Copyright holder: Tyndale University, 3377 Bayview Ave., Toronto, Ontario, Canada M2M 3S4 Att.: Library Director, J. William Horsey Library Copyright: This Work has been made available by the authority of the copyright owner solely for the purpose of private study and research and may not be copied or reproduced except as permitted by the copyright laws of Canada without the written authority from the copyright owner. Copyright license: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License Citation: Pedlar, James E. “Holiness Tradition.” In Encyclopedia of Christianity in the United States, edited by George Thomas Kurian and Mark A. Lamport, 1113-1119. Vol. 3. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2016. ***** Begin Content ****** TYNDALE UNIVERSITY 3377 Bayview Avenue Toronto, ON M2M 3S4 TEL: 416.226.6620 www.tyndale.ca Note: This Work has been made available by the authority of the copyright owner solely for the purpose of private study and research and may not be copied or reproduced except as permitted by the copyright laws of Canada without the written authority from the copyright owner. Pedlar, James E. “Holiness Tradition.” In Encyclopedia of Christianity in the United States, edited by George Thomas Kurian and Mark A. Lamport, 1113-1119. Vol. 3. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2016. [ Citation Page ] [ Page ] 1113 Holiness Tradition The Holiness Tradition is a body of Christian churches that emerged from the nineteenth-century Holiness Move- ment. The Holiness Tradition is marked by a particular approach to the doctrine of sanctification that emphasizes the necessity of a definite second work of grace subsequent to the conversion and regeneration of the Christian believer. Historically, this second work of grace, known by several names (entire sanctification, Christian perfection, perfec- tion in love, the second blessing, the higher Christian life), was presented as an instantaneous divine work, and was often associated with the baptism of the Holy Spirit. While the Holiness Tradition encompasses a particular group of evangelical denominations with Wesleyan theological com- mitments, the nineteenth-century Holiness Movement was a much broader revivalistic force that influenced religious life across nearly all Protestant denominations. Holiness denominations founded in the United States and still in existence include the Wesleyan Church (1843), the Free Methodist Church (1860), the Church of God (Anderson) (1880), and the Church of the Nazarene (1908). Other sig- nificant denominations with historical roots in the Holiness Movement and significant presence in the contemporary United States include the Salvation Army, the Brethren in Christ, and the Christian and Missionary Alliance. Many Pentecostal denominations, such as the Foursquare Church and the Assemblies of God, also acknowledge historical connections and continued theological affinities with the Holiness Tradition. The Holiness denominations, along with their associated missionary bodies and postsecond- ary institutions, represent an important segment of US Christianity. Origins The Holiness Tradition ultimately traces its roots to John Wesley (1703-1791), the founder of Methodism and leader of the evangelical revival in eighteenth-century England. Wesley was an Anglican priest and Oxford don who expe- rienced a dramatic spiritual transformation in 1738, after returning from two years of unsuccessful missionary service in Savannah, Georgia. Wesley, thereafter, embraced an evan- gelical doctrine of salvation, with a strong emphasis on the transforming power of grace and the possibility of living a holy life. As an itinerant preacher, he travelled the country, and established an effective system of interconnected small groups, in which converts could find guidance in their quest for “Christian perfection.” Wesley and the early Methodists were not seeking for sinless perfection, but a perfect or com- plete love for God and one’s neighbor. British Methodism remained a renewal movement within the Church of Eng- land during Wesley's lifetime, but became a separate church soon after his death. Methodism had spread to the American colonies in the 1760s, and the War of Independence provided the context for a separation from the Anglican Church prior to such separation in England. Thus the Methodist Epis- copal Church was established in the United States at the so-called “Christmas Conference” at Baltimore, in 1784. American Methodists continued to emphasize holy living in their preaching and teaching, but in the early decades of the nineteenth century their perfectionist teaching became more muted. The Holiness Movement thus began as a move among Methodists to reinvigorate the doctrine and experi- ence of sanctification. [ Page ] 1114 MOST DISTINCTIVE CONTRIBUTION OF HOLINESS MOVEMENT TO CHRISTIANITY IN THE UNITED STATES While holiness has always been something that all Christian churches advocated, a Holiness denominational family emerged from within Wesleyanism in the United States in the 1 800s that especially emphasized it. Whereas Catholics and Orthodox had tended to associate the pursuit of holiness within their monastic traditions, these holiness-leaning Protestants saw it as a second work of grace available for all. It is distinct from a first work of grace, salvation, but is also received by faith. Disagreement