Is it wise to make holiness a specialty in the church and in Christian effort?

Is it wise to make holiness a specialty in the church and in Christian effort?

1. It is. The Bible makes it a specialty. It is the grand objective point of the whole Christian system -- the center where all the lines of truth meet. The commands, promises, invitations, exhortations, and counsels all run to this "central idea" of Christianity.
Bishop Foster says: "It is the truth glowing all over, welling all through, revelation; the glorious truth which sparkles and whispers, and sings and shouts in all its history, and biography, and poetry, and prophecy, and precept, and promise, and prayer. The great central truth of the system." -- Christian Purity, p. 80.

We hardly need say, in harmony with this, that Christian perfection, or "perfecting the saints," is a specialty in Methodist theology and history. Why, then, may it not be pushed to the front, or why should it be deemed contraband in our meetings and church work?

2. The expediency of making it a specialty is seen in its importance, and in its essential relation to the whole work of God. When this prospers, every other interest of religion prospers; and when this is neglected, all other interests suffer, and none other can compensate for it. Making a specialty of this doctrine and experience, more than any other cause, produces all manner of precious fruit, both in heart and life hence, in its highest gospel form, holiness ought to be the specialty of the whole church.

3. To make it a specialty, or give it prominence, does not involve the neglect of other truths, as many seem to suppose. There can be no true presentation of holiness, without presenting its correlated truths in the Gospel. A moment's thought will show that human depravity, the atonement, the work of the Spirit, faith, obedience, and the conversion of sinners, all stand intimately related to it.

4. This is the most common and popular form of objection to efforts for the spread of holiness in the church and world. This opposition stands against distinctively teaching it, or giving it prominence by word or pen. Making holiness a specialty, of course, involves presenting it distinctly, distinctively, and persistently, and this is the main point of the objection. Mr. Wesley said "Let all our preachers make a point (specialty) to preach Christian perfection to believers constantly, strongly, explicitly." -- Plain Account, p. 169.

5. No one excels, except he makes his pursuit, for the time, a specialty. College and Seminary professors understand this for in teaching it is deemed essential. Why should "perfect love." as a specialty, be an exception. "Love" is declared to be "the fulfilling of the law," and love out of a pure heart the end of the commandment.

6. The cry of "fanaticism," "extravagance," "division," and "secession," as against making this subject a specialty, is rather too wholesale, and too common to frighten intelligent, thinking people. These have been the staple so long with infidels, worldly men, and cavilers, it is unseemly for those who call themselves Christians to adopt them.

7. The assertion that those who make this subject a specialty become "narrow," and are "men of one idea," is not disparaging to any man's character. If a man has an idea large enough to take in all other true ideas, he has no occasion to abandon it, nor need he fear being made "narrow"

by it. One idea, and that a good one, is better than no ideas at all, or than a number of very poor ones. Holiness is the grandest and most comprehensive idea in the universe.

8. The world is indebted to men of one idea for its inventions, its discoveries, and its great moral and religious reformations. Columbus was a man of one idea, and he discovered a new world. John Wesley resolved to be "a man of one Book," and "a man of one work." What has been the result? St. Paul proclaimed his devotion to one idea. "This one thing I do." "For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ and him crucified." "Teaching every man, in all wisdom, that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus." Was the apostle wise?

Newton, Herschel, Shakespeare, Howard, Luther, Fulton, Morse, Edison, and Longfellow, were all specialists. Were they "narrow," and lacking in breadth because of their several, one great idea?

9. The Methodist Church has always had her specialists. Do they become "narrow"? Did Dr. Durbin become narrow because he made the missionary cause a specialty for more than a score of years? And how in regard to Drs. Whedon, Curry, Vincent, and Kynett? On the other hand, who believes that the Missionary Society, Sabbath School, Church Extension, and Quarterly Review, have suffered in their interests because these men have made them specialties?

Suppose, now, that some make, in study and effort, the grand "central idea of Christianity" a specialty, and devote themselves fully and intensely to the work of "perfecting the saints," or spreading holiness through the church, will that belittle them, make them "narrow," or be out of harmony with the policy of the church which makes a large use of specialists as book agents, presiding elders, bishops, editors, secretaries, presidents of colleges, &c.? Where do we look for the deepest penetration, or the highest skill? Where?