in the society, because he that could speak thus in our congregation cannot be an honest man. ^ In the year 17 25 Mr 'Wesley, at the age of twenty-^three met Bishop Taylor’s ’ ’Rule and Exercise of Holy Living and Dying". Parts of this book profoundly affected him, particularly the part relating to "Purity of Intention". Having read this, he writes,"Instantly I resolved to dedicate all my life to God". In the year 17 26 he met Kempis’s "Christian Pattern". His reaction to iCempis was as follows: The nature and extent of inward religion, the religion of the heart. 1. Stevens, History of Methodism, Vol. II, p. 212ff. 2. Coward, Entire Sanctificationl 1739-1900) u. 285 4 now appeared to me in a stronger light than ever before. I saw that giving even all my life to Godî supposing it were possible to do so and go no further) would profit me nothing, unless I gave my heart, yes, all my heart to Him. I saw 'Simplicity of Intention and Purity of Affection' as the wings of the Soul with out which she can never mount to God. A year or two afterward "law's Christian Perfection and Serious Call" came into his hands* These convinced him more than ever of the impossibility of being half a Christian. At this time he wrote: "I determined through His grace to be all-devoted to God, to give Him all my soul, my body and substance" 2 In the year 1729 he began the study of the Bible as the one and only standard of truth. Then he saw in a clearer light the indis pensable necessity of having the mind of Christ, and of walking as Christ also walked. He writes: Even of having, not some part only, but all the mind which was in Him, and of w^alking as He walked, not only in many or in most respects, but in all things. And this was the light wherein at this time, I generally considered religion, as an uniform following of Christ, and entire inward and outward conformity to our Master. Nor was I afraid of anything more, than of bending this rule to the experience of myself or of other men: of allowing myself in any the least disconformity to our great Exemplar.^ In January 1733 Wesley preached before the University in St. Mary's Church; his subject being the Circumcision of the Heart. The follwing is an extract from this sermon: It is that natural disposition of the soul, which in the sacred writings is termed holiness, and which directly implies the being cleansed from sin, from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, and by consequence, the being filled with those virtues which are in Christ Jesus, the being so renewed in the image of our mind, as to be perfect as our Father in Heaven is perfect.... Love is the fulfilling of the law, the end of the (commandment. It is not only the first and greatest command, but all the command ments in one. Whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, if there be any virtue, if*there be any praise, they are all comprised in this one w?ord: Love. In this is perfection and glory and happiness: the royal law of heaven and earth is this, Thou shalt 1. Tigert, Doctrines of M^E.Church in America, p^ 4 2. Ibid p. 4 3. Ibidp. 6 love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind and all thy strength. The one perfect good shall he your ultimate end. One thing shall ye desire for its own sake, the fruition of Him who is all in all. One happiness shall ye propose to your souls, even an union with Him that made them: the having fellowship with the Father and with the Son, the being joined to the Lord in one Spirit. One design ye are to pursue to the end of time, the enjoyment of God in time and eter nity. Desire other things so far as they tend to this: love the creature as it leads to the Creator. But in every step you take, be this the glorious point that terminates your view. Let every affection, and thought, and word, and whatever ye seek or shun, whatever ye think, speak, or do, be it in order to your happiness in God, the sole end, as well as the source of your being.^ The foregoing extract was taken from Wesley’s first published writings. This view he does not hesitate to call Perfection. Ih August 1734 Wesley had a long talk with Arvin Gradin in Germany. He gave an account of his experience to Wesley and a def inition of "Pull Assurance of Faith", which is as follows: "Repose in the blood of Christ; a firm confidence in God end per suasion of his favor; the highest tranquility, serenity and peace of mind, with a deliverance from all fleshly desire, and a cessa tion of all, even inward sins. The following is Wesley’s comment on this definition: "This was the first account I ever heard from any living man, of what I had before learned, from the oracles of God, and had been praying for( with a little company of friends) and expecting for several years"^ In the latter part of 1739 Wesley wrote a tract, entitled."The Character of a Methodist", in which he described a perfect Christian. A Methodist is one who loves the Lord his God with all his heart, with all his soul, with all his mind, and with all his strength. God is the joy of his heart, the desire of his soul: He is happy in God, always happy. Perfect love having cast out fear, he re joices evermore. Whether in ease or in pain, whether in sickness or in health, whether in life or death, he giveth thanks from the ground of his heart to Him who orders it for good. For indeed he prays without ceasing; whether he lie down or rise up, God is in his heart and in all his thoughts. And loving God, he loves his 1. Tigert, 2. Ibid. p 3. Ibid. p. 12ff. Doctrines “TD------ of M B Church in America, pp. 6-7 neighbor as himself; he loves every man as his own soul. He loves his enemies, yea, and the enemies of God. He is pure in heart, love has purified his heart from envy, malice, wrath, and every unkind temper. It has cleansed him from pride, and he hath put on the bowels of mercy, kindness and humbleness of mind, meekness and longsuffering. He has a single eye. And because his eye is single his whole body is full of light. God reigns alone; all that is in his soul is holiness unto the lord. For as he loves God, so he keeps his commandments ; not only some, but all, from the least to the greatest. He continually presents his soul and body a living sacrifice, holy acceptable to God. Whatever he doeth, it is all for the glory of God. These are the words wherein I largely declared, for the first time, ray sentiments of Christian Perfection- This is the very point at which I aimed from the year 1726, and,more determinâtely from the year 1730, when I became the man of one book, the Bible. This is the very same doctrine which I believe and teach this day, not adding one point either to that inward or outward holiness, which I maintained six and twenty years ago.^ In 1741 in the preface to a second volume of hymns, the doctrine of Christian Perfection is further explained: It is a renewal in the spirit of-our minds, after the likeness of Him that created them. The So^chath made them free from pride. They feel all their sufficiency is of: God- They are freed from self-will, desiring nothing but the holy perfect will of God. They are freed from all evil thoughts, so that they cannot enter into them, no, not for a moment. They are freed*from wanderings in prayer. They have no fear or doubt. At all times their souls are even and calm, their hearts steadfast and unmovable. Their peace floweth like a river, and passeth all understanding. ..... neither dare we affirm, as some have done, that all this salvation is given at once. There is indeed an instantaneous v/ork of God (as well as gradual) in his children; and there wants not, we know, a cloud of v/itnesses, who have received in one moment, either a clear sense of of the forgiveness of their sins, or the abiding witness of the Holy Spirit. But we do not know of a single instance, in any place, of a person'« receiving in one and the same moment, remission of sins, the abiding witness of the Spirit, and a clean heart. Indeed how God may work, we cannot tell, but the general manner wherein he does work is this: those who once trusted in themselves that they were righteous, that they were rich, and increased in goods, and had need of nothing, are by the Spirit of God applying his word, convinced that they are poor and naked. All things that 1. Tigert, Doctrines of M E Church in America, p. 12 they have done are brought to their remembrance. In their trouble they cry unto the Lord. Sorrow and pain flee away, and sin has no more dominion over them. In this peace they remain for days, or weeks or months, and commonly suppose that they shall know war no more, till some of their old enemies, their bosom sins, or sins that most easily beset them(perhaps anger or desire) assault them again, and thrust sore at them that they may fall. Then arises fear that they shall not endure to the end, and often doubt, whether God has forgiven them, or whether they did not deceive them selves in thinking their sins were forgiven. Under these clouds, especially if they reason with the devil, they go mourning all the day long. But it is seldom long before their Lord answers for Himself, sending them the Holy Ghost to comfort them, to bear witb ness with their spirits that they are the children of God. And now first do they see the ground of their heart, which God before would not disclose unto them, lest the soul should fail before Him, and the spirit which He had made. Now they see all the hidden abominations there, the depths of pride, self-will and hell; yet having the witness in themselves, ’Thou art an heir of God, a jolnt- heir with Christ.'even in the midst of this fiery trial, which continually heightens both the strong sense they then have, of their inability to help themselves, and the inexpressible hunger they feel after a full renewal in his image, in righteousness and true holiness. Then God is mindful of the desire of them that fear him, them a single eye, and a pure heart: He stamps upon them and sperscription: he creates them anew in Christ Jesus; unto them with His son and Blessed Spirit, and fixing in their souls, bringeth them into the rest which for the people of God. and gives his image He cometh His abode remaineth At a Conference in June 1744, the doctrine of Sanctification or perfection was discussed. The following questions were asked and answered: Q. What is it to be sanctified? A. To be renewed in the image of God, in righteousness and true holiness. Q. What is implied in being a perfect Christian? A. The loving God with all the heart and mind and soul. Q. Does this imply that all inward sin is taken away? A. Undoubtedly, or how can we be said to be saved from all our uncleanness? ^ At the fourth Conference which convened in June 1747, there were some present who did not believe the doctrine of perfection, Wesley agreed to examine it from the foundation. 1. Tigert, 2. Ibid., p Doctrines ------- of M E Church in America, p. 26. 8 point where we divide? should we expect to be saved from all sin before death. appear that this is to be done Q. What is the A. It is this; the article of Q. How does it of death? A. From the very nature of the command, which dead but to the living. Therefore thou shalt they heart, cannot mean, 'Thou shalt do this, but hot while thou livest.'I before the article is not given to the love God with all when thou diest. In 1762 Wesley made a further statement concerning the doc trine of Christian Perfection: To this day, both my brother and I maintained; 1. That Christian Perfection is the love of God and our neighbor, which implies deliverance from all sin; 2. That it is received merely by faith; 3. That it is given instantaneously, in one moment; 4. That we are to expedt it (not at death) every moment; that now is the accepted time, now is the day of salvation. H In the Conference of 1769 Wesley enlarged on the doctrine of Christian Perfection. Soon afterward he published "Thoughts on Christian Perfection", from which some thoughts are given: When may a person judge himself to have attained Christian -Perfection? A. When after having been fully convinced if inbred sin, by a far deeper and clearer conviction than that he experienced before justification, and having gradually experienced a mortification of it, he experiences a total death to sin, and an entire renewal in the love and image of God, so as to rejoice evermore, to pray without ceasing, and in everything give thanksv, Not that 'feel all love and no sin’, is sufficient proof. Several have experienced this for a time, before their souls were fully renewed. None therefore ought to believe that the work is done, ’till there is added the testimony of the Spirit, witnessing his entire sanctifioa? tion, as clearly as in justification. Q. Is death to sin, and renewal in love, gradual or instantaneous? A. A man may be dying for some time, yet he does not, properly speaking, die, till the instant the soul is separated from the body: and in that moment he lives the life of eternity. In like manner he may be dying to sin for some time ; yet he is not dead to is separated from the soul. In that instant he lives of love. know that you are sanctified, saved from inbred sin until sin the full life Q. How do you corruption? A. I can know it in no otherwise than I know that I am justified li Tigrert, Doctrines 2. Ibid.:44' of M E Church in America. P» 44 Hereby we know that we are of God, in either sense, by the Spirit that he hath given us. We know it by the fruit of the Spirit. And first by the witness, as when we are justified, the Spirit bore witness with ouir spirit, that our sins were forgiven, so when we were sanctified. He bore witness that they were taken away. Indeed the witness of sanctification is not always clear at first; (as neither is that of justification) neither :is it afterward always the same, but like justification, sometimes stronger and sometimes fainter. Yea, and sometimes it is withdrawn. Yet in general, the latter testimony of the Spirit is both clear and steady as the former. Q. Do not the justified gradually die to sin and grow in grace, till at, or perhaps a little before death, God perfects them in love? A. I believe this is the ease of most, but not all. God usually gives a considerable time for men to receive light, to grow in grace, to do and suffer His will before they are either justified or sanctified. But He does not invariably do this. Sometiimes he cuts short his work. He does the work of many years in a few weeks; perhaps in a week, a day, and hour. He justifies, or sanctifies both those who have done, or suffered nothing, and who have had no time for a gradual growth either in light or grace. And may he not do what he will with his own? Is thine eye evil because He is good? It need not therefore be affirmed over and over, and proved by forty texts of scripture, either that most men are perfected in love at last, that there is a gradual work of God in the soul, or that, generally speaking, it is a long time, even many years, before sin is destroyed. All this we know, but we know likewise, that God may with man's good-leave, cut short his work, in what ever degree he pleases, and do the usual work of many years in a moment. He^ does so in many instances. Yet there is a gradual work, both^before and and after that moment. So that one may affirm, the work is gradual, another, it is instantaneous, without any manner of contradiction. I In the year 17 64, upon review of the whole subject of Christian Perfection, Wesley wrote the sum of his observations in the following short propositions : 1.There is such a thing as perfection; for it is again and again mentioned in the scripture. E. It is not so early as justification; for the justified persons are to go on to perfection. 3. It is not so late as death; for St. Paul speaks of living men that are perfect. Phil. 3: 16 4. It is not absolute ; absolute perfection belongs to God alone. 5. It does not make a man infallible ; none is infallible while he Tigert, Doctrines of M B Church in America, pp. 67ff. 10 remains in the body. 6. Is it sinless? It is not worthwhile to contend for a term. It is salvation from sin. 7. It is perfect love. This is the essence of it; its properties, or inseparable fruits, are rejoicing evermore, praying without ceasing, and in everything giving thanks. 8. It is improvable. 9. It is ami8sible. It is capable of being lost. 10. It is constantly both preceded and followed by a gradual work. 11. But is it in itself instantaneous, or not? In examining this let us go step by step. An instantaneous change has been wrought - in some believers, none can deny. Since that change they enjoy perfect love. They feel this and this alone; they rejoice evermore pray without ceasing, and in everything give thanks? Now this is all that I mean by perfection; therefore these are the witnesses of the perfection which I preach. But in some this change was not instantaneous ; they did not percéive the instant it was wrought. It is often difficult to perceive the instant when a person dies; yet there is an instant when life cease, there must be a last moment of its existence, and a first moment of our deliverance.I At the close of Wesley's Plain Account of Christian Perfection, we find the following paragraph: Let us strongly and explicitly exhort all believers to go on to perfection. That we may all speak the same thing, we ask once for all, shall we defend this perfection or give it up? We all agreed to defend it, meaning therebyf as we did from the beginning) salvation from all sin, properly so called, by the love of God and man filling our heart. Some say, 'This cannot be attained till we have been refined by the fire of purgatory'. Others say, 'Nay it will be attained as soon as the soul and body part.'But others say, 'It may be attained before we die'; a moment after is too late'. Is it so, or not? We are all agreed that we may be saved from all sin before death, é. r.„ from all sinful tempers and desires. The substance then is settled. But as to the circum stances, is the change gradual or instantaneous? It is both the one and the other. But should we in preaching insist both on one and the other? Certainly we shall insist on the gradual change; and that earnestly and constantly. And are there not reasons why we should insist on the instantaneous change? If there be such a blessed change before death, should we not encourage all believers to expect? And the rather because constant experience shows, the more earnestly they expect this, the more swiftly and steadily does the gradual work of God go on in their souls; the more careful they are to grow in grace; the more zealous of good works, and more punctual in their attendance on all the ordinances of God (whereas j'dst the contrary effects are observed, whenever this 1. Tigert, Doctrines of M E Church in America, pp. 140 11 expectation ceases). Theyare saved by hope ; but this hope of a total change, with a gradually increasing salvation. Destroy this hope, and that salvation stands still, or rather ceases daily. Therefore - whoever would advance the gradual change in believers, should insist strongly on the instantaneous.1 Summary Lesley describes Christian Perfection as being cleansed from all sin, of being endowered with those virtues which are in Christ Jesus, of being perfect in love as the Father in Heaven is perfect in love, of loving God with all the heart, with all the soul, with all the mind and with all the strength. Perfect love oast et h out fear; it rejoices evermore in all that happens; it prays without ceasing; loves its neighbor as itself, and loves its enemies. Perfection is charac terized by purity of heart and freedom from pride. The perfect man continually presents his body a living sacrifice to God. Many testify to receiving this perfection instantaneously. No one testified to have received remission of sins and a clean heart at the same time. The taking away of sin and uncleanness should occur befcre death. This experience is received by faith instantaneously. Inbred sin may be dying for some time, but there is an instant when sin is separated from the soul. In that instant the Christian lives the full life of love. Generally speaking, it is a long time before sin is destroyed, but God may cut short the work of years in a moment, yet there is a gradual work before and after that moment. The work of Christian Perfection is gradual work before and after that moment. The work of Perfection is gradual and instantaneous, a gradual approach to the moment that sin is destroyed, and growth in grace afterward. 1. Tigert, Doctrines of M E Churhh in America, 151-152 12 SANCTIFICATION IN"EARLY METHODISM .'CHAPTER mil The early Methodists, in the main, held to Wesley's views of Entire Sanctification. In early Methodist writings large numbers are mentioned as having sought and found the experience definitely subsequent to regeneration. The doctrine and experience seemed to many early Methodists to be.-the :glory of themovement. The doctrine appeared to be at the fore in the overwhelmingly aggressive days of early Methodism, the days when the Methodists depended solely on the power of the Gospel to redeem individuals and society. Fears were expressed by some of the leaders of Early Methodism that the Church's power as a spiritual force would decline should:: a vital change occur in ' the doctrine and experience of entire sanctification... : : .. At the Bristol Conference of 1768 Wesley called special attention to the doctrine of Sanctification. Charles Perronet, the brother of the hymn writer was a Methodist itinerant and was instrumental in a remarkable revival at Shoreham. He was frail in body. In 1776 we find Wesley writing concerning this extraordinary man: "I had a long conversation with that extraordinary man, Charles Perronet. What a mystery of providence. Why such a saint as this buried alive by continual sickness.I It is said that Charles Perronet was a living witness of the doctrine of Entire Sanctification. In 1762-3 Wesley was disappointed by the extravagance of George Bell and others who followed him. Two years before a glorious work of sanctification had spread through Yorkshire and many parts of Ireland. All branches of the work revived and increased. But there 1. IMràt, History of Methodism^ Vol. II, 795 13 were some who did not preach the doctrine as Wesley taught it. George Bell professed to he endowed with extraordinary gifts,- held meetings of his own and declared independence ofthe sac raments. He claimed the gift of prophecy and declared the world would come to an end on a certain day in February. Bell was arres ted and imprisoned. He recovered from his fanaticism to become a professed infidel and reformer. Wesley was filled with grief, four hundred members being lost to the London Society by this outburst of fanaticism. With great forbearance he dealt with those who had been infected with Bell's teaching and addressed them in tender pastorals.^ In the years of 1760 and 17 62 there were great revivals under the labors of Mr. Wesley in London and Bristol and other places. In London alone there were six hundred and fifty two members of the classes who professed to experience this blesslngf entire sanctification). Mr. Wesley with characteristic caution, took great pains to examine these cases, and he testifies that, in general, they were exceedingly clear in their experiences, and there was no reason to doubt their testimony. He predicted that the time would come when sanctification would be as common as conversion.^ Benjamin Abbott was one of the most successful evangelists of the period following 1774. He was a class leader and practically pastor of the Society in-his neighborhood in New Jersey. On one occasion Abbott met a Methodist preacher who talked with him about Wesley's views of sanctification, and he resolved to seek that higher grace. Says Abbott concerning this matter: I was now engaged for the blessing more than ever. Soon after Daniel Ruff came upon the circuit, and my house became a preaching place, he came to my house to preach. In the morning at family prayer he preyed that God would sanctify-us soul and body. That 1 Hurst, History of Methodism, Vol. II, 795 2 Methodist Quarterly Review, Vol. 30, p. 322, 1848 14 moment the Spirit of God came upon us in such a manner that I fell flat on the floor. I had not power to lift my hand, nor yet say a word. I believe I lay there half an hour, and felt the power of God running through every part of my body and soul like fire consuming the inward corruption of fallen, depraved nature. In three days God gave me full assurance that He had sanctified me soul and body.^ No evangelist of the day was more successful than Benjamin Abbott, though unlettered. A writer, signing himself "Preacher" writing in the Methodist Magazine in 1819 says that he sav/ in one Society in one year forty instances of sanctification, many of them remarkably clear and sound. Here follow some extracts from the Preacher’s article: This doctrine(Sanctification) every Methodist Minister professes to believe. Not only the ministers, but the great body of their people believe it also. Thus a great part of their difficulties are conquered. There is a large body of Christians already prepared and ready for this harvest. Many of these would instantly rise and go forward with proper encouragement and assistance from these ministers. Let every minister, whether he has experienced it or not, make the v/ay of sanctification a distinct, though not an exclusive subject in every society. Let them preach explicitly in all the societies and make it the subject of conversation with the members in private. Let them propose in every society that those who are convinced of the necessity of sanctification, and are determined to seek it, meet together in small companies and pray for it.^ A minister, writing for the Methodist Magazine in 18E2 makes the following remarks concerning sanctification; "To those who ask whether you are to expect the blessing of Perfection gradually or instantaneously, I answer: The mind is prepared for its reception by a gradual process, but there is a precise moment when it is completed."3 In the Methodist Quarterly Review in 1842, George Peck writes the following significant words on the subject of Christian Perfection: "Did we not honestly believe the doctrine of Christian Perfection, as held by Wesley, to be the marrow and fatness of the Gospel, we should never for a moment have run the hazard of presenting to the public a work on the subject."^ 1 Stevens, History of Methodism, Vol. I. 262 2 Methodist Magazine. Vol. II, 342, (181$). 3 Ibid, March((1822125 4 Methodist Quarterly Review, Jan. (1843) 166 15 In the Methodist Quarterly Review in 1848 Hev. Jesse T. Peck writes concerning Christian Perfection; What perfection is attainable in this life? Christian Perfection is attainable in this life. It is the perfection of the Christian graces. love is the principal of these.'Perfect love casteth out fear.’’Thou shalt love the lord with all thy heart.’Upon these we remark: (1) That the obedience rendered to this command is less than obedience to the perfectly unchangeable law, by just so much as tha powers of a man are less than they would have been if he had never been a sinner, (s) That this implies pure motive and the full devotion of all the capabilities of the soul and the body to God. (3) That the power of filial perfect love, and the spirit of love and the exercise of love, are all from Christ, and the obedi ence rendered is through faith in his name. In no other way could it be accepted. (4) The deficiencies of our service must be atoned for by the Blood of Christ, or the law must be bent to accommodate them. The latter is impossible; therefore the former must be true.I In the Guide to Christian Perfection of 1839 occurs the following interesting testimony: At length one evening, while engaged in a prayer meeting a great deliverance came. I began to exercise faith by believing and praying,’I shall have the blessing now'. Just at that moment a heavenly influence filled the room. No sooner had I uttered or spoken the words from my heart,'I shall have the blessing now', than refining fire went through my heart, illuminated my soul, scattered its fire through every part, and sanctified the whole. I then received the witness of the Spirit that the blood of Jesus Christ cleansed me from all sin.2 1 die th odist Quarterly Review. Vol. 30, 322, (1848) 2 Guide to Christian Perfection, p. 50,(1939) - ” 16 THE GENERAL CONFERENCE PASTORAL ADDRESSES , CHPAT.ER IV The pastoral addresses of the Bishops to the General Confer ences are characterized by conservatism in doctrinal statement. These doctrinal statements would scarcely be more liberal than the original incipient doctrinal statements of the Church. It seems to be a law of churches that practice and experience always run ahead of doctrinal statement. The older an organization the greater the gap is likely to be between practice and doctrinal statement. This assumption accepted, one would expect to find little difference between the dontrinal'statemèntb in the Pastoral Address to the General Conference of 1924 and the doctrinal standsirds of Methodism found in Wesley’s Sermons and The Plain Account of Christian Perfection. In reading the Pastoral Addresses to the General Conferences from 1796 to 1924 such expectation is not disappointed. Teaching and practice with refer ence to the matter of entire sanctification has greatly changed, but this change is not indicated in any great degree in the Pas toral Addresses to the General Conferences. The Pastoral Address to the General Conference of 1796, signed by T.Coke and F.Asbury are found the following statements: Our grand object is to raise and preserve a holy and united people. Holiness is our aim ; and we pay no attention to numbers, but in proportion as they possess the genuine principles of vital religion.I In the Pastoral Address to the General Conference of 1824, signed by Bishops McNendree, Bedding, Sould, George and Roberts strong emphasis is placed on the doctrine and experience of entire 1 General Conference Journal, Vol. I, 7 17 sanctification. lever was there a period more momentously interesting to our church than at present. Do we, as preachers, feel the same child-like spirit which so eminently distinguished our first ministers? Do we come to the people in the fullness of the blessing of the Gospel of Peace? It is not enough merely to preach the gospel from a full heart, and preach it too, in demonstration of the Spirit and power. Above all, do we insist on the present witness of the Spirit and entire sanctification through faith in Christ. Are we striving through faith and obedience to elevate our hearts qnd lives to the standard of Gospel Holiness? Or are we wishing to have the standard lowered to our unsanctified natures? In short, are we contented to have the doctrine of sanctification an article of our creed only, without becoming experimentally and practically acquainted with it? Are we pressing after it as the prize of our high calling in Christ? If Methodists give up the doctrine of entire sanctification, or suffer it to become a dead letter, we are a.fallen people. If Methodists lose sight of this doctrine, they will fall of their own weight. Their success in gaining members will be the cause of their dissolu tion. Holiness is the main cord that binds us together. Relax this and you loosen the whole system. This will appear the more evident if we call to mind, the original design of Methodism. It was to raise and preserve a holy people. This was the principal object, which Mr. Wesley, who, under God, was the great founder of our order, had in view. To this end all the doctrines believed and preached by the Methodists tend.^ The General Conference of 1832 issued a pastoral address to the Church, warning the Church to be true to the doctrine and experience of entire sanctification : When we speak of holiness we mean that state in which God is loved with all the heart and served with all the powers in us. This as Methodists we have said, is the privilege of the Christian in this life. And we have further said that this privilege may be secured instantaneously by an act of faith, as justification is. Why then do we have so few living witnesses that the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth from all sin? Among primitive Methodists the experience of this high attainment in religion may justly be said to have been common. Now a profession is rarely to be met with among us. Is it not time to return in this matter to first principles? Is it not time that we throw off the inconsistency which we-are charged with in this matter? Only let those who have been born of the Spirit 1 Coward, Entire Sanctification, 1739-1900, 289, quoting Bishop J.S. Key ’ 18 and have tasted of the good word of God, seek with the same ardor to he made perfect in love as they sought for the pardon of their sins, and soon will our class-meetings and love-feasts he cheered by the relation of experiences of this character, as they now are with those which tell of justification and the new birth.I In the Pastoral Address of the Bishops to the General Conference of 1840 the Church is reminded that the doctrine and experience of entire sanctification is the glory of Methodism: The doctrine of entire sanctification constitutes a leading fea ture of original Methodism, let us not suppose it enough to have this doctrine in our standards. Let us labor to have this experi ence and the power of it in our hearts. Be assured, brethren that if our influence and usefulness, as a religious community, depend upon one thing more than another, it is upon our carrying out the great doctrine of sanctification in our life and conversation. When we fail to do this, then we shall lose our preeminence; and the halo of glory which surrounded the heads and lit up the paths of our sainted fathers, will have departed from their unworthy sons. 0, brethren, let our motto be: Holiness unto the lord. And may the God of peace sanctify you wholly, and we pray God that your whole spirit, soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ* Faithful is he that calleth you, who.also will do it.2 A like exhortation is found in the address of the British delegate to the General Conference of 1844: "We feel it our duty to press upon our hearers the duty of seek ing and acquiring a more plentiful enjoyment of God's sanctifying grace."3 In the address to the British Conference from the General Confer ence of 1844, signed by Bishops Soule, Bedding, Waugh and Morris, the following mention is made of Sanctification: The great doctrine of entire sanctification is exciting increased interest in our church. Many of our ministers and members are re joeing in that perfect love which casteth out fear, while many others are groaning earnestly for full redemption in the blood of Jesus Christ. A holy baptism of the Spirit has fallen upon many 1 Coward, Entire Sanctification, 1739-1900. 