The 'Ordo Salutis' and Charismatic Movement DOUGLAS ROBINSON One of the central concerns of the last five centuries of theological debate has been the relationship of justification to sanctification. Prior to the Reformation, justification and sanctification were not clearly distinguished. Justification was, in effect, dependent in part upon a prior work of sanctification. The Reformers reordered this under­ standing. They clearly separated these works of grace. Justification became entirely dependent upon the imputed righteousness of Christ. Man's response to this example of God's grace is to respond by faith. The work of sanctification follows on from this. It is, however, never complete, for whilst man is justified, he always remains a sinner­ simu/ justus-simul peecat or. The Protestant ordo salutis is thus justifi­ cation followed by santification, whereas the Catholic order is the reverse of this. Within Protestantism, one of the most significant developments in the accepted ordo salutis came from John Wesley. In his theology, the focus of the ordo salutis shifted from justification to a point subsequent to it. For Wesley, the ordo salutis began with prevenient grace which draws men to the Father; then convincing grace brings about repentance and saving faith. From saving faith, justification ensues. Yet this brings about only a 'relative change'-liberation from the guilt of sin. Final justification is not complete at this point. A work of sanctification must be effected between the two moments of justification. This work of sanctification has a dual nature. Sanctification not only has a progressive and gradual character; Wesley also believed that it is a particular experience taking place at an identifiable moment. It is given in answer to faith, and is received in its entirety. As a result of this gift, the Christian's life increases in sanctity, 'which is a necessary qualification for eternallife.'1 It is clear that, under this scheme, sanctification must become the dominant component in salvation. Wesley himself was aware of this, and regarded his doctrine of sanctification as the peculiar tenet of the Methodist movement. As he wrote in a letter dated 15 September 1790: 'This doctrine (full sanctification) is the grand deposition which God has lodged with the people called the Methodists, and for the sake of propagating this chiefly He appeared to raise us up. '2 Wesley's emphasis was subsequently adopted and modified by the evangelists and theologians of the American holiness movement. In this new context, and under the influence of the camp meeting, the 232 The 'Ordo Salutis' and the Charismatic Movement principal modifications were in the direction of individualism, emotionalism and an increasing emphasis upon the crisis experience. In the mid-nineteenth century, through the preaching of C. G. Finney and the writing of Asa Mahan, the crisis experience became known as 'the baptism with the Holy Ghost'. This term came into greater prominence with the evangelistic campaigns of both Moody and Torrey who, in their counselling, promised a further experience of grace called 'baptism in the Spirit' which converts were to seek diligently. Torrey added a new and decisive element. He wrote: 'The baptism with the Holy Spirit is an experience connected with, and primarily for the purpose of service ... the baptism with the Holy Spirit has no direct reference to cleansing from sin. It has to do with gifts for service rather than with graces of character ... '3 The significant change here is in the purpose of sanctification. Wesley had seen the work of sanctification as having two parts: first, the relationship between the believer and God through Christ; and second, the transformation of behaviour. Torrey saw it a different way. Sanc­ tification was no longer the divinization of man; it was his empowering. The focus of theology was moving even further away from justification; here we see it moving away from sanctification. This continuing change of theological focus became more pro­ nounced at the end of the century. Benjamin Irwin, a Baptist preacher, was drawn into the holiness movement and discovered in the writings of John Fletcher, an early Methodist, an important new emphasis. Fletcher had taught that beyond sanctification there is a further experience which he called 'the baptism of burning love'. This is an inflow of divine fullness which is given only to the sanctified and the pure in heart. Irwin adopted this into a three-stage ordo salutis: conversion, sanctification, and the baptism of fire. As the nineteenth century came to a close, Americans were surrounded by a whirlwind of change: economic, social, intellectual and religious. This led to a widespread desire for the church to demon­ strate to the world its power and vitality. It was directly from this context that Pentecostalism sprang. As a full scale movement it dates from the remarkable