Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected
| PentecostalTheology.com
THE SIGNIFICANCE OF WILLIAM
H. DURHAM
FOR PENTECOSTAL HISTORIGRAPHY
by
Allen L.
Clayton
In 1910 the
tremendously popular Chicago pastor,
William H. Durham was invited to address a convention of midwestern pentecostals.
Ever since his
Spirit baptism
in 1907 at the Azusa Street Mission in Los
Angeles,
Durham’s rise to fame in the pentecostal
movement had been meteoric. Thousands had flock- ed to the North Avenue Mission to hear the
message
of Pentecost from one who was without doubt a
prodigy preacher.1
On this
occasion,
“where all was
unity
and
blessing
and all
‘Frank
Ewart, The Phenomenon of Pentecost
Aflame Press, revised edition, 1975), pp. 94-107. Among them were E. N.
Aimee (World Bell,
Semple McPherson, A. H. Argue, Luigi Francescon, Giacomo Lombardi, P. Ottolini, Gunnar Vingren, and Daniel Berg.
Allen Clayton is Ph.D. candidate at Southern Methodist University. He is affiliated with the Assemblies of God.
– 27-
1
in
love”1,
Durham Work of
Calvary”,
were melted
together
titled “the Finished
understanding
of sanctification by
a crisis
experience subsequent version. A doctrinal
controversy the nascent
pentecostal
weger2
has labeled
three-stage former teaches three distinct sanctification,
and
Spirit-baptism; holiness as a
life-long process fore teaches
only
two
experiences baptism.
movement
and
two-stage pentecostalism.
experiences
initiated
Traditionally,
William
preached
a
sermon,
en-
that
sought
to
“nullify”
the as
wholly
realized in the believer
to and distinct from con- ensued that
eventually
divided
into what Walter Hollen-
The
of
grace-conversion,
whereas the latter conceives of
at conversion and there- of
grace-conversion
and
Spirit
H. Durham has been
perceived man who
spoke
out in behalf of a number of
pentecostals
roots were in
Baptist
or reformed of sanctification conflicted purpose
historiographical
device doctrine of sanctification
controversy
he
engendered.
with the
three-stage of this
study
is to examine the
adequacy
by focusing
and the
subsequent
as the
whose traditions,
and whose doctrine
scheme.3 The
of this thesis as a
attention
upon
Durham’s
developments
of the
In essence the doctrine the
Wesleyan understanding
of the finished work was a denial that Christ’s
victory
of over both actual
1 Author unknown, title unknown, The Faithful Standard (November, 1922). Quoted in A Sound From Heaven by Carl Brumback.
2Walter Hollenweger, The Pentecostals, translated from the German by R. A. Wilson (Augsburg Publishing House, 1972), pp. 24-26.
3Klaude Kendrick, The Promise Fulfilled (Springfield: Gospel Publishing House, 1961); William Menzies, “The non-Wesleyan Origins of the Pentecostal Movement,” Aspects of Pentecostal-Charismatic Origins, ed. Vinson The Holiness-Pentecostal Movement in the United States Synan (Logos Books,1975); Vinson Synan, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1971) pp. 147-156; Edith Waldvogel, “The ‘Overcoming Life’: A Study in the Reformed
Evangelical Contribution to Pentecostalism,” Pneuma
1 (1): 7-19 (Spring, 1979).
– 28-
2
and inbred believer in doses.’
sin,
which he
accomplished
to
Bishop
According
on the
cross,
is
given
to the
J. H.
King.