over whether this should be instantaneous or gradual resulted eventually in different denominations. The most distinctive holiness contribution was the wide influence, in three distinct streams, it has had throughout almost all of Protestantism. First, besides Methodism, some of the new denominations emerged from within the Mennonite and Quaker families or were started by those with Restorationist or Presbyterian roots. Second, the much larger Pentecostal movement emerged from it in the 1900s. (Notably, the difference between instantaneous or gradual understandings of holiness led to distinct Pentecostal denominations also). Third, the Holiness Movement in the 1800s had been very active in social reform (antislavery etc), and this aspect in the 1900s was preserved especially from within liberal Protestantism. Many earlier Holiness Movement emphases on personal piety are now muted, but its influence remains. The first half century of the movement, however, was markedly nonsectarian and interdenominational. The focus was not on defending Methodist doctrine or terminology, but fostering the lived experience of holiness. The epicenter of the early Holiness Movement was a weekly meeting in the home of Walter and Phoebe Palmer in New York City. This meeting, called the Tuesday Meeting for the Promo- tion of Holiness, was started in 1836 as a ladies meeting by Phoebe Palmer's sister, Sarah Lankford. Phoebe Palmer had her own sanctification experience in 1837, and soon took over the leadership of the Tuesday Meeting, which she retained until her death in 1874. The agenda was informal and conversational, and focused on sharing of testimonies. The meetings were eventually opened to men, and came to be attended by key Methodist leaders, such as Nathan Bangs, and L. L. Hamline, with whom the Palmers had sig- nificant close connections. However, influential figures from a variety of denominations were present in Palmers parlor, including Congregationalist and professor at Bow- doin College, Thomas Upham, Baptist evangelist Edgar Levy, Presbyterian William Boardman, who would soon pen an influential holiness book, and Episcopal physician Charles Cullis. The Tuesday Meeting was replicated in other cities, furthering interest and expectations regarding the possibilities of holy living. The Palmers Palmer further influenced the North American church through her popular books The Way of Holiness (1843), Entire Devotion to God (1845), and Faith and its Effects (1848), and her editorship of the widely circulated Guide to Holiness from 1864 to 1874. She is best known for her so- called “altar theology,” which is a useful example of Holiness Movement teaching. Using typological interpretations of Old Testament texts, Palmer argued that the way to holi- ness is to be found through offering oneself to God on the altar, and that Christ himself is the altar which sanctifies the gift thus offered. Stressing the instantaneous nature of this spiritual encounter, she also called it the “shorter way” to holiness, and summarized it in terms of a three-step pro- cess of entire consecration, faith, and testimony. Believing that the Bible promises that God will sanctify that which is offered to him on the altar of Christ, she stressed that those who have done so can believe that they are in fact deemed holy and acceptable. With such faith, the believer should “tarry at Jerusalem” (cf. Acts 1:4) and await the Pentecost of Spirit baptism. Finally, those thus sanctified must testify to their experience, or risk losing it. While not all holiness advocates would have used the same language and imagery as Palmer, they shared the emphasis on a “higher” Christian life, available to all through a second, definite, instanta- neous work of divine grace, associated with the baptism of the Holy Spirit, and intended to be shared with others through testimony. The Wesleyan holy living emphasis evident in Palmer was merged with the popular revivalism which had already been a driving force in US Protestantism. The leading US revivalist Charles G. Finney had also begun to espouse a perfectionist view of holiness in the late 1830s. The holiness teaching of Finney and his colleague Asa Mahan became known as Oberlin perfectionism, due to the connection of Finney and Mahan with Oberlin College in Ohio. Oberlin perfectionism was similar to Wesleyan teaching, although it sought to be less emotional and more ethically rigorous. By the 1850s, the Palmers were leading revivalists in their own right, holding mass meetings with great success in the United States, as well as Canada and Britain. Others such as Methodist revivalist James Caughey were contributing to the new holiness revivalism that was gathering steam at this time. In addition to preaching a pietistic message of personal holiness and using revivalist techniques, the Holiness Movement also had a strong social activist agenda. The leading issue at this time, of course, was the abolition of slavery, and Holiness figures were at the forefront of the abolitionist cause. Oberlin College was the first college in the United States to admit African American students, and was an important station on the underground railroad. The first Holiness denomination to form, the Wesleyan Methodist Church (1843), was established in protest over the failure of the Methodist Episcopal Church to embrace the abolitionist cause. The