29D, 2 : General Conference Journal( 1840 ), Vol. II, 161 3 TbriôrTM:844) r-i73--------- 19 portions of our Zion, and great multitudes are struggling into liberty. Our fervent prayer is that this great work may continue to move onward until Scriptural Holiness shall indeed be spread over the world.I From the pastoral Address of 1856: The Church has been quickened ; many of its members, we trust, are hungering and thirsting after righteousness, and are going on to perfection, thus evincing that the doctrine of entire sanctifica tion, is not with them a mere theory, but a substantial and saving reality.^ From the Pastoral Address of 1872: Our aim is personal holiness, internal and external holiness for every child of man. let us not forget this. Let 'Holiness unto the Lord' still be our motto. May it be inscribed not only on our churches, but on our business and on our pleasures, even to the bells of our horses. Nothing but an earnest, intelligent, entire consecration, will ever answer the demands of Him who gave Himself for us.3 In the Address of 1872 the Bishops urged an increased use of the means of grace, with special emphasis on the class-meeting, which was being seriously neglected* They exhorted the people to retrace their steps toward the zeal of the Fathers who were mighty to bring things to pass. From the Pastoral Address of 1892: If there is less emotional experience, there is reason to believe that there is an increase in religious stability.....Heart power is still the great want. Nothing but the presence of God in the hearts of the people can win the day. More and more the struggle must be for a holy church. 4 In the Pastoral Letter to the General Conference of 1880 there is no mention of sanctification, but thereris an earnest exhorta tion to daily Bible reading and family worship. I quote an excerpt: Too many homes have no family altar. The lines should be kept distinct between the narrow path of self-denial for Christ's sake and the broad road of conformity to the world 6ur camp-meetings 1 General Conference Journal, Vol. II, 176, (184^ 2. (1856), 294 3 Ihirl. ( 1872), 444 4 Ibid. (1892). 43 20 ere less helpful to the spiritual life than they should be. Especially is this true when they are made a source of revenue only, or where entertainment rather than salvation is the chief end, or where luxurious ease and popular amusement are more largely patronized than prayer meetings are.I The Episcopal Address of 1904 urges a return to the "Old Paths" in the following words: Among those truths which Wesley lifted out of the dust of the ages were at least these: the deep guilt of sin, the equal redemp tion of all men by the vicarious atonement, the absolute freedom of the will, the entire practicability of salvation now for every sinner, and the attainability of perfect cleansing and perfect love in this life.^ In the address of 1904 the Bishops lament the fact that the membership of the church had increased only two per cent during the quadrennium. The Episcopal Address of 1916 contains a glorification of the doctrines of Methodism: The doctrines of Methodism are a rich inheritance. The Methodists, like Timothy have been nourished up in words of faith and good doctrine. Wesley could have said to all his followers, no less to this Conference than to the first one, as did the wise man in the Book of Proverbs,’Hear, ye children, the instruction of a father, and attend to know understanding, for I give you good doctrine, forsake ye not my law.' Age has carried nothing of its foundation truths away. The Lord gave the word and the Wesleys were the compa ny that published it. The Holy Club could have been styled the Schoolmen of Oxford: they gave attention to reading, to exhorta^' tion, to doctrine, to good works, to prayer, they believed the scriptures and the word which Jesus had said. They were called Bible Moths before they were called Methodists. From the first they were made to understand the doctrines through their walls. Obedi ence is the fortifying virtue of Christianity. Never vain in their imagination, their hearts were not darkened. As many as were ordain ed to eternal life believed. The Church therefore has had little trouble with its doctrines. The new doctrines are the old doctrines. They have lost nothing of their power with age or usage. They have been cherished, not only because they have been bequeathed, but walled about with devoted 1 General Conference Journal(1880}, 433 2 Ibid.( 190477 'TH 21 intelligence and consistent piety; both their authority and force are still inflexible and inviolate. Beseiged in every generation, they are more firmly entrenched because of the repeated assaults.L In the foregoing address there is no mention of the doctrine of entire sanctification. This omission is in rather striking contrast with the emphases, on the doctrine in the earlier pastoral addresses in the history of the I^thodist Episcopal Church. In the Episcopal Address to the General Conference of 1920 there is a self-gratulation on account of the greatness of the doctrines of Methodism: We do not'recite again our providential history; we take it for granted. We do not again analyze and defend our policy; we assume it as existing and useful. We do not restate and laud our doctrines; we assume them and believe them, rejoicing in their emphasis on personal religion, - religious activity and religious experience. We are not careful to prove that we are a church, or to justify our standing as a true church of Christ. Much less are we trying to create a new church. We assume that by the Spirit and blessing of God, by the unfailing presence of Christ, we are a church.^ Again, we find no mention of the doctrine of entire sanctification in the Address of 1920. The Episcopal Address of 1924 contratulates the Church on having doctrines that have stood the test of criticism in the past and will stand the searching light of advancing knowledge : A church without doctrine will be as invertebrate as a moHusk. It would hold no grip on the conscience. It will never lead men back to God. Truth sets men free. It is the glory of Methodism that at a time of widespread theological laxity our fathers laid hofd of the crucial truths of Christianity and uttered them with fervid unction in the ears of the world. The test of a living church is its power of adjustment. We were never more alive to the trumpeting challenge of radical thought , nor more responsive to the results of reverent scholarship. The spirit of inquiry is the thermometer of progress. Nor are we influenced by the ignorant fear that the faith we profess may not 1 General Conference Journal(1904), 121 2 Ibid(l920). 22 bear the searohing light of advancing knowledge. We give the largest hospitality to freedom of thought. But we are anxious that we shall he enlightened hy the Spirit of God, and not misled by the vain devices of men. Certainly our theological tranq.uility is not because, as some vainly imagine, we have relegated sound doctrine to a minor place and given sociology chief consideration, thereby proclaiming our indifference to the movements of théologie thought. We do not recognize any failure of doctrinal Christianity to interest the masses. We were never more confident that the Christian doctrine is the basic condition of all social betterment As to personal salvation, we as firmly believe as ever in the necessity of repentance for sin, justification by faith, in the sanctification of the believing heart, and in the witness of the Spirit to these miracles of grace wrought in the soul.b In this address we find a definite declaration of belief in experience of sanctification for the believing heart and the witness of the Spirit to this experience. 1 General Conference Journal, 1924 23 TEE' BISHOPS' VIEWS OE SAECTIFICATIOE CHAPTER V The Bishops are the leaders of the Church. The General Conference which is composed of representatives from all the Conferences choose the best men for the office* The Bishops are men who have risen above their fellows because of superior intelligence, superi or executive and superior preaching ability. The Bishops are the conservative element in the church; for no man who differed rad ically with the conservative element in the church could be chosen Bishop. Therefore, if the Bishops, or a few of them admit any change in any doctrine of the Church, such admission would seem to show that a change had taken place. Thus the Bishops': opinions are given to show that Methodist Episcopal Church has changed views on the doctrine of entire sanctification. At least some of the Bishops make such admissions: Bishop Asbury undoubtedly believed in entire sanctification as a second work of grace instantaneously received, as indicated in the following quotations: Bishop Asbury wrote to Rev. Henry Smith, and closed his letter as follows: 'Night comes on, and I will close with saying: preach sanctification, directly and indirectly in every sermon.' He wrote to another, '0 purity, 0 Christian Perfection, it is heaven below to feel all sin removed. Preach it whether they bear or forbear. Preach it.b I think we ought to tell modestly what we feel to the fullest. For two years past, amidst innumerable trials, I have enjoyed almost inexpressible sensations. I have good reason to believe that on the eastern shore four thousand people have been converted since May first, last, and one thousand sanctified.^ Bishop Hamline also seemed to hold the view of entire sanctification as a definite experience subsequent to regeneration as indicated 1 Wood, Perfect Love, 191 2 Ibid, 161 24 in the following extracts: "That this perfect love, or entire sanctification, is specifically a new state, and not the mere improvement of a former state, or of regeneration, is plainly inferred from the Bible."! !!The heart may be cleansed from all sin, while our graces are imma ture, and the cleansing is a preparation for their unembarrassed and rapid growth. All at once, I felt as though a hand not feeble, but omnipotent, not of wrath, but of love, were laid on my brown I felt it not only outwardly, but inwardly. It seemed to press upon my whole body, and to diffuse all through and through it a holy, sin-consuming energy. As it passed downward, my heart as well as my head was con- cious of the presence of this soul-cleansing, under of which I fell to the floor, and, in joyful surprise of the moment, cried out in a loud voice. For a few minutes the deep of God's love swallowed me up, all its waves and billows rolled over me.^ Bishop Bedding: that regeneration was the beginning of purifica tion, and entire sanctification was the finishing of that work, in which original sin was destroyed: The difference between a justified soul who is not fully sanctified, I understand to be this: the first( if he does not backslide) is kept from voluntarily committing known sin, which is commonly meant in the New Testament by committing sin. But he finds in him self the remains of inbred corruption, or original sin, sûeh as pride, anger, envy, a feeling of hatred to an enemy, the rejoicing at a calamity which has befallen an enemy, etc.: The second or ful ly sanctified person, is cleansed from all these inward, involuntary sins The degree of original sin which remains in some believers, though not a transgression of known law, is nevertheless sin, and must be removed before one gets to heaven, and the removal of this evil is what we mean by full sanctification. Though the Christian does not feel guilty for his depravity, as he would if had voluntarily broken God s law, yet he is often grieved and afflicted at the sight of this sinfulness of his nature. Regeneration also, being the same as the new birth is the beginning of sanctification, though not the completion of it, nor not entire sanctification. Regeneration is the beginning of purification; entire sanctification is the finishing of that work. It is as important that you( Ministers of the New Jersy Confer ence) should experience this holy work, as it that sinners to whom you preach should be converted..The faith which is the condition of this entire sanctification is exercised only by the penitent heart, a heart willing to part from all sin forever. 1 Wood, Perfect Love, 23 2 Ibid, 69 3 Ibid. 156 25 and determined to do the will of God in all things.! Bishop Enoch George was admitted on probation in 1790. His biographer says that he preached and enjoyed Christian Perfection: The great Wesleyan doctrine of Perfect Love, so prominent a feature in the preaching of the early Methodists, was embracedand cherished by Bishop George. 'His theme', says Atwood, 'was holiness, in the pulpit and out of it, because he enjoyed it himself. It burned in his soul like the fire that is unquenchable. All who heard him knew and felt that he held steady‘communion with God. To the praise of men and honors of the world he seemed to be as dead as the sainted Fletcher. In the midst of his sermons I have often seen him stop, and lifting his eyes toward heaven, cry out, in a plain tive voice, '0 thou that lightest the lamps of glory, save the Methodist Church from freezing up.' Amens would follow it all over the congregation, old Methodist style; sympathy and feeling would be so intense that the house would be full of praise. Bishop George used•the word 'glory' in a manner and with a little different tone from all others.^ 'Bishop Peck wrote one of the best known books on entire sanctifi cation, "The Central Idea". I quote some extracts from this book: In the merely justified state we are not entirely pure. But in the work of entire sanhtification, these impurities are all washed away, so that we are 'wholly saved from sin, from its inward pollu tion. ^ There is surely no time fixed in the scriptures which must elapse before the work( sanctification) can be accomplished. The Saviour prays : for his disciples, 'Sanctify them through thy truth', assuming that they were at that time eligible to this great bless ing. ..... Inde ed , there have such varieties in the periods of entire sanctification, as to show clearly that no specific time must elapse before the converted man may enter into the rest of perfect love. In a few instances we believe, the blessing has been received so soon after regeneration, as to make the periods seem entirely identical; and all times, from this infant state to the greatest age of Christians on earth, have been found available for this great work.4 The Wesleyan Reformation was eminently a movement in favor of holiness. The true doctrine of Christian Perfection was more clear ly taught and powerfully enforced than at any former time since the days of primitive purity. And while the great mass of converts made it their aim, large numbers passed on to the actual experience and living demonstration of the power of the Spirit of Christ to cleanse from sin. And mark the result: No weapon formed against them 1 Coward, Entire Sanctification 1739-1900, 211-212 2 Flood and Hamilton, Lives of Methodist Bishops, 163 3 Peck, Central Idea, 52 4 Ibid., 110 26 could prevail. From the feeblest beginnings, v/ithout wealth, without power, in the midst of the most violent persecutions, they have moved in a career of usefulness unparalled since the days of the Apostles.! But there are reasons why holiness is not more faithfully preached. !t is hard to raise the stream higher than the fountain. It is hard to preach what we have not experienced, and fear of reproach^ 'Physician, heal thyself,' we doubt not hinders many of us from charging home upon the members of the church, their remaining corruptions, their neglect of the blood that cleanseth from all sin, and their exposure to apostasy, and final ruin in consequence. We thus can see how it is that we have so little preaching on the subject of holiness. The want of experience renders it unpleasant to do it, and herd to do it truthfully and effectually.2 Another of the well known books on the doctrine of Christian Perfection, or entire sanctification, was written by Bishop Foster, who holds a high place in the church as a theological thinker. I give a few quotations from Bishop Foster's book, Christian Purity: The process of this work is in this order : beginning with pardon, by which one aspect of sin, that is actual guilt, is wholly remov ed , and proceeding in regeneration, by which another kind of sin, that is depravity, is in part removed, terminating in entire sanctification, by which the remainder of the-second kind, or depravity, is entirely removed.^ Sin committed and depravity felt, are very different, the one is an action, the other a state of the affections. The regenerate believer is saved from the one, and he has the grace to enable him to have the victory over the other; but the disposition itself, to some extent, remains, under the control of a stronger, gracious power implanted, but still making resistance, and indicating actual presence, as needing to be entirely sanctified.*^ Sanctification is distinct in opposition to the idea that it is mere regeneration; holding it to be something more and additional; instantaneous, in opposition to the idea of growth gradually to maturity or ripeness. And though' there is progress toward it, yet that its attainment is not a mere ripeness ensuing by gradual growth, but is by direct agency of the Holy Ghost, and instan taneously wrought, however long the soul has been progressing toward it.^ 1 Peck, Central Idea, 26 2 Ibid, 375 3 Foster, Christian Piiirity, 122 4 Ibid, Ï2Ï 6 Ibid. 46 27 According to Bishop S. 11 Merrill:. Regeneration and sanctifica- are not synonymous. The ideas that the;/ contain are not the same. They pertain to a work of grace which, while it presents several aspects, is essentially one work, as it belongs to the same person, is all provided for in the same way and by the same sacrifice, and is experienced on the same conditions in response to the same faith and substantially at the same time, yet. are two processes, distinct and unlike, yet equally necessary, and never to be separa ted in the work of salvation. Regeneration produces the new life, but does not complete it. In regeneration the life element is imparted, but it is not developed, and has not reached its perfect manifestation. Sanctification begins in regeneration, sanctifica tion accompanies regeneration, yet sanctification is not regenera tion. Sanctification washes away the defilement of sin, and removes the obstructions to the expanion :of the inward life, rendering growth possible. ^Sanctification in its fullest signification, relates to a process of cleansing which begins with regeneration and goes on and on through all the experiences of growth, maturity and perfection. Regeneration is a definite experience, which has a definite period or date, and is to the believer, in the strictest sense, a past event. But sanctification is not so positively a past event. Sanctification is a continuous process. Sanctification begins with regeneration, but is not then completed. Sanctification is something that never becomes a past experience. Bishop Merrill distinguishes between sanctification and entire sanctification. He says that sanctification is complete when all 28 the powers of the soul are purified and the heart is clean. I quote directly from Bishop Merrill's book: In the primal act of sanctification, at the time of the new birth, the heart is washed from the defilement of old sins; but the scriptures will not justify the assertion that all impurities of thought and evil tendencies of nature, which are impurities in God's sight, are entirely purged till the new life has expanded and the indwelling spirit has revealed to the enlightened con science the enormity of inbred depravity. The filthiness of the flesh and spirit must be felt and loathed before it can be washed away. Hence, the general experience is that the full cleansing follows a season of deep self-abasement. The provision for this entire sanctification is anple, and the Spirit of God is always ready to respond to the longing desire, so that as soon as the soul feels its need of this great deliverance, and takes hold of the atonement as efficacious to this end, the merit of the cleans ing blood is applied, and the Spirit reveals the result as suddenly or as gradually as faith will apprehend the evidence given. But the fact should not be overlooked that the work and evidence of it are distinct. The work itself may be instantaneous, and the evidence gradually unfolded and recieved. ! It seems that Bishop Mg^rrill does not believe that the Spirit witnesses' tb the #brk of entire sanctification as in regeneration* He says that the Spirit declares the result, not the process, and the Spirit attests our filial relation. I give a further extract from Bishop Merrill's book: His voice is spiritual and spiritually discerned. It speaks of our relationship as children. It reveals the love of the Father; but does not name every phase of the great salvation. The particulars are all comprehended in the adoption* The divine life within proves the regeneration, and this implies the sanctification. With the fact of adoption attested, our rational inferences as to the ■processes and implications are both scriptural and satisfactory. We need not worry because the Spirit does not particularize, and say to every believer, with reference to every detail of the work of grace, 'This is regeneration,' 'This is sanctification,''This is reconciliation,''This is adoption*' Such is not the divine economy; and by insisting that it is, some are betrayed into hurt- extra vaganc es and others are discouraged and fail to accept the testimony which God gives. The direct witness is to adoption, and upon this strong foundation our enlightened understanding will build L Merrill, Aspects of Christian Experience, 194 29 the superstructure of assurances with reference to all the pro cesses of the great work of deliverance from the guilt, the death, and the power and the pollution of sin.2 Bishop J* S. Key, of the M. E. Church, South, in an address, entitled,. "Heart Purity", makes the following statement concerning Entire sanctification: Heart Purity we must have. Without it, v/e are fearfully and appre hensively convicted none of us shall see the Lord. We know also hy a mortifying experience that we were not purified when we were pardoned. These many years have been years of advance and retreat, success and failure, victory and defeat. The Old Man of the heart, which Mr. Wesley termed, 'inbred sin', lingered in us long after our conversion. What wrestlings we have had. Now, brethren we must he holy, and there is no hope for us, except as Mr Wesley and our Bishops say:'Men are justified before they are sanctified. Converted, but not consciously sanctified, how can we reach your blessed attainment if not by another and subsequent w^ork of cleansing? For this we reach up and pray and believe. Encourage us brethren. Having reached it yourselves, we know you cannot he unconcerned for us who in conversion did not. Some have fo'und it by a second work. For this we give thanks, and we are assured that you rejoice with us.^ In the same address we find some very interesting statements concerning sanctification in early Methodism; 'What was the rise of Methodism?' asked John Wesley, in his confer ence of 1766. This is the answer he gave: 'In 1729, my brother Charles and I, reading the Bible, saw we could not be saved without holiness: Followed after it and incited others to do to. In 1737 we saw that this holiness comes by faith. In 1738 we saw likev/ise that men are justified before they are sanctified, but still holiness v/as our object: inward and outward holiness. God thrust us out to raise up a holy people.'To this statement found in your discipline of 1882, are signed the names of Bishops Paine, Pierce, Kavanaugh, Keener, Wilson, Parker, Granbery and Hargrove.3 Rev. John J. Tigert a member of the Louisville Conference of the M E. Church, South, contributed an article to a book, entitled, "Entire Sanctification from 1739 to 1900", by Coward. The name of Tigert'8 article was "Purity and Peace". Mr Tigert afterwards became a Bishop in the Li K Church, South. Tigert accepts Miley's views with the the possible exception of a sentiment or two. 1 Merrill, Aspects of Christian Experience, 194 2 Coward, Entire Sanctification from 1739 to 1900. 299 5 Ibid. . 279 ' : 30 I quote briefly from Tigert: Hr. Miley definitely aeoepts the phrase, 'second blessing', as the formula for the Wesleyan doctrine, and under the caption, "Second Blessing view', gives the full and positive account of the doctrine and experience. It so nearly seems to me to be the true view, that with possible exception of a sentiment or two, we give it our hearty indorsement.! Miley's view is given in another chapter of this treatise, so it is not necessary to repeat his view in another connection. From Bishop McConnell's point of view, Methodist thinking from the beginning was phrased in terms of the prevailing philosophy of that day-Beism. According to Deism, God showed himself in relation to nature and man by miracle. Conversion was an intervention. After conversion, another intervention, entire sanctification. This doctrine of entire sanctification fitted rather loosely into the philosophy of the time. In his exposition of doctrines Wesley left things at loose ends. Wesley and others of his time seemed to teach that the cleansing work of grace which results in entire sanctifica tion could be accomplished in a single crisis. Crises do occur in the lives of believers. Psychological study of today shows that the spiritual progress of believers is very apt to proceed uner a certain law of spiritual rhythm, like the growth of an organism in which periods of long preparation are succeeded by quick flowerings, or like the bodily processes which come to a focus, or what we call a turning point. In Wesley's day, a person on whose thought profound religious impressions are being constantly made would find himself suddenly coming to a keen awareness of the presence ofthe Divine, to a 1 Coward, Entire Sanctification from 1739 to 1900, 317 31 deeper understanding of God. No doubt such experiences occurred. But the interpretation of such experiences was often artificial and unnatural. They were artificial in that they fitted into a doctrine rather than into a life, and unnatural in that one crisis out of many crises which occurred in the Christian life was picked out and given the name of Entire Sanctification. The normal Christian has many crises in his religious life. If a Christian names one of these crises Sanctification, he may have difficulty in classifying later crises, and. thus be confused by a theology that does not fit into life. The early Methodists made use of a distinction which was fraught _ with moral peril. They said that a sanctified man was pure as to his intent, but faulty as to his judgment. Today we are becoming aware that the human life is on and individual. To use this disctinction led to a double disadvantage: Believers found it easy to excuse themselves on the ground that they meant well; and this excuse prompted hard-headed outsiders to scoff at harmful deeds which came out of the sanctified life. Furthermore this doc- encouraged a spirit Of lawlessness: if all men's impulses are holy, they are, of course, divinely authorized to act out any im pulse that comes to them. Unless a doctrine like that of Entire Snactification is in the hands of very wise, cool-headed leaders, it can open the door to all kinds of v/ildness. Care-ful students of Wesley's life have insisted that he never claimed the blessing of entire sanctification for himself, and Charles Wesley confessed increasingly perplexed at the contradic tion which he saw between profession and practice in the lives of many believers. 32 The foregoing is a summary of Bishop McConnell's view. In addi tion I append significant passages quoted directly: Still with all the defects of the doctrine we must insist that it is essential to keep alive the ideal at which it aims; that is the bringing of all parts of the life under the subjection to the laws of the Kingdom. In the emphasis upon the doctrine not enough stress has been laid upon the will to act up to the full light, as the light is revealed. A good working definition of entire sanctification is that of an old saint; that entire sanctification consists in a pur pose to sanctify every thing that one can get one's hands on. It will not do to let the ideal drop from Methodist thinking. Whether progress in the individual life comes through sharply marked crises, or whether it is a gradual unfolding which cannot mark times and places, the truth that the essential duty of progress must always be kept before the mind of the Christian. As well teach that the mere fact of enlistment in an army makes a man a soldier in a full sense 88 to teach that mere enlistment in a church makes a man a full ehristian.l Bishop E.G.Richardson in a personal letter on the subject of Entire Sanctification: "The most satisfactory work on the subject of which you write me is Wesley's little book entitledA.Plain Account of Christian Perfection. That expresses my opinions better than anything else I have read." Bishop Warren A«Candler, of the Methodist Church, South, in a private letter: Î beg to say that I am unable to set forth what may be the views of the leading men in the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, concerning the doctrine of entire sanctification. I doubt not every one of them believes in entire sanctification, and preaches on the doctrine on appropriate occasions; but I doubt that many of them believe that sanctification is a distinct and separate work of grace from regeneration and that its office is to clease the heart from original sin which regeneration does not affect, as it is asserted by some. So far as I can gather from the writings of Mr. Wesley that great man was not himself finally settled on the point mentioned'. Bishop William F. Anderson in private letter: I am sure that we all believe in the doctrine of sanctification as john Wesley taught it. I wish we might all realize it in personal life and experience. Bishop Thomas Nicholson in a private letter: Your question, 'Why has the Methodist Church changed views on the 1 McConnell, Essentials of Methodism, 22 33 doctrine of entire sanctification,' implies that the Church has changed. I think that thesis remains to he proven. Bishop Edwin Hughes in a private letter: ’Why has the Methodist Episcopal Church changed vi®vs: on the doctrine of entire sanctification?' I could not, off course, go into the deeper phases of the Church’s life and get a full answer to such a subtle question as this.I rather imagine that there has been a feeling in many of our men that the old doctrine of entire sanctification was based too much on syllogism,- the first premise being the almighti- ness of God.; the second, the need of man, and then the inevitable conclusion. In addition to this, so many people who professed entire sanctification were really rather petulant. They used the idea as a bludgeon against other people. Professing to be wholly sanctified, they were still at times very irritable companions, both at home and in society. Occasionally, likewise, they were so ardent in their views that they split churches into two factions and considerably hindered God's work. In answer to the question, 'What is the present view of the Method ist leaders as to the doctrine-of entire sanctification?' I would say again that I think nobody could give you a full reply. I imagine that the doctrine has become in a way less personal and more social. Perhaps I could better state it by saying that the ideals remains, only it applies more to active love and not so exclusively to passive love in the heart. I think that our men are preaching as vigorously as ever that all life belongs to Christ and should be sanctified to him. Stated differently, it can be put that entire sanctification now would be deemed more of a life and action and less of a mystical state. Bishop John W.Hamilton in a private letter: There is a lot of misrepresentation abroad concerning the doctrine of sanctification as taught by the Methodists. The word sanctifica tion is a very ambiguous one. It has different religious meanings as applied by different sorts of believers in different denominations. The thing for you to do is to get John’.Wesley ' s little book on Perfect Love. There you will get the straight doctrine as taught by John Wesley and all faithful Methodists. You will find there a lot of things that the doctrine of sanctification in the Methodist Church nnever stood for. It does not mean perfection of intellectual, physical or any other kind of ability^ It does not mean perfection of circumstance; it does not mean perfection of character for no one nor many in this life have reached the point of finished perfection. We are all going on and never attaining to anything except perfect- tion in love. So you must avoid all the mistakes that people have made by '/thinking as so many people do when they are converted, that if they leave off the use of tobàcco they are sanctified or leave off coffee or swearing or anything else that may be a human frailty, fancy or fact. 34 Bishop William Burt in a private letter: I dp not understand that the Methodist Episcopal Church has changed views on the doctrine of Entire Sanctification. Certain loud professors of the doctrine who did not manifest its spirit have caused many in the church to treat the doctrine with indifference. The present teach ing is that we are saved entirely from sin and wholly consecrated to Christ who enables us to manifest His spirit in our lives. Bishop Charles Edward Locke in a private letter: In reply to your questions I would say that I did not know that the Methodist Church had changed its views on the doctrine of Entire Sanctification, and still holds to those views stated by John Wesley. Bishop Edgar Blake in a private letter: I am not aware that the Methodist has. changed its views on the doctrine of sanctification from that held by Mr. Wesley. 