BOOK REVIEWS
Exploring Christian Holiness, Volume 3, The Theological Formulation, by Richard S. Taylor. Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press, 1985, 260 pp. Reviewed by Wayne McCown, Th.D., Conference Superintendent, Free Methodist Church, S. California-Arizona.
This volume completes a trilogy published by Beacon under the title, Exploring Christian Holiness. It was preceded by and presumes on The Historical Development by Paul M. Bassett and William M. Greathouse.
The proper use of the definite article in the title is overstatement. More properly what we have in this case is a theological formation. Richard S. Taylor is an exponent of old school holiness. So while his formulation will resonate with some (as "a bell-ringer"), others will find it quite disturbing (more like "a clanging cymbal").
Dr. Taylor argues that the original sin is transmitted genetically. He believes in the eradication of the original sin nature. He develops a "Theology of Secondness," and devotes one of two appendices to an apology for "The Two Natures." Christian perfection can be described (and is) a "level of performance."
There is little interaction with other (Wesleyan) interpretations of holiness. The substantive versus relational question, for example, is acknowledged, but given only one page. Taylor quickly concludes: the two interpretations are "complementary, not contradictory" (p. 100).
Dr. Taylor does modify (and soften) the presentation of classical doctrine by defining the several (key) theological terms used as "models." This concept he borrows from Ian Ramsey (cf. Alden Aikens, "Wesleyan Theology and the Use of Models," WTJ, 1979). This "model" concept introduces "some breathing space" (p. 156) into the use of such typical holiness terms as baptism, sanctification, and eradication. Otherwise, Dr. Taylor's theological formulation is airtight.
The book has a ring of authority, because what the author says is rooted in deep personal conviction.
At times, Taylor's declarations are so sweeping and courageous as to prove breathtaking. For example: "Wherever theology makes divine sovereignty the keystone of its system instead of divine holiness, it goes astray" (p. 17); "A theology without sanctification is not fully evangelical, no matter how zealously it waves the banner" (pp. 112-113).
Detailed specification is this author's forte. In this arena, too, there are many declarations which arrest the reader's attention. For example: ". . . certain observable marks belong to any true holiness from the beginning: genuine spiritual-mindedness, a strong moral concern, and a highly visible religious life-style. The church, the Bible, prayer, and witnessing will constitute the polarities of the daily routine" (p. 45); "Adjustments of habit, manner, interpersonal relationships, spending, recreation, or, most of all, attitudes, are the day-to-day response to the tutoring of the Spirit" (p.46); "Loudness, immodesty, crudeness, and otherwise disorganized and haphazard lifestyles He [the Holy Spirit] will rebuke and shame" (p. 193).
The book is replete with this kind of analysis and clarification, in conceptual matters as well as practical applications. Some will judge it pedantic in the first arena, and petty in the second. Others will appreciate and applaud both.
Whether or not you agree with Taylor's interpretation of holiness, this is an important book. The author is well read: the Selected Bibliography contains more than two hundred titles (although only a handful of journal articles). This theological formulation represents the crystallization of a lifetime of studying-and living-Christian holiness.
A trinitarian approach is taken to the subject. Special emphasis is given to the work of the Spirit. The baptism of the Holy Spirit is equated with entire sanctification.
Hermeneutically, chapter 10 is key to this theological formulation. Titled "Pentecost and the Ministry of the Holy Spirit," it posits the following conclusions: (1) Pentecost (Acts 2) was the disciples' second experience; (2) Pentecost is "personal as well as historical"; (3) Pentecost (i.e., the fulness of the Spirit) is the norm of experience for all believers.
Theologically, the formulation is based on Taylor's two-fold definition of sin. Practically, it is anchored in his conviction that holiness is real and experiential, and must be fleshed out in life.