Original
sin is dealt with
separately
in God’s
economy …
It is It remains in us after that
grace
not removed in regeneration. is received. It
remains, heart. It is held in check
but it does not
reign
in the converted
by
the
grace
of
regeneration
… There
may
be outbreaks at
times,
but not the
recapturing
of the soul
by
such
momentary
by
a distinct act of
grace … subsequent
Durham,
on the other edition of his
magazine,
hand,
The Pentecostal
I …
‘
manifestations. Its removal is
to
regeneration.2
proclaimed
in the
June,
Testimony
1911
and cleansed but
against
God in
it … a change
deny
that God does not deal with the nature of sin at conversion. I deny that a man who is converted or born
again
is
outwardly washing
that his heart is left unclean with
enmity
This would not be Salvation. Salvation … means
of nature … It means that all the old
man,
or
don lAccording
to John L. Peters, Christian Perfection and American Methodism
Press,
(Abing-
1956), pp. 175, 176, during the last three decades of the nineteenth doctrinal views of century,
Wesleyans on sanctification fell into two
those who contended that man’s holiness, as effected by the of
major groups:
grace
God was either
in
1) accomplished regeneration, or 2) accomplished by further infusion of grace subsequent to tion. regenera-
Group 1 divided into two subgroups, a) those who taught that “complete deliverance from all sin is
accomplished in regeneration, and b) those who taught that deliverance from inbred sin is never “complete
accomplished in this life: does all that and, therefore, regeneration
may ever be done in this sense.” Group 2 divided into three subgroups: those who believed
of entire
a) that “a complete purification is instantaneously accomplished in the crisis
sanctification,” b) that “a of completed purification and
that “a
may be gradually wrought in the process continuing sanctification,” c) progressive purification is wrought through a sanctification combining crises and process.” In this paper Wesleyanism and all like terms will
apply strictly to group 2, subgroup a.
2J. H. King, From Passover to Pentecost (Advocate Press, 1976), pp. 19-23.
– 29-
3
which was sinful and
depraved
condemned,
and which is crucified
old
nature,
was the
very thing
in us that was with Christ.1
The difference between King,
the sinful nature
…
subsequent
to
regeneration.” the sinful nature is not
removed, The difference between
Wesleyan tion is the difference
King
and Durham is a
great
one. For is removed
by
a “distinct act of
grace In Durham’s
system, however, but is “crucified with Christ.” and finished work sanctifica-
between inherent and
imputed righteous- ness. And this distinction was
easily
blurred
by early pente-
defined finished work sanctifica-
that at conversion
grace
when he claimed it
taught
of sin are removed so that one is wholly
at the moment of
pardon.”
costals.
King2
himself
mistakenly tion as infused
both the
guilt
and
power “sanctified
also informs us that when Durham fication
in Los
Angeles
the extreme of
declaring
fully accomplished
on
the cross also,
the moment
was an unfortunate side-effect they
were
totally
and
inherently they
would remain so no matter
some “abused
that because the work of redemption
we believed.” In other
Finished work sanctification was not infused
righteousness have
agreed
of Christ
imputed with Zinzendorf’s
All our
perfection in the blood of Christ.
is in Christ. All Christian
The whole of Christian
Frank Bartleman3
preached
his doctrine of sancti-
the
message” by going
to
was it was of
necessity
finished in us
words,
antinomianism suffered
by
some who believed righteous and,
as a consequence, how much
they
sinned.
grace,
but the
to the believer. Durham would argument against Wesley
that
perfection
is faith
perfection
is
1William H. Durham, Title unknown, The Pentecostal Testimony June, 1911. in Brumback.
Quoted
2King, p. 101-109.
3Frank Bartleman, How Pentecost Came to Los Angeles, (n.p., 1925), p. 145-152.
– 30-
4
imputed, selves, sanctified
not inherent. We are never… The moment
wholly.1
perfect someone
in
Christ;
-in our- is
justified,
he is
Plymouth Brethren, and,
as
However,
we have seen,
pentecostals doctrine was
proclaimed. modification of Zinzendorfianism ethical seriousness
According
to
Durham2, perfection continuou’sly
maintained
cross. As
long
as this was
done, Christ and
imputed righteousness liever’s life.