35 THE EDITORS/"VIEWS ON SANCTIFICATION ' ' CHARTER VI Editors of the Methodist Episcopal Church gave their views in personal letters, as follows; Dorr Diefendorf; Contributing Editor to the Christian Advocates: I understand the historic doctrine of Sanctification as held by Methodism in the light of the limitless possibility of the growth and the expansion of human nature. To speak more theologically, I should, of course, refer to the human possibility of a constant approximation to the ideal life as found in Jesus Christ. Dan B.Brummitt. Editor, Northwestern Christian Advocate: I do not know that the Methodist Church has changed its views on the doctrine of entire sanctification. There may be some change in the emphasis that some preachers make, but I have been watching our General Conferences for a good many years, and none of them has ventured to change the official statement on this subject. The statements in the Discipline and the writings of John Wesley, including his "Plain Account of Christian Perfection" are still standards in the Methodist Episcopal Church. W, E. J. Gratz, Editor, Epworth Herald: You are assuming that the Methodist Church has changed its views on the doctrine of entire sanctification, which is a question of fact that must first be proven, and which I do not believe. Study the questions asked preachers when admitted to full membership in an annual conference. There has been a great difference of opinion as to what John Wesley meant by this doctrine and there is wide difference of opinion as what John Wesley meant by this doctrine and there is wide differences of opinion today. Bishop McConnell writes, "It will not do to allow this ideal to drop from Methodist thinking. The Methodist ideal does not differ from the New Testament ideal, that we are to be perfect, even as the Father in heaven is perfect. Edward Laird Mills, Editor, The Pacific Christian Advocate There has been no change in the church views as to the doctrine, moreover there are a large number of preachers and people who still preach, profess and practice the doctrine. It is probable that there has been some shift of emphasis in recent years, so that it does not command the relativedegree of attention that it did in former years. The reason for this is to be sought, not so much within the denomination as in the impact upon it by certain forces in the civilization of which it is a part. An article that I read recently in an English paper might furnish a clue to the situation. The writer said that the doctrine of entire sanctification had been allowed to rest just where Wesley left it; practically everything 36 else3 has been stated in terms of modern thought. It would seem that those interested especially in the doctrine could perform no better service than to give it that restatement, preserving essentials of the doctrine, but putting it in a dress more adapted to the times/ in which we live. Edward P.Dennett, Editor, California Christian Advocate: The doctrine of Entire Sanctification originated with John Wesley who, in harmony with the intense earnestness with which he was living his religious life, felt that there was a higher state of grace than that which the ordinary Christian attained at conversion and believed that a person could be made perfect in love in this life. Ee made it plain that the emphasis was to be on the perfect in love--not perfect in wisdom and perfect in conduct. This doctrine has fallen largely into .disuse at present. There are few if any pastors or evangelists v/ho are stressing it, although I presume an occasional sermon is preached on it at the present time. L, Q. Hart men. Editor, Zion ' s Herald: I think the reason why Methodists have not been emphasizing the doctrine of Entire Sanctification as much in these days as they used to stress it in the days gone by lies in the fact that it has frequently been abused and badly interpreted. As sometimes preached in old-time camp-meetings and elsewhere the doctrine seemed to imply that whoever possessed the "second blessing" had lost all capacity for sin. Sometimes,, also, those who claimed the "Blessing" also claimed visions, special revelations, and direct communication from the Most High. These and other development have brought the doctrine of Perfect Love into disrepute. Wesley, however, in his later years intended to teach, I think, that there was a possibility of so complete a purification of the intention of the believer that he would not knowingly transgress the will of God. Such an interpretation did not imply that a Christian could not sin or even that he^bècame entirely free from errors in judgment. He might even give way to a quick temper, but the whole trend of his life is represented by an effort to please God. Wesley himself through the years had considerable difficulty in arriving at a sound statement of this doctrine. This comes out in partieularlly in his correspondence with one John Smith, who was said to be a high official in the Church of England. These letters appear in the works of Wesley. Personally, I should like to see a wide dissemination of a sound teaching of Perfect Love throughout Methodism. I think if you were to question Methodist leaders on this subject they would, almost to a man, say that there is a great need of a re-emphasis upon this historical doctrine as interpreted in Mesleyls little book, called 'A Plain Account of Christian Perfection.' John W. LaiiRdale, Book Editor, Abingdon Press: The Methodist Episcopal Church has not changed its views on the doctrine of Entire Sanctification. Our denominational emphasis is upon experience. We have much more 37 homogeneity of experience than we have of doctrine. Accordingly no one can give you the present view of the Methodist leaders on any doctrine. Each leader would want to speak for himself or herself. I suppose the fanaticisms that have attached themselves to Entire Sanctification have influenced many people but the Methodists whom I know still believe that a life can be entirely consecrated to God. Ralph B. Urmy, Editor, Pittsburgh Christian Advocate: I was not aware that the Methodist Church had changed views on the doctrine of Entire Sanctification. The present view of the Methodist Church on the doctrine of entire sanctification is just what it has always been. George Elliot, Editor, Methodist Review : While I do not think it is fair to say that the Methodists have changed their views as to the doctrine of sanctification, 1 do confess that there is to-day too little•teaching and preaching - by our ministry on the subject of Christian Perfection which is the genuine Wesleyan title of that doctrine. The genuine Methodist doctrine is substantially that taught by John Wesley and also by John Fletcher, which is perfect love. Probably, one of the reasons that too little attention has been given to this question of holiness is the religious life, unfortunate ly, a false emphasis had been given to it by many of the recent advocates of entire sanctification, identifying that experience with the baptism of the Holy Ghost.. Certainly it is the Holy Spirit which is the divine power that accomplishes all things in our religious life, beginning with the conviction of sin, our new birth, and all the further elements in the Spiritual life. But there is real danger of identifying the charismatic gift of the spirit with this more profound experience of the inward life and the outward application of religion to everything in life. . As you are doubtless aware. Saint Paul found it necessary to make a rather stern reproval to the Corinthian Church for the excessive emphasis which they made upon certain spiritual gifts, and..after the tenth, eleventh and- twelfth chapters in First Corinthians in which he dealt' with that difficulty he led to the thirteenth Chapter on Love which is really the highest expression of Christian character and holiness. It has always been a source of danger for Christians to constantly identify every psychological feeling whidi they have possessed with the supreme matter of perfect love. Now of course this is only my judgment as to what we as a church believe in this truth to-day; yet X am willing to admit that doubt less both in our ministry and laity there are all sorts of personal opinions which are not wholly or properly in full agree ment with the genuine doctrinal attitude of our church. There are, however, one or two things which can be said in compliment of some of some elements in the present teaching or our ministry. Very much emphasis is being placed today, more than formerly, upon the necessity of applying all the spiritual ethics 38 of Jesus to everything in life, that politics, business, and all social relations are to come into perfect harmony with the will of God. Probably there has not been sufficient emphasis made upon the dispensation of the Holy Spirit as a real power to accomplish this matter. Yet we need to recognize the fact that Jesus himself in his teaching always placed the emphasis not upon doctrine but upon life, and declared that if we were willing to do the will of God we would comet, at last to the true knowledge. I think if any one to-day would read carefully both the teachings of Jesus in the New Testament and we Methodists would also go over again the messages of John Wesley as they appear both in his little book on Christian Perfection and still more in those forty sermons of his which are regarded as a part of our standards of doctrine, we would enter a more wholesome realm both of teaching and living in our Christian life. 39 VIEWS OF LEADERS OTHER THAN BISHOPS AND EDITORS CHARTER VII Professor John Godfrey Hill: Doctor Hill is the professor of Religion at the University of Southern California. This University until quite recently was a school of the Methodist Episcopal Church. It was probably the largest Methodist school in the world. One thousand young people, many of whom are from Methodist homes, pass through Doctor Hill's hands each year. In addition to the important place as professor of Religion in the University, he is held as an authoritative teacher of Methodist young people by the Methodist Church at large. He is held in such high esteem by the leaders as a scholar and thinker in the field of religion that a book written by him has been accepted by the Board of Religious Education of the Methodist Episcopal Church for use by the young people of this Church. This book is entitled, "Christianity for Today." By this indorsement it is plainly evident that Doctor Hill is a mouthpiece of Methodist leaders whose high prerogative it■is to select religious reading for the younger generation of Methodists. Such selection puts the book into the hands of Methodist young people and advises them to read it, assimilate.'it, and make its ideas their own. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that Doctor Hill accurately represents in his book the trend of present day thinking acceptable to Methodists on the subjects discussed in this book. In this book Doctor Hill repudiates entire sanctification as a second blessing. Instead of a definite crisis in which entire sanctification is reached, he believes that advance in the Christian's interior life proceeds by constant, steady, and uninterrupted growth, as in the development of the physical and mental life. He admits that 40 there may he crises in the Christian's progress, hut such crises are not confined to two crises as advocated hy the Second Blessing advocates. There are many crises which are the culminations of the normal process of growth and development. Doctor Hill's views are given in the following extract from "Christianity for Today": And this unfolding of the young convert's Christian life and character must he just as steady, constant and uninterrupted as is the physical development of man's body. Nothing is sadder than to see the development of a child held up or arrested by whatever cause* Such arrested development always results in a cripple life either physically or mentally. And while there are many physically crippled and mentally undeveloped people in our midst, I am afraid the proportions of Christians whose Christian growth has been arrested and whose spiritual life is therefore gradually declining and dying, is sadly large. Often there have been those in our midst who have held that, in addition to the experience of conversion, there is needed another experience, called the 'Second Blessing', or "Entire Sanctification". Let it be remembered that our God is both richer and better than to be satisfied with giving his children only two blessings. His bless ings are innumerable, not one, two or three. It is recognized that there âreiin the religious unfolding of the individual certain more or less definite stages, but these are never to be considered separate entities, or acts of God in themselves. They are simply marked by cerljain natural religious crises, which are the inevitable results and culminations of normal processes of growth and develop ment . Without such a constant and uninterrupted natural Christian unfolding and evolution, sporadic methods of receiving divine blessings are likely to result in momentary emotional experiences and fail to have a lasting value or issue in active Christian life and endeavor.' Throughout the whole process of the unfolding of the Christian life it is of course the grace of God, as operative in the individual believer, that makes the development possible and assures the constant and natural continuation of the process. The Life of Perfection: Every sincere disciple of Jesus hopes for a life of Christian Perfection, and rightfully so. The Christian is entitled to inherit his birthright of coming to full-grown manhood in Jesus Christ. Yet perfection in this realm, as in any other, is always a process rather than an achievement. No physically full-grown man, no ever-so-wonderful an athlete has ever deceived himself that he has reached the peak of perfection, beyond which it was impossible for any man to go. Usually it is true that the more perfect a man actually is, either in physical caliber or mental acumen, the more he realizes his own imperfections and shortcomings. The folk who claim to have reached the insurpassible heights of Christian Perfection, who claim to have reached the place of inability of wrong doing, should, to say the least, bear close observance and inspection. The old Apostle to the Gentiles was right, when near the close of his active career and marvellously active 41 life, he said,'Not that I have already obtained, or am already made perfect; but I press on, if so be that I may lay hold on that for which also I was laid hold on by Jesus Christ. Brethren, I count not myself yet to have laid hold: but ohèsthing I do, forgett‘ . ting the things which are behind, and stretching forward to the things which are before, I press on toward the goal unto the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. Let us therefore, as many as are perfect, be thus minded: and if inyanything ye are otherwise minded, this also shall God reveal unto you. Phil. 3,12-15.1 George A.Coe : A good many years ago I gave some study to the experi ence of 'holiness' or 'entire sanctification' in connection with my study of conversion. The question that I chiefly worked at was neither that of the source of the doctrine, nor the motivation or sense of need of those who seek the experience, but rather the process whereby a sense of having attained a particular state is brought about. I found that the process is practically the same as that in conversion-experiences, suggestion being the chief external factor, a temperamental type probably being the chief subjective determinant. There is a place, I think, for an investigation of the motivation of those who are attracted by the doctrine, and particularly of those who seek the experience. There is probably some material upon this point in the controversy between,the psycho-analysts and others over the psychology of Zinzendorf's piety. But I do not know where else to look for anything specific upon the subject apart from self- descriptions (which are valuable, but always in need of supplementat ion) As to the doctrine, I am not interested. It is a phase of an out worn and discredited theologizing. I do not mean that the history of the doctrine would be worthless, but only that thought has already passed beyond the presuppositions and the method represent ed by the doctrine. We get at the actualities of experience in a different way. The foregoing extract is from a personal letter from George A.Coe. The District Superintendent of one of the most important districts in the Methodist Episcopal Church gave the following reply to a request for information concerning the present status of the doc trine of Entire Sanctificationi.as a second blessing in the Methodist Episcopal Church of today : Sanctification as a second blessing is as dead as a 'dodo' in the Methodist Episcopal Church. Wesley, no doubt taught sanctification as a second blessing in his book on Christian Perfection. Wesley's Christian Perfection is as clear as mud. But the whole theological outlook has changed since Wesley's time. Wesley's impregnation with Augustinianism is doubtless \.responsible for his idea of inbred sin which is alleged to be removed by entire sanctification by the second blessingists. The idea of inbred sin can only be held by sttraining the scriptures. The historical method of Bible Study has exploded the interpretation which allows the idea of inbred sin. Many profess to get rid of inbred sin by the experience of entire sanctification, but they find disconcertedly that inbred sin is still with them. The idea of inbred sin is repugnant to modern 42 thought. .Such an idea has no place in the best thinking to-day. The second blessing people say that sin is eradicated by a definite experience. I am convinced that the holiness'people are wrong. That God should hold me accountable for some catastrophe that happened in the dim past, as the fall of Adam, and that he should punish me for such a happening, is repugnant to justice and good sense. The emphasis recently in the Methodist Episcopal Church has been,. on other things than on the theological minutiae and technicalities of such doctrines as sanctification. The emphasis has been upon social betterment. The church has been trying to make the world a better place for men, women, and children to live in. I do not discredit mystical experience, for I am a mystic myself. Perhaps the modern equivalent of the experience of entire sanctifica tion would be the 'practice of the presence of God.’ A person who today practices the presence of God, no doubt has what was known in Wesley's time and in later times in Methodism and elsewhere as the experience of entire sanctification. If the Holiness people could get rid of some of their obsolete theology and obselete terminology, there might probably be some chance of the second blessing people and the non^seeond blessing mystics getting together. This District Superintendent is a man of high repute in the Method ist Episcopal Church. He has unusual power both as an executive and preacher. He has been in prominent positions in his conference for more than thirty years. The fact that he could hold prominent posi tions, and today the most prominent executive position in his Confer ence, is indicative of the church on the doctrine of entire sanctifi cation as a second blessing. This superintendent was the Secretary of the Nebraska State Holiness Association before coming to Calif ornia. That this Superintendent’s repudiation of the Second Blessing view of sanctification has been accompanied by his promotion rather than his demotion is an interesting commentary on the status of the doctrine in the Methodist Episcopal Church. The minutes of the Southern California Conference of the ÎA E. Church of 1894 record that P.F.Bresee, the founder of the Church of the Nazarene, was refused a supernumerary relation by that Confer ence. Dr. Bresee^s biographer says that Dr. Bresee was refused this relationship on the ground that he planned to conduct a mission in Los Angeles in which mission the Second Blessing was to have a prominent place. The minutes of the Conference are silent as to the 43 cause of the Conference's refusal to grant a supernumerary relation ship. The minutes of same Conference of 1895 record that P P Bresee was granted a location, or permission to withdraw from the Confer ence. This permission was granted at Dr. Bresee's request. Thus it seems from evidence available, that the only way a Second Blessing Methodist preacher could conduct a mission, in which the doctrine could be taught was to demit the ministry in that church. In the case of the District Superintendent referred to in this paper, the repudiation of the Second Blessing was accompanied by promotion in the church. Thus the attitude of the leaders of the church in Southern California toward entire sanctification as a second blessing is indicated. Dr. George P. Mains was publisher of the Methodist Book Concern for twenty years. He is now publisher emeritus. In an informal interview he said substantially as follows: The spirit of Wesley's teaching on the subject of entire sanctifica tion, or Christian Perfection is still held by the leaders of Methodism. But there has been a reinterprétâtion of the application of the doctrine to experience. Sanctification as a second blessing is not generally not held today. Ministers do not generally invite their parishioners to seek sanctification as a second blessing to received instantaneously. But they urge their members to go on to perfection, to strive for sanctification. This urging is based on the assumption that the is characterized by growth and crises; each crisis being a step toward the goal. Many of the best pastors in the Methodist Episcopal Church have been greatly harassed by members of their congregations, who were louder than holy, though professing a high degree of holipess. A holiness meeting is conducted each Sunday morning in one of the largest Methodist Churches in California. The leader of this meeting is so conscious of his superior goodness that he does not need the regular worship of the church except on rare occasions, nor does he contribute to the support of his church. I am in substantial agreement with Bishop McConnell on the subject of sanctification. I believe Bishop McConnell is one of the best thinkers in America today. I once heard Bishop Fowler, one of the greatest thinkers of his time, say, when receiving ministers into the Conference, that Christian Perfection, or Entire Sanctification was a precious 44 doctrine. Se urged the ministers before him to keep their promise to go on to perfection, but that they should remember that sanctifi cation was not 'cranktification.' A Professor in a Methodist Episcopal School of Religion in an inter view, made the following very intersting remarks on the subject of sanctification : The present attitude of the Methodist Episcopal Church toward entire sanctification as a second blessing is one of indifference. The attainment of sanctification is by a gradual process. This experience may.be said to be attained when the whole personality is brought under the complete control of the Spirit of God and the whole life wholly conforms to the law of love. I believe the second blessing sects have a theory or doctrine that does not have a corresponding experiencei they preach a doctrine that has no experiential counterpart. There seems to be no differ ence in the lives of the second blessing people and those who do not hold such a theory. No man's human nature is completely changed by conversion. In conversion a person gets new motives; he gets new power, and acquires a new center of life. If a converted man has a bad temper before his conversion, he still has a tendency to get angry after his conversion Conversion gives him power to control his temper; it does not de stroy his temper. The destruction of a man's temper would be the destruction of his human nature. No aôt of divine grace destroys human nature. The same assertion could be made of all the human instincts. As conversion gives a person a new center of affection, new motives, new powers of control over his errant tendencies, con version is the only experience that is necessary to make a man a Christian. Since no experience destroys essential human nature, a second blessing, which the protagonists of the doctrine assert destroys human nature, is unreasonable. When I was a young preacher, I carefully and earnestly investi gated the doctrine of entire sanctification as a second blessing. This study and seeking continued for several years, but I was unable to acquire this experience as taught by the second blessing people. I finally came to reject the second blessing on pragmatic grounds. I believe the inability of a large number of sincere Methodists of attaining the experience as advocated by the Holiness people is responsible for the present prevailing attitude of indifference toward the doctrine among Methodists. A doctrine that assumes the attainment of an experience that is unattainable by a large number of sincere Christians will finally cease to have a place in those peoples' systems of theology. Thus the doctrine of sanctification as a second blessing, having been unattainable by large numbers of Methodists in the course of Methodist history has ceased to be believed as a doctrine by the ma^jority of Methodists. 45 A leading pastor on the Southern California Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church in reply to questions as the present status of the doctrine of entire sanctification in his church gave the following information; Entire sanctification as a second blessing is no longer generally held or preached in the Methodist Church. I look upon sanctification as an attainment after a long period of growth and development rather than an experience attained as conversion is. I have known some people who had attained sanctification, but no mai'iy. The Method ists no longer invite people to seek sanct ification as a definite experience instantaneously attained, but members are urged to seek for God's grace in many blessings on their lives. Such blessings are steps on the way to sanctification. People in the churches are not urged to seek experiences to which labels can be attached, but to seek God who will lead them on to perfection. The idea of two blessings only in the Christian life is inadequate. I believe the Christian will have numberless blessings before he arrives at the state of Christian Perfection. Preachers who preach sanctification as a second blessing have difficulty in finding charges in the Methodist church today, because the preaching of sanctification as a second blessing is not gener ally acceptable to the laity of the Church. A second blessing preacher is always a problem to the Bishop and his cabinet at the annual^ conferences; the problem is to find churches that will accept such preachers. A potent cause of disrepute of sanctification as a second blessing has been the fanaticism and wild fire that have accompanied such teaching. I know of a holiness man who said in a prayer-meeting that he hadi not sinned in twenty years. A godly old man in the meet ing replied that he did not believe such a statement. At the close of the service the godly old man attempted to shake hands with the loud holiness man, but was rebuffed angrily. The godly old man replied to the rebuff : 'Brother, you may not have sinned for the last twenty years, but you surely have sinned tonight. ' A few years ago a group of thirteen holiness holiness preachers in North Dakota asked for the supernumerary relation at a session of their annual conference. These men wished to do evangelistic work independent of the church and to organize a holiness association, and at the same time retain their relationship to their conference. The Bishop refused their requests and told them that they could take regular appointments or take the consequences. Several of these preachers refused appointments; they left the Church, some organized a Holiness association, and some joined the church of the Nazarenei The Holiness Association which these preachers joined declined to the canishing point within a few years. The greatest heresy in the Methodist Church of today relates to 46 the doctrine of the Holy Spirit. The Methodist Episcopal Church has almost forgotten that there is a Holy Spirit. Eugene B.Hawk, First Methodist Church, Fort Worth, Texas; in a personal letter: I look at Entire Sanctification as a possibility in life, but a most exceptional attainment. I believe that, according to the omnipotence of God such a work of Grace might be effected in a human heart instantaneously, but I do not believe that this is the method by which the Lord operates. To.me, the unfolding of character and a full realization of Christian life comes about in an orderly and progressive way. In other words, I believe there are clearly appointed laws of spirit ual growth, and by these the saints of the Lord come into an expe rience of sanctification which carries with it both a negative and a positive element. It is separation from, and dedication to. The goal of Entire Sanctification is the goal which every aspir ing Christian should set for himself, but he should hesitate and be very careful about the declaration of his arrival. To me the outstanding quality of Christian character is the sense of humility, and this would prevent, in my mind, any man who really possessed it from boasting about it. My observation of those who profess Sancti fication as an instantaneous work of grace leads me to feel that such a claim is never very complimentary to the Spirit of God. Elmer 11Isworth Helms. Los Angeles, California, in a personal letter I never posed as a theologian. I don't know much except to preach the gospel and insist that nobody has too much religion. I have- known and dealt; with hundreds of people that had too little, and I have never yet met anybody that had too much. In a very practical, crude way I preach that the man is fairly close to being sanctified who asks the help of the Lord every conscious moment of his life to help him to be what he ought to be, do what he ought to do, say what he ought to say, and go where he ought to go. When it comes to technical matters I am not the man you are looking for. Rev. R. P. Shuler. Los Angeles, California, in personal letter: I am not a partisan when it comes to the doctrine of sanctification, and have never been dogmatic in my views upon that doctrine. Person ally I think that there is much in the Bible, and undoubtedly there is in Methodist doctrine, teaching a second work of grace or of cleansing. But I have not been quite able to agree in toto with this idea. It seems to me that the Holy Spirit has to do with our Christian life from the very moment of coversion, and I am not at all sure that there are not many acts of cleansing and empowering and that sanctification is a continuous process that, goes forward ever in the Christian life to that point where we are full statured in Christ Jesus. I do not pretend to have expert ability in reason ing upon this doctrine. 47 TSB TEBOI^OGIAES' VIEWS OF SAFCTIFICATIOF CHAPTER VIII Harrison Franklin Rail is the professor of systematic Theology in Garrett Biblical Institure. In an article in the Methodist Quarterly Review, of the Methodist Episcopal Church, for October 1926, he gives some interesting ideas on Methodist Theology. He shows that Methodist Theology was not fixed in the beginning of the Methodist movement ; it is an elastic theology. Methodists have not felt bound in their thinking by the thinkers of the past, but have ever looked for new truth, assuming that no thinkers had the : Authority to fix the think ing of posterity, and assuming that the truth has not at any time been completely revealed. Here follows a digest of Professor Rail’s article : Methodism did not begin as a doctrinal reform, nor did it ever issue in a doctrinal statement. Presbyterians had their Westminster Confesr sion; Augsburg; stands for Lutheranism, and the Thirty Fine Articles for Anglicanism, but there is no generally recognized creed which makes Methodism distinctive. The founder of Methodism did not apol ogize for this omission; he gloried in it. Methodism began as a spiritual awakening, not as a reform in doctrine; but then every religious movement has begun in that fashion, including Christianity itself. Theology does not come first, but every vital and permanent movement brings a theology with it. Men inevitably seek to explain what their religion and faith mean and commend that faith to others, and the more evangelistic and the more missionary a religion is, the more surely some kind of a theology will follow. Methodism stood for religious awakening and a definite Christian message. It would be the task of Methodist theology to interpret this. What is the doctrinal significance of historic Methodism? Wesley accepted the Articles, the Apostles’ Creed, the ^icene Creed, and even the Athanasian Creed with its damnatory clauses, though he balked a little at these last, which were so clearly contradicted by oft-repeated statements of his. He carried over, indeed, a good deal of High-Churchism which Methodism disregarded and repudi ated. Wesley excluded no Methodist preacher, he says, because of his Calvinistic views, and he declares that his own sermons dealt little with such themes. The one view which Wesley insisted upon was full freedom to preach the gospel of salvation which was available for all men. When we turn to the teaching like that of sanctification, who will say just what Wesley's teaching was? It was the experience and the life in which Wesley was interested and not the formulation 48 of a theory. His concern was not the promotion of the doctrine of holiness, but the spread of Scriptural holiness. Methodism is a doctrine of religion rather than the doctrine of an institution. Methodism revived the central question that has come to the fore in every great religious epoch, not the question of doctrine, but of the nature of religion itself, of the true relation of man and God. The supreme,mark of salvation from sin was the spirit of love, it is from this point of view that Wesley's teaching about holiness is to be understood. The method of it about which his followers disputed was a lesser interest to him. His first concern was to declare that there was no Christianity without holiness of life, his second was that holiness was a gift of God as well as man's own spirit and life, his third was that at heart this holiness meant love. Only in part did Methodist leaders see that their message called for a new theology. Mr. Wesley asserts the High-Churoh belief in baptismal regeneration of infants. There is a sweeping assertion of total depravity. Infants are guilty and sinful, even before there is any personal sin, though he does not allow the eternal damnation of those who die in infancy. The Augustinian conception of original sin (which Wesley held) of man as void of all impulse and capacity for good, results necessarily in the Augustinian idea of election and irresistible grace, while Methodism brings a free gospel to free men who can choose and respond. Here the later Methodist Theologians, beginning particularly with Pope, pointed out the failure of Calvinism. Calvinism held that men had no grace at all. Even Wesley felt the need of some modification. So the Methodist Theologians proceeded to modify the doctrine and that modification has been the generally accepted Protestant position. These later Methodist Theologians did not, any more than the earlier, work out a theology which consistently and fully expressed that conception of the Christian religion for which Methodism stands. Looking to the future along the lines which Methodist Theology may proceed: The Doctrine of Man: If human nature is totally corrupt from infancy, then we can only wait for a miracle to transform this child fr©m a state of sin to a state of grace. This is not the Method ist conception. The only childhood Methodists know is oneJin which God is present by His Spirit in the beginning in which there are impulses and capacities to which we can appeal in Christian nurture. Human in which the primacy belongs to instinct and impulse with ten dencies to good and evil, is a nature which must be transformed, and which can be transformed, not extirpated but redeemed. Holiness : With too many of Wesley's followers holiness became merely an experience to be professed; with Wesley it was a life to be lived. To the theory of holiness he gives little place; the moral demand he makes plain, and to it he gives constant emphasis. Holiness is the spirit of love applied to the relations of life. Holiness is the placing of all life under the power and rule of Christ. In considering Methodist Theology there is a danger as indicated by Bishop Hoss at the Ecumenical Conference in 1901: If Mr Wesley could know the extent to which many of his followers have fallen 49 into the habit of repeating ipsissima verba his teachings as if they were the final and oonclusive statements of the truth, he would turn over in his grave and groan; for he himself, far from being the slave of tradition, was the freest and boldest mind of his generation. Under conditions of our human life, the spirit must always cre ate itself forms if it is to maintain itself in the world. The tragedy is, that the forms tend to become fixed, and then take first place (it is so much easier to maintain forms than the spirit) and to crush out the life they meant to serve. The true prophet has always stood for the .primacy of the spirit. Here prophets stand against the priests, bidding men to deal justly and to love kindness and to walk humbly with God. Jesus called man from rules to love God and men. Paul stood against reviving legalism. Luther called men to 'freedom of a Christian man'. In this succession we find Wesley, who by his 'Plain Account of the People called Method ists ',■'Thoughts upon Methodism.' 