Free Methodist Church, estab- lished in 1860, was also strongly abolitionist, though this was one issue among others which caused their separation [ Page ] 1115 from mainstream Methodism. The Holiness Movement has also been identified with early feminist concerns. Oberlin Colleges was not only the first racially integrated postsec- ondary institution in the United States, but also the first to be coeducational. The movement to gain women the right to vote began with a meeting held in 1848 at the Wesleyan Methodist Church in Seneca Falls, New York. In eccle- siastical matters as well, the Holiness Movement pushed the boundaries of prevailing gender roles. Initially this was done through the use of female testimonies in mixed revival meetings and prayer gatherings, but such a move opened the door for further ecclesiastical credentialing. Phoebe Palmers Promise of the Father (1859) remains a landmark book in the debate over womens ministry in the church, and her views had a strong influence on the think- ing of Salvation Army founders William and Catherine Booth, in whose ranks women were able to hold any office. B. T. Roberts, founder of the Free Methodist Church, was a strong advocate of womens ordination, though his denomi- nation did not initially follow through on his radical ideas. Postwar Holiness activism would turn to a host of other social issues such as prostitution, alcohol, unemployment, and poverty. Layman’s Revival The zenith of the early Holiness Movement came in 1858, in what is sometimes called the “Laymans Revival,” due its origins in series of daily prayer meetings for business- men begun in New York City. This had been preceded in the fall of 1857 by a significant revival campaign led by Phoebe Palmer in Hamilton, Ontario, at which hundreds were converted. News of this local revival spread through the religious press, exciting and expectant atmosphere. The nonsectarian character of the Laymans Revival is evident in the fact that it was a Dutch Reformed businessman-turned- city-missionary Jeremiah Lanphier who began the prayer meetings at North Dutch Church, on September 23, 1857. Originally a weekly meeting, the growing attendance moti- vated a change to daily noon-hour meetings. The financial crisis of 1857, which reached its peakin the fall, undoubtedly contributed to the fervor, along with the news of the revival in Hamilton. Ten thousand people were gathering in New York City within six months, and similar meetings began in other cities. The remarkable and dramatic revival that ensued impacted every US State, adding a million converts to churches across the denominational spectrum. Adding to the momentum at this time was the publication of Wil- liam E. Boardmans The Higher Christian Life (1858), which popularized the Holiness message among non-Wesleyan Christians by avoiding typical theological terminology. Canada and the United Kingdom were also caught up in revival, leading to the establishment of significant British evangelical institutions such as the Salvation Army (1865) and the Keswick Convention (1875). PostWar Consolidation The Civil War interrupted the momentum of the holiness revival, but it did not stall it entirely, and the Holiness Movement continued to gather steam in the immediate post- war years. The character of the movement began to change, however, as it became organized and centered around mass revival meetings, as opposed to the earlier lay-led prayer and testimony meetings. The shift is marked by the establish- ment of the National Camp Meeting Association for the Pro- motion of Holiness, begun by Rev. John Inskip and others following the first National Camp Meeting in Vineland, New Jersey, in July 1867. Efforts now focused on organizing large annual camp meetings, with the largest drawing 25,000 to Sunday services at Manheim, Pennsylvania in 1868, followed by Round Lake, New York, in 1869. After this the “national” camp meetings were held at more than one location each year. The National Association, as it came to be known, was a loosely structured body of Methodist clergy. It had unquestioned leadership of the Holiness Movement until the 1880s. Its leadership and activities were more aligned with the northern United States, though it was not completely without influence in the South. At this time, though the leadership of the National Asso- ciation was Methodist, the Holiness Movement retained an interdenominational character. The camp-meeting atmo- sphere, free from the trappings of denominational church buildings, encouraged participation of both clergy and laity from outside the Wesleyan churches. The Guide to Holiness reported on revivals taking place involving Quakers, Bap- tists, Lutherans, Presbyterians, United Brethren, Moravians, and Mennonites. Boardman continued to spread the holi- ness message in the United States and the United Kingdom. Finney, now nearing the end of his life and career, was still preaching a perfectionist revival message. The National Association also enjoyed good relations with Methodist Church leaders, who at this point accepted the teaching of the Holiness Movement, even if there were some concerns about revivalistic methods. In short, the late 1860s and early 1870s were the peak of the nineteenth-century holiness revival. However, by the mid-1870s the seeds of a more sectarian and schismatic movement were being planted. Conflicts