Progressive Sanctification & the Assurance of Pardon - 5

     After reading Forde's treatment of sanctification I can see several main conclusions he has drawn.  The thesis statement of his article is this, "Sanctification is simply the art of getting used to justification." Below are some other quotes I've taken to show Forde's conclusions.

"It [sanctification] is what happens when we are grasped by the fact that God alone justifies."

"It is what happens when the old being comes up against the end of its self-justifying and self-gratifying, however pious. It is life lived in anticipation of the resurrection."

"Now, living morally is indeed an important, wise and good thing. There is no need to knock it. But it should not be equated with sanctification, being made holy. The moral life is the business of the old being in this world. The Reformers called it "civil righteousness." Sanctification is the result of the dying of the old and the rising of the new. The moral life is the result of the old being's struggle to climb to the heights of the law. Sanctification has to do with the decent of the new being into humanity, becoming a neighbor, freely, spontaneously, giving of the self in self-forgetful and uncalculating ways."

"Talk about sanctification can be dangerous in that it misleads and seduces the old being into thinking it is still in control. We may grudgingly admit we cannot justify ourselves, but then we attempt to make up for that by getting serious about sanctification."

"Conditional thinking is wedded to the schemes of law and progress characteristics of this age. Sin is understood primarily as misdeed or transgression of such a scheme...The logic would then be that with the help of grace one progressively gains more and more righteousness and thus sins less and less. One strives toward perfection until, theoretically, one would need less and less grace or perhaps finally no more grace at all."

"Whose fault is it if the scheme doesn't work?...Either I have not properly responded to or cooperated with the free divine grace, or most frightening of all, the God of election who presides over such grace has decided, in my case, not to give it."

"So it is impossible to put God's unconditional act of justifying sinners for Jesus' sake alone together with our ideas of progress based on conditions. It doesn't work either logically or in the life of faith."

"So it is always as a totality that unconditional grace attacks sin. That is why total sanctification and justification are in essence the same thing."

"The second aspect of the transition of the Christian from old to death to life, is that all our ordinary views of progress and growth are turned upside down. It is not that we are somehow moving toward the goal, but rather that the goal is moving closer and closer to us. This corresponds to the eschatological nature of the New Testament message. It is the coming of the kingdom upon us, not our coming closer to or building up the kingdom. That is why it is a growth in grace, not a growth in our own virtue or morality. The progress, if one can call it that, is that we are being shaped more and more by the totality of the grace coming to us. The progress is due to the steady invasion of the new. That means that we are being taken more and more off our own hands, more and more away from self, and getting used to the idea of being saved by the grace of God alone. Our sanctification consists merely in being shaped by, or getting used to, justification."

"Sanctification under the invasion of the new, however, holds out the possibility of actually coming to hate sin, and to love God and his creation, or at least to make that little beginning. It is not that sin is taken away from us, but rather that we are to be taken away from sin heart, soul and mind, as Luther put it. In that manner, the law of God is to be fulfilled in us precisely by the uncompromising totality and unconditionality of the grace given."

"If we are turned around to get back down to earth by grace, then it would seem that true sanctification would show itself in taking care of our neighbor and God’s creation, not exploiting and destroying either for our own ends, religious or otherwise. It would mean concern for the neighbor and society, caring for the other for the time being. Here one should talk about the place of morality and virtue and such things. Although we do not accept them as the means by which we are sanctified, they are the means by which and through which we care for the world and for the other. This is what the Reformers meant when they insisted that good works were to be done, but one was not to depend on them for salvation."

   In my next post I intend to comment on some if not all of these quotes.

Progressive Sanctification & the Assurance of Pardon - 4

   Below is a quote from former (he has since died and gone to be with the Lord) professor of theology at Lutheran Seminary, Gerhard Forde. I've posted this as I continue to search out the biblical view of progressive sanctification. The entire article can be found here.

