Sanctification

[PuritanCovenanter]

Greetings:
Randy: I do not believe the synergistic/Roman Catholic/Arminian view of Sanctification in the formula: God's work + Man's work = Sanctification.

Rob, You accused us of Roman / Arminian teaching. I was just responding to your accusation. Please learn how to listen when you read. No one was accusing you of this. You were accusing us.

 

[Peairtach]

It is God the Holy Spirit's work + the work of the soul that He regenerated monergistically.

All the glory goes to God.

Rob

The Spirit sanctifies you, then you respond. The Spirit sanctifies you more, then you respond, etc... Sanctification is an ongoing work of the Spirit of God that makes you holy. We simply respond in faith to the Sanctifying work of the Spirit.

Scripture and the Confession tell us we are duty bound before God not to take a passive, quietist approach to sanctification. We are regenerate, after all.

Chapter XVI, Of Good Works, III. Their ability to do good works is not at all of themselves, but wholly from the Spirit of Christ. And that they may be enabled thereunto, beside the graces they have already received, there is required an actual influence of the same Holy Spirit, to work in them to will, and to do, of His good pleasure:yet are they not hereupon to grow negligent, as if they were not bound to perform any duty unless upon a special motion of the Spirit; but they ought to be diligent in stirring up the grace of God that is in them.[14]

[14] PHI 2:12 Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. HEB 6:11 And we desire that every one of you do shew the same diligence to the full assurance of hope unto the end: 12 That ye be not slothful, but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises. 2PE 1:3 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue. 5 And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge. 10 Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall: 11 For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. ISA 64:7 And there is none that calleth upon thy name, that stirreth up himself to take hold of thee: for thou hast hid thy face from us, and hast consumed us, because of our iniquities. 2TI 1:6 Wherefore I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands. ACT 26:6 And now I stand and am judged for the hope of the promise made of God unto our fathers: 7 Unto which promise our twelve tribes, instantly serving God day and night, hope to come. For which hope's sake, king Agrippa, I am accused of the Jews. JUD 20 But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost, 21 Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.

 

[fredtgreco]

Rob,

Do you understand the difference between definitive and progressive sanctification? It appears not. I'd advise that you read Owen on the Holy Spirit, particularly III.386-406.

 

[KMK]

KMK: Yes.

The Holy Spirit enabled you, Rob, to do that and then you, Rob, did it. Hence, you did not cause your sanctification but you participated in it.

The WLC states that Sanctification is a "Work of God's Free Grace..." If Sanctification is a work of Grace, then it cannot be a work of man

In context, the WLC states that Sanctification is a work of God's free grace, meaning that it is a work caused by, and founded upon God's grace, but the subject of that grace actually exercises it.

WLC Q. 77. Wherein do justification and sanctification differ?

A. Although sanctification be inseparably joined with justification, yet they differ, in that God in justification imputeth the righteousness of Christ; in sanctification of his Spirit infuseth grace, and enableth to the exercise thereof...

You want to deny that the exercise of grace by the subject of that grace is a part of Sanctification. That is not only contraconfessional it is absurd. In what category do you suggest the exercise of grace should be placed if not in the category of Sanctification?

 

[Jack K]

Justification is Monergistic - it is solely the Work of God.
What about Sanctification? Is Sanctification solely the Work of God? or, is it Synergistic - the work of God and man?

Sorry for being late to the discussion, and maybe I have it all wrong, but...

Doesn't "monergism" refer just to the new birth? That's when we were unable to cooperate with God's work in us because we were dead in sin and enemies of God. But once we were born again, we became new creatures who gladly "play along" with God's work in us.

In that sense, even justification could be said to be synergistic. It includes our faith. We act. We repent and believe in Jesus, and so we are justified and adopted and made holy (in the definitive sanctification sense). These are wholly acts of God, but we played along. We wanted it. We chose it. As reborn people, we were in sync with God. Hence, "synergism."

And so also we continue to work with God, not against him, in our progressive sanctification.

None of this should be taken to mean that we deserve any of the credit, nor that if we failed to hold up our end of the bargain God's work would be ineffective. All credit goes to him. He gave us new birth solely by his discretion and mercy, and in his sovereign providence he stregthens us today to continue to fight sin. In that sense, it's still all about God. But I do think we miss some of the wonder of the new birth if we fail to see what a radical change it is. We went from being completely opposed to God to willingly acting in synergy with his sovereign design for us.

 

[au5t1n]

The response is not Sanctification, but a humble acknowledgement that God has Sanctified you.

I think this statement captures the basic disagreement between you and others on this thread. We are using sanctification as a holistic term because by definition it includes our becoming holy, but you are restricting the term only to the cause at the back of it all. We appear to agree on what is happening but not on how much of it to call sanctification.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

I ought not to have been so annoyed in some of my responses but your impious claim that any view posited here was Arminian or Roman Catholic was beyond the pale. You seem to have already decided what Sanctification means and so any demonstration that broadens the discussion beyond what you think it means is interpreted as man cooperating with grace to make it effectual.

As Jack helpfully pointed out, not even Justification is monergistic. Justification includes the instrumental act of our faith to cling to Christ. One of the reasons Calvin used the word regeneration in a way that included the entire Christian life is because the life of Christ through the Spirit impels every act from repentance to faith to repentance again to faith to....

The way you define Sanctification, it would put the believer's continual repentance and faith outside of it. Why? Because even though you might grant that the reason the believer repents is the Spirit's moving, repentance and faith are still acts of our will just like obedience.

You've basically squshed Sanctification down to mean evangelical grace. That is to say that whatever the Spirit does to move or infuse us with the power of Christ equals Sanctification. Sanctification has always been intended to describe more of an entire "realm" after Justification where the believer is perfected by Christ. It is definitive on the one hand because the believer is united to Christ but it is progressive on the other because the whole of the beilever's life thereafter is on a trajectory to glory.

 

[CalvinandHodges]

Greetings:

Austin: I fully agree with you.

