Introduction.
In this essay I will examine
J I Packer’s teaching on holiness giving special attention to his view of the
role of man and of the grace of God. This will be examined against the
background of his Reformed soteriology and in contrast to Wesleyan Theology.
The main aim of this essay is
to explore the apparent tension between the triumph of grace in soteriology and
the seemingly pessimistic for the life of holiness in the believer’s life of
holiness in Packer’s work.
At the outset I want to state
the enormous debt I owe to Packer for his writing which has been one of the
formative influences on my theological thinking. Because of his great influence
on my thinking, both through his own writing and authors that he commends, I
have come to hold a very similar view of holiness. This essay therefore is not
only a critique of Packer but of my own thinking and the tradition that I have
worked within.
Whilst examining the Wesleyan
view of holiness, I noticed that there is an optimism of grace whereas Reformed
Theology seems to be pessimistic. With this in mind I will (a) outline reformed
soteriology as represented by Packer. I shall then look at (b) Packers view of
holiness contrasting it with the Wesleyan perspective.
I shall then pose the
question, © does sin overshadow grace in Packer’s Theology and in Reformed
Theology as a whole?
I will then examine whether
it is possible to demonstrate an optimism of grace which is consistent with
reformed soteriology.
Packer’s soteriology.
Packer most clearly expounds
his soteriology in parts 2 and 3 of Concise Theology where he follows
closely the Puritan exposition as set forth in the Westminster Confession of
Faith.
Packer following reformed
tradition deals with the doctrine of sin before that of grace. Packer
demonstrates that the result of original sin is spiritual deadness. He says,
“ Total depravity entails
total inability, that is, the state of not having it in oneself to respond to
god and his Word in a sincere and wholehearted way(John 6:44; Rom8:7-8). Paul calls this
unresponsiveness of the fallen heart a state of death (Eph 2:1, 5; Col 2:13),
and the Westminster Confession says: ‘Man by his fall into a state of sin, hath
wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation;
so as a natural man, being altogether averse from that good, and dead in sin, is
not able by his own strength to convert or prepare himself thereunto’ (ix.3)[i]
It is at this point that
Packer shows the triumph of grace in his theology. Where one would expect a
total pessimism, Packer believes God’s grace comes with power. Packer states it
this way,
Regeneration is
monergistic: that is, entirely the work of god the Holy Spirit. It raises the
spiritually dead to life in Christ (Eph 2:1-10. Regeneration is a transition
from spiritual death to spiritual death to spiritual life, and conscious,
intentional active faith in Christ is its immediate fruit, not its immediate
cause. Regeneration is what Augustine called ‘prevenient grace’, the grace that
precedes our outgoings of our heart toward God.[ii]
The above quotation
demonstrates quite clearly Packer’s rejection of any synergistic
interpretations of the gospel. Packer affirms that salvation is completely a
work of god from beginning to end.
Because man is totally depraved
he needs inward renewal before he can come to saving faith. Therefore
there is a priority of grace in the scheme of salvation. Packer following the
Reformed tradition emphasises effectual calling, it is therefore helpful to
look at what Packer has to say on this important and misunderstood subject.
Packer says,
Effectual calling is a
sixteenth century English phrase that became the title of chapter x of the 1647
Westminster Confession. The chapter begins thus:
“All those who God hath
predistinated unto life, and those only, he is pleased, in his appointed time,
effectually to call, by his Word and Spirit, out of the state of sin and death,
in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation, by Jesus Christ;
enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of
God, taking away their heart of stone and giving them a heart of flesh;
renewing their wills, and by his almighty power determining them to that which
is good, and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ: yet so as they come most
freely, being made willing by his grace.”
What is being spoken of
here is the many sided reality of Christian conversion, involving illumination,
regeneration, faith and repentance. It
is being analysed as a sovereign work of God, “effectually” (i.e. effectively)
performed by the power of the Holy Spirit.
The concept corresponds to Paul’s use of the verb call (meaning
bring to faith) and called ( meaning “converted”) in Romans 1:6;8:28,30;
9:24; 1 Corinthians 1:24, 26;7:18-21; Galatians 1:15; Ephesians 4: 1, 4 and 2
Thessalonians 2:14, and contrasts with the idea of a merely external and
ineffective invitation as found in Matthew 22:14.
