Perfectionism

John Humphrey Noyes was an intensely intellectual person living in a time when almost all moral discourse was framed in religious terms. It is not surprising, therefore, when Noyes thought about the social and personal upheavals of his time he did so in a religious framework. I assume he got the fundamentals of his religious education when attending Dartmouth College (Class of 1830). In the period before the civil war, a college education was basically a religious education. Any “philosophical” education was conducted personally by the college president and was designed to indoctrinate students with the basics of that distinguished clergyman's personal religious outlook.

Like most old New England colleges, Dartmouth was founded by a Congregational minister (Eleazer Wheelock) and remained firmly a Congregational institution when Noyes was there. At the core of the Congregational faith was a belief in the essential sinfulness of all humans and in salvation by grace alone. Perhaps the most eloquent expression of this belief can be found in Jonathan Edwards' 1741 sermon, Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God, http://www.biblebb.com/files/edwards/je-sinners.htm

Put simply, this doctrine holds it is impossible for humans not to sin. Even though a person may know God's laws and faithfully try to do what is right, failure is inevitable. Despite this fact, God still judges certain persons worthy of salvation and sends them to heaven after death. Others will be damned. The choice is God's alone and cannot be known during a person's life. In this view, the intention and effort to always do what is right is no guarantee of salvation. The believer must work hard to do good all his or her life, aware of the inevitability of committing some sin, with no sense of whether he or she will be saved in the end. The role of the Church is to guide the faithful, hopefully maximizing their chances of salvation.

This issue received a new formulation in the 18^th century by the German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724 - 1804). Kant called the Christian belief in original sin a “moral puzzle.” He held that a fundamental principle of all morality is that “ought” implies “can.” Kant did not believe it made sense to claim we have a moral obligation to act in a certain way if, in the practical world, it is impossible to perform such acts. In his view, valid moral rules cannot require more than we are able to give.

John Wesley (1703-1791), founder of the Methodist Church, also believed that God's laws for living a moral life could not require behavior that is not attainable. He preached that any human being, who truly devoted him or her self to live a moral life, could live a “perfect” life without sin. He spells out this view in some detail in A Plain Account of Christian Perfectionism (1725). He recognized the reality that humans dwell in a corruptible body marked by a thousand defects arising from ignorance, infirmities, and so on. In his view, a truly devout person who loves God with all one's heart, soul, and mind has the ability to live without deliberate sin.

In Wesley's formulation, achieving the state of “perfection” is accomplished by a religious conversion experience followed by a revelation of personal salvation. During conversion a person is freed from the outward sins he or she committed in the past. Salvation allows the believer to transcend the inner limitations of original sin. He exhorted his followers that salvation from sin is not the end of their spiritual search, but the beginning. Once saved, a person still has to strive daily to live a good life.

In 18^th century England and in early 19^th century New England Wesley's views were seen as heresy. It is easy to see why. So long as salvation from sin could only be achieved within the framework of an established church, the existing social order was not threatened. The Church, be it Catholic, Anglican, or Congregational, could largely control society so long as all moral authority emanated from the pulpit. If individuals outside of the church were allowed to believe that personal salvation can be achieved without Church guidance, chaos would reign.

By the time John Humphrey Noyes was attending Yale Theological Seminary the term “perfectionism” was shorthand for a sort of Wesleyan belief in personal salvation from sin. On February 20, 1834, when he stood up in the Free Church of New Haven and declared his personal revelation that he was free of sin, he was actually publicly taking sides against the established religious order. It is little wonder, then, that he quickly lost his license as a Congregational minister.

The interesting question for me is what happens next. The act of taking a public stand against established religion, threw Noyes into an emotional turmoil. His account of his life in the time following his departure from Yale sounds like a description of a nervous breakdown. He moved briefly to New York City and wrestled with what he had done. I'm sure he considered returning to Vermont to work at his father's successful dry goods store or to practice law. In the end he realized he had to share his revelation. He spent the next four years he eked out a meager living as an itinerant perfectionist preacher traveling throughout the settled parts of the northeast from New York City to Vermont.

His efforts to make sense of Kant's “moral puzzle” drove him deeper and deeper into scriptural interpretation. Like many other perfectionists he believed the final days were destined to occur within his lifetime. This belief added urgency to his effort to understand how greater personal moral perfection could be practically achieved. He published his thoughts on these issues in the little religious newspapers he edited, first in The Perfectionist and later The Witness. By 1838 he had collected a small following and his ideas had matured. He returned to his home town of Putney, Vermont, married Harriet Holton, one of his followers, and commenced the process of founding his own religious society.

He had an outline of how to create “heaven on earth.” He was determined.