"SANCTIFICATION, IF IT IS TO BE SPOKEN OF AS SOMETHING other than justification is perhaps best defined as the art of getting used to the unconditional justification wrought by the grace of God for Jesus’ sake. It is what happens when we are grasped by the fact that God alone justifies. It is being made holy, and as such, it is not our work. It is the work of the Spirit who is called Holy. The fact that it is not our work puts the old Adam/Eve (our old self) to death and calls forth a new being in Christ. It is being saved from the sickness unto death and being called to new life...It is not something added to justification. It is not the final defense against a justification too liberally granted. It is the justified life. It is what happens when the old being comes up against the end of its self-justifying and self-gratifying ways, however pious. It is life lived in anticipation of the resurrection."

The Place of Personal Testimony in Evangelism - 2

     On a recent White Horse Inn episode they once again discussed the modern Evangelical tendency to prefer telling an unbeliever/skeptic about one's personal testimony and experience over "gospel doctrine".  This is a continuation of sorts of an article I posted on October 25th 2008.  In a series of interviews at a recent convention of Christian communicators, the persons interviewed all said that, when they witnessed to the unbeliever/skeptic, they believed they personal testimony of transformation was better proof, more effective, and easier to relate to than "gospel doctrine".  Many of them said that both were equally important, but even that is not true—one's own sanctification narrative isn't as important as what God did one day in history to reconcile the world unto Himself—and that personal story definitely isn't part of the good news of Jesus Christ.

     As I listened to their discussion, I saw a possible parallel.  In the last 100-150 years or so, the face of visual art (especially that of painting) has changed dramatically.  We have seen an abundance of new sorts of philosophies which work themselves out in not-so-traditional methodologies.  For instance, the paintings of Jackson Pollock (Abstract Expressionism) or Pablo Picasso (Cubism); I believe we can condense the difference between "Modern" painting and Classic painting to two categories: Modern—guileless/candid methodology with a sophisticated/complex philosophy, and Classic—technically complex methodology with a sophisticated/complex philosophy.  Granted, not all forms of painting or artist's philosophies fit into these two categories, however, the distilled distinction between Modern and Classical approaches can be simple described in this manner.

     So how does this parallel the gospel presentation to unbelievers you ask?  Let's look at the similar two categories in that realm: Personal Narrative—grounded only in the utter subjectivity of personal experience, and the Meta-Narrative of Redemption—grounded in the objective, historical truth of Incarnate Deity satisfying the wrath of God against sinners, which is an observable fact.  Again, before I say what I'm about to say I want to admit the generalization of these categories makes for a very narrow understanding of both, artist and the world of human creation and the witness of Christ and the Kingdom of God and its various practices.  Many observers of the fine art world, and artists alike, criticize much of what has been produced under the category of "Modern" art as being too simplistic and motivated by a lack of technical understanding and raw talent, thus supplying the sort of art that drifts further and further away from realism.

     Much like the criticism leveled at the non-traditional painters and other artists of the 20th century, one could speculate that the lack of presentation of "gospel doctrine" when American Evangelicals bare "witness to Christ", is in part due to a lack of factual knowledge of that doctrine—a lack of technical apologetic skill.  Of course, this may not be true in every case.  Much of this slackness, as some may call it, could also be in part due to the post-modern idea of relativism, where individual subjectivity is validated as an individual reality, even if it opposes another so called reality.

The "Crux" is the Crux of the Matter

     "This is the heart of the matter."  Most of us have heard that said during conversation; when someone wants to make a particularly salient point, one that they believe encapsulates the very focus of the idea they are presenting, they may employ this adage, "now this is the crux of the matter".  The word "crux" is Latin and translates into English as the word "cross".  It is interesting that the Latin word for cross is used in a saying which is attempting to set apart a certain portion of one's conversation as being the most important part.  It is no mistake that this has happened.  Aside from the obvious involvement of the Cause of Causes, men who knew the importance of the cross to the body of Christian doctrine and fundamentals have used it in the past to highlight what they are saying by, in essence, claiming, "this is as important and central to what I am attempting to say as the cross is to Christianity".  (1 Cor. 15:13-17) Resurrection necessitates physical death, the death of the cross in particular in our discussion.