'The Character of a Methodist 'Earnest Apneal to men of Reason and Religion.' and 'A Plain Account of Genuine Christianity*, showed his interest in the value of true religion. Wesley's conception of religion did not come at once and was not gained without a struggle. Pietisan, asceticism. ,and ritualism were all present in that little student group at Oxford. The Moravian influence marked a great step forward but did not bring Wesley to his goal, though we might see here the real starting point of the Methodist movement. We can sum up Wesley's conception of religion as follows; religion is a man's life in personal fellowship with God, known in conscious experience, received by the grace of God through His Spirit, lived in holiness of life and especially in that spirit of love which forms the Christian fellowship and issues in Christian service. He valued doctrinal statements, and appreci ated ritual, but these do not give the place of his emphasis. To Wesley, religion is no other than love; the love of God and of all mankind, loving God with all the mind, soul, and strength, and loving every soul which God hath made. The thirteenth chapeter of first Corinthians, he declares, contains the whole of religion. In the fellowship of his societies Wesley welcomes Anglicans, Calvinists, Quakers, and Roman Catholics. The acceptance of creeds on the part of applicants for membership was not compulsory. Says Wesley, ' A man may assent to three or three and twenty creeds, and yet have no Christian faith at all'. Feither do wrong opinions disqualify a man in his estimation,'For opinions or terms, let us not destroy the work of God. Dost thou love and serve God? It is enough.' Methodism did not work out its theology at the beginning; it may be fairly said that: that work is yet to be done. There are many reasons. Wesleyls. mind.'.was better at analysis than construction, better for assimilating others' thoughts than original thinking. Wesley's practical duties coincided with his natural adaption = . His teaching was largely the practical task of mediating to his peo ple what he had gained from others. The theological thinking of early Methodism was, practically all of it, incidental to the work ... 50 of preaching; the controversy with Calvinism was in the main sim ply the defense of its message. Methodism did not eliminate the idea of power and sovereignty, which was dominant in Calvinism, but gave the primacy to moral character and made power always subject - to righteousness and love. The relation between God and man thus became primarily ethical and personal and free, the relation of Father and Son. To Calvinism, God was all, man was totally depraved, a mere puppet in God's hands. But to Methodists, a man could respond to the call of God and with his free choice could secure the help of God in free moral fellowship. God's gift and man's task go hand in hand. We need Wesley's spirit today. He writes significantly:'In our first conference it was agreed to examine every point from the foundation. Have we not been somewhat fearful in doing this? What were we afraid of? Of overturning our first principles? Whoever was afraid of that, it was a vain fear. If they are false, the soon er they are overturned the better. Let us all pray for a willingness to receive the light.' This Methodist Theology will lay stress upon the abiding presence of the Spirit of.God who did not cease to guide his church when the Apostles or Church Fathers passed away. •Ittwilllremain a theology based upon the historic faith, upon the great conviction of Christianity that God has come to men for life and salvation in Jesus Christ; but it will do so in the freedom of the faith, the faith that rests back upon the inner conviction, that understands and proves by the experience of life, that knows but one truth, and welcomes it from every source. From Dr. Rail I draw the following conclusions bearing on the doctrine of entire sanctification; Methodism was not a doctrinal reform, but a religious awakening. Methodism has not had a theol ogy of its.own. Wesley was not primarily a thinker, but a practical man. He was concerned in promoting holiness, not a theory of holi ness. He was a mediator of other men's ideas rather than a creator of ideas. He was not consistent in his thinking, especially in his views of original sin' and free salvation. Wesley's theology was not fixed apparently, and he gloried in the fact that such was the case. It seems that Wesley did not intend that his theological views should be the final and conclusive statements of theological truth. Therefore the doctrine of entire sanctification as held by Wesley need not be held today even by the true heirs of Wesley, later thinking shows that Wesley was mistaken as to the method of 51 acquiring the experience of entire sanctification. Methodist theol ogy is not static, but ever in a state of flux, always in the pro cess of being made, but never made. Therefore a view held by Wesley need not necessarily characterize a loyal Methodist of today. One might disagree with Wesley on such.a vital matter as entire sancti fication, and yet be loyal to Methodist ideals and Methodist doctrines William Henry Bernhardt, of the Iliff School of Theology in a personal letter : Methodist theology during the time of Mr. Wesley was based upon a dualistic philosophy. A rebirth or new birth, from above, was consid ered essential. If that be so, then the process of salvation is one from a state of total damnation to one of entire sanctification. Believing, as he did, in a full salvation, John Wesley preached entire sanctification. Methodist theology today, especially because of the work of Borden P.Bowne, is monist ic rather than dualist ic in its■philosophical aspects. God is immanent and not absent. That being the ease, there is no such as total damnation nor entire sanctification. Rather, every man is in the process of being saved. So long as we are human and finite we do well to leave to one side all discussion of "Entire Sanct ification"? Furthermore, the very terms 'saved' and'lost' are dropping out of our vocabulary today. Religion, as Shai1er Mathews puts it, 'is the effort to get into help-receiving relationships with the personal- ity-producing forces of the.universe.' We are personal and we are seeking to grow more personal. There is not any such category as 'entire personalization' in the conception of religion stated above. The!chief reason for our unwillingness to use the term 'entire sanctification' is that it is too absolutistic for present day thought. Absolutism rests back upon the conception of an infallible revelation of some kind. With that type of revelation it is conceiv able that we could speak of 'entire sanctification' or 'entire personalization'^ but without such authoritative revelation we have no occasion to use the phrase. We are seeking, in the light of our fullest knowledge, for the highest type of life possible for us under existing conditions. But that our present ideal is equivalent to 'entire sanctification' we do not claim. So far ^as my own teach ing is concerned, the term or idea of 'entire sanctification' has no place or meaning. The foregoing letter confirms Dr. Rail's suggestion that a person might disagree with Mr. Wesley on the subject and still be a loyal Methodist, even a Rrofeasor in a Methodist Theological Seminary. 52 Albert C.Knudson, Boston School of Theology, in a personal letter; It is,I.think important to distinguish between the traditional theoretical hasis of the doctrine of entire sanctificat ion and its practical aspects. I am heartily in sympathy with what the early Methodists had in mind when the preached entire sanctification. They aimed at a deepening and strengthening of the religious life which was greatly needed. And that aspect of the doctrine, I think, will never become obsolete. But the theoretical basis of the doctrine, as it was incidentally worked out by Wesley and a good many of his followers, seems to me seriously defective. It rested upon a mis taken psychology and rested altogether too much on a single emotional experience. The figures of speech that were used about removing the roots of sin,were, it seems to me, often misleading. They suggested a kind of metaphysical change in the soul,when, as a matter of fact, all that ought to have been meant was a radical change in the inner life and experience. So I might say that I believe in a life of entire sanctification but not in the theory of sanctification. A Professor in a Methodist Theological Seminary, a leader of thought in Methodist circles, when asked to give answers to the following questions: Why has the Methodist Church changed views on the doc trine of entire sanctification? What is the present view of Methodist leaders today on the doctrine of entire sanctification? answered sunstantially as follows; Since Wesley's day the entire psychology of religious experience has changed. In Wesley's time and in later early Methodism, the stages of religious experience, as conviction, regeneration, justification, and entire sanctification were conceived as definite stages in the Christian man’s experience. The early Methodist thinkers thought that there were definite steps in religious experience that had a corresponding exactness to such theological terms as conviction, regeneration, justification, and entire sanctification. Wesley and his followers found from Biblical study and theolog ical study certain doctrines, certain forms of thinking, certain moulds of thought. They naturally assumed that since certain forms of thinking were found in the theology of their day, that all relig ious experience cast itself into these moulds. Were not these thought forms found in the Inspired Word? There was practically no inductive study of religious experience in Wesley's time. As a result, if a person's religious experiences did not correspond to the Biblical thought forms, that person was pronounced inadequate as to his faith or unsound in the faith. The method of the study of religious experience was almost wholly deduc tive. The deductive method laid down certain assumptions concerning religious experience. This method required religious experiences to fit into these deductive moulds. According to this method, people 55 • • were rigidly divided into the convicted, the regenerated, the entirely sanctified, the backslidden, eet. There was no place in the thinking of the day for experiences that did not find their designations under one of these classifications. This method was scholastic; it was purely deductive. It fitted people to ideas; it fitted students to the courses of study, and fitted religious experiences into preconceived moulds of thought. On the other hand, the inductive study of religious experience consists of the experiences themselves rather than the forms of thought deductively arrived at. This inductive study finds it very difficult to fit all religious experience into the old forms of thought. The modern religious thinker in his inductive study of religious experience attempts to find all possible knowledge of man in the study of such sciences as anthropology, psychology, and sociology as well as theology. This inductive study. This induc tive study indicates that it is presumptions to attempt to measure experiences as rigidly as the older thinkers attempted to tag and classify religious states. The inductive, or scientific method attempts to fit forms of thought to human experience rather than to pour human experience into preconceived moulds as did the theo logians of the Deist ic-Scholastic period of human thought. This inductive study is used in the modern study of religion as in other fields of thinking in order to arrive at the , truth concerning religious experience. Ideas on religion were accepted as truth on mere authority in the pre-scientific days, but today observation and experience must offer testimony to the truth of an idea asking for acceptance. As to religious experience : Surrender to God's will, a consecra tion to His service, a sincere repentance of one’s sins brings God to the human heart. As long as such person is surrendered to God’s will and uses the means of growth, such person will grow in grace; he will become more Christ-like. But to designate any stage in the Christian's life as regeneration, justification, or entire sanctifi cation is not satisfactory in the light of the modern inductive study of religion. The human spirit is intangible; the work of God in the soul is unseen by others and not understood fully by the person who has the experience. Who can measure by a human thought form the work of God in the human soul? It is unreasonable that the thought forms of another age that were the results of deductive methods of think ing should be used to measure religious experience of today. What we should strive for is the consciousness of God. But no stage of this growing God-consciousness should be designated as entire sanctification. The term has been almost forgotten by the Methodists of today. There are two reasons for the neglect of this doctrine: (l) the new method of thinking, (2) the fanaticism of the protagonists of entire sanctification. At no stage of my experience could I say that I was sanctified. 54 Edwin Lewis, Professor of Systematic Theology, Drew Seminary: All that men ever meant hy the Holy Spirit can he expressed in one single phrase 'God-with-us’. There are many grades of the experience of God-with-us, because the experience itself is under law. If we could learn that law and fulfil it perfectly, wet could have a per fect experience of.the Holy Spirit, which is the same as saying that we could be in a perfect relationship with God. Whatever a man does or feels under a conviction of the divine will is for him an experi ence of the Holy Spirit. It is God reaching him in the only way in which it is possible to know him. God may, of course, seek to reach man and evoke no response whatever» This divine seeking may still be regarded as the action of the Holy Spirit, but after all, it is only because some men have actually found God that there is reason to believe that he is seeking others. Therefore it is only the completed experience that is really significant. When the experience is complete, we can analyze to ascertain its conditions, and we know that if a man finds God it is because he is already able to find him and because God is already seeking him. What has led men to believe in the Holy Spirit is not merely a conviction that God seeks them, but the realization that He finds them and they find Him. The Holy Spirit is, so to speak, a divine-human fusion. It is knowing God and God entering into the life of man. There are there fore two questions Ifo be asked:: (l) What are the human conditions to man knowing God? Here we find the need for various instrumental ities: nature, social contacts, art, music, literature, and other forms of human achievement for definite religious instruction, for personal belief and faith, especially in relation to Jesus Christ. All this assumes on man's part a fundamental capacity for God. (2) What are tthe divine conditions to God entering into the life of man? If there is in man a capacity for God, which is presupposed in the .God-with-man experience, there, must be on God's part a capacity for man. This divine capacity .for man, or, more exactly, this power on .the part of God to enter into the life of man, is what we mean by the Holy Spirit on its so-called objective side. Summarizing the foregoing discussion: The Holy Spirit means "God- with-us”. The holy Spirit on the objective side is the Divine capacity for man. There are many grades of this"God-with-us" of this divine fusion because this experience is under law. If we fulfil the law of this divine fusion, we can have a perfect experience of the Holy .Spirit, that is a perfect experience of God. Instead of two grades religious experience: regeneration and sanctificat!on, as held by second blessing advocates, which bring us into perfect relation with God there are many grades of "God-with-usDr. Lewis seems to think that the Christian life proceeds toward perfection by a great number of crises. 55 Olin Alfred Curtis « late professor of Systematic Theology at Drew Theological Seminary suggests what seems to he a contradiction in Wesley's teaching on the matter of growth into sanctification; In Sermon GVII he finds these words : As in the natural birth, a man is born at once, and then grows larger and stronger by degrees; so in the spiritual birth, a man is born at once and then gradually increases in spiritual stature and strength. The new birth, therefore, is the first point of sanctifi cation, which may increase more and more unto the perfect day. He finds other passages to have the same drift. To harmonize this view of growth with Wesley's other statements, some have said that he believed Christian Perfection to be obtained either by growth or by instant and crucial faith. Quoting Curtis directly : But the truth, I think, is that Wesley regarded the decisive stroke in attainment as always instantaneous, growth being but a preparation for the stroke, or an after work in utilization and enlargement. I am sure of wesley's doctrine of Christian Perfection, as sure of its essential import as I am that I walk on the earth; but I am unable to relate my view, in an exact way, to all his statements, or even to all his very important statements. I will give my personal concep tion without quotation and without defense. According to John Wesley, a sinner had three things the matter with him: First, he is guilty; secondly, he is morally helpless; and thirdly, his inherent and inherited disposition is wrong. Or as I would say, the individuality is out of harmony with the ideal of the moral person. When a sinner is justified the guilt is by grace canceled. When he is regenerated, he receives a nucleus of power, not enough to exterminate the wrong disposition, but enough to fight it to a standstill. In Christian Perfection, there is no such fight with the disposition, 'no civil war at all’, for the wrong impulse never enters the consciousness as motive. How, when you ask, 'What becomes of the wrong disposition?' Wesley can give no fundamental answer, for the simple reason that he was mixed in his psychology. My opinion rather is that he was a very crude realist, but usually restless under that unspeakable curse, and trying to break away, without ever being able fully to accomplish his purpose. 'This slavery to the lump' is not surprisii^ , if we only remember that many of the recent Christian books, and many more of the modern scientific books have been written with an underlying realism so gross that any serious thinker should have been unwilling to grant it toleration at any time since the death of Immanuel Kant; and I almost said at any time since the death of Plato 56 But Wesley does this much for us; he holds that the civil-war in the perfect Christian is rendered impossible by love, supreme love to God and man. Whether the natural disposition is extirpated or only overwhelmed, it does not appear in the consciousness full to brim with love.I Henry C Sheldon, in History of Christian Doctrine, discusses Chris tian Perfection as follows: Christian Perfection in the Wesleyan sense implies freedom from in- bred sin, the complete dominance of love over voluntary exercises, and such a service to God as is competent to powers which indeed have been given a right direction, but which fail of that ideal measure which they would have had if man had not been a sinner. It is not therefore, Adamic or Angelic perfection. It does not secure from mistakes in judgment and consequent mistakes in action; it does not imply objective faultlessness. It carries with itself immunity neither from temptation nor from apostasy. It is simply loving God with all the heart, freedom from underlying appetencies and conscious activities from anything contrary to love. The standard (of entire sanctification) is taken from the possibilities of a recovered being and not from those of the unfallen.P Among Methodists Christian Perfection has always had a place of an acknowledged doctrine though claiming very different degrees of prac tical interest and advocacy from different representatives. In the present(1885) while it is advocated by not a few after the manner of John Wesley, many in effect set it forth as a possible ideal to be progressively approached than in a goal lying immediately before every well-instructed Christian, the prize of present faith and consecration.*^ William Burt Pope. Author of Compendium of Christian Theology. Pope quotes Wesley to show that entire sanctification is an instan taneous work, to be received not at death, but at the present moment, that there is a gradual work both before and following the reception of the experience. He quotes these words from Wesley: That Christian Perfection is that love of God and our neighbor which implies deliverance from all sin ; that it is received merely by faith; that it is given instantaneously, in one moment ; that we are to ex pect it, not at death, but every moment ; that now is the accepted time,, now is the day of salvation. But again: as to the manner: I believe this perfection is always wrought in the soul by a simple act of faith; consequently in an instant. But I believe in a gradual work. 1 _Curti.s-„ Christian Faith, 382-3 2 Sheldon;, history of Christian Doctrine, 3 dbld,. -S7:e~ Vol. II, 376 57 both preceding and following that instant. As to time. I believe this instant generally is the instant of death, the moment before the soul leaves the body. But I believe it may be ten, twenty, or forty years before. I believe it is usually many years after jus tification. I believe it may be within five years or five months after it; I know no conclusive argument to the contrary. It must be many years after justification, I would like to know how many. But in some this change was. not instantaneous. They did not perceive the instant when it was wrought. It is often diffcult to perceive the instant a man dies; yet there is an instant when life ceases. And if ever sin cease, there must be a last moment of its existence, and the first moment of our deliverance from it.l The uniqueness of the Methodist doctrine of Christian Perfection emphasized by Pope : •The Methodist doctrine is the only one that has consistently and boldly maintained the possibility of the destruction of the carnal mind, or the inbred sin of the fallen nature. It is true that certain mystics held something almost equivalent to the doctrine; and that the Pietists of the school of Spener included the annihilation of the Old Adam among the privileges of God’s children. But the utmost con templated by them was the gradual suppression of the evil nature through the ascendency of love. How it is undeniable that a very large portion of the Methodist teaching takes that ground: the. destruction of the carnal mind. The combination of the two elements, the negative annihilation of the principle of sin, and the positive diffusion of perfect love, is, it may be said, peculiar to Method ist theology as such.^ Pope denies a second blessing as meaning more than an intensifica tion of the first blessing, or that the second blessing is more than an unrestrained outpouring of the same Spirit that gave the first : Hever do we read of a higher life that is other than the intensifi cation of the lower; never of a'second blessing that is more than an unrestrained outpouring of the same Spirit that gave the first. 'Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed?', means,'Did you receive the Holy Ghost on believing?’ and cannot refer to a reception of the higher gift superinduced on a lower gift which was without the spirit of entire consecration. The only instance in which Christ ians are said to be without the Spirit is that one in which St. Jude describes the fallen state of men who, to use St. Paul’s words, 'having begun in the Spirit were now made perfect in the flesh': had reached the lamentable issue of being sensual again.* 1. Bone'.. Comioendium of Christian Theology. Vol. Ill, 91 2 .Pope., Compenduum of Christian Theology, TqI. II, 95 3 Rig/ 44 58 Pope combat s the tendency in his time of some teachers who speak of Christian Perfection as the entrance into a new order of life, as a Pentecostal visitation superadded to the state of conversion : There has been a tendency among some teachers of religion in modern times so to speak of Christian Perfection as to seem to make it the entrance into a new order of life, one namely of higher conse cration under the influence of the Holy Ghost. That this higher life is the secret of entire consecration there can be ho doubt* But. there is no warrant in Scripture for making it a new dispensation of the Spirit, or pentecostal visitation superadded to the state of conversion.Entire Sanctification is the stronger energy of a Spirit already in the regenerate, not a Spirit to be sent down from on high. This Kingdom of God is already within, if we would let it come in its perfection. The word ’since' in the passage, 'Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed', has no warrant in the original Greek. This interpretation tends to diminish the value of regener ation, which is itself a life hid with Christ in God; and it undoubt edly has some affinity with the ancient principle of Montanism; just as on the other hand, the asserters of a necessary inherence of sin until death, betray a lurking and most subtle affinity with Gnosti cism. I Pope warns against a certain fanatical ignorance of certain teach ers who attribute to transient crises of the religious life the fin ished work of holiness; A certain fanaticism of devout ignorance has in every age led enthu siasts to mistake transient effusions of heavenly influence for the finished work of holiness. This error, venial in one sense, but very hurtful in another, is the result of a too prevalent separation between the sanctification of Christian as a free gift and the ethi cal means appointed for its attainment. Sometimes it springs from forgetting that the present posture of the soul is a very different thing from its abiding character. Opponents of the Scriptural doc trine make use of a fact which must be admitted, that religious enthusiasm often outruns discretion.^ John Miley. Author of a Systematic Theology, is essentially a fol lower of John Wesley in his views of sanctification. He believes that entire sanctification may be attained by the second blessing method, but contends that the second blessing is not the only method of re ceiving the experience: 1 Pope, Compendium of Christian-Theology, Vol. iil, 44 2 Ibid.. 64r”65 59 The privilege of entire sanctification is at once so thoroughly scriptural and Wesleyan that from it there is among us the rarest dissent. Yet notea few hesitate respecting the sharply defined secong-hlessing view. We do not share this hesitation, so far as that view represents a possible mode of entire sanctification; " though we object to any insistence that such is the only possible mode. Right here is the occasion of unfortunate differences among us. However much of the evil consequences might be avoided, much of it would be avoided through mutual forbearance. Let those who rigidly hold the, second-blessing view preach sanctification in their own way, but let them be tolerant of such as preach it in a manner somewhat different; and let such as hesitate respecting that special view be tolerant of those for whom it possesses great interest. All ministers who believe in the privilege of full sal vation can preach it in good faith, indeed they are not at liberty to omit this preaching. Who shall say that the only permissible or profitable preaching of sanctification is that which prescribes an exact mode of attain ment ? The doctrine itself, and not any rigid form into which it may be east is the real interest; the privilege itself the great priv ilege; the actual attainment the highest. And if with one consent, even without regard to definite modes, we should earnestly preach a full salvation; preach it as a common privilege and duty ; preach it as the true aim of every Christian life, surely there would be a large gain in a wider spiritual life while many would enter into the fullness of the blessing of Christ.1 Underlying the second blessing,view of sanctification is the doc trine of a common incompleteness of the work of regeneration. Here in the soul is renewed but not wholly purified. Something of deprav ity remains which is antagonistic to the spiritual life. This de pravity is not strong enough to bring that life into bondage to itself, yet this depravity is strong enough to impose a burden upon the work of maintaining this new life. The second part of the second blessing doctrine is that the regenerate shall come to acute consciousness of this incompleteness and of his need of a fuies8 of spiritual life ; that the experience shall be analogous to those experiences which preceded regeneration and be juÉt as deep and thorough. The fullness of sanctification shall be instant ly attained; there shall be a new experience of a great and gracious change just as consciously such as received in regeneration. That Mr Wesley held to such views there can be no doubt, but we think it would be wrong to say that he allowed no instances of entire sanctification except in this definite mode. We see no per plexity for faith in the possibility of such an instant subjective purification. Through the divine agency the soul may as quickly be cleansed as the leper, as quickly purified in whole as in part. We admit an instant partial sanctification in regeneration, and therefore may admit the possibility of an instant entire sanctifi cation. 1 Miley, Systematic Theology, Vol. II» 370 60 In 1767 Mr. Wesley wrote thus: 'Some thoughts occurred to me this morning concerning Christian Perfection, and the manner and time of receiving it, which I believe may he useful to set down: 1. By perfection I mean the humble, patient, gentlë love of God and our neighbors, ruling our tempers, words and action. 2. As to the manner, I believe this perfection is always wrought in the soul by a simple act of faith; consequently in an instant. But I believe a gradual work, both preceding and following that instant. 3. As to time, I believe this instant generally is at the instant of death, the moment before the soul leaves the body. But I believe it may be ten, twenty or forty years before* I believe it is usually many years after justification, but that it may be five years or five months after it I know no conclusive argument to the contrary. 4. Is death to sin and renewal in love gradual or instantaneous? A man may be dying for some time, yet he does not, properly speak ing, die till the instant the soul is separated from the body, and in that instant he lives the life of eternity. In like manner he may be dying to sin for some time; yet he is not dead to sin until sin is separated from the soul, and in that instant he is fhll of the life of love.'I L.P.Young, in Studies in Church History and Doctrine, appearing:in 1890, for the use of the Epworth Leagues; put out by the Methodist Book Concern, contains some very interesting material on the doc trine of sanctification:' What do we as a church teach respecting the doctrine of sanctifica tion? Ans. 1st. Negatively; 2d. Positively. 