If, however, relationship
with Christ
some of the
Moravians,
fell into antinomianism when this
Finished
of both reformed and
by reckoning
work sanctification was a in that it
incorporated
the
holiness traditions. was
something
that must be
on the historical fact of the inbred sin was crucified with would bear fruit in the be-
it was a
sign
that the
faith was once
again placed
sin
appeared,
had been broken and the carnal nature had been resuscitated. Perfection could be restored,
in the cross.3
the
quarrel
though,
if
where he
escalated meetings padlocked finished
In
February, 1911,
Durham went to Los
Angeles
over sanctification into a full-scale war. His
were canceled at the
Upper
out of the Azusa Street Mission
Finally
work sanctification.4
Room Mission and he was
when he
preached he was able to settle at the
lNicholas Ludwig Count von Zinzendorf, Nine Public Lectures on
in
Important Subjects Religion, translated and edited by George W. Forell (University of Iowa xviii. Press, 1973), p.
cars Brumback, A Sound From Heaven (Springfield, MO: Gospel Publishing House, 1977), pp. 96-104. Originally published as the prologue and part one of Heaven Suddenly… from
(GPH, 1961).
Perfection
3Finished work sanctification is very close to a doctrine propounded by D. D. editor of the Methodist
Whedon,
Quarterly Review from 1857-1884. John
L. Peters, Christian
and American Methodism (Abingdon Press, 1956), pp. 151, 152.
4Frank Bartleman, How Pentecost Came to Los Angeles (n.p., 1925), pp. 145-152; Vinson Synan, The Holiness-Pentecostal Movement in the United States
William B.
(Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1971), pp. 147-156.
– 31-
5
on
Kohler Street Mission Sundays
and an
average
where he drew crowds of 1000
people
of 400
throughout
the week.1
were aroused on both sides of the
while he
counterparts
of
having
a
Many
unsanctified
passions issue. Durham was attacked preached.2 Charges
spread.3
uncharitably
accused their “fictitious
experience.”4 turmoil. On one occasion detractors that
Bartleman,
by
a woman with a
hat-pin
that he was a
dupe
of the devil were wide-
Many
of those who were
won
over to Durham’s doctrine
Wesleyan
Durham himself could not
stay
above the
he lashed
though sympathetic,
because he was “not
willing
to stand for a
spirit
of retaliation.”5
out so
harshly against
his
left the
platform
In the winter of 1911 Durham returned to
Chicago While there he contracted a cold that
proved
the end of the
year.
The
controversy
but has remained to this
day
as the
major
his
passing
issue
among pentecostals.
1 Bartleman.
for a visit.
fatal to him before he
began
did not cease with
devisive
2Brumback. She was eventually won over to Durham’s view!
3J. H. King called Durham’s doctrine “Satan’s big gun”, Vinson Synan, The Old Time Power (Advocate Press, 1973), pp. 138-141. Parham in reflecting on the division costalism over the doctrine
of pente-
said, “The diabolical end and of his Satanic in perpetrating Durhamism in the
purpose majesty,
world, in repudiating sanctification, as a definite work of grace, has now been clearly revealed”, William W. Menzies, “The non-Wesleyan Origins of the Pentecostal
Movement,” Aspects of Pentecostal-Charismatic
83-98. The
Origins, ed. by Vinson Synan (Logos R. A. Wilson. Books, 1975), pp. Pentecostals, translated from the German Hollenweger,
by (Augsburg Publishing House, 1972), pp. 24-26, relates the of one woman’s vision of demons story
When “a distorted demon discussing
how to counteract the present Spirit-led awakening. very said, ‘I have
unsanctified
it, give them a Baptism on an
life’, all the demons clapped and roared in approval.”
4Frank Ewart, The Phenomenon of Pentecost (World Aflame Press,
1975), revised edition, pp. 94-107; Vinson Synan, The Holiness-Pentecostal Movement in the United States (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1971).
5Bartleman, pp. 145-152.
– 32-
6
We are now faced with the
question
fits into the flow of
pentecostal thesis that has
gained pentecostalism
over the doctrine Wesleyan
and
particularly subsequent
to or coterminous movement.
wide
acceptance
reformed
of how this information
history.