      The use of the term cross in the saying is for good reason—for it is true to say that the cross is the heart of the matter of Christianity, and without its truth and efficacy there is no resurrection, no redemption, no life after death, and no meaning to our present existence; no inalienable rights, and no real cause for what might be referred to as goodness, regardless of cultural moras.

Progressive Sanctification & the Assurance of Pardon - 3

     After studying the doctrine of sanctification as represented in the three confessions I consulted: The Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF), the Belgic Confession (BCF), and the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith (LBC), I have drawn the following conclusion about their contents.

     Christ’s death and resurrection are the power behind sanctification (WCF).  Believers are sanctified by the virtue of His work, (LBC) and sin’s dominion is destroyed (WCF) as the regenerate have been freed from the slavery of sin (BCF).  Even our lust after sin is mortified (WCF).  At our regeneration we are made new creatures capable of living the “new life”. (BCF)  Sanctification is a manifestation of “true faith” that comes by the hearing of God’s Word (BCF) and true believers are progressively strengthened in all saving graces for to practice holiness (WCF).  This holiness is perfected in the fear of God as we seek a heavenly life through evangelical obedience to all God’s commands (LBC).  Believers are warmed to pious and holy living out off a love for God (BCF).  Only the holy see God, (WCF) but the truly regenerate necessarily bare fruit (do what God has commanded) (BCF).  Good works done by believers are acceptable to God because those works are sanctified by His grace (BCF), and it is God who works those good works in us (BCF).  Always keeping in mind that salvation is not based on our good works, and our assurance of regeneration does not come from those works (BCF).  Nevertheless, even though our good works do not merit God’s favor, He does reward them with crowns (BCF).  Finally, sanctification is imperfect and the believer does struggle against temptation and sin, (WCF) but overcoming sin, growing in grace, and the fear of God are characteristics of believers (WCF).  Certainty in our justification should rest on the merit of Christ our Savior (BCF).

     In later posts in this series I plan to quote recent (and by recent I mean in the last 200 or so years) authors regarding the topic of sanctification, and contrast these statements above with opposing views.

Progressive Sanctification & the Assurance of Pardon - 2

     I think it is important to consider what has historically been believed regarding almost any doctrine, especially when there are a variety of positions held within the loosely bound category of Evangelicalism.  I realize that some of you don't have the same regard for historical theology as the Reformed tradition does.  So to ease your possible concern, note that we do not believe that writings other than those inscripturated have actual authority over the Christian's doctrine and practice—the Scripture alone has that authority.  Having said that, we do hold those theological writings that have been preserved for us by the providence of God in high regard.  Here is what the Westminster Confession says about sanctification.

     "CHAP. XIII. - Of Sanctification.

1. They, who are once effectually called, and regenerated, having a new heart, and a new spirit created in them, are further sanctified, really and personally, through the virtue of Christ's death and resurrection, by His Word and Spirit dwelling in them, the dominion of the whole body of sin is destroyed, and the several lusts thereof are more and more weakened and mortified; and they more and more quickened and strengthened in all saving graces, to the practice of true holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord.

2. This sanctification is throughout, in the whole man; yet imperfect in this life, there abiding still some remnants of corruption in every part; whence ariseth a continual and irreconcilable war, the flesh lusting against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh.

3. In which war, although the remaining corruption, for a time, may much prevail; yet, through the continual supply of strength from the sanctifying Spirit of Christ, the regenerate part doth overcome; and so, the saints grow in grace, perfecting holiness in the fear of God"

     And here is the doctrine of sanctification as defined in the Belgic Confession.

"Article 24: The Sanctification of Sinners

We believe that this true faith, produced in man by the hearing of God's Word and by the work of the Holy Spirit, regenerates him and makes him a "new man,"57 causing him to live the "new life"58 and freeing him from the slavery of sin.

Therefore, far from making people cold toward living in a pious and holy way, this justifying faith, quite to the contrary, so works within them that apart from it they will never do a thing out of love for God but only out of love for themselves and fear of being condemned.

So then, it is impossible for this holy faith to be unfruitful in a human being, seeing that we do not speak of an empty faith but of what Scripture calls "faith working through love,"59 which leads a man to do by himself the works that God has commanded in his Word.