1st. negatively,- (1) We do not teach angelic perfection. (2) We do not teach Adamic perfection. (3) We do not teach freedom from temptation. (4) We do not teach perfect knowledge. (5) We do not teach perfect physical health. (6) We do not teach absolute perfection. That belongs only to God. 2d. Positively,- (1) We do teach the complete renovation of the entire nature. (2) We teach the destruction of the body of sin. (3) We teach the extermination of the 'old man' or the old Adam. (4) We teach the regaining of the essential elements of Adam’s unfallen nature: Supreme love to God. 1 MTPey,, Systematic Theology, Vol. II, 374 oa. What was said hy its-.founder to he the prûvideht'.ialdesign of Method ism. Ans. It was designed to spread Scriptural holiness. Is sanctification possible prior to regeneration? Ans. It is not. May all regenerated believers be sanctified in the sense in which the term is used? Ans. They may. How is the blessing to be obtained? Ans. By faith in thé Lord Jesus Christ, and in the divine efficacy of his atoning blood. When may this blessing be received by those who properly seek it? Ans. At any moment. Is this state of grace demanded of all God's people? Ans. It is. Can any one enter heaven without holiness? Ans. They cannot. Thus in the above extract that as late as 1890, the official studies put out for the members of the Epworth League, sanctification was taught as a definite experience to be received by faith instan taneously. Miner Raymond was professor of Systematic Theology at Garrett Biblical Institute. He published a Systematic Theology in 1877. He is essentially Wesleyan in his views of sanetification, as the following excerpts will show: God possesses all possible perfections in Infinite degree. Thoughn man is limited by his finite existence and his faculties are im paired by sin, yet the nature of God warrants the expectation that it is God’s will that holiness shall become actual in the personal experience of His obedient children. The Scriptures confirm this expectation by commanding man to love God with all his heart. Entire sanctification is not usually, if ever, contemporary with regeneration. Regeneration is, in most cases of Christian experience, if not all, initial sanctification, not complete, perfect renewal. The regenerated man is not, at the moment of his régénérât ion, 'wholly sanctified'; he is not born into the Kingdom a full-grown person; his creation is not in the stature of the fullness of Christ, nor is he a child unto perfect spiritual life and health. A proud man is converted. This experience does not give him perfect free dom from pride. If saved from pride, such a case is a rare excep tion. A high-tempered, quarrelsome man is converted; thiss experi ence does not give him perfect meekness. A thief is converted. In most cases of thieves' conversions, such persons are not wholly emancipated till after many a struggle and many a baptism of holy 1 Yo u n g Studies in Church History and Doctrine, 85 62 cleansing. Love is the fulfilling of the law. Therefore if perfection is to be found, it must be found in the perfection of love. The Scriptures speak of perfect love as actually attained. -Sanctification being a matter of experience is incapable of logi-cal definition. Fo experience can be defined. Sanctification is salvation from inbred sin, not salvation from all the inherited defects of the first transgression, but complete in the sense of being a ftill restoration to original righteousness, not Adamic perfection. Limitations and imperfections abide while man remains in the earthly tabernacle. Thus perfection is in the affections( says Mr. Wesley). We understand Mr. Wesley as teaching, that when the Holy Spirit so shedS abroad the love of God in the heart of a man so that man is thereby enabled to love God with all his soul, mind and strength; such a shedding abroad of love is sanctifying a man wholly; this is entire sanctification; the man in such a state as this is a perfect Christian, is cleansed from all unrighteousness, is saved from all sin. The work of sanctification is both progressive and instantaneous; progressive as to acquisition of knowledge and the ability to know, and instantaneous as to the appropriation of the blessing apprehend ed. It may take time to acquire the ability to do, but the doing is a definite act, done in a definite, individual moment. The Spirit may take time in preparing the holy temple for a habitation of God, but he enters and takes full possession, fills the temple with His presence in a single moment. The work may be long in doing, but there is an instant when it is done, completed, finished. This is obviously the ordinary method; but who can say it is the only method? Many testify to instantaneous sanctification, but no man's experi ence should be the basis for another man's faith. I may not believe that I may be saved miraculously because my brother has been so saved; it may be the means, if wisely used, of leading me to faith; but faith itself must be founded’ on the Word of God and the workings of the Spirit in my own mind. If God, by His Spirit clearly revealed to me, permits me, in ref erence to anything that I shall ask of Him, even to the removing of a mountain, to say, 'I will not let Thee go except thou bless me,' I may so say; in such a ease God will surely honor my faith and answer my prayer. That thousands have come into full salvation, and have obtained it, we do not doubt; and that it is the privilege of all believers by patient continuance in well-doing and by dili gent attention to the means of religious culture, to so grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour as to attain unto the stature of the fullness of Christ, and live many years on earth in the full enjoyment of perfect love, we think is fully attested by the scripture.I Summary of Raymond's view of entire sanctification: Entire Sancti fication is not perfection in the absolute sense; it is only perfec tion in love. It is the destruction of inbred sin, which was not destroyed in regeneration. Sanctification is progressive as to 1_'Raym'oÆ, Systematic Theology, Vol. II, 372 preparation for the completion and finishing of the work, but in stantaneous as to completing and finishing. There is a moment when the Christian is entirely sanctified. Instantaneity is the ordinary method, but who can say that this is the only method because no man's experience should bp the basis of another man's belief. The only legitimate basis of a man's belief is his own experience plus the authority of the Scriptures. If person found grounds for be lief in instantaneous: sanctificat ion in the Scriptures and in addi tion experienced instantaneous sanctification, that person would have reasonable grounds for believing in instantaneous sanctifica tion. But such an experience on one person's part would not be a reasonable ground for another's belief in such a doctrine. Conse quently the person receiving the experience of sanctification instantaneously has no right to question another person's experi ence who finds it by some other method. 64 THE ORIGIF OF THE FREE METHODIST CHURCH CHARTER II - John - A. Faulkner, in his hook, entitled "The Methodists"makes the following Gomment eocerning the origin of the Free Methodist Church : The only church that sprung out of the Methodist ground hy reason of dissatisfaction with the worldliness of the church and with its abandonment of the heroic ideal of the elder time, is the Free Meth odist Church, which was organized in Pekin Few York in 1860. It was the outgrowth of a profound agitation in Western Few York in the fifth and sixth decades of the nineteenth century, and was occasioned by the alleged lapse of the church from its primitive testimony, (1) as to slavery, (2) as to holiness, (3) as to non- conforming to the world, and (4) as to evangelical conception of doctrine. I Bishop Hogue, in his history of the Free Methodist Church makes the following comment on Professor’s Faulkner’s statement concerning the origin of the Free Methodist Church: The foregoing is a correct statement of the case with one exception. In meaning, the items regarding which the Methodist Episcopal Church was conceived of as departing from its primitive testimony, ’(i)! and ’(2)’ should be transposed. It was the lapse of the church from its primitive testimony concerning holiness, first of all, that occasioned the profound agitqtion of which Professor Faulkner writes The agitation as to the church’s testimony regarding slavery, non^ conformity to the world and evangelical conception of doctrine, grew out of the church’s attitude on the Church’s attitude on the subject of holiness, or entire sanctification, and was altogether subordinate thereto.^ The Free Methodist Church did not originate in secession from parent body. Those who formed the Free Methodist Church were loyal to the parent church unto the last. Hot until there were excluded, as they belieyed unjustly and unlawfully, from its pale, and even denied the right of appeal to the General Conference, did they entertain the idea of forming a new church. The Introduction from the first Free Methodist Discipline throws light on this matter: 1 Faulkner, The Methodists. 175 2 Hogue, The History of the Free Methodist Church, Vol. I, 4 65 The Free Methodist Chur oh had its origin in necessity, and not in choice. It did not grow out of a secession, nor out of an unsuc cessful attempt to bring about a reform in the government of the church. Those concerned in its formation never expected to sep arate from the Methodist Episcopal Church. Separation did not occur until they were unjustly excluded from its pale. They sought redress at the proper tribunal: it was not granted. Even a candid hearing was denied them. Thus thrown out, and the possibility of a restoration being cut off, amd believing that God still called them to labor for the salvation ofrsouls, they had no alternative but to form a new organization. In doctrine, discipline, and spirit they were Methodists, and hence they could not offer themselves to another denomination. The issue upon which they were thrust out was between a dead formalism and the life of godliness and power, and so they could not feel at home with those branches of the Methodist family into whose formation other questions mainly entered. I According to Free Methodist writers, there was, toward the middle of the nineteenth century, a manifest anbandonment of the heroic ideals of the older time . The Methodist Church of that day had come to accept very largely 'the Moravian view of sanctification, or holiness : a person is sanctified wholly at the. moment of justifi cation; entire sanctification and justification being in one and the same instant. In her doctrinal standards, Methodism retained the doctrine of entire sanctification in its verbal form, but there was a general drift away from the same,especially among her ministry. It was gener ally ignored and by not a few ministers treated with contempt. This neglect led to looseness with regard to the new birth, the witness of the Spirit and practical holiness in many important details. The prevailing types of experience became shallow, and former fervor of Methodist worship was generally treated with fanaticism, which became more liable to the castigation of discipline than the plainest viola tion, of the general rules. During the period of agitation which led up to the formation of the Free Methodisjr Church slavery was an all- absorbing question in 1 Hogue, The History of the.Free Methodist Church, Vol. I, 4 66 the Methodist Episcopal Church as well as the nation? The church for years had been divided on the slavery question, but strangely enough the division was over the rights of ministers to hold slaves. The right of members to hold slaves was conceded by the Discipline. By the action of the General Conference of 1860 on the subject of slavery, the last vestige of the mandatory prohibition of the evil was toned down to a mere matter of advice, with no penalty attached for the violation of the advisory action. Up to the day that slavery was abolished by the sword there were thousands of slave holders in good standing in the Methodist Episcopal Church. The Methodist Episcopal Church tolerated slavery to the last.^ Still another evidence that Methodism had departed from her origi nal unworldliness and purity was manifest in the extent to which ministers and members had become unequally yoked with Free Masonry and Odd Fellowship. In the excitement that followed the Morgan tragedy the Masonic lodges had generally disbanded. But at length Free Masonry had revived, Odd Fellowship having led the way. A num ber of ministers in the Genesse Conference became identified with one or both of these fraternities. Sharp collisions occurred between these lodge ministers and some of the older conservative laymen in the churches they were called to serve. Of such disagreement, B. T. Roberts, in "Why Another Sect", speaks directly: Men of God, in whose minds the remembrance of the Morgan tragedy was fresh, felt that they could not, in conscience, support men who took tiS-pon,themselves oaths which required them to commit similar crimes, should occasion demand it. Such men(layman) were often put out of the church. But such action brought about dissatisfaction and division.2 According to Bishop Hogue the bond of lodge fellowship became 2 Roberts, Why Another Sect? 48 1 Hogue, The History of the Free Methodist Church, Vol. I, 25 67 stronger among the ministers than church fellowship; this grew into a nefarious lodge machine in the Conference. I quote directly from Hogue : Methodist ministers, in consider able'*'humhers joined the lodges. It became noticable that among these lodge-ministers that the bond of lodge fellowship became stronger than the bond of church and Chris tian fellowship. The preachers who had joined the lodges and the time-serving and timid characters naturally drew together in such a manner as to enable the lodge-ministers to acquire the leadership of the latter and use them as tools for the accomplishment of their purposes; and there can be little doubt that the division of that body which finally spread to the various parts of Methodism result ing in the formation of the Free Methodist Church had its real origin in these very circumstances. ^ There were many men in the Genesse Conference who feared evil consequences would likely arise from the alliance of the lodge- ministers and lodge-member8 of the church. These men earnestly strove to resist the encroachments of the lodge on the church. These protestants had deep conviction that Methodism had been prov identially raised up to spread Scriptural holiness over the land. They also believed that Scriptural holiness could be spread only by holy means and methods. They believed an alliance with the lodge was an unholy alliance. These ministers who held to the old paths, trustful and ignorant of the tactics of the lodge, received their appointments as from the Lord. They did not know that there was a power at work secretly to fill the chief places of the Conference with men who at least were not opposed to the lodges. On the other hand the loyal sons of Metho- ism drew together in suffering and in devotion to I\5ethodist ideals. Here was an issue clearly defined and clearly drawn. The issue was occasioned by the lapse of the church from the ideals of holiness, 1 Hogue, The History of the Free Methodist Church, Vpl. I, 2 5 68 from the ideals on slavery, and the lapse in the matteir of non- oonformity and worldliness; the latter involving the matter of secret societies. Quoting Bishop Hogue again: In fact to sum it all briefly, the issue was on holiness, since the other issues mentioned are all involved in holiness of the Scrip tural type. The effort was honestly made to reform these abuses with out a separation from the Methodist Episcopal Church being necessary, but in vain. These efforts only revealed more ihlly the hopelessness of the situation, and hastened the developments by which those who diligently sought to restore the church to her primitive simplicity and purity were forced to a separation.I Bishop Hogue quotes from the"Cyclonedia of Universal History", Vol. II, page 570, to show that religious organizations, as well as polit ical organizations cannot reform themselves: He who studies the Reformation attentively, will not fail to perceive that the success of the movement in Germany under the leadership of Luther followed two other efforts, not successful, to reach the same result. The first of these, first in time and first in natural conse quence , was the effort of the church to work a reform inside her own organization. Vain Chimera. Fond and foolish credulity to suppose that the thing to be reformed could mend itself, that the abusers should abolish the abuse. The history of the world has not yet fur nished an example of an organization, grown fat and sleek and con scienceless by the destruction of human freedom and the spoilation of mankind that has had the virtue and honesty to make restitution and return to an exemplary life ; nor will such a phenomenon ever occur under the sun. Whether the organization be religious, politi cal, or social, that law is equally irreversible, by which Ephraim is joined to his idols. He and they are bound by an indissoluble tie and will perish together.2 It became more and more evident that a crisis was coming in the Genessee Conference. At the Conference session in Buffalo in 1848 Rev. Eleazer Thomas distributed a pamphlet by Rev. S. L. Burl ingame. ; the subject of the pamphlet was Free Masonry and Odd Fellowship. This pamphlet asserted the belief that the direct tendency of Odd Fellowism was to create parties in the. Conference, in the Church and in civil society ; parties injurious to the cause of God and dangerous to the State. It. asserted further that. , small party of 1 Hogue, The History of the Free Methodist Church, Vol. I, 27 2 Ibid» 30 69 of lodge-ministers, acting in perfect concert, and under the influ ence of an obligation imposed upon its members, deemed by them as sacred, perhaps as an oath, was able to control, in almost any ease a multitude of unsuspecting men who were not under the influences of such affinities. Such combinations would bring a favoritism, on account of attachment to the Order, which would create envyings and jealousies in the ministry, and very much injure all the interests of the Church.I A furore was created by the pamphlet. A breach soon occurred that could not be healed. The prophesy of the Burlingame pamphlet soon had its fulfilment. The secret society ministers labored diligently to induce the young preachers to join the secret societies, giving them to understand that their positions in the Conference would de_- pend upon the party with which they officiated. As fast as they could the lodge ministers took the lodge into the Church and the Church into the lodge. In a few years the power of the lodge was ex ercised to control the affairs of the Church. Bishop Hogue records an instance which tends to confirm the foregoing statement : The Rev. J. B. Alverson, a venerable, respected, and influential mem ber of the Conference, endeavored to dissuade Thomas Carlton from being a candidate for agent of the Book Concern, on the ground that he could not be elected. Carlton replied :'I can command sufficient secret society influence to secure my election? The sequel showed that he knew his reckoning. He was not only elected, but re-elected, and became wealthy.^ The ministers who opposed the Lodge influence ; some of whom later were influence in organizing the Free Methodist Church, were accused of belonging to a secret society known as "Fazarites". In the Cyclo pedia of Methodism, edited by Bishop Simpson, first published in 1878, the statement is made that the movement which resulted in the 1 Hogue, The History of the Free Methodist Church, Vol. I, 30 2 Ibid, 32 70 in the . formation of the Free Methodist Chur oh in 1860, began sever al years earlier in an association of ministers who thought they had not been properly treated by the leading men of the Conference. These men privately adopted a platform, it is alleged, and in this organization were known as lazarites. Dr. J.M.Buckley, in writing of the General Conference of 1860 mentions this organization : This Conference had to consider the appeals of Rev. Benjamin T. Roberts and others, growing out of an agitation in Western Few York, the germs of which appeared as early as 1850, but did not attract general attention till some years later, when an associa tion of ministers was formed within the bounds of the Genessee Conference. They claimed that they had not been properly treated by the leading members of that body; that on account of their prin ciples on certain subjects they were ostracised, and did not receive personal consideration to which their characters and abilities entitled them. They were known as'lazarites’ and their association was at first secret.1 This charge that the origin of the Free Methodist Church origi nated in a secret society is an interesting phenomenon. Jonathan Swift once said that the mere mention of a slander without any proof was sufficient for the belief of that report by many hearers. The only proof ever adduced of the existence of a lazarite Union is based on the writings of a single man, Rev. Joseph McReery. He read a paper before the session of the Genessee Conference which convened at Clean Few York in 1855. At this time McReery particularly stated that he alone constituted the Fazarite Union and that he alone was responsible for the whole affair. Others supposed to be long to this Union corroborated his statement, all agreeing that the whole matter was a creation of McReery*s fancy. McReery virtu ally declared that no such society existed and that the pamphlet presented to the Conference was only a proposal to return to the 1 Buckley, History of Methodism in the United States, 168 71 "Old. Paths". The belief in the existence of a Fazarite secret organization was persistently held by many in spite of the denial of its existence by the author of the pamphlet, McReery. The belief persisted in spite of the persistent denial over the signatures of seventeen members of the Genessee Conference who were accused of being members of such a secret band. Five of these members had been Presiding Eld ers , and four of them were members of the General Conference. Of these seventeen only three ever became members of the Free Methodist Chur ch^ The secret society men of the Genessee Conference secured control of Conference affairs in an adroit manner. For a number of years they did the very thing which they accused their brethren of doing; the combined in secret to control the Conference. Their secret meet ings were used for embarrassing and even crushing those members who refused to submit to their policies. The first attempt to change matters in the Conference appeared to have been in the direction of securing changes in the Presiding Eldership. At the Conference of 1856 about thirty members presented to the Bishop requesting the removal of two Presiding Elders, who were not in sympathy with the secret society element that was trying to gain control of the Con ference., These Presiding Elders were strong advocates of entire sanctification. They were transferred to the Cincinnatti Conference. Another measure was adopted by the secret society party: of defeat ing for admission to the Conference devout young men who they suppos ed would not submit to the control of the secret party. Therefore a number of young men of good standing and good qualities were forced 1 Hogue, The History of the Free Methodist Church, Vol. I, 53 72 to knock at other Conferences for admlssiion. Concerning this action, and indicating it to he the settled purpose of the secret society party, the Buffalo Advocate published the following statement: Hotheads and fanatics, from any quarter, will find it hereafter difficult soil on which to produce any of their mischief or scandal. Some attempted to gain admittance to the Conference at its last session, but were repulsed from the threshold, and passed away, disgusted with the forebodings of order and manliness, which (if) a kind providence permits shall govern hereafter. These, with their sympathyzers in and out of the body, are the agencies employed in writing scandal of those who now hold the reins, and who mean to live and govern for Cod and Holiness, and respectable position.1 At the next session of the Conference charges were preferred against B.T.Roberts; which charges were sustained. The charges against Roberts were based on his published article, "Hew School Methodism". Here follow some extracts which give the general drift of the article : As a denomination we are just as liable to fall by corrupting influ ences as any that have flourished before us. Already there is spring ing up among us a class of preachers whose teaching is very differ ent from the teaching of the fathers of Methodism. In the Cenessee Conference these man act as a body. They number about thirty^ during the last session of the Conference they held several secret meetings in which they conceived a plan to carry their measures and spread their doctrines. They have openly made the issue in the Conference. The Conference is divided. With one party or the other every preach er is in sympathy. It involves nothing less than the nature of Christianity itself. According to the new party in the Conference: the characteristic idea of Christianity is benevolence, and its practical realization is achieved in benevolence. It consecrates the principle of charity, and instructs its votaries in regard to good works as the holiest sacrifice, and the most acceptable which can be brought to the Almighty. Whatever graces be necessary to constitute the inner Christian life, the chief and principal one of these is love to man. The great condition upon which one becomes a participant of the gospel salvation, is some practical exhibition of self-abnegation, of self-sacfifice for the good of others. 'Go sell what thou hast, and give to the poor', were the only terms of salvation which Christ proposed to the young,man, who, otherwise, was not far from the King dom. The Hew School Methodists teach that justification and entire sanc tification are the same; that after a man is pardoned, the only 1 Hogue, The History of the Free Methodist Church, Vol. I, 106 73 / spiritual change he may expect subsequently is simply growth in grace. They do not receive the doctrines on the subject of entire sanctification as taught by Wesley and Fletcher. From their point of view, the means of grace in which an Olin, an Asbury, a Redding and a host of worthies, departed and living, were nurtured to spiritual manhood, must be abolished, and those adapted to the development of genial and humane dispositions estab lished in their places. The lodge must supersede the prayer meet ing and love feast; and the old-fashioned prayer meeting must give way to the social party. The Hew School tîethodists build fine churches and furnish them with pews to accommodate select congregations. They furnish them with organs and melodeons and violins; professional singers execute difficult music for fashionable audiences. The preachers of the Hew School ridicule .singularity ; they encour age by thier silence and in some cases by their example and the ex ample of their wives and children the putting on of gold and costly apparel, and treat with distrust all professions of religious expe rience. When the Hew School men desire to raise money for the bene fit of the church, they recourse to the selling of pews to the high est bidder, to parties for pleasure, oyster suppers, fairs, grab- bags, festivals and lotteries. The lew School appears to depend upon the patronage of the worldly, the favors of the proud and aspiring and the various artifices of worldly policy. Unmistakable indications show that prosperity is producing an in toxicating effect on the church. The change by the General Confer ence in 1852 in the rule of the Discipline requiring that all houses of worship be built plain and with free seats, and that of the last General Conference in the section ..respecting dress, show that too many of us would take down the barrier that hitherto sep- ■ rated us from the world. The Hew Party has succeeded for the most part, in controlling the appointments to the districts and most important stations. If by reason of his obvious fitnèssoany impractical adherent of Primitive'- Methodism has been appointed to a district or first class station, he has usually been pursued and hunted from the position before his constitutional term expired. In eight yeqrs under the réign of the Hew School, the Church has suffered the loss of fifteen per cent in members in one Conference The Seminary at Lima, second to none in the land at the time of the division, by the same kind of management has been brought to the brink of financial ruin. The prevalence of the Hew School of Meth odism has on one Conference brought division and disaster. Let it generally prevail and the glory will depart from Methodism. ^ The publication of this statement gave great offense to the Hew School party and furnished the pretext for the commencement of a series of proscriptions and expulsions which led to the formation 1 Hogue, The History of the Free Methodist Church, Vol. I, 96ff. 74 of the Free Methodist Church. B. T. Roberts was the first victim; he was tried on the charge of Immoral and Unchristian conduct for the writing and publication of the Hew School Methodism'. In corroboration of Mr. Robert’s point of view expressed in his pa per, the following afticle appeared in the editorial columns of the Buffalo Advocate, the organ of the Hew School party, and was reprinted in the Christian Advocate and Journal, now known as the Hew York Christian Advocate: Religious interest in Buffalo: We have none; we have no more than is usual through the year. We do not intend to convey the idea by this that there is any special movement among us, or that there is any marked effort toward getting souls converted, or keeping those convert ed who are already in the thuroh. The great movement among us is, to , determine how far the church can go back to the world and save its semblance to piety, devotion and truth. Hence, many, many church members have become the most frivolous and pleasure-loving and folly- taking part of the town’s people. They love, give and sustain the most popular‘worldly amusements, such as dancing parties, drinking parties, masquerade and surprise parties, and have no disposition to come out from the world and be separate from it. All this may be seen, read and known in more or less of the Buffalo Churches.^ The proscription of the Old School Methodists began it seems v/ith Rev. Joseph McEeery. When Mr. McReery was stationed on the Lyndon- vllle circuit in 1854, he called the people to return to the old paths of Methodism and Primitive Christianity. He read and explained the General Rules, and reminded the members of the obligations in joining the Methodist Church. He also informed them that if they did not wish to obey the rules, they could quietly withdraw. He abolished choir singing and introduced congregat ional singing, and exhorted all, and not one in ten to join in this part of the service. He preached with great fervor and power, and soon a revival resiilted.2 On the Lyndonville charge live a superannuated preacher who was an 1 Hogue, The History of the Free Methodist Church, Vol. I, 106 2 Ibid, 140 75 advocate of the "gradual" theory of holiness. He syrnpathyzed with the dominant party in their attacks on the Old School Methodists. During McReery’s year on the Lyndonville circuit he kept a memoran dum of his pastor's odd, characteristic sayings as they were uttered in the pulpit, hut detached from their original connection. The fol lowing are some of the samples of his objectionable sayings. Leseri- ing a festival: "A whiskered and blanketed blackleg will come along, and pay his quarter for the privilege of fishing a rag baby from a grab bag"l Referring to the opposition he incurred in trying to bring the peo ple back to the old paths, he spoke as follows: Some of the younger boys have taken my mother, the Methodist Church, in her old age, painted her face, curled her hair, hooped her, and flounced her, and jeweled her, and fixed her up, until we can hardly tell her from a woman of the world. How wlien I have taken the old lady, and washed her face, and straightened her hair, dressed her up in modest apparel, so that she looks like herself again, they make a great hue and cry, and call it abusing mother.^ At the next session of the Conference at Clean, the superannuated preacher read before that body the list of sayings that he had culled from McReery's sermons and arrested.the passage of his character. Charges were brought against him. The prosecution objected to the rul ing of having his trial at Lyndonville, McReery's former charge, and refused to proceed ; so the trial was brought to an abrupt close- At the next session of the Conference the charges against McReery were withdrawn and a series of resolutions reflecting upon him were adop ted. Under these reflections cast upon him he went forth to his charge by Conference appointment to labor for the salvation of souls. At the same session of the Conference charges were preferred against B T Roberts for alleged misrepresentations of his Conference brethren in his article "Hew Methodism". He was sentenced by the 1 Hogue, The History of the Free Methodist Church, Vol. I, 140 2 Ibid. 141 76 Conference to be reproved by the chair. He received the reprimand and appealed to the General Conference. Following his reproof, Roberts was sent to Pekin Hew York. Before reaching his charge, a prominent member of the Hew School party preceded him and informed the members of the charge that their new preacher had been convicted at the Conference of Unchristian con duct. Roberts received a very cold reception as a .consequence of the slander, but began his work. Soon his efforts resulted in a gracious revival. During Roberts’ year at Pekin, George W* Estes, a layman and close friend of Roberts, republished Roberts’ paper ’ ’The Hew School Methodism", together with a short account of Roberts’ trial in pamphlet form. He did this without his pastor's knowledge and de frayed all the expenses out of his own pocket. With regard to the Estes pamphlet, Roberts writes: I never saw the article until some time after it was published, and was in no wise responsible for its publication. But Mr. Estes, a man of means, and an exhorter in the Methodist Episcopal.Church, was responsible, and like a man, he assumed the responsibility. At the last Quarterly Conference in the year, the question of the renewal of his license came up. The Presiding Elder renewed his license without a word of objection, and soon after went to the Annual Conference and voted to expel me from the Conference and Church on the charge of publishing the pamphlet.