Faith and Good Judgment

We have seen something in the remarks which have been made in some of the preceding chapters, of the mighty influence of faith in the regulation of the affections and the will; but it is worthy of notice, that it has influence in other parts of our nature also; and particularly in giving rectitude to the judgment. 

Knowledge, which is the result of the action of those perceptive and comparing powers, which we commonly express by the single term, the JUDGMENT, has a closer connection with a correct and thorough inward experience, than is sometimes supposed. True knowledge is the food of the purified mind; that upon which it lives and gains strength. “He, that hath the truth,” says the Savior, “heareth my voice.” False knowledge, if we may call it such, or rather falsehood, under the semblance of knowledge, may be described, on the contrary, as the soul’s poison. Looking at the subject in this point of view, it is not easy to appreciate too highly any thing, which gives precision and steadiness to those powers of the mind, in which knowledge has its source.

A Change of Heart

Reflections on
the Life of
Madame Jeanne de la Mothe Guyon.

---

Further reflections on Jean Guyon's conversion experience:

 Madam Guyon, in her Autobiography, makes a number of practical remarks on the nature of her religious experience at this time.

Recognizing a distinction, which is important in the analysis of inward experience, she regarded the change which she underwent at this period, as not merely an intellectual illumination, but as truly a change of the heart. It is true, undoubtedly, that she had received new light. She had been led to see more distinctly than ever before the extreme perversity and blindness of the natural mind. She had now a clearer perception both of what God is, and of what he requires; and especially of the way of forgiveness and salvation by faith in Christ alone.

But perception is not love. The righting of the understanding is not necessarily identical with the rectification of the sensibilities. The understanding, enlightened of God, will sometimes dictate what the heart, in its opposition to God, will be slow to follow. This was not her case. Her under­standing was not only enlightened, but her heart was renewed.

— edited from The Life of Madame Guyon Volume 1, Chapter 7.

Justification and Sanctification Distinguished (Part 3)

We propose to delay a few moments for the purpose of considering the relation between Sanctification and Justification. 

The distinction is evidently made in the Scriptures. The passages of Scripture where it is clearly recognized are so numerous, and so familiar to attentive readers of the Bible, that it seems to be hardly necessary to quote them at any great length. — "And the very God of peace," says the apostle, I Thess. v.  23, "sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit, and soul, and body, be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ." And again, 8 Cor. vii. 1, "Having, therefore, these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God."  It  is very evident from the general tenor of the apostle's communications to them, that these exhortations were addressed to those whom he regarded, and had reason to regard, as justified persons. He felt, nevertheless, although they were justified, although their past sins were blotted out, that there was much remaining to be done in the matter of their present and prospective sanctification. Hence his exhortations to preserve their bodies blameless, to cleanse themselves, and to perfect holiness in the fear of God; which would have been unnecessary, if he had considered the work of sanctification as absolutely and necessarily involved in that of justification. There are, also, a number of passages, different in their import from those which have been particularly referred to, which seem to involve the distinction in question. Those, in which persons are spoken of as disciples or believers, but without having received the gift of the Holy Ghost, such as John 7. 39, Acts, 8. 15-17 Acts 19. 1, 2.

The distinction, which is made in the Scriptures between the two, is regarded so obvious and incontrovertible by most writers, that it has naturally passed, as an established truth, into treatises on theology. It is also recognized almost constantly in sermons, and in religious exhortations and conversation. There is, perhaps, as much unanimity among religious men on this subject as on almost any subject of theological inquiry. And the attempt to confound justification and sanctification together, which has been made from time to time, would necessarily tend, if it were successful, to perplex and confuse the established forms of speech among men, as well as the authorized and scriptural modes of religious thought.

Although these two states of religious experience are distinct from each other, they nevertheless may be regarded as having something in common, which establishes an intimate relationship between them. This fact has already been alluded to. In both cases, in sanctification as well as in justification, we ultimately receive every thing from Christ. And we are obliged, also, in both cases, to receive it in that meek and submissive spirit which recognizes our own unworthiness and nothingness. Every thing is received, also, through the same channel, viz., by faith. We may say, further, that there can be no such thing as sanctification without antecedent justification. The latter may be considered as the commencement or first coming of that hidden life in the soul, which is completed in the former. We are not to suppose, however, because there are some things common to justification and sanctification, and because they are in some respects closely related, that they are, therefore, the same thing. This would be a very unsafe mode of argument. There are some things common to memory and reasoning, and yet memory and reasoning are distinct. There are some things common to reasoning and imagination, and yet there can be no doubt that they are very  dis­tinct departments of the mind. There is a close connection between liberty and power; for instance, where there is no power there can be no liberty; yet they ought not to be confounded together. There are some things common to faith and love, or which connect them together in some way, (such as that they are both the gift of God, and that faith acts by love,) and yet all agree that they cannot be considered as identical; and thus justification and sanctification, although they are closely connected, are nevertheless two things, and the distinction between them is a very important one.