Richard S. Taylor is a careful, analytical theologian. In the end, however, he humbly acknowledges: "The reality of holiness can only be experienced; it cannot be known by verbal dissection alone. No matter how correct and Biblical our exposition may be, if readers do not seek and obtain the experience for themselves, doctrinal exactness will avail nothing" (p. 186).
Every book has its flaws, I suppose, and this book is no exception. Some of the more pervasive and disconcerting should be mentioned. The reader must be prepared for an extraordinary mixing of styles, ranging from pedantic stiltism to campy preacher-talk. On the one hand, Dr. Taylor analyzes "agapeic [sic!] love" from (a) to (g). On the other, he inquires whether marital fidelity is not more satisfying than "puppy love," then answers: "Ask the 'puppy' and he will say no . . ." (p. 38).
Colloquial language (homely sermonic illustrations) are intermixed with scholarly discourse on pages 38, 55-56, 88, 101, 148, 188-189, etc. But the style is not consistently popular.
At times, by contrast, not only the language but the argument is obscure. Consider, as an illustration, the following: "Man cannot speak of having a 'spark of divinity' in any pantheistic or theosophical sense. He is not a
fragment of God and can never achieve such a mystical union with God that the Wholly Otherness of God on the one hand, and the unique distinctiveness of man on the other are blurred" (p. 29). Maybe "puppy love" is better after all!
The use of a sermonic style within scholarly discourse sometimes leads to unsatisfactory results. Compare, for example, the following generalizations: "This [human sin] is the kingpin of everything that follows in the Scriptures" (p. 48); "Herein [holiness] is the kingpin of all Christian theology" (p. 26). Somebody better check the kingpin!
Elsewhere, commenting on the significance of Acts 15:6, it is asserted: ". . . 'heart purity' can be seen as a model that helps us to understand the state resulting from the baptism with the Holy Spirit. It can mean nothing less than the removal of inbred sin" (p.162). Really? (The point is not argued: Dr. Taylor assumes it is self-evident.)
The argument equating entire sanctification and the baptism of the Holy Spirit is presented in similar fashion. Within a single (brief) paragraph, the following generalizations are laid down: (1) a definition of "sanctify" as separation from sin; (2) a diagnosis of this as the disciples' need; and (3) the identification of Pentecost as their cleansing. Then (within the same paragraph), this conclusion is drawn: "It is scarcely possible, therefore, to separate entire sanctification from the baptism with the Holy Spirit." "Furthermore," the next sentence asserts, "our entire sanctification today is as dependent upon the immediate, personal, and radical action of the Spirit as it was in their case" (p. 165).
This is theologizing by declaration, rather than reasoned argument.
Leading Wesleyan Thinkers, edited by Richard S. Taylor, Vol. III: Great Holiness Classics, Kansas City, Missouri: Beacon Hill Press of Kansas City, 1985. Reviewed by Laurence W. Wood, Ph.D., Professor of Systematic Theology, Asbury Theological Seminary, Wilmore, Kentucky.
This work is volume three of a series of six volumes on Great Holiness classics. Its intent is to present some selected "leading Wesleyan thinkers" ho have been influential in interpreting the doctrine of Christian perfection. No claim is made that this selected list of writers is the best, though t is obvious that the editor believes they do represent the most representative of those writers who are "standard, Methodistic, and Wesleyan theologians."
These writers include "thinkers" from Richard Watson (1781-1833) whose theological Institutes intended to be the Wesleyan corollary to Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion to J. Paul Taylor (1885-1973), a bishop of the Free Methodist Church who is described as "an eloquent preacher, and able administrator, and above all . . . a powerful defender and exponent of Wesleyan doctrine." Other "leading Wesleyan thinkers" included in this volume are Jabez Bunting, Thomas N. Ralston, Luther Lee, Samuel Wakefield, Miner Raymond, William Burt Pope, Benjamin Field, John Miley, Randolf S. Foster, Daniel Steele, Olin Curtis, Wilson Thomas Hogue, Solomon Jacob Gartsfelder, Aaron M. Hills, Albert Frederick Gray, and H. Orton Wiley who is "the plumb line of the entire volume."
