Wednesdays with Wesley: What Christian Perfection is Not...

"Love has been perfected among us in this: that we may have boldness on the day of judgment, because as God is, so are we in this world." - 1st Jn. 4:17

"Are you going on to perfection? Do you expect to be made perfect in love in this life? Are you earnestly striving after it?" I find these questions unavoidable, for they are part of the historic examination that awaits any clergy person seeking admission into full connection within The United Methodist Church. This should not be taken as a monastic like move that limits perfection to an elite group of Christians called clergy, for Wesley came to think, "that propagation of this very teaching [Christian perfection] was the chief reason for which God had raised up the Methodists." Entire sanctification was both a consistent theme and a controversial doctrine for Wesley. It not only caused opponents of Wesley to argue that his ideas on Christian perfection were "confusing, erratic, or simply incompatible," but also was the subject of passionate debate within the early Methodist movement. In fact, the timing and attainment of entire sanctification even divided John and Charles Wesley. Being unable to dismiss Christian perfection as either unimportant or universally accepted, it seems fitting to explore the topics of entire sanctification and eschatology. What would it mean to "expect to be made perfect in love in this life" according to Wesley? Could this happen to the whole of creation?

Wesley approached the issue of Christian perfection with some caution. He believed, "That consequently it behooves us to speak almost continually of the state of justification, but rarely, at least in full and explicit terms, concerning entire sanctification." When Wesley was questioned about the practical task of preaching Christian perfection he said it should be done "scarce at all to those who are not pressing forward." Young preachers are to talk about entire sanctification "not too minutely or circumstantially, but rather in general and scriptural terms." Wesley was once asked if an entirely sanctified person would be capable of marriage. He responded, "We cannot well judge. But supposing he [or she] were not, the number of those in that state is so small, it would produce no inconvenience." Later Wesley added to his remarks on this matter by nothing that, "Marriage is honorable in all (Hebrews 13:4)." It is important to remember that Christian perfection is not one of the seven essentials for Wesley, at least according to Dr. Ted Campbell.

This is not to say that entire sanctification was unimportant for Wesley. Wesley firmly thought that Christian perfection was the intention of God. The Great Commandment lets believers know that what God desires is that we should love God entirely (Matthew 22:37-38). Wesley's belief in entire sanctification was also connected to his ideas on the power of God. He was willing to admit that you cannot perfect yourself, but vehemently questioned those who contended that God is not capable of accomplishing what God intends.

So, what is Christian perfection? Perhaps it is more appropriate to start with what Christian perfection is not. Kenneth J. Collins and Colin Williams make the same move. They may do this, as I do, in an intentional attempt to follow in the footsteps of John Wesley himself. His sermon Christian Perfection was written in 1741. Surprisingly, there is no account of Wesley actually preaching this sermon, which raises the question of if it can actually be called a sermon then. Whatever one's personal theology may be about what does and does not consitute a sermon, Christian Perfection as a written work does communicate Wesley's desire "to show, First, in what sense Christians are not, and Secondly, in what sense they are, perfect."

Wesley's first observation is that:

And both from experience and Scripture it appears, first, that they are not perfect in knowledge: they are not so perfect in this life as to be free from ignorance.

There are so many things for Wesley that Christians do not know. He lists examples of the Trinity, the Incarnation, and eschatology. Wesley's second point flows from his first. He writes:

Nor, secondly, from mistake, which indeed is almost an unavoidable consequence of it; seeing those who "know but in part" are ever liable to err touching the things which they know not. Tis true the children of God do not mistake as to the things essential to salvation...But in things unessential to salvation they do err, and that frequently.

Wesley continues, "It is a proof that we are no more to expect any living man [or woman] to be infallible than to be omniscient." Thirdly, Christian perfection does not mean freedom from infirmities. What are infirmities? Wesley wants us to "not give that soft title to known sins, as the manner of some is." He clarifies his view by stating:

But I mean hereby not only those which are properly termed "bodily infirmities," but all those inward or outward imperfections which are not of a moral nature.

Examples of these infirmities include slow understanding, ungraceful pronunciations, or incoherent thoughts. Fourthly, Christian perfection does not entail being wholly free from temptation. The fifth and last point Wesley makes about Christian perfection is this:

Yet we may, lastly, observe that neither in this respect is there any absolute perfection on earth. There is no "perfection of degrees," as it is termed; none which does not admit of a continual increase. So that how much soever any man [or woman] hath attained, or in how high a degree soever he [or she] is perfect, he [or she] hath still need to "grow in grace," and daily to advance in the knowledge and love of God his Saviour.

So, Wesley summarizes his discussion of what Christian perfection is not in this way:

Christian perfection therefore does not imply (as some men seem to have imagined) an exemption either from ignorance or mistake, or infirmities or temptations.

What is Christian perfection then? Tune in next time...