The
historiographical
is that the division of
of sanctification was due to non-
influences,
which were either with the influence of the holiness
Form A of this thesis
perceives pentecostalism
branch of the holiness movement. ordo salutis was normative costalism
beyond
holiness and
boundaries, Eventually
doctrinal
homogeniety
movement.
grew
and
matured, however,
this influx of
non-Wesleyans
and
precipitated
Form B was
recently
as
originally
a
Consequently,
the
three-stage pentecostal
doctrine. As
pente-
it attracted
people
from
most
notably
from the
Baptists.
undermined the
early
the bifurcation of the
traditions
costalism.
what
Waldvogel
denied
instead focused its
emphasis life,” thereby making perfection
propounded by
Edith
article in Pneuma. 2 In this
essay
she contends
contributed to the
emergence
These two concurrent traditions were
Wesleyan
identifies as reformed.
that sanctification was an instantaneous
upon daily living
an
“overcoming
Waldvogal
in an
that two
theological and
growth
of
pente-
and This latter tradition
experience
and
a progressive
and
life-long
affair.
Both forms of this thesis leader of the
Baptist
portray
or reformed faction. The
controversy
William H. Durham as the
that
IKlaude Kendrick, The Promise Fulfilled (Springfield, MO: Gospel Publishing House, 1961); William Menzies, “The non-Wesleyan
of the Pentecostal Move- ment,” Aspects of Pentecostal-Charismatic Origins, ed. Vinson
Origins
Synan (Logos Books, 1975), pp. 83-98; Vinson Synan, The Holiness-Pentecostal Movement in the United States (Grand Rapids:
William B. Eerdmans, 1971), pp. 147-156.
2Edith Waldvogel, “The ‘Overcoming Life’: A Study In The Reformed Evangelical Contribution to Pentecostalism,” Pneuma I (1): 7-19, Spring 1979,
– 33-
7
Durham
initiated, Waldvogel clear lines of
separation among
claims,
buted to the
emerging movement was desirable.” when the Assemblies
also identified them with
major evangelical
sense that some formal
organization
And this desire
of God was founded.1
“not
only began
to define the small
pentecostal groups;
it
traditions and contri-
of the
was realized in 1914
device with
themselves
How
adequate regard
to the
rupture are some
striking
is this thesis as a historiographical
over sanctification? It seems to me that there
dissimilarities between the events
and the
way
this thesis has
interpreted
them.
First of
all,
I have shown that Durham’s doctrine of the fin-
ished work can
hardly
be classified trine of sanctification.
– and
specifically
Zinzendorfian. taneous
experience;
believer at the moment
life is
only
a
corollary
nomianism.
On the
contrary,
as a reformed or
Baptist
doc-
it was
primarily
Lutheran Sanctification is an instan-
of Christ is
imputed
to the Emphasis upon living
a holy
anti-
being
tention that finished work formed or
Baptist
alternative
the
righteousness
of conversion.
included as a
prophylactic against
Moreover, holy living
is not an indicator of a
gradual growth
in
grace
but
signifies
that a right
relationship
maintained. Does this not
seriously
sanctification was a
grass-roots
to
Wesleyan
with Christ is jeopardize
the con-
re- pentecostalism?
problem
with this historio-
the one that
was sanctification. With-
graphical
thesis is that dissolved the
harmony out a doubt
perfection spective
A second and more fundamental
it assumes the real
issue,
of the
movement,
was and still is the issue from the
per-
of
three-stage pentecostalism.
But does this also hold
1Vinson Synan, The Holiness-Pentecostal Movement in the United States (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1971), pp. 147-156; Edith Waldvogel, “The Life’: A ‘Overcoming
Study in the Reformed Evangelical Contribution to Pentecostalism,” Pneuma I (1): 7-19, Spring, 1979.
34
8
true for the
non-Wesleyans?1 sanctification as a second status of a cardinal doctrine very
existence
omitted from the
testimony baptized.
Where is the
parallel
definite
among
of this
group
is threatened if the second
to
being saved, sanctified,
The doctrinal debate elevated
experience
of
grace
to the
Wesleyan pentecostals.