Original sin renders all
human beings naturally dead (unresponsive to Go, but in effectual calling god
quickens the dead. As the outward call of God to faith in Christ is
communicated through the preaching and explaining of the contents of the Bible,
the Holy spirit enlightens and renews the heart of elect sinners so that they
understand the gospel and embrace it as truth from God, and God in Christ
becomes an object of desire and affection. Being now regenerate and able by the
use of their freed to choose God and the good, they turn away from their former
pattern of living to receive Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour and to start a
new life with him.[iii]
The above quotation shows the
grace of God triumphing over man’s fallen condition and bringing him into a
living relationship with God. This
emphasis on effectual calling shows that God deals with people as individuals
and treats them as morally responsible.
This contrasts with the misunderstanding of Reformed thought shown by
some Wesleyan scholars who see this doctrine as incompatible with moral
responsibility. R S Taylor supplies us with a good example of this
misunderstanding when he says:
Human depravity was so total
that any spasm of moralism would prove grossly inadequate, while the operation
of grace on the elect would be so effectual so as to accomplish its end
infallibly without the sinner’s effort. Therefore personal striving was superfluous.
The result was the deadening of any sense of moral responsibility[iv]
This quotation contains a
distortion when it accuses the Augustinian position of deadening moral
responsibility. One only has to read
Packer’s “Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God” or “Concise Theology”
to realise that moral responsibility is not nullified by man’s inability. This
is not the place to argue this at length but it has to be mentioned in passing
if justice is to done to the Reformed position. I will end this section on
Packer’s soteriology by quoting from his introduction of “The Death of Death
in the Death of Christ” by John Owen. Packer says,
The old gospel is
proclaimed in the sure confidence that the Christ of whom it testifies, the
Christ who is the real speaker when the Scriptural invitations to trust him are
expounded and applied, it is not passively waiting for man’s decision as the
word goes forth, but it is omnipotently active, working with and through the
word to bring His people to faith in himself. The preaching of the new gospel
is often described as the task of “bringing men to Christ”- as if only men
move, while Christ stands still. But the task of preaching the old gospel could
more properly be described as bringing Christ to men, for those who preach it
know that as they do their work of setting Christ before men’s eyes, the mighty
Saviour whom they proclaim is busy doing his work through their words, visiting
sinners with salvation, awakening them to faith, drawing them in mercy to
Himself.[v]
These words show the triumph
of grace over sin that even with the most pessimistic view of man’s sin and its
consequences, there can be an optimism of grace, a grace that is victorious
over sin and effectively brings the sinner to Christ.
Packer’s view of
Holiness
Sanctification in reformed
Theology is synergistic and emphasises the spiritual battle but expects no
triumph of grace before heaven. This is where one seems to move from an
emphasis on grace to an emphasis on obedience. Victories are to be expected in
the Christian life but any suggestion of perfection is firmly rejected. Packer
in summarising his view of sanctification has this to say,
Sanctification says the
Westminster Shorter Catechism (Q35), “is the work of God’s free grace, whereby
we are renewed in the whole man after the image of God, and are enabled more
and more to die unto sin, and live unto righteousness.” The concept is not of sin being totally
eradicated ( that is to claim too much) or merely counteracted (that is to say
too little), but of a divinely wrought character change freeing us from sinful
habits and forming in us Christlike affections, dispositions and virtues.[vi]
He continues:
Regeneration was a
momentary monergistic act of quickening the spiritually dead. As such it was
God’s work alone. Sanctification,
however, is in one sense synergistic – it is an on-going co-operative process
in which regenerate persons, alive to god and freed from sin’s dominion ( Rom
6: 11, 14-18” are required to exert themselves in sustained obedience. God’s
method of Sanctification is neither activism (self-reliant activity) nor apathy
(God –reliant passivity), but God-dependent effort (2Cor.7:1; Phil.3:10-14; Heb
12:14).[vii]
The above quotations from “Concise
Theology” demonstrate the synergistic nature of sanctification as well as