intensified between National Association leadership and Methodist Church leadership and pastors over the appropri- ateness of “special meetings” for the promotion of holiness. The debates became acrimonious, and spilled over into the religious press. The organized and clergy-led character of the National Association posed more of a concern for unsupportive Methodist clergy than the informal meetings of the prewar movement. The specter of schism began to be raised, though Inskip and his colleagues claimed they were only seeking to further Methodism’s well-known mission to spread scriptural holiness. The death of Phoebe Palmer in 1874 did not help the situation. Palmer, as noted, had been closely aligned with the Methodist establishment, and had attempted to work graciously with the National Association, despite some concerns. Opposition became increasingly vocal from voices such as that of Daniel Whedon, who con- tended that the Holiness Movement was guilty of introduc- ing novelties that were not authentically Wesleyan. These controversies, which would eventually contribute to the [ Page ] 1116 formation of Independent Holiness churches, continued into the late 1870s. “Come-Outers” and the Emergence of Holiness Churches Separation did not begin with National Association leaders, who continued to profess loyalty to Methodism in the 1880s, but with similar regional and local holiness organizations. The National Association had encouraged the formation of such bodies to aid in the support of holiness converts, who they worried would drift in established Methodist churches. The regional associations offered special services for the promotion of holiness, and published their own holiness periodicals. They also encouraged the formation of local “bands” of evangelists and home groups of professed holi- ness adherents. Eventually some of these local associations would buy their own properties and construct meeting halls, and even their own training schools. These efforts created the infrastructure for the emergence of the first holiness churches, even though they were initially intended to func- tion as supports standing alongside the established churches. While national association leaders such as Inskip enjoyed close ties with sympathetic eastern bishops, regional leaders did not have such connections. This buttressed the tendency of the regional and local leaders to view the established church with skepticism, and even identify it as a hindrance to the spread of the holiness message. Such views were already expressed by J. P. Brooks, leader of the Western Holi- ness Association (centered in Illinois), at the 1877 General Holiness Convention in Cincinnati. This convention was one of several failed attempts to unify the growing web of loosely connected Holiness associations springing up across the country. Brooks and others, such as Daniel Warner and James F. Washburn, were starting to adopt a new “Church of God” ecclesiology. The Church of God concept viewed sectarianism as a great sin and hindrance to the biblical mes- sage of holiness, which was not intended for one particular party, but for the universal church. Blended with this was a dispensationalist view of history, which suggested that the church was entering into the “age of the Spirit” in which all true believers, now “invisibly” present in the denomina- tional churches, would be called out to join the true, visible “Church of God.” This church would not be another sect, and would not be bound by rigid structures and doctrinal commitments, but would rather be joined by the experience of scriptural holiness. Such ecclesiological assumptions obviously made the move toward separation more attractive. In fact, in War- ners view, it became an imperative that those who had experienced the second work of grace “come out” from the sinful, sectarian established churches and join the “Church of God.” For this reason, these early separatists were called “come-outers.” Warner, having been active among sev- eral similar Church of God groups, founded the Church of God (Anderson) in 1881, intending it to be a move- ment of churches guided only by the Holy Spirit and the Bible. J. P. Brooks had stronger Methodist ties than Warner, and was involved with the Western Holiness Association (founded 1871), often writing in its periodical, the Banner of Holiness. His outspoken criticisms of the Methodist establishment got him tried for slander in an ecclesiastical trial, and though he was acquitted, Brooks began to support efforts toward the establishment of Independent Holiness churches. The Independent Holiness churches, mostly aris- ing out of the South-Western Holiness Association (Kansas and Missouri), embraced a view of the church that was very close to Warner's Church of God concept, and had a similar, loose structure. Washburn was another example of an early “come-outer,” active in the Southern California and Arizona Holiness Association (founded 1880). Independent churches were formed there as early as 1882, and although the motives were more pragmatic and less ecclesiological, a group of California Holiness Churches was eventually formalized. This body of churches shared many of the assumptions of the Church of God movements, and even went so far as to make entire sanctification the basis for church membership. The California Holiness Churches later merged with the