Pastor Greco has accused me of not knowing the difference between difinitive and progressive sanctification. Passing over the accusation I will address his reference to John Owen:

Sanctification is an immediate work of the Spirit of God on the souls of believers, purifying and cleansing of their natures from the pollution and uncleanness of sin, renewing in them the image of God, and thereby enabling them, from a spiritual and habitual principle of grace, to yield obedience unto God, according unto the tenor and terms of the new covenant, by virtue of the life and death of Jesus Christ. Or more briefly: It is the universal renovation of our natures by the Holy spirit into the image of God, through Jesus Christ, John Owen, Works Vol 3, pg 386

Such is Owen's operating definition. This definition does not include the Works of man but simply the enabling of the Spirit.

Owen's point is further substantiated later on in the section which Pastor Greco has pointed out. In this section he is answering all of your objections listed above, and I will let Owen speak for himself.

But it will be said, "That if not only th beginning of grace, sanctification, and holiness be from God, but the carrying of it on, and the increase of it als be from him, and not only so in general, but if all the actings of grace and every act of it, be an immediate effect of the Holy Spirit, then what need is there that we should take any pains in this thing ourselves, or use our own endeavours to grow in grace or holiness, as we are commanded. If God work all himself in us, and if without his effectual operation in us we can do nothing, there is no place left for our diligence, duty, or obedience, pg. 394

I will stop here for a moment to point out that Owen is listing the objections to his doctrine of Sanctification. These are the same objections which all of you are trying to point out - especially Pastor Greco. I will let Owen answer:

Ans. 1. This objection we must expect to meet withal at every turn. Men will not believe there is a consistency between God's effectual grace and our diligent obedience; that is, they will not believe what is plainly, clarly, distinctly revealed in the Scripture, and which is suited unto the experience of all that truly believe, because they cannot, it may be, comprehend it within the compass of carnal reason. 2. Let the apostle answer this objection for this once; 2 Peter 1:3, "His divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue: whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust." If all things that pertain unto life and godliness, - among which, doubtless, is the preservation of the increase of grace, - be given unto us by the power of God, if from him we receive that divine nature by virtue whereof our corruptions are subdued, then, I pray, what need is there of any endeavours of our own? The whole work of sanctification is wrought in us, it seems, and that by the power of God; we, therefore, may let it alone, and leave it unto him whose it is, whilst we are negligent, secure, and at ease. "Nay," saith the apostle; "this is not the use which the grace of God is to be put unto. The consideration of it is, or ought to be, the principal motive and encouragement unto all diligence for the increase of holiness in us." For so he adds immediately, verse 5, kai auto touto de, - "But also for this cause," or, because of the gracious operatioins of the divine power in us, "giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue," as before. These objectors and this apostle were very diversely minded in these matters; what they make an insuperable discouragement unto diligence in obedience, that he makes the greatest motive and encouragement thereunto. 3. I say, from this consideration it will unavoidably follow that we ought continually to wait and depend on God for supplies of his Spirit and grace, without which we can do nothing. That God is more the author, by his grace, of the good we do than we ourselves ("Not I, but the grace of God which was with me"); that we ought to be careful that by our negligences and sins we provoke not the Holy Spirit to withhold his aids and assistances, and so to leave us to ourselves, in which condition we can do nothing that is spiritually good; - these things, I say, will unavoidably follow on the doctrine before declared; and if oany one be offended at theim, it is not in our power to render them relief, Works Vol. 3, 394-395.

Owen makes the distinction between Sanctification - which is a work of God, and holiness - which is the work of men. Owen goes on a little later:

From what hath been proved it is evident that the work of sanctification is a progressive work, that holiness is gradually carried on in us by it (Sanctification) towards perfection. It is neither wrought nor completed at once in us, as is regeneration, nor doth it cease under any attainments or in any condition of life, but is thriving and carried on, Works Vol 3, 397, parenthesis mine.

Owen would not be addressing all of your concerns if he was teaching your views of Sanctification.

KMK writes:

In context, the WLC states that Sanctification is a work of God's free grace, meaning that it is a work caused by, and founded upon God's grace, but the subject of that grace actually exercises it.

I will let Puritan pastor and theologian Thomas Vincent answer your question from his Exposition on the Shorter Catechism, a Puritan Paperback published by the Banner of Truth, pg. 98:

Though we be the subjects of sanctification, yet we are not the authors and efficient causes of our sanctification; we can defile ourselves, but we cannot cleanse and renew ourselves. 2. Sanctification is a work of God, which is wrought by his Spirit. "God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation, through sanctification of the Spirit." 2 Thess 2:13

and,

Q7. How is our sanctification carried on? A. Our sanctificatioin is carried on by degrees, as God doth bless his providences, especially his ordinances, through them to communicate further measures of his Spirit and grace.

To answer your question: Our response to God's work of Sanctification in our souls is the living out of a holy life. My repenting of sin is a response to the work of repentance given to me by the Spirit of God.

I find the fact that Owen and the Puritans are answering all of your objections to be quite interesting. .

Blessings in Jesus,

Rob

Jack: I do not mean to be mean, but I think your reasoning is unsound. The instrumental cause of our Justification is faith, but that faith is not our own but given to us by the Grace of God - it accompanies Grace

 

[CalvinandHodges]

Greetings:

Rich L. writes:

I ought not to have been so annoyed in some of my responses but your impious claim that any view posited here was Arminian or Roman Catholic was beyond the pale.

I think you have jumped to a conclusion that is not substantiated by my language. You say that "any objection" was argued by me to be "Arminian or Roman Catholic." I put forth two formulas. One I labelled "Arminian and Roman Catholic" the other I labelled "Reformed." If you are proposing a third formula, then my apologies I was not aware of it. Since I saw no such formula in your previous posts, then I mentioned that it seems to me that you are defending the Arminian formula. I did not say that you were, but that is how you presented yourself to me.

