Friday, December 26, 2014

Hannah W. Smith, Sign Gifts and Pentecostal Roots: part 4 of 21 in Hannah W. Smith: Keswick Founder, Higher Life Preacher, Quaker Quietist and Universalist Heretic

In line with the Quaker background she shared with her husband, both Mrs. and Mr. Smith were believers in the continuation of miraculous gifts for the present day as opposed to being cessationists, advocates of the Biblical truth that the sign gifts ceased with the completion of the canon of the Scripture and the death of the Apostles in the first century.  The Smiths were consequently involved in the Faith or Mind Cure movement which advocated miraculous and non-medical means for healing and laid the foundation for Keswick continuationism and Pentecostalism.  Mrs. Smith knew Quakers who had received Faith Cures.[1]  She was the instrument through which various people received such Cures herself,[2] healing several who were “close to hysteria,” although she “tried her powers, in vain, on a victim of cancer,”[3] since cancer is clearly a physical disease that is not removed when someone is no longer hysterical.  She stated:  “With Faith Healing I have had a great deal of experience.”[4]  Hannah wrote concerning a sick friend:  “I wish she could get hold of faith healing[.]”[5]  She herself used a “Mind Cure for sea-sickness[.]”[6]  She was acquainted with that prominent evangelist of the Faith Cure,[7] Dr. Charles Cullis, from at least 1871,[8] and ministered with Cullis on various occasions,[9] since “Dr. Cullis of Boston [was] a friend and fellow evangelist” of the Smiths.[10]  After all, Cullis surely had miraculous powers;  he healed Mrs. Smith’s daughter of indigestion through the techniques of the Faith Cure,[11] although he was unable to heal himself—ever—of a serious heart condition he endured for decades.[12]  Indeed, Cullis was such a firm supporter of Mr. and Mrs. Smith and their Higher Life preaching that he sought to restore Robert after Mr. Smith’s fall due to his preaching of erotic Spirit baptism.[13]  As a Quaker, Hannah W. Smith was naturally an advocate for the continuationism of the Faith or Mind Cure.
Mrs. Smith was likewise a “friend” of the “New Thought teacher . . . Mrs. Caldwell,”[14] illustrating the close relationship between the nineteenth century New Thought or Mind Cure movements from which arose the Christian Science of Mary B. Eddy, with its spiritualism and laws of healing, and the Faith Cure.[15]  Hannah noted:
I find that spiritualists have all the “baptisms” and “leadings” and “manifestations” that [non-spiritualistic but continuationist] Christians have, with precisely similar symptoms. The same “thrills,” the same “waves” or currents of life, the same spiritual uplifts, the same interior illuminations; they even see similar visions of Christ, and hear similar interior voices . . . taken in themselves, it is utterly impossible to distinguish between them.[16]
Mrs. Smith’s daughter also “visited . . . with the intention of studying her doctrine, the famous female prophet, Mrs. Mary Baker Eddy.”[17]  Indeed, Hannah Smith’s description of the Faith Cure makes its identity with the Mind Cure of New Thought evident:
[O]ur faith lays hold of spiritual forces which are superior to natural forces and which therefore can overpower them. . . . [W]e become able to avail ourselves of powers that He has put at our disposal in the spiritual realm. I expect His real will for us is health always, but if we disobey natural laws His will is thwarted, and it is only by bringing in spiritual laws that we can overcome the evil tendencies caused by sin[.] . . . [J]ust as a wire does not create the electric current but only draws it down in certain directions so our faith does not create health but only draws the vitality of the spiritual realm down into our vessel. It is wonderful what faith will do.[18]
Thus, the Faith or Mind Cure works based on “law,” and prayer is not, as it is in the Bible, a means of healing through the petitioning of a personal, sovereign, and loving God in Christ for His gracious physical mercies—rather, prayer is the instrument of healing insofar as by it people are “brought into harmony with those laws” of healing.[19]  Anticipating the Word of Faith doctrine of positive confession creating positive realities and negative confessions creating negative realities, Mrs. Smith consequently counselled:  “[L]et me advise thee not to talk of thyself as being old.  There is something in Mind Cure, after all, and, if thee continually talks of thyself as being old, thee may perhaps bring on some of the infirmities of age.”[20]  She wrote:  “[T]he mind cure . . . is only the science by which the faith cure works,”[21] a fact generally recognized by objective writers of her day.[22]  No objective disjunction and sharp division between an allegedly Christian Faith Cure movement and a clearly pagan and evil Mind Cure movement can be established by objective historiography—Hannah W. Smith and other early continuationist Higher Life leaders certainly made no such division.
