ASBURY SEMINARY 1 09403S314 Abstract The Spirit and Sanctification: Changes Within American Wesleyanism Victor Paul Reasoner One of the many contributions John Wesley made to the worldwide church was his understanding of Christian perfection. He brought Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox, and Protestant contributions together with his own convictions in a way that conformed to the teaching of scripture. When the American holiness movement came into being it sought to restore the original teachings of John Wesley. In 1952 the Inter-church Holiness Convention formed in reaction to changes occurring within the larger holiness movement. The purpose of the proposed study is to examine what credentialed ministers today within the Inter-church Holiness Convention believe about sanctification - initial, entire, progressive, and final - and compare that emphasis with John Wesley's teachings on sanctification. A survey was developed and sent to a random cross-section of clergy within the IHC movement. The results of the survey were analyzed to determine how Wesleyan the Inter-church Holiness Convention actually is in their thinking. An analysis of the current emphasis on sanctification in the Inter-church Holiness Convention can have practical benefits for the caring pastor who wants to be biblical and avoid an unbalanced emphasis. It would have special interest to those who have been influenced by the I. H. C. emphasis. The survey indicated an over-reliance upon certain holiness proof texts. Many pastors seem to have a fragmented concept of sanctification. They have missed Wesley's big picture. Initial sanctification has been overlooked. Entire sanctification is thought of almost exclusively as a crisis experience with little regard given to the progressive work of the Holy Spirit. Entire sanctification is too often understood as a permanent state of grace instead of a moment- by-moment condition to be maintained. To teach that entire sanctification is accomplished through the baptism of the Holy Spirit is also a shift from Wesley's terminology. It is my hope that this study can assist pastors in working through their own beliefs and then offering help in determining what are the real needs of their congregation. I want to demonstrate some of the consequences of the departure from Wesley and how a rediscovery of Wesley can help me be a better counselor and communicator of truth. DISSERTATION APPROVAL This is to certify that the dissertation entitled THE SPIRIT AND SANCTIFICATION : CHANGES WITHIN AMERICAN WESLEYANISM presented by Victor Paul Reasoner has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for the DOCTOR OF MINISTRY degree at Asbury Theological Seminary e Wi Imor , Kentucky Date Date Director, Doctor of Ministry Program Date THE SPIRIT AND SANCTIFICATION: CHANGES WITHIN AMERICAN WESLEYANISM A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of Asbury Theological Seminary In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Ministry by Victor Paul Reasoner May 1994 Copyright 1994 Victor Paul Reasoner ALL RIGHTS RESERVED TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page 1 . Introduction 1 The Significance of this Study 1 Purpose of the Inquiry 5 The Procedure 6 Overview of the Study 17 2. Development of the Doctrine of Sanctification 19 The Old Testament 19 The New Testament 22 The Church Fathers 23 Three Eighteenth Century Streams 33 Wesley's Synthesis 35 3. Shifts in Wesleyan/Holiness Theology 40 A Paradigm Shift 40 Nineteenth Century Holiness Theology 69 Consequences of the Change 78 Conclusion 84 4. Understanding Current Beliefs of the IHC 91 A Description of the IHC 91 The Development of a Survey 95 ii The Results of the Survey 97 Critique of the Survey 100 5. Conclusions and Summary 104 An Analysis of the Data 104 Areas of Agreement/Disagreement 114 The Problem 116 The Findings 119 The Recommendations 121 Appendixes A. Sample - First Cover Letter 129 B. Sample - Second Cover Letter 130 C. Sample Survey 131 D. Sample of Letter to Rev- Schmul 134 E. Copy of Rev- Schmul 's Reply 135 F. Copy of Bible Missionary Letter 136 List of Works Cited 137 iii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION The Significance of this Study In A Fundamental Practical Theology Don S . Browning explained that no one does theology in a vacuum. Total objectivity is impossible. We all approach a problem with our own background and presuppositions. Instead of moving from theory to practice, which he claims we never do in real life, his recommendation is that we begin with descriptive theology (9). My starting point is the context in which I was raised and the community of faith in which I have pastored. My family identified with the conservative holiness movement in the 1940s. This segment of the holiness movement would have been more concerned with cultural issues than the larger holiness denominations. Melvin Dieter described the conservative holiness movement