So, if I have offended in my language, then pardon me, I meant no offense. May we get on with the discussion and put down the accusations?

Blessings in Jesus,

Rob

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Rob,

Demonstrate for me any Confession where "Evangelical Holiness" is treated as a separate header or outside the broad category of Sanctification.

Since Owen calls Evangelical Holiness the fruit of the Sanctifying work of the Spirit, are you saying that the fruit does not belong to the tree?

In point of fact, just like Owen, the WCF on Sanctification, includes within the boundaries of what it is discussing under Sanctification the practice of holiness. Not every clause is limited to the ground or author of Sanctification nor does it only discuss sanctifying but it clearly includes the practice of holiness in several clauses.

Once again, above, you demonstrate that you limit to Sanctification the process of sanctifying but deny that the fruits are part of Sanctifcation in general. All your quotes do is add misunderstanding upon misunderstanding. Though one may argue that Owen speaks about sanctification in particular, he does not separate the practice of holiness as a separate heading but groups it under the broader discussion of holiness where God, is the author and principle cause of holiness (the Sanctifier - the one who makes holy) where we are those who respond and practice holiness.

Now, whether you want to argue that Owen (and others) when speaking of Sanctification speak pincipally about the Sanctifier or author of holiness being God, the WCF INCLUDES the fruit or practice of holiness within the boundaries of sanctification. It includes not only the author but its fruit. Sanctification, in the Confession, may be seen as the "ground and practice of holiness". You may wish to cast Evangelical Holiness into a separate Chapter of the Confession to maintain your neat Procrustean bed but the WCF speaks about the practice of Holiness within the Chapter of Sanctification and within the context of questions dealing with it for it is impossible to talk about being made holy without talking about its fruits.

I'm quite weary of you taking everybody's notes about the obvious treatment of the practice of holiness, putting it into the sausage grinder of what you consider sanctification to merely consist of and then accuse ministers and others of not understanding what the Reformed writers are actually saying.

Most careful thinkers are at least able to see what categories of thinking others are using and not come to the conclusion that they are completely mistaken in their thinking. You may want to argue the point that progressive sanctification should be called "progressive practice in holiness" but that's a difference in terminology and not in substance.

What disturbs me throughout is that you think you're teaching everybody what the Reformed really thought. Let's say you're right for a moment. What would a mature teacher do in such a situation? He would recognize the places where others are conjoining "being made holy" with "the practice of evangelical holiness". What you believe the Reformed called Sanctification is clearly the former and all of us who need a good teaching by you are conflating the latter with the former and calling the grouping "Sanctification" where we ought to be sophisticated enough to ungroup them.

The mature teacher would see this. It would not even enter his mind that when ministers and elders were explaining to him that the Evangelical practice of holiness needs to be understood as part of Sanctificaiton as a whole that they were actually saying: "Oh no, Rob, like the Arminians and Roman Catholics, we believe that the author of our Sanctification includes God AND us."

Such would not even enter into the mature teacher's thinking because he would see that, where he's making a distinction, the other teachers are saying that the two need to be considered under the broader category.

Honestly, this hasn't been so much of a discussion as a thorough demonstration that you have a lot to learn. Assuming you may establish that Sanctification needs to be limited to the former aspect alone, you have very far to go in order to maturely instruct others. This requires that you understand what they are saying and not make errors for them that they have not made for themselves. Only then (if you are correct) may you be able to help them see that they are in error and ought to see something more precisely the way you are seeing it.

 

[CalvinandHodges]

Greetings Rich:

Answering your concerns one at a time. Own writes, from the quotation in 39 above:

there is a consistency between God's effectual grace and our diligent obedience;

Where in any confession is "Evangelical holiness" included in Sanctification?

The fruit is not the Tree. The fruit is a product of the tree. The tree itself is Sanctification the fruit of it is our obedience.


Our diligent obedience is not effectual grace. God works effectual grace in our hearts, and afterwards from that Grace we obey.

The Confession says, "To the practice of holiness." The language is specific for a reason. It is indicating the enabling of the Spirit. The Spirit enables us "to the practice of holiness," the practice of holiness is not the doctrine of Sanctification. See Owen's display of it in the previous post.

I have never denied that I believe that Sanctification is solely a work of God. Scripture everywhere calls the Spirit of God - The Spirit of Sanctification.

I am sorry, but I accused Pastor Greco of nothing. I simply pointed out that his citation of Owen was arguing for the presentation of Progressive Sanctification that I am seeking to point out. It was Pastor Greco who accused me of mistaking Progressive Sanctification (I mention Progressive Sanctification in post #30 above). It seems to me that his accusation was not substantiated by his citation.

There is no meat grinder here. I am teaching what Owen, the WCF, and the Puritans taught on the matter. I did not expect to receive such wide, verbose, and acrimonious responses.

I am also tired of writing the same things over and over again. If you do not believe me, that is fine with me. I would only suggest that you all pray about this while reading the WCF. This was helpful for me in working out the Puritan doctrine.

Blessings in Jesus to you all,

Rob

 

[KMK]

To answer your question: Our response to God's work of Sanctification in our souls is the living out of a holy life. My repenting of sin is a response to the work of repentance given to me by the Spirit of God.

See Rich's post above. You still have not answered the question: Under what category does 'our response to the work of repentance' fall if not Sanctification?

 

[Prufrock]

Now this is just getting silly. I cannot believe this thread has entered its second page.