Indeed, the Mind or Faith Cure was simply the application to the body of the Higher Life or Keswick doctrine of sanctification by faith alone:  “[T]he mind cure . . . [or] faith cure . . . is simply doing on the plane of physical health what we did on the plane of sin when we reckoned ourselves dead to it and alive only to God.  If the atonement covers sickness as well as sin this [is] all . . . true.”[23]  Hannah’s rejection of self-examination was helpful as a support for the Faith and Mind Cure, for not only should one refrain from spiritual self-examination, but from physical self-examination also, so symptoms that were “cured” by the Faith Cure but were still present could be ignored:  “Self examination of one’s physical symptoms or spiritual symptoms is about as disastrous as anything.”[24]  Unfortunately, the adoption of the Faith and Mind Cure in Hannah’s family led to unnecessary and tragic early death.  Hannah Whitall Smith’s sister Mary Thomas died of breast cancer at the age of fifty-three in 1887, leaving behind her husband and eight children.  Mary believed she was cured by the Faith Cure, consequently refused to go to a doctor to deal with her cancer, and consequently died.  In the words of Hannah W. Smith:
The one great grief to all of us is that six months [earlier] she could have been cured [by conventional medicine], when she first began to think she had the trouble, but then she trusted the Lord for healing and fully believed it was done and went on believing this all summer so fully that she never said anything to anyone about it.[25]  And all the while [her cancer] was growing as rapidly as it was possible for it to do . . . my sister is simply the victim of the faith cure teaching.[26]
Hannah’s preaching at a camp meeting exemplified the union of the Faith Cure and the Higher Life in her theology:
In our hotel I found one of the housekeepers who was a devoted adherent of mine and who told me of a Holiness Camp Meeting in progress in the country outside of the city. . . . Just as I neared the ground . . . I saw a Philadelphia lady whom I used to see at meetings there long ago coming to the pump for water! I spoke to her and she recognized me at once, gave me a hearty welcome, and then introduced me to the leaders of the meeting and to all the dear saints right and left. I received a perfect ovation! They had all apparently read my book “The Christian’s Secret,” and were full of it, and of the blessing it had been to them “next to their Bibles” [as] the “constant companion of their devotions,” the “greatest help of their lives” etc. etc. And they fairly overwhelmed me with their delight at seeing me, dear souls.
They would hear nothing but that I should stay and preach for them in their evening meeting, which I did, under a large tent. It was altogether quite a refreshing experience. . . . They had a meeting for faith healing, and insisted on my going to it to teach them! . . . I told them . . . I would give them Dr. Cullis’ teaching, and that seemed to satisfy them.[27]
Mrs. Smith was far from being alone in combining the Faith or Mind Cure and the Higher Life;  rather, preparing the way for Pentecostalism, “belief in and the witness to miraculous divine healings attended the holiness movement at every turn.”[28]  Her Quaker continuationism was by no means restricted to a belief in continued Apostolic healings;  she noted that “speaking with tongues . . . is . . . apt to come to [Higher Life] Revivals, [and] I have known a great many instances.”[29]  She likewise thought:  “[It is] the privilege of Christians to receive the same Baptism now . . . [as was received] on the day of Pentecost. . . . There is nothing in the Bible which suggests that this gift [of Spirit baptism as experienced on Pentecost] should cease[.] . . . [T]he early Friends must have known and experienced it, and . . . this accounts for their wonderful success.”[30]  After all, for Mrs. Smith, if not for Scripture, only elite believers—those only who have entered into the Higher Life—have the Holy Spirit,[31] so a post-conversion second blessing comparable to Pentecost was obviously of tremendous importance.  Mrs. Smith was a committed continuationst because of her Higher Life Quakerism, and was consequently very important Pentecostal precursor.



