The Two Points of Confusion in the RPC Controversy – (2) Sanctification as Fruit
The idea of salvation is so basic to our doctrine that you might assume we all know exactly what it is. But one of the main errors that fuels controversy is a failure to distinguish between salvation itself and the working out of salvation. Am I already saved, or will I be saved only after I have completed sanctification and glorification? The reason this is confusing is that we define salvation in two different ways.
We use the word salvation like we use the word trip. We may say we have taken a trip to Spain when our plane lands safely in that country (the trip itself). We may also say that our trip included sightseeing and meeting people in Spain (the goals of the trip). We may say that we are saved after we receive the gift of faith and are ingrafted into Christ (salvation itself). We may also say that salvation includes sanctification and glorification (the goals of salvation).
As Herman Hoeksema taught, salvation has a goal, and that goal is perfect covenant fellowship with God. There is a biblical expression that refers to accomplishing salvation’s goal: working out our salvation. Phil 2:12, “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling” cannot mean working toward accomplishing salvation itself. It means working toward salvation’s goal, after salvation is already “your own.”
Even though sanctification and glorification are considered steps in the Order of Salvation (ordo salutis), they belong to the fruit or working out of our salvation, not salvation itself. The ordo salutis includes all of salvation in the broadest sense – decreed, accomplished, and brought to full fruition. It is not a series of steps that determines who will be saved – that is determined in step one (election). And it is not just steps that explain how we are saved (regeneration, justification, etc.); it also includes steps that describe what we are saved unto (sanctification, glorification). If sanctification is a step unto salvation itself, then unsaved man has a job to do, and that is error.
Everything changes when we start talking about sanctification because we are talking about a saved believer. How do we define forgiveness for one who has already been eternally forgiven? (See the Word Baggage blog post.) How do we define justification for one who is already justified? (James 2:21.) How do we explain the commands of scripture to one who has been delivered from the law? (Romans 7:6) Faith and repentance are bestowed upon the unbeliever as a gift, but for the believer who has received these gifts, repentance and faithfulness are also duties. Even the meaning of sanctification changes – in the ordo salutis, and in this blog, sanctification refers to a process that occurs after we are already “sanctified in Christ” (Jude1:1, 1Cor 6:11.) The point is, it is impossible to have a conversation about all these things unless we know whether or not we are talking about one who is already saved.
To say man takes part in salvation itself is a serious doctrinal error; to say man does not take part in the working out of salvation is also a serious doctrinal error. For a student of HH, the question of whether good works are a necessary part of salvation is really a nonsense question. It is like asking if living is a necessary part of life, or if being in Spain is a necessary part of traveling to Spain. Good works are part of the goal of salvation, they are what our new man was created for (Eph 2:10).
But why is it okay to speak of man’s activity in sanctification? Is not sanctification entirely God’s work too? Yes, it is. In fact, every step of the ordo salutis is God’s work and cannot fail – no part of it involves us independently from God. And to make sense of that we must understand the new man, which is the subject of the next blog post.