Rob, I would direct you to Robert Shaw's exposition of the Westminster Confession, as he is frequently used as an authority around here for explaining the meaning and intention of the Confession:

Sanctification is both a privilege and a duty. In the one view it is the work of God, and in the other it is the work of man, assisted by supernatural grace. (See "The Reformed Faith," ch. 13)​

I can't imagine it getting much more explicit than that. Of course Reformed theology teaches that God alone is the author and efficient cause of sanctification. Multiplying quotes which state the obvious does little more than repeatedly state the obvious, for whatever that's worth. The confessions declare a "monergistic" regeneration, because man is passive therein. Man cannot be said to "co-operate" in his justification, since justification is simply a forensic declaration on the part of God (the topic became a little confused when justification was brought into the thread in this context). Sanctification is said to be "synergistic" ("sun" + "ergos" - "working with," "co-operate") because the Holy Spirit is the author and efficient cause thereof, and man responds thereunto and actively works to bring forth the fruits of that new life by faith in the power of Christ working through his Spirit in the Word and Sacraments. Of course man cannot renew, purify or sanctify himself; but man co-operates in bringing forth the fruit of holiness which the Holy Spirit has wrought in him, and in working out his own salvation in fear and trembling. This is the "duty" of sanctification in Reformed teaching.

 

[Mushroom]

Gee, I miss Paul... <sigh>

Love you, brother. Hope all is well.

 

[Peairtach]

Rob

Our diligent obedience is not effectual grace. God works effectual grace in our hearts, and afterwards from that Grace we obey.

As regenerate souls we obey before we receive fresh grace as well as afterwards.

The view of sanctification that is passive is associated with hyper-Calvinism and antinomianism, as well as "let go, and let God" Keswick theology.

 

[Jack K]

Jack: I do not mean to be mean, but I think your reasoning is unsound. The instrumental cause of our Justification is faith, but that faith is not our own but given to us by the Grace of God - it accompanies Grace

Of course. I was merely pointing out that justification is something we are on board with as God does it (we are repenting in faith at the time), whereas regeneration is something God does for those whose hearts are still opposed to him.

At the risk of being simplistic... it does seem, Rob, that you are insisting on a narrow definition of "sanctification" that's bound to create confusion. I agree with Rich that most of us, when we speak of "sanctification," have in mind that our practice of holiness falls under that umbrella term. If you're going to use the word in a different way (even if that way is based on something from Owen), you're certainly allowed to do so but you should realize that people will misunderstand you and will think you're off your rocker. Perhaps some other term would serve you better.

Various ways to define the word "synergism" might also be part of the problem here. For example, I think of it as "acting in agreement and cooperation with God" but others may think of it as "requiring the work of both God and man." Those aren't quite the same thing. In short, I suspect difficulties in communication, more than differences in theology, are at issue here.

 

[SinnerSavedByChrist]

In short, I suspect difficulties in communication, more than differences in theology, are at issue here.

Jack's nailed it

 

[CalvinandHodges]

Greetings:

I do sincerely appreciate all of your comments - as they help me work out these thoughts on the doctrine of Sanctification.

I have seen it written many times that man's duty to holiness is a part of Sanctification - that man co-operates with the Spirit in order to be sanctified. Such language is prevalent in many godly men who are seeking to present the Biblical doctrine of Sanctification.

As I see it: Our duty to holiness is a fruit of Sanctification. To extend this metaphor: the fruit is produced by the tree. A factory, for example, produces a car, but the car is not the factory. God's work of Sanctification produces our humble obedience in holiness. I will reproduce the definition of Progressive Sanctification cited in John Owen, vol 3. pg. 386:

Or more briefly: It is the universal renovation of our natures by the Holy Spirit into the image of God, through Jesus Christ.

Thus, I place the whole work of Sanctification as the renewing of our souls, and the enabling of us to walk in holiness. Our response, or duty, or work is a consequence of God's work of Sanctification in the soul. God makes us holy - we then act holy. In this I understand our salvation to be sola Deo, all of Grace, and not of any man's working.

If we are to "work out our salvation" it is because we are already saved. The working out of it is not our salvation, but the necessary fruit of it. God sanctifies us, we then work out this sanctification by sanctifying ourselves. This sanctifying of ourselves is not Sanctification, but the fruit of Sanctification in our souls.

If you want to think that your duty, response, or work of holiness is a part of Sanctification, then I will not stop you. It does not seem to me to be careful theology. Nor does it seem to me to be the teaching of the WCF, Thomas Boston, Thomas Manton, John Owen, Thomas Vincent, Thomas Watson, or 35 other Westminster Divines and Pastors who acknowledged Vincent's work as teaching the very doctrine of the Westminster Standards.

KMK: I have thought I answered you several times above. Our duty to holiness is our response to the working of the Spirit of God. So I will place the duty of it in the Christian's Walk with God. I hope this helps.

My love and blessings to you all as you walk by faith and not by sight,

Rob

 

[Mushroom]

All my co-operations are as filthy rags...

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Thus, I place the whole work of Sanctification as the renewing of our souls, and the enabling of us to walk in holiness. Our response, or duty, or work is a consequence of God's work of Sanctification in the soul. God makes us holy - we then act holy. In this I understand our salvation to be sola Deo, all of Grace, and not of any man's working.

Do you believe that Shaw (who comments on the Westminster standards) and others who insist that Sanctification needs to be understood as not only including the Root but the fruit as teaching anything other than that Salvation is all of Grace and not of any man's working?

 

[CalvinandHodges]

Greetings:

Brad: Amen!

Rich: I will try to carefully answer your question so as not to seem to be an "immature teacher" to you. Or, that I have somehow entirely missed your meaning. Please be patient with me.

I am citing Owen correctly. Owen places the whole of Sanctification in the Work of the Spirit of God. The effects or fruit of this work of God is our holy obedience. If I am mishandling Owen, as some seem to insist, then I will be happily corrected by a citing of references. I think that the reading of Owen is also substantiated by the citations of Boston, Vincent, Bavinck, Hodge, Ryle, and Goodwin cited in post #8.

Consequently, we have a difference of opinion between godly men. I do not think I would accuse Boston, Goodwin, Ryle, etc... of misunderstanding grace?

It seems to me that if it is true - that Sanctification is solely a work of God in the soul, then to say that man's work is necessary for the work of Sanctification is not consistent theology. Since it seems that we all agree that man's work is an effect or fruit of Sanctification, then to include it as Sanctification does not seem right. The effect (man's pursuit of holiness) is not the Cause (the enabling of the Spirit).