This entire study can be accessed here.





[1]              Letter to Priscilla, August 14, 1882, reproduced in the entry for August 12 of The Christian’s Secret of a Holy Life, Hannah W. Smith, ed. Dieter.
[2]              Mrs. Smith testified that she was the instrument of several healings, the character of which illustrate well many of the healings practiced in the Keswick and Pentecostal movements.  Hannah recounts:
On one occasion I had a dear friend who was very nervous.  She used to cry on the smallest provocation and about things which had no personal element in them, except that they upset her nerves. . . . She and I attended a little prayer meeting . . . she announced to us at the beginning of the meeting that we were to devote that meeting to her[.] . . . I confess that I had not much expectation that praying would do her any good, as I thought it was a physical condition which probably could never be alleviated.  But when the time came we all knelt down to pray, and of course I knelt with them.  I supposed that there would be fervent prayers offered for our friend by the others, and I did not really intend to pray myself at all, but to my astonishment the whole little company prayed all round in turns and never mentioned her case.  It seemed to me that this was very impolite, and, in fact, unkind, when she had thrown herself so upon our sympathy, and so mainly, with the idea that she might not be disappointed, and simply out of an impulse of politeness and kindness, when the rest had finished I prayed for her;  but, I confess, I had not the slightest idea that anything would come of it, except that her feelings would be smoothed by the recognition of her need.  Imagine my astonishment when we rose from our knees and she turned to me and said, “Hannah, thy prayer is answered;  I am cured.”  And as a fact she was cured from that time.
        Another case was once when I was attending a meeting.  After I had spoken, a woman rose from the middle of the meeting and said, “If that lady who has just spoken will come and lay hands on me and pray for my recovery I shall be healed of a throat trouble that has caused me great suffering for many years, and for which the doctors declare they can do nothing.”  I thought to myself, “How little that woman knows how unbelieving I am with regard to faith healing.  I am certain my prayers would do her no good.”  And, in fact, I was rather amused at her ignorance, and had to cover my face to hide a smile.  The meeting went on for a little longer, and by the time it closed I had entirely forgotten the incident, and began to talk to a friend beside me, when someone came hastily in and said, “Mrs. Smith, that woman is waiting for you to come and pray for her, and you must come at once, for she says her throat is very bad.”  Out of kindness I went, but I said to the woman as I entered the room, “You have sent for me to pray for you, but I haven’t a particle of faith that it will do the least bit of good.”  “Yes it will,” she replied;  “it will cure me.  Kneel right down here beside me, and lay your hand on my throat and ask God to heal me, and I know I shall be healed.”  Out of kindness I did as she wished, although I confess it seemed to me something of a farce.  However, when we rose from our knees, to my amazement her voice was changed, and she declared her throat was cured.  I hear from her quite often afterwards, and the story was always the same, that the cure was complete.
        As I bade the woman farewell, she said, “Now, Mrs. Smith, you have the gift of healing, and you ought to exercise it.” . . . Another instance . . . was in the case of a friend who had become . . . a victim of the opium habit.  One day when we were talking together, she said, “I believe if you would pray for me, I could be cured of this habit.”  I myself had no idea that it could be done, but, of course, when a person wanted me to pray for them [sic], I should not think of refusing, so I keeled down beside her wheel-chair and prayed, and the result in her case also was a complete cure.  (pgs. 253-256, Religious Fanaticism, Strachey)
Many other instances of the Faith Cure were, without a doubt, as supernatural as those Mrs. Smith experienced, and as a result of the employment of similar means.
Notwithstanding working several Faith Cures herself, elements of skepticism were engendered in Hannah concerning the Faith Cure as she saw that the Cure failed to cure disease.  For example, having heard of Dr. Charles Cullis, whom she called “a most delightful Christian doctor,” she assembled a few dozen sick people at her house so that he could come and heal them.  He failed to heal anybody at all (pgs. 262-263, Religious Fanaticism, Strachey).  The fact that the Faith Cure led to the death of her sister Mary Thomas must also have brought doubts into Hannah’s mind.  Nevertheless, she never renounced or opposed the Faith or Mind Cure but continued to believe and preach that there was truth in the practice, and she continued to recommend the Cure to others.
[3]              Pgs. xv-xvi, A Religious Rebel:  The Letters of “H. W. S,” ed. Logan Pearsall Smith.
[4]              Pg. 262, Religious Fanaticism, Strachey.
[5]              Letter to Anna, May 15, 1878, reproduced in the entry for August 22 of The Christian’s Secret of a Holy Life, Hannah W. Smith, ed. Dieter.
