Studies in Perfectionism (The B.B. Warfield Collection)

Description

Benjamin B. Warfield’s Studies in Perfectionism is a comprehensive critique of theological movements advocating sinless perfection in Christian life. Through historical and doctrinal analysis, Warfield argues that perfectionist teachings—such as Wesleyan holiness, Oberlin theology, and the Keswick movement—distort the biblical relationship between justification and sanctification.

Key Themes

Separation of Justification and Sanctification: Warfield critiques perfectionist movements for dividing justification (God’s act of declaring sinners righteous) from sanctification (ongoing growth in holiness). He emphasizes that both are inseparable gifts of grace received through faith in Christ, not through distinct acts of faith.

Redefinition of Sin: Perfectionists, according to Warfield, diminish sin’s severity by defining it narrowly (e.g., only conscious or deliberate acts) rather than as any failure to meet God’s moral law. This leads to a “theoretical perfectionism” that ignores the persistent reality of human sinfulness.

Historical Analysis: The work traces perfectionism’s roots from Wesleyan teachings to 19th-century movements like the Oberlin School (Charles Finney, Asa Mahan) and European influences (e.g., Albrecht Ritschl, Theodore Jellinghaus). Warfield exposes how these groups blended Quietist mysticism, Pelagian self-reliance, and revivalist fervor.

Critique of Key Figures:

Ritschl: Warfield condemns Ritschl’s subjective view of justification as a denial of real guilt and atonement, reducing Christianity to ethical striving.

Finney and Mahan: The Oberlin theologians’ “New Divinity” is criticized for promoting human ability over divine grace, undermining Reformation principles.

Keswick/Higher Life Movements: These are shown to emphasize momentary “victory over sin” through faith, neglecting the gradual nature of sanctification.

Conclusion
Warfield’s work defends the Reformed view that sanctification flows from justification, both grounded in Christ’s finished work. He warns against perfectionism’s tendency to foster either complacency (by underestimating sin) or anxiety (by demanding unattainable standards). The book remains a pivotal resource for understanding the theological and historical tensions between Reformed orthodoxy and perfectionist movements.