Having read Shaw with much profit I would certainly say that he believes that Salvation is all of Grace, and not of any man's doing. However, I believe that he is inconsistent if he is teaching that man's work is a part of Sanctification.

I hope this answers your question.

Blessings,

Rob

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Why do you suppose the WCF writers put the fruit of Sanctification within the chapter on Sanctification? Inconsistent to head the Chapter so as to confuse the issue?

By the way, you've been repeatedly shown how you are mishandling your sources. Demonstration and persuasion are not the same thing.

 

[CalvinandHodges]

Greetings:

THis post was a second copy of my previous one.

 

[CalvinandHodges]

Greetings:

Rich L. writes (post #40):

Once again, above, you demonstrate that you limit to Sanctification the process of sanctifying but deny that the fruits are part of Sanctifcation in general. All your quotes do is add misunderstanding upon misunderstanding. Though one may argue that Owen speaks about sanctification in particular, he does not separate the practice of holiness as a separate heading but groups it under the broader discussion of holiness where God, is the author and principle cause of holiness (the Sanctifier - the one who makes holy) where we are those who respond and practice holiness.

Now, whether you want to argue that Owen (and others) when speaking of Sanctification speak pincipally about the Sanctifier or author of holiness being God, the WCF INCLUDES the fruit or practice of holiness within the boundaries of sanctification. It includes not only the author but its fruit. Sanctification, in the Confession, may be seen as the "ground and practice of holiness". You may wish to cast Evangelical Holiness into a separate Chapter of the Confession to maintain your neat Procrustean bed but the WCF speaks about the practice of Holiness within the Chapter of Sanctification and within the context of questions dealing with it for it is impossible to talk about being made holy without talking about its fruits.

Having thought that I addressed this before (post #11) I will do so more cogently (by God's Grace):

First,the term "ground and practice of holiness" is nowhere found in the Westminster Confession of Faith. You have highlighted two phrases that you claim indicate man's work in Sanctification: "to the practice of true holiness" and "the regenerate part doth overcome."

The confession is saying that the enabling of the Spirit is ... to the practice of holiness. That is, that the practice of holiness is not a part of Sanctification, but the enabling of the Spirit. He enables us to practice holiness. It does not mean that our actual practice of holiness is a part of Sanctification.

"the regenerate part doth overcome..." but how is this possible? the previous clause reads: "through the continual supply of the Spirit..." The Confession is not saying "through the continual supply of the Spirit and the co-operating work of man." I will ask the simple question and mean no disrespect: Is that how you are reading the Confession?

Would it not be more logical for the Confession to state such an interpretation outright? "Through the enabling work of the Holy Spirit and man working out his Sanctification that man is Sanctified"? It seems to me that the Confession is far more careful in its language than is commonly understood.

After defining Sanctification as being "the universal renovation of our natures by the Holy Spirit into the image of God, through Jesus Christ," Works, vol 3, 389. Owen immediately states, "Hence it follows that our holiness, which is the fruit and effect of this work (of Sanctification)" Does not include our practice of holiness as a part of the work of Sanctification.

Blessings in Jesus,

Rob

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Your explanation is unsatisfactory. The point is that the Chapter does not limit discussion to the root only.

More pointedly, however, what causes imperfection in sanctification according to the WLC? How is it it possible for sanctification to be imperfect at all if it includes only the Root and has nothing at all to do with the will of man?

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Turretin adds that the gospel demands not only profession of the truth, but also (principally) the practice of piety and defends this view by noting that works can be explained in three ways, with reference to justification, sanctification, and glorification:

They are related to justification not antecedently, efficiently, and meritoriously, but consequently and declaratively. They are related to sanctification constitutively because they constitute and promote it. They are related to glorification antecedently and ordinatively because they are related to it as the means to the end.

Beeke, J. R., & Jones, M. (2012). A Puritan Theology: Doctrine for Life (313). Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books.

Sanctification, therefore, consists in two things: first, the removing more and more the principles of evil still infecting our nature, and destroying their power; and secondly, the growth of the principle of spiritual life until it controls the thoughts, feelings, and acts, and brings the soul into conformity to the image of Christ.

Hodge, C. (1997). Vol. 3: Systematic theology (221). Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

Sanctification therefore, according to this representation, consists in the gradual triumph of the new nature implanted in regeneration over the evil that still remains after the heart is renewed. In other words, as elsewhere expressed, it is a dying unto sin and living unto righteousness. (1 Pet. 2:24.)

Hodge, C. (1997). Vol. 3: Systematic theology (224). Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

In Ephesians 4:22–24, we are told: “Put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts; and be renewed in the spirit of your mind; and” put ye “on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.” By the old man is to be understood the former self with all the evils belonging to its natural state. This was to be laid aside as a worn and soiled garment, and a new, pure self, the new man, was to take its place. This change, although expressed in a figure borrowed from a change of raiment, was a profound inward change produced by a creating process, by which the soul is new fashioned after the image of God in righteousness and holiness. It is a renewing as to the Spirit, i.e., the interior life of the mind; or as Meyer and Ellicott, the best of modern commentators, both interpret the phrase, “By the Spirit” (the Holy Spirit) dwelling in the mind. This is a transformation in which believers are exhorted to cooperate; for which they are to labour, and which is therefore a protracted work. Sanctification, therefore, according to this representation, consists in the removal of the evils which belong to us in our natural condition, and in being made more and more conformed to the image of God through the gracious influence of the Spirit of God dwelling in us.

Hodge, C. (1997). Vol. 3: Systematic theology (225). Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

It is not, however, merely in such passages as those above cited that the nature of sanctification is set forth. The Bible is full of exhortations and commands addressed to the people of God, to those recognized and assumed to be regenerate, requiring them on the one hand, to resist their evil passions and propensities, to lay aside all malice, and wrath, and pride, and jealousy; and on the other, to cultivate all the graces of the Spirit, faith, love, hope, long-suffering, meekness, lowliness of mind, and brotherly kindness. At the same time they are reminded that it is God who worketh in them both to will and to do, and that therefore they are constantly to seek his aid and to depend upon his assistance.