The editor is obviously concerned about several key issues surrounding the doctrine of Christian perfection. His editorial notes intend to correct some false notions about certain of these "Wesleyan thinkers," such as the opinion that Richard Watson moved more toward a gradual interpretation of entire sanctification instead of an emphasis upon the instantaneous-crisis aspect. The selection of writings from Watson and others of these "leading Wesleyans" intends to show that they affirmed the doctrine of "two works of grace" and that entire sanctifying grace is received instantaneously. The editor also points out that many of these writers equate the fullness of the Spirit with entire sanctification, another obvious point of view which the editor wants to stress.
One possible weakness of this work is that it restricts Wesleyan thinking too narrowly in terms of the doctrine of holiness, while other Wesleyan distinctives are bypassed or are only slightly mentioned.
Another possible weakness is that the book may be misnamed. The title suggests that the reader should look for those influential Wesleyan thinkers who have been the theological pacesetters and who have engaged in serious dialogue with the best of theological scholarship. Actually, this work is more of a chronological sequencing of Wesleyan writers who may have been more or less influential during certain periods of time. To call them "the leading Wesleyan thinkers" may be an overstatement in some instances, though clearly several persons included in this volume may be said to be leading Wesleyan thinkers at a particular time and were competent scholars.
If by "leading" is meant enduring relevance, then not many in this list are really "leading thinkers." If by "leading" is primarily meant representative holiness thinkers who have had some measure of influence during their life time, then this work succeeds in fulfilling its goal. However, some of the most influential Wesleyan "leaders" of the past were not even "thinkers" but primarily evangelists and preachers whose sermons are nonetheless theologically substantive. Perhaps some justification could be given for including them in this volume, especially since many believe that Wesleyan "thinking" takes place more appropriately in the sermon than in a textbook. To be sure, the editor points out that a primary reason for the selection of persons included in this volume is their having written a "systematic theology." While this point is well taken, some would say this goes against the spirit of Wesleyan theology. Some would say this attempt to identify "leading Wesleyan thinkers" with systematic theology is rationalistic. Perhaps a balance could have been achieved by including some "biographical, devotional, expository, or evangelistic readings."
One cannot help but ask why the contemporary period is largely bypassed with the exceptions of H. Orton Wiley and J. Paul Taylor, neither of whom are recent writers. It may be, in the judgment of some, that the "leading Wesleyan thinkers" should include more contemporary and recent theologians who have a direct bearing on Wesleyan interpretation in the contemporary setting. In fact, the title of this work could suggest to the reader that this expectation is what is intended. To be sure, volume six of this series on Great Holiness Classics deals with the subject of contemporary holiness teaching. But it does not deal directly with the leading holiness thinkers as such.
There is also a glaring absence of contemporary British Methodist writers as well as American United Methodist holiness writers. My judgment is, without attempting to take away from the significance of this present volume, that focusing more on the leading Wesleyan scholars who have a more enduring, or at least a direct relevance, to our contemporary understanding of Wesleyan thought would have been helpful.
It is obvious this volume intends to acquaint the reader with some representative holiness "thinkers" throughout the Wesleyan tradition who exerted some influence in their time. Whether or not this feature qualifies calling them "leading Wesleyan thinkers" is a matter of perception. Regardless, this is a helpful volume and it will cause one to be better informed of some of our forgotten theological forefathers. We are indeed indebted to the editor of this volume, as well as to the editors of the entire series, for making available to us these writings on holiness thinking of the past.
No Time for Silence: Evangelical Women in Public Ministry Around the Turn of the Century, by Janette Hassey. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986. 150 pp. plus appendices. Reviewed by Randy L. Maddox, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Religion, Sioux Falls College, Sioux Falls, South Dakota.
