WESLEY AND ERADICATION

A -- OUTLINE

Introduction

Wesley believed in two types of sin -- sin as an act, and sin as an inbeing, or nature. When man fell he both sinned and became sinful in nature. When a sinner is converted, he is freed from the guilt of his acts of sin and from the power of indwelling sin. At that time, however, he is not cleansed from the presence of indwelling sin.

I. The Reach of Indwelling Sin

Wesley described the sinful condition of man in no uncertain terms. He believed in total depravity. Nevertheless, this depravity was total only in the sense that it affected every part of man, and not in that every part of man was completely bad. Man was in a helpless but not a hopeless condition. He still had the image of God in a certain sense, and thus could be appealed to by God. He could not save himself, but he could still be saved by God if he would co-operate.

II. The Essence of This Sinful Nature

Wesley used many figures of speech to describe this indwelling, or inbred, sin. Because of this, some have accused him of being very materialistic in his conception of the carnal mind -thinking of it as a physical thing. Such was not the case. In the last analysis, Wesley thought of this sinful nature as something psychical and ethical -- as atheism and idolatry, pride, unbelief, self-will, and love of the world. The soul, and not the body, was the seat of sin for Wesley.

III. The Sinful Nature Destroyed in Entire Sanctification

Wesley was constantly using terms and phrases which implied that the sinful nature is destroyed when the Christian is sanctified wholly. Here are some descriptions of what takes place when one obtains the second blessing: purification from sin, present deliverance from sin, perfect deliverance from sin, deliverance from evil thoughts and evil tempers. He also speaks of this sinful nature as being destroyed, extirpated, subsisting no more, or cleansed away when we are sanctified. Likewise, he spoke of this second crisis as the renewal of our souls after the image of God in righteousness and true holiness, Christian perfection, full salvation, entire renewal of the spirit, having the mind of Christ, and loving God with all of our heart and our neighbors as ourselves. Therefore, it is no surprise that one writer declares that, according to Wesley's teaching, the self-will which the believer has but is not governed by is utterly annihilated by entire sanctification.

IV. Wesley Belonged to the "Extinction School"

Wesley did not use the term eradicate, but he certainly implied all that it means by the words which he did employ. He used the term extirpate; and it is more comprehensive in its destructive significance than eradicate. Still, there is even more direct evidence in this connection than anything which has yet been given. One writer has correctly said recently that Wesley belonged to the "extinction school." In one letter Wesley declared that he would not dispute as to whether sin is suspended or extinguished, but in another and later letter he did that very thing. There he said: "I use the word 'destroyed' because St. Paul does: 'suspend' I cannot find in the Bible."

Conclusion

Soon after Wesley's time, the term eradication came into use and became a key word in the American holiness movement. Pope, the theologian of the Wesleyan movement, uses the term at least once in his three-volume work on theology. It appears several times in Steele's writings, and then in most of the writings of the leaders of the holiness movement in America.

Discussing how this term eradication came to be used in this religious sense, we suggested in an earlier chapter that it might have been because of its connection with disease. It was early used to indicate that a physical disease had been destroyed, and then it was taken over into the moral and spiritual realm and employed to describe the complete destruction of the sin nature, a moral and spiritual disease. Another theory as to how it came to be used to set forth the complete destruction of the carnal mind is that it was employed when some began to drop the words entire and wholly as used with sanctification to indicate the thoroughness of the destruction of the old man which had been suggested by these words.

B -- MAIN BODY TEXT

Wesley believed in two types of sin: sin as an act, and sin as a nature. He looked upon sin as an act as largely springing from sin as a nature. Sin as an act and sin as a nature were both acquired. Man was created perfect, free from sins without and within. In Adam the human race fell. From then on, all men have been born in sin. Wesley believed in this doctrine of original sin so strongly that he declared it to be the essential difference between Christianity and heathenism.

Wesley defined an act of sin as a willful transgression of a known law of God. Any other act which might deviate from the perfect law of God was a mistake and not a sin. Of course, both sins and mistakes could be divided into inner and outer, or negative and positive types. When one is converted, he is forgiven for his acts of sin. He is also freed from the power of inbred or original sin, but not cleansed of its presence. This results in an intense inner struggle between the spirit of Christ, which comes in when one is born again, and the carnal mind or evil nature which remains.

