Justification and Sanctification Distinguished (Part 1)

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

Among other grounds of distinction between the two, it may be remarked that justification, while it does not exclude the present, has special reference to the past, and does not appear to have that prospective bearing which sanctification has. Sanctification, on the contrary, starting on the basis of justification, and regarding the past as cancelled and settled in the justificatory application of the Atonement, has practically an exclusive reference to the present and future.  Justification inquires, How shall the sin which is past be forgiven? Sanctification inquires, How shall we be kept from sin in time to come? Considered, therefore, in their relation to time, there is good reason for saying that they ought not to be confounded together.

Another mark of difference is this. Justification, in its result upon individuals, removes the condemnatory power or guilt of sin; while sanctification removes the power of sin itself.  He, who is justified, no longer stands in a state of condemnation, in relation to all those past sins, from which he is justified; but he that is sanctified, just in proportion that he is so, is freed from the influence of that which brings condemnation, viz. sin itself. Or the distinction may be concisely expressed in other terms, amounting essentially to the same thing, as follows. The object of justification, considered in reference to the, law, is to free us from condemnation. The object of sanctification, considered in reference to the law, is to secure conformity to it.

Justification and sanctification are distinct, also, when considered in the order in which they present themselves, as subjects of thought and interest, to the human mind. It is very obvious that, in the first instance, they present themselves consecutively and separately, and not simultaneously and identically. It is not the first cry of the sinner, that he may be sanctified, but  that  he may be forgiven. It is his past sins which stare him in the face. It is his past sins which must be washed away. And until this is done, and at the feet of Jesus he has received the remission of his transgressions, he has no other desire, no other thought. But  when he has experienced a release from the bitter memory of the past, and has felt the rising hope of forgiveness, and not till then, is his mind occupied with the distinct subject of the reality, the obligation, and the blessedness of a holy heart, in all time to come.

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

The Distinction Between Justification and Sanctification

The life of faith and love, when introduced into the heart, is not inoperative. Its introduction there is the signal for an inward war, because it meets with an antagonistical life, the corrupt life of nature. The two have nothing in common; and, therefore, they cannot be in each other's presence without a conflict. But before entering into the particulars of this inward struggle, which, if the soul becomes truly sanctified, must necessarily result in the death of nature.

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

Justification and sanctification, it is generally conceded, are different from each other; and yet it is well known that they have sometimes been confounded by writers who have bestowed some examination upon them, as if they were one and the same thing. Nor is it altogether surprising that this should be the case, when we consider that there is one leading idea which is common to both; we mean the idea or principle of entire submission. In both cases, impressed with a sense of our own unworthiness and nothingness, we must be sincerely willing, in the spirit of entire submissiveness, to receive all from God; and must receive it also instrumentally in the same way, viz., by faith.  Nevertheless, there are some important points of distinction in the two things, which are inconsistent with their being regarded as truly identical. And we may add, it is very important, for various reasons, both theological and practical, that the distinction should be generally understood and maintained. If the idea should become prevalent that justification and sanctification are the same thing, it would involve the subject of sanctification and perhaps that of justification in much confusion. It would be necessary that new ideas should be established, and that new forms of speech should be introduced; and one unhappy consequence, among others, would be, that some, who are seeking the blessing of holiness, would become perplexed and discouraged.

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

Triumph in Death

On earth when the journey allotted us closes,
When the hour and the moment of parting are near,
If a gleam on that parting of mercy reposes,
Oh wish not, oh, think not, to fasten us here.

'Tis true, there is strength in the ties which endear us,
And bind us so closely to things here below;
But bright is the land where no sin can come near us,
And bliss is disturbed by no moments of woe.

Then joy to the soul, that is ripe for ascending,
And breathe not a sigh that shall tempt it to stay,
When angels in triumph its flight are attending,
And Bethlehem's star is the light of its way.

— American Cottage Life (1850).

Evidences of an Overruling Providence

To the eye of a disciplined and comprehensive faith, the footsteps of God, as they are left in the great pathway of nations, are as plain as if they were impressed and written there in letters of light. God is to be found in the dust of Nineveh and the ruins of Thebes. If he raised them to mighty power, he also, in the day of his righteous retribution, clothed them in sackcloth, and made them desolate. It was God who planted the Israelites in Egypt in the condition of slavery, and who afterwards employed them in the punishment of their masters, and then led them to the overthrow of the corrupt nations of Palestine. The Israelites themselves had their day of progress and decline, according as they walked in God's ways, or were disobedient. It was God, making the crime of human ambition the blind but effective instrument in fulfilling his own mighty purposes, who called the Assyrians from the banks of the Euphrates to the overthrow of the Israelites The Assyrians, in their turn, with Babylon, their immense city, fell under the arm of the destroyer. God found an instrument of his mighty purposes where none was supposed to exist. He raised up the Persian Cyrus, and called him by name many years before his birth, and said, "I will go before thee." And again, "I am the Lord, and there is none else; there is no God besides me. I girded thee, though thou hast not known me." — Isa. 45: 8.