^ At the Conference, following Roberts’ year at Pekin, the follow ing bill of charges was preferred against him: Charges: I hereby charge Benjamin T*Roberts with unchristian and immoral conduct. First, Contumacy: in disregarding the admonition of this Conference at its last session. ■ Second, In republishing and circulating a document, entitled, ’Hew School Methodism’, the original publication of which had been pro nounced by the Conference as unchristian and immoral conduct. Third, In publishing, or assisting in the publication and circula ting a document, printed in Brockport, and signed by George W Estes, 1 Roberts, Why Another Sect? 160-168 77 and appended to the one entitled, 'The Hew School Methodism’ , and containing among other libels upon this Conference generally, and upon some of the'members particularly, the following, to wit: 1. 'For several years past there has been the annual sacrifice of a human victim at the Conference’. 2. ’Ho man is safe who dares to even whisper a word against this secret inquisition in our midst.’ 3. ’Common crime can command its indulgencies; bankruptcies and adulteries are venial offenses, but opposition to its schemes and policies is a mortal sin, a crime without benefit of clergy.’ 4. ’The .same fifty men who voted Brother Roberts guilty of un- , Christian conduct voted to readmit a brother for the service per formed of kissing a young lady.' 5. 'In a trial, a right that any civil or military court would have allowed him was denied.’ 6. ’A venerable Doctor of Divinity read the ’ "Auto de fe’ ’ sermon, wherein in he sent, in true inquisitorial style Brother Roberts’ body and soul to hell.' 7. 'This honorable Doctor of Divinity is quite efficient in embar rassing the effective preachers in their work and pleading them to hell for the crime of teaching and writing the truth.’ 8. 'There is a clique among us called the Buffalo Regency, conspir ing and acting in secret conclave to kidnap, to drive away, or proscribe and destroy by sham trials and starvation appointments, all who have the boldness to question their supremacy in the Confer ence . ' 9. ’The fearless champions of Methodism are being cloven down one after another in our sight.' 10.’The aforesaid members of the Conference are a monster power which is writhing itsslimy folds around the Church of God and crushing out its life ! Signed, David Hichols, October 11, 1858^ Mr.Roberts, anticipating the arrest of his character, had engag ed a minister from another Conference to.act as his counsel in his defense. But the Bishop ruled that counsel from another Confer ence was not allowable. Mr. Roberts then asked for a change of venue. This was denied. He then urged that he might be tried by a committee according to the provisions of the Discipline. He expressed his preference for a committee small enough so that each member would have a sense of personal responsibility for his action, even though the committee were composed of those most strongly against him, rather than have it go before the entire Conference, where members could hide behind each other. This request was refused. 1 Hogue, The History of the Free Methodist Church. Vol. I, 163--64 78 By majority vote of his Conferenoe, Mr. Roberts was expelled . . from the ministry and membership of the Methodist Episcopal Church, the charges having been sustained. Rev. J* G*32breery was also expelled from the ministry and members ship of the church on a two fold charge of contumacy, embodying substantially and almost identically the same specifica'tions as those in the case of Roberts. At length the laymen within^the Conference became aroused. A Conference of one hundred and ninty five laymen from forty seven circuits and stations met at Albion Hew York December first, 1858. This convention protested against the expulsion of Roberts and McReery, naming the expulsion cruel persecution, and a palpable violation of the freedom of the press and freedom of speech. The convention passed resolutions : expressing confidence in the characters and reputations of the expelled men; they pleaded for recognition of the rights of laymen to be heard in such matters by the officials of the Conference ; that they would not support any minister who had a part in the expulsion of these two men; that the expelled men should receive a reasonable support for the ensu ing year, and appointed a committee for the collection of funds for the same. ^ In accordance with the recommendation of the convention the expel led men gave themselves to laboring throughout the Conference as laymen, having first:united with the Church on probation, believ- it was the right and proper thing to do. They also received liscense to exhort. 1 Hogue, History of the Free Methodist Church, Vol. I, 196 79 Two years of time faced the expelled men before the meeting of the General Conference. What should they do during this time? After much thought they joined the Church on probation and receiv ed liscenses to exhort- Under the authority of these liscenses they held many meetings with marked success* But the religious work done under the authority of the churches was held agaimst,them in the consideration of their appeals to the General Conference. Bishop Simpson took an active part in the proceedings of the General Conference to which the appeals came. Bishop Simpson writes in his "Cyclopedia of Methodism"; "As they declined to recognize the authority of the Church, and had continued to exercise their ministry and to organize societies, the General Conference declined to recognize their appeals." The expelled men deny having defied the authority of the Church, in that they did not exercise their ministry in the administration of the sacraments, nor in organizing societies, having only organ ized bands; the latter being permitted by the Discipline* The General Conference denied their appeals. Then the so-called lazarites, who never thought of separating from the Church, lost all hope of reconciliation with the Mother Church and decided upon a separate organization. This seemed the only thing to be done. In accordance with the provisions of the last laymen’s convention (three laymen’s conventions had occurred) a delegated convention was held at Pekin Hew York August twenty third 1860 to'consider the best ways of furthering the work of God. The body was composed of fifteen preachers and forty laymen. The following is an account of the convention by a member present: At the convention several ministers and laymen opposed the immediate organization of a new denomination on the ground that it would be premature, but it would come (later) in a greater swarm from the 80 Methodist Episcopal Church. They would in the meantime substi tute bands. Dr. Redfield was present to represent the West; he said the West was in favor of organization. B T Roberts said that the East was ready and that East and West should move in the matter simultaneously. The majority prevailed, and the organization was effected, taking the name of the Free Methodist Church. The minority withdrew, and were afterward known as the Hazarite faction of the salvation movement. Though the name 'Hazarite' was well known among us before that crisis came (that author under stands that those who withdrew chose to accept the name 'Hazarite Bands'). The Hazarite faction went to seed completely at a camp- meeting at Shelby lew York. Rev. William Cooley was at this camp- meeting, and seeing fanaticism in some of its wildest features coming in, fled with others to the Free Methodist Church for ref uge, and were useful workers therein. Brother Stiles desired a clause inserted in the Discipline favoring a gradualistic as well as the instantaneous view of en tire sanctification. Dr. Redfield arose and remarked substantially as follows: 'Brethren, I would not make a threat, but unless we go straight on the question of holiness in the Discipline, we had better halt where we are. The Gradualistic theory is what has made so much mischief. We are John Wesleyan Methodists ; we must not dodge that point. This view prevailed.^ The new denomination took the name of "Free Methodist". The sig nificance of the prefix "Free" is indicated by the following quotation : It signified freedom from episcopal domination, from which they had suffered in the church which had cast them out ; freedom from the_ lodge interference, which had wrought so disastrously in the troubles which led to their expulsion; freedom from those discrim-ina- tions in favor of the wealthy and aristocratic in the house of God, which are engendered by the renting or sale of pews; freedom in personal experience, in the public worship of God, to give such outward expression to deep religious emotion as the Holy Spirit may inspire or prompt.^ The Discipline of the new denomination was based largely on the Discipline of the Methodist Episcopal Church; all but four of the articles were adopted, articles 14, 19, 21, and 23 were omitted. Two articles were added: one on entire sanctification and one on rewards and punishments. The Free Methodist Church adopted the rules of the parent 1 Hogue, The History of the Free Methodist Church, Vol. 1, 321 2 Ibid. 325 81 organization unmodified, except it distinctly forbade the buying . and selling of slaves, whereas the Methodist Episcopal Discipline was ambiguous in the matter of slaves. The Free Methodist Church forbade the use of tobacco; later forbidding the growing and sell ing of same. Members are admitted into full connection into the Free Method- ist Church by answering affirmatively the following questions : 1. Have you the witness of the Spirit that you are a child of God? 2. Have you that perfect love that casteth out fear? If not, will you seek diligently until you obtain it? 3. - Is it your purpose to devote yourself the remainder of your life to the service of God, doing good to your fellow men, and working out your own salvation with fear and trembling? 4. Will you forever lay aside all superfluous ornaments, and adorn yourself.in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety, not with broidered hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array, but, which becometh those professing godliness, with good works? 6. Will you abstain from all connection with secret societies? 6. Do you subscribe to our articles of religion, our General Rules, and our Discipline, and are you willing to be governed by the same ? 7. Have you Christian fellowship and love for the members of this society, and will you assist them, as God shall give you ability, in carrying on the work of the Lord? 82 THE H0LIHE88 MOVEMENT IH THE SOUTHWEST CHAPTER % Among the first to profess holiness as a second blessing in Texas was a Mrs. Martha Mcïïhirter who lived at Belton Texas. She professed the experience about 1872. She was a Sunday School teacher in the Methodist Church. She testified to the experience and taught the doctrine in her class; she also conducted weekly holiness meetings. She was opposed by her pastor. She finally withdrew from the church, but continued the meetings. About the time of Mrs. McWhirter's leaving the church two carpen ters came form Illinois to Belton. They attended her meetings and obtained the experience of entire sanctification. The community became aroused because of these meetings. Finally a mob waited on these men and threatened them if the continued to testify in the meetings. They continued to testify. The mob beat them. Soon the men were adjudged insane and sent to the insane asylum at Austin. The superintendent of the asylum kept them only one night, finding no insanity in them. He sent them away, but admonished them not to return to Belton. They took his advice and returned to Illinois. A man in whose home these meetings at Belton were held later professed sanctification and became a Hazarene preacher. In 1877, through the influence of a holiness man at Calvert Texas, Rev. Hardin Wallace of the Methodist Episcopal Church was invited to hold a meeting in the Southern Methodist Church at Calvert. Rev. R . H. H, Burnett was the pastor; he professed sanctification in the special- meeting, and later became s strong evangelist. In March 1877 the Wallace band held a meeting at Ennis Texas in 83 the Gumherland Presbyterian Church. Wallace preached so much .against tobacco and worldliness that the ruling elders ordered him out of the church and locked the doors. The meetings were fi nally finished under the trees in a holiness man's yard. Everywhere the went they organized holiness bands. Rev. W. B. Colt, a holiness evangelist, was invited to Ennis after the Wallace meeting for some meetings. At this meeting Rev. George A MeCullooh professed sanctification. He became a great camp-meet ing preacher and a Presiding Elder in the Free Methodist Church. Men of this kind pushed the holiness cause with such vigor that in the next ten years many camp meetings were established and were attended by thousands of people. The first camp meeting was held.in October 1878 about twelve miles south of Corsicana Texas. The Texas Holiness Association was organized at this meeting. This association held ten annual camp meet ings.^ Among the bands formed for preaching holiness was that of Rev. E. G. De Je met t, who for eight years was a member in full connection of the Eorth Texas Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South; most of the t:ime He was secretary of that Conference. He was assisted by C.B. Jernigan and wife. These traveled together for two years until DeJernett was'called home to found the Texas Holiness University. Among the meetings of the DeJernett band, they held one at Linden Texas. V/hen they arrived at Linden, they.went to the Court House yard for a street meeting as was their custom. When they arrived 1 Jernigan.„ Pioneer Days of the Holiness Movement in the Southwest, 20 ^ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 84 they found a large sign on the corner of the Courthouse which read as follows; "Yellow Fever in Louisana. Holiness is coming to Linden. Govern yourself accordingly." The first evening twelve people attended their service. The meeting continued for three weeks and one hun dred and twenty five people professed conversion and sanctification. Their next meeting was at Atlanta Texas, where they had their characters arrested and were charged with contumacious conduct because they would not stop the meeting at the call of the local Methodist pastor and three other Methodist preachers. In September 1898 the DeJernett band were holding meetings at Jefferson Texas ; they used the school house for their services. Jefferson was the birthplace of De^ernett; here he was converted and liscensed to preach in the Methodist Church. The pastor of the Methodist Church sent a message to DeJernett protesting against the meeting at Jefferson. The protest did not stop the meeting. Shortly after closing the meeting at Jefferson, the band opened a meeting at Atlanta. At Atlanta three Methodist preachers t old DeJernett that he could take his choice of three courses of action: close the meeting then in progress, withdraw from the church, or meet a charge at the coming Quarterly Conference. DeJernett prompt ly told them that the meeting would go on. The meeting continued. Over one hundred persons professed conversion and sanctification. After the meeting DeJernett was cited to trial at the Quarterly Conference. A great crowd <came to hear the trial of a preacher "ion whose escutcheon was not a stain and whose character was above reproach"(words of the Presiding Elder at the close of the trial) The secretary read the charges: Contumacious conduct. Specifications: Holding a meeting in the town of Atlanta over the protest of the 85 preacher in charge. He was asked if the defense was ready for trial. Whereupon DeJernett arose and said: I think myself happy. Presiding Elder, because I shall answer for myself this day before thee concerning all things whereof I am ac cused, especially because I know' thee to be an expert in all the customs and questions which.are among the Methodists. Wherefore, I beseech thee to hear me patiently. My manner of life from my youth,,which has ever been among the Methodists, mine own people, know all these people assembled here tonight, for after the strait- est sect of nor religion I have lived a Methodist, which I hope to prove by these authorities (pointing to a pile of Methodist books).I He was promptly stopped and told that he was not being tried for false doctrine, but for violation of law. He was promptly expelled and his credential demanded. About this time G.M.Keith, the pastor of Weston Circuit of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, attended the Greenville Holiness camp meeting. At this meeting he received the experience of sanc tification. He returned home and began to preach holiness. Soon holiness became very unpopular with the members of his charge. They informed the Presding Elder that they would not support a second-. blessing pastor. Keith was removed. Keith soon retired from the itineracy and started the Texas Holiness Advocate, which became the leading paper of the Holiness movement and for years was the official organ of the Texas Holiness Association. As editor of the Texas Holiness Advocate, Keith push ed holiness as a second blessing and opposed the lodges with which he was formerly associated until he was no more acceptable as a member of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South. He found it nec essary to withdraw in order to have his freedom Texas Holiness Association A general convention of all holiness people was called at Terrell 1 Jrernigan, Pioneer Days of the Holiness Movement in Southwest, 83 86 Texas in August 1898 in connection with the camp meeting which conducted hy two well known evangelists, H.G. Morrison and Bud Robinson. The call was prompted by the outspoken opposition to holiness among the churches. Many ministers and laymen had been expelled from the churches for preaching and professing holiness as a seoong blessing. Prominent among thse had been E. C. Morrison, who had been expelled for conducting a revival meeting at Dublin Texas over the protest of the preacher in charge. Morrison's Conference had restored him, but he was being threatened at this time by the Texas Methodists. The Bishop of one of the Texas Methodist Conferences stated on the floor of the Conference that he would stamp the second blessing heresy out of the church if it took five years. This resolution was successful. At the end of this period, five years, not one preacher in that Conference, out of eighteen that preached holiness, not one was left; they either changed church relations of quit preaching the second blessing.1 This convention advised all that had withdrawn from the churches, or had been turned out of the churches, or had not joined any church at all, to seek some congenial church and join. This advice was difficult to follow; for with the exception of five or six holiness churches that had^been founded by two men coming from Cal ifornia, there were only two other churches favorable to the second blessing doctrine ; the Free Methodist church and the Methodist Episcopal Church. The Free Methodist Church was objectionable to most of the people seeking a ^church home because they refused the 1 Jerniga.h, Pioneer Days of the Holiness Movement in the Southwest, 97 — -- 87 use of musieal instruments in their services; they also emphasized externals too much; their manner of preaching failed to reach the masses, and they seemingly had little sympathy with any religious movement not distinctively Free Methodist. The Methodist Episcopal Church was oh jectienable because it was not indigenous to the Southland. After several days of discussion, the Terrell Convention made the following recommendations: That the holiness people who were members of the various churches should continue to maintain their present relationship, attending upon the ordinances and supporting its institutions, but to testi fy publicly and privately as occasion offered to what the Lord had done for their souls; in the meanwhile living the experience of perfect love before a gainsaying church and mocking world, enduring patiently thie slights and open persecutions of their fellow members and their pastors.^ This convention also planned to organize local holiness associ ations to care for the religious needs of the holiness people. But the Convention's plans fell so far short of the wants and needs of the people that not more than half a dozen unions were organ ized during the year. The Convention did not meet the second time. Since the Terrell Convention failed to meet the needs of the people there, was a demand for another meeting, which convened at Greenville Texas in November 1899 at the Texas Holiness University. At this meeting the Presiding Elder of the Methodist Episcopal Church, who had been compelled to leave the' Methodist Church, South on account of preaching holiness, made the following plea to the assembly : Come home, boys to your mother. Methodism is the mother of holiness. Come home, and we shall do as they used to do; give you a horse to ride and a pair of old-fashioned saddle bags, with a Bible on one 1 Jernigan, Pioneer Lays of fhe Holiness Movement in Southwest, 101 88 side and a Methodist hymn hook on the other, and put some money in your pockets, and send you out to preach holiness.1 But the hoys did not come at his call. After much discussion, all of which was apparently fruitless, the Convention adjourned sine die. OZhe evening of the day of the adjournment of the Convention, C.B,. Jernigan called a meeting at his home. There were seven per sons present. This group of seven organized The Holiness Associa tion of Texas. After many vicissitudes the Association was launched in 1900. It continued through ten successful years until 1910, when it was changed into the Texas Holiness Union. Here follows the constitution of the Association; This association shall he called the Holiness Association. The object of this association shall be the promotion of the doctrine and experience of scriptural holiness throughout the world. We accept the Bible, illuminated by the Holy Spirit, as our rule of faith and practice. We believe in holiness, or entire' sanctifica tion; that it is a second definite work of grace in the heart, whereby we are thoroughly cleansed from all sin; that only those who are justified and walking in the favor of God can receive this grace ; that it is not absolute perfection, which belongs to God alone. It does not make a man infallible It is perfect love, the pure love of God filling the pure heart. This love is capable of increase. It may be lost, and we need constantly to wat ch and’ pray. It is received by faith after consecration. It is accomplish- edfby the baptism of Jesus foretold, by John the Baptist. It is loving the Lord our God with all the heart, soul, mind, and strength, and our neighbors as ourselves. It was this which the disciples received in the upper room at Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost, for which Jesus commanded them to wait. It is the inheritance of the church; and with it comes preparation, anointing, illumina ting and giving power for the work for which God has called us. Our preachers are to preach it definitely and urge in on all be lievers. It is the privilege and duty of all believers to seek and obtain it. It is this to which we are called:'That we might become partakers of his holiness.’ The Association shall be composed of individuals, bands, unions, county and district associations, local churches, or members of any denomination who hold and promulgate the statement of doc trine adopted by the association, and who shall make application for membership, and who are received by a majority vote of the 1 Jernigan, Pioneer Lays of Holiness Movement in Southwest, 103 89 association present, they giving evidence of being in, or earnest- seeking the experience of entire sanctification. The use of opium, morphine, and all intoxicating liquors, unless prescribed as medicine, and the use and sale of tobacco in all its forms, are prohibited.^ The last meeting of the Holiness Association convened at Peniel November 1910. The Association at the time of its dissolution had more than two hundred ministers on its roster, but,there was little provision for the laity. Holiness bands had been organized, and some of these hands had regular preachers, but there was no bap tism, no sacrament of the Lord's Supper, and the Holiness people were called "Come-Outers". The holiness churches which had been organized by preachers from California seemed too narrow for the Texas holiness people; these churches permitted no organs in their worship and forbade public collections. Only about five of these churches had been organized and they were on the decline. In 1899 and 1900 two very successful revival meetings were held at VanAlstyne Texas by holiness evangelists. In the early Spring of 1901 some of the people who had been blessed in these meetings sent a delegation to C.B.Jernigan, one of the evangelists who had assisted in these meetings. Jernigan responded. A new church was organized. The new organizati on was named the "Independent Holiness Church". C.B.Jernigan was chosen pastor. All the members were, poor renters, not a land owner among them. Jernigan gave half time to the church and the other half to evangelistic work. Soon calls came for other churches. The next Spring in a special meeting at Peniel, Rev. H.C .Morrison 1 Jernigan, Pioneer Lays af Holiness Movement in Southwest, 105 90 rebuked the starting of the new church. Among other things he made the following remarks: An unknown wood-chopper has got him a jack-knife and c orn .stalk and sat down under the shade of a haystack and whittled out a church to suit himself, and is now trying to herd the whole holi ness movement into it. When we need a new church, we will call a great convention and we will find us a Moses, and when he starts down the road there will be a dust in the desert. In 1902 a church building was erected at YalAlyotine at the cost of much self-denial on the part of the members, all of whom were desperately poor. Great opposition sprang up against this new organization, but it had the quality of permanence and increased rapidly. In February 1903 occurred the first Council of the Independent Holiness Church. C.B.Jernigan was elected President, and James B. Chapman was chosen secretary. James B.Chapman is now one of the General Superintendents of the Church of the Bazarene(1928). In Bovember 1903, at a second Council of the new church, twelve churches were represented. At a third Council at Blossom Texas in October 1904 twenty seven churches were represented. The Bew Testament Church of Christ In 1893,E.H.Sheeks of Memphis Tenessee attended a revival meeting at Bells Tennessee, conducted by Rev. Robert L.Harris, a Methodist preacher. In this meeting both were reclaimed and sanctified. Mr. Harris being in poor health, the Sheeks invited him to share.their home at Memphis. Mr. Harris, having long seen the necessity of getting the doctrine of holiness before the people, started a paper. The Trumpet. A servant's house on the Sheeks' premises was used 1 Jernigan, Pioneer Lays cf. Holiness Movement in Southwest, 111 91 as a print shop. In April 1894 Mr. Sheeks formed a partnership with E. B. Mitohim in a store at Milan Tennessee and immediately moved there. Mr. and Mrs. Harris were invited to make their, home with the Mit chims at Milan. Here again a servant's house was used as a print shop for the Trumpet. At the close of a tent meeting in July 1904, Mr. Harris at Milan organized the "lew Testament Church of Christ" with thirteen mem bers. In less than four years this church had four missionaries in foreign lands. These churches were strictly congregational, and would not accept members who had been immersed unless they consented to rebaptism by sprinkling or pouring. They also ordained women preachers. The Holiness Church of Christ The lew Testament Church of Christ and the Independent Holiness Church united at Pilot Point Texas in lovember 1905. The new organ ization took the name of "The Holiness Church of Christ". There were about one hundred local organizations in this union at the beginning. The Church of the lazarene The first General Council of the Holiness Church of Christ met at Texarkana in 1906. At this Council was read a letter from Hev. G. E Ruth telling of a proposed union of the Associated Pentecost- -al Churches of America with the Church of the lazarene, and ask ing that delegates be sent to seek union with them. Three delegates -were chosen, but the distance and heavy expense forbade their attendance. But the correspondence between C, W. Ruth and G. B. Jernigan 92 resulted in seven unaooredited delegates being sent from the Holi ness ChurGh of Christ to the first General Assembly of the Pente costal Church of the lazarene where the Associated Pentecostal Church8 of America and the Church of the lazarene were united. These delegates were invited to sit as honorary members of the Man ual committee. At this assembly a tentative union was agreed upon between the two bodies, the Pentecostal Church of the lazarene and the Holiness Church of Christ, subject to the different auunual councils of the Holiness Church in the South. These delegates returned home to arouse interest in the union of all the holiness churches. These delegates invited the Pente costal Church of the lazarene to hold a General Assembly the next Pall in the South. In October 1908 the General Assembly of the Pentecostal Church of the lazarene met at Pilot Point Texas. At this Assembly the union between the Pentecostal Church of the lazarene and the Holiness Church of Christ was fully consummated.^ The Pentecostal Church of the lazarene is now the Church of the lazarene, having later taken the name of I)r. Bresee’s organization beginning in 1895 at los Angeles California. Bud Robinson Rev. Bud Robinson is the most popular and best known minister in the Church of the lazarene. In an article appearing in the Herald of Holiness, the official organ of the Church of the laz arene, he characterizes quite well and quite interstingly that 1 Chapman, History of the Church of the lazarene, 30 93 church: At last, thank the Lord, we are training and educating our own teachers and college presidents and our own preachers and mission aries, so that if we don't succeed it is because we are at least no good, for we have the United States open to us and if we can't make good it is because we afa simply flat-footed failures, and if we fail it is because we are too trifling to knock the dog gnats off our noses. We have the United States and Canada wide open to us and scarcely anybody else doing what we want to do; that is put on revivals and organize churches of the lazarene, and place in the towns and cities churches where holiness is preached as a definite second work of grace, and also preach the whole Bible for a whole world and salvation from all sin, provided through the shed blood and dying groans of the blessed Son of God. At this writing there is not a 'Monkey ï'ian' in our connection, and you can't find a man in a lazarene Pulpit that believes that we are evolved animals. Every man in our church believes in a Divine Creator and a Divine Creation. We believe all jof the BibXe is inspired from the word 'in' in the book of Genesis to the word 'Amen ' in the book of Revelation. We just as much believe that the whale swallowed Jonah as that he had a swallow. It is no more trouble for us to believe of Christ and also in His death, burial and ressurrection, than it is to sit out in the warm sun shine and breathe good fresh air. There is not one doubt in our minds as to the Bible's being inspired, and we know, and we know that it is an inspired book. Mr. Moody said that he knew that he knew that the Bible was inspired because, when he read it it inspired him. So as à people we have more in our favor and less against us than any peeple on the earth. And as a denomination we have more to our credit than any people in the nation, if not in the world. lobody expects lazarenes to use tobacco and nobody expects lazarenes to join the lodges, and nobody expects the lazarenes to hang around race tracks and gambling houses. And nobody expects the lazarenes to hang around the circuses and the vaudeville and movies. I judge-that to the number of members they buy the smallest amoung of jewelry/on earth. The average church member seems to think he can't g©t along Without jewelry, but the laz- arenes don't seem to want the thing at all and really have no use for it, so that they are about the most peculiar people that I have met. 1 Herald of Holiness, 17, January 16, 1929 94 SAlCTIFICATIOl II SOUTIiERl CAIIFORIIA CHAPTER ZI A Presiding Elder's report to the Southern California Conference in the year 1881 show that California'Methodism was true to Methodist tradition in the matter of entire sanctification: Times of refreshing from the presence of the Lord have blessed several of the charges. In these revival sevices many sinners have been converted from the errors of their ways, and many believers have received Christ as made of the Father unto them, wisdom, right eousness, sanctification and redemption. They profess to lay all upon Christ as their altar, priest, and sacrifice, and by faith are sanctified through the truth, wholly sanctified to Cod. They profess to come into the fullness of the blessing of perfect love and peace and joy. Observation confirms my opinion that in nearly every instance this fuller experience intensifies Methodist charac teristics and attachments.1 The Minutes of 1888 record definite experiences of entire sancti fication : The Alliance Assembly was succeeded by our Annual Conference camp meeting, which continued ten days. It was under the management of the Presiding Elders who were present. It resulted in about one hundred professed conversions and a goodly number of sanctifica tions . In the Conference of 1889 many were reported as having been sanc tified : "Special services were held at sixteen places, resulting in more than six hundred conversions and the sanctification of many believers. Special weekly meetings have been held in Fort Street Church, Grace and University Churches, and with excellent results.