|
Home About Us Holiness Library History of the Holiness Movement Early English Bibles Bible Studies Listen to Sermons Links
|
|
PREFACE.
THE
book entitled Growth in Holiness Toward Perfection was written by my
friend and brother in the Christian ministry, James Mudge, D.D., for several
years past the Secretary of the New England Conference of the Methodist
Episcopal Church. He is held in the highest esteem as a very devout and earnest
Methodist, in the strict sense, “one who observes method” in his Christian
life and work. That he has written this book with the pure desire to elucidate
and harmonize our doctrines with themselves, with reason, and with the
Scriptures, no one is acquainted with him will deny. But many loyal Methodists
are convinced that he is in great error, overturning our doctrinal foundations.
When an eminent religious teacher, esteemed by all for the purity of his
character, repudiates truths hitherto considered vital to the highest religious
attainments, his very eminence in the public regard enables him to eclipse many
more minds and obstruct their vision of the truth. It is for this reason that I
have reluctantly taken up my pen to do the uncongenial work of criticism. There
are excellences in this book. There are helpful suggestions about spiritual
growth. The author’s Christian experience is interesting. Testimony is always
more convincing than theory, as persons are always more attractive than
abstractions. It has been very wisely suggested that the author’s experience
should be read before his argument. It might soften a little the repugnance
which arises in pious minds against the assailant of a cherished doctrine. It
might possibly have saved one copy of this book from the flames. A very
intelligent woman, educated as a Congregationalist, finding herself in a
pulmonary decline, death in a few weeks in full view, supposing from the title
of this book that it was a devotional, and not a polemical work, began reading
it, thinking she would find nutriment to her soul seeking a full preparation for
eternity. She desired no partial sanctification up to knowledge, but the
asssurance of perfect cleansing. Nothing short of this would satisfy her. She
wanted such an experience as her Methodist husband professed and beautifully
exemplified. She found the teachings of this book so disappointing and
distasteful, so inadequate to her emergency, that she turned away from it
utterly dissatisfied. Before her triumphant death she requested the burning of
the book, lest it might be a stumbling block to her children. This was not an
act of one known as a fanatic or an “empyrean professor of holiness,” but of
a well-balanced, cultivated lady, seeking the highest possibilities of grace for
herself and for her family. The
chamber of death is not an infallible test of a religious book, but it is the
best test on the earth in the case of a sincere inquirer after the highest
possibilities of grace. The last letter to me from that soldier of the Union
army who helped General Grant take Vicksburg, and who incited many churches to
spiritual victories, Dr. S. A. Keen, that well-poised pastoral evangelist and
pentecostal preacher, conveyed his expression of regret on account of the
publication of this “misleading book.” We have appealed to an English
dictionary, because the book is written in the English language. Though it will
be read chiefly by preachers, these address their people in English terms which
have an established meaning, which no one man can change. It becomes public
speakers to use words with their fixed meanings. For the same reason we chose
not a theological dictionary, where we might have found some sectarian meaning,
but a popular, secular dictionary, acknowledged for three quarters of a century
as superior to all others in its definitions. Though Noah Webster was educated
under Calvinistic influences, it cannot be proved that that stern creed warped
any of his definitions. His work is a perfect mirror of the thought of the
English-speaking world. We
have not attempted to reply to all the errors of our brother, but have called
attention to those which seem to be fundamental. The
reference to the silence of our Articles of Religion, though made by our author
in a very incidental manner, I have spoken of at some length, because many
readers, especially among the laity, might infer that these Articles are the
sole standard of the Methodist Episcopal Church. By
criticising the book, and not its author, we have endeavored to make our
critique as void of personalities as possible by avoiding the author’s name,
and, so far as possible, we have refrained from the use of the argumentum ad
hominem. While
earnestly contending for vital truth we have had in our heart love, and love
only, toward the writer of the book under criticism, both while writing and
publicly delivering portions of this defense of Christian perfection, and in
listening to the author’s public reply. Hoping that this little volume will help to conserve a precious truth, I send it forth into the world.
D.
S.
|