False Gospel According to the Holiness Movement
Catholic and Pentecostal historians all recognize that the modern
charismatic movement has its roots in the holiness movement. Pentecostalism
is the logical and inevitable extension of "holiness" theology. For
this reason, Present Truth Magazine will devote this issue
to an appraisal of the "holiness" doctrine.
We will quote at length
from two "holiness" books which are still being circulated in the
United States. Just as there are many types of Pentecostal ism, so
there are many types of "holiness" doctrine. But all "holiness" teaching
is clearly distinguished by one characteristic: rather than allowing
holiness of life to appear in its true order as the fruit of preaching
the gospel, the attainment to holiness of life is the "holiness" gospel.
The first presentation,
by John Morgan, proposes such a state of holiness of life as a condition
for being justified that it is certain no sinner could ever attain
to justification by following out the condition. Morgan's teaching
is a far cry from St. Paul's message that God justifies the ungodly
who believe (Rom. 4:5)
The second presentation,
by C.W. Ruth, proposes that the attainment of the "second blessing"
(which is supposed to eradicate inbred sin) is a condition of retaining
the blessing of justification. It is certain that no believer could
retain his justification upon the condition set forth by this "holiness"
Neither author has anything
to say about God's saving act in Christ. God's redeeming work outside
of the poor sinner is not that to which his hope is directed, but
it is made to rest on the work of grace inside of himself. This doctrine
is the old Romanism dressed up in a few Protestant revivalist trappings.
from Holiness Acceptable to God, by John Morgan1
John Morgan was a lifelong
friend of Charles G. Finney and textual advisor at Oberlin College.
Finney held Morgan's presentation in such high regard that he included
it in the original edition of his Systematic Theology, volume
2. This presentation represents the theological viewpoint of one of
America's most renowned revivalists. As well as teaching that the
believer's perfect obedience to the law is a condition of justification,
the Finney school took issue with the Reformers' doctrine that all
good works of the saints, being defiled with human imperfection, cannot
satisfy the claims of God's law. We wonder whether the Finney school
was aware that their arguments were substantially the same as the
arguments used by the Roman Catholics who opposed Luther and Calvin.
Says John Morgan:
" 'Wherewith shall
I come before the Lord, and bow myself before the High God?' This
has in all ages been the solemn and anxious inquiry of earnest souls.
It is the question of one who has sinned—the question, however, of
hope and not of despair; the question of one who conceives that perhaps
the High and Holy One may be acceptably approached. But the inquiry
presupposes that whatever God may have done, may be doing, or is ready
to do for his salvation, the inquirer has a personal responsibility
which he must meet, that there are conditions which he must fulfill.
What shall I do to inherit eternal life? The question recognizes the
moral agency of the inquirer and the necessity of its appropriate
"It is admitted by all, except utter antinomians,
that some degree of holiness or conformity to the divine law is
indispensable to acceptance with God.2 No one, we think,
would refuse to unite with the venerable Westminster Confession
in the statement that 'repentance, by which a sinner so grieves
for and hates his sins as to turn from them all to God, purposing
and endeavoring to walk with Him in all the ways of His commandments,
is of such necessity to all sinners, that none may expect pardon
"Still, the majority of the church would doubtless,
with the Larger Westminster Catechism, maintain that the 'best works'
of God's accepted saints, 'are imperfect and defiled in the sight
of God.' The celebrated Dr. Beecher in his recent letter on Perfection
exhibits the theory which he has embraced on the subject. We will
quote a few of his questions and answers.
"Question 1. What takes place in regeneration?
"Answer. The reconciliation of an enemy to God;
submission to his will; love to God more than to all creatures and
all things. In its commencement, this love is feeble compared with
'all the heart, mind, soul and strength,' according to the moral
law; and to qualify for heaven, must be progressively augmented
through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth.
"Question 2. How can the help of Christ be obtained,
to secure our growth in grace?
"Answer. By renouncing all reliance upon our own
strength and merits, and relying entirely on the sufficiency and
willingness of Christ to help us, sought by filial supplication,
and the diligent use of the appointed means of grace; striving,
as the Puritan writers say, as if all depended on ourselves, and
looking to Christ as if all depended on him.