series of meetings in Azusa Street, Los Angeles, which began in 1906. But its beginnings may be traced back to the Topeka Bible College where what was to become a distinctive belief for Pentecostals was first fully formulated at the end of 1900--namely 'that in apostolic times speaking in tongues was considered to be the initial physical evidence of a person having received the baptism in the Holy Spirit. •• This new and distinctive doctrine fitted into the order of salvation in the following manner: first came conversion, then sanctification, followed by baptism in the Spirit. The early teachers of the movement, 233 Churchman Parham and Seymour, regarded sanctification as the essential prepara­ tion for the baptism in the Holy Spirit. This represents a de-eschatolo­ gization of the Wesleyan scheme of salvation. For Wesley, the purpose of sanctification was to prepare for salvation; now it paved the way for service and individual assurance of God's presence and power. This three-tier view of salvation was the hallmark of the emerging Pentecostal movement. However, from a relatively early point, W. H. Durham began to put forward a simpler scheme: I began to write against the doctrine that it takes two works of grace to save and to cleanse a man. I denied and still deny that God does not deal with the nature of sin at conversion. I deny that a man who is converted and born again is outwardly washed and cleansed but that his heart is left unclean with enmity towards God in it ... This would not be salvation. Salvation is an inward work ... It means a change of nature ... It means that all the old man, or old nature which was sinful and depraved, and which was the very thing in us that was condemned, is crucified with Christ.' Thus sanctification is no longer a distinct and sudden experience subsequent to justification. The two are merged into one work of grace, which is quite separate from baptism in the Spirit. No longer is there a three-stage way of salvation, only a two-stage ordo salutis. Despite some vociferous opposition to Durham when he first put forward this two-stage scheme, it became the dominant model within Pentecostalism. Upon first encounter, the Pentecostal preaching of salvation appears to be thoroughly within the Protestant framework. The starting-point is identical, 'the utter depravity of human nature' bringing as its consequence 'the necessity for repentance and regeneration.' A person who is regenerate is said to be justified by faith in the atoning blood of Christ. In spite of this formal affirmation of the doctrine of justification by faith, the doctrine is robbed of meaning by various other elements in Pentecostal teaching. First, the utter depravity of human nature is not taken very seriously in connection with the genesis of faith. In contrast to Luther's view of the bondage of the will, man plays a decisive role in coming to faith. Thus Pearlman, a leading Pentecostal, says, 'Is faith a human or a divine activity? The fact that man is commanded to believe implies the ability and the obligation to do so. '6 Second, it cannot be doubted that the doctrine of justification by faith does not, in the Pentecostal movement, hold the central position that it does within Reformed theology. For whilst sanctification may no longer be the dominant motif of Pentecostal theology, its focus of attention remained at a point subsequent to justification; namely, baptism in the Spirit. This is the primary characteristic of Pentecostal preaching and practice. 234 The 'Ordo Salutis' and the Charismatic Movement Thirdly, Pentecostalism suffers from the merging of justification with sanctification. Within Pentecostalism, justification does not have any clear precedence over sanctification. Pentecostals emphasize sanctification to such a degree that justification by faith is claimed to be insufficient for salvation. They insist that there must be a minimum of sanctification or there can be no redemption. So Barrett says, 'Inward purification must be achieved in order to enter heaven, because it is written "holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord" (Heb. 12: 14). ' 7 Professor Hollenweger illustrates this understanding very vividly in the story of the man condemned to death for embezzlement. 8 Those present in court took pity on him and raised £1,999,19.6<1. But since the man owed £2,000, the judge ruled that he must be condemned. In despair, the man went through all his pockets and then, to wild applause, produced 6d. This example demonstrates the dual character of justification within Pentecostalism. Despite the extensive changes in the ordo salutis since Wesley's scheme, it still bears his mark. In spite ofthe large proportion of the debt being paid for him (£1,999.19.6<1), there still remains a proportion which depends upon the exertion of the condemned (6d). Sanctification is still a necessary qualification for justification.