Hodge, C. (1997). Vol. 3: Systematic theology (225–226). Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

You can scratch Hodge (or Turretin if you like) off your list.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Quoting Owen extensively here, you can see the manner in which he interchanges holiness and sanctification and uses them interchangeably. Notice, throughout, what he calls the "work of sanctification":

2. This work of sanctification differs from that of regeneration, as on other accounts, so especially on that of the manner of their being wrought. The work of regeneration is instantaneous, consisting in one single creating act. Hence it is not capable of degrees in any subject. No one is more or less regenerate than another; every one in the world is absolutely so, or not so, and that equally, although there are degrees in their state on other reasons. But this work of sanctification is progressive, and admits of degrees. One may be more sanctified and more holy than another, who is yet truly sanctified and truly holy. It is begun at once, and carried on gradually. But this observation being of great importance, and such as, if rightly weighed, will contribute much light unto the nature of the whole work of sanctification and holiness, I shall divert in this chapter unto such an explanation and confirmation of it as may give an understanding and furtherance herein.
An increase and growth in sanctification or holiness is frequently in the Scripture enjoined us, and frequently promised unto us. So speaks the apostle Peter in a way of command, 2 Pet. 3:17, 18, “Fall not,” be not cast down, “from your own steadfastness; but grow,” or increase, “in grace.” It is not enough that we decay not in our spiritual condition, that we be not diverted and carried off from a steady course in obedience by the power of temptations; but an endeavour after an improvement, an increase, a thriving in grace, that is, in holiness, is required of us. And a compliance with this command is that winch our apostle so commendeth in the Thessalonians, 2 Epist. 1:3,—namely, the exceeding growth of their faith, and abounding of their love; that is, the thriving and increase of those graces in them,—that which is called “increasing with the increase of God,” Col. 2:19, or the increase in holiness which God requires, accepts, approves, by supplies of spiritual strength from Jesus Christ our head, as it is there expressed.
The work of holiness, in its beginning, is but like seed cast into the earth,—namely, the seed of God, whereby we are born again. And it is known how seed that is cast into the earth doth grow and increase. Being variously cherished and nourished, it is in its nature to take root and to spring up, bringing forth fruit. So is it with the principle of grace and holiness. It is small at first, but being received in good and honest hearts, made so by the Spirit of God, and there nourished and cherished, it takes root and brings forth fruit. And both these, even the first planting and the increase of it, are equally from God by his Spirit. “He that begins this good work doth also perform it until the day of Jesus Christ,” Phil. 1:6. And this he doth two ways:—
First, By increasing and strengthening those graces of holiness which we have received and been engaged in the exercise of. There are some graces whose exercise doth not depend on any outward occasions; but they are, and that in their actual exercise, absolutely necessary unto the least degree of the life of God: such are faith and love. No man doth, no man can, live to God, but in the exercise of these graces. Whatever duties towards God men may perform, if they are not enlivened by faith and love, they belong not unto that spiritual life whereby we live to God. And these graces are capable of degrees, and so of increase; for so we read expressly of little faith and great faith, weak and strong faith, both true and the same in the substance, but differing in degrees. So also is there fervent love, and that which comparatively is but cold. These graces, therefore, in carrying on the work of sanctification, are gradually increased. So the disciples prayed our Saviour that he would increase their faith, Luke 17:5;—that is, add unto its light, confirm it in its assent, multiply its acts, and make it strong against its assaults, that it might work more effectually in difficult duties of obedience; which they had an especial regard unto, as is evident from the context, for they pray for this increase of faith upon the occasion of our Saviour’s enjoining frequent forgiveness of offending brethren,—a duty not at all easy nor pleasing to flesh and blood. And the apostle prays for the Ephesians, that they may be “rooted and grounded in love,” chap. 2:17; that is, that by the increase and strengthening of their love, they may be more established in all the duties of it. See 1 Thess. 3:12, 13.
These graces being the springs and spirit of our holiness, in the increase of them in us the work of sanctification is carried on and universal holiness increased. And this is done by the Holy Spirit several ways:—
First, By exciting them unto frequent actings. Frequency of acts doth naturally increase and strengthen the habits whence they proceed; and in these spiritual habits of faith and love it is so, moreover, by God’s appointment. They grow and thrive in and by their exercise, Hos. 6:3. The want thereof is the principal means of their decay. And there are two ways whereby the Holy Spirit excites the graces of faith and love unto frequent acts:—
(1.) He doth it morally, by proposing their objects suitably and seasonably unto them. This he doth by his ordinances of worship, especially the preaching of the word. God in Christ, the promises of the covenant, and other proper objects of our faith and love, being proposed unto us, these graces are drawn out unto their exercise. And this is one principal advantage which we have by attendance on the dispensation of the word in a due manner,—namely, that by presenting those spiritual truths which are the object of our faith unto our minds, and those spiritual good things which are the object of our love unto our affections, both these graces are drawn forth into frequent actual exercise. And we are greatly mistaken if we suppose we have no benefit by the word beyond what we retain in our memories, though we should labour for that also. Our chief advantage lies in the excitation which is thereby given unto our faith and love to their proper exercise; and hereby are these graces kept alive, which without this would decay and wither. Herein doth the Holy Spirit “take the things of Christ, and show them unto us,” John 16:14, 15. He represents them unto us in the preaching of the word as the proper objects of our faith and love, and so brings to remembrance the things spoken by Christ, chap. 14:26; that is, in the dispensation of the word, he minds us of the gracious words and truths of Christ, proposing them to our faith and love. And herein lies the secret profiting and thriving of believers under the preaching of the gospel; which, it may be, they are not sensible of themselves. By this means are many thousands of acts of faith and love drawn forth, whereby these graces are exercised and strengthened; and consequently holiness is increased: and the word, by the actings of faith being mixed with it, as Heb. 4:2, increaseth it by its incorporation.
(2.) The Spirit doth it really and internally. He dwelleth in believers, preserving in them the root and principle of all their grace by his own immediate power. Hence all graces in their exercise are called “The fruits of the Spirit,” Gal. 5:22, 23. He brings them forth from the stock that he hath planted in the heart. And we cannot act any one grace without his effectual operation therein: “God worketh in us both to will and to do of his good pleasure,” Phil. 2:13;—that is, there is no part of our wills singly and separately from him in obedience but it is the operation of the Spirit of God in us, so far as it is spiritual and holy. He is the immediate author of every good or gracious acting in us; for “in us, that is, in our flesh” (and of ourselves we are but flesh), “there dwelleth no good.” Wherefore, the Spirit of God dwelling in believers doth effectually excite and stir up their graces unto frequent exercise and actings, whereby they are increased and strengthened. And there is nothing in the whole course of our walking before God that we ought to be more careful about than that we grieve not, that we provoke not, this good and holy Spirit, whereon he should withhold his gracious aids and assistances from us. This, therefore, is the first way whereby the work of sanctification is gradually carried on, by the Holy Ghost exciting our graces unto frequent actings, whereby they are increased and strengthened.