These works, proceeding from the good root of faith, are good and acceptable to God, since they are all sanctified by his grace. Yet they do not count toward our justification-- for by faith in Christ we are justified, even before we do good works. Otherwise they could not be good, any more than the fruit of a tree could be good if the tree is not good in the first place.

So then, we do good works, but nor for merit-- for what would we merit? Rather, we are indebted to God for the good works we do, and not he to us, since it is he who "works in us both to will and do according to his good pleasure" 60-- thus keeping in mind what is written: "When you have done all that is commanded you, then you shall say, 'We are unworthy servants; we have done what it was our duty to do.' "61

Yet we do not wish to deny that God rewards good works-- but it is by his grace that he crowns his gifts.

Moreover, although we do good works we do not base our salvation on them; for we cannot do any work that is not defiled by our flesh and also worthy of punishment. And even if we could point to one, memory of a single sin is enough for God to reject that work.

So we would always be in doubt, tossed back and forth without any certainty, and our poor consciences would be tormented constantly if they did not rest on the merit of the suffering and death of our Savior.

57 2 Cor. 5:17 58 Rom. 6:4 59 Gal. 5:6 60 Phil. 2:13 61 Luke 17:10"

     And lastly, the docrrine of sanctification according to the 1689 London Baptist Confession.

"Chapter 13: Of Sanctification

1. They who are united to Christ, effectually called, and regenerated, having a new heart and a new spirit created in them through the virtue of Christ's death and resurrection, are also farther sanctified, really and personally, through the same virtue, by His Word and Spirit dwelling in them; the dominion of the whole body of sin is destroyed, and the several lusts thereof are more and more weakened and mortified, and they more and more quickened and strengthened in all saving graces, to the practice of all true holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord.

( Acts 20:32; Romans 6:5, 6; John 17:17; Ephesians 3:16-19; 1 Thessalonians 5:21-23; Romans 6:14; Galatians 5:24; Colossians 1:11; 2 Corinthians 7:1; Hebrews 12:14 )

2. This sanctification is throughout the whole man, yet imperfect in this life; there abideth still some remnants of corruption in every part, whence ariseth a continual and irreconcilable war; the flesh lusting against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh.

( 1 Thessalonians 5:23; Romans 7:18, 23; Galatians 5:17; 1 Peter 2:11 )

3. In which war, although the remaining corruption for a time may much prevail, yet through the continual supply of strength from the sanctifying Spirit of Christ, the regenerate part doth overcome; and so the saints grow in grace, perfecting holiness in the fear of God, pressing after an heavenly life, in evangelical obedience to all the commands which Christ as Head and King, in His Word hath prescribed them.

( Romans 7:23; Romans 6:14; Ephesians 4:15, 16; 2 Corinthians 3:18; 2 Corinthians 7:1 )"

     In the next post regarding this topic I will attempt to provide a comparison and analysis of these views on sanctification, not to insinuate that they are different, but in doing so I also intend to boil it down to a composite statement and bring in other popular views that oppose the Reformed conclusion.

Wasted Blues

     "Don't worry, be happy"—the creedal cry of a generation.  Actually it's not something to believe but another law; and contained in the admonition is absolutely no power whatsoever to do what it is asking. The affluence of American culture has somehow facilitated the belief that one shouldn't be sad, and has an inalienable right to happiness, not its pursuit but its certain acquisition and maintenance.

     This philosophy, of course, has nothing in common with Christianity and the "already/not yet" tension of the Kingdom.  We already have hope, hope in a future and final redemption, the redemption of our souls and our bodies.  So we should expect times of melancholy and sadness because we are not yet what we will be.  And even more so for the unbeliever who actually has no lasting hope.

