Scriptural Sanctification - Media Sabda Org

perfect in love in the sense in which Wesley taught it. Drs. Mahan, Upham, and Earle, of a former
generation, did; and the Rev. Drs. E. M. Levy, Baptist, of Philadelphia, and A. B. Simpson,
Presbyterian, of New York, and the Rev. A. M. Hills, Congregationalist, of Oberlin, of the present
day, do most emphatically. But Drs. Gordon, Pierson, and Chapman, and Messrs. Murray, Meyer,
McNeil, Moody, and others, seem to "fight shy" of the words "perfect" and "perfection," and
presumably for the following reasons: (1) Because of their Calvinistic training they believe that
spiritual depravity or inbred sin, as well as mental and physical weakness, is constitutional, and is
connected with the body in such sense that we cannot be fully saved from it in this life. (2) The "Free
Methodists" or "Nazarites," and the "Plymouth Brethren" of the North, have, by their Antinomianism
and other errors and extremes, brought the term "perfectionist" into disrepute, if not contempt, as
some unwise and extreme "sanctificationists" have done in the South; so that some prudent preachers
of our section, who believe in and teach the Wesleyan theory of "perfect love," rarely or never use
the terms "perfection," and "second blessing," in the pulpit. (3) Because they do not, as indicated
above, understand or use the term in the same sense in which Mr. Wesley did. What he calls "sins
of infirmity," resulting from ignorance, physical and mental weakness, etc., they seem to regard as
sin in the Bible meaning of the term, "the law of sin," "indwelling sin," etc., and hence say we cannot
be saved from all sin -- "a sinful body" in this life. Properly understood, there is very little difference
between them and Mr. Wesley, for he did not preach or claim to have "sinless perfection," in the
sense of being saved from sins of infirmity, etc.; nor does any intelligent follower of his do so today.
After rejecting the theory of "sinless perfection" and "deliverance from a sinful nature," Dr.
Gordon says:
"But we do consider it possible that one may experience a great crisis in his spiritual life, in which
there is such a total self-surrender to God, and such an infilling of the Holy Spirit, that he is freed
from the bondage of sinful appetites and habits, and enabled to have constant victory over self;
instead of suffering constant defeat ... And we doubt not there are Christians who have yielded
themselves to God in such absolute surrender, and who through the upholding power of the Spirit
have been so kept in that condition of surrender that sin has not had dominion over them. If in them
the war between the flesh and the spirit has not been forever ended, there has been present victory,
in which troublesome sins [inbred sin] have ceased from their assaults, and the peace of God has
ruled in the heart."
Dr. Gordon's views of the nature of this work of the Spirit are almost identical with those of Mr.
Wesley. It marks "a great crisis in his spiritual life," conditioned on "total self-surrender to God,"
followed by, being "kept in that condition of "constant victory over self" -- selfishness or improper
self-love -- "the war between the flesh and the spirit," if not "forever ended," is so successful that
"troublesome sins" -- "the sin that dwelleth in us" -- have discontinued their assaults," and "peace
rules in the heart." Taken in connection with what he and Mr. Moody say of uninterrupted assurance,
every essential element of entire sanctification or perfect love is seen to be included. Indeed, it will
thus be seen that the interpretation of Scripture by many leading divines of non-Methodistic
Churches, confirmed by experience, supports the affirmation of Dr Tillett's hypothetical proposition:
(1) That sanctification is subsequent to regeneration; (2) that it is instantaneous in its development;
and (3) that its accomplishment is certified to the subject of it.
*************************************