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 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.
MILTON,
MASS., March 12, 1896. |