The counter-traditional opening of ministry to women by Wesleyans during the last half of the nineteenth century is a source of pride for Wesleyan feminists. By contrast, the significant restriction of this openness in the same Wesleyan circles during the first half of the twentieth century is a source of chagrin and perplexity. What caused the reversal? The most commonly suggested culprit is the influx of a fundamentalist "leavening" into Wesleyan circles. Hassey's study both substantiates and nuances this explanation.
Indeed, the burden of Hassey's investigation is to demonstrate that there was a beginning acceptance of and then growing disassociation from women in ministry within early fundamentalist circles as well. To make this case, Hassey first surveys the Bible Institutes that were the primary sources of continuity and leadership for the early evangelical and fundamentalist movements. She demonstrates convincingly that they were nearly unanimous in accepting women for ministerial training and in supporting their alumnae in ministry during the latter half of the nineteenth century. This fact is particularly noteworthy since many of these schools now prohibit women from their "ministerial" programs and claim historical precedent for this practice (see especially her chapter on Moody Bible Institute).
To further substantiate her claim, Hassey analyzes the various denominational approaches to women in ministry. Her analysis provides one of the best surveys available of the "earliest" openings of ministry to women in America: from Quaker openness to women preachers (without ordination, of course), to the first licensing of a woman to preach by the Free Will Baptists in 1815, to the first full ordination of a woman by the Congregationalists in 1853. What is most intriguing about this survey is Hassey's focus on conservative traditions like the General Conference Baptists and the Evangelical Free Church-demonstrating some early openness to the full ministry rights of women in these denominations, even though they now deny such rights.
Hassey dates the reversal on acceptance of women's ministry which she has highlighted in evangelical and fundamentalist circles to the time "between the wars" (10). This context provides her suggestion for the primary causes of the change. World War I had pressed American women into the public "working sphere" and American men into unfamiliar cultures in unprecedented numbers. These new experiences led to a sense of social relativity and a wide-spread challenge of traditional social values following the war. It also led to a strong conservative Protestant call to reject these "innovations" and uncertainties in favor of old standards. When such a call was not heeded by the culture at large it encouraged the emergence of separatist sub-culture mentalities and a search for an unquestioned source of truth and order in the midst of the shifting times. These developments were particularly evident in fundamentalist circles. Indeed, they characterize the emergence of "fundamentalism" in its most precise sense from the broader evangelical arena. More importantly, these developments also undercut the fledgling support for women in ministry since such was construed as a concession to "modern" culture which contradicted a literal (i.e., unquestioning) reading of Scripture.
Obviously, part of the value for Wesleyans of Hassey's study is the insight it provides into the context of the related developments in Wesleyanism. In addition, she provides an excellent summary of early evangelical feminist Biblical exegesis, including many Wesleyan representatives (chapter6). Her most important contribution, however, is to those Wesleyans who wish to defend the continuing practice of women's ministry against the common criticism that it is an unscriptural concession to present social pressures. Hassey has shown convincingly that the conservative position is equally a product of cultural forces and motivations. Thereby, she undercuts its pious assertions about merely affirming the "obvious" literal meaning of Scripture.
Indeed, Hassey ultimately argues that the issue of women in ministry is not whether evangelicals should let the teachings of Scripture critique their culture or not but whether evangelicals are sufficiently sensitive to how subtly culture affects their "literal" readings of Scripture. Her hope is that an exposure to this segment of evangelical history will help cultivate such a sensitivity. We join her in affirming both this need and this hope.
Edited by Michael Mattei for the
Wesley Center for Applied Theology
at Northwest Nazarene University
© Copyright 2000 by the Wesley Center for Applied Theology
Text may be freely used for personal or scholarly purposes, provided the notice below the horizontal line is left intact. Any use of this material for commercial purposes of any kind is strictly forbidden without the express permission of the Wesley Center at Northwest Nazarene University, Nampa, ID 83686. Contact the webmaster for permission or to report errors.
