On John Wesley's “A Plain Account of Christian Perfection”

John Wesley’s vexing book, A Plain Account of Christian Perfection (London: Epworth Press, 1952), is an altogether miserable read, and known by its critics for its glaring imperfections (pun intended). Written in 1766, you can find it in its entirety here: A Plain Account of Christian Perfection.

John Wesley (1703-1791), the founder of Methodism, was for a time an evangelical luminary—people in such circles often spoke of him on a par with the Protestant Reformers. But Wesley has fallen out of favor of late—no doubt due to the rigorous obedience tied to his “Methodist” system. The Methodist church which he helped to found has for the most part gone the way of all flesh, making the news recently for a whole bunch of reasons completely beyond the foresight of the movement’s founder. Wesley is, no doubt, turning in his grave over the path the Methodists have taken to full apostasy.

In the evangelicalism in which I was raised, Wesley was held in high esteem largely because of the story of his dramatic conversion at Aldersgate St. in London in 1738. He was “strangely warmed”when hearing the “preface” to Martin Luther’s commentary on Romans read aloud. It is often quipped that it is too bad Wesley didn’t go on to read the entirety of Luther’s commentary. Anyone who reads Wesley’s A Plain Account discovers a mass of confusion and contradictions as he affirms one thing, and then quickly backtracks on much of his prior teaching so as to define and defend his doctrine of “Christian perfectionism,” also called “sinless perfection,” or “entire sanctification.”

On occasion, when I mention his perfectionism, people will often challenge me, saying something like, “it can’t be that bad.” No, in fact, it is worse. When I tell them what Wesley actually taught in A Plain Account they simply can’t believe it. So, I keep my Kindle close by to show the quotations replicated below. I recently addressed Wesley’s take on election and good works to make much the same point—Wesley was an Arminian in his soteriology and taught a very confusing, and conscience burdening doctrine of Christian perfectionism.

Wesley on Christian Perfection: What it is:

In this I endeavoured to show, (1.) In what sense Christians are not, (2.) In what sense they are, perfect. “(1.) In what sense they are not. They are not perfect in knowledge. They are not free from ignorance, no, nor from mistake. We are no more to expect any living man to be infallible, than to be omniscient. They are not free from infirmities, such as weakness or slowness of understanding, irregular quickness or heaviness of imagination. Such in another kind are impropriety of language, ungracefulness of pronunciation; to which one might add a thousand nameless defects, either in conversation or behaviour. From such infirmities as these none are perfectly freed till their spirits return to God; neither can we expect till then to be wholly freed from temptation; for ‘the servant is not above his master.’ But neither in this sense is there any absolute perfection on earth. There is no perfection of degrees, none which does not admit of a continual increase (16).

What Christian Perfection is not:

“(2.) In what sense then are they perfect? Observe, we are not now speaking of babes in Christ, but adult Christians. But even babes in Christ are so far perfect as not to commit sin. This St. John affirms expressly; and it cannot be disproved by the examples of the Old Testament. For what, if the holiest of the ancient Jews did sometimes commit sin? We cannot infer from hence, that ‘all Christians do and must commit sin as long as they live’ . . . . But whatever was the case of those under the law, we may safely affirm, with St. John, that, since the gospel was given, ‘lie that is born of God sinneth not’ . . . . In conformity, therefore, both to the doctrine of St. John, and the whole tenor of the New Testament, we fix this conclusion: A Christian is so far perfect, as not to commit sin.” (16-17, 19).

Perfection in our Thoughts and Tempers:

“This is the glorious privilege of every Christian, yea, though he be but a babe in Christ. But it is only of grown Christians it can be affirmed, they are in such a sense perfect, as, Secondly, to be freed from evil thoughts and evil tempers. First, from evil or sinful thoughts. Indeed, whence should they spring? ‘Out of the heart of man,’ if at all, ‘proceed evil thoughts.’ If, therefore, the heart be no longer evil, then evil thoughts no longer proceed out of it: For ‘a good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit.” (19).

Charles Wesley Held to Christian Perfection as Well:

I have been the more large in these extracts, because hence it appears, beyond all possibility of exception, that to this day both my brother and I maintained, (1.) That Christian perfection is that love of God and our neighbour, which implies deliverance from all sin. (2.) That this is received merely by faith. (3.) That it is given instantaneously, in one moment. (4.) That we are to expect it, not at death, but every moment; that now is the accepted time, now is the day of this salvation (41).

On “Mistakes”:

“QUESTION. What is Christian perfection? “ANSWER. The loving God with all our heart, mind, soul, and strength. This implies, that no wrong temper, none contrary to love, remains in the soul; and that all the thoughts, words, and actions, are governed by pure love.

“Q. Do you affirm, that this perfection excludes all infirmities, ignorance, and mistake? “A. I continually affirm quite the contrary, and always have done so.

“Q. But how can every thought, word, and work, be governed by pure love, and the man be subject at the same time to ignorance and mistake? “A. I see no contradiction here: ‘A man may be filled with pure love, and still be liable to mistake.’ Indeed I do not expect to be freed from actual mistakes, till this mortal puts on immortality. I believe this to be a natural consequence of the soul’s dwelling in flesh and blood. For we cannot now think at all, but by the mediation of those bodily organs which have suffered equally with the rest of our frame. And hence we cannot avoid sometimes thinking wrong, till this corruptible shall have put on incorruption (42).

In Summation, the Wesley’s Retract the Content of Their Hymns:

BRIEF THOUGHTS ON CHRISTIAN PERFECTION

SOME thoughts occurred to my mind this morning concerning Christian perfection, and the manner and time of receiving it, which I believe may be useful to set down.

1. By perfection I mean the humble, gentle, patient love of God, and our neighbour, ruling our tempers, words, and actions.

I do not include an impossibility of falling from it, either in part or in whole. Therefore, I retract several expressions in our Hymns, which partly express, partly imply, such an impossibility.

And I do not contend for the term sinless, though I do not object against it.

2. As to the manner. I believe this perfection is always wrought in the soul by a simple act of faith; consequently, in an instant.

But I believe a gradual work, both preceding and following that instant.

3. As to the time. I believe this instant generally is the instant of death, the moment before the soul leaves the body. But I believe it may be ten, twenty, or forty years before.

I believe it is usually many years after justification; but that it may be within five years or five months after it, I know no conclusive argument to the contrary.

If it must be many years after justification, I would be glad to know how many.

And how many days or months, or even years, can any one allow to between perfection and death? How far from justification it must be; and how near to death? (112-113)

Conclusion:

On a charitable reading, A Plain Account of Christian Perfection is Wesley’s ham-fisted attempt to explain definitive sanctification in relation to to justification, and yet keep progressive sanctification (attaining Christian Perfection) as his main point of emphasis.

The bottom line is that Wesley affirms that Christians can reach sinless perfection, yet are still liable to “mistakes.” So, if that is what l should call my sins, do I still need to confess and repent of my “mistakes”?