The
point
is
and
Spirit to this in
non-Wesleyan pente-
costalism ? What are the tenets of the doctrine of sanctification
confusion
The Assemblies of
God,
for
example,
has
managed
The
original defined sanctification
Is it not the case that far from
of
perfection, non-Wesleyan
regarding
the doctrine of
in their brief
to
adopt
two
conflicting
Statement of Funda-
synergistically,
whereas the as a grace of God
appropriated
grows
in
grace by living
a
around which this
group
rallies? having
a well articulated
concept pentecostalism
is in
complete sanctification?
sixty-five year history,
statements on sanctification. mental Truths
present
one teaches sanctification by
the believer in faith.
“patient, sober, unselfish, the Christ within.”2
Foursquare
godly life,”
which is a true reflection of
From the
non-Wesleyan perspective,
fication did not arise because of
conflicting
three-stage pentecostals.
were
precisely just that,
not
Wesleyan.
the debate over sancti-
doctrines of
per-
Rather,
non-
Their
primary as a second definite
experience
fection vis a vis the
Wesleyans
emphasis
was a denial of holiness of
grace.
This is evidenced “finished work of
Calvary”
by
the
way
in which the
phrase functioned after the death of Durham.
1
prefer to use the term “non-Wesleyan” to signify this wing of instead of the more common pentecostalism
designation “reformed”. Although many from reformed evangelical traditions were a part of this group, technical theological terms should be diverse applied
to pentecostalism both sparingly and cautiously. Pentecostalism is a wonderfully
amalgam of several theological traditions, some of which have been nuanced when concocted with the others. uniquely
Also, I feel the term the real “non-Wesleyan” captures
spirit of the debate over sanctification, as I demonstrate subsequently.
2Aimee Semple McPherson, Declaration of Faith, Article VIII: Daily Christian in The
Life,
Foursquare Gospel, Raymond L. Cox, editor (California: The Heritage Committee, 1969), p. 279.
– 35-
9
In
1926,
J. H.
McPherson’s
meetings
in
Roanoke, her doctrine of sanctification Pentecostal Holiness Church.
King stopped
work of
Calvary.
was not in
harmony
Mrs. McPherson assault on her
orthodoxy by confessing
She went on to affirm that
Sin is sin whether inbred
it is actual
one of Aimee
Semple Virginia,
on the
grounds
that
with that of the
responded
to this
her belief in the finished
transgressions,
Adamic
sin,
or
why,
without holiness no
sin … and as for
holiness,
man shall see the Lord. We must be
saved,
must be sancti-
the
precious
fied,
but ’tis all
through
This statement
blood of Jesus Christ.,
content
the
phrase
belief in the finished
statement could be
planted mons on the
sanctifying “finished work” was
merely the
Wesleyan
doctrine cept
of sanctification associated
What I am
suggesting
shows how little doctrinal
“finished work” carried. If lVlrs. McPherson’s initial confession of
work of
Calvary
easily
into one of
Bishop
experience.
a slogan
that signified
of
perfection.
here is that the doctrine cation was not the cause of the rift in
pentecostalism.
battleground
of a war touched-off cation to have been the cause would have
proposed
of its
Wesleyan counterpart. has ever claimed the
allegiance their
concepts
a doctrine of holiness to
compete
But no one doctrine
were
omitted,
the rest of her
King’s
ser-
In other
words,
the
phrase
its user denied
There was no
specific
con-
with the
phrase.2
of sanctifi-
It was
only
a
by
other factors. For sanctifi-
non-Wesleyan pentecostalism
with that
of sanctification of all the
non-Wesleyans. Instead,
a
very confusing picture.
way
an
of salvation. To understand entirely
new
historiographical
In his brilliant
of
perfection present
What has united them is a universal disavowla of a three-stage
why
this is the case is to
propose
thesis.
essay
on the
emergence
and
signficance
of the
1 Aimee Semple McPherson, This is That (Echo Park Evangelistic Association, 1923), pp. 127-128.
2In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes.” Judges 21:25.