Let us, therefore, who humbly hope that we are justified by the blood of Christ, seek also to be sanctified. Let it not be sufficient for us that our sins have been forgiven; but let us strive to gain the victory over sin, and to exclude it from the heart in all future time. Well may we exclaim, in the gratitude of our hearts, praise be for that grace which sanctifies, as well as for that which justifies; for that which keeps the heart clean in time to come, as well as for that which washes away the stains of the past.  It is holiness which adds its highest value and its transcendent beauty to forgiveness.

"O for a heart to praise my God,

A heart from sin set free!

A heart that alway feels thy blood,

So freely spilt for me.

A heart in every thought renewed,

And full of love divine;

Perfect and right, and pure and good

A copy, Lord, of thine."

— The Interior or Hidden Life (1844), Part 2, Chapter 1.

Moral Freedom is the Gift of God

Let it be remembered, ... as a first truth in the doctrines of religious experience, that in all things God is the giver. Among the gifts which thus flow from God, is that high and invaluable one of moral freedom. In the exercise of that moral power, which is involved in the possession of moral freedom, men sometimes speak of it as their own possession, their own power but they cannot, with any propriety, speak of it as a power which is not given. The gift of freedom involves the possibility of walking in the wrong way, but it does not alter the straightness and oneness of the true way. The laws of holy living, although they are and can be fulfilled only by those who are morally free, are, nevertheless, unalterable. Founded in infinite wisdom, they necessarily have theIr permanent principles; and God himself, without a deviation from such wisdom, cannot change them. In the exercise of their moral choice, it is undoubtedly true, that men may endeavor to live in some other way, and to walk in some other path, than that which God has pointed out; but it does not follow from this that there is, or can be, more than one true way. God, in imparting to men the gift of moral freedom, has said to them, Life and death are before you; but he has not said, Ye can find life out of myself. He tells them, emphatically, there is but one Fountain; but having given them the freedom of choice, he announces to them, also, that they may either rest confidingly on his own bosom, and draw nourishment from that eternal fountain of life which is in himself, or may seek, in the exercise of their moral freedom, the nourishment of their spiritual existence from any other supposed source of life, with all the terrible hazards attending it.

— A Treatise on Divine Union (1851) Part 1, Chapter 5.

Present Holiness Is Not the Holiness of Heaven

The holiness which, in accordance with the principles of the gospel, is required to be exercised in the present life, differs in some respects from the holiness or sanctification of a future life. It is important to add, however, that it does not differ in its nature; but only in some of its accessories or incidents. In its nature holiness ever will be, and ever must be the same; but it may differ in some of the attendant circumstances or incidents, under which it exists. One of the particulars of an accessory or incidental character, in which the holiness of the future life may be regarded as differing from that of the present, is, that it is not liable, by any possibility whatever, to any interruption or suspension. No physical infirmity, no weariness or perplexity, of body or of mind, nothing will ever, even for a moment, either vitiate or weaken the purity of its exercises. The spiritual body, which constitutes the residence of the soul in its heavenly state, accelerates and perfects its operations, instead of retarding and perplexing them; so that its purity is always unstained, its joy always full, the song of its worship always new.

Another ground of difference between the sanctification or holiness of the present and that of the future life is to be found in the circumstance, that in the present life we are subject to perpetual and heavy temptations. No one, however advanced in religious experience, is wholly exempt from them. On the contrary, persons, who are the most holy, often endure temptations of the severest kind. But it is not so in the heavenly world. In that happier place the contest ceases forever. There is not only no sin, and no possibility of sinning; but no temptation to sin. While, therefore, we hold to the possibility of a freedom from actual voluntary transgression in this life, it ought to be understood that we do not hold to a freedom from temptation. So that we may speak of the continuance of the spiritual warfare in the present life, as a matter of necessity, but not of the continuance of sin as a matter of necessity.

— Edited from The Interior of Hidden Life (1844), Chapter 2.