Secondly, He doth it by supplying believers with experiences of the truth, and reality, and excellency, of the things that are believed. Experience is the food of all grace, which it grows and thrives upon. Every taste that faith obtains of divine love and grace, or how gracious the Lord is, adds to its measure and stature. Two things, therefore, must briefly be declared:—(1.) That the experience of the reality, excellency, power, and efficacy of the things that are believed, is an effectual means of increasing faith and love; (2.) That it is the Holy Ghost which gives us this experience. (1.) For the first, God himself expostulates with the church how its faith came to be so weak, when it had so great experience of him, or of his power and faithfulness: Isa. 40:27, 28, “Hast thou not known? hast thou not heard? How, then, sayest thou that God hath forsaken thee?” And our apostle affirms that the consolations which he had experimentally received from God enabled him unto the discharge of his duty towards others in trouble, 2 Cor. 1:4; for herein we prove, or do really approve of, as being satisfied in, “the good, and acceptable, and perfect will of God,” Rom. 12:2. And this is that which the apostle prayeth for in the behalf of the Colossians, chap. 2:2. I may say that he who knoweth not how faith is encouraged and strengthened by especial experiences of the reality, power, and spiritual efficacy on the soul of the things believed, never was made partaker of any of them. How often doth David encourage his own faith and [that of] others from his former experiences! which were pleaded also by our Lord Jesus Christ to the same purpose, in his great distress, Ps. 22:9, 10. (2.) That it is the Holy Ghost who giveth us all our spiritual experiences needs no other consideration to evince but only this, that in them consists all our consolation. His work and office it is to administer consolation unto believers, as being the only Comforter of the church. Now, he administereth comfort no other way but by giving unto the minds and souls of believers a spiritual, sensible experience of the reality and power of the things we do believe. He doth not comfort us by words, but by things. Other means of spiritual consolation I know none; and I am sure this never fails. Give unto a soul an experience, a taste, of the love and grace of God in Christ Jesus, and be its condition what it will, it cannot refuse to be comforted. And hereby doth he “shed abroad the love of God in our hearts,” Rom. 5:5, whereby all graces are cherished and increased.
Thirdly, He doth it by working immediately an actual increase of these graces in us. I have showed that these are capable of improvement, and of an addition of degrees unto them. Now, they are originally the immediate work and product of the Spirit of God in us, as hath been abundantly evinced. And as he first works and creates them, so he increaseth them. Hereby they that are “feeble become as David,” Zech. 12:8; that is, those whose graces were weak, whose faith was infirm, and whose love was languid, shall, by the supplies of the Spirit, and the increase given by him unto them, become strong and vigorous. To this purpose are promises multiplied in the Scripture; which in our constant supplications we principally respect. This is that which the schoolmen, after Austin, call “Gratiam corroborantem;” that is, the working of the Holy Spirit in the increasing and strengthening of grace received. See Eph. 3:16, 17; Col. 1:10, 11; Isa. 40:29. And this is the principal cause and means of the gradual increase of holiness in us, or the carrying on of the work of sanctification, Ps. 138:8.
Secondly, There are graces whose exercise is more occasional, and not always actually necessary as unto the life of God; that is, it is not necessary that they be always in actual exercise, as faith and love are to be. With respect unto these, holiness is increased by the addition of one to another, until we are brought on several occasions to the practice and exercise of them all; for the addition of the new exercise of any grace belongs unto the gradual carrying on of the work of sanctification. And hereunto all things that befall us in this world, all our circumstances, are laid in a subserviency by the wisdom of God. All our relations, all our afflictions, all our temptations, all our mercies, all our enjoyments, all occurrences, are suited to a continual adding of the exercise of one grace to another, wherein holiness is increased. And if we make not use of them to that purpose, we miss of all the benefit and advantage we might have of them, and disappoint, what lies in us, the design of divine love and wisdom in them. This is given us in charge, 2 Pet. 1:5–7: “Besides this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge; and to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness; and to godliness brotherly-kindness; and to brotherly-kindness charity.” The end why this injunction is given us is, that we may “escape the corruption that is in the world through lust,” verse 4; that is, have all our corruptions thoroughly subdued, and our souls thoroughly sanctified. To this end are the promises given us, and a divine, spiritual nature is bestowed upon us. But will that suffice, or is there no more required of us unto that end? “Yes,” saith the apostle; “this great work will not be effected unless you use your utmost diligence, and endeavour to add the exercise of all the graces of the Spirit one to another, as occasion shall require.” There is a method in this concatenation of graces from first to last, and an especial reason for each particular, or why the apostle requires that such a grace should be added unto such an one in the order laid down; which at present I shall not inquire into. But, in general, he intends that every grace is to be exercised according to its proper season and especial occasion. Hereby, also, is the work of sanctification gradually carried on, and holiness increased. And this addition of one grace unto another, with the progress of holiness thereby, is also from the Holy Ghost. And three ways there are whereby he accomplisheth his work herein:—1. By ordering things so towards us, and bringing of us into such conditions as wherein the exercise of these graces shall be required and necessary. All the afflictions and trials which he bringeth the church into have no other end or design. So the apostle James expresseth it, chap. 1:2–4: “My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations; knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience. But let patience have its perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing.” These temptations are trials upon afflictions, troubles, persecutions, and the like; but take them in any other sense, it is the same unto our purpose. These are all guided unto us by Christ and his Spirit; for it is he who rebukes and chastens us. But what is his end therein? It is that faith may be exercised and patience employed, and one grace added unto another, that they may carry us on towards perfection. So he bringeth us into that condition as wherein we shall assuredly miscarry if we add not the exercise of one grace unto another. 2. In this state of things he effectually minds us of our duty, and what graces ought to be put upon their exercise. We may dispute whether it be better to act faith, or to despond; to add patience under the continuance of our trials, or to trust unto ourselves, and irregularly to seek after deliverance or divert unto other satisfactions. Then doth he cause us to “hear a word behind us, saying, This is the way, walk ye in it, when we turn to the right hand, and when we turn to the left,” Isa. 30:21. When we are at a loss, and know not what to do, and are ready, it may be, to consult with flesh and blood, and to divert to irregular courses, he speaks effectually to us, saying, “No; that is not your way, but this is it,”—namely, to act faith, patience, submission to God, adding one grace to another, binding our hearts thereby to our duty. 3. He actually excites and sets all needful graces at work in the way and manner before spoken unto.
This, then, is to be fixed, that all this increase of holiness is immediately the work of the Holy Ghost, who therein gradually carries on his design of sanctifying us throughout, in our whole spirits, souls, and bodies. There is in our regeneration and habitual grace received a nature bestowed on us capable of growth and increase, and that is all; if it be left unto itself, it will not thrive, it will decay and die. The actual supplies of the Spirit are the waterings that are the immediate cause of its increase. It wholly depends on continual influences from God. He cherisheth and improves the work he hath begun with new and fresh supplies of grace every moment: Isa. 27:3, “I the LORD will water it every moment.” And it is the Spirit which is this water, as the Scripture everywhere declares. God the Father takes on him the care of this matter; “he watcheth over his vineyard to keep it.” The Lord Christ is the head, fountain, and treasure of all actual supplies; and the Spirit is the efficient cause, communicating them unto us from him. From hence it is that any grace in us is kept alive one moment, that it is ever acted in one single duty, that ever it receives the least measure of increase or strengthening. With respect unto all these it is that our apostle saith, “Nevertheless, I live, yet not I, but Christ liveth in me,” Gal. 2:20. Spiritual life and living by it, in all the acts of it, are immediately from Christ.