Pilgrim Holiness Church in 1946. Another Holiness church that began to form in the 1880s is the Christian and Missionary Alliance. Although the Alliance did not emerge out of a regional or local holiness network, and had no formal ties with holiness organiza- tions, its early history was shaped by many Holiness Move- ment connections and resonances. Founder A. B. Simpson, originally a Canadian Presbyterian, ended up establishing an independent church in New York City in 1882. He also founded two mission organizations in 1887: the Christian Alliance and the Evangelical Missionary Alliance. Neither organization was originally intended to function as a church home for its members, who were expected to maintain membership in their own churches. The two organizations merged to form the Christian and Missionary Alliance in 1897. The Alliance, although still eschewing denominational status, began planting churches in the 1890s. Simpson was mentored by Boardman, whose book The Higher Christian Life was instrumental in Simpsons sanctification experience, and Charles Cullis, under whom Simpson received a faith- healing experience. He articulated the influential formula of the “fourfold gospel” which emphasized Christ as savior, sanctifier, healer, and coming king. His views on holiness differed from both the later Wesleyan-Holiness emphasis on eradication of the sin nature and from the Keswick under- standing, which taught the suppression of the sin nature. The latter two aspects of the fourfold gospel anticipated the early Pentecostal movement, with which Simpson had sig- nificant connections and influence. The Christian and Mis- sionary Alliance maintained holiness ties into the 1920s. The Holiness Movement heritage of the denomination began to be downplayed in the 1930s; but recent scholars such as Bernie Van De Walle have sought to recapture this aspect of the Alliance’s diverse theological heritage. Meanwhile, the mainstream Holiness Movement lead- ers, including those of the National Association, continued to hold out hope that the Methodist churches themselves should be “holiness churches,” and that all of the move- ments efforts to revive Methodism were not in vain. Thus [ Page ] 1117 they rejected the separations of the “come-outers,” not least because it tainted their own efforts and supported the charges their opponents, who were now claiming that all special efforts at promoting holiness would lead to schism. In reality, these early Holiness denominations of the 1880s anticipated the coming wave of separations in the 1890s and early twentieth century. Some holiness evangelists, such as William Clay Morrison, were able to walk a fine line between extensive Holiness Movement involvement and Method- ist credentials, but such examples increasingly became the exception. Other independent churches soon began to take shape, some of which formed into small federations of churches, such as the Heavenly Recruit Association (Philadelphia, 1885), the Central Evangelical Holiness Association (New England, 1890), and the Association of Pentecostal Churches of America (Brooklyn, 1895), among others. Many of these bodies would eventually be merged into two major Holiness groups which emerged in the early twentieth century: the Church of the Nazarene and the Pilgrim Holiness Church. Phineas F. Bresee (1838-1915), founder of the Nazarenes, was a lifelong Methodist, who served successfully in the Methodist ministry for thirty-seven years. Beginning his pastoral service in Iowa, Bresee moved to California in 1883, and there he became increasingly involved with the organized Holiness Movement. After having his request to be granted supernumerary status denied by the Confer- ence, Bresee withdrew from Methodist ministry. He initially became involved with the Peniel Mission in 1894, a ministry to the urban poor; but he soon went on to found a new church, called the Church of the Nazarene, in 1895. As was the case with all holiness churches at the time, Bresee and the early Nazarenes focused their mission on the poor, though Bresee moved away from a “mission” style outreach toward creating a church which would support poor families. The church met with significant growth, continuing the revivalist style of services of the Methodist camp-meeting tradition. By 1907 there were dozens of Nazarene churches and thou- sands of members. A series of mergers took place in 1907 and 1908 (with the Association of Pentecostal Churches of America, the Holiness Church of Christ, the Holiness Association of Texas, and the Pennsylvania Conference of the Holiness Christian Church), and thus the denomination officially recognizes 1908 as the date of its founding. Martin Wells Knapp (1853-1901) was also reared in the Methodist Church, and served for several years as a Meth- odist pastor in Michigan, preaching relentlessly against the perceived worldliness and laxity of the Methodist people, and advocating perfectionist holiness teaching. Knapp with- drew from Methodist ministry in 1886 and engaged in full-time revival work, founding and editing The Revival- ist, and writing several books which were popular among holiness advocates. After a move to Cincinnati in 1891, he worked with several local Holiness Associations and bands before forming the International Holiness Union and Prayer League in September 1897, a body which became Pilgrim Holiness Church