[6]           Pg. 89, A Religious Rebel:  The Letters of “H. W. S,” ed. Logan Pearsall Smith, reproducing Letter to her daughter, Mary Costelloe, September 2, 1886.  Not surprisingly, the Mind Cure did not work, and Hannah W. Smith still suffered from a horrible sea-sickness.
[7]              Hannah describes the views of Cullis, and his working of a Faith Cure, in connection with a positive confession of healing, on her nephew Tom Whitall, who had suffered from overwork.  The Cure did not completely cure him, and it did not work at all at first.  In any case, the partially cured “overwork” of the Faith Cure is hardly the reattached limbs or raising of the dead performed by Christ and His Apostles.  Mrs. Smith wrote:
We really have been stirred up on this faith healing question lately. You may have heard me speak about Saidee’s brother Tom as having broken down from overwork several years ago. For four years now he has been doing every thing possible to recover his health, but all in vain. His last venture was a voyage to the Cape of Good Hope, but he came back worse than he went.
When Dr. Cullis was here a week or two ago, Tom felt drawn to try the faith cure, as every thing else had failed, and Dr. Cullis prayed with him twice and told him to say he was healed. He began to say it, and, poor fellow, he had a hard battle, for a whole week there was no sign of any improvement. His mother and I were immersed in the deepest sympathy with him, and we all had to fight for our faith together. . . After a week, however, Tom began to improve, and there has been a most wonderful change in him in every way, and he is full of praise to the Lord. It has, of course, made a great stir among all our circle here, for Tom was always a great favorite. He has gone on to Boston now to spend a little time with Dr. Cullis to have his faith strengthened, and perhaps to help the Dr. a little in his faith work.
If he really does get entirely well I believe I will have to give up and adopt Dr. Cullis’ view of the subject. He says Matt. 8:17 teaches clearly that Christ bore our sicknesses just as much as He bore our sins, and that we may be delivered from the one by faith precisely as we are delivered from the other! If this is true, it would revolutionize the church! I am not convinced yet that it is true, but I confess that passage looks wonderfully like it. I will mail thee some little books about it. Ask thy sister Charlotte and thy cousin Mary Agnes to compare Matt. 8:17 with James 5:14, 15 and see whether they get any light on the subject for themselves.
It would be glorious, would it not, if Christians universally could dispense with all human doctors and be cured by the Great Physician alone, and could show the world a continual miracle of healing? Dr. Cullis thinks all disease is from the devil, and is a direct attack from him upon God’s children, just like temptation to sin is, and must therefore be met in the same way. There is a good deal of Scripture that seems to support his view. (Letter to Priscilla, May 7, 1882, reproduced in the entry for August 12 of The Christian’s Secret of a Holy Life, Hannah W. Smith, ed. Dieter)
Nonetheless, surely Tom’s Faith Cure, while nothing like Apostolic healing, was very grand—at least until some days later, when it became apparent that he was not cured at all, causing Hannah doubts:
I went up to that invalid friend’s who has been trusting for faith healing for so long. We had a little Bible class in her sick room. She does not seem any better. And yet she sticks to the testimony that she is healed, since that is what Dr. Cullis told her she must do. It does not seem right to me somehow.
The fact is this faith healing matter grows more and more perplexing all the time. You remembers [sic] that funny friend of mine Elisabeth Nicholson, who went with us to the prayer meeting about President Garfield? She is not particularly consecrated, except in quite an ordinary fashion; she does not believe in the “Higher Life” at all, and she is very much afraid of fanaticism. And yet the other day she wrote me as follows[:] “The 31st. of May, sitting waiting for the dinner bell to ring, I talked to the Lord like this, “Lord, you know the muscles of my back are weak, and cause me much pain. You know I have inherited this through two generations; that I have been very indifferent about healing, making it an excuse for not visiting or doing anything I did not want to. But now, if it will honor you and if it will give me more strength to work for you, Lord Jesus, then I ask thee to heal me instantaneously.” It was done! From that moment I have not had a pain; nor even the soreness which often made me shift my position. It no longer seems like me, but somebody else! I have done my hardest work since then without pain. [Note:  At least this is the testimony of this lady, unexamined medically, from the standpoint of two weeks later—a time frame in which Tom Whitall also thought he was cured.]