Owen, J. Vol. 3: The works of John Owen (W. H. Goold, Ed.) (387–393). Edinburgh: T&T Clark.

 

[fredtgreco]

After defining Sanctification as being "the universal renovation of our natures by the Holy Spirit into the image of God, through Jesus Christ," Works, vol 3, 389. Owen immediately states, "Hence it follows that our holiness, which is the fruit and effect of this work (of Sanctification)" Does not include our practice of holiness as a part of the work of Sanctification.

Blessings in Jesus,

Rob

You seem to be having trouble understanding both English and theology. The quote here from Owen says the exact opposite of what you think it says. "Holiness" is not "practice of holiness," or else Owen would have written "practice of holiness." Holiness is a state - not an action. You don't do "holiness," the work of sanctification produced holiness. You have completely missed Owen's point, in an attempt to make him support you (which he absolutely does not).

 

[KMK]

Our duty to holiness is our response to the working of the Spirit of God. So I will place the duty of it in the Christian's Walk with God.

So, would you like to see the WCF rewritten something like this?

Chapter 13 Of Sanctification

I. They, who are once effectually called, and regenerated, having a new heart, and a new spirit created in them, are further sanctified, really and personally, through the virtue of Christ's death and resurrection, by His Word and Spirit dwelling in them.


Chapter 13.5 Of The Christian's Walk With God

I. They, who are sanctified, begin their walk with God; the dominion of the whole body of sin is destroyed, and the several lusts thereof are more and more weakened and mortified; and they more and more quickened and strengthened in all saving graces, to the practice of true holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord.

II. This walk with God is throughout, in the whole man; yet imperfect in this life, there abiding still some remnants of corruption in every part; whence arises a continual and irreconcilable war, the flesh lusting against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh.

III. In which war, although the remaining corruption, for a time, may much prevail; yet, through the continual supply of strength from the sanctifying Spirit of Christ, the regenerate part does overcome; and so, the saints grow in grace, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.

 

[JimmyH]

Hoping that a view from the pew, by a layman, offering this sermon by Reverend D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones might be considered ;

When Not to Pray; but to Act | Sermons | MLJ Trust

If I'm not misinterpreting the substance MLJ addresses and clarifies this topic of sanctification and our responsibilites. He mentions John Owen's Mortification Of Sin towards the end of the sermon as recommended reading. As we know, MLJ was largely responsible for bringing back the writings of the Puritan divines. He knew the Scriptures as few do and is considered one of the greatest expository preachers of all time. Forty six minutes of your time will be well spent in hearing this sermon.

If you have the hard copy of volume six, Darkness and Light, of his Ephesians series the sermon, titled "When Not To Pray But To Act" begins on page 140. The verses exposited are Ephesians 4:22-24

22 That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;

23 And be renewed in the spirit of your mind;

24 And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.