Study of sanctification

I've got a big-time intellectual curiosity right now on the topic of sanctification. It seems like the pietistic way I hear so often isn't satisfying enough for my mind. But I still need sanctification like I need a doctor. It's ugly.

I've been following threads in John Piper's book Future Grace and the various materials by Andy Naselli analyzing the Keswick theology of sanctification. I've made up my mind to read Phoebe Palmer's book from the 1840s, The Way of Holiness, which seemed to spark off the Methodist Holiness movement in the US, which spread to England and became the Keswick conference... the party includes Fanny Crosby, Amy Carmichael, Andrew Murray, and Dwight Moody.

Here's an interesting survey of some of these life-connections in the Higher-Life movement, which reached even C.T. Studd, Billy Graham and Bill Bright.

The things I'm disturbed about are anti-intellectualism, passive quietism, and unrealistic, superstitious assessments of self and spiritual realities -- in short, a stereotypically feminine approach to dealing with sin. It emphasizes faith (let go and let God), but the faith is the sort you need for falling, not for climbing.  I really don't know what to make of the accusations being lobbed back and forth, especially when I read about Phoebe Palmer's life and the emotional demands of revivalism that she was responding to. So... if you understand it well and it works for you, great. But I'm in search of a more comprehensive model. As I said in an earlier post, I'm looking for an openeyed faith that is realistic and robust. I'm sure others have gone in the opposite direction for equally valid reasons. I'm not.

It's been a worthy distraction, though. And I finally found the passage I was looking for, that both Piper and Naselli refer to: J.I. Packer's testimony of "deliverance" from an unrealistic pietist view of sanctification.

Read below, from Packer's introduction to Triumph over Temptation, an abridgement of John Owen (pp. 31-37).