as those discontented with changes the holiness denominations made regarding traditional holiness life-styles (Beacon 261 ) . There were defections from all of the major holiness denominations and there were also 2 small holiness groups which had not experienced change. When the Inter-church Holiness Convention (IHC) emerged in the 1950s it would have drawn from both sources. I was raised to suspect the sincerity of anyone who was not identified with the conservative holiness movement. I was also raised to distrust anyone who did not accept our conservative standards of dress and conduct. I attended the first national IHC in 1974 and was then delighted to see there were so many of "us." I was first licensed to preach by the Church of God (Holiness) in 1975 and was ordained by them in 1981. I pastored within that denomination for sixteen years. I was educated at their bible college and in a sense was "pure bred." I always wondered why people who professed to be Bible believing could reject our interpretations. However, shortly into my first pastorate I became aware that some of our favorite proof texts would not necessarily bear the weight we put on them. I came to a crisis in my ministry regarding whether I would preach the traditional interpretations I had grown up with or whether I would strive to be exegetically honest. I chose to be loyal to scripture, not fully realizing where that might lead me. In my second pastorate I served as chairman of the Southern California Inter-church Holiness Convention from 1985-88. I also completed a Master of Divinity degree with a 3 major in church history. My thesis was an attempt to trace a shift in the emphasis on sanctification within the holiness movement. In a sense, I am still trying to grasp the full scope of what happened in the American holiness movement and how that has effected my ministry My third pastorate was an attempt to pastor a congregation which had broken away from certain expectations within the conservative wing of the holiness movement and yet was still trying to maintain ties with that segment of the holiness movement. I was ostracized because I did not adhere to the party line in my interpretation of key biblical passages or in my insistence upon certain dress standards. They had developed their own set of issues, behaviors, and values which made them distinct from the mainstream holiness movement and which justified their existence. I felt I was no longer accepted within the subculture in which I grew up. I went through a painful evaluation trying to discover where I belonged. In June, 1993 I transferred my credentials to the Fellowship of Bible Churches which considers itself to be outside the conservative wing of the holiness movement. This dissertation reflects my own solidification of what I believe and the realization that my conclusions place me outside the conservative wing of the holiness movement. I believe this research will be beneficial to anyone struggling with issues of identity and effectiveness in future ministry. In his history of the Church of God (Holiness) C. E. 4 Cowen asserted that the Methodist Church had lost its zeal for the doctrine of sanctification and therefore it was necessary for the holiness movement to propagate the doctrine (11-14). However, the new emphasis on sanctification was not the original emphasis of John Wesley. In many cases the Methodist church did not oppose the doctrine of Wesley, but the excesses within the nineteenth century holiness movement. I was particularly fascinated by a document in which T. J. Bryant rebutted charges made by John P Brooks in the Banner of Holiness. Brooks had presented a paper, "What Are the Chief Hindrances to the Progress of the Work of Sanctification Among Believers?" at the Holiness Conference held in Cincinnati in 1877. According to Melvin Dieter, it was Brooks who laid the groundwork which led to the formation of holiness churches (Revival 219). Brooks became an early leader of the Church of God (Holiness) and later published The Divine Church in 1891. In his book Brooks argued that "holiness cannot be successfully propagated under sectarian conditions" (271). This meant that holiness sympathizers should "come out" and identify with the one true church. Bryant began with an admission that "there is an honest and growing opposition in the Methodist Episcopal Church to the so-called holiness movement in the West" (4). But he affirms the issue is not the doctrine of holiness, but excesses within the holiness movement. In chapter 3, I will 5 recount the story of A. L. Brewer who was also affiliated with the Church of God (Holiness) for a time. His fanaticism would not represent the whole group, but I began to see that we had no monopoly on either the doctrine or practice of holiness. I came to the conclusion that it was not honest for me to remain identified with a group that came into existence to promote a rather narrow understanding of one doctrine.