The contemplative mind will see, in the history of all nations, not excepting those of modern times, the evidences of an overruling Providence. They stand or fall as  they stand in or out of God. When nations have obeyed him, they have lived. When they have forgotten him, they have been destroyed. To forget God is to sin. And all sin has in itself an element of self-destruction. It is internal disorganization and weakness as well as immorality. And it is not in the power of God, while it continues sin, and is thus placed out of the reach of his protection, to save it either from decay or sorrow. With no divine arm under it, it is prostrated by its own recumbence. But as it lies scattered and decayed in the ashes of successive generations, it shows the burning footprints of the divine displeasure.

Such is the true idea of Divine Providence; extending to all things which exist, to things animate and inanimate, organized and unorganized, to plants, and trees, and animals, to men, to families, to nations; wide as the universe, sleepless as the divine omniscience, effective as the supreme power; always holding in respect, however, the moral freedom of all moral agents, and inviting, without forcibly compelling, them to accept that daily bread of superintendence and love which is the true element of everlasting life.

— A Treatise on Divine Union (1851) Part 6, Chapter 1.

The Judge and Father of the Nations

God, in the exercise of his providential care, is the Judge and Father also of great commonwealths. The idea that God should be united to man as an individual, and in his relation to families, but forgetful of and alien to those bodies of men which are denominated civil societies, — governing the one, and leaving the other without government,— would be exceedingly absurd. If he cannot abandon a man, nor the hair of a man's head, how can he abandon a nation or any part of a nation's interests? It is an obvious dictate of reason, therefore, that he who is watchful over the less, will be careful of the greater; that he, who watches over the members of the body, will take care of the whole body, if he has the power and qualification to do so; and that he, who is the head of the citizen, a fortiori if his capacity equals the impulses of his benevolence, will be the head of the state.

And it is certain that what is reasonable in this case is also scriptural. The Bible everywhere represents God as the God of nations. How often is it said, in Daniel, in Job, in the Psalms, and everywhere, that "the kingdom is the Lord's;" that "He is Governor among the nations;" that He "removes and sets up kings!" What was the language which David used in his great contest with the Philistine chief, — young as he was, and just come from the flocks and the pastures of Bethlehem? "Thou comest to me," said David, "with a sword, and with a spear, and with a shield: but I come unto thee in the name of the Lord of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, whom thou hast defied. This day will the  Lord  deliver thee into mine hand; and I will smite thee, and take thine head from thee. And I will give the carcasses of the hosts of the Philistines unto the fowls of the air and to the wild beasts of the earth; that all the earth may know that there is a God in Israel. And all this assembly shall know that the Lord saveth not with sword and spear, for  the battle is the Lords, and He will give you into our hands.”

What was the declaration of the Spirit of the Lord, by the mouth of his prophet, to Jehoshaphat, king of Judah? "Thus saith the Lord unto you, Be not afraid nor dismayed by reason of this great multitude; for the battle is not yours, but God’s. Ye shall not need to fight in this battle; set yourselves, stand ye still, and see the salvation of the Lord with you. O Judah and Jerusalem fear not, nor be dismayed; to-morrow go out against them, for the Lord will be with you.” And  it is added, after some account of the great victory which the Lord gave: "So the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet; for his God gave him rest round about."  [2nd Chron., chapter 20.]

— A Treatise on Divine Union Part 6, Chapter 1.

God's Care for Every Person

It is interesting to see how many passages there are in the Scriptures which speak of God's protection of animals, even of those which are the least considerable. He  takes care of the cattle of the fields; he feeds the young lions; he plants the cedars where the birds build their nests. "Behold the fowls of the air," says the Saviour, "for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them." It is not possible that he should take less care of man. Of all the existences on the earth, man stands the first, and God loves him most.

The Savior adds, for the comfort of those who heard him when speaking of God's care of the birds, "Are ye not much better than they?” As much as if he had said, the God who provides for them cannot fail to provide for you, who are so much more important in his estimation. And, in another passage, he says, "Are not five sparrows sold for two farthings? And not one of them is forgotten before God. But even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear not, therefore, ye are of more value than many sparrows."