     In our culture there seems to be no room for the "blues" or for legitimate sadness.  You can observe in many places, the occasional frustration against this sort of unrealistic denial of the human's real tendency to depression.  One such occurrence I believe was the evolution of popular American music in the 80's.  At least in the "Rock" music realm we see the superficial happiness of "Hair Bands" like Cinderella, Ratt, Skid Row and Poison, with which the market came to a critical mass causing the onset of bands like Guns and Roses, Jane's Addiction, Nirvana and Soundgarden, who undeniably interjected a bit more realism into the artistic expression of a culture that had become weary of pretending to be happy and pleased all the time.  Of course, the knee jerk reaction of the "Grunge" band scene, which really flowed seemlessly from an underground stream of early "Punk" (The Clash, Black Flag, etc) and "Heavy Metal" (Sabbath, and Metalica), erred in the opposite direction—suicidal tendencies.
     So we should conclude that sadness, mourning and melancholy are to be expected, never meditated on producing dispair, but ever drive the believer back to the gospel, and hopefully drive, for the first time, the unbeliever to the cross.

Two year Anniversary

     Believe it or not, I have posted this article two years to the day after my first blog article. This comes as nearly my 250th post, and after nearly 1900 visitors.  Thank you for visiting!
     I'll say again that I would like to draw upon the interests of my readers to help me to decide the topics on which I should post for much of the next year. So, if you have a particular topic you would like addressed, please feel free to comment on this article listing your suggestion.
     Note that the categories I divide the topics into are:
Creation - Anything related to that which has been created by God.
Art - Anything related to that which has been created by man.
Theology - Anything related to the study of God.
Anthropology - Anything related to the study of man.
     And it seems to me that any conceivable topic will fit into at least one of these categories.

"Progressive" Sanctification & the Assurance of Pardon

     In recent months I've been more intentional in my consideration of the topic at hand.  Just what is the nature of sanctification and what doctrine assures us of our salvation from God's wrath?

     At one point in my race with Christ, I believed that there was no real pressure for the child of God to pursue holiness or good works; they were just supplemental actions not linked to our justification in any way.  After some time in the faith, and some small measure of study and discipleship, I came to understand the intended  (and undeniable) connection between justification and sanctification, the old adage, "you are saved through faith alone, but not by a faith that is alone (Jam. 2).  But that doctrinal truth was rarely tempered with the gospel; I mean, we were certain about being regenerated by grace through faith alone(Eph. 2), but the relationship between grace and sanctification didn't seem so clear—at least not in praxis.  It seemed as though the "progressive" nature which I then believed was part of the process, was emphasized far more often than the gracious power of the Spirit needed in order to mortify my sin.  As a result of adopting the "Lordship" position, I began to tie my assurance of pardon to my performance or progress in the mortification process.  This, as I see now, is deadly, especially when coupled with a high view of ecclesiastical discipline and a low view of the Lord's Supper.  The next shift in my theology concerned my view of the Lord's Supper.  Over time I no longer saw it as a simple memorial of what Christ did in time—a periodic reminder needed because it might have been the only time during the month that we heard so loudly and clearly about Christ's work for us, and before which we were charged to confess any known sin so as to make ourselves suitable for the participation in the ordinance—I soon came to see the sacrament as a means to an end:  the end was the outpouring of God's gracious benefits, so I no longer saw the practice only as a reminder of Christ's death, one such practice my heart was never really prepared to take, but instead, as another means for God to be good to me on account of His Son; a visual, tactile proclamation of the gospel for weak sinners whose whole persons (bodies and all) are being saved.

     When that theological shift was well under way, I began to question the "progressive" nature of sanctification.  Maintaining my view of church discipline, and beginning to see the great necessity of protecting the Table from unbelievers, and protecting unbelievers from hypocrisy, I started to tie my assurance of pardon more to Christ's merit rather than the progress of my sanctification; I had begun to see the actual/biblical separation of Law and Gospel; I had been convinced that it was not my obedience to the imperatives of scripture that should make me sure of my justification, but rather my belief, against all hope, in the gospel laden indicatives of scripture: that I have been made a son of God, a child of the Kingdom, a new creation.  But therein lies the true struggle of this journey, if I am set apart to Christ, and I am a new creature, and I have been declared just in God's eyes, and it is in those declarations that I find my assurance of guiltlessness, then is my mortification of personal sin necessarily progressive, and what is really meant by that term?  It is this question over which I intend to muse in the next several posts.