"Question 3. What will be the effect of such a prayerful
reliance upon Christ, in the diligent use of the means of grace?
"Answer. Not perfection; for faith can be no more
perfect than the love which animates it; and not including love
with all the heart, and mind, and soul, and strength is always an
implication of defect needing an advocate and pardon. The child
who cannot go a step alone may as well exult in the claim of perfect
manhood, as those who can do nothing without Christ, in the claim
of perfection. But the result will be that they will grow in grace
till they die, going from strength to strength, till they all appear
in Zion before God.
"The doctrine of these extracts clearly is not simply
that the love of a newborn saint is feeble compared with that of
an advanced Christian but that it is less than the moral law requires,
and therefore sinfully defective. These extracts also teach that
'the most prayerful reliance on Christ and the most diligent use
of the means of grace' ever practiced in this life never produce
an obedience which does not itself, because of sinful defect, need
"In these views Dr. Beecher coincides with the representation
of the Westminster Confession, that 'they who in their obedience
attain to the greatest height which is possible in this life . .
. fall short in much which in duty they are bound to do.'
"We propose to seek a scriptural answer to the inquiry:
Is any degree of holiness acceptable to God, which, for the time
being, falls short of full obedience to the divine law? We put the
question into the most general form, intending it to apply to both
the accepted holiness of the newborn soul and the holiness of the
most mature Christian."
". . . we proceed more directly to the question
whether full obedience to its [the law's) requisitions is a condition
of acceptance with God. Those who believe that 'the best works of
justified persons are defiled in the sight of God' cannot believe
that full obedience to the divine law is a present condition of
the divine favor."
". . . nothing can be plainer than this that such
passages as Micah 6:8 speak of a condition on which sinners may
approach God acceptably. A serious inquirer is introduced as asking,
'Wherewith shall I come before the Lord and bow myself before the
High God? Shall I come before him with burnt-offerings, with calves
of a year old? Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams,
or with tens of thousands of rivers of oil! Shall I give my first-born
for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?'
Can anything be more manifest than this, that these are the questions
of a sinner?
"Let us hear again the answer of the inspired prophet:
'He hath showed thee, 0 man, what is good; and what doth the Lord
require of thee but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk
humbly with thy God?' He presents to him the whole compass of duty,
and encourages him with no hint that he may come before the Lord
and bow himself before the High God with a partial performance of
"The Bible declares of saints that they have actually
rendered full obedience. It is said of Caleb (Num. 14:24), 'My servant
Caleb, because he had another spirit with him and hath followed
me fully, him will I bring into the land that he hath trodden upon
and to his children, because he hath wholly followed the Lord' (Deut.
"Of Joshua and Caleb (Num. 32:12), it is said: 'They
have wholly followed the Lord.' The same language is employed with
respect to David (I Kings 11:6). God sentences the Israelites in
the wilderness: 'Surely none of the men that came up out of Egypt
from twenty years old and upward, shall see the land which I sware
unto Abraham, unto Isaac and unto Jacob; because they have not wholly
followed me' (Num. 32:11). Solomon is sentenced(I Kings 11:11; compare
verse 11) to lose his kingdom because 'he went not after the Lord
fully as did David his father,' and thus failed 'to keep the Lord's
"The original Hebrew phrase in all these places
is the same, though translated into somewhat different English.
Gesenius, surpassed by no one in Hebrew lexicography, explains the
phrase to mean 'to yield God full obedience.' Leopold in his lexicon
renders it 'integra obedientia Jovam sequi,' that is, to follow
Jehovah with entire obedience.
"In reference to David, God says to Jeroboam, 'Thou
hast not been as my servant David, who kept my commandments, and
who followed me with all his heart, to do that only which was right
in mine eyes' (I Kings 14:8). It is recorded of Jehoshaphat (II
Chron. 22:9) that 'he sought the Lord with all his heart.' Of Josiah
the inspired record is, ' And like unto him was there no king before
him, that turned to the Lord with all his heart, and with all his
soul, and with all his might, according to all the law of Moses,
neither after him arose there any like him' (II Kings 23:25)..."