– 36-
10
doctrine
of
Spirit baptism,l
Donald
the time of the Civil War
“pentecostal” terminology
began
to
captivate
the holiness this time that the
signification changed
“By 1900,” Dayton
costal formulation was
nearly centrism,
founded
ness of the holiness
experience, able
sign
of assurance
led to the birth of the
pentecostal
The new
movement, however,
for the
sanctifying from Christian Perfection to
Baptism
tells
us,
“holiness
complete.”
upon
the book of
Acts, emphasizing
that
Spirit baptism
Azusa Street revival focused its
emphasis
work of Christ”.2
on the ‘blood.’
on the blood of
Christ,
of pentecostalism. Hollenweger4
in the shed blood of Christ for the remission of sins “the central
of Christ. This was
probably Seymour.
Frank Ewart informs exalted the
atoning
“great emphasis
was
placed was
placed
distinguishing
feature
Dayton
has shown that about
and
imagery and
related traditions. It was at
work of grace was
of the
Holy
Ghost.
capitulation
to the Pente-
It was this
pneumato-
the event- and
seeking
for an
unimpeach-
had taken
place,
which
movement.
was not
Spirit-centered.
The
upon
the
atoning
work due to the influence of William
us that
Seymour “constantly
Bartleman concurs that
“3
So much
emphasis
in
fact,
that it became a
calls faith
article of Pentecostal
christology.”
From the
beginning
pentecostal
movement.
inclinations were christocentric. in William H. Durham
the Azusa Street
Mission,
a
theological
While its roots were
pneumatocentric,
who,
after
receiving
discovered he “could never
preach other sermon on the second work of
grace theory,”
had
held,
and continued to
hold,
this doctrine for a number of
years.
He
did,
however,
find
tension existed within the
its We find this tension
personified
his
Spirit baptism
at
an-
even
though
he
that he could
“preach
Christ
– Donald W. Dayton, “The Doctrine of the Baptism of the
and
Holy Spirit: Its Emergence
Significance, Wesleyan Theological Journal XIII: 114-126, Spring, 1978.
2Frank Ewart, The Phenomenon of Pentecost (World Aflame Press, 1975), p. 87.
3Frank Bartleman, p. 54.
4Walter Hollenweger, The Pentecostals, translated from the German by R. A. Wilson (Augsburg Publishing House, 1972), p. 313.
– 37-
11
and … holiness as never before.”I
As time went on and the
atoning
old holiness notions of sanctification
of the blessed
made the blood of Christ cleanse the sinner.
and more
revered,
look like a
cheapening
christocentrists,
the
separation the moment of
pardon
able to
completely
the sinful nature was an
operation sufficiency
when he insisted
gathering
around Him
solely William H. Durham
movement when
emphatically faith is in the Lord Jesus sanctification.3
3
of Christ was in
question. King
was
absolutely
that “atonement disassociated
is
God-dishonoring
struck the
responsive
maintained that the
object
Christ
work of Christ became more
began
to
death of Jesus. To the of
complete victory
over sin from
appear
less than
Again,
if the
extirpation
of
of the
Holy Spirit,
then the all-
right
from Christ and
indeed.”2 But
chord for much of the
of our
and not an
experience
of
The tension between christocentrism and
pneumatocentrism
movement broke in two. A
rising
doctrines of
sanctification,
pentecostals
had been
previously acquired
increased until the
pentecostal tide of
Jesus-piety,
brought
about this division. able to enter
holiness doctrines
centered and
consequently increasing
christocentrism Wesleyans,
distinct
theology
context of atonement-oriented ally began
to
recognize the doctrine of
sanctification with their own christocentric
and not
conflicting
Three-stage
the movement with their
intact. These doctrines tended to be
Spirit-
insulated the
Wesleyan
taking place
on the other
hand,
came into the movement with no
of their own.
They
were
heavily
influenced
that
aspects
in
particular,
wing
from the elsewhere. Non-
by
the thought
and
worship
and eventu-
of
Wesleyan pentecostalism,
were not
synchronized piety.