the stress on obedience. What is not so clear from these quotations is the
problem of the downward drag of sin. Packer wants to assert strongly that there
is a real change within but there is always the pull of sin. The change within
posited by Packer is vastly different from that of Wesley. Packer asserts that we should aim to love God
with all our heart, soul and strength but we most certainly cannot attain this
level of love this side of heaven. In
contrast to this, Wesley says that by the grace of god it is possible to love
him with all our being. Wesley’s
optimism of grace is in striking contrast to Packer’s expectations. This is how
Packer describes the Christian life:
The principle is clear,
the Spirit is with us to empower us, and we know that Christ-like behaviour is
now in the profoundest sense natural to us. But still, maintaining
Christ-likeness under the kind of pressure I have described is hard. How do we
2by the Spirit…put to death the misdeeds of the body” (Rom 8:13)? This too is
hard. It is a matter of negating, wishing dead, and labouring to thwart,
inclinations, cravings and habits that have been in you (if I may put it so)
for a long time. Pain and grief, moans and groans will certainly be involved,
for your sin does not want to die, nor will it enjoy the killing process. Jesus
told us, very vividly, that mortifying sin could well feel like plucking out an
eye or cutting off a hand or foot, in other words self mutilation. You will
feel that you are saying goodbye to something that is so much part of you that
without it you cannot live.[viii]
Packer’s comments above show
that he is faithfully reflecting the views of Ryle, The Puritans and, indeed,
mainstream Reformed Theology. This picture of the Christian life painted by
Packer is, in some ways quite dismal and holds out little hope of real change
and victory.
Packer in common with other
Reformed theologians insists that the law of God is to be the guide and
standard of a holy life for the believer. Packer and Wesley share this in
common but, once again, the real difference is one of how much can be achieved.
Wesley held that by the grace of God, the Decalogue could be observed by those
who had been entirely sanctified. Packer
on the other hand believes the believer is called to do that which he cannot
possibly achieve. Packer, in his discussion of the law, does not address this
issue head on but the whole thrust of his teaching shows that he believes the
traditional Reformed teaching is correct at this point.
The pessimism that comes
about as a result of the Reformed view leads to a stress on repentance as a way
of life. This very often leads to a morbid introspection and a solemn
spirituality which shows very little of the joy of the Lord. The example of
Bradford as given by Packer, illustrates the danger of this type of thinking.
Bradford went beyond repentance to self-denigration, yet Packer holds this up
as example of spiritual ardour.
Here again, there is a
lesson of profound importance to be learned from Bradford. When he signed
letters, as he did, as “a very (i.e. real) painted hypocrite, John Bradford”, “a
very hypocrite”, “the most miserable, half- hearted, unthankful sinner”, “the
sinful John Bradford”, it was not play acting. He was, in fact, testifying to
the intensity of his sense of present imperfection. He longed to advance
further along the path of whole-hearted repentance than he had yet succeeded in
doing. It is, in fact, a law of the spiritual life that the further you go, the
more aware you are distance still to be covered. Your growing desire for God
makes you increasingly conscious, not so much of where you are in your
relationship with him as where you are not.[ix]
It can be seen clearly here
that there is a very pessimistic note running through Reformed Theology, which
stand in stark contrast to the Wesleyan expectation of a heart filled with love
for god and neighbour. It is at this juncture that it seems apparent that
Reformed Theology with its emphasis on the forensic aspects of salvation has largely
forgotten the relational aspects. This seems to lead to understanding salvation
in legal terms, so that the concentration is put on words such as
justification, sin, and atonement. Of course these are all important concepts
but they must not be used in isolation from such terms as reconciliation and
adoption which are relational terms. The relational aspects emphasise the
possibility of real change in not only our standing before God but that we can
relate to him as his children.
I have tried to demonstrate
above that Packer’s theology is pessimistic in its hopes for transformation in
the present. Behind of all this lies Packer’s doctrine of sin to which we now
turn.
Packer’s view of sin.