"Bible saints professed this entire obedience. Thus
Caleb says to Joshua, 'My brethren that went up with me, made the
heart of the people melt; but I wholly followed the Lord my God'
(Josh. 14:8). 'I beseech thee, 0 Lord,' says Hezekiah (II Kings
20:3), 'remember how I have walked before thee in truth and with
a perfect heart.' It is remarkable that the lexicographers Gesenius,
Leopold, and Gibbs, in explaining the word shaulem, give both the
general signification, perfect, entire, consummate, and in reference
to the relation of men to God make it signify at peace or on good
terms with Him.
"In Psalm 119:10, 58, 145, the Psalmist professes,
'With my whole heart have I sought thee; 0 let me not wander from
thy commandments. . . . I entreated thy favor with my whole heart;
be merciful unto me according to thy word. . . . I cried with my
whole heart; hear me; I will keep thy statutes.' It may be thought
that historians or poets in describing the characters or conduct
of others would resort to the language of hyperbole; but do the
modest, humble saints employ hyperbolical expressions in telling
of their own conduct and exercises? Do they magnify their own earnestness
and faithfulness or use the words of simple truth? Two remarks we
will make on the passages from the Psalmist: (a) He founds on his
wholehearted seeking and prayers a covenant claim to be heard, to
be made a subject of mercy and grace. (b) His belief of his own
wholeheartedness did not make him self-confident or presumptuous.
'0 let me not wander from thy commandments' is anything but the
language of a self-confident spirit."
"We request our readers to consider attentively
such passages as declare: . . . (a) that we cannot serve God and
Mammon; (b) that we must hate our nearest friends and forsake all
that we have in order to be Christ's disciples; (c) that we must
sell all that we have in order to buy the field with the treasure
hid in it, or to obtain the pearl of great price; (d) that the violator
of one commandment is guilty of all; (e) that the accepted Christian
is free from sin, dead and buried to sin—that he is risen to righteousness;
(f) that to him who is in Christ Jesus old things are passed away
and all things become new. Let these passages be examined with their
context, and it will be seen that they entirely harmonize with the
numerous texts quoted from the Old Testament.
"On Matthew 5:24 we quote from the Commentary of
Calvin, one of the ablest and most spiritual of expositors, and
on the whole decidedly our own favorite. The extracts are instructive,
both as showing the force with which such passages strike pious
minds, in theory opposed to their teachings, and as giving a specimen
of the best shifts by which they try to dispose of their natural
import. 'Christ denies that it can be that any one should obey God
and his flesh at the same time. . . Since God everywhere commends
sincerity, while a double heart is abominable, all those are deceived
who think he will be contented with half of their heart. All, indeed,
confess with the mouth, that God is not truly worshipped except
with entire affection, but they deny it in reality, while they study
to reconcile things contrary to each other. I will not cease, says
the ambitious man, to serve God, although I apply a good part of
my mind to the chase of honors. . .
'It is true, indeed, that believers themselves never
are so entirely given to obedience to God but what they are drawn
from it by the vicious desires of the flesh. But because they groan
under this miserable bondage, and are displeased with themselves,
and do not serve the flesh otherwise than unwilling and reluctant
(inviti et reluctantes)—they are not said to serve two masters,
because their purposes and efforts are approved by the Lord, just
as if they rendered him an entire obedience. But here the hypocrisy
of those persons is exposed, who flatter themselves in vices, as
if they could conjoin light with darkness.'
"We ask, where in the whole compass of the Bible
are saints said to be thus distinguishable from sinners? Where are
they said to sin 'unwillingly and reluctantly'—while none of the
ungodly are reluctant about it? We know of no texts which can under
any pretense be cited to sustain such a view, except the contested
passages in Romans 7 and Galatians 5—with respect to the first of
which we cannot but concur with Tholuck in the remark that 'if the
least attention is paid to the connection of this section of chapter
7 with that which precedes and that which follows, it is not possible
to explain it of any other than a person standing under the law.'
