A Biblical-Theological Review of Michael Allen's Sanctification - Part 3: Chapter Two - God
Chapter 2: God
Affirmation
There is a great deal to affirm in Allen’s treatment of
divine holiness: his recognition that divine holiness is metaphysical as well
as moral; his connection of God’s metaphysical holiness to the first three of
the Ten Words and the Shema of Deut. 6 (57-61), his observation that sinless
seraphim veil their faces and feet in the presence of the Holy One, thus highlighting
the “incomparable singularly of the transcendent LORD” (66-67), his note that
metaphysical incomparability both illumines moral impurity and responds
graciously to confession bringing both expiation and atonement (67).[1]
Perhaps most commendably, Allen does not allow the reality
of believers’ remaining sinfulness to overshadow their grace-enabled capacity
for personal holiness. Allen unapologetically asserts, “We cannot imitate God’s singular role as the moral register and
foundation of covenantal life … However, we are called, and we are
capable—with God’s grace—of mirroring God’s moral standards, materially
speaking. … we can be conformed to a patient and gentle character by God’s
grace.” This assertion resounds throughout the book, strikingly without caveat
or confessional mitigation.
For example, WLC 149 or WSC 82 are
common Reformed caveats: “Is any man able perfectly to keep the commandments of
God? A. No man is able, either of himself, or by any grace received in this
life, perfectly to keep the commandments of God; but doth daily break them in
thought, word, and deed.” Allen no doubt affirms this assertion, but his
characterization of the Christian life reflects the terminology and emphasis of
Scripture admirably. In reference to the Corinthians, Allen writes, “Paul has
already addressed these ecclesiastical misfits as those sanctified in Christ
Jesus, called to be saints together with all those who in every place call upon
the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. ... These saints or holy ones suffer many
maladies - they were ‘foolish’ and ‘weak’ (1:27), ‘low’ and non-existent
(1:28). They continue to struggle with respect to schisms (3:1-4), sexual
immorality (5:1-2), and any other number of issues involving liturgical, moral,
communal, and theological error. Yet they are called saints and are ‘sanctified
in Christ Jesus’” (29).
Critique
First, throughout the book Allen correctly reverts to “set
apart” language as the basic sense of holiness. Nonetheless, exegetical grounding
of that language would have been helpful and theologically fruitful. For
example, attention to sanctification as separation from the common and ordinary
as well as from the sinful and defiling has implications for human
sanctification. God calls His people away not just from sin, but also at times
from ordinary pursuits, e.g., personal convictions addressing the idiosyncrasies
of individual fallenness.
Second, although
Allen invokes trinitarian language and asserts the necessity of trinitarian
theologizing,[2] he
doesn’t press into the implications of God’s tri-personal nature for divine holiness
or the doctrine of sanctification.
Third, the chapter’s key weakness is that Allen makes holiness
a “central character trait that takes in God’s singularity” (54) or regards it
as an “ingredient in the divine fullness” (64). This problematizes the
relationship of other “central character traits” such as transcendence and
immanence or love and righteousness, given Allen’s affirmation of divine
simplicity. Worse, cross-grain to Scripture’s presentation, it seems to make
divine moral holiness one among many attributes to which we must conform.
All these problems resolve when we recognize that divine
holiness, both metaphysical and moral, is a consequential category. By that I
mean what sets Yahweh apart transcendently, incomparably, and singularly from
all others is the unique excellence of His being and character. Holiness is
therefore a term that denotes first God’s transcendent metaphysical
separateness as a consequence of all that He is: infinite, eternal, immutable,
self-sufficient, omniscient, etc. Another way to say this is that God’s
holiness metaphysically encompasses
everything that sets his being apart, including such “comparative” attributes
such as singular, unique, incomparable. God’s holiness morally denotes his moral separateness due to the unique excellence
of his ethical character, viz., his set apartness due to the presence of all
good and the consequent absence of all non-good. Divine moral holiness, therefore, encompasses,
sums up, gathers in one, everything that sets his character apart ethically.
For God to be ‘majestic in holiness’ is to say that the awesome
splendor effulgent from the totality of the Most High King is a component of
His holiness. It would follow then that divine holiness is a component of
nothing else. There is no descriptive category larger than holy.[3]
All that sets God apart is comprehended in his “holiness.”
Extension
Three dimensions of divine holiness which I could not
discern in Allen’s work are: 1) Yahweh’s self-sanctification (Ezek. 28:23;
36:23), 2) human sanctification of Yahweh (Num. 20:12; Isa. 29:23), and 3) worship
as a response to divine holiness (Psa. 30:4 “give thanks”; 105:3 “glory in”;
145:21 “bless”). Each dimension is rich with gospel holiness import. For
example, Yahweh’s sanctification of himself in Ezekiel alters nothing about
himself, but it does alter how he is perceived by others. His reputation or
name is seen as it is in fact—truly transcendently separated from all
contenders for greatness due to the unique excellence of his character and
being exhibited in his mighty works. This perceptual sanctification links
divine glory and sanctification, providing a basis for understanding how God is
sanctified by us when he is glorified by us. The holy God who graciously
sanctifies us generates in us the appropriate response of our grateful
sanctification of God. Sanctification begets sanctification, though our
responsive sanctification certainly differs in many ways from God’s
sanctification of us.
[1] Although
Allen doesn’t note this, Isaiah 6 exemplifies the principle articulated in Isa.
57:15 “For thus says the high and exalted One Who
lives forever, whose name is Holy, "I dwell in a high and holy
place, And also with the contrite and lowly of spirit In order to revive
the spirit of the lowly And to revive the heart of the contrite.”
[2] “Trinitarian
theology must orient both [ecclesiology and ethics] in an operative way” (26).
[3] For a
more extended argument for this understanding of divine holiness, see my 2010
Chamberlain Holiness Lecture “Divine Holiness and Sanctifying God: A Propoal”
available online at http://www.academia.edu/2996945/Lecture_1_Divine_Holiness_and_Sanctifying_God_A_Proposal.
Comments