Tension mounted until
William H. Durham articulated a doctrine of sanctification that
1William H. Durham, “Personal Testimony of Pastor Durham,” The Pentecostal Testimony, June, 1911, quoted in Brumback, A Sound From Heaven.
2J. H. King, From Passover to Pentecost (Advocate Press, 1976), fourth edition, p. 7.
3Car1 Brumback, A Sound From Heaven (Springfield, MO: Gospel Publishing House, 1977), pp. 96-104.
– 38-
12
appropriate Once he
formally
was well within the characteristic group, however,
was
theologically diverse to understand and/or the finished work of
Calvary.1 costalism,
the
non-Wesleyans taught fection,
only
in their
rejection
experience
of
grace.
many
of them labeled “finished
of sanctification as a second
piety
of the
non-Wesleyans.
This
both too
unsophisticated
and
Durham’s doctrine of
cracked
pente-
a variety of ideas about
per-
work”,
which were united
definite
once the christocentrists resolved the tension be-
pentecostals,
another
point
within the
non-Wesleyan wing.
Two
years
after
R. E. McAlister
preached
a ser-
in Los
Angeles,
in which he formula for water
baptism
was
However,
tween themselves and the
Wesleyan of stress
appeared
the death of William H.
Durham, mon at the world-wide
camp meeting asserted that the correct
apostolic in Jesus’ name
and within
a year germinated
Godhead.
only.
This seed fell
upon
Frank Ewart’s fertile mind
into a revelation of the oneness of the
The
organic and
pentecostal
connection between the finished
versy
unitarianism
work contro- has
gone
unnoticed
by
his-
Only
movement
literally
literature-as
though
it
comes out of nowhere were,
as its
proponents David Reed has tried to amend causes within
pentecostalism pentecostalism’s
torians of the movement.2 The Jesus
in the
secondary
claim,
a revelation from God.
Recently,
this situation
for the oneness movement:
heavy dependence upon
by suggesting
three
1) the
Spirit
to
subjec-
1 Frank Ewart is an example. In spite of the fact he sat under Durham’s ministry, he claims in The Phenomenon of Pentecost that finished work sanctification as Durham was a
taught by
gradual “growth in grace” after the reception of Spirit baptism.
2Frank Ewart, The Phenomenon of Pentecost is, to my knowledge, the only person to have ever connected these two He describes Durham’s doctrine of sanctifi- cation as the first in a series of divine revelations phenomena. intended to “get this movement back in full doctrinal fellowship with the apostles.” The second revelation was McAlister’s sermon, and the third was Ewart’s own regarding the trinity.
– 39-
_
13
to new
ideas,
and
3) its
intensive
study
“And it is
precisely
in
Acts,” apostolic pattern
of baptism preponderance
of the
expression,
Although
Reed’s
all the data. It was not
pentecostalism unitarianism. The Jesus
non-Wesleyan,
christocentric Only-R.
E.
McAlister,
tively
confirm biblical truth,
2) its openness
of Acts above all other New Testament books.1
Reed
in the name of Jesus Christ and a high
case is most
sound,
observes,
“that we find the
‘in Jesus’ name’.”
it does not account for
as a whole that
gave
birth to
of the
Frank
Ewart,
and Glen
sanctification.2
Moreover, serious inroads into
ravaged
These facts make sense context of a
growing Jesus-piety costals.4 Once christocentic
Only
movement was the
produce
wing.
The
early
advocates of Jesus
John G.
Scheppe,
Cook-all used the term “finished work” to describe their views of
the oneness movement
Wesleyan-oriented
the infant Assemblies of God.3
only
if
they
are seen in the wider
failed to make pentecostalism,
but
among non-Wesleyan pente-
gained
their
independ-
to focus almost
everything
pentecostals
ence, they
found that their
willingness
in the Christian life
upon
Jesus left
very
little room for God the Father and God the
Holy Spirit.
The Jesus
Only
movement was an
solution to this tension. Ewart
2:9: if all the fulness of the Godhead
extreme and
yet logical stubbornly
on Colossians dwells
bodily
in
Christ,
then Jesus
stood
himself must be that Godhead.