in 1922, following a series of mergers. The Pilgrim Holiness Church eventually merged with the Wesleyan Methodist Connexion in 1968 to form the Wes- leyan Church. Knapp also founded God’s Bible School in Cincinnati, and was influential among the most radical of Holiness groups, such as the Metropolitan Church Associa- tion, or “Burning Bush” movement. His teaching included some elements which were becoming more common in later Holiness Movement teaching, and which anticipated the rise of Pentecostalism, such as faith healing and an expectation that the return of Christ was imminent. Remembering that the Free Methodists, Salvation Army, and Wesleyan Methodists were well established by this time, it is clear that this later wave of Holiness churches in the 1890s signal the full-scale denominationalization of the Holiness Movement at the turn of the century. The Holiness-Pentecostal Stream As has already been noted, some streams of later Holiness Movement thinking anticipated early Pentecostalism, and historians such as Donald Dayton and Vinson Synan have mapped the many theological and historical connections between the two movements. From the very beginning of the Holiness Movement, the foundational teaching of Pheobe Palmer had associated Pentecostal baptism in the Spirit with the “second blessing” of entire sanctification. In the 1880s and 1890s, figures such as Simpson and Knapp were emphasizing faith healing and an expectation that the return of Christ was imminent, both hallmarks of Pentecostalism. Another late Holiness Movement development which laid groundwork for Pentecostal theology came in the 1890s, as radical Holiness teachers such as Benjamin H. Irwin (Iowa) and Ralph C. Horner (Canada) began to argue that baptism in the Spirit was something separate from entire sanctification. They thus added a “third blessing” to the way of salvation—the “baptism with fire” as an empowering gift for ministry. The two key figures normally identified as the founders of classical Pentecostalism in the United States, Charles Parham and William Seymour, both came out of a Holiness background. Parham began his ministry in the Method- ist Episcopal Church, before coming into contact with radical elements of the Holiness Movement in the 1890s, and leaving the Methodist ministry in 1895. He began an independent holiness ministry including an emphasis on faith healing, and founded Bethel Bible School in Topeka, Kansas, in 1900. Parham, after studying the book of Acts with his students, became the first to claim that the “gift of tongues” or glossolalia was the only initial evidence of having received the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Shortly after coming to this conclusion, glossolalia was experienced among the Bible school students. By 1905 he had relocated an established another Bible school in Houston, Texas, where Seymour became his student. As an African Ameri- can, Seymour was prohibited by Texas law from studying in Parhams classroom, but Parham allowed him to sit in the hallway and listen. Seymour had been moving in Method- ist and Church of God circles since 1895. After studying Parhams new Pentecostal theology, he set out for Los Ange- les in early 1906, having been offered a pastoral position at a [ Page ] 1118 Holiness Church. He was immediately rejected by the other leadership of the church because he preached the “initial evidence” doctrine, though he had not yet experienced glos- solalia himself. After some home services, at which he and others spoke in tongues, Seymour began the services at 312 Azusa Street, an abandoned African Methodist Episcopal Church building. The ensuing revival, centered at Azusa Street, is commonly reckoned as the fountainhead of classi- cal Pentecostalism. Many other early Pentecostal leaders, as well as a significant portion of the membership, had similar Holiness backgrounds. Thus some scholars now speak of the “Holiness-Pentecostal Movement” as a way of stressing the many connections between the later Holiness Movement and early Pentecostalism. Holiness Encounters: Modernism and Fundamentalism In the first half of the twentieth century, the Holiness Tra- dition continued to establish itself as a family of churches. The history of Holiness churches in the twentieth century is tied up with broader trends in American Protestant history, including the FundamentalistorModernist contro- versy, and later the emergence of postwar neo-Evangeli- calism. As was the case with the conservative Protestant tradition more generally, Holiness Churches initially sided with the Fundamentalists in the 1920s, and the influence of early Fundamentalism remained strong in the 1930s and 1940s. At the same time, there was an awareness, particu- larly among Holiness theologians, that Fundamentalisms Reformed scholastic framework did not necessarily sit well with the Methodist theological ethos. Thus, though there was an undoubted infiltration of Fundamentalist thinking into Holiness churches, there was also an undercurrent of ambivalence. This complicated relationship is seen in the introduction of the concept of “inerrancy” into the 1928 Nazarene article of faith concerning scripture. Inerrancy, though it had a longer history in conservative US Reformed circles, was not part of earlier Holiness and Methodist theology. The origi- nal Nazarene article of faith was indebted to the