Now what are we to think when such saints as some I know can’t get healed with all their praying and all their trusting? There is a secret somewhere that we have not fathomed yet, I am convinced. Meanwhile, I would advise every sick person to try this way of prayer and faith anyhow. It cannot hurt, and it may be a grand success. My nephew Tom Whitall is not well yet. He thought he was for a few days, and was very jubilant over it, but his trouble all came back, and he has been having a hard conflict. Now he has gone to a water cure to fight it out. My heart just aches for him. I wish I understood! (Letter to Priscilla, June 16, 1882, reproduced in the entry for November 14 of The Christian’s Secret of a Holy Life, Hannah W. Smith, ed. Dieter)
Indeed, Mrs. Smith’s “invalid friend” was still not better many months later, despite “declaring . . . she was healed that day” so long ago, despite still “trusting for faith healing” many months later, despite having “Dr. Cullis pray for her,” and despite believing “teaching of all kinds on the subject of faith”—despite all this, her Faith Cure “fail[ed] . . . utterly” (Letter to Priscilla, August 14, 1882, reproduced in the entry for August 12 of The Christian’s Secret of a Holy Life, Hannah W. Smith, ed. Dieter).  However, despite its failures, and despite the lack of exegetical evidence for it, Hannah W. Smith was so far from being willing to denounce the Cure of Cullis as a delusion that she still concluded that she “would advise every sick person to try this way” of the Faith Cure anyway.
[8]              See her Letter to Frank, May 16, 1871, reproduced in the entry for June 5 of The Christian’s Secret of a Holy Life, Hannah W. Smith, ed. Dieter.
[9]              See, e. g., her narrative of her “Framingham, Massachusetts meeting sponsored by Dr. Charles Cullis,” or her description of her ministry with “Dr. Cullis at his conference” in 1879 and her commending the “little book issued by Dr. Cullis” there, in her Letter to a Friend of August 8, 1876 & Letter to a Friend, August 17, 1879, reproduced in the entries for August 2-3 & September 20 of The Christian’s Secret of a Holy Life, Hannah W. Smith, ed. Dieter.
[10]          Pg. 66, A Religious Rebel:  The Letters of “H. W. S,” ed. Logan Pearsall Smith.
[11]            Pg. 39, A Religious Rebel:  The Letters of “H. W. S,” ed. Logan Pearsall Smith, reproducing Letter ot Mrs. Henry Ford Barclay, April 13, 1877.
[12]            Pg. 131, Theological Roots of Pentecostalism, Dayton.
[13]            Pg. 32, A Religious Rebel:  The Letters of “H. W. S,” ed. Logan Pearsall Smith, reproducing Letter to Mrs. Anna Shipley, August 8, 1876.
[14]            See Letter to Sarah, March 7, 1881 & Letter to Sister, July 28, 1881, reproduced in the entries for October 24 & 28 of The Christian’s Secret of a Holy Life, Hannah W. Smith, ed. Dieter.
[15]            Interestingly, Hannah noted:  “I find that spiritualists have all the ‘baptisms’ and ‘leadings’ and ‘manifestations’ that [continuationist] Christians have, with precisely similar symptoms. The same ‘thrills,’ the same ‘waves’ or currents of life, the same spiritual uplifts, the same interior illuminations; they even see similar visions of Christ, and hear similar interior voices . . . taken in themselves, it is utterly impossible to distinguish between them” (Letter to Carrie, July 31, 1882, reproduced in the entry for November 17 of The Christian’s Secret of a Holy Life, Hannah W. Smith, ed. Dieter).
[16]            Letter to Carrie, July 31, 1882, reproduced in the entry for November 17 of The Christian’s Secret of a Holy Life, Hannah W. Smith, ed. Dieter.
[17]            Pg. 128, Unforgotten Years, Logan Pearsall Smith.
[18]            Letter to Mary, November 1, 1882, reproduced in the entry for November 27 of The Christian’s Secret of a Holy Life, Hannah W. Smith, ed. Dieter.
[19]            Letter to Mary, November 1, 1882 & December 8, 1882, reproduced in the entries for November 27 & December 1-2 of The Christian’s Secret of a Holy Life, Hannah W. Smith, ed. Dieter.
[20]            Pg. 187, A Religious Rebel:  The Letters of “H. W. S,” ed. Logan Pearsall Smith, reproducing Letter to her Daughter, Mary Berreneson, March 5, 1907.  The date of the letter validates that Mrs. Smith continued to believe in the value of the Mind or Faith Cure for the course of her lifetime;  her faith in the law of the Faith or Mind Cure was no passing fancy.  Note also the connection between her affirmation of the Mind Cure and of the Word of Faith idea of positive and negative confession.
[21]            Letter to Anna, July 1, 1885, reproduced in the entry for December 28 of The Christian’s Secret of a Holy Life, Hannah W. Smith, ed. Dieter.  Hannah made these remarks concerning her sister Mary Thomas, who trusted in the Mind and Faith Cure, but saw “the mind cure . . . fai[l] . . . [a]nd . . . the faith  cure . . . fai[l]” (Letter to Sister, March 15, 1885, reproduced in the entry for December 28 of The Christian’s Secret of a Holy Life, Hannah W. Smith, ed. Dieter), so that she died of a breast cancer that the medical science the gracious God has allowed men to discover could have cured.
[22]            For example:
Christian Scientists and Faith Healers are closely affiliated. . . . [T]hey have a common foe—the scientist and the Christian;  and a more or less common practice—reaching, in a somewhat similar way, about the same sort of results. . . . [T]he adherents of the two systems often meet together in conventions, and the laity are to some extent interchangeable. . . . The two systems . . . converge in practice. (pg. 249, “Christian Science and Faith Healing,” Clyde W. Votaw. New Englander and Yale Review.  New Haven, CT:  Tuttle, Morehouse & Taylor, 1891.  However, Votaw recognizes that there are ways in which the Christian Scientist and Faith Cure advocate “diverge” markedly in their “theory,” the manner in which they speak of their systems.)
[23]            Letter to Anna, July 1, 1885, reproduced in the entry for December 28 of The Christian’s Secret of a Holy Life, Hannah W. Smith, ed. Dieter.  The “newer gospel” of the faith cure, Hannah’s letter affirms, teaches that “suffering and sorrow” are not part of God’s plan for the body, just as sorrow and suffering must be eliminated from the spiritual life for a perpetual state of happiness—the secret of a happy life.  However, Hannah also notes that she entertains doubts about the validity of the Mind or Faith Cure, despite the fact that it is the necessary consequence of her Keswick or Higher Life theology of sanctification by faith alone, chiefly because the Faith Cure does not seem to work.  It was not evident to her that her theology of sanctification by quietistic faith alone also was contrary to the truth of God.
[24]            Letter to Mary, May 12, 1878, reproduced in the entry for August 24 of The Christian’s Secret of a Holy Life, Hannah W. Smith, ed. Dieter.
[25]            Mary Thomas’s action, a result of her confidence in the Faith Cure, was an instance of misplaced faith and of sinful disobedience to use proper means to preserve her life.
[26]            Pgs. 97-98, Remarkable Relations, Barbara Strachey.  Italics in original.  Hannah likewise queried while her sister was still alive:  “Why should you have all this to suffer when you already had so much?  And why the mind cure has failed with you . . . why the faith cure has failed too?  And why, if you are going to get well, you do not get well faster?”  (Letter to Sister, March 15, 1885, reproduced in the entry for December 26 of The Christian’s Secret of a Holy Life, Hannah W. Smith, ed. Dieter).
[27]            Letter to Priscilla, August 14, 1882, reproduced in the entry for November 19 of The Christian’s Secret of a Holy Life, Hannah W. Smith, ed. Dieter.  While she publicly preached the Faith Cure at the camp meeting, in her private letter to Priscilla she voiced reservations that she did not make public:
I could not bear to upset their faith by telling them of the practical difficulties I see in the subject[.] . . . But I can tell you my heart ached to hear some poor invalids there declare they were healed, when it was perfectly plain to everyone else that they were not. I do not know what will be the outcome of all this agitation on the subject of faith healing. In all parts of the church it is being made prominent, and enough wonderful results follow it to excite a continually increasing interest. And yet there are far more failures than successes, and I dread the reaction. For these failures are nearly always with the most devout Christians, and it is an awful strain on their faith.
She noted later:  “It’s no wonder that doctors are provoked at the way Christians ignore the very first laws of health, and because of it bring such misery and make so much trouble for others” (Letter to Priscilla, 1883, reproduced in the entry for December 16 of The Christian’s Secret of a Holy Life, Hannah W. Smith, ed. Dieter).
[28]            Pg. 68, Aspects of Pentecostal-Charismatic Origins, ed. Vinson Synan.
[29]            Pgs. 260-261, Religious Fanaticism, Strachey.  Hannah recounts:
[I]n one case it went so far that two apparently sensible people allowed their young daughter of thirteen years to go out to China . . . as a missionary, she not knowing a word of Chinese, but being led to speak gibberish in this way, and they all believed that when she got there the Chinese would understand.  What really happened when she did get there, however, I have never heard, but I presume she had to come home again. (pgs. 260-261, ibid).
By the time Mrs. Smith composed those papers published posthumously by Ray Strachey, having increased in her skepticism with age, Mrs. Smith thought tongues were a “fanaticism.”
[30]            Journal, October 29, 1866, reproduced in the entry for February 11, The Christian’s Secret of a Holy Life, Hannah W. Smith, ed. Dieter.
[31]            As Hannah preached at the Broadlands Conferences:  “God wishes us [Christians] to have the Holy Spirit . . . [W]hy do we not?  We do not accept [Him].”  The Conferences taught:  “The permanence of the presence of the Holy Spirit is a surer sign of a high degree of spiritual life than any other. . . . Let us pray for the Spirit of God Himself to come to us . . . [t]he highest life[,] [to be] one with God” (pgs. 190-195, The Life that is Life Indeed:  Reminiscences of the Broadlands Conferences, Edna V. Jackson.  London:  James Nisbet & Co, 1910.  Italics in original.).  While the permanent presence of the Holy Spirit is the sign of spiritual life, a life possessed by all believers (cf. Romans 8:9), for Mrs. Smith and the Broadlands Conferences such a permanent presence is emphatically restricted to those in the Higher Life alone.