Wesley described, in many and varied ways, the extent of this evil condition which is still in man after he is saved. Here are some of his statements: Man is all sin, he is merely a lump of ungodliness, he is prone to evil and averse from all that is good. As a result of this sinful state, confusion and ignorance and error reign over our understanding; unreasonable, earthly, sensual, devilish passions usurp authority over our will; in a word, there is no whole part in our soul, all of the foundations of our nature are out of course. Original sin is a condition in which all of the faculties of man, understanding and will, and affections, have been perverted. It is a total corruption of the whole human nature. These statements prove that Wesley believed in total depravity. However, out of fairness to him, we must say that this total depravity was chiefly thought of as something which made man helpless, morally and spiritually, but not hopeless. Man still had the image of God in certain senses. However, he could not come to God without divine help.

More important for us than the reach of this sinful nature is its essential character. Just how did Wesley think of the condition of man? He described it in many ways. It was an evil nature, a force inherent in man, an innate corruption of the innermost nature of man, an evil root, an inclination to evil, a natural propensity to sin, a leprosy or illness. But this was not all. He called original sin an evil root from which spring both inward and outward sins; a sour yeast which permeates the whole soul; that carnal mind which is enmity against God -- pride of heart, self-will, and love of the world; a leaven which leavens the whole mass; roots of bitterness which infect our words and taint our actions; a corruption chiefly manifested in atheism and idolatry -- pride, and self-will, and love of the world. Thus Wesley uses many figures of speech in setting forth the essence of original sin. In the light of this fact, how can anyone hold that he thought of original sin as a thing because he sometimes likened it to a root? The Bible is guilty of the use of such figures with reference to both regeneration and entire sanctification. The minister who preaches about either of these today does the same.

Like Jesus, he talks about the living water, the new birth, the old man of sin, the dirt of sin which needs to be cleansed away, the disease of sin which needs to be cured, etc., etc., ad nauseam. Further, Wesley, time and time again, tells us what he really means by the figures of speech or the manner in which this original sin manifests itself. The chief expressions of this root or disease or leaven are atheism and idolatry, pride, unbelief, self-will, and love of the world. These manifestations of original sin are psychical in character; and material roots do not produce psychical effects or branches -- if I may be permitted to use a figure of speech without being misunderstood. Besides, we ought to remember that Wesley, when he uses these figures of speech, is always talking about a certain type of sin; and sin is psychical and not physical. Of course, Wesley did not live in our day and have the opportunity of being taught modern psychology. But he did live after Plato and Descartes and many other thinkers who had differentiated clearly and fully between the material and the immaterial or spiritual. He was not as dumb in this realm as some have tried to make us believe. Lindstrom, in speaking of Wesley's view of justification as over against his doctrine of sanctification, says rightly that the latter makes justification judicial and objective, and sanctification subjective and psychological.

He also declares that, according to Wesley, Christian perfection is an inherent ethical change. As a conclusion to this part of our discussion, let me give a significant quotation from Wesley: "But surely we cannot be saved from sin while we dwell in a sinful body. A sinful body, I pray observe how deeply ambiguous, how equivocal, this expression is! But there is no authority for it in Scripture. The word sinful body is never found there, and as it is totally unscriptural, so it is palpably absurd. For no body, or no matter of any kind can be sinful; spirits alone are capable of sin. Pray, in what part of the body should sin lodge? It cannot lodge in the skin, the muscles, the nerves, the veins, or the arteries; it cannot be in the bones any more than in the hair or nails. Only the soul can be the seat of sin." How could a man who gave us these words think of original sin as a material thing? And I am convinced, also, that we have plenty of reason for believing that for Wesley, original sin was a psychical-ethical condition or state, and not an entity of any type.

Did Wesley believe in the eradication or complete destruction of this psychical-ethical condition or state of sin in which man is born? We believe that the evidence compels one to answer this in the affirmative. Here are a number of phrases which he used in stating what is done when a person is sanctified wholly: purification from sin, present deliverance from sin, perfect deliverance from sin, a heart that is purified from all sin, deliverance from inward as well as outward sin, deliverance from evil thoughts and evil tempers, the circumcision of the heart from all filthiness -- all inward as well as outward pollution, salvation from all sin, inbred sin or the total corruption of man's nature taken away, the heart purified or cleansed from all unrighteousness, liberation from sin, a love which is incompatible with sin, a love unmixed with sin -- a pure love, a condition in the heart where there is no mixture of contrary affections, full deliverance from sin, freedom from evil thoughts and evil tempers, a total death to sin, delivered from the root of sin -the source of inward and outward sins, delivered from original sin, and freed from all sin. Notice how many times the term all appears in these statements. In fact, all of them imply universal affirmative propositions, from the standpoint of logic, and could not, therefore, fit into any other interpretation than that of eradication.