Truly here is a great truth, worthy of our constant contemplation. Around every individual, no matter what may be his situation, is thrown the shield of the divine presence, love, and care. Every individual can say of himself, God is with me.  He is not a God afar off. He knoweth my down-sitting and up-rising, my going out and my coming in. He not only knows, but he orders events concerning me.

Nor is there any limit to the divine presence and operation, except that which is interposed by unbelief. God will do all, operating in entire harmony with the laws of our mental constitution, if we only have faith enough to leave ourselves entirely in his hands, and let him do all. He will not, in the present state of things, so interpose and extend his own action as to prevent the concurrence of ours. But, nevertheless, he will unite the two in such a manner that we shall recognize every good thing as coming from him. In reference to the daily support received from him, we shall be ready to say, with an eminent English writer, who had passed through many vicissitudes and trials, "I have been fed more by miracle than Elijah when the angels were his purveyors." [Daniel Defoe.]

— A Treatise on Divine Union (1851) Part 6, Chapter 1.

The Practical Atheism of Our Age

It is the rejection of the doctrine of providence, considered as entering into particulars, which constitutes one of the great evils, the practical atheism, perhaps we may call it, of the age in which we live. It is true, undoubtedly, that men, with but few exceptions, admit the existence of a God; but they do not admit, except in a very mitigated and imperfect sense, his presence and supervision. They allow him a being, but they practically strike off its infinity, by assigning him a distant and strictly bounded locality. They allow him the privilege of casting a look down upon the world's affairs; but cannot bear the thought that the world does not and cannot go on without him. Here, then, is one of the great evils of the day, one of the secrets of our misery; the acknowledgment of God's existence, with the excision of his practical omnipresence; the recognition of God in general, but the rejection of him as God in particular.

One would be almost inclined to think that heathen nations are less faulty in this particular than those which bear the name of Christians. The untutored savage

“Sees God in clouds, and hears him in the wind."

Because an advanced knowledge in the sciences has explained many physical laws, men have fallen into the habit of ascribing to law what belongs to agency. And by thus attributing almost everything to what they denominate the laws of Nature, they forget the God of Nature. The mind of the savage, on the contrary, contemplating the result without understanding the law by which it is brought about, sees God in all the objects around him. It is God, dwelling in the cave of its fountain waters, who pours down the mighty rivers. It is the Great Spirit that sends the storm and the lightning from the mountain tops. It is God that shines in the sun, and walks in the clouds, and dwells even in four-footed beasts and creeping things. Here is a great truth, founded in the nature of God, although it is perverted and darkened in its development by the imperfection of fallen hearts. It is a truth, therefore, which ought to be respected. And the question may be put in all sincerity: — Who would not rather be the superstitious savage than the unbelieving philosopher?

It is certainly necessary that science, bewildered in its own wanderings, should return at last, and baptize itself in the truth of the Scriptures: those Scriptures which constantly associate God with all his works. The beautiful Psalms, unequaled in poetry as they are in devotion, may be said to be built upon this great idea, which is equally philosophical and religious. Speaking of God, the Psalmist says, “He sendeth the springs into the valleys, which run among the hills. He watered the hills from his chambers. He causeth the grass to grow for the cattle, and herb for the service of man. He hath planted the cedars of Lebanon, where the birds build their nests. He appointeth the moon for seasons and the sun knoweth his going down, Thou makest darkness, and it is night, wherein all the beasts of the forest do creep forth. The young lions roar after their prey, and seek their meat from God.” [Psalm 104: 10, 20.]

This is the spirit which pervades these divine poems They everywhere represent the union of God with his works by an ever-present supervision and love. It is not a system of second causes, it is not nature, but God, who does all. It is God "who covers the heavens with clouds, who prepares rain for the earth, who maketh grass to grow upon the mountains. He giveth to the beast his food, and to the young ravens which cry." [Psalm 147: 8, 9]

The same spirit, the same devout disposition to recognize God in everything, pervades all parts of the Scriptures.

— A Treatise on Divine Union Part 6, Chapter 1.

The Doctrine of Divine Providence

THE  word providence is derived from the Latin term PROVIDENTIA, meaning watchfulness, care, oversight.  As the  term is commonly employed, it means the constant oversight or care which God exercises over all his works. Says a judicious writer:

The doctrine of divine providence is of the very first importance, and contributes greatly to the peace and happiness of human life. Were it not that God maintained a constant and watchful care over all his works, all piety would immediately cease. A God who did not concern himself in the affairs of the world, and especially in the actions of men, would be to us as good as none at all. In that case,  should men live in a virtuous and pious manner, they would have no approbation to expect from him. Should they be guilty of crimes, they would have no punishment to fear. Were they persecuted, they would think of God only as the idle witness of their wrongs. Were they in circumstances of suffering and sorrow, they could find no consolation if God were unmindful of them. 