In this section I need to
briefly look at Packer’s doctrine of sin, to determine whether his doctrine of
sin overshadows that of grace. I will therefore examine his views of original
sin, total depravity and actual sin (see Concise Theology pages 79-86.).
Original sin in reformed theology is not only Adam’s first sin but also the
imputation of that sin to all mankind. As a consequence of this, the doctrine
of total depravity is expounded. Packer, along with Reformed Theology as a
whole, does not believe that this means that every man is as bad as he can be,
but rather that he is fallen in all his parts. Wesleyan scholars and Wesley
himself come very close to this position but generally deny the imputation of
the guilt of sin to all mankind. Wesley himself certainly believed strongly in
the depravity of man. The major difference between Wesley and Packer concerns
what grace can achieve in the saved. Packer, as we have seen above, believes
that there is real change in the believer but he rejects any form of
deliverance from sin, which, in any way speaks of perfection. His basic
presupposition is that man’s depravity clings to him and he has to fight it to
the end of his days. Packer at this point appeals to Romans 7 as the norm for
believers. Although the debate about this chapter is long and complex, I
believe it is helpful to look at an alternative interpretation as set forth by
Purkiser. He says,
This then is not the
normal regenerate state. In broadest terms, it is the struggle of an awakened
person with the sinful; impulses of his own unredeemed heart, a struggle carried
on by his own strength of will. Paul takes back nothing he had already said in
6:18, 22 about being free from sin, nor does he undercut what he will say in
8:1-11. William Greathouse writes:
“Clearly the wretched man
is the awakened sinner, struggling in vain for deliverance from indwelling sin.
To apply these verses to the Christian believer would be to admit practically
that the grace of Christ is as powerless against sin as is the law. The thrust
of this argument is to demonstrate that the grace of God in Christ can do what
the law could not do (8:3), to show that under grace a man has been freed from
sin”
However, we may interpret
this passage on two levels. There is an echo of this struggle in the experience
of any who strive for a consistently victorious life by means of their own
self-discipline or their own strength of will. All who depend on self-effort
for dealing with inner sin are represented here. These words do away with any
scheme of sanctification that relies on “suppression” or “counteraction” as a
matter of self effort. Such is only a path to futility”.[x]
This view strongly contrasts
with that of Packer. Packer is quite aware of the tensions created by his
interpretation of the text. Packer says:
The second section [0f
Romans 7] (vss.14-25) is written entirely in the present tense. Grammatically,
therefore the natural way to read it would be as a transcript of Paul’s
self-knowledge at the time of writing; but its contents seem to make this
reading of it quite incredible. It presents the experience of a man who sees
himself as constantly failing to do the good which the law commands, and which
he himself wants to do, and who reflecting on this fact has come to see the
bitter truth which is announced at the outset of the thesis of the whole
section- “I am carnal sold under sin” (v14). It is this perception that prompts
the cry (Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me…?
What creates our problem
is the prima facie contradiction between that state of the wretched man and the
Paul of Rom.8.[xi]
Packer defends his view fully
in the appendix to Keep in Step with the Spirit. Although I cannot argue
the case more fully here, it does seem to me that there is a real transition
from a place of defeat (in Rom.7 to a place of victory (in Rom.8)
Packer in A Passion for
Holiness, says that the Christian needs to grow downward in repentance (see
chapter 5). It is interesting to compare Packer’s view with that of Wesley’s as
found in his sermon, “The Repentance of Believers”. Once again we will
be looking at how sin overshadows Packer’s doctrine of sanctification. Packer
says,
The “law of sin” means sin
operating as a driving force, irrationally anti-God in its thrust. The words “I
see” tell us how Paul perceives himself and measures his actual achievement –
in other words, when he practices the discipline of self-examination. Each time
he does so, he sees that his reach has exceeded his grasp, that nothing he said
or did was as good and right as it should have been, and that his noblest,
wisest, most selfless, pure minded, God honouring acts were all in retrospect
were all flawed in some discernible way. In retrospect he always finds that his
conduct could and always should have been more Christlike and his motives less
mixed. Always he finds that he could have done better than he did.