1David Reed, “Aspects of the Origins of Oneness
costal-Charismatic
Pentecostalism,” Aspects of Pente-
Origins, ed. Vinson Synan (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1971), pp. 143-168.
2Vinson Synan, The Old Time Power (Advocate Press, 1973), pp. 138-141.
3Vinson Synan, The Holiness-Pentecostal Movement in the United States
(Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1971), pp. 147-156; Synan, The Old Time Power cate
(Advo-
Press, 1973), pp. 138-141.
4David Reed, “Aspects of the Origins of Oneness
costal-Charismatic
Pentecostalism,” Aspects of Pente-
Origins, ed. Vinson Synan, mentions christocentrism as a cause of the Jesus
Only movement, but does not notice its presence
within
costalism. He links to the American revivalistic pre-oneness from which pente- christocentrism, instead,
piety pentecostalism emerged. One wonders how this context directly affected unitarianism unless Jesus-centeredness was also a characteristic of pentecostal
early pentecostalism.
– 40-
14
fully
divine nor a
complete
A trinitarian scheme makes him neither
I
revelation
of God.l
In
conclusion,
currently operative
quate
to
interpret
the doctrinal Instead,
I have
proposed
I have shown that the
historigraphical among
historians of
pentecostalism
that
pentecostalism
as a movement that arose from the
pneumatocentric of holiness and related revivals. Once the movement
to
develop
however,
it
quickly began istics. New
people
from outside fluenced
greater
friction
developed affections until
pentecostalism
by
these tendencies. As christocentrism
between
thesis
is inade- developments
of the movement.
should be
perceived
inclinations
was
born,
christocentric
character-
Wesleyanism
were
heavily
in-
increased,
Spirit-
and Jesus-oriented was
finally
divided. The
apparent
but as I
that mised
cause of this bifurcation was the doctrine of sanctification;
have
shown,
the real cause was a rising tide of Jesus-piety-a piety
doctrine
of Christ’s shed blood.
believed the
Wesleyan the
power
The
strength
of sanctification
compro-
of this thesis is that it can account for the Jesus Only
movement. Heretofore the
appearance
costalism has
posed
a conundrum understood as an
outgrowth initiated the sanctification the narrative
history
asistant
for historians.
of oneness
pente-
If, however,
it is
of the same christocentrism that
controversy,
of
pentecostalism
more than
just
a
quirk
of
fate, therefore,
minister
who sat in services
exalted and
magnified
William H. Durham’s ceeded him as
pastor, words,
“the
people …
one of the
rough places
in is made smooth. It was
that the man who was in Los
Angeles,
who suc-
where in E. N. Bell’s
Jesus Christ and his
1 David Reed, “Aspects of the Origins of Oneness Pentecostalism,”
costal-Charismatic
Aspects of Pente-
Origins (Logos Books, 1975). For a complete statement of oneness theology see John Patterson’s excellent study, God in Christ Jesus (World Aflame Press, 1966).
– 41-
15
Blood as I had never
heard it done on the face of the
atoning earth”,l revealed,
was also the one to whom the
unity
of the Godhead was
Frank J. Ewart.
The
significance, historiography
then,
of William H. Durham
is that his doctrine of finished was the first outward manifestation of this
Jesus-piety been
growing
for some
time,
unnoticed
the
controversy
for
causing
as a group to cleave the movement
pentecostalism. By initiating Durham was
responsible costals
to jell enough not
enough
to avoid eventual selves.
for pentecostal
work sanctification
that had
and
unannounced,
within
over
sanctification,
the christocentric
pente-
in two, but theological
division
among
them-
lE. N. Bell, “Testimony of a Baptist Pastor,” The Pentecostal Testimony I (1), 27 March 1907. Quoted in A History of the Assemblies of God by Irvine John Harrison, ThD thesis, Berkeley Baptist Divinity School, 1954, pp. 128-136.
– 42-
16