— Lectures on Christian Theology, by George Christian Knapp.

In  considering this important and interesting subject, it is proper to notice the distinction which is frequently made between a particular and general providence. It is certainly doubtful whether such a distinction ought to be made; — especially if the doctrine of a general providence is designed to supersede that of a particular providence. How can we readily conceive of a general providence, extending its watchfulness over things in their general aspects, which does not involve the fact of a particular providence, extending its watchfulness at the same time to those particulars, out of which that which is general is constituted? If there is a God, to whom the attributes usually ascribed to God belong, there is and must be a providence of God. If there is a providence of God extending with any degree of certainty, and with any good results, to things in their general nature, it extends to everything. We do not propose, however, to enter into an argument in support of a view which seems to us to be obvious of itself.

— A Treatise on Divine Union Part 5, Chapter 8.

Once More Becoming the Children of God

"Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." — Matthew 18:3

In once more becoming the children of God, we receive and retain a filial nature, but without ceasing to possess a moral nature. Much is involved in that free and full consecration which every true Christian is supposed to have made of himself to his heavenly Father. As free and moral agents, we consent now, and forever, if we do what we ought to do, that God shall be a truth, a life, a nature in us; which he never has been and never will be without our consent. Adam before he fell, Christ in his humanity, angels in heaven, all holy beings everywhere, either have existed, or do now exist, as  holy beings, by means of the operation of God in the soul; and yet without any alienation of their moral attributes and responsibilities, because they have received this operation with their own choice, and have sanctioned it by their own approbation.

There is no true place of rest and safety, short of the reestablishment of those relations which we have endeavored to illustrate. Accordingly, we cannot regard it as safe for any one to stop in the progress of inward experience, until he feels and knows that he has become, in the Scripture sense of the terms, a LITTLE CHILD; not only having a child's name, but a child's nature. And when this relation is reestablished, not as a name merely, but as a reality, not as a mere conventional arrangement, but as a true nature, — then, and not till then, we are brought into true union with our heavenly Father.

It is on these principles, and these only, that we can make our position harmonize with our prayers. When we pray, we address God as our Father. This implies that we either are, or ought to be, his children. And our language throughout in prayer corresponds to the idea that our true position is the filial position. We pray that we may distrust and renounce ourselves, and look only to God for guidance and support. Recognizing our inability to supply our own wants, we pray for faith, for wisdom, for love, for the guidance of our wills. We go to him, in form at least, just as the little child goes to its earthly parent. If we will go in the same sincerity, our heavenly Father will recognize the relationship, and we shall thus become the true sons of God.

— edited from A Treatise on Divine Union (1851) Part 5, Chapter 8.­

Childlike Will

"Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." — Matthew 18:3

The will of the child is naturally merged in the will of the father. There is a nature in this case, as there is in the others. The filial will is not harmonized in the parental will as a matter of calculation, but as the result of a mental tendency. There are, undoubtedly, some variations from this view, in consequence of the power of choice inherent in the will, and particularly in consequence of man's fallen condition; but what has been said is correct as a general statement. Accordingly, yielding readily to the tendency of their mental position, little children do what they are commanded to do. Sometimes it will cost them trouble and suffering; but this does not alter the general direction and the general inclinations of their feelings and actions. Subjecting their own wisdom to a higher wisdom, they have an instinctive feeling that their appropriate and first business is to harmonize with the expression of a parent's will. And so strong is this tendency to a union of wills, that very frequently they act without knowing what will be the end of their action. It is natural to them to leave everything with their father, — the mode, the time, the object, and the results of action, as well as the action itself.

And this, in a remarkable manner, represents the state of things as it existed in man at his first creation. The will of Adam, before he fell, not only harmonized perfectly with the divine will, but naturally; that is to say, without effort, and by an implanted tendency. It is so with all holy beings now. It was eminently so, (as I think we may safely infer from the passages which indicate his submission and union of will,) with Christ, the second Adam; and it will be found to be so with all those who are restored again and perfected in Christ's image. What God chooses, they choose. What God wills, they will. The will becomes in relation to God what the will of the affectionate and dutiful child is to its earthly parent.

— A Treatise on Divine Union (1851) Part 5, Chapter 8.