This discovery, calling as
it does for the constantly renewed repentance that I advocate, is
unquestionably depressing. Hence Paul’s agonized cry in Romans 7:24, “what a
wretched man I am! Who will rescue from the body of this death?” Yet we should
note, is followed by the triumphant shout of Romans 7:25, as Paul looks to “the
redemption of our bodies” in the life beyond (Rom 8:23: “Thanks be to God (that
one day he will rescue me) through Jesus Christ our Lord!” Partial present deliverance from sin the power
of sin, which is the other side of his experience (see Rom&:5-7) makes
him long all the more for the total future deliverance that God has promised.
Meanwhile, however, he grows downward in deepening humility as he becomes more
and more aware of how sin in him still thwarts his aim of perfectly pleasing
God in this he is the model for us all.[xii]
Wesley and Packer hold much
in common when they diagnose man’s condition but the solution is radically
different. Wesley holds out an optimism of grace for the present. In his sermon
“The Repentance of Believers” Wesley says,
Thus it is that in the
Children of God repentance and faith exactly answer each other. By repentance
we feel the sin remaining in our hearts, and cleaving to our words and actions.
By faith we receive the power of God in Christ purifying our hearts and
cleansing our hands. By repentance we are still sensible that we deserve
punishment for all our tempers and words and actions. By faith we are conscious
that our advocate with the Father is continually pleading for us, and thereby
continually turning aside all condemnation and punishment from us. By
repentance we have an abiding conviction that there is no help in us. By faith
we receive not only mercy but “grace to help in every time of need”. Repentance
disclaims the very possibility of any other help. Repentance says “without him
I can do nothing” faith says “I can do all things through Christ strengthening
me”. Through him I can love the Lord my God with all my heart, mind, soul and
strength: yea’ and walk in holiness and righteousness before him all the days
of my life.[xiii]
The contrast between these
two quotations is enormous when it comes to the final outcome. For Packer there
is no hope for final deliverance in the present, whereas for Wesley, he sees
rich possibilities flow from God’s grace.
I have tried to demonstrate
that the Reformed doctrine of sanctification as advocated by Packer is
overshadowed by the doctrine of sin. Because of this there is no real cleansing
from sin available but only a “partial deliverance” from sin. Packer says that
there has been a radical change of nature caused by the new birth but that the
new nature is still hampered and hindered by sin. One must question whether
this does full justice to the many promises of cleansing and renewal contained
within scripture. When one looks at Packer’s soteriology, one sees clearly the
triumph of grace. There does seem to be a real tension within Reformed Theology
at this point. This is made even clearer when one considers the teaching about
salvation being all of grace from first to last. In contrast to this is the
emphasis on the power of sin in the believer’s life. The problem is not solved
by accepting an Arminian framework for then the triumph of grace is not held in
the area of soteriology. Of course this paper cannot deal with the debate of
this issue. Having made this statement I realise that this would be disputed by
the Arminian and one must acknowledge that some views of prevenient grace come
very close the Reformed doctrine of effectual calling. Both the Reformed and
the Arminian are determined to maintain the priority of grace but come to very
different conclusions.
Toward an Alternative
View
In the following paragraphs
only a brief outline can be given of what I believe is a tenable alternative
view of holiness with a Reformed framework. I will presuppose a Reformed
soteriology in what follows.
This outline of an alternative is developed
from Paul’s letter to the Ephesians. The letter to the Ephesians speaks of the
glory and power of god’s grace as bestowed upon the believer. Paul firstly
expounds the plan of salvation and its application to his readers, he then
moves onto outline the godly life. We will also look briefly at his prayers.
Paul in his letter brings his
readers face to face with the glory of God’s grace. Predestination was not some
abstract doctrine for the Apostle but rather a demonstration of God’s grace.
Paul is eager to communicate the riches of the grace of god, looking backward
to eternity past and looking upward to receive that grace Christ Jesus in the
present. Paul shows the pastoral connection between election and daily living
when he says,
For he chose us in him
before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love
. (Eph 1:4)..