Methodist Twenty-Five Articles, which was in turn inherited from the Anglican Thirty-Nine Articles, stressing the inspiration of the Bible as divine revelation of all things necessary to salva- tion. In Fundamentalist circles, these terms were deemed insufficient to clarify the character of scripture against the attacks of higher criticism. Thus, in the 1920s, the Nazarenes were considering the introduction of the term “inerrancy” into their doctrine. In the end, the 1928 General Assem- bly adopted the term, but rather than endorsing a blanket statement of inerrancy, it specified its meaning in historic Anglo-Methodist terms. Scripture was described as “iner- rantly revealing the will of God concerning us in all things necessary to our salvation.” This use of the term “inerrancy” placated early Fundamentalist concerns, but kept atten- tion focused on matters of faith and practice, rather than a sweeping statement of inerrancy on all matters. The Free Methodists took a similar stance on the inerrancy issue. The Salvation Army articles, which have remained unaltered since 1878, make no reference whatsoever to inerrancy. On the other hand, the Wesleyans adopted a more robust statement of scriptures inerrancy. The diversity of responses to the Fundamentalist debates about scriptures authority demonstrate the Holiness Tradi- tions ambivalent embrace of Fundamentalism in the early twentieth century. The Holiness Tradition had been formed as a movement of reform within the Methodist tradition, and thus its aim was not primarily to fend off theological liberalism, but to return to a vision of primitive Wesleyan spirituality, believed to be the scriptural way of salvation. Now, as independent churches, they were facing a new challenge in the form of biblical criticism and scientific challenges to received Christian interpretations of the Bible. On the one hand, Holiness churches were not about to side with Modernists; on the other, there was an awareness that the Fundamentalist theology had been shaped by Calvinist minds. The delicacy of this balance of concerns has retained a tension in Holiness circles, as evidenced by the fact that the Nazarenes entertained and rejected a call to expand their definition of inerrancy in the early twenty-first century. As conservative Protestants attempted to extricate them- selves from Fundamentalism and form a new “neo-Evangel- ical” coalition in the postwar years, the Holiness Tradition joined in those efforts. When the National Association of Evangelicals formed in 1942, Holiness churches were part of the new organization, and have remained active in its ranks to the present day. The new Evangelicalism attempted to remain theologically conservative while avoiding the narrow sectarian perspective of Fundamentalism. Twentieth-century Evangelicalism was open to ecumenical cooperation, but generally resistant to the agenda of the Ecumenical Move- ment, as represented by such organization as the World Council of Churches and the National Council of Churches of Christ. The Holiness Tradition has been one stream of this twentieth-century Evangelical coalition, which has at times struggled to maintain its integrity in view of the many differ- ent traditions which contribute to its ongoing life. Holiness churches also continued to find ways to coop- erate with one another and promote a common Holiness identity. The National Holiness Association continued to be a central organization, though its name changed to the Christian Holiness Association in 1971, and the Christian Holiness Partnership in 1998. The Inter-Church Holiness Convention was started by Wesleyan evangelists H. Robb French and H. E. Schmul in 1951, motivated in part by a sense that the Holiness Movement was losing its focus and identity. It became a home for more conservative, reviv- alistic voices within the Holiness Tradition. The National Association of Holiness Churches, also formed by French, was established in 1967 to provide credentials for leaders of churches associated with the Convention. The Holiness Churches have continued to mature theo- logically in the late twentieth century, aided by several sig- nificant developments. Colleges and seminaries established by the Holiness churches continued to mature and establish themselves as legitimate centers of Christian undergradu- ate and theological education. The Wesleyan Theological Society held its first meeting in 1965, and has continued to [ Page ] 1119 meet annually since that time, publishing its own scholarly journal. Several landmark books on Holiness history sought to recover the pre-Fundamentalist ethos of the nineteenth and early twentieth century. Timothy L. Smiths Revivalism and Social Reform appeared in 1957, narrating the progres- sive social agenda of the Holiness Revivalists. Donald W. Daytons Discovering an Evangelical Heritage (1976) tackled similar subject matter on a more popular level, and his Theo- logical Roots of Pentecostalism (1987) mapped the ways in which Holiness theology laid foundations for the emergence of classical Pentecostalism. Another notable work was Mel- vin Dieter's The Holiness Revival of the Nineteenth Century (1980), which was published a few years after Charles E. Jones’s more sociologically based study, Perfectionist Persua- sion (1974). Jones went on to publish a string of important bibliographical guides to the study of the Holiness Tradition. These foundational works fostered further scholarship on the key figures of nineteenth-century Holiness history. Another essential aspect of the theological maturation of the Holiness Tradition has been the renaissance in scholar- ship on John and Charles Wesley, which began in the 1960s with the production of the scholarly edition of The Works of John Wesley, a project that continues today. Mainline Meth- odist scholars such as Albert Outler and Frank Baker gener- ated serious historical and theological interest in Wesleys life and theology, which had been neglected due to a percep- tion, even among Methodists, that Wesley should be viewed primarily as an evangelist and organizer, rather than a theo- logian. Scholars from the Holiness churches have joined in these efforts, which in turn have led to greater understand- ing of the variations between Wesleys theology and that of the Holiness Tradition. Opinion remains divided regarding the degree of variation between Holiness theology and early Methodist theology, and the merit of the nineteenth-century theological developments. Recent Developments Late twentieth- and early twenty-first-century Holiness churches have continued to struggle to maintain a unique identity amid the other forces at work in American Prot- estantism. Broader Evangelical and even Fundamentalist concerns continue to have some purchase in the Holiness constituency, partly through parachurch organizations and influential personalities in popular Evangelicalism. On the other hand, Holiness intellectuals have been attempting to push back against some of these currents and recover a more authentically Holiness perspective. A stir was caused in the Movement when Keith Drury, Wesleyan scholar and church leader, gave an address to the 1995 Presidential Breakfast of Christian Holiness Partnership entitled, “The Holiness Movement is Dead.” Drury argued that the Holiness Move- ment had sought respectability and subsumed itself into mainstream Evangelicalism, failing to retain its theological focus on a Wesleyan understanding of Holiness. The address was subsequently published followed by a string of responses and discussion. More recently, the Wesleyan-Holiness Study Project, commenced in 2004 under the leadership of Kevin Mannoia, is evidence of the continued sense that Holiness identity is in danger of being lost. Representatives from the Church of the Nazarene, Free Methodist Church, Salvation Army, Church of God (Anderson), Brethren in Christ, Evan- gelical Friends, and Christian and Missionary Alliance all took part, along with Pentecostals from the Shield of Faith Church, Church of God in Christ, International Church of the Foursquare Gospel, and International Pentecostal Holi- ness Church. The group produced the Holiness Manifesto in 2006 as an attempt to rearticulate the Holiness message for the contemporary context. Out of this project has emerged the latest effort at Holiness cooperation, the Wesleyan Holi- ness Consortium, which has very similar membership to the denominations participating in the study project. The out- come of such efforts remains to be seen. However, regard- less of the future of the Holiness Tradition, it is presently an important segment of American Evangelicalism, and its history is integral to the story of US Christianity. References and Resources Brown, Kenneth O. 1999. Inskip, McDonald, Fowler: “Wholly and Forever Thine.” Early Leadership in the National Camp Meeting Association for the Promotion of Holiness. Hazleton, PA: Holiness Archives. Dayton, Donald W., and Douglas M. Strong. 2014. Rediscovering an Evangelical Heritage: A Tradition and Trajectory of Integrat- ing Piety and Justice. Second Edition. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic. Dieter, Melvin Easterday. 1980. The Holiness Revival of the Nine- teenth Century. Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press. Ingersol, Stan. 2014. Past and Prospect: The Promise of Nazarene History. Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock. Jones, Charles Edwin. 1974. Perfectionist Persuasion: The Holiness Movement and American Methodism, 1867-1936. ATLA Mono- graph Series 5. Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press. ------. 2005. The Wesleyan Holiness Movement: A Comprehensive Guide. 2 vols. ATLA Bibliography Series 50. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press. Kostlevy, William and Gari-Anne. Patzwald. 2001. Historical Dic- tionary of the Holiness Movement. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press. Mannoia, Kevin W., and Donald Thorsen. 2008. The Holiness Mani- festo. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans. Smith, Timothy L. 2004. Revivalism and Social Reform: American Protestantism on the Eve of the Civil War. Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock. Synan, Vinson. 1997. The Holiness-Pentecostal Tradition: Char- ismatic Movements in the Twentieth Century. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. Van De Walle, Bernie A. 2009. The Heart of the Gospel: A. B. Simp- son, the Fourfold Gospel, and Late Nineteenth-Century Evangeli- cal Theology. Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications. —James E. Pedlar ***** This is the end of the e-text. This e-text was brought to you by Tyndale University, J. William Horsey Library - Tyndale Digital Collections *****