John Stott and the Changing Face of Keswick

As is now well known, John R. W. Stott passed away this week. The blogosphere is filled with accolades (and a few well-placed but tasteful disclaimers) concerning his life, ministry, theology, and works. Among Stott's many achievements that impact my small world, though, perhaps none stands out more than his revolutionary and nearly single-handed correction of the so-called "Keswick" theology at the 1965 Keswick Convention.

For 90 years, the Keswick Convention had been perpetuating, with virtually no opposition, an understanding of Romans 6 that reduced sanctification to the believer's passive "reckoning" or faith-contemplation of his justification. Despite the 17 references to death, dying, and crucifixion in the first 14 verses of this chapter, it was rather incredibly understood that the old man had not really died. Rather, it had only been declared dead. Practically speaking, the old man was as strong as ever--so strong, in fact, that it was foolhardy to struggle against it. Rather, the believer was to "let go and let God" do the practical work of sanctification.

In 1965, Stott challenged the Keswick consensus through a series of "Bible readings" on Romans 5-8 (subsequently published as Men Made New: An Exposition of Romans 5–8 [London: Inter-Varsity Fellowship, 1966]). In these he argued that the former "self" (the unregenerate self who was "in Adam") is truly dead and has been replaced by the new self (the regenerate self in Christ). Nonetheless, the remnants of the flesh (what Stott denominated the old "nature") persist in the life of the believer (see esp. Men Made New, p. 45). These remnants, he argued, are to be aggressively battled by the believer as he strives to advance in his Christlikeness.

"Reckoning" oneself dead to sin is not, Stott argued, "pretending that our old nature has died when we know perfectly well it has not. Instead, we are to realize that our former self did die with Christ, thus putting an end to its career. We are to consider what in fact we are, namely dead to sin and alive to God" (Stott, Romans, p. 179). But, further, as Christians we are not only to contemplate this truth, but also to act on that truth, resisting sin and radically excising it from our lives so as to "become what we really are."

The furor raised by Stott's alternative (and in my opinion, his spot-on) interpretation was intense (for details, see Price and Randall, Transforming Keswick, 234–44), as is to be expected after 90 years of contrary teaching. But in the end, Stott's understanding prevailed, and the Keswick Conference gradually ceased to perpetuate the so-called "Keswick" theology. The "Keswick" theology still lives, of course, but thanks to Stott, not so much at Keswick as elsewhere.

MAS