This connection between God’s
sovereign grace and holiness is also seen in Eph. 2:1-10 in this passage Paul
shows that salvation is all of God’s, he then closes the passage by saying,
“For we are God’s
handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in
advance for us to do. (Eph 2:10)”.
Although Paul expected moral
transformation, he was also aware of the eschatological tension between the
already and the not yet, he says
When you believed, you
were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, 14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our
inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession (Eph
1:13–14).
Paul’s prayers I this letter
show that he expected a great measure of transformation in believers. In his
first prayer he speaks of,
the riches of his glorious
inheritance in his holy people, 19
and his incomparably great power for us who believe. (Eph 1:18–19).
Paul’s second prayer if
anything goes beyond his first prayer, as he prayed,
that you may be filled to
the measure of all the fullness of God.
(Eph 3:19).
Paul is surely praying for
what he thinks is attainable and if this is so then he expected a very clear
knowledge and experience of the love of God. Springing from these prayers and
the teaching of the first two chapters are the calls to holiness in Ephesians
4-6.
The call to holiness and
moral exertion spring from Paul’s experience of the grace of God that is why he
appeals to believers to be full of the Spirit and to stand in the strength of
Lord. He then applies his teaching to marriage, family and work. What is of great interest here is the
combination of optimism and the expectation of conflict.
Paul’s teaching about
spiritual warfare in Ephesians 6, gives insight into the nature of the optimism
of grace. Paul does not pretend that conflict ceases but rather that god
enables the believer to
be strong in the Lord and
in his mighty power. (Eph 6:10).
The apostle recognises the
weakness of the believer but he demonstrates the optimism of grace by his
expectation that the believer will be able to stand in god’s strength. Linked
very closely to the armour of God is Paul’s is the importance of prayer.
I have tried above to outline
an optimism of grace which takes seriously man’s weakness but also takes
seriously the power of God’s grace. At this point I am not sure that I can
follow the Wesleyan tradition with its two moments of grace but at the same
time I believe that the Wesleyan contribution forces one to face to the fact
that the New Testament contains an optimism of grace.
Conclusion
I have tried above to give a
careful analysis of Packer’s theology as it relates to the triumph of grace in
conversion and also in his doctrine of sanctification. I believe that Packer
rightly stresses the triumph of grace in conversion but there is a real tension
when it comes to the doctrine of sanctification. Sin seems to overshadow grace
in a way that does not reflect the New Testament’s expectation of victory over
sin.
I have also tried to
demonstrate briefly an alternate view could be developed. I used the letter to
the Ephesians because it contains many of the themes of Reformed Theology while
at the same time demonstrating an optimism of grace.
I believe that when it comes
to the doctrine of sanctification, Reformed Theology is inconsistent with its
doctrine of grace which is powerful in conversion but weak in its application
to holiness. There is therefore a real need to develop a more consistent view
of God’s grace which will do greater justice to the Reformed slogan, “Salvation
is of God from first to last”.
.
End Notes
[i] J.I Packer
Concise
Theology (Leicester Inter-Varsity Press,1993), 84
[ii] J I Packer
Concise Theology (Leicester, Inter-varsity Press 1993), 158
[iii] J I Packer
Concise Theology (Leicester, Inter-varsity Press 1993) 152-153
[iv] R Taylor,
Exploring
Christian Holiness Volume 3 (Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press, 1985) 76
[v] J I Packer
Introduction to
The Death of death in the death of Christ by John Owen (Banner of Truth, 1959} 22
[vi] J I Packer
Concise theology 169
[vii] J I Packer
Concise
Theology 170
[viii] J I Packer
A Passion for Holiness
(Cambridge, Crossway Books, 1992) 174-175
[ix] J I Packer
A Passion for Holiness 138
[x] W T Purkiser
Exploring Christian Holiness
vol 1 (Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press 1983)
[xi] J I Packer
, Keep in Step with the
Spirit (Leicester: Inter-varsity Press 1984) 264
[xii] J I Packer
A Passion for Holiness 150-151
[xiii] John Wesley “Sermon 14 The Repentance of
Believers in
Bicentennial Edition of the works of John Wesley
(Nashville, Abingdonn,1975) 349-350
