SANCTUS

Why is this topic so unpopular? Of course, writing a book on sanctification can never be easy. It deals with a subject that can never be popular, even with the author, as it must highlight the failings that seem to be an inevitable part of being human, and nobody likes to have their faults pointed out to them. This was after all one reason why Jesus was crucified. Nicholl (1981:3), starting his work Holiness, has to confess a feeling of absurdity in the enterprise. For immediately, he was overcome by a feeling of unworthiness, and incompetence in approaching so great a theme. He even felt that there was a touch of the comic, for holiness can never be achieved as the result of a technique to be learnt, such as from a book. It is even embarrassing; who wants to admit working on such a theme! I can certainly identify with Nicholl in these thoughts. But really, this reticence is very strange. After all, there is a great joy in writing and thinking about the forgiveness of sins, even though it must be accompanied by a measure of sadness at the realization of what it cost Christ to enable this for us. There is perhaps an even greater joy when the topic is the intimately related one of the gift of eternal life, for this is enabled by the glory of the resurrection, and so points to our's. An old classic on sanctification points out that "sanctification in Christ is glorification begun, as glorification is sanctification perfected" (Marshall 1981a:237). One impetus to sanctification is the confidence in future bliss (Marshall 1981a:27, also Calvin 1989b:25). Yet salvation is more than these; indeed, it has been a frequent criticism of the gospel as it has often been preached that it deals with “pie in the sky when you die”, without being relevant to the present life. If the preaching of the gospel is limited to forgiveness and eternal life, it is a perversion, for included in the atonement is the command to repent, which is much more than being sorry for previous sins, but must include a determination to live in a way more worthy of the Christ who gave so much for us. The atonement must have a third component of repentance in addition to the means of forgiveness and the gift of eternal life, and indeed a full understanding of salvation must have all three elements (Williams 2007:228f). This immediately gives a further motive, for salvation gives peace with God, and if it does that, it leads to peace with others and within oneself. Indeed, a sanctified life must give peace, for it is one in accordance with the intentions of the Maker. Bonar (sa:7) can therefore insist that the way of peace is the way of holiness, and that one cannot have either without the other. This must affect the present, and then must bring in a move towards increasing sanctification as a necessary sequel to justification, the declaration of forgiveness and therefore the imputation of righteousness. Sanctification continues the story, as the impartation of righteousness (Dieter 1987:35); it is then a necessary part of salvation. Prior (1967:9) writes that holiness is the chief purpose of election. But it is the tough one! It is nice to be forgiven, glorious to receive eternal life, but hard to change a lifestyle. Yet, hard though it may be, it is a legitimate part of the gospel, and a valid demand of God. It is then surprising that a book on salvation, such as that by Letham, gives such a small amount of space to the topic of sanctification (1993:184-5), even though it does base sanctification on the work of Christ. Rather, there is a concentration, so typical of the church in the West since the Reformation, on the forgiveness of sins, and the life everlasting, largely neglecting what should happen in between. Smail (1980:46) agrees that evangelicals have largely concentrated on the beginnings of the Christian life. One reason for this is that, very correctly, the Reformation emphasis was on salvation entirely by grace, totally unearned by any works. Then as Protestants have had a fear of “works”, a neglect of sanctification has naturally followed (Dieter 1987:20). A second aspect here follows from the Reformation, which stressed the authority of scripture as fundamental source and authority; as it says so little about sanctification, the topic tended to be neglected. Sanctification is one area where exegesis has been ruled by dogmatics (Peterson 1995:16). This is particularly evident in respect of the Wesleyan view of “entire sanctification”, which lacks an explicit scriptural basis. Perhaps this is one reason why even more than the overall idea of sanctification, there has been a wide neglect of the doctrine of perfection (Sangster 1943:6). The dearth of writing on holiness becomes especially striking when seen in the context of a veritable explosion of works on spirituality, mysticism or meditation (Nicholl 1981:5). It is not that there is no interest in religion! Yet Packer (1995:99) has to write that "As holiness is a neglected priority throughout the modern church generally, so it is specifically a fading glory in today's evangelical world." In the Church, as the interest in holiness fades, there has been a growth in spiritual healing and of obsession with the powers of evil (Packer 1992:9); an example of this is the shift in the understanding of the “second blessing" from the granting of holiness to the receipt of power. This may be sought for the wrong motives (Cook 1913:155), which may be far from sanctified. And yet, as Smail (1980:48) observes, every successful revival has stressed repentance! Davies (1992:251) affirms that "There is an observable connection in the history of awakenings between revival and holiness". Much of our contemporary church life seems superficial, self-indulgent and compromised (Peterson 1995:11). A lack of awareness of God's holiness leads to moral decline (Prior 1967:16), and there is moral laxity even in evangelicals (Packer 1992:152). So of all the subjects about which a book could be written this must be one of the most needful. "Real practical holiness does not receive the attention it deserves" (Ryle 1979:xiii). The fact that it has been comparatively little written on, indeed neglected (Dieter 1987:35), is in the context of what must be seen as an increasing need as the world continues in a moral decline. If we are concerned about the survival of western civilization, we must be concerned about morals, for the two things are clearly linked. This statement is especially apposite in the context of England at the time of Wesley, which was in the depths of sin and corruption, yet which as a result of his preaching experienced a "profound social evolution" Metz 1971:9). Then if we are concerned about the survival of Christianity, the same is even more true, for unless the moral standard of Christians is distinctive, where is its appeal? Indeed, even a cursory glance at the moral state of society, and regrettably, often including the Church, shows a remarkable lack of holiness. It is a sad comment on a society when the points recommending a film are "lust and deceit". It is a tragedy when so much of a person's time and effort has to go into protection against crime. It is an offence to a person's professionalism when so much administration is necessary, taking time away from the real task, just because otherwise people cannot be trusted to do a conscientious job. It repels people from the Gospel when ministers are caught in embezzlement or adultery; although holiness is for all, it is particularly important for them (Ryle 1979:276). The list could go on. Would it not be true to say that in contrast to previous centuries, there is just no awareness of sin in the modern world? And if that is the case, it is hardly surprising when the interest in the Church is on other matters, hardly surprising when there are few modern works on justification (Toon 1983:126), and even fewer on sanctification.