Keeping to the negative idea of what is destroyed when a Christian is entirely sanctified, let us present a somewhat longer quotation from Wesley. From the sermon on "The Repentance of Believers," we have these words: "Indeed this is so evident a truth, that well-nigh all the children of God, scattered abroad, however they differ on other points, yet generally agree in this: that although we may, by the Spirit, mortify the deeds of the body, resist and conquer both outward and inward sin; although we may weaken our enemies day by day; yet we cannot drive them out. By all the grace which is given at justification we cannot extirpate them. Though we watch and pray ever so much, we cannot wholly cleanse either our hearts or hands. Most sure we cannot, till it shall please our Lord to speak to our hearts again, to speak the second time, 'Be clean'; and then the leprosy is cleansed. Then only, the evil root, the carnal mind, is destroyed; and inbred sin subsists no more." Here we have at least five very definite and all-inclusive phrases which refer to the elimination of sin. It is destroyed, subsists no more, or the leprosy is cleansed. Further, it is implied that while we cannot drive out or extirpate the inner enemy before entire sanctification, this is exactly what is done when we are wholly sanctified. Etymologically, extirpate is one of the strongest terms ever used in connection with the sin nature. It means "not only to destroy the individuals of any race of plants or animals, but the very stock, so that the race can never be restored."

One writer rightly asserts that, according to Wesley's teaching, the self-will which the believer has but is not governed by is utterly annihilated by entire sanctification. Such a statement is certainly in harmony with eradication. Another quotation which has in it both the negative and positive aspects involved in entire sanctification is now given. It reads as follows: "By salvation I mean, not barely, according to the vulgar notion, deliverance from hell, or going to heaven; but a present deliverance from sin, a restoration of the soul to its primitive health, its original purity; a recovery of the divine nature; the renewal of our souls after the image of God, in righteousness and true holiness, in justice, mercy, and truth. This implies all holy and heavenly tempers, and, by consequence, all holiness of conversation."

Since we have given positive, as well as negative, elements in this quotation, permit us to offer some other names and declarations from Wesley which indicate what is done positively when a person is sanctified. They are as follows: Christian perfection, full salvation, entire sanctification, wholly sanctified, perfect love, pure love, entire renewal of the spirit, purity of intention, dedicating all of the life to God, giving God all our heart, one desire and design ruling all our tempers, devoting all our soul, body, and substance to God, having the mind of Christ and walking as He walked, and loving God with all our heart and our neighbor as ourselves. These positive results of entire sanctification bar the possibility of sin remaining in the heart, in any form, after one has received this experience.

Nowhere do we find Wesley using the word eradication, although, as we have shown, he used many statements which mean the same as to destroy completely. We could stop here and be perfectly satisfied that he was an eradicationist, but we have still more definite proof of this fact. One recent writer has correctly said that Wesley belonged to the "extinction school." In one letter he declared that he would not dispute as to whether sin is suspended or extinguished; and yet in another letter he did dispute, and came out for the latter truth. In writing to John Benson he said: "Are not the love of God and our neighbor good tempers? And, so far as these reign in the soul, are not the opposite tempers, worldly-mindedness, malice, cruelty, revengefulness, destroyed? . . . I use the word 'destroyed' because St. Paul does: 'suspended' I cannot find in the Bible."

After Wesley, the term eradication soon came into use and was appropriated by the leaders of the holiness movement in America. Of course, it is fair to say that it has never been extensively used. We find it at least once in Pope's discussion of entire sanctification in his second volume. It appears in Steele's writings and occasionally in most of the books written by the early leaders of the holiness movement. Some of these men seem to prefer the word extirpate, which, as we have already shown, is a stronger and more definite term than eradicate. However, eradicate has been the word which holiness preachers and theologians have generally employed when they have wanted to state our position in a clear and unmistakable manner.

In an earlier chapter we have made the suggestion that eradicate likely came into use because it had already been employed with reference to physical disease, and now could well signify the destruction of the moral and spiritual disease of inbred sin. (Wesley, as we have seen, often likened it to an illness.) Allow me now to offer another explanation for the fact that it came into use. Some of the staunch believers in the truth of entire sanctification began to leave off the entire and the wholly -- which Wesley so often used with sanctification to indicate its completeness or thoroughness -- because of certain misunderstandings which might have arisen. In order to offset this, they then adopted the use of eradication, which so strikingly indicates the thoroughness or completeness of the destruction of sin in the second blessing.