"The great Edwards is not always consistent with
himself, nor are his professed disciples. Thus they all insist that
no one can be a good Christian who does not intend or aim at sinless
perfection, or, as the Westminster Confession has it, 'purpose and
endeavor to walk with God in all the ways of his commandments.'
Yet they also insist that it is dangerous error, if not heresy,
to believe that anyone ever really fully obeys God. All Christians
have the will for it but never do it. 'If there be a full compliance
of will,' says Edwards, 'the person has done his duty; and if other
things do not prove to be connected with his volition, that is not
owing to him.' "
"It would appear that in the apostle's [Paul's]
view we must be conformed to the law in order to please God. And
how shall he 'who is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity, and
who cannot look upon sin,' be pleased with less than full conformity
". . . The whole argument of Paul, in the 6th, 7th
and 8th chapters of Romans, proceeds on the supposition that the
entire subjugation of sin is indispensable to justification."
"We are well aware of the interpretation of Romans
7:7-25 still current among Calvinistic writers in England and America.
It is an interpretation which, beginning with Augustine, spread
through his great influence extensively in the church, and gained
still further vogue by the adoption and sanction of the reformers
Calvin and Luther. But until Augustine broached it, so far as history
informs us, the church knew nothing of it. By the whole early church,
learned and unlearned, the passage was referred to as the experience
of a sinner under the law. Notwithstanding the venerable authority
of the reformers and the high esteem in which they are held by evangelical
men the world over, the whole body of pious German commentators,
several of the most distinguished in Scotland and England, and Professors
Stuart and Robinson in America have been compelled by the apostle's
argument, in spite of theological bias, to return to the ancient
"With the exception of the Methodist commentators,
we see not how these learned men can be plausibly charged with adopting
their views from theological prejudice, inasmuch as they all, so
far as we know, held or hold the doctrine of the constant moral
imperfection of Christians. Hence Professor Hodge of Princeton in
his able work on Romans, while tenaciously cleaving to the current
view among Calvinists, says: 'There is nothing in this opinion which
implies the denial or disregard of any of the fundamental principles
of evangelical religion.'"
"The doctrine with which we are at present concerned
is not that of the simplicity of moral actions, nor that of the
constant sinlessness of such as have been converted, but simply
this, that nothing short of present entire conformity to the divine
law is accepted of God. Now, we admit, that if it could be made
out that the Scriptures represent the saints as constantly' sinful,
that would be fatal to our view, though then we should be at a loss
to interpret the numerous texts we have cited so as to make them
harmonize with the texts adduced against us."
from Entire Sanctification, by C. W. Ruth3
C. W. Ruth takes a different
approach than John Morgan. Whereas Morgan advocates the attainment
of a certain degree of holiness as a necessary condition to obtain
justification, Ruth takes a position that is more widely held — he
advocates the attainment of a certain degree of holiness as a necessary
condition to retain justification.
Says C.W. Ruth:
". . . sanctification
is an experience subsequent to regeneration, conditioned upon entire
consecration and faith, the privilege of every believer, to be experienced
and enjoyed in this life. That by the baptism with the Holy Ghost
inbred sin is destroyed and the heart perfected in love. The people
holding this theory are the only people who, personally, have any
experience or testimony to sanctification. These believe that sin
has never gone so deep into the soul, but that the blood of Jesus
can go deeper. 'That where sin abounded grace did much more abound.'
Jesus believed sanctification a divine act, for He prayed the Father
to sanctify the disciples, John 17:17. Indeed, the Trinity enters
into our sanctification. God the Father wills our sanctification,
I Thess. 4:3. In order to provide our sanctification Jesus suffered
without the gate, Heb. 13:12. And the Holy Ghost witnesses to our
sanctification, Heb. 10:14, 15. It is said of Bible saints, they were
'sanctified by God the Father,' Jude 1:1; also that Jesus sanctifies,
Eph. 5:25-27; and of the offering up of the Gentiles it was said they
were 'sanctified by the Holy Ghost,' Rom. 15:16. In Acts 26:l8 we
find that sanctification is obtained by faith. Seeing it is a work
that God must do for us, we need not wait for growth, death or purgatory,
but may by faith enter this blessed experience the instant the consecration
is entire and complete. While there is a gradual approach to the experience
from the human side, the divine work is instantaneous. Hallelujah!"
Between Justification and Sanctification4
Justification and Sanctification are not used in a technical or
critical sense, but rather in a general sense as referring to experience.)"
there is life.
"In Sanctification there is life more abundant.
there is love.
"In Sanctification there is perfect love which casteth out fear.
the 'old man' is repressed.
"In Sanctification the 'old man' is destroyed.
there is 'peace with God.'
"In Sanctification there is 'the peace of God.'
destroys the 'shoots' of sin. "Sanctification destroys the 'roots'
"Justification gives us a right to heaven. "Sanctification gives
the fitness for heaven.
we 'put on the new man.'
"In Sanctification we 'put off the old man with his deeds.'
there is joy—intermittent joy.
"In Sanctification there is fullness of joy — abiding joy.
includes pardon, which is a judicial act.
"Sanctification includes a cleansing, which is a priestly function.
comprehends adoption; making us children of God.
"Sanctification comprehends anointing, making us kings and priests
is illustrated by the rescue of the sinking man from the water.
"Sanctification is getting the water out of the lungs of the drowning
is conditioned on confession of sin (I John 1:9).
"Sanctification is conditioned on walking 'in the light as he is
in the light' (I John 1:7).
has to do with sin as an act — sins committed.
"Sanctification has to do with sin as a principle—the sin nature
comes by the birth of the Spirit—when the repentant sinner is born
"Sanctification comes by the baptism with the Spirit—when the believer
has a personal pentecost.
restores to us the favor of God which we had lost through our own
"Sanctification restores to us holiness or the moral likeness of
God, which we had lost through Adam's disobedience.
is the impartation of a spiritual nature, bringing us into possession
of eternal life.
"Sanctification is the crucifixion and destruction of our carnal
nature, making us dead indeed unto sin.
is obtained by surrender, repentance and faith.
"Sanctification is obtained by obedience, consecration and faith.
delivers from guilt and condemnation.
"Sanctification delivers from unholy tempers and abnormal appetites.
the Holy Spirit is with the believer.
"In Sanctification the Holy Spirit is in the believer (John 14:17).
separates us from the world, so we are no longer of the world.
"Sanctification takes the world out of us; worldly desires and ambitions.
makes us free—free from outward sin and condemnation.
"Sanctification makes 'free indeed.' Gives the 'deed' to our freedom
with all the mortgages paid off. Freedom from fear, and doubt, and
we are united to Christ as the branch to the vine.
"In Sanctification we receive the purging promised to the living,
fruitful vine, that we may 'bring forth more fruit' (John 15:2).
the experience is a 'well of water' (John 4:14). A well is for personal
"In Sanctification there is a fullness of blessing so that out of
our inward parts 'shall flow rivers of living water' (John 6:38,
39). A river cannot be confined to personal use, but will bless
and fructify wherever it flows."
is the 'second blessing' exactly in the same sense that justification
is the first blessing. Justification is the first blessing that
changes our moral condition and our personal relation toward God.
In justification we are changed from the attitude and relation of
enemies and rebels toward God into that of obedient children. It
certainly is a blessing—but it is more, it is a grace that transforms
and transposes into a permanent state and experience. Until this
experience, all other blessings left the individual in the same
moral condition they had found him. So, after a person is fully
justified, he may receive not only many temporal, but many spiritual
blessings—prayermeeting and campmeeting blessings—which will greatly
refresh, and help, and encourage, and yet they will not eradicate
inbred sin, and make him holy; if he was given to fear or impatience
or doubt, or any other carnal manifestations, those same conditions
will continue to exist after the 'hundreds of blessings' have come
justification is the first blessing that effects a permanent inward
change, so sanctification is the 'second blessing,' hence, 'properly
so called.' While justification comprehends pardon, regeneration
and adoption, making us children of God, sanctification comprehends
the full eradication of the carnal mind, the inbred sin, and the
baptism and anointing with the Holy Ghost, making us kings and priests
unto God. Whereas justification delivers us from sins committed,
sin as an act, sanctification delivers us from the sin-nature inherited-sin
as a principle; justification delivers us from guilt and condemnation
while sanctification delivers us from unholy appetites; the first
gives us the birth of the Spirit; the second, the baptism with the
Spirit. Just as certainly as justification marks a distinct epoch
and crisis in the life of those receiving it, just so certainly
sanctification marks a second epoch, a second crisis, a second experience,
and therefore is a 'second blessing, properly so called.'
"The facts of
'original sin' are admitted by all evangelical denominations. There
is scarcely a denomination that does not make some reference to
the subject of original sin in its creed, in some form or other,
and so, clearly distinguishes between it—the sin-nature inherited—and
sin as an act committed. That all men are born into this world with
this 'Adamic taint,' this 'infection of nature,' this 'inbred sin';
or, as it is termed in the Scriptures, the 'carnal mind,' 'our old
man,' 'the body of sin,' 'sin that dwelleth in me,' 'the sin which
doth so easily beset,' etc., is generally recognized and conceded.
"Nor is there
any controversy touching the fact that this thing—termed 'original
sin'—cannot enter heaven, and therefore must be eradicated from
the soul before there is perfect fitness for a holy heaven. The
points of controversy are concerning the time and method for the
accomplishment of this deliverance; the Calvinistic, Zinzendorfian,
Keswickian theory being that this full deliverance cannot be fully
realized until death; hence the only hope for the Christian in this
life is to obtain grace to repress, subdue, regulate, control and
overcome this evil within until death shall set us free. The Arminian,
Wesleyan and present-day second-blessing, holiness-movement theory
is, that subsequent to regeneration, by a complete consecration
and faith, there may be an instantaneous cleansing and eradication
of all sin from the heart of the believer by the baptism with the
Holy Ghost and fire."
"Some have supposed
that this inbred sin was removed in regeneration, but this is contrary
to the experience of all Christians in all ages, and is contrary
to the teachings of the Bible. While the Apostle Paul could say
of the Corinthians, 'I thank my God always on your behalf, for the
grace of God which is given you by Jesus Christ,' and called them
'babes in Christ,' he also declared, 'ye are yet carnal' (Cor. 3:3),
which proves most conclusively that the carnal mind was not eradicated
at the time of their conversion.
to think that by some mysterious process of growth the soul may
advance until in some inexplicable manner, just about the time death
might ensue, it would develop into a state of perfect holiness,
and so have deliverance from the evil within. Just how, or by what
law, the growth of a child would remove uncleanness, or the growth
of the vegetable in the garden would at the same time grow out or
destroy the weeds in the garden, is not explained. However, in the
advancement of this theory there is the recognition of the sin-nature
remaining in the heart after regeneration. Though the deliverance
from it were only fully realized and accomplished at the time of
death, it would nevertheless be a second or subsequent experience
to anticipate the repression theory in Rom. 6:1,2, when he exclaimed:
'What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may
abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any
longer therein?' He then continues by declaring that the divine
method for inbred sin—'our old man,' or, 'the body of sin'—is crucifixion
and destruction. 'Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with
him, that the body of sin might be destroyed.' 'Crucified' and 'destroyed'
surely do not mean repressed.
"There is nothing
that can eradicate sin from the heart but the blood of Jesus. If
the blood is efficacious to cleanse from inbred sin when the person
is dying, surely it has the same efficacy prior to death. Thank
God for the promise, 'If we walk in the light, as he is in the light,
we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ,
his Son, cleanseth us from all sin.'
and the Baptism with the Holy Ghost.
"Whoever is sanctified
wholly has the baptism with the Holy Ghost; whoever has the baptism
with the Holy Ghost is sanctified wholly. It is the baptism with the
Holy Ghost that sanctifies wholly. These terms simply represent different
phases of the same experience, and are used as synonyms. When the
consecration of the believer is entire and complete, the 'old man,'
or inbred sin is crucified and eradicated by the baptism with the
Holy Ghost. The negative side of sanctification, which is the destruction
and removal of inbred sin, is as certainly effected by the Holy Ghost
as is the positive side of sanctification, which is the divine infilling
and the enduement of power. Multitudes are praying for power and so
insist on having the positive side of sanctification without consenting
to have the negative work of cleansing accomplished in them. All such
seeking is in vain. The work of subtracting inbred sin from the heart
must precede addition or the enduement of power. Purity is power."
1967 by Bethany Fellowship, Inc., Minneapolis, Minn. Excerpts are quoted
"The difference of the craving and longing of a
justified soul and that of a sanctified soul may be illustrated
by the person having a craving or appetite for apple dumplings,
or some special dish,—he may sit up to a table laden with good things,
and eat all he may wish; but that one dish he was especially craving
is not on the table; although he has had a full meal, he is still
craving something not contained in that meal. Thus it is with the
justified soul; he may be blessed even to the shouting point, and
still crave something not contained in that blessing. But when he
is sanctified wholly he gets the apple dumplings, or the very thing
he was craving. That special longing having been satisfied, having
received not only all he wanted, but the very thing his nature craved—his
hungering and thirsting are just as though he had apple dumplings
for every meal. Thus it is with the sanctified soul. He is not wanting
or desiring something other than what he has, although at the next
meal time he will relish some more of the same kind. Because justification
does not and cannot satisfy the longing of the heart for holiness,
they try so-called 'innocent' and 'no-harm' amusements, etc., and
backslide. Whereas, if they were properly instructed, and would
seek entire sanctification they would find what their heart is craving,
and hence have entire satisfaction."
"The common experience of Christians is that while
carnality is yet in the heart, 'the flesh lusteth against the spirit,
and the spirit against the flesh, and these are contrary the one
to the other; so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.' Because
of this inward conflict and struggle, they frequently suffer defeat,
and realize that they do things they did not mean to do, and leave
undone the things they meant to do, and so have an up and down life
of sinning and repenting. The bedside of multitudes is transformed
into a mourner's bench, where they are obliged to go every night
before they retire and weep and repent over their failures during
the day. Under certain temptations and provocations the carnality
in their hearts had gained the ascendency and had betrayed them
into wrong feelings and tempers, and so defeated them. After they
had spent some time at their 'mourner's bench,' and wept and prayed,
they again felt that the pardoning grace and smile of God was in
their hearts, and resolved to do better the next day, only to find
that the same disturber of the peace and source of trouble was still
in their hearts. But after they were sanctified wholly, and the
carnal nature destroyed and eradicated from their hearts, they ceased
doing things they should not do, and leaving undone things they
should do, and found they had in their hearts the grace and power
to perform all the will of God, which made them 'more than conquerors,'
and put the real swing of victory into their souls. So instead of
going to the 'mourner's bench' before retiring at night, they simply
climbed up into the choir-loft and got out their 'cornet, flute,
harp, sackbut, psaltery and dulcimer, and all kinds of music,' and
sang and shouted their glad doxologies of praise to God for the
'keeping power' and the glorious victories of another day. Just
as certain as the foundation preserves the building, just so certainly
the building preserves the foundation; and just so surely does the
experience of sanctification preserve or enable one to maintain
the experience of justification. Blessed be God!"
2The Pauline and Reformation doctrine declares that absolute
conformity to the divine law is necessary for acceptance with God. Morgan
utterly fails to show that God has provided this in the obedience of
Christ. Faith brings to God the perfect obedience of Jesus, and this
obedience is placed to the sinner's account. —Editor
3Published by Beacon Hill Press, Kansas City. Mo. First printing
1937. Excerpts are quoted from pp.14-99.
4The reader will observe the very definite subordination
of justification to sanctification given by this author. This is the
earmark of all holiness doctrine. —Editor