Scriptural Sanctification - Media Sabda Org

his heart? It shows itself in a bent toward, if not a giving way to, peevishness, selfishness,
worldliness, pride, self-will, backsliding, etc. Does not observation thus add its testimony to that of
Scripture and experience, that we are not fully saved from depravity in regeneration? The Rev. Dr.
Hoss, editor of the Christian Advocate, Nashville, Tennessee, not long since made the following
statement in his paper supporting this view:
"With perfect candor we declare that we do not know a single Methodist preacher who doubts the
necessity of holiness, nor one that identifies it with justification [regeneration ], nor one that fails to
teach that, as a complete work, it is subsequent to justification."
Would that we could say the same thing of some preachers whom we know.
2. It is urged that a true psychology contradicts this theory of instantaneous sanctification as a
second work after regeneration. Dr. Paul Whitehead, one of the acutest and most accomplished
divines of Southern Methodism, some two years since, prepared and had published in the Richmond
Advocate a somewhat elaborate paper on sanctification. In it he objects to "a vagueness and
indefiniteness, both in psychology and scriptural interpretation, as to what the so-called 'remains of
the carnal mind' are." And others may be ready to ask what part of original nature is left when the
"body of sin is destroyed," or the "old man" is "crucified," etc.? And much is said about the innocent
appetites, desires, and affections of our nature, which belong to a pure or unfallen man.
Now, we do not claim to have received any new light on this subject, and candidly admit that
there may be a degree of vagueness, about it which we are not able to remove; yet we fail to see any
lack of harmony between this theory and a true and scriptural psychology. We know of no intelligent
writer who claims that sanctification works any change in the substance of the soul, removing any
of its natural faculties or powers, or imparting to it any new ones. Bishop Foster, in his Philosophy
of Christian Experience, notes the changes wrought in regeneration and subsequent experiences, and
gives the true psychology of the subject. He says:
"It is the same soul it was prior to its naturalization. It is important that we should emphasize this.
It is not another soul. Nothing has been added to its prior self-essence, and nothing has been removed
from its prior self-essence. All its old faculties and susceptibilities remain, and no new ones have
been added. In these respects it does not differ from its former self. The change that has taken place
in it is simply a change as to the objects of its affections and the determinations of its will ... There
is an identity of soul which holds from the dawn of existence to utmost immortality."
We contend as earnestly as Dr. Crane, Dr. Boland, or any one else, that in the "destruction" or
"crucifixion" of the "old man" not a single one of these faculties of the soul is entirely extirpated, but
that order is restored to these deranged powers by the eradication of that which is morbid, and by a
regulation of and a restraint upon that which is innocent in these faculties. It is admitted that a
sensuous meaning and a too literal construction may sometimes be given to the terms the apostle
uses in speaking of inherited depravity, such as "the body of "the body of this "the carnal "the old
man," etc., but we think that all of what is represented by them is removed in sanctification. But, as
Bishop Foster says: