I’ve been reading and writing a lot about love lately.  In the midst of all that mental activity, this song by The Avett Brothers has become a favorite of mine.  It is deep and beautiful and moving – “The Ballad of Love and Hate.”  Enjoy:

It is a well known fact that a pitfall of “holiness” traditions (those that trace their spiritual heritage to John Wesley) is legalism.  Rules rule our lives.  We often find “holiness” in a list of what NOT to do.  I’ve heard it said, “don’t drink, smoke, cuss, or chew – or go out with girls that do.”  Leagalism.  Rules.

One reason for this slide into legalism is that rules are easy.  If I cannot drink or smoke or go to movies and that equals holiness, then it is easy to know if I am holy and easy to see who else is.  (Though people may drive way out to Wickenburg to avoid being caught watching Gone with the Wind – a true story from my own family history.)  Lists and rules make Christian perfection easy.

But – and this is a big but – but that is not what Christian perfection is really about.

In my denomination we have a Manual.  It is a document that describes our history, doctrine, and polity.  It also includes (to my great disappointment) a section called “The Covenant of Christian Conduct.”  This section contains twelve pages of rules.  Rules about how to live a holy life.  It says that these rules “should be followed carefully and conscientiously as guides and helps to holy living” (section 33.2, p 48).

Do you know what admonition I failed to read in that entire section of rules?  The command (or law or rule or whatever you want to call it) ominously missing is the only one that belongs: “love.”

If those twelve pages don’t betray us as a denomination of legalism, I don’t know what would.  What makes this even worse is that it is not true to Wesleyan holiness – the very thing we claim to be about.  Read what Wesley wrote in A Plain Account of Christian Perfection about adding expectations and rules to the one rule of love:

‘But he does not come up to my idea of a perfect Christian.’  And perhaps no one ever did, or ever will.  For your idea may go beyond, or at least beside the Scriptural account.  It may include more than the Bible includes therein…Scripture perfection is, pure love filing the heart, and governing all words and actions.  If your idea includes anything else, it is not Scriptural; and then no wonder, that a Scripturally perfect Christian does not come up to it.  60

Worth repeating:  “Scripture perfection is, pure love filing the heart, and governing all words and actions.  If your idea includes anything else, it is not Scriptural.” My denomination has gone well “beyond” by adding twelve pages of “anything else” but has completely omitted the one command that matters:  “Love God & love others.”

Here is another important and relevant section of A Plain Account:

It were well you should be thoroughly sensible of this, – the heaven of heavens is love.  There is nothing higher in religion; there is, in effect, nothing else; if you look for anything but more love, you are looking wide of the mark, you are getting out of the royal way.  And when you are asking others, ‘Have you received this or that blessing?’ If you mean anything but more love, you mean wrong; you are leading them out of the way and putting them upon a false scent…[Y]ou are to aim at nothing more, but more of that love described in the thirteenth chapter of the Corinthians.  You can go no higher than this , till you are carried into Abraham’s bosom. 99

Worth repeating:

“If you look for anything but more love, you are looking wide of the mark.”

“If you mean anything but more love, you mean wrong.”

“You are to aim at nothing more, but more…love.”

And yet we aim at twelve pages – and the command to love is nowhere in them. What a shame.

I would be quite happy to have a “Covenant of Christian Conduct” in the manual if the entire section contained only these words:

Christian Perfection “is nothing higher and nothing lower than this, – the pure love of God and man; the loving of God with all our heart and soul, and our neighbor as ourselves.  It is love governing the heart and life, running though all our tempers, words, and actions.” ~John Wesley

I don’t know what else is necessary.  Anything more than love is simply legalism.

May the God of Grace help us get away from our silly rules and fill us all with perfect love.

One of the biggest sticking points, when people consider Wesley’s teaching on Christian perfection, is the issue of being sinless; living without sin.  The problem seems to be that we all seem to continue to make mistakes in our lives.  This level of perfection – living without sin – seems unattainable.

In fact, this should not be an issue, for Wesley, according to what he wrote in A Plain Account of Christian Perfection, did not expect anyone to live a sinless life:

“Not only sin, properly so called (that is, a voluntary transgression of a known law), but sin, improperly so called (that is, an involuntary transgression of a Divine law, known or unknown), needs atoning blood…Therefore sinless perfection is a phrase I never use, lest I should seem to contradict myself.” 53

Note definitions.  Wesley makes a distinction between two kinds of “sin.”  Most people I know call any  wrongdoing “sin.”  Wesley, however, seemed to prefer to use the word “sin” only for a truly rebellious action, “a voluntary transgression of a known law.”  Other transgressions or mistakes (or missing the mark), according to Wesley, should not be called “sin.”

But the issue at the center of Christian Perfection is not avoiding sin but of “love governing the heart and life, running through all our tempers, words, and actions.” People filled with love will still make mistakes (call that sin, if you wish), but according to Wesley:

“all men are liable to mistake, and that in practice as well as in judgment.  But they do not know, or do not observe, that it is not sin, if love is the sole principle of action.” 53

So, in a sense, if we make all our choices from the motivation of love by the power of the Holy Spirit, we cannot “sin” (in the “proper” use of the term).  However, mistakes will still haunt us.  Wesley clearly states his views on ongoing “mistakes” (call it “sin” if you must) in this statement:

“For neither love nor the ‘unction of the Holy One’ makes us infallible; therefore, through unavoidable defects of understanding, we cannot but mistake in many things.  And these mistakes will frequently occasion something wrong, both in our temper, and words, and actions….The holiest of men still need Christ, as their Prophet…they still need Christ as their King…they still need Christ as their Priest… Even perfect holiness is acceptable to God only through Jesus Christ.” 82

In the same section of argument, Wesley continues:

“But even these souls [who are filled with perfect love] dwell in a shattered body, and are so pressed down thereby, that they cannot always exert themselves as they would, by thinking, speaking, and acting, precisely right…yet as even in this case, there is not a full conformity to the perfect law, so the most perfect do, on this very account, need the blood of atonement, and may properly for themselves, as well as for their brethren, say, “forgive us our trespasses.”  84

These statements seem worth repeating: “The holiest of men still need Christ…Even perfect holiness is acceptable to God only through Jesus Christ.”  And “ sinless perfection is a phrase I never use.”  No, we are all prone to mistakes, wrongdoing, and in constant need of Christ, no matter how “holy” we may be.

All of us need to utter the wonderful little phrase, “forgive us our trespasses.”

I recently read John Wesley’s little book, A Plain Account of Christian Perfection, written in 1777 as a summary of his teaching on Christian perfection (also knows as entire sanctification).

As a result of growing up in a Wesleyan denomination (Nazarene) and of my studies as a theology student, have come to terms with the doctrine – but others are not so sure: denying it outright or misunderstanding it badly or both.

So, what is Christian perfection (or entire sanctification)?  What did Wesley mean when he used the words?  This quote sums it up wonderfully:

Christian Perfection “is nothing higher and nothing lower than this, – the pure love of God and man; the loving of God with all our heart and soul, and our neighbor as ourselves.  It is love governing the heart and life, running though all our tempers, words, and actions.”  A Plain Account of Christian Perfection 55

That last bit is outstanding:  “It is love governing the heart and life, running through all our tempers, works, and actions.” Wow.  How simple.  How to the point.  How beautiful.  Love.  It is all about love.  (In fact, another synonym for Christian perfection is “perfect love.”)

This is the basic idea:  once someone begins to follow Christ, they grow more like him every day (the process of sanctification).  At some point, after continually seeking God, one may enter a state where  “love [is] governing the heart and life….”  When all we do is motivated from love, that is perfection.  At this point there is still growth – getting better and better at loving God and loving others.  Perfection is not about actually being perfect (only God can do that), rather it is about the perfect motivation from which we live our lives: Love.

I’ll be writing several posts about entire sanctification over the next few days (possibly weeks).  I’ll address some important nuances, misunderstandings, and so on.

Until then, join me in praying that God might fill us all with perfect love.

According to Onelook (my go-to online dictionary), a Famine is:

▸ noun: a severe shortage of food (as through crop failure) resulting in violent hunger and starvation and death
▸ noun: an acute insufficiency

Well, that last one hits it on the head.  ”An acute insufficiency.”  I think that defination could be written: “Severely empty.”  Well, that’s been my blog lately and, apparently, my mind as well.  Sorry about that.

The good thing about most famines (and many things described as acute) is that they come to an end at some point.  Hope with me that my blog famine will soon be over.

I’m sure that my readers, both of you (yep, that includes you, Mom), would appreciate it.

Today,  August 24th, 2009, marks the 5,000th day I’ve been married.  Happy Anniversary Shar!

I’ve not blogged for a long time.  Too long.  I enjoy writing and thinking and expressing what is going on in my mind.  Lately I’ve just not had much to say.

But today I became aware of a piece that President Jimmy Carter wrote and it struck a nerve,  I loved what he had to write because I agree so strongly.  And I hated what I read so much because the kind of injustice he describes is a type that really gets up my nose.

It is the issue of women and ministry.  I read President Carter’s piece and thought it was so well worded that I’d simply allow you to read it yourself.  I hope you enjoy it, are challenged by it, and that you’ll make a stand against such injustice.

The Words of God Do Not Justify Cruelty to Women

Discrimination and abuse wrongly backed by doctrine 
are damaging society, argues the former U.S. president

By Jimmy Carter

July 12, 2009

This editorial was published in the July 12, 2009, edition of The Observer.


“Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status …” (Article 2, Universal Declaration of Human Rights)

“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28)

I have been a practising Christian all my life and a deacon and Bible teacher for many years. My faith is a source of strength and comfort to me, as religious beliefs are to hundreds of millions of people around the world.

So my decision to sever my ties with the Southern Baptist Convention, after six decades, was painful and difficult. It was, however, an unavoidable decision when th e convention’s leaders, quoting a few carefully selected Bible verses and claiming that Eve was created second to Adam and was responsible for original sin, ordained that women must be “subservient” to their husbands and prohibited from serving as deacons, pastors or chaplains in the military service. This was in conflict with my belief – confirmed in the holy scriptures – that we are all equal in the eyes of God.

This view that women are somehow inferior to men is not restricted to one religion or belief. It is widespread. Women are prevented from playing a full and equal role in many faiths.

Nor, tragically, does its influence stop at the walls of the church, mosque, synagogue or temple. This discrimination, unjustifiably attributed to a Higher Authority, has provided a reason or excuse for the deprivation of women’s equal rights across the world for centuries. The male interpretations of religious texts and the way they interact with, and reinforce, traditional practices justify some of the most pervasive, persistent, flagrant and damaging examples of human rights abuses.

At their most repugnant, the belief that women must be subjugated to the wishes of men excuses slavery, violence, forced prostitution, genital mutilation and national laws that omit rape as a crime. But it also costs many millions of girls and women control over their own bodies and lives, and continues to deny them fair access to education, health, employment and influence within their own communities.

The impact of these religious beliefs touches every aspect of our lives. They help explain why in many countries boys are educated before girls; why girls are told when and whom they must marry; and why many face enormous and unacceptable risks in pregnancy and childbirth because their basic health needs are not met.

In some Islamic nations, women are restricted in their movements, punished for permitting the exposure of an arm or ankle, deprived of education, prohibited from driving a car or competing with men for a job. If a woman is raped, she is often most severely punished as the guilty party in the crime.

The same discriminatory thinking lies behind the continuing gender gap in pay and why there are still so few women in office in Britain and the United States. The root of this prejudice lies deep in our histories, but its impact is felt every day. It is not women and girls alone who suffer. It damages all of us. The evidence shows that investing in women and girls delivers major benefits for everyone in society. An educated woman has healthier children. She is more likely to send them to school. She earns more and invests what she earns in her family.

It is simply self-defeating for any community to discriminate against half its population. We need to challenge these self-serving and out-dated attitudes and practices – as we are seeing in Iran where women are at the forefront of the battle for democracy and freedom.

I understand, however, why many political leaders can be reluctant about stepping into this minefield. Religion, and tradition, are powerful and sensitive area to challenge.

But my fellow Elders and I, who come from many faiths and backgrounds, no longer need to worry about winning votes or avoiding controversy – and we are deeply committed to challenging injustice wherever we see it.

The Elders have decided to draw particular attention to the responsibility of religious and traditional leaders in ensuring equality and human rights. We have recently published a statement that declares: “The justification of discrimination against women and girls on grounds of religion or tradition, as if it were prescribed by a Higher Authority, is unacceptable.”

We are calling on all leaders to challenge and change the harmful teachings and practices, no matter how ingrained, which justify discrimination against women. We ask, in particular, that leaders of all religions have the courage to acknowledge and emphasise the positive messages of dignity and equality that all the world’s major faiths share.

Although not having training in religion or theology, I understand that the carefully selected verses found in the holy scriptures to justify the superiority of men owe more to time and place – and the determination of male leaders to hold onto their influence – than eternal truths. Similar Biblical excerpts could be found to support the approval of slavery and the timid acquiescence to oppressive rulers.

At the same time, I am also familiar with vivid descriptions in the same scriptures in which women are revered as pre-eminent leaders. During the years of the early Christian church women served as deacons, priests, bishops, apostles, teachers and prophets. It wasn’t until the fourth century that dominant Christian leaders, all men, twisted and distorted holy scriptures to perpetuate their ascendant positions within the religious hierarchy.

I know, too, that Billy Graham, one of the most widely respected and revered Christians during my lifetime, did not understand why women were prevented from being priests and preachers. He said: “Women preach all over the world. It doesn’t bother me from my study of the scriptures.”

The truth is that male religious leaders have had – and still have – an option to interpret holy teachings either to exalt or subjugate women. They have, for their own selfish ends, overwhelmingly chosen the latter.

Their continuing choice provides the foundation or justification for much of the pervasive persecution and abuse of women throughout the world. This is in clear violation not just of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights but also the teachings of Jesus Christ, the Apostle Paul, Moses and the prophets, Muhammad, and founders of other great religions – all of whom have called for proper and equitable treatment of all the children of God. It is time we had the courage to challenge these views.

Jimmy Carter was U.S. president from 1977-81. The Elders are an independent group of eminent global leaders, brought together by Nelson Mandela, who offer their influence and experience to support peace building, help address major causes of human suffering and promote the shared interests of humanity.

I would like to direct you to read Eugene Cho’s short but important “i am more than a stereotype” blog post.  Be sure to watch all three (short) videos.  It is powerful stuff.

I love the title of this blog.  So for those of you curious as to what that word sounds like, here you go:  How to pronounce pietrisycamollaviadelrechiotemexity

And for it’s meaning, especially for how it is such a good title for my blog, you should look at the meaning of pietrisycamollaviadelrechiotemexity.

My blog has been on the heavy side lately, so here is a change.  This is a recipe I came up with for a homemade version of the Frappé coffee drink found at a major coffee retailer…if you know what I mean.  I think it is outstanding and saves me a good $4 a pop by making it myself at home.

Homemade Caramel Frappé-Matteo

How to assemble:

Dissolve 1 oz. sugar in 6 oz. coffee and freeze in an ice-cube tray until solid, at least 2 hours (I find that mixing the sugar with the coffee helps the coffee-cubes break up with a more pleasant texture in the blender).  Once frozen, combine cubes with the rest of the ingredients in a blender and frappé until smooth.

By the way, this also works with milk.  Substute all the “coffee” places above for “milk” and you get a coffee-free cream-based version.