7 comments:

KJB1611 said...

By the way, I provide a great deal of evidence demonstrating that the Keswick/Higher Life movement was crucial to the rise of Pentecostalism and made the development of that movement essentially inevitable in "Keswick Theology, Continuationism or Anti-Cessationism, and the Rise of the Pentecostal, Charismatic, and Word of Faith Movements: Vignettes of Certain Important Advocates of Keswick or Higher Life Theology and their Beliefs Concerning Spiritual Gifts and Other Matters: William Boardman, Andrew Murray, Frederick B. Meyer, Evan Roberts and Jessie Penn-Lewis, A. B. Simpson, John A. MacMillan, and Watchman Nee" here:

http://faithsaves.net/soteriology/

Tyler Robbins said...

KJB1611:

I'm doing a lot of research into Oneness Pentecostalism. A Oneness author I'm reading specifically attributes the rise of Pentecostalism to a renewed emphasis on the Spirit in the late 19th Century. He cites R.A. Torrey specifically. Just wanted to let you know that Pentecostals themselves would agree with you on their indebtedness to the Keswick movement.

Cheers!

Jim Camp said...

Good material.
Thanks

KJB1611 said...

Dear Tyler,

Thanks for the comment. Torrey was actually the closest pre-Pentecostal to the Pentecostal view of Spirit baptism. Paul King, professor at Oral Roberts University, has also done work showing the Keswick/Higher Life influence on the Word of Faith movement (of course, from his perspective, this makes the Word of Faith theology more orthodox, rather than the Keswick theology worse.)

Also, I have some lectures on Oneness in the college course on Trinitarianism I taught here:

http://faithsaves.net/trinitarianism/

and this:

http://faithsaves.net/jesus-only-doctrine-god-examined-jesus-christ-father-son-holy-spirit/

deals extensively with the modalist view of God they hold.

Dear Jim,

Thanks.

Tyler Robbins said...

KJB1611:

I've been reading David Bernard and David Norris, who appear to be the two most articulate spokesmen for that perspective who have written.

Did you ever catch the 1985 television debate between Nathaniel Urshan and Robert Sabin (Oneness) vs. Walter Martin and Calvin Beisner? What an eye-opening thing to see Oneness Pentecostals take their views into public discussion. They didn't fare well!

KJB1611 said...

Dear Jim,

I don't believe I have seen that debate. Bernard is definitely one of the better spokesmen for their idolatry.

I have found the book:

Oneness Pentecostals and the Trinity
by Gregory Boyd to be a useful critique, as he was former Oneness. Boyd does not get into his current heresy of Open Theism in the book, which is a pretty solid and effective critique of Oneness.

Tyler Robbins said...

KJB1611:

If you want to watch the television special, shoot me an email at pastor@faithbaptistdivernon.com. Nathaniel Urshan was the Superintendent of the UPCI before Bernard, and Robert Sabin was (from what I've seen) was the most articulate apologist for the UPCI. It is worth a look, if you're interested.