^ At the Conference of 1884 a committee on Christian Perfection made a report. This report indicates loyalty to the doctrine and experience of entire sanctification, but laments the existence of unorganized holiness bands that breed dissension and schism; We agree with the late general Conference that there is.no reason 1 Minutes, Southern California Conference, M E Church, 35(1881) 2 Ibid. 27(1888) : ^ " 3 Ibid. 31(1889) / 95 for any restatement of our views on this subject. Wesley, Fletcher, and Richard Watson are accepted authorities, and we commend them to our people and believe that the general circulation of Wesley's Plain Account of Christian Perfection would correct crude and mis leading views of this question..... We cannot take any lower ground than-that sin in believers may be and ought to be extirpated by Cod through faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. Perfect Love which casteth out fear is not a mocking dream, nor do doctrines and the Discipline tantalize us with a baseless hope. Your committee has seen with gravest concern the evil effects of unorganized 'Union Holiness Bands'under the leadership of persons who are irresponsible, erratic and fanatical, who reject the advice and control or pastors and official leaders and set themselves forth. as._the special exponents and exemplars of holiness. The inev itable tendency of these organization is toward dissension and schism; so much so that the Rational Holiness Association has sev ered connection with these holinessbands and affirmed its determi nation to receive only Methodists into its fellowship and advised the members of other denominations to remain in steadfast union with their own churches. A few or our people whose conscientious ness we cannot doubt have been drawn into these 'Union Holiness Bands' and are exhausting their energies in work alien to our institutions and agencies, therefore, Resolved: That we approve the resolution of the Rational Holiness Association to confine its work, method and membership to the church of its own choice, and to act in harmony with its pastors and churches; and we agree with it in strongly deprecating the organization of unnecessary, injurious, and schismatic bodies under the pretense of promoting holiness; and we most affectionately urge the members of our churches not to involve themselves in any way with these extraneous and irregular bodies, nor become finan- nancially responsible for their enterprises, but to continue in the fellowship with their own brethren and under the godly super vision of their pastors. Resolved: That our ministers and official, boards refuse the use of our churches to any parties whatever who propose to organize any society or band within the bounds or any of our churches.^ In Autumn of 1883 Dr. Bresee was appointed to the First Church Los Angeles. First Church at that time had between three and four hundred members. Here he found for the first time a class of fully'sanctified people. They were clear, sound and substantial and evangelical, and were intelligently and earnestly, though rather quietly, pushing the work of full salvation.! In the second year of Dr. Bresee's pastorate at Los Angeles, Doctors McDonald and Watson, two outstanding holiness preachers 1 Girvin, A Prince in Israel, 81 96 held a three weeks meeting in the church. A number of persons professed conversion and sanctification. A great crisis came into the life of Dr. Bresee shortly after this meeting. He writes of it as follows : I had been for some time almost constantly in prayer and crying to Cod for something that would meet my needs, not clearly realizing what they were, or how they could be met. I sat alone in the front parlor of the parsonage in the cool of the evening. The door being open I looked into the azure blue in earnest prayer while the shades of evening gathered about. As I waited and waited, and con tinued in prayer, looking up, it seemed to me as if from the azure there came a meteor, or an indescribable ball of condensed light, descending rapidly toward me. As I gazed upon it, it was soon within a few score feet of me, then I seemed distinctly to hear a voice as my face was upturned toward it: ’Swallow it, swallow it’, and in an instant it fell upon my lips and face. I attempted to obey the injunction. It seemed to me', however, that I swallowed only a little of it. It felt like fire on my lips and the burning sensation did not leave me for several estatic. days. While all of this of itself would be nothing, there came into my heart and being a transformed condition of life and blessing and unction and glory, which I had not known before. I was always conservative and reticent in referring to my personal religious life, yet i have never go over the experience of that memorable day; I have said little about it. From that day there came into my ministry a new element of spiritual life and power. People began to come into the blessing of full salvation; there were many persons converted ; and the last year of my ministry was more consecutively successful, being crown ed with an almost constant revival. The third year came to a close with the church having nearly doubled in membership and in every way built up.! At the expiration of his term of service at First Church, Dr. Bresee was'in great favor with the membership of that church. This popularity be attributes somewhat to his lack of definiteness in the preaching of holiness in its doctrinal aspects. Of his work at First Church in Los Angeles be writes: My ministry here did not arouse any conflict on the subject of holiness; my preaching probably not being sufficiently definite in its doctrinal aspects to especially arouse opposition, it being given more to a deeper spirituality through the incoming of the Holy Spirit. At that time I did not preaeh the second work of grace very definitely. I preached it, but did not give it such emphasis as to call out opposition, or as led so mamy people into the expe rience as otherwise would have probably been the case. While I had 1 Girvin, A Prince in Israel, 61 97 not a wide popularity in the city at the end of the three years, i did have a popularity • and love in the First Churc^ and among the people generally, which was almost, if not altogether univer sal. At the end of my third year, there would have "been hut one voice with reference to the desirability of my ministry, if I could have remained longer. At that time there seemed to a unan imous acclaim of devotion to me. During the next four years tÿis condition changed radically.1 Dr. Bresee further writes of his pastorate at First Church: that he could have brought large prestige to the Holiness doctrine in Southern California if he had had the wisdom. He felt that he missed a great opportunity: During my pastorate in the First Church, my ministry was in the transition stage. The reason for this was that my preaching had not the definite element to arouse opposition, and I had a strong hold on the people on account of my personality. I carried them with me generally, with much prayer and deep piety. If I had known more when I came to the coast, and had had experience and sense, I could have swept the whole of Methodism into holiness. It was not set against it enough to prevent me from putting my hands on everything in Southern California, and drawing into holi ness the whole of Methodism, but I did not know. I neither had the experience nor the general ministerial wisdom to do it. I am very sorry. What leading men there were, had been aroused more or less by this holiness work and movement, and, coming to First Church as I did, with the influence that the position gave, these men came to talk about this subject more or less, or in conversation opened their hearts to me, to a greater or less extent. Here I met M M Bovard, the President of the University of Southern California, and he talked oyer the matter very earnestly with me. If I had been wise enough, I could have led him into the experience of holiness, and thus impressed the whole of Southern California,■ but I did not, and yet I was preaching holiness.2 In 1886 Dr. Bresee was appointed to First Church Pasadena. Some weeks after his arrival he started a protracted meeting. This meet ing resulted in about forty professions of conversion. From that time on for four years there was a constant revival. During these four years he took into the church by letter or probation a thous and persons. Although not all the members were in the experience 1 Giryin, A Prince in Israel, 84 2 Ibid. 81 98 of sanctification, the church was on a high tide of spiritual life. At the end of Dr. Bresee's fourth year a few influential members opposed his return on account of his favorable attitude toward holiness. Although the opposition was confined to about half a dozen, the refused to return for the fifth year. He afterwards decided that he had made a great mistake in not returning. In 1890 Dr. Bresee was sent to Asbury Church Los Angeles. At a special meeting conducted by prominent holiness evangelists near ly all the members of the official bo.ard professed, the experience of entire sanctification. The Fall of 1891 Bishop Mallelieu appointed Dr. Bresee Presiding Elder of the Los Angeles District. In this capacity he gave much time to evangelism in coMpany with some holiness evangelists. At the Conference of 1892 at San Diego Dr. Bresee was appointed to Simpson Church Los Angeles by Bishop Vincent. Of his removal from the district, Dr. Bresee writes: Bishop Vincent had little difficulty in arranging for my removal from the District, as my desire to withdraw from the Presiding Eldership was as strong as his desire to remove me could possibly have been. His method of accomplishing that result, however, showed his determination in the matter. As he was calling over the appointments, and came to some which were more or less uncertain, he called out Simpson Church, and said:'Dr. Bresee, who is to go to Simpson Church?' I replied that I did not know, and that possi bly they might be compelled to have a transfer. He said then: 'Why don't you go there yourself?' So he wrote me down to Simpson Church. His attitude toward holiness was clearly brought out in the cabinet in connection with some other matters bearing on the appoint ments. As the names of the preachers were called or’referred to, that of Hev. T.E.Rohinson was mentioned, and the Bishop said, med itatively: 'Robinson, Robinson. Is he that holiness crank?' I replied: 'Brother Robinson preaches holiness, but he is a very safe, sane, and able men. VJhen it was proposed, to send another brother, a young man, the Bishop said again, thought fully : 'There is a layman up there, a holiness man, who I am afraid will spoil that young man if I send him there'. Thus indicating the fact that the men who preached or professed holiness in the Conference were 99 marked men, and not evidently marked for favor.^ Dr.-Bresee left Simpson Church about the middle of the year. An impossible debt and the unwillingness of the members to accept the deeper things of God were the causes of his leaving the Church before the end of the year. Dr. Bresee had long desired to have a place in the heart of the city which could be made a.center of holy fire and where the gospel could be preached to the poor. In the early part of 1894 such an opportunity presented itself. At the end of the Conference year a building had been completed and was ready for dedication. Dr. Bresee had supposed that he could carry on such an undenominational mission work as he had planned as a member of his Conference. At the session of the Conference in the Fall of 1894 the Cabinet declined to appoint him to such a work and the Conference in executive session refused to grant him a supernumerary relation. After a night of prayer, he asked his Conference for a location, which was granted apparently without reluctance. He now felt free to carry out his plan. He began work in the new building which was situated on Main street between second and; third. It was duly dedicated with large audi ences a great blessing of the Lord. Three services were held each Sunday, besides Sunday School and prayer meeting each week. In addition to these regular services t%o special meetings of three weeks were held by prominent holinessi evangelists. The entire year was one of marked victory. A training school for Christian workers was organized and carried on throughout the year. Large possibil ities seemed ahead of the mission enterprise While Dr. Bresee was in the East in the Summer of this year in Girvin, A Prince in Israel, 97 100 camp jïieeting work, he was informed by his coadjutors of the unwil lingness to go forward with him in the mission enterprise. 1895 found Dr. Bresee without a place to work in Southern Calif ornia, and apparently without an opportunity for service. But an opportunity soon came. Many of his friends from the mission rallied about him. Soon he and his friends rented a hall at 317 South Main Street, where the first meeting was held October 1895. The following notice was sent out advertising the first service : ■ Dear Friends : Permit us to inform you that Rev. P- F. Bresee will preach next Sabbath, October 6, at eleven o'clock in the hall at 317 South Main Street’ Los Angeles California, instead of Peniel as heretofore. There willcbe a special holiness meeting at the Same place at three P.M., conducted by Rev. J* A- Wood, D.D.. . Rev. J. P. Widney LL.D Y/ill preach at 7:30 P.M. We are also very glad to announce that Doctors Widney and Bresee have arranged to associate themselves, together with such Christian people as desire to join with them to carry on Christian work, especially evangelistic and city mission work, and the spreading of the doctrine and experience of Christian holiness. We cordially invite you to the opening services of this work next Sabbath, October 6, at 317 South Main Street, Los Angeles, California. . • Los Angeles California, October 1895. Committee. There came into this work with Dr. Bresee at this time Dr. DP. Widney, ' who brought with him a good degree of influence, and gave much cheer and hope. Br.Bresee spoke of his fellowship and person ality as follows: He was a member of the Southern California of the Methodist Episco pal Church, a noble, cultured, Christian•gentleman. Kis life had largely been given to his profession as a physician, until some years previously he had founded and organized a medical college. He -was afterward elected to the presidency of the Southern California University, because of which relation he had united with the Annual Conference. He was. a man of ripe scholarship and earnest Christian life. He at once entered heartily with me into the work and organ ization and evangelism. His-training and teaching were such as not to adapt him in all respects to the various features of such work WQ had undertaken, and after about four years, he withdrew from the ChurGh of the Hazarene, and returned to the Methodist Eipscopal lUirvin, a rrince ih Israel, 103 101 Church, taking up the regular work of the ministry in that Chur ch. 1 On the third Sunday in October 1895 the Church of the Hazarene was organized in Los Angeles California by Dr. Bresee. The organiza tion was finally consummated with 135 charter members. The Church of the Lazarene holds to the doctrine of entire sancti fication as a second work of grace, instantaneously received by faith. The statment from the Manual of the hazarene Church is as follows : Entire Sanctification is that act of God, subsequent to conversion, by which regenerate believers are made free from inbred sin, and brought into the state of entire devoternent to God and holy obedi ence of love made perfect. It is provided for through the precious blood of Jesus and is wrought instantaneously by the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, the conditions being entire consecration and appropria ting faith; and to this work and state of grace the Holy Spirit bears witness. This experience is also known by various terms, representing its different phases, such as 'Christian Perfection,' ’Perfect Love,''Heart Purity','Baptism with the Holy Ghost','The Fullness of the Blessing',and ’Christian Holiness'. There is a marked distinction between the perfect heart and the perfect char acter. The former is obtained in an instant, but the latter is the result of growth in grace. It is one thing to have the heart all yielded to God and occupied by Him; it is quite another to have the entire character, in every detail harmonize with His Spirit, and the life become conformable to His i m a g e .2 Remarks on the Hazarene Movement Dr. Bresee's plan to conduct an independent mission in Los Angel es was thwarted by the Conference's refusal to grant him a supernum erary relationship. .-It seems a reasonable inference that the Confer ence was displeased with Dr. Bresee's plan to conduct an independ ent work. The Conference a few years before had voiced its vigorous opposition holiness bands under the leadership of erratic, fanatical,, and schismatic persons who refused to receive advice of responsible leaders in the church. Ho doubt it was a fear that Dr. Bresee's 1 Giryin, A Prince in Israel, 104 2 Manual of the Church of the Hazarene 102 proposed independent movement would become an irresponsible organization with a member of the Conference in charge that led to a refusal for the request of a supernumerary relationship.^ The Methodists would perhaps interpret the Conference action thus, while perhaps attribute the Conference's refusal to their opposi tion to entire sanctification as a second blessing. From the best information obtainable from Hazarene sources, there was a radical change in Southern California Methodism toward entire sanctification as a second blessing during the decade pre ceding 1895. When Dr. Bresee came to Los Angeles in 1883, entire sanctification as a second blessing was in repute among the lead ing churches, but at the time of his leaving the Methodist Church, the doctrine seemed to be without reputation among the leading churches of Southern California Methodism.^ Dr. Bresee's biographer records an experience of Dr. Bresee which occurred while he was pastor at Chariton Iowa. This experience Dr. Bresee designates entire sanctification: carnality and all doubt were removed. A great spiritual crisis came in his life when pastor of Los Angeles First Church. He does not call this secong experi ence sanctification, though he received an increased God-conscious ness and an empowering that led to a greatly increased efficiency in his ministry. The Manual of the' Church of the Dazarene states that there is only one method of entire sanctification, which is instantaneously by faith. Wesley's Plain Account af Christian Perfection says the the experience may be acquired instantaneously, but that 1 Minutes, Southern California Conference, M.S.Church, 14 (1884) 2 Girvin, A Prince in Israel, 96 103 instantané it y is not the only method. In Methodist theology, sanctification begins in regeneration. Regeneration is initial sanctification, but not entire sanctificatiônj.. In Bazarene Theol ogy the only sanctification recognized as doctrinally sound is entire sanctification, a definite second blessing, which takes place in the believer instantaneously, followed by entire conse cration and faith. 104 miEODIST FREEDOM OF THOUGHT CHAPTER ZII With the turn of the nineteenth century Methodism faced a great question: were ministers to he judged by their theological opinions or by their spirit and the results of their work for the Hingdom? The question came to an issue in 1905. Up to 1908 the Bishops' indorsement was necessary for the retention of theological profes sors in the theological seminaries of the church. Dr. H.G.Mitchell of Boston University Divinity School was accused of holding heret ical views. He had become a so-called "Higher Critic". His -theolog ical views were of such a nature that in 1905 the Bishops refused to indorse him. Dr. Mitchell asked his Conference for a trial. Instead of a trial be was given a reprimand. The General Conference of 1908 decided that a Conference could not reprimand a member without a trial. The same General Conference decided that the Bishops should be relieved from the duty of inves tigating and reporting upon the charges of erroneous teaching in the Methodist Theological Seminaries. Later followed the trial of the great Borden P.Bowne; this trial proved a fizzle. The idea that now prevails among Methodists is freedom to think and to let think. Methodists have adopted Wesley's saying :"Is thy heart as my heart, then give me thy hand." Thus a stage has been reached in the Methodist Church which corresponds to academic free dom in the Universities. Though there is a departure of almost all Methodists from the doctrine of entire sanctification as taught by John Wesley, yet in accordance with the prevailing idea of "Freedom to think and let 105 think", ministers may hold to the doctrine of entire sanctification as a second blessing, or they may hold some other view. But the Methodist Church as a whole has gone so far from the concept of the second blessing that there is little p’ lace in the Church for ministers who hold to the second blessing doctrine of sanctification The churches with rare exceptions refuse such pastors. Further, the Discipline of 1928 in paragraph 596 in the Declara tion on Spiritual life and Standards of Faith makes the following statement : We steadfastly maintain our unshaken loyalty to the great basic doctrines, but we would not be silent as to the Widely discussed conflict of science and religion....If we are afraid to go into the laboratory with the scientist or into the geological field with true and reverent investigators, then we are doubting God. The preacher may go with the scholar wherever reverent and honest scholarship can go. His very loyalty to God will free him from the fear of finding anywhere the footprints of another creator or of another cross in which to glory....Besides the Apostles' Creed and those articles of religion whose truths we hold in common with the Universal Church of Christ, the Methodist Episcopal Church has added as principles of doctrine sermons by John Wesley and his Hotes on the Hew Testament. Therefore the central strength of Meth ods, sm is not only in those teachings found in the historical standards of faith, but also in her emphasis on the dispensation of the Holy Spirit, by which we hot only possess the historical Jesus but a living present Christ who is the object of saving faith and the source of personal Christian experience reveqled by the witness of the Spirit, furnishing a spiritual fruitage in life and realizing Holiness to the Lord which is perfect love. From this declaration we see that the objective of the Methodist Church continues the same as it has always been: perfect love for its members. The Discipline in the same section declares that there can be no conflict between science and religion, and that the preacher may go with the scholar wherever honest and reverent scholarship can go. If the. application of the scientific method to the acquisition of Perfect Love it is learned that the Wesleyan method is unscientific, the Wesleyan vièw being that the experience 106 is acquired instantaneously;by faith, then the Wesleyan views would have to be discarded with other pre-soientifio theories. The application of the scientific method means that old views must be given up if new views show their superiority.to the old. From the point of view of many Methodist leaders of thought the acquisi tion of the experience of Entire Sanctification, or Perfect Love by a single cataclysmic experience is unscientific; the Methodists have officially adopted the scientific method. Therefore, the Wesleyan view has yielded very largely to the scientific view in Methodist thought. Methodism, stiIX ; clings to its ideals; Perfect Love attainable by its members. The scientific method applied to the experience of religion has abolished the delstic, cataclysmic, pre-scientific acquisition of Perfect Love in favor of progressinve sanctification Therefore the Methodist Church has changed views on the doctrine of Entire Sanctification. A very popular book published by the Methodist Book Concern in 1926, the 'Story of Methodism" by Luocock and Hutchinson, is no doubt the most interesting history of Methodism that has been written. There are some very significant omissions in this book. There is no reference to the doctrine or experience of entire sanctification. Bor is there any mention of the Free Methodist Church which sprang from the Methodist Episcopal Church in 1860 largely on the ground of the Methodist Church's lapse from its primitive testimony as to this doctrine. The Free Methodist Church is strictly a second blessing church. Bor is there mention of the Bazarene Church, organized in 1896 1Ô7 on the ground of entire sanctification as a second blessing. From this popular book, one would never suspect that- the Methodist Church had ever held such a doctrine as expounded in Wesley’s A Plain Account of Christian Perfection, ' or Bishop Peck's -Central Idea , of Bishop Foster's Christian Purity . . Ho one in Methodist -History is spoken of as having received the experience of entire sanctification in this popular book. There can be but one reasonable inference from these omissions The Methodist Church of today has given up the doctrine of entire sanctification as advocated by the early Methodists. The doctrine that held so high a place in the thought of the early, devout multitides of Methodists is held so insignificant that it is not mentioned in the most popular Story of Methodism. The thought forms, if not the thoughts, have changed in Methodism. 108 C0BCLU8I0H CHAPTER AllI "The Lord hath yet more truth to break forth from His Holy Word," said John .Robinson the Puritan Pastor. This famous saying express es, a principle now generally aecpted by thinkers of the progressive type: God reveals Himself progressively according to His children’s capacity to receive new truth. In the Wesleyan Revival the new truth of "God-Consciousness- possible -for- all" burst forth from God's Fountain of Truth to water the arid plains of Deism and unbelief in the Christian Era’s most unbelieving century. From the Wesleyan revival gushed forth Roman ticism in religion into the formal deserts of religious Classicism. This Romanticism in religion gave the new truth that the drupken illiterate scavenger had as much, if not more, religious capacity as the well-fed, silken-robed ecclesiastic in the House of Privilege; that the poor could find God without the mediation of the Apostolic (Classicist) priest. This truth gave a Romantic religion of peace, joy, and love, a religion which furnished an outlet for emotional expression and satisfied the needs of the common human heart. It gave a religion that could save hopeless men from the Colossus of evil habits by the expulsive power of a new affection. This nev7 truth of experiential religion gushed forth into the brook, creek, and river beds of current theological and philosoph ical thought. The religious thought forms of Lesley’s time were greatly influenced by Deism: God is an absentee from the world and intervenes in men’s affairs miraculously on occasions. Deism held as true, religious experiences were thought of as cataclysmic; regen eration and entire sanctification were both received instantaneous ly, according to Wesley. 109 Since Wesley’s time there has been an earthquake whioh has changed the configuration of "Thought-Land". The subterranean factors acting together to produce this mighty change were "The Hew Psychol ogy", "The Historical Approach to the Bible", "God’s immanence", and "The Discovery of the Child". Many Methodists accepting the new thought forms caused by this earthquake, no longer think of entire sanctification as Wesley taught it- an instantaneous eradica tion of "Inbred Sin." True Methodists retain Wesley's great gift to the world's thought: "God-Consciousness-possible-to-all-men", the truth that broke forth from God's Word when struck by Wesley, the rod of religious genius, and think of this "God-experience" in the thought molds of the twentieth century. The Wesleyan truth, "God-Consciousness-for-every-man"^ is a vital truth that should never be abrogated. The true Methodist holds to it as firmly as the earth holds the sea to itself; also Methodists may be true Methodists who accept more recent truths than Wesley's great truth and cast Wesley's truth into the thought forms of these more recent truths. Methodists are Methodists in name only who have the new thought forms unless these new thought forms are filled with what Wesley called"Perfect Love". The mystical experience, labeled, "Entire Sanctification" has lost its meaning to millions of Methodists because this doctrine has not been cast into the molds of modern thinking. The principal cause, it seems reasonable to think, for the decline of the doctrine and its present unpopularity among Methodists may be traced to the failure of religious leaders to interpret the doctrine Mnterms of 110 changing thought. A Moses is needed in Methodism to lead the Methodist Hosts from uncertainty, doubt, and ignorance concerning the doctrine of Perfect Love to certainty and knowledge as to this experience, that this rich truth may not be lost to Methodism. Ill THESIS BIBLIOGRAPHY Anderson, William P. Bishop, Personal Letter, February, 15, 1929 Blake, Edgar Bishop, Personal Letter, April, 1, 1929 Burt, William Bishop, Personal Letter, March 23, 1929 Candler, Warren A. Bishop, Personal Letter, March 13, 1929 Hamilton, John W. Bishop, Personal Letter, March 2, 1929 Hughes, Edwin H, Bishop, Personal Letter, March 18, 1929 Locke, Charles Edward Bishop, Personal Letter, April 11, 1929 Hi Choison, Thomas Bishop, Personal Letter, March 15, 1929 Brummitt, Ban B. Editor, Borthwestem Christian Advocate, Personal Letter, March 26, 1929 Bennett, Edward P. Editor, California Christian Advocate, Personal Letter, March 12, 1929 Liefendorf, Dorr, Contributing Editor, Christian Advocates, Personal Letter. February 14, 1929 Elliot, George, Editor, Methodist Review, Personal Letter, Marc)i 19, 1929 Grata, W.E.J., Editor, Epworth Herald, Personal Letter, March 15, 1929 Hartman, L. 0., Editor, Lion's Herald, Personal Letter, March 20, 1929 Langdale, John W., Editor, Abingdon Press, Personal Letter, March 20, 1929 Mills, Edward Laird, Editor, Pacific Christian Advocate, Personal Letter, I^rch 13, 1929 Smith, Alfred Franklin, Editor, Hashville Christian Advocate, Personal Letter, February 2, 1929 Urmy, Ralph Brainard, Editor, Pittsburgh Christian Advocate, Personal Letter, March 26, 1929 112 THESIS BIBLIOGRAPHY Aitken, Walter, Pastor, St. Paul's Methodist Episcopal Church, Lincoln, Nebraska, Personal Letter, March 12, 1929 Bernhardt, William Henry, Professor, Christian Theology and EthiCB, Iliff School of Theology, Denver, Colorado, Personal Letter, March 11, 1929 Hawk, Eugene B., Pastor, First Methodist Episcopal Church, South, Fort Worth, Texas, Personal Letter, February 1, 1929 Helms, Elmer Ellsworth, Pastor, First Methodist Episcopal Church, Los Angeles, California, Personal Letter, January 29, 1929 Knudson, Albert 0., Dean,.Boston: University School of Theology, Boston Massachusetts, Personal Letter, February 7, 1929 Rail, Harrison Franklin, Professor, Cystematic Theology, Garrett Biblical Institute, Evanston Illinois, Personal Letter, February 16, 1929 113 THESIS BIBLIOGRAPHY Buckley, J. M. , History of Methodism in the IlniteoL States» 2 vols Charles Sorihnerls Sons, Lew York, 1900 Caughey, James, Revival Miscellanies, "n.yp." 1854 Chapman, J. B., History of the Church of the Lazarene, Lazarene Publishing House, Kansas City, 1926 Curtis* Clin Alfred, The Christian Faith, Jennings and Graham, Hew York, 1900 Coward, S. L. 0., Entire Sanctification from 1739 to 1900, Pentecostal Herald Press, Louisville, 1900 Liscipline, Methodist Episcopal Church, Methodist Book Concern, Hew York, 1928 Faulkner, John Alfred, The Methodists, "n. p7 "n. p." Flood, Theodore L. and Hamilton,JJohn W. ,Lives of Methodist Bishops, Methodist Publishing House, "n. ph", 1882 Foster, Randolph S., Christian Purity, Philips and Hunt, Hew York, 1869 Guide to Christian Perfectionfbound magazine), "n. p." 1839 Girvin, E. A,, Phineas F. Bresee, A Prince in Israel, Pentecostal Publishing House, Kansas City, 1916 Hill, John Godfrey, Christianity for Today, Methodist Book Concern, Cincinnatti, 1924 Hogue, Wilson T., History of the Free Methodist Church, Free Methodist Publishing House, Chicago, 1916 Hurst, John Fletcher, History of Methodism, 7 vols., Eaton and Mains, new York, 1903 Hyde, A. B., St cry of Methodism, Willey & Go., Springfield, 1889 Jernigan, C. B., Pioneer Lays of the Holiness Movement in the Southwest, Pentecosta1 Publishing Co., kansas City, 1919 Luccock, Halford^E. and Hutchinson, Paul, Story of Methodism, Methodist Book Concern, Cincinnatti, 1926 Metnodist Magazine, Yol. II, 1819 114 Methodist Quarterly Review, "n. pV 1843 , Ibid. Vol. 30, 1848 , "n. d." Minutes, Southern California Conference, Methodist Episcopal Church, 1881-1895 Miley, John, Systematic Theology, Methodist Book Concern, Lew York, 1892. Merrill, S. M., Aspects of Christian Experience, Cranston and Howe, Lew York, 1882 McConnell, Francis J., Essentials of Methodist Doctrine, Methodist Book Concern, Lew York, 1916 Heok, Jesse T., The Central Idea of Christianity, Henry V. Dugan, Boston, 1897 Pope, TTilliam Burt, Compendium of Christian Doctrine, Hunt and Eaton, Lew York, 1889 Sheldon, Henry C., System of Christian Doctrine, Jennings and Graham, Lew York, 1903 Simpson, Matthew, Cyclopedia of Methodism, Evans and Stuart, Philadelphia, 1878 Stevens, Abel, History of the Methodist Episcopal Church, Philips and Hunt, Lew York, 1894 Roberts, B. T., Mhy Another Sect? Free Methodist Publishing House, Chicago, "n. d." Rail, Harrison, Franklin, Methodist Quarterly Review, Methodist Episcopal Church, South, Lashville, 1926 Tigert, John J. Doctrines of M. E . Church in America, Jennings and Graham, Lew York,1903 Uesley, John, A Plain Account of Christian Perfection, "n. p". "n. dV Wood, J. A. Perfect Dove, "n. d. ""n. p." Manual, Church of the Lazarene, Lazarene Publishing House, Kansas City, 1928 Discipline, Free Methodist Church, Free Idethodist Publishing House, Chicago, "n. d."

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The mediation of Christ's authority to the church with special reference to P. T. Forsyth and Dietrich Bonhoeffer

PDF

A study in the technique and administration of worship in Protestant churches

PDF

Leibniz's doctrine of substance in the light of contemporary philosophy

PDF

A historical study of higher education for Negroes in the Methodist Episcopal Church and the Methodist Episcopal Church, South

PDF

The place of evangelism in the church school (Sunday school) of a certain Protestant denomination (Methodist Episcopal Church South) in the Los Angeles district

PDF

The development of ecclesiastical independence in England

PDF

A survey of the administrative technique of the ministers of the Southern California conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church

PDF

Cohesive and divisive factors in the early Church to 325 A.D

PDF

A study in the possibility and realization of human contact with deity, based on New Testament teaching

PDF

The development of the official attitude of the Methodist Episcopal Church toward the economic order

PDF

Karl Barth's doctrine of election

PDF

An interview study of counseling done by ministers of Methodist churches in the state of New Mexico

PDF

A creative program for the First Methodist Episcopal Church of South Gate

PDF

A proposed manual for incorporating "group dynamics" in the Y.M.C.A

PDF

A critical comparison of John Wesley's doctrine of original sin with Andras Angyal's concept of the "trend toward autonomy"

PDF

The aims, methods, and results of the Church Loyalty Crusade in the city of Los Angeles

PDF

A study of the social program and the social welfare service of the First Methodist Episcopal Church of Los Angeles

PDF

A study of selected changing social attitudes of boys in the Los Angeles Church Federation Boys' Home

PDF

Overlapping sector in the conflict of authority between church and state

PDF

An analysis and reconstruction of the program of the St. John's Methodist Church, Kingman, Arizona

Asset Metadata

Creator White, Robert Herman (author)

Core Title The history of the sanctification doctrine in the Methodist Episcopal Church and Methodist Episcopal Church South

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Degree Master of Arts

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag OAI-PMH Harvest,philosophy, religion and theology

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c39-159998

Unique identifier UC11312541

Identifier EP65020.pdf (filename),usctheses-c39-159998 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier EP65020.pdf

Dmrecord 159998

Document Type Thesis

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights White, Robert Herman

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA