God and Providence [1] 978-0-310-32815-5

Citation preview

VOLUME 1 GOD AND PROVIDENCE

JOHN Wf®s THOMAS C. ODEN

Bz o n d e r

v an *

ZONDERVAN.com/ AUTHORTRACKER follow your favorite authors

ZONDERVAN John Wesley's Teachings, Volume J Copyright © 2012 by Thomas C. Oden Volumes l and 2 are revised and expanded from John Wesley's Scriptural Christianity Copyright © 1994 by Thomas C. Oden This title is also available as a Zondervan ebook. Requests for information should be addressed to: Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49530

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Oden, Thomas C. John Wesley's teachings / Thomas C. Oden, v. cm. Rev. ed. of: John Wesley's scriptural Christianity. C1994Includes bibliographical references and indexes. Contents: v. 1. God and providence- v. 2. Christ and salvation- v.3. The practice of pastoral care - v. 4- Issues of ethics and society. ISBN 978-0-310-32815-5 (softcover) 1. Wesley, John, 1703-1791. 2. Theology, Doctrinal. 3. Methodist Church-Doctrines. 4. Theology, Doctrinal-History-l8th century. 5. Methodist Church-Doctrines-Historyl8th century. I. Oden, Thomas C. John Wesley’s scriptural Christianity. II. Title. BX83313O35

2012

230'.7092 — dc23

2012001655

All Scripture quotations, unless otherwise indicated, are taken from the King James Version of the

Bible. Scripture quotations marked TCNT are from the Twentieth Century New Testament. Scripture quotations marked NIV are taken from The Holy Bible, New International Version®, N/V®. Copyright © 1973.1978,1984.2011 by Biblica, Inc.™ Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide. The Scripture quotations contained herein are from the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible, copyright © 1989 by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of Churches of Christ in the United States of America, and are used by permission. All rights reserved. Scripture quotations marked NEB are taken from the New English Bible. Copyright © The Delegates of the Oxford University Press and the Syndics of the Cambridge University Press 1961,1970. Reprinted by permission. Any Internet addresses (websites, blogs, etc.) and telephone numbers in this book are offered as a resource. They are not intended in any way to be or imply an endorsement by Zondervan, nor does Zondervan vouch for the content of these sites and numbers for the life of this book. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means-electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other - except for brief quotations in printed reviews, without the prior permission of the publisher. Cover design: John Hamilton Design Cover image: Corbis® Images Interior design: Beth Shagene Edited by Katya Covrett and Laura Dodge Weller Printed in the United States of America 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 /DCI/ 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 IO 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

To ma jor pa rtne rs in dia logue on Wesley, ma ny of the m my forme r gra dua te s tude nts in the We sle y Semina rs a t Dre w Unive rs ity ove r the years who are now te a ching a nd writing in this a nd re la te d fie lds . I have be ne fite d from the ir dia logue in ways be yond te lling. P rof. Ke nne th Collins of Asbury Theological Seminary, Wilmore, Kentucky P rof. John Tys on of Houghton College, Houghton, Mew York Cha nce llor Chris tophe r Ha ll of Eastern University and dean of Palmer Theological Seminary, St. Davids, Pennsylvania Dr. Joel Elows ky of Concordia Unive rs ity-Milwauke e, Mequon, Wisconsin P re s ide nt Da vid Ea ton of Wesleyan University, Bartlesville, Oklahoma P rof. Dona ld Thors e n of Azusa Pacific School of Theology, Azusa, California P rof. Le ice s te r Longde n of Dubuque Theological Seminary, Dubuque, Iowa P rof. Ste phe n Seamands of Asbury Theological Seminary, Wilmore, Kentucky Dr. Thoma s Bucha n of Asbury Theological Seminary, Orlando, Florida P rof. Da vid Ford of St. Tikhon’s Theological Orthodox Seminary, South Canaan, Pennsylvania Dr. Micha el Christe nse n of Drew Theological School, Madison, New Jersey P rof. Willia m Ury of Wesley Biblical Seminary, Jackson, Mississippi P rof. Ke lle y Steve McCormick of Nazarene Theological Seminary, Kansas City, Missouri P rof. Ke nne th Bre we r of Somerset Christian College, Zarephath, New Jersey P rof. Chris tophe r Bounds of Indiana Wesleyan University, Marion, Indiana Dr. S te phe n Flick of Wesley Biblical Seminary, Jackson, Mississippi De a n Le roy Linds e y of the OMS Biblical Seminary of Mexico, Mexico City P rof. Woodrow Whidde n of Andrews University, Berrien Springs, Michigan Dr. Guns hick S him, dis trict superintendent in New York United Methodist Conference, Long Island, New York The la te Fa the r Je ffre y Finch, translator for Ancient Christian Commentary on S cripture

Contents Preface...........

13

Abbreviations

17

Introduction

21

A. The Te aching Hom ily as Chris tian Doctrine 1. The Scope of We s le ys Te a ching 2. The Te a ching Homily 3. The Whole Compass of Divinity B. We sle y’s Evange lical Conne ction of S piritual Form ation 1.The Connection 2. The Scope of We sleya n Conne ction Today C. My Purpos e 1. Why I Write on Wesley: A Note on Voca tion 2. Cle a r Expos ition 3. Adhe ring to P rima ry Sources D. His tory and Doctrine 1. The Chie f Me ntor of Mode rn We s le y Studies 2. Whe the r Wes le y Was a Systematic The ologia n 3. How to Ma ke P ra ctical Use of This Study VOLUME ONE

God and Providence CHAPTER ONE: God

A. Attribute s of God 1. The Ete rnity of God 2. Time 3. The Omnipre s e nce of God 4. The Unity of the Divine Being

35

5. Re la tional Attribute s : Goodness, Me rcy, Holine s s , S pirit 6. God, Happiness, a nd Re ligion 7. True a nd False Re ligion 8. The Wis dom of God’s Counsels 9. The Firs t Article of the Article s of Re ligion: On God B. God the Fathe r, God the S on, God the S pirit 1. On the Trinity 2. S piritua l Wors hip — On Triune S piritua lity CHAPTER TWO: The Primacy of Scripture............................................... 65 A. The Authority of Scripture 1. The P rima cy a nd Norma tive Authority of the Pla in Sense of S cripture 2. The Ana logy of Fa ith 3. S pirit and S cripture 4. S cripture , Conscience , a nd Ge ne ra l Re ve la tion B. The Ins piration ofHoly S cripture 1. A Cle a r and Concis e De mons tra tion of the Divine Ins pira tion of Holy S cripture 2. We sle y as Comme nta tor on S cripture 3. On Corrupting the Word of God in t e r l u d e : c h apt er

God's Particular Method of Working

THREE: Tradition

81 83

A. Tradition as the Cons e ns ual R e ce ption of the Apos tolic Te aching 1. The Uncha nging Apos tolic Tra dition of S cripture Te a ching through Changing History 2. We s le y as Editor of Classic Chris tia n Writings c h apt er

FOUR: Reason

A. On Reason 1. Reason as God’s Gift 2. Reasoning Out of S cripture 3. The Case of Reason Impa rtia lly Cons ide re d

93

4. Wha t Reason Ca n a nd Ca nnot Do 5. The Impe rfection of Human Knowle dge B. Natural Philos ophy 1. Whe the r The re Is Gra dual Improve ment in Na tura l P hilos ophy 2. On Huma n Unde rs ta nding CHAPTER FIVE: Experience..................................................

111

A. On Expe rie nce 1. The Neces sity a nd Limits of Expe rie nce in Re ligion 2. On S piritua l Senses 3. On Living without God — The Parable of the Tre e Toad 4. The Ne w Birth of the S piritua l Senses B. On Enthus ias m 1. The Na ture of Enthus ia s m 2. Type s of Enthusiasm 3. How S cripture Corre cts Expe rie nce C. The Catholic S pirit 1. The Premise of Tole ra nce 2. Cha lle nging La titudina rianis m 3. To a Roman Ca tholic — An Ire nic Le tte r D. A Caution agains t Bigotry 1. Why Bigotry Is an Offe nse against the Ca tholic S pirit 2. How the S pirit of Bigotry Is Tested 3. How to Exa mine Our Own Bigotry CHAPTER SIX: Creation, Providence, and Evil A. The Goodness of Cre ation 1. God’s Approba tion of His Works 2. The Fre e -Will Defense B. S piritual Cre ation 1. Of Good Angels 2. Of Evil Ange ls

133

C. Provide nce 1. On Divine Providence 2. Special Provide nce 3. On God’s S overe ignty D. The odicy 1. Whe nce Comes Evil? 2. The P romis e of Unde rs ta nding in the Future E. Evil 1. On Na tura l Evil 2. The Groa ning of Cre a tion a nd the Ge ne ra l Delive ra nce CHAPTER SEVEN: Man

171

A. Hum an Exis te nce : Cre ate d, Fallen, and R e de e m ed 1. The Anthropology of the Article s of Re ligion 2. Free Will a fter the Fall (Article 8) B. The Im age of God 1. In His Own Image 2. Whe the r the Image of God Ma y Be Recovered C. W hat Is Man? Two Dis cours e s 1. Ma n in Space, Ma n in Time (Firs t Discourse ) 2. On the Greatness of the Human S oul within Space a nd Time 3. Suppose The re We re Othe r Worlds 4.1 Find S ome thing in Me Tha t Thinks (Second Dis cours e ) 5. Huma n Life a Dre a m 6. He a ve nly Treasure in Ea rthe n Vessels 7. Counte ring the Ove rre a ch of Na tura l Science CHAPTER EIGHT: Sin

A. On the De ce itfulne ss of the Hum an He art 1. Why Optimis ts Fore ve r Mis judge the Huma n He art 2. Towa rd S criptura l Realism a bout the Human He art: Why De spera te ly Wicke d? 3. Why De ce itful above All Things?

189

4. Towa rd the Me nding of the S elf-De ceived Will B. On the Fall ofMan 1. Why Does God Allow Mis e ry a nd He a rta che in the World He Loves? 2. The Consequence of Sin for the Body-S oul Compos ite C. S piritual Idolatry 1. Keep Yourselves from Idols 2. Idola try in the Form of Se nsua lity 3. Idola try in the Form of Pride 4. The Idols of Ima gina tion 5. Inordinate Love of Mone y a nd Sex 6. Whe the r P e nite nt Fa ith Ca n Break the Bondage of Idola try CHAPTER NINE: Original Sin....................................................................

199

A. The Doctrine of Original S in according to S cripture , Reason, and Experience 1. Why Wesley Wrote His Longe s t Tre a tis e on Sin 2. Whe the r Sin Is a S ocia lly Tra ns mitte d Disease 3. Comba ting the De is t De nia l of Origina l Sin: A Searching Response to John Ta ylor B. Evide nce s ofS in Dis playe d in the His tory of S in 1. Human His tory Atte s ts the Unive rs a lity of Corruption 2. Whe the r Huma n Corruptibility and Mise ry Are Found Unive rs ally C. S ociological Evide nce s of the Unive rs ality ofHum an Corruption 1. The Unive rs a lity of Sin in Nonthe is tic Culture s 2. The Unive rs a lity of Sin in The is tic Culture s 3. The Unive rs a lity of Sin in P re domina ntly Chris tia n Culture s 4. Whe the r Wa r Is a P rototype of Socia l Sin 5. Expe rie ntial S e lf-Examina tion Confirms the Unive rs a lity of Sin 6. The Unha ppine s s of Unive rs al Huma n His tory Is Due to the Unholine s s of Human Choices D. Le arning from S cripture about Original S in 1. From the Be ginning 2. Whe the r One Suffers from Anothe r’s Sin

E. S in and De ath 1. Dis tinguis hing Te mpora l De a th from S piritua l De a th 2. Whe the r Re demption in Chris t Ma ke s Up for Losses Suffered in Ada m 3. The We s tmins ter Ca techism on Origina l Sin F. Adam ’s He ads hip with Eve’s Coope ration 1. Ada m as a P ublic Person: On Federal He a ds hip 2. The Conse que nce of Ada m’s Fall for Subsequent Human His tory 3. The Abyss into Which Humanity Plunged 4. Dis tinguis hing Origina l Sin from Actua l Sin G. Ans we ring Que s tions on the Ins idious S pre ad ofS in 1. The Inte rge ne ra tiona l S ociality of Sin 2. The Communica tion of the Sin of Ada m a nd Eve to All Humanity 3. Whe the r Loss of Communion with God Sharpens the S ting of Une xpla ined S uffe ring 4. Whe the r The re Remains a Na tura l Te nde ncy to Sin 5. Whe the r Guilt Ma y be Impute d from One to Anothe r H. The Hidde n Link be twe e n R e de mption and Original S in 1. Original S in a nd Ne w Birth 2. Re fra ming We s le ys Doctrine within Conte mpora ry Culture I. Conclus ion a p p e n d ix

A: Alphabetical Correlation of the Sermons in the Jackson and Bicentennial Editions.......

225

APPENDIX B: Bicentennial Volume Titles Published to Date

231

Subject Index..............................................................................

232

Scripture Index............................................................................

240

This is a re a de r’s guide to John We s le y’s te a ching. It introduce s his thought on the ba s ic te ne ts of Chris tia n te a ching on God a nd provide nce (volume 1), Chris t a nd s a lva tion (volume 2), pa s tora l the ology (volume 3), a nd e thics a nd s ocie ty (volume 4). The se are orde re d in a ccord with We s le y’s own orga niza tion of s ubje ct ma tte r. The y a re a rra nge d in the fa milia r se quence of classic conse nsua l Christia n te a ching to which he a dhe re d. The e xpos ition pres e nts a pla in a ccount of We s le y’s works and thrives on cons ta nt cita tion from We s le y’s own te xts. My ta s k has be e n to cla rify We s ley’s e xplicit inte nt in e ve ryda y mode rn Englis h. This inte nt ca n be che cke d by re a ding the te xt its e lf, we ll ma rked in the note s. I have re duce d the a rcha is ms a nd a mbiguitie s to communicate his me a ning as cle a rly as pos s ible to a conte mpora ry audience.

Tracking References to the Major Editions The pre fe rre d s chola rly e dition of The Works ofJohn Wesley is the Oxford/Abingdon Bice nte nnia l e dition (Oxford: 1975-83; Na s hville : 1984-), s ignified by B.1 The mos t frequently re produce d e dition, often s till the only one a ppe a ring on libra ry a nd pa s toral books he lve s , is the Thoma s Jackson e dition, firs t publis he d in 1829-31, s ignifie d by J for Jacks on. Thus , whe ne ve r B or J appears in the footnote s , the re a de r is be ing dire cte d to e ithe r the Bice ntennia l e dition (B) or the Jackson e dition (J). This is necessary because the re a de r ma y have access to one but not both e ditions. Ma ny more copie s of the Jackson e dition have be e n dis tribute d tha n the Bice nte nnia l e dition. He re are the ke y guide line s for the s chola rly apparatus : • Volume references in Ara bic numerals refe r to the Bice ntennia l e dition. Volume references in uppercase Roman numerals re fe r to the Jackson e dition. • Both the Bicente nnial e dition (B) and the Jackson e dition (J) are available in searchable CD-ROMs or online . In the case of B, the curre nt dis k is s till incomplete , a wa iting print publica tion of ma ny volumes. • Dis tinguis hing a B reference from a J reference is easy: If the firs t digit is an 'In rare cases where Sugden’s edition of the S tandard S ermons (see Abbreviations: S S ) is quoted, the readers attention is directed especially to his annotations. 13

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

Ara bic numeral, the reference is to B. If the firs t digit is an uppercase Roman numeral, the reference is to J. A reference to B 4:133 indicates the Bicentennial e dition, volume 4, page 133. But a reference to J IV: 133 indicates the Jackson e dition, volume 4 (IV), page 133. • In cases where a new homily is being introduce d in orde r to be discussed more fully, I have referenced in parentheses the Bicentennial e dition (B) in this conventional order: the homily number, the date of the homily, and the volume and page references in the Bicentennial e dition. Where the Jackson e dition (J) is referenced, I have listed the homily numbe r and the volume and page references in Jackson. ♦ At times the homily numbers appear in a diffe re nt orde r and numbe r in the Bicentennial tha n in the Jackson e dition.2 My purpos e is to assist thos e who wis h to access ha ndily the proper te xt in the a va ila ble e dition. Readers will more fre que ntly be working out of e ithe r J or B but ordina rily not both. For conve nie nce, we cite both e ditions . An a ppe ndix title d “Alpha be tica l Correla tion of the Sermons in the Jackson and Bice nte nnia l Editions” ca n be found a t the back of a ll volume s . Thos e who are doing s chola rly research work are advised to work with the Bice nte nnia l e dition whe ne ve r possible.

On Biblical References Though Wesley expressed a biding gra titude for the King James Ve rs ion of the Bible, e spe cia lly in its va lue for common wors hip, his s tudy te xt was norma lly in the origina l language. In citing the lead te xt for his homilie s , I ordina rily cite the King James Authorize d te xt (KJ V) from which We s le y was pre a ching or writing, unless spe cifie d othe rwis e . When he publis hed his own tra ns lation of the Ne w Te s ta me nt, ma ny references in the Authorize d Ve rs ion of 1611 we re a lte re d to communica te with his pla inspe a king a udie nce of the 1700s. The re is no reason to think tha t We s le y regarded his own Englis h re nde ring of the Gre e k as de finitive for future ce nturie s of English readers for whom the language protocols a nd usages would have s hifte d as the y norma lly do ove r decades. Thos e who might assume tha t Wesley hims e lf was cons ta ntly working out of the King James Ve rs ion do we ll to re ca ll tha t We s le y read the Gre e k Ne w Te s ta me nt flue ntly. He s tudie d it da ily in his e a rly morning a nd e ve ning me dita tions .

On Other Editions of Wesley's Works The only colle cte d e dition published during Wesley’s life time was the 32-volume Bristol e dition of The Works of the Rev. John Wesley (Bris tol, UK: Willia m Pine, 1771 - 74). 2“The Trouble a nd Rest of Good Me n” appears as S e rmon 109 in the Bice nte nnia l e dition (B #109), a nd as S e rmon 127 in the Jackson e dition (J #127). The numbe ring is ofte n the same but in some instances is diffe re nt. 14

PREFACE

The second e dition of The Works of the Rev. John Wesley was edited by Joseph Benson (17 vols., London: Conference Offices, 1809-13; republished in New York and Philadelphia in 10 volumes, 1826-27). The most-used third e dition of The Works of the Rev. John Wesley, edited by Thomas Jackson (14 vols., London, 1829-31), has been frequently reprinted in America and is employed here as one of two major available editions of Wesley’s Works.3 Prior to the Bicentennial edition, the editions that presented an annotated editoria l apparatus to the works of Wesley, with scholarly introductions according to modern standards, were Nehemiah Curnock’s edition of The Journal ofJohn Wesley (see JJW in Abbreviations) in 1916, Edward H. Sugden’s e dition of the S tandard S ermons (see S S ) in 1921, John Telford’s e dition of the Letters ofJohn Wesley (see LJW) in 1931, and Albe rt C. Outle r’s selection of Wesley’s key writings (see JWO) in 1964. These are all commended here. The Oxford/Abingdon Bicentennial edition (see B in Abbreviations)4 will stand for generations to come as the definitive edition.

Wesley's Patrimony Wesley left behind an enormous corpus of literature. This vast body includes 151 teaching homilies, six decades of journals (1735-91), manuscript diaries, eight volumes of letters, essays, doctrina l tracts, occasional writings, and prefaces. The untold numbers of hymns were mostly writte n by John’s brother Charles but were edited by John. These were the fruits of the ir editing and publishing over a very long time span. It is difficult to think of a single figure in the eighteenth century who left behind such a massive body of work as did John Wesley. This series seeks to deliver to the nonprofessional reader the gist of the whole of Wesley’s patrimony in systematic order. It provides a window into the basic wisdom of his Christian teaching. While it cannot claim to be comprehensive, it seeks to include core insights from all of these varied genres of literature. This is why we need multiple volumes to examine this massive range of Wesley’s works. A shorter series would threaten to cut off essential parts. For readers who want to investigate only one doctrine or idea, the Further Reading in each section will make these searches more accessible. 3Tha t Te lford, Sugden, Curnock, a nd Jackson (see Abbre via tions ) are ha rdly me ntioned in the Bicente nnia l e dition of the Sermons re ma ins a puzzle. The y a ll conta in useful notes pe rtine nt to this study. The Ame rica n e dition, e dite d by John Emory, was publis he d in Ne w York in 1831, based on the Jackson e dition. In ma ny libra ries , the Jackson e dition is the only one available. 4Whe n “Article s of Re ligion” (Art.) are indica te d. 1 a m re fe rring to We s le ys own recension of the Twe nty-Four Article s (to which the 1784 Ame rica n Me thodis t Church added a twe nty-fifth), de rive d and e dite d down from the Anglica n Thirty-Nine Article s . The Article s have played a ce ntra l role in the Ame rica n Wesleyan doctrina l tra ditions . The y are include d in the cons titutions of mos t church bodies of the Wesleyan tra dition. Whe n Confe ssion (Confes.) is referenced, I a m indica ting the s umma ry of Wesleyan fa ith set forth in the 1962 Confession of the Evangelical Unite d Bre thre n, which by a cons titutiona lly re s trictive rule has become a doctrina l s ta nda rd of the Unite d Me thodis t Church. A reference to the firs t a rticle of the Confession appears as Confes. 1. 15

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

On This Edition Zonde rva n has a dis tinguis he d re puta tion as a publis he r of re fere nce works and classics, ma ny of the m bound in multivolume e ditions . My hope is tha t this series will be come a s ufficie ntly us e ful re s ource for lay a nd profes s iona l readers tha t it will be in due time ma de a va ila ble digita lly for internationa l re a de rs for decades to come . Nothing like this te xt-by-text re vie w of the conte nt of We s le y’s te a ching e xists in We sle y studies. In 1994 Zonde rva n publis hed my e a rlie r s tudy of We s le y’s doctrine unde r the title John Wesley’s S criptural Chris tianity: A Plain Expos ition of His Teaching on Chris tian Doctrine (JWS C). In this pre s e nt e dition, much of the conte nt of tha t s ingle volume is now e xpa nde d a nd e xte ns ive ly revised, qua drupling the informa tion pre s e nte d in the e a rlie r s ingle volume.

16

Abbreviations

ACCS AHR

The Ancie nt Chris tian Comm e ntary on S cripture . Edite d by Thoma s C. Ode n. Downe rs Grove , IL: Inte rVa rs ity, 1997 - 2010. Am e rican His torical Review.

AM Art.

Arm inian Magaz ine . Twe nty-Five Article s of Re ligion.

AS

As bury S e m inarian.

B

BCP

Bice nte nnia l e dition of The Works ofJohn Wesley. Edite d by Fra nk Baker a nd Richa rd He itze nra te r. Oxford: Cla rendon, a nd Ne w York: Oxford Unive rs ity Press, 1975-83; Na s hville : Abingdon, 1984-; in print: vols. 1,2, 3,4, 7,18,19, 20,21,22, 23, 24. Book of Common Prayer.

BETS

Bulle tin of the Evange lical The ological S ociety.

Bull.

Bulle tin.

CCD

"A Cle a r a nd Concis e De mons tra tion of the Divine Ins piration of Holy S cripture .” A Colle ction of Hym ns for the Use of the People Calle d Me thodis ts , vol. 7 of the Bice nte nnia l e dition.

CH Chr.

Chris tia n.

ChrCe nt Chris tian Century. CL

A Chris tia n Libra ry.

COC

Creeds of the Churches: A Reader in Chris tian Doctrine . Edite d by John H. Le ith. Atla nta : John Knox, 1982.

Confes.

1962 Confes sion of the Evangelical Unite d Bre thren.

CW T

Robe rt W. Burtne r a nd Robe rt E. Chile s. A Com pe nd of Wesley’s Theology. Na s hville : Abingdon, 1954.

Diss.

Dis s e rta tion.

DOS

The Doctrine of Original S in according to S cripture , Reason, and Experience. “Dia logue be twe e n a P re de s tinaria n a nd His Friend.”

DPF

77

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

DSF

"The Doctrine of Sa lva tion, Fa ith a nd Good Works Extra cte d from the Homilies of the Church of England.”

DS W T

Thoma s C. Ode n. Doctrinal S tandards in the Wesleyan Tradition. Gra nd Rapids: Zonde rva n, 1988.

EA

“An Earnest Appe a l to Me n of Reason a nd Religion.”

ENNT

Explanatory Notes upon the Ne w Testament.

ENOT EQ

Explanatory Notes upon the Old Testament. Evange lical Quarte rly.

ETS

Evangelical The ologica l Society.

EW T

Paul Micke y. Essentials of Wesleyan Theology. Gra nd Rapids: Zonde rva n, 1980.

FA

“A Fa rthe r Appe a l to Me n of Reason a nd Religion.”

FAP FB

Fra ncis As bury Press, Zonderva n. Howa rd A. Slaatte. Fire in the Brand: Introduction to the Creative Work and Theology ofJohn Wesley. Ne w York: Expos ition, 1963. Ke nne th Collins . A Faithful Witness: John Wesley’s Hom ile tical Theology. Wilmore , KY: Wesleyan He rita ge , 1993.

FW FW AT

Mildre d Bangs Wynkoop. Foundations of W e s le yan-Arm inian Theology. Kansas City, MO: Beacon Hill, 1967.

HS P

Hym ns and S acred Poems.

J

Jackson e dition of Wesley's Works . Edite d by Thoma s Jackson, 1829-32. The 1872 e dition has be e n re printe d in ma ny 14-volume Ame rica n e ditions (Eerdmans, Zonde rva n, Chris tia n Book Dis tributors , e t al.); digita lly a va ila ble on Wesley.nnu.edu.

Int

Inte rpre tation — Journal ofBible and Theology.

JBR JJW

Journal ofBible and Religion. The Journal ofJohn Wesley. Edite d by Ne he mia h Curnock. 8 vols. London: Epworth, 1916.

JTS

Journal of The ological S tudies.

J WO

John Wesley. Edite d by Albe rt C. Outle r. Libra ry of P rote s tant Theology. Ne w York: Oxford Unive rs ity Press, 1964.

JW PH

Robe rt Monk. John Wesley: His Puritan He ritage . Na s hville : Abingdon, 1966.

JW S C

Thoma s C. Ode n. John Wesley’s S criptural Chris tianity: A Plain Expos ition ofHis Teaching on Chris tian Doctrine . Gra nd Rapids: Zonde rva n, 1994.

JW TT

Colin Williams . John Wesley’s Theology Today. Na s hville : Abingdon, 1960.

KJV

King James Version.

18

ABBREVIATIONS

LCM LJW

Le tte r to the Rev. Dr. Conye rs Middle ton (January 4,1749). Le tte rs ofJohn Wesley. Edite d by John Te lford. 8 vols. London: Epworth, 1931.

LLBL

A Le tter to the Right Reverend Lord Bis hop of London.

LP C

Le tte r on Preaching Chris t (same as Le tte r to an Evangelical Layman, De cembe r 20,1751).

LQHR

London Quarte rly and Holborn Review.

LS

Thoma s C. Ode n. Life in the S pirit. San Francisco: Ha rpe rSa nFra ncisco, 1992.

MH

Me thodis t His tory. Minute s “Minute s of Some La te Conve rs a tions be twe en the Rev. Mr. Wesley a nd Others." MLS Martin Luthe r: S elections from His W ritings . Edite d by John Dille nbe rge r. Ne w York: Double da y, 1961. MM MOB MP L

Me thodis t Magaz ine. Willia m M. Arne tt. “John Wesley: Ma n of One Book.” P hD diss., Drew Unive rs ity, 1954. Patrologia latina (Patrologiae cursus com ple tus: S eries latina). Edite d by J.-P. Migne . 217 vols. Paris: 1844 - 64.

MQR

Me thodis t Quarte rly Review.

MR NDM

Me thodis t Review. Re inhold Nie buhr. The Nature and De s tiny of Man. 2 vols. Ne w York: Scribner, 1941,1943.

NIV

Ne w Inte rna tiona l Ve rs ion

NRS V NT

Ne w Revised S tandard Ve rs ion. Ne w Testament.

OED

Oxford English Dictionary.

OT PACP

Old Testament. A Plain Account of Chris tian Perfection.

PCC

"P re de s tina tion Calmly Considered.”

PM

Pre ache r’s Magaz ine .

Pref. Publ.

Preface. P ublis hing, Publishers.

PW

Poe tical Works of Charle s Wesley and John Wesley. Edite d by George Os born. 13 vols. London: We sleya n Me thodis t Confe rence , 1868-72.

PW HS

Proceedings of the Wesley His torical S ociety.

Q

Qua rte rly.

QR

Quarte rly Review. 19

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

RC

Roman Ca tholic.

RE

Re ale ncyklopadie fur prote stantische Theologie und Kirche . Edite d by J. J. He rzog a nd A. Ha uck. 24 vols. Le ipzig: J. H. Hinrichs , 1896-1913.

R JW

George Croft Cell. The Rediscovery ofJohn Wesley. Ne w York: He nry Holt, 1935.

RL

Re ligion in Life.

SS

Wesley’s S tandard S ermons. Edite d by Edwa rd H. Sugden. 2 vols. London: Epworth, 1921; 3rd ed., 1951.

SSO

John Wesley. S ermons on S everal Occasions. 3 vols. London: W. Strahan, 1746.

SSM

S unday S ervice of the Me thodis ts of the Unite d S tates ofAm e rica (1784). Edite d by Edwa rd C. Hobbs. Na s hville : Me thodis t S tude nt Move me nt, 1956.

TCNT

Twe ntie th Ce ntury Ne w Testament.

TIRC

"Thoughts on the Imputa tion of the Righteousness of Chris t.”

TJW

Willia m R. Ca nnon. Theology ofJohn Wesley: W ith S pecial Reference to the Doctrine ofJus tification. Ne w York: Abingdon, 1946.

TUN

"Thoughts upon Necessity.”

UMC

Unite d Me thodis t Church,

unpubl.

Unpublis hed.

WC

John Deschner. Wesley's Christology. Gra nd Rapids: Zonde rva n, 1989.

WHS

Lycurgus M. Starkey. The Work of the Holy S pirit. Na s hville : Abingdon, 1962.

W MM

Wesleyan Me thodis t Magaz ine.

WQ

Dona ld Thorse n. The Wesleyan Quadrilate ral: S cripture , Tradition, Reason, and Experience as a Model ofEvange lical Theology. Gra nd Rapids: Zonde rva n, 1990.

WQR

Wesleyan Quarte rly Review

WRE

John W. P rince . Wesley on Religious Education. Ne w York: Me thodis t Book Conce rn, 1926.

WS

Ha ra ld G. A. Linds trom. Wesley and S anctification. Na s hville : Abingdon, 1946.

W TH

Albe rt C. Outle r. The Wesleyan The ological He ritage : Essays of Albe rt C. Outle r. Edite d by Thoma s C. Ode n a nd Le ice s te r R. Longde n. Gra nd Rapids: Zonde rva n, 1991.

W TJ

Wesleyan The ological Journal.

XXV

Twe nty-Five Article s . Ada pte d from the S unday S ervice of 1784.

XXXIX Anglica n Thirty-Nine Article s of Re ligion. 20

Introduction

A. The Teaching Homily as Christian Doctrine In his address to readers of his colle cte d works of 1771, We sle y made a pre limina ry a tte mpt a t a rough se que ntia l orga niza tion of his ins tructiona l homilie s : “I wa nte d to me thodize these tra cts , to range the m unde rprope r heads, pla cing those toge the r which were on s imila r subjects, and in such orde r tha t one might illus tra te a nothe r.... The re is scarce any subject ofim portance , e ithe r in practical or controve rsial divinity, which is not tre ate d of more or less, e ithe r profe s s edly or occasionally.”1 We s le ys own ca re ful orde ring of his work is the syste ma tic design on which we will build.

1. The Scope of Wesley's Teaching No ma jor Chris tian doctrine is neglected in We s le ys te a ching. Ke y classic te a ching topics are tre a te d with re ma rka ble internal consistency. My obje ctive is to set forth the implicit inne r cohe s ion of these diverse points of We s le y’s teaching. The re is an intuitive sense of orde r in this wide range of homilie s a nd essays. My ta sk is to organize We s le y’s te a ching in a sequence na tura l to his own design and cons is te nt with the classic Chris tia n tra dition to which he appealed. We s le y did not inve nt this s ys te matic sequence. He was the gra teful inhe ritor of the we ll-known orde r of s a lva tion in a ncie nt Chris tia n te a ching. This orde r can be seen implicitly in the Council of Nicae a a nd in the cons e ns us -be aring te xts of Cyril of Jerusalem, John of Damascus, Thoma s Aquina s , a nd John Ca lvin. Among Anglican divine s , it is promine nt in Thoma s Cra nme r, John Jewel, a nd John Pearson. I will s how tha t the whole range of classic loci (points of the ology) appears in We s le y’s large body of writings , but the y are not easily re cognized as a syste ma tic whole because of the na ture of the te a ching homily, which focuse d on a single te xt of sacred S cripture . Only a fe w of these loci, nota bly origina l s in a nd the wa y of sa lvation, are de a lt with a t gre a t le ngth his torica lly and systematically. We s le y’s inte nt was not to write a compre he ns ive ecclesial theology, such as tha t of Richa rd Hooke r, or a comme nta ry on the creed, such as tha t of John Pearson ‘"Preface to the Third Edition,” J 1:3, in a brie f address "To the Reader" in the thirty-two duode cima volume s of 1774, ita lics added. 21

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

be fore him, but to speak pla inly to his conne ction2 of s piritua l forma tion on a ll ma jor themes of Chris tia n te a ching.

2. The Teaching Homily We sle y ta ught his conne ction by publis hed homilies . The e a rlie st of these were colle cte d a nd fre que ntly publis he d as his S tandard S ermons (in va rious e ditions numbering forty-e ight, fifty-two, a nd fifty-thre e ). The wa y Chris tia n doctrine was ta ught by e ighte e nth-ce ntury Anglica n divine s was through publis he d te a ching s e rmons , not rococo tome s on s pe cific doctrines . We s le y was born a nd bre d in this Anglica n ce ntris t tra dition of homile tic ins truction. The notion of an established, re lia bly tra ns mitte d book of homilie s was a fa milia r pa ttern of the Englis h church tra dition (following Thoma s Cra nme r, La nce lot Andre wes , John Jewel, a nd Ma tthe w Parker). This book was a colle ction of prepa red the ma tic te a ching s e rmons de signe d to ins truct congre ga tions on received Chris tia n doctrine .3 Wes le y followe d this two-hundre d-ye a r Anglica n tra dition by mode s tly offe ring his own tutoria l homilie s to thos e in his dire ct conne ction of s piritua l formation.4

3. The Whole Compass of Divinity We do not have from We s le y’s ha nd, as from Ca lvin’s or Suarez’s or Me la nchthon’s, a de finitive syste ma tic the ology in the sense of a compre he ns ive and sequentia l orga niza tion of the topics of the ology. With Wesley, wha t we have are occasional ins tructiona l homilie s , ma ny pre a che d nume rous time s on his le ngthy journe ys through England, Scotland, a nd Ire la nd. Though not orga nize d as s ys te ma tic the ology, these homilie s we re designed for s ta nda rd doctrina l ins truction, publis he d for future reference, a nd cle a rly inte nde d to inform the e ntire curriculum of evangelical studie s on the “whole compass of divinity.”5 Among the charges ma de a ga ins t We s le y in his life time ,6 which he answered in de tail, was the indictme nt by Rola nd Hill, who thought tha t We s le y re ma ine d “a bs olute ly uns e ttle d with re ga rd to e ve ry funda me nta l doctrine of the gospel,” and tha t "no two dis puta nts in the Schools ca n be more oppos ite to each other tha n he 2The Britis h a rcha ic s pe lling connexion is dear to astute ins iders. It is ra re ly in use except a mong tra ditiona l Britis h Me thodis ts. Because it appears a wkwa rd to mode rn readers, I will not ins is t on the a rcha ic form. *LJW 1:305, 312; 3:382; 4:125-26, 379-81; )WO 119-33, 204-6, 417; FA, B 11:175, cf. 279. See also John Cos in and Jeremy Taylor. 4The root word ofhom ily is homos, the same root from which our te rms homogeneity, homogenize, and homoousian come. A hom ilios is an assembly, and a hom ilia is an inte ntiona l, re fle ctive , deliberate, considered ins truction to gathered hearers. Since so many have a dis ta s te ful aversion to the ve ry word sermon, ta rre d by a long his tory of browbe a ting, lega listic e motivis m, I prefe r the more de s criptive te rm te aching hom ily as a conte mpora ry dyna mic e quiva le nt. Cf. FW 11-14. *IJW 4:181; 5:326. 6Among othe r compla ints , Wesley was charged with contra dictions , inconsistencies (B 9:56, 375), evasions (B 9:374-75), and hypocris y (B 9:304). 22

INTRODUCTION

is to himse lf."7 We sle y wrote de ta ile d a nd a musing responses to critics Rola nd Hill, Conye rs Middle ton, a nd Ge orge La vington to de mons tra te the cons is te ncy of his te a ching ove r his long life . He de fe nde d hims e lf against charges of inte rna l incongruitie s a nd took pa ins to de mons tra te tha t the supposed dis cre pa ncie s tha t others thought the y ha d ide ntifie d we re based on the e ighte e nth-ce ntury re a de rs hasty mis sta te me nt or fa ilure to grasp his inte nt.8 Ne ithe r Wesley nor his successors ever issued an e dition of his publis he d works de libe ra te ly sequenced in the orde r of s ta nda rd points of classic syste ma tic the ology.9 My ta sk is to s how the s ys te matic cohe s ion a nd ra nge of his homilie s and essays. If this ta sk had been unde rta ken decades ago, We sle y might have been earlie r a cknowle dge d as a ma jor P rote s tant thinke r ra the r tha n as his s te re otype of pra gma tic organizer so cha racte ris tic of nine tee nth-ce ntury inte rpre te rs . To thos e who ima gine tha t We sle y la cke d a syste ma tic mind,10 I will s how tha t e ve ry ma jor point of classic Chris tia n te a ching is addressed in his ins tructional homilie s , s upple mente d by his essays, journa ls , prefaces, a nd le tte rs, with minima l lapses a nd incongruitie s .11 Within the scope of his fifty-plus years ofwriting, Wesley covere d virtua lly e ve ry pivota l issue of Chris tia n theology, Christology, s ote riology, ecclesiology, pa s tora l care, a nd e thics . It is difficult to find a ny ma jor que s tion of Chris tia n doctrine tha t he grossly disregarded. Though the re is nothing in We sle y or mos t othe r Anglican sources tha t has the s tructura l appearance of the ponde rous dogma tic style of the s e ve nte e nth-ce ntury Luthe ra n or Reformed orthodox dogma tics, s till no essential a rticle of fa ith is le ft una tte nde d, as we will see.12

B. Wesley's Evangelical Connection of Spiritual Formation 1. The Connection To s ta nd “in We s le y’s conne ction” tra ditiona lly has me a nt tha t one looks to him 7“Some Remarks of Mr. Hill’s ‘Review of All the Doctrine s Ta ught by Mr. John Wesley,’”) X:377, quoting Roland Hill. 8“Some Remarks of Mr. Hill’s ‘Review of All the Doctrine s Ta ught by Mr. John Wesley,’”) X:381. In response to Hill, Wesley pa tie ntly re fute d 101 s pe cific a rgume nts a rrange d unde r twenty-four headings. As an experienced forme r teacher of logic, he did not la ck confidence tha t he could “unra ve l truth and falsehood, a lthough a rtfully twis te d together.” 9With the s wolle n shelves of We sley studie s in his tory archives, it is s urpris ing tha t no pre vious write r has a tte mpte d the task presented in this series: a pla in e xpos ition of the core a rgume nts of his teaching, e xplica te d te xt by te xt in his own words , with an a tte mpt to cove r his ma jor writings . ‘“John Deschner, who has writte n the de finitive work on We sley’s Chris tology, ma inta ins tha t “Wesley's the ology is not a settled system of doctrine , as Ca lvin’s or Schleiermacher’s the ologie s are. It is ra the r the e ffort of an energetic mind to orga nize for popula r use the principa l elements of a message” (W C 14). Cf. Albe rt C. Outle r, “John Wesley: Folk-The ologia n,” Theology Today 34 (1977): 150-66. The most e mine nt inte rpre te rs of We s le y—George Croft Ce ll, Albe rt Outle r, Thoma s La ngford, John Deschner, Richa rd He itze nra te r, and Dona ld Thors e n — are a ll uncomforta ble with the cla im tha t Wesley was a systematic the ologia n. The y te nd to regard it as a s tre tch of the ima gina tion to vie w We sle y unde r the rubric of dogma ticia n or systematic the ologica l te a che r or exacting catechist. My purpose is to show tha t this is more pla usible tha n usually thought. "LJW 5:326. 12For doctrina l s umma rie s , see J WO 183-85, 386ff. 23

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

for s piritua l formation. Hundre ds of thous a nds of be lie ve rs in the e ighte e nth and nine te e nth ce nturies s tood fa ithfully within this conne ction, some with gre a te r or lesser distance. The e ntire e a rly Me thodis t Moveme nt was volunta rily a nd pe rs ona lly me ntore d by this re ma rka ble pa s tora l guide. We sle y gave hims e lf unres e rvedly to the pa s tora l ca re of thous a nds in countle s s Englis h, Iris h, We lsh, a nd S cottis h villages, tra ve ling incessa ntly to serve the inte re s ts of be lie ve rs’ s piritua l ma tura tion. Ma ny toda y re ma in oblique ly in We s le y’s e va nge lica l conne ction or re mna nts of it, though more dis ta nce d by time a nd his tory. Some who re main committe d to the churches re s ulting from his minis try are now a sking how the y might again be formed by his wis dom, the truth of his message, a nd the joyful inte grity of his outlook. Others not in the We sleya n fa mily of e va nge lica l churche s can be ne fit by seeing in Wesley a godly lea der of spe cia l s piritua l power. It is re ma rka ble tha t pe rs ons thoroughly imme rs e d in modern consciousness s till seek to re a ppropriate We s ley’s couns e l, not only by means of his writings a nd s e rmons , but also by a tte nding to the roots from which he dre w s tre ngth — e s pe cia lly the pa tris tic, Anglica n, holines s , a nd Re forme d tra ditions . Untold numbers of pe ople a round the globe have been pe rs ona lly forme d by his s pirit, even whe n una wa re of it.

2. The Scope of the Wesleyan Connection Today The fa mily of churche s We s ley’s minis try spa wne d is va st a nd worldwide . It include s not only the e ight-million-me mbe r Unite d Me thodis t Church (la rge r tha n combined Luthe ran a nd Epis copa lia n bodies in the Unite d States) but also a cons picuous a s s ortme nt ofworldwide church bodies tha t have spun off from Me thodis t a nd holine ss re viva l pre a ching. Chie f a mong these are the We sleya n Church, the Free Me thodis t Church, the Church of the Na za re ne , the S a lva tion Army, the Africa n Me thodis t Epis copa l Church, a nd the AME Zion Church tra ditions . Even more numerous worldwide are ma ny forms of cha risma tic a nd Pe nte costa l communitie s tha t pre a ch e ntire s a nctifica tion, assurance, a nd holy living. Nota bly, the Africa n-Initia te d Churches move me nt in Africa has profus e echoes of We s ley’s te a ching. We s ley’s te a ching is a mong the ma jor prototype s of mode rn globa l e va nge lica l the ology. No serious a ccount of the history of world e va nge lica l thought could omit Wesley.

C. My Purpose 1. Why I Write on Wesley: A Note on Vocation A pe rsona l voca tiona l note may he lp some readers get in touch with my motivation for doing this study. My voca tion since 1970 has be e n ce nte re d on the re covery of classic Chris tian te a ching, e s pe cia lly in its e a rly phases in the pa tristic pe riod. Ove r ma ny years, a s ignifica nt pa rt of tha t voca tion has be e n te a ching ca ndida te s for ordina tion in 24

INTRODUCTION

this tra dition. This has extended to providing scholarly resources for the larger Wesleyan family of churches, and evangelicals generally, especially those seeking to recover their vital historic roots. This is why I write . It is not merely an incidental part of my vocation, nor disrelated to that aspect of my vocation that has focused in recent years on postmodern orthodoxy and classical consensual Christianity.13 In the 1980s and early 1990s, I worked steadily on a systematic theology that was grounded in classic, historic Christian teaching. Tha t three-volume work has now been thoroughly revised in a one-volume edition title d Classic Christianity: A S ystematic Theology (San Francisco: HarperCollins, 2009). Since 1979 I have earnestly pledged to my readers that I intend to propose nothing original as if it might be some improvement on apostolic teaching and its early exegesis. Afte r seventeen years of editing the Ancient Christian Commentary on S cripture, focused on patristic texts,141 turn again to the same tree of classic Christianity in its eighteenth-century evangelical form. Its modern expression is the community of faith into which I was born, baptized, and ordained. Many years after I was ordained, 1 was reborn into this faith. I wa nt to show how a pa rticular branch of that pa tristic tra dition, Wesleyan theology, has grown out of the same root of ancient ecumenical teaching. Wesley’s eighteenth-century movement corresponds closely with classic fourth-century consensus Christian teaching. Wesley’s teaching springs out of what he called, in lowercase, the catholic s pirit.15 I see these two tasks — patristic exegesis and Wesleyan preaching — not as conflicte d but as complementary. Both projects are close to the center of my vocation: the rediscovery of ancient ecumenical theology and the recovery of classical Christia nity within my own evolving Wesleyan tra dition.16 This correlation has been neglected in the secondary literature. Many of Wesley’s ultramodern interpreters are focused on accommodating Wesley in ways congenial to contemporary audiences. Some have entirely recast Wesley in terms of liberation theology or process theology or gender studies in a way that leaves Wesley himself only vaguely 13As one who gre w up on the prairie , I have for thre e and a ha lf decade s been te a ching in the Ne w York area, with the dus t of the Okla homa pla ins s till unde r my eyelids. Working in the shadow of the prototype inte rna tiona l cosmopolis, 1 find mys e lf loca te d by ordination in the he a rt of Protesta ntisms second-largest de nomina tion, te a ching in one of its le a ding academic ins titutions . Inwa rdly this feels to me to be some s ort of hidden provide nce beyond mere huma n a rtifice , which places on me a we ighty challenge and opportunity to re ma in fa ithful not only to Wesley but also to We s le ys curre nt orga niza tiona l elites. 14Thoma s C. Ode n, ed., Ancie nt Chris tian Comm e ntary on S cripture , 29 vols. (Downers Grove, IL: Inte rVa rs ity, 1993 - 2010). 15I promis e d my readers in my systematic the ology tha t I would not fois t off Arminia n or Wesleyan or even P rotes ta nt thinking. I pledged nothing ne w tha t would pre te nd to ove rride the wis dom ofclassic Chris tia nity. In these volume s I continue tha t pledge. 16I do not wa nt my readers to draw the uninte nde d conclus ion tha t I have abandoned my longs ta nding consensual pa tris tic classical e ffort as I now refocus on my own Wesleyan tra dition as a mode rn expression ofa ncie nt e cume nica l teaching. 25

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

re cogniza ble . My mis s ion is to le t him speak for hims e lf in his own language to mode rn believers.

2. Clear Exposition Two reference points are cons ta ntly correla ted in wha t follows : the te xt its e lf and our conte mpora ry language s itua tion to which 1 be lie ve the te xt s till speaks. My a im is to offe r a pre se nt-day inte rpre ta tion a nd e xpos ition of We s le y’s teaching in conte mpora ry language, de libe ra te ly seeking to be expressly a ccounta ble to his own text. Two worldvie ws are cons ta ntly linke d in wha t follows : the te xt its e lf, writte n for an e ighte enth-ce ntury audience, a nd our conte mpora ry language s itua tion, to which 1 be lie ve the te xt s till speaks. If the me thod is inductive ly e xpos itory, its inhe re nt orde r is ins tinctive ly syste ma tic. My mode s t ta sk is me rely to a rra nge a nd e xplica te We s le y’s te xts in the pre va iling classic orde r of the a ncie nt Chris tian write rs , but with the special imprint of We s ley’s own prioritie s , colloquia lis ms , idioms , a nd pre dile ctions .17 By "classic orde r” I me a n the cha in of the ologica l re a s oning ge ne ra lly found in the tra dition from Irenaeus and Cyril of Jerusalem through John of Damascus a nd Thoma s Aquinas to John Ca lvin and John Pearson.18

3. Adhering to Primary Sources I have de libe ra te ly focuse d on prima ry sources in this study, le a ving it to others, e s pe cia lly thos e with more his torica l tha n s ys tema tic intere s ts , to purs ue de ve lopme nta l que s tions conce rning We s le y’s the ologica l a nd biogra phica l tra ns formations in the ir s ocia l conte xts .19 Howe ve r intriguing the ps ychologica l, socia l, and his torica l-critica l approaches may be to me, the y have a tra ck re cord of not yie lding profound the ological ins ights . These ins ights re quire te ste d me thods of exegesis a ccording to the a nalogy of fa ith, as We s le y ins iste d. The y a pply the crite ria of internal coherence, unity, a nd continuity of a pos tolic a nd ca nonica l te s timony, a nd a concilia tory a ttitude . The he rme neutica l me thod of this s tudy is to work more with the intra te xtua l the ologica l truth of the prima ry te xt its e lf tha n with the history of its de ve lopme nt.20 l7The re is s urpris ingly little re pe tition in Wesley whe n the seque nce is vie we d e conomica lly in this tra ditiona l orde r. As a write r a nd an e ditor, he was a s tickler for e conomy of style. 18The e xpos itory me thod has not been compre hens ive ly a pplied to We s le ys writings . The leading re ce nt inte rpre te rs of We s le y—Albe rt Outle r, Frank Baker, and Richa rd He itze nra te r—have wise ly sought to place him in his torical conte xt. The y have le ft open the fie ld for s imple e xpos ition. Of those who have trie d to provide a general a ccount of We sle ys theology, see Furthe r Reading at the end of this section. 19Othe r scholars are curre ntly ma king s ignifica nt inquirie s into We sle ys theology, nota bly Randy Ma ddox, Ke nne th Collins , Theodore Runyon, a nd Willia m Abra ha m. The y are s kille d in a nd inte nt on e nte ring into the vast arena of secondary lite ra ture on Wesley to assess its adequacy, a worthy task tha t I do not he re a tte mpt. 20Though I comme nd the work of colleagues who pre fe r to engage the secondary lite ra ture , the more I read it, the more I come to see tha t it has put upon its e lf the limita tions of hype r-his toricism. A 26

INTRODUCTION

This method exists in tension to some extent with some Reformed evangelicals who, without a thorough reading of Wesley’s own writings, may tend to caricature him (against his e xplicit wish) as Pelagian or lacking a sound doctrine of grace. Some Lutherans cannot imagine that Wesley grasped justifica tion by grace through faith. Some Anglicans remember only one thing about Wesley, and that is that he reluctantly pe rmitte d the separation of Methodism from the Church of England. They forget the fact that he himself remained Anglican all his life and resisted precisely that separation with all his might. Mos t of all, Wesley’s own texts resist those Wesleyans who so sentimentalize and idealize his pragmatic skills that he is not taken seriously as an independent thinker. D. History and Doctrine 1. The Chief Mentor of Modern Wesley Studies These volumes stand in a singular relation of appreciation to the work of my incomparable mentor Albe rt C. Outle r — complementary, sympathetic, and grateful. I have spent most of my professional life as a systematic theologian with avid interests in early Christianity. Outle r spent his as a historical theologian with avid interests in ecumenical teaching, ancient and modern. My method is prima rily systematic; Outle r s was prima rily historical. These are complementary methods. The theological method underlying this study weighs in more heavily on divine revelation as a premise of a wholesome historica l inquiry, since the meaning of universal history is the overarching subject of the discipline of theology. Outle r’s method has weighed in more heavily on historical inquiry without neglecting theological implications. This is why 1 remain grateful for Outle r’s enormous contribution but s till remain less bound to critica l historical methods that commonly have a constricted vie w of evidence. In all my writings since the 1970s, I have sought to expand the range of evidence to include “revelation as his tory” (Pannenberg). This is a method that is consistent with Wesley's teachings, although I did not fully grasp it until reading Cyril the Great. The following attempt seeks to order Wesley’s thought cohesively, comprehensively, and systematically. This is a task that my beloved teacher Albe rt Outle r never aspired to do, and in fact may have looked upon somewhat disdainfully. Outle r s vocation was to provide an exhaustive placement of Wesley in his historica l context, showing his sources and accurately describing his thought in its historical-autobiographical development, which he did in an exemplary way. My modest attempt stands on his shoulders. It presupposes his work and the work of other historians in this recent period that he described as the "Third Phase” of Wesley studies, a phase whose methods have been dominated by historians, who, comple me nta ry emphasis is now needed: e mpa thic e xpos ition of the ologica l the me s in Wesley draws dire ctly from his own te xts ra the r tha n from conte mpora ry his toria ns . He re the focus is de libe ra te ly on the prima ry te xts themselves. 27

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

though brillia nt, have not wis he d to e nte r into the plaus ibility of We s le y’s e xpos ition of the plain sense of sacred S cripture .21

2. Whether Wesley Was a Systematic Theologian I have ne ve r a spired to be ing a his toria n in the sense tha t Elie Halevy, V. H. H. Gre en, a nd Richa rd He itze nra te r are prima rily his toria ns . I a m una pologe tica lly an orthodox s chola r with re s pe ct to classic te xts , with lifelong inte re s ts in his torical wisdom. I work una s ha me dly a ccording to the me thods of classic Chris tia n exegesis, which form the founda tion of a ll tha t we toda y ca ll a the ology of re ve la tion.22 If his toria ns s ome time s assume tha t s uch a ta sk is impla us ible or even imposs ible , my purpos e is to s how its via bility in a pa rticula r arena: We s le y’s te a ching.23 Albe rt Outle r ma de We s le y accessible to Wesleyans as a folk the ologia n. I seek to make We sle y accessible to non-We s le ya ns as a wis e te a che r of classic Christia nity. Without de nying or ignoring the intriguing que s tion of how We s le y’s the ology de ve lope d a nd cha nge d ove r time , my que s tion is fa s hione d diffe rently: To wha t degree, if any, does the gis t of the whole of We s le y’s the ological contribution a dmit of cons is te nt cohe sion, with via ble , orga nic conce ption a nd design?24 Thos e who be gin by ins isting tha t the pe rce nta ge is ze ro will have to be convince d by the We s le y te xts themselves. If the percentage is a nything above zero, the n the burde n of proof rests on the e xpos itor to s how te xtua lly tha t the re indeed is in the prima ry te xt a s olid core of cohesive te a ching.25 Tha t is my assignment. 21I a m restless both with those his toria ns who ca nnot ta ke Wesley se riously as a the ologia n a nd with those the ologia ns who refuse to see Wesley in his his torical-inte lle ctua l conte xt. 22If some ma y mis inte rpre t my inte nt as cla iming too much for Wesley as systematician, le t me refine the point more mode s tly: Wesley was an evangelical pre a che r whose intelle ctual te mpe ra me nt e xhibite d a steady conce rn for cohesion and consiste ncy grounde d in a wide database. On this score, I think Wesley is not so ove rtly systematic as Aquina s or Ca lvin or Ba rth, but more so tha n Luthe r or Ne wma n, and e qua lly so with Cra nme r a nd Edwards. 23The me thod of this s tudy resists a s trong tendency a mong some recent his toria ns to re s trict his torica l knowle dge to s cie ntific a nd e mpirica l evidences in a wa y tha t dismisses a ll ta lk of re ve la tion. Wesley was tutore d by Oxford his toria ns who did not na rrow his torica l evidences in this way. Some his toria ns toda y are prone to ca rica ture orthodox Chris tia n teachers as always pre ma ture ly jumping to conclusions, ove rle a ping piles of evidence, mis s ing de ve lopme nta l comple xitie s , and ove rlooking contextua l influe nce s . Orthodox Chris tian teachers have a wide r database tha n do mode rn his toria ns , since the y do not na rrow his torica l knowle dge to e mpirical and s cientific models of knowing. Modern his toria ns are ofte n fixa te d on picking up e phe me ra l pieces of evidence but ne ve r gra s ping the la rge r picture , always too he s ita nt to make judgme nts a bout how the cha nging vie ws of a pe rson cohere through the ir mutations . Some are fixa te d on the spe cifics of the conte xt so much tha t the wis dom tha t motiva te d the m to take a his torica l figure seriously has become diffuse d. In Wesley studies I a dmire the e xcellent work of rigorous his toria ns such as Albe rt Oude r, Fra nk Baker, Richa rd Heitze nrate r, Ala n K. Wa lz, and my esteemed colleagues a t Dre w Unive rs ity — Ke nne th E. Rowe and Cha rle s Yrigoyen. I think the ir splendid work s till yearns for a la rge r pre s e nta tion of evidence tha t can be based only on the premises mos t dear to Wesley: divine re ve la tion and the a uthority ofa pos tolic te a ching for unde rs ta nding unive rs a l history. 24The mos t systematically ignore d aspect ofthe secondary lite ra ture on We sle y’s te a ching is the triune fra me ofhis theology, e mbra cing his orde ring of dis cipline , sacrament, pastoral practice, and mora l reasoning. In the s e ction on the Trinity in this volume (pp. 56 - 64), I will s how how importa nt this was to him, and how triune re a soning is saturated throughout the e ntire e nte rpris e , in his doctrine s of God the Creator, God the Son, and God the Holy S pirit. 25Focal questions to be pursued are the following: Does We sle ys te a ching illumine the evangelical 28

INTRODUCTION

Wesley has been prematurely dismissed as unsystematic on the ground that his writings were largely occasional and not ordered in a methodical, systematic manner.26 My objective is to show that all of his occasional writings indeed had a cohesive and implicitly systematic core. Tha t core is textually available to anyone who cares to examine it fairly. Wesley is a special sort of systematic theologian — his interrelated reflections emerge dire ctly out of his wide range of active pastoral relationships. This is especially noticeable in his letters, where pastoral and moral advice and spiritual admonition abound yet integrate into a connected pattern of deliberate reflection. Readers who look for a systematic theologian strongly grounded in pastoral care will find it more in Wesley than in Friedrich Schleiermacher or Karl Barth, who ostensibly might otherwise appear to be more systematic. The remainder of this series, in fact, will be devoted to the pas toral and moral aspects of Wesley’s teaching. One furthe r whimsical note: though Wesley is often imagined to be unduly sober and humorless, I have found many engaging passages where he radiates brillia nt sparks of wit and comic perception. Rather than merge them into a separate section on humor, I have decided to let them lie quie tly in the text, awaiting the readers unanticipated discovery. There is no other motive greater in my mind than proactively sharing with readers the steady joy 1 have found in reading Wesley, which centers in taking pleasure in the good news of God’s own coming. 3. How to Make Practical Use of This Study

It is customary in a preface to sketch the ways in which the work has pra ctical utility or moral relevance. This series, for example, may be practically used for devotional reading, for moral reflection, or even for topical sermon preparation. Even more so, it will serve as a reference work for ide ntifying the range of Wesley’s ideas and opinions. The indexes and Further Reading sections will be the guide to the reader who is particularly interested in a topic, whether on ecological recovery, moral relativism, enthusiasm, catholicity, experience, paradise, Final justifica tion, providence, or any of countless other topics. These may intrigue the curious, inspire the devout, or give courage to those weary in well doing. Wesley’s teaching awaits being fruitfully applied to numerous pressing issues of contemporary society, such as addictive behaviors, poverty, and punk nihilism. pastoral task today? How fully developed are his doctrine s of cre a tion, provide nce , the triune God, the ologica l me thod, sin and grace, jus tifica tion and s a nctifica tion, Word and sacraments, a nd eschatology? It is commonly acknowledged tha t Wesley gave e xplicit a tte ntion to selected areas ofthe ology such as soteriology a nd ecclesiology, and the work of the Holy S pirit, but to what extent did Wesley attend s ufficie ntly to the wider range of the ologica l que stions so as to be rightly regarded as a reliable guide to Chris tia n doctrine as a whole? Is it possible to s ort out We s le ys essays, sermons, and occasional writings in te rms of the categories of classical doctrine s of systematic the ology and s urve y the m ge nera lly in a brie f scope? 26It need not count against the cohesive thought of a write r tha t he is capable of occasional writings in which s pe cific challenges are answered, provide d those occasional writings are cons is tent with the la rge r lite ra ry whole . The a tte mpts to e xpla in this cohesion through va rious the orie s ofWesley’s developme nt have ofte n re s ulte d in an unnecessary fra gme nta tion of tha t wholeness. 29

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

Ins te a d, I pre fe r to a le rt re ade rs to wha t is mos t like ly to be e njoyed from these pages: We s le y’s good sense, practical wis dom, a nd nons pe cula tive e a rthy realism.

Further Reading on Wesley's Theology Overviews of Wesley's Theology

Baker, Frank. “The Doctrine s in the Discipline.” In From Wesley to Asbury: S tudies in Early Am e rican Methodism, 162-82. Durham, NC: Duke Unive rs ity Press, 1976. Burwash, Nathaniel. Wesley’s Doctrinal S tandards. Introduction. Toronto: Willia m Briggs, 1881; re print, Salem, OH: Schmul, 1967. Campbell, Ted A. Methodis t Doctrine: The Essentials. Nashville: Abingdon, 1999. Cannon, Willia m R. Theology ofJohn Wesley: W ith S pecial Reference to the Doctrine ofJustification. Ne w York: Abingdon, 1946. Cell, George C. The Rediscovery ofJohn Wesley. Ne w York: He nry Holt, 1935. Coke, Thomas, and Francis Asbury. The Doctrines and Dis cipline of the Me thodis t Episcopal Church in America. Philadelphia: He nry Tuckniss, 1798. Collins , Kenneth J. A Faithful Witness: John Wesley’s Hom ile tical Theology. Wilmore , KY: Wesleyan Heritage, 1993. --------. The Theology ofJohn Wesley: Holy Love and the S hape of Grace. Nashville: Abingdon, 2007. --------. Wesley on S alvation. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1989. Harper, Steve. John Wesley’s Message for Today. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1983.

30

Lee, Umphrey. John Wesley and Modern Religion. Nashville: Cokesbury, 1936. Mickey, Paul. Essentials of Wesleyan Theology. Gra nd Rapids: Zondervan, 1980. Norwood, Frederick A. “Roots and S tructure of Wesley’s Theology.” In The S tory ofAm e rican Methodism, chap. 3. Nashville: Abingdon, 1974. Outle r, Albe rt C. “John Wesley as Theologian: The n and Now.” MH12, no. 4 (1974): 64-82. --------. “Toward a Reappraisal of John Wesley as Theologian." Perkins S chool of Theology Journal 14, no. 2 (1961): 5-14. --------, ed. John Wesley. Introduction, 3 - 33. Libra ry of Protestant Theology. Ne w York: Oxford Unive rs ity Press, 1964. Pope, Willia m Burt. A Compendium of Chris tian Theology. 3 vols. London: Wesleyan Me thodis t Book-Room, 1880. Ralston, Thomas N. Elements ofDivinity. Ne w York: Abingdon, 1924. Slaatte, Howa rd A. Fire in the Brand: Introduction to the Creative Work and Theology ofJohn Wesley. Ne w York: Exposition, 1963. Sugden, Edward H. Wesley’s S tandard S ermons. London: Epworth, 1921; 3rd ed., 1951. See introduction and annotations. Summers, Thomas O. S ystematic Theology. 2 vols. Edited by J. J. Tigert. Nashville: Me thodis t Publishing House South, 1888.

INTRODUCTION

Watson, Philip. The Message of the Wesleys. Ne w York: Ma cmilla n, 1964. Watson, Richard. Theological Institutes. 2 vols. Ne w York: Mason and Lane, 1836,1840; edited by John M’Clintock, Ne w York: Carlton & Porter, 1850. Willia ms , Colin W. John Wesley's Theology Today. Nashville: Abingdon, 1960. Systematic Theologies Largely Based on Wesley's Theology

Banks, John S. A Manual of Chris tian Doctrine. 1st Ame rica n e dition. Edited by J. J. Tigert. Nashville: Lamar & Barton, 1924. Binney, Amos, with Daniel Steele. Theological Compend Improved. New York: Phillips and Hunt, 1875. Burwash, Nathaniel. Manual of Christian Theology. 2 vols. London: Horace Marshall, 1900. Gamertsfelder, S. S ystematic Theology. Ha rrisburg, PA: Evangelical Publishing House, 1952. Me rrill, Stephen M. Aspects of Chris tian Experience. Ne w York: Me thodis t Book Concern, 1862. Mile y, John. S ystematic Theology. Reprint, Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1989. Miner, Raymond. S ystematic Theology. 2 vols. Cincinna ti: Hitchcock and Walden, 1877-79. Outle r, Albe rt C. Theology in the Wesleyan S pirit. Nashville: Tidings, 1975. Pope, Willia m Burt. A Compendium of Chris tian Theology. 3 vols. London: Wesleyan Me thodis t Book-Room, 1880. Ralston, Thomas N. Elements ofDivinity. Ne w York: Abingdon, 1924.

Summers, Thomas O. S ystematic Theology. 2 vols. Edited by J. J. Tigert. Nashville: Me thodis t Publishing House South, 1888. Tille tt, Wilbur. Personal S alvation. Nashville: Barbee and Smith, 1902. Watson, Richard. Theological Institutes. 2 vols. Ne w York: Mason and Lane, 1836,1840; edited by John M’Clintock, Ne w York: Ca rlton & Porter, 1850. Weaver, Jonathan. Chris tian Theology. Dayton, OH: Unite d Brethren Publishing House, 1900. Wynkoop, Mildre d Bangs. Foundations of Wesleyan-Arminian Theology. Kansas City, MO: Beacon Hill, 1967. The Relation of Wesley's Theology to His Biography

Clarke, Adam. Mem oirs of the Wesley Family. London: J. & T. Clarke, 1823. Coke, Thomas, and He nry Moore. The Life ofthe Rev. John Wesley, A.M. London: G. Paramore, 1792. Gambold, John. “The Character of Mr. John Wesley.” AIM 21 (1798). Green, Vivia n H. H. The Young Mr. Wesley. London: Edward Arnold, 1961. Heitzenrater, Richard P. The Elusive Mr. Wesley. 2 vols. Nashville: Abingdon, 1984. --------. Mirror and Me m ory: Reflections on Early Methodism. Nashville: Abingdon, 1989. Schmidt, Ma rtin. John Wesley: A Theological Biography. 2 vols. in 3. Nashville: Abingdon, 1963-73. Tuttle, Robert. John Wesley: His Life and Theology. Gra nd Rapids: Zondervan, 1978. Tyerman, Luke. The Life and Times of the Rev. John Wesley. 3 vols. Ne w York: Harper, 1872.

31

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1 Bibliographical Resources

Baker, Frank, comp. A Union Catalogue of the Publications ofJohn and Charles Wesley. Durham, NC: Duke Unive rsity Press, 1966. --------. "Unfolding John Wesley: A Survey of Twe nty Years’ Study in Wesley’s Thought.” QR 1, no. 1 (1980). Bassett, Paul M. “Finding the Real John Wesley.” Chris tianity Today 28, no. 16 (1984). Green, Richard. The Works ofJohn and Charles Wesley: A Bibliography. 2nd ed. Ne w York: AMS, 1906. Jarboe, Betty M. John and Charles Wesley: A Bibliography. Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow, 1987.

32

Jones, Arthur E. A Union Checklist of Editions of the Publications ofJohn and Charles Wesley: Based upon the “Works ofJohn and Charles Wesley: A Bibliography”by R ichard Green (1906). Ma dison, NJ: Dre w University, 1960. Rowe, Ke nne th E. Me thodis t Union Catalogue. Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow, 1975 Humor in Wesley

Cra wford, Robert C. "John Wesley’s Humour.” W MM 157 (1934): 313-15. Foster, He nry J. "Wesley’s Humour.” W MM 126 (1903): 446-49. Page, W. Scott. “Wesley and the Sense of Humour.” MR (1906): 13. Perkins, J. P. “The Humour of John Wesley.” W MM 143 (1920): 697-98.

VOLUME ONE GOD AND PROVIDENCE

JOHN WESLEY’S TEACHINGS

CHAPTER 1

In a series of homilies from his mature years, Wesley entered into a meticulous, detailed consideration of the divine attributes, especially the eternity, omnipresence, and unity of God. Though sparse, these homilies convey sufficient argument to indicate the main lines of Wesley’s doctrine of God. A. Attributes of God The ancient Christian writers and the earliest ecumenical councils formed the foundation for the Anglican evangelicalism that Wesley affirmed. He was also very close to classic Protestant sources — Luther and Augsburg, Calvin and the Heidelberg Confession — regarding the knowledge and attributes of God. Wesley summarized key points of the doctrine of God he had received in his renowned "Letter to a Roman Catholic”: "As I am assured that there is an infinite and independent Being and that it is impossible there should be more than one, so I believe that this one God is the Father of all things,” especially of self-determining rational creatures, and tha t this one “is in a peculiar manner the Father of those whom he regenerates by his Spirit, whom he adopts in his Son as coheirs with him.”1 The eternity of God received more explicit treatment in Homily #54, "On Eternity." 1. The Eternity of God a. Ete rnity Pas t and Future The text of the homily "On Eternity" is Psalm 90:2: “From everlasting to everlasting, thou a rt God” [Homily #54 (1789), B 2:358-72; J #54, VI: 189-98]. As immensity is boundless space, so eternity is "boundless duration.”2 As omnipresence refers to God’s relation to space, as present in every location, eternity refers to God’s sovereign relation to time. God is intimately present in every moment. There was no time when God was not. There will be no time when God will not be.3 If e te rnity is from everlasting to everlasting, it can be thought of as ■“A Le tte r to a Roman Catholic,” J WO 494. 2“On Eternity," B 2:358, sec. 1. 3"On Eternity,” B 2:359, J VI: 189-98, sec. 3; J WO 455.

35

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

dis tinguis hable in two dire ctions : (1) Ete rnity pas t is tha t duration tha t reaches from everlasting, e te rnity be fore cre ation, time vie we d as before, the e te rnity tha t precedes this now and a ll pa st nows, which We sle y calls a parte ante. (2) Ete rnity ye t to come is the dura tion tha t reaches to everlasting, which will have no end, the whole of time a fter now, e verything e te rnally on the future side of now {a parte post).4 Time vie we d s ynoptica lly is a “fra gme nt of e te rnity broke n off at both ends.”5 The e te rnity of God embraces a nd s urrounds time . Time is tha t portion of dura tion tha t begins whe n the world begins a nd ends whe n the world comes to its fina l days. We do not see a ll of time , but only a mome nta ry glimps e , which we ca ll the pre s e nt.6 b. Ete rnity as De cis ion Now The fa ithful s ta nd be fore God in a way tha t keeps the m in the presence of eternity. When fa ith receives God as the Lord of time , e ve rything is changed, a ll re lations hips are reshaped, a ll are re born, a ll things be come new. S ocia l a nd e thical re s pons ibility come from tha t change of he art of each pe rs on one by one, in due time a ffe cting the flow of the politica l orde r a nd e conomic life . Only the renewed, whole pe rs on who is se rious a bout e te rnity is rightly pre pa red to work e ffe ctive ly to make a be tte r society. We sle y offe re d a pra ctica l wa y of thinking pe rs ona lly a bout the e te rnity of God by pla cing his he a re r ima gina tive ly on the brink of a he re -a nd-now de cis ion: think ofyours e lf as de ciding now for or agains t e te rnal life . Each he a re r is invite d to e nter now into an une nding re la tions hip with the Ete rna l by choos ing a ha ppy e te rnity, a life of e te rna l blessedness, or the mis e ry of mis s ing wha t is e te rnally good and worthy of wors hip. This is the choice be ing offe re d in the e me rging re ign of God. This de cis ion is be ing ma de implicitly e ve ry te mpora l mome nt. It is hidden ta citly in e ve ry single huma n e xperie nce of time . This continuing a ct of choos ing has va st consequences for huma n happiness. It is no e xa gge ra tion to vie w huma n existence as de ciding e ve ry mome nt towa rd the joy of e te rna l life or the de s pa ir of e te rna l e mptine ss.7 Only whe n we think of ourselves as s ta nding on the edge of e ithe r a ha ppy or a pitia ble e te rnity does prese nt life be come me a ningful a nd serious. "The Cre a tor bids thee now s tre tch out thy ha nd e ithe r to the one or to the other.”8 Even if we doubt this, we can te s t the hypothe s is tha t our pe rs ona l live s will continue be yond bodily de ath in e ternity. We a ll have a high stake in our re la tion to our e te rna l future . This pre mis e a lone has the la tent power of tra ns forming huma n actions. 4“On Eternity," B 2:362, J VI: 189-98, sec. 7; cf. “The Unity ofthe Divine Being," 4:60, proem. 5“On Eternity,” B 2:360, J VI:189-98, sec. 3; "On Predestination,” B 3:416-17, sec. 5; Augustine, Confessions 11-12. 6“The Imperfection of Human Knowledge," B 2:570, J VE339, sec. 1.3. 7“Human Life a Dream,” B 4:108 -19; J VII:318 - 25. 8“On Eternity," B 2:368 - 71, secs. 17 -19. 36

GOD

2. Time a. The Fle e t Flow of Time Every moment of time has the fleeting character of beginning and ending. That is what characterizes it as time.9 It is not a sad thought that time, which had a finite beginning in God and which has a fleeting present, will have a consummate ending in God. The fa ithful know that the Sovereign over time is in process of duly completing and fittingly refinishing the good but fallen creation. Nothing that happens within the distortions of history has power to undo God’s long-range eternal purpose within time .10 It is evident that we experience our living souls only as embodied within space. Similarly, we experience eternity only from within the crunch of time. This is why we who are so enmeshed in time and its demands are so permeated with finitude. We have great difficulty in grasping the very concept of e te rnity because of this condition of being so wrapped up in time. Our human awareness, as creatures of fleeting time, can form only a veiled idea of eternity, and that only by fragile analogies. As God is immense beyond any conceivable finite immensity, so e te rnity is infinite beyond any imaginable duration of time.11 Time remains for temporal minds an ever-flowing mystery. There is no nontemporal moment or place for the finite mind to step away, as if to depart from time, to think trans-temporally about time, as if we had a point outside time to perceive time. Time is an uncommon mystery. It is difficult to wrap our minds around precisely because we are creatures lodged in time. It is right here in time that we are called to understand ourselves within the frame of reference of eternity, living life in this world as if accountable to the giver of time .12 b. God in the Now Wha t divides past and future is now, the infinitely fleeting moment that can never be possessed as a fixed entity. We can never capture or hold a moment except in the tenuous form of memory. This is why temporal life is rightly compared to a dream.13 Wha t we call “now" keeps on vanishing, eluding our grasp, changing its face. Yet the present is the only position from which anyone can ever know or see the world, through the tiny keyhole of this constantly disappearing moment we call "now.” This fleeting present lies “between two eternities.”14 The moment we say "now,” we have already lost the now in which we just said "now.” We have this little splinter of ongoing time, which its e lf is a continuing refraction of the eternal.15 9B 2:360. 10B 2:358 - 70, 420 - 24; 3:196 - 97. 11 “On Eternity,” B 2:360, secs. 4-5. 12“On Eternity,” B 2:360 - 61, secs. 4-6. 13“Huma n Life a Dream,” B 4:109-14, secs. 1-9. 14“On Eternity," B 2:360, sec. 4. 15The P la tonic idea tha t time is the unfolding expression of e te rnity is ta ke n ca ptive by Chris t in the inca rna tion. It is a powe rful idea, in We sle ys view, tha t what we are e xperiencing right now is precisely e te rnity e nte ring time, as seen by biblica l re ve la tion in the na tivity of the Son. 37

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

God me e ts us in time , but as the incompa rable Crea tor of time , God is not bound by time . Only one who is s imulta ne ous ly pre s e nt with e ve ry mome nt of time can fully know the future and past reaches of e te rnity.16 Tha t one we ca ll God. c. Knowing Time from within Time God is ra dica lly diffe rent from cre a ture s in tha t God inha bits a ll e ternity, whereas cre a ture s inha bit fle e ting successive te mpora l mome nts he ld togethe r by me mory a nd ima gina tion. Since God has a pre se nt re la tion to a ll past a nd future mome nts , God can know time in a fa r la rge r way tha n our knowing. The whole of time is be yond our knowing. God’s comple te me mory a nd fore knowle dge of time do not coe rcive ly pre de te rmine events to come or a rbitra rily undo events tha t have occurre d.17 God’s re la tion to the future a nd past is e ntire ly diffe re nt from ours. Time -dre nche d minds have limite d access through m e m ory to the ir pe rs onal past a nd to the ir future through im agination. Me a nwhile , the e te rna l God is always a lre a dy pre s e nt to the past. God embraces the e ntire ty of a ll time s . Ha rde r to conce ive is the pre mis e tha t God is pre se nt to a ll future mome nts , a pre mis e essential to the Chris tia n te a ching of the e te rna l God —tha t God already knows the future because he is e te rnally pre s e nt to a ll mome nts . “S trictly speaking, there is no ‘fore ’knowle dge , no more tha n ‘a fte r’knowle dge with God: but a ll things are known to Him as pre se nt from e te rnity to e te rnity.”18 This does not me a n tha t God de te rmine s the future so as to ignore or a rbitra rily ove rrule huma n fre e dom. Divine fore knowle dge does not imply pre de te rmina tion. It s imply means tha t God knows wha t outcome s the fre e dom of creatures will bring, because he dwe lls in the future . The omniscie nt God knows how the free choices of cre a ture s will interplay with incalcula ble continge ncie s , because he has a ccompa nie d e ve ry step of e ve ry hypothe tica l choice. God has be come pa radoxica lly revealed in his tory as ha ving a lre a dy se cure d final outcome s tha t are s till in process of unfolding in the de cis ions of free cre a ture s in time.19 Nothing is ta ke n away from the re a lity of huma n choice by the fa ct tha t God dwe lls in the future as we ll as the now. d. Whe the r S piritual Cre ature s Have a Be ginning in Time The huma n s oul [psuche, anim a) is the living aspect of huma n existence in time . Through conception and birth we are e ntrus te d with soul, which is to say a life, an e nlive ning of flesh. The s oul is ge ne ra te d in sexual procre a tion as a gift of God. Once give n, psuche continue s to e xis t be yond de a th as a re la tion with the e te rna l Life -give r. Jewish a nd Chris tia n S cripture s promis e tha t the soul will be re unite d with the body in the re s urrection on the la s t day. The s oul is cre a te d a nd hence is 16"On Eternity,” B 2:366-70, secs. 14-18. 17“On Eternity,” B 2:359, sec. 3. ISENNT on 1 Peter 1:2; “On Predestination,” B 2:420, sec. 15. 19“On Eternity,” B 2:360f., secs. 4-5. 38

GOD

not e te rna l in time past; but ha ving been created, it does not fina lly come to nothing in death. A corps e is a body without life — tha t is, no s oul resides in the body. De a th is de fine d as the s e pa ra tion of life (tha t which God bre athe s into the body) from the body. When the motion of the body ceases, its ca rdiova s cula r move me nt and bre athing cease. The life or s oul bre a the d into the body by God leaves the body but the re by does not s imply e nd; it a wa its a final re ckoning. Tha t e nd-time e ve nt is ca lle d the general re s urre ction. Wha t happens at the e nd of his tory is the mys te ry of bodily re s urre ction in a glorified body tha t tra nsce nds s imple phys ica lity and ye t is a re s urrection of the same body. De a th does not e nd the life of the soul or even fina lly of the body, since in the re s urre ction, body a nd s oul are re unite d.20 e. W he the r Mate rial Cre ation Is Ete rnal Ma tte r is not e te rna l, since ma tte r is created. Yet ma tte r once created will not be a nnihila te d but will fina lly be tra ns forme d so as to mirror once again the beauty a nd goodness of the origina l cre a tion. Once God makes ma tte r, he pe rmits it to continually change, but not so as to be e xte rmina te d. The Almighty has s ufficie nt power, of course, to a nnihila te atoms, but no reason to do so.21 We s le y a rgue d for the dura bility of a tomic ma tte r through wha te ve r cos mic changes occur. Though cre a ture s may lose the ir pre s e nt form, e ve ry s ubpa rticle of e ve ry a tom endures, even while be ing tra ns muted, unde r one form or othe r, to the fulfillme nt of time in e te rnity. Even dia monds , the ha rde s t of phys ica l substances, may unde r e xtre me heat be turne d to dus t, ye t as dus t the y continue.22 No cre a ture shares with God the a ttribute of e te rna l aseity. This means tha t God’s be ing is necessary be ing. It e xists without be ginning. "Ye t there is no a bsurdity in s upposing tha t a ll cre a ture s are e te rna l a parte post. All ma tte r inde ed is continua lly cha nging ... but tha t it is changeable does in nowis e imply tha t it is perishable. The substance ma y re main one a nd the same, though unde r innume rable differe nt forms.”23 The promis e d ne w cre a tion implie s not the e ra dica tion of the old but its tra nsforma tion. Wha t is promis e d is a ne w heaven a nd ne w e a rth whe re nothing has been de stroye d, a full re nova tion without a nnihilation. It “will me lt" but “not pe ris h."2* As ma tte r changes in form but with its substance re ma ining through differe nt forms , so in the case of the soul does life re ma in a fte r death, ye t in a differe nt s piritua l form.25 f How Faith Trans form s the Te m poral W orld The re me dy for huma n de s pa ir ove r e ve r-pa s s ing time is fa ith. Tha t means 20“On Eternity,” B 2:361, sec. 6. 21 “On Eternity,” B 2:362, sec. 7. 22Ibid. 23“On Eternity,” B 2:360, sec. 7. 24“On Eternity,” B 2:361, sec. 7, ita lics added. 25“On Eternity,” B 2:361 -63, sec. 7. 39

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

coming by grace to trus t in the trus ta bility of the Ete rna l One who gives life . Whe the r the s oul is e te rnally ha ppy or s e lf-a lie na te d hinges on whe the r a pe rson trus ts in the trus tworthine s s of God who comes be fore a nd a fte r a ll things . Faith wa lks continually in the awareness of the unseen Ete rnal One , me dita ting da ily on tha t one who does not pass, who puts a ll things te mpora l in fitting proportion a nd pe rspe ctive.26 God presides ove r e ve ry individua l life as pa tie ntly as ove r the whole universe. Each of us has a s hort time to live in a bodily sense, perhaps a fe w decades at most, perhaps no time a t all, since even the young and he a lthy are vulnera ble to a ccide nt a nd illness. But no one, howe ver vulne ra ble , is de prive d ofsome level of re cognition tha t time is coming a nd going. The de cisive fra me of reference in which to unde rs ta nd our own brie f live s is e te rnity, a thought both s obering a nd e xhila ra ting.27 g. How Faith R e quire s De cis ion This vis ion of e te rnity calls each he a re r to a he re -a nd-now choice with e te rnal consequences.28 Ra ther tha n offe ring a s pe cula tive the ory of e te rnity, We s le y asked his hearers pe rs ona lly a nd earnestly, if your life is inde ed cast within time , which stands always in re la tion to the ete rna l, wha t are you choos ing to do with it? Ete rnity places a decisive cha lle nge be fore our lives, calls us to a s pecific de cis ion: a re la tion of e te rnal happiness with the e te rna l Life -give r, or a re la tion of e te rna l mis e ry in turning away from tha t e te rna l happiness. We are ra tional creatures a nd have the powe r to choose. How we live out our lives in this sphere is decisive for e te rnity 29 Evangelical pre a ching leads to a single point: each of us is now ma king a decis ion a bout e te rnity. Now is the time to place our time in re la tion to e te rnity. The gospel provide s a way. Now, a fter all, is the only mome nt we concre te ly experience. The re is a gre a t diffe re nce be twe e n the s oul tha t lives fore ve r ha ppily glorifying God, even a mid the loss of cre a ture ly goods, a nd the s oul tha t mourns fore ve r the loss of creature ly goods a nd resents the Give r for those losses.30 No one becomes e te rnally ha ppy or mis e ra ble except by his or he r own choice .31 Gra ce provide s choice with cons ta nt options to move towa rd the truth. The re is no pre te mpora l divine decree tha t conde mns us to unha ppine ss or de te rmine s us a bs olute ly to happiness so as to circumvent huma n fre e dom. Those who pa rticipa te by fa ith in the e te rna l life of God through the Son are ta ke n up into a blessed e te rnity. If the "ha ppy life” is to share in the cre a tive willing a nd working of God in his tory, the mis e ra ble life is its oppos ite , se pa rate d from God’s own life , a lie na te d from it e ntire ly. Whe n we choose te mpora l values ove r the Crea tor, the Source and End ofa ll finite values, the n our lives be come miserable 26“On Eternity," B 2:368-72, sec. 17. 27“On Eternity,” B 2:368-71, secs. 17-19. 28B 1:549; 2:286,296-97; 4:327,402. 29“On Re de e ming the Time,” B 3:322 - 32; cf. Cha rle s Wesley, “Awa ke , Thou Tha t Sleepest,” B 1:142-58. 30“On Eternity,” B 2:368-72, secs. 17-20. 31“On Eternity," B 2:372, sec. 20. 40

GOD

because the y are ill-time d, out of proper focus, off ta rget. In consequence of the primitive fa ll of huma nity, this off-ce nte re dne s s has be come our pe rva s ive condition a nd will re ma in our huma n condition till na ture is cha nge d by grace.32 Clos ely pa ra lle l with the e te rnity of God is the omnipre s e nce of God, which We sle y took up in Homily #118. 3. The Omnipresence of God The te xt of “On the Omnipre s e nce of God” is Je remia h 23:24: “Do not 1 fill heaven a nd earth?” [Homily #118 (1788), B 4:39 - 47; J #118, VII:238-44]. Finite minds are inca pa ble of fully gra s ping God’s omnipre s e nce , because the knowe r re ma ins finite ly loca lized in each a nd e ve ry pe rce ption. a. W he the r God Is Pre s e nt Eve rywhe re Even whe n fle eing from God, we find ourselves me e ting the one from whom we fle e (Ps. 139). “The re is no point of space, whe the r within or without the bounds of cre a tion, whe re God is not.”33 We sle y cha lle nge d de is tic ra tiona lis ts who argued tha t God firs t cre a te d the n a ba ndone d the world to its own devices, le a ving the Cre a tor functiona lly absent from the world. God’s holines s addresses a nd pe rva de s the whole of cre a tion — s piritua l and physical: “‘Do not 1 fill heaven a nd earth?’ declares the Lo r d ” (Jer. 23:24 NIV). Both the unseen world of the s pirit a nd the seen world of physical cre a tion are penetrate d by God’s e te rna l presence. As Jonah discove re d, there is no place to hide from the presence of the one who creates a nd susta ins a ll s pa tia l loca tions .34 The fa ithful ce lebrate the abode of God as both tra ns ce nding a nd e mbra cing a ll time a nd space.35 Take a grain of sand in your hand. Compa re its ma gnitude not jus t with a sand dune but with the whole of space. Compa re d to the boundlessness of God, this world of space stands in the same re la tion as the millionth pa rt of a gra in of sand stands to known space. Yet even with such imme ns ity, the cosmos re ma ins measurable and bounde d. All its physical expressions are finite , hence ne xt to nothing in re la tion to the infinite.36 Time a nd space are trans cende d by the boundlessness of God. The Give r a nd Me a s ure r of space ca nnot be me a s ure d by s pa tia l qua ntitie s . Howe ve r one might ima gine the cos mic imme ns ity, God is present a t e ve ry discre te point, from the s malle s t speck, the tinie s t spa rrow, e ve ry niche of time a nd space, to the utte rmos t pa rts of the seas a nd heavens, a nd unknown galaxies.37 b. W he the r The re Are Othe r Unive rs e s Are other unive rs e s possible? Whe the r space is fille d with ma tte r, we do not 32“On Eternity,” B 2:368-72, secs. 17-20. 33“On the Omnipre s e nce of God,” B 4:42, sec. 1.1. 34“On the Omnipre s e nce of God,” B 4:42, sec. 1.1; 4:39 - 47; J VIl:238 - 44. 3SLJW 5:300; B 1:123-24; 2:502, 538 - 39, 569 - 70; 4:39-50. 36“On the Omnipre s e nce of God,” B 4:42, secs. 1.2, 3; cf. quota tion from Cypria n in "Wha t Is Ma n? " Ps. 8:3-4, B 3:458, sec. 2.3. 37“The Imperfe ction of Huma n Knowledge,” B 2:570,1 VI:338, sec. 1.2.

41

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

know e mpirica lly, but we ca n know by the a na logy of fa ith tha t wha teve r space e xists is fore ve r a ccompa nie d by God the Cre a tor, “who fills e ve rything in e ve ry wa y” (Eph. 1:23 NIV). Suppose we ima gine a space be yond knowa ble spaces. We s le y toye d with the fa nta s y as to whe ther some hypothe s ize d "space be yond space” might be conceived. Suppose we could ima gine the e ntire e xte nt of the cosmos — would there the n be any space outs ide the cosmos? If there is, tha t too would be bounde d by the boundlessness of God, for God as s ingula r Crea tor transcends a ll conce ivable worlds . Even if we pos it myria d other cre a tions a bout which we know nothing, the same re as oning applies. The one God is present to a ll possible cre a tions ima gina ble. God is not me re ly the Cre a tor of the unive rs e we see, but of a ll tha t ca n be conceived. Othe rwis e , God would not be tha t necessary one tha n which no gre a te r be ing can be conceive d. No cre a te d orde r is conce iva ble without pos iting a cre ator. The re is no cos mic design without a designer.38 The omnipres e nt God is as a tte ntive to a nd e na bling of the tinie s t a tomic eleme nt, as of the whole cosmos, s us ta ining each a nd gove rning all, influe ncing the aggregate noncoe rcive ly without de s troying the fre e will of ra tiona l cre a ture s . When God gives huma ns fre e dom, it is not an a ba ndonme nt to the coe rcive forces of na ture. It is not a de ce it tha t only pre te nds to but does not offe r viable selfde termining fre e dom.39 c. W he the r God Can Be Conce ive d as without the W orld To pos it a world without God is to pos it nothing, for there ca nnot be a n e ffect without a cause. The world minus God adds up e ntirely to nothing. God minus the world remains comple te ly God. Nothing has be e n s ubtra cte d from God by the absence of a pa rticular world. God’s existence is not de pe nde nt on the world’s existence; othe rwis e , some cre a ture would be come biza rre ly necessary to the Cre ator.40 Suppose we fantas ize the pre mis e tha t only God exists a nd not any world. That of course is a dre a m tha t could only be dre a med by a fre e pe rs onal agent living in an a ctua l world. So tha t idea is intrins ically absurd. We can e nte rta in such fantasies only because a ta ngible world has inde ed be e n created. But even gra nting such a fa ntas tic premis e, God would re ma in the incompa ra ble Crea tor s till able to choose to create or not create any such conce iva ble world, which would re main de pe nde nt in e ve ry mome nt of time a nd space on the s us ta ining powe r of the Cre ator.41 This ra dica lly dis tinguis he s the J ude o-Chris tia n na ming of God from a ll pa ntheisms. All pa nthe is tic vie ws pre s ume a source of be ing continuous with or insepara ble from the world or re ducible to the world its e lf. The re s ult is the irra tiona lity tha t God is the world. If God is the world, the n the a ccompa nying illus ion is tha t the 38“On the Omnipresence of God," B 4:42 - 43, sec. 2. 39“On the Omnipresence of God," B 4:42 - 44, sec. 2. 40“On the Omnipresence of God,” B 4:43 - 44, sec. 2; J VII:238-44. 41“On the Omnipresence ofGod," B 4:44; cf. 2:13. 42

GOD

world is vie we d as God’s body. This is not me re ly a conce ptua l e rror but a profound s in of the mind tha t at root is a dis torte d a ct of idola trous willing.42 All notions of the s e lf-s ufficie ncy of ma tte r or of the oozing or e ma na ting of ma tte r from God are notions fore ign to the He bre w Bible a nd the Ne w Te sta me nt. All conceivable re ductions of God to cre aturely be ing, whe the r by s ke ptica l na tura lis m or a nimis tic na tivis m or e a rth-mothe r vita lis m or philos ophica l pa nthe is m, are s ha rply re pudia te d.43 Some ca nnot ima gine God without a world. The y ins is t tha t since God’s ove rflowing love is by s ome e xterna l necessity bound to be cre a tive, God ca nnot be conce ive d except in re la tion to a cre a tion. We sle y answered tha t a supposed “cre a tor” who from the outs e t re ma ins de pende nt upon the world thus “cre a te d” (so to speak) is not the Crea tor a tte ste d in S cripture who cre a te d "heaven a nd e a rth” — the cre eda l wa y of pointing s ynoptica lly to a ll tha t has be e n created. "Whe re no cre a ture is, s till God is the re . The presence or absence of any or a ll cre atures makes no diffe re nce with regard to him.”44 It is this precise point tha t put Wesley in tension with some vie ws tha t late r would be ca lle d process the ology. Thos e who vie w the world as the body of God ca nnot find a pre ce de nt in Wesley. Thos e who wis h to e xa lt na ture by vie wing it as ide ntica l with God ra the r tha n cre a ture , or who bind the world and God intrins ica lly toge the r a ccording to the analogy of body and mind, find fe w a ffinitie s with We s le y’s firm te ne t of divine omnipres e nce 45 d. W he the r Cod Can Be Alm ighty without Be ing Om nipre s e nt To ima gine any space e ntire ly be yond God's influe nce is to de ny the witne s s of S cripture a nd cre e d to "God the Father Almighty.” To confess "God Almighty” is to a cknowle dge a t the same time the omnipre s ence of God.46 The re can be no serious a ffirma tion of unsurpassable divine power tha t does not a t the same time imply tha t God is pe rva s ive ly pres e nt in the world. No huma n a ctor ca n a ct whe re the a ctor is not pre s ent47 No unsurpassable compe te nt be ing will be found a cting unless tha t be ing is present. He nce the intrins ic re la tion of omnipote nce with omnipre s ence . One ca nnot be ima gine d without the other. Some e mpiricis ts may a tte mpt to look at God as an object, as if analogous to che mica l compone nts or biologica l s tructure s . But God does not yie ld to fla t meas urable obs erva tion, because God is s pirit, tra ns ce nding ma te ria lity a nd na tura l causality. The s tudy of cre a tion is not a mode of inquiry in which fa cts can be established in the same wa y tha t e mpirica l conclus ions can be dra wn by us ing s cie ntific me thod s ubsta ntia ted through e xpe rime nta tion with re pe a ta ble physical measurements. Thos e who be hold God do so with s piritua l senses. The Cre a tor gives ra tiona l 42Le tte r to Willia m Law, January 6,1756, LJW 3:343 - 45. 43Ibid„ LJW 3:332 - 42. 44“On the Omnipre s e nce of God,” B 4:43, J VI1:240 - 41, sec. 2.3. 45“On the Omnipre s e nce of God,” B 4:42 - 45, sec. 2. “ LJW 3:343 - 44; 5:365; 8:153; B 1:589; 2:540-41; 4:320 - 21. 47“The Unity of the Divine Being," B 4:61 - 62, secs. 3-4; LJW 6:49.

43

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

cre a tures not only our fa milia r phys ica l senses48 but also by provide nce through the means of grace a s piritua l s e ns ibility, a ca pa city to re ceive his s e lf-dis closure . This s e ns ibility grows through prayer, sa crame nt, s a crificia l service, the re a ding of S cripture , and s piritua l dis cipline .49 e. Moral Cons e que nce s ofDivine Om nipre s e nce No one can speak rightly of the a ttribute s of God while ignoring the ir mora l implica tions . The te a ching of divine omnipres e nce has powe rful consequences for interpe rs ona l re la tions hips . It shapes our de alings with othe rs . The ve ry thought of God’s omnipre s e nce calls us to mora l a tte ntive ne ss to wha t we are curre ntly saying a nd fe e ling. It is as if we are be ing he ld up imme diate ly be fore the a ll-s e e ing, a llknowing God who fills even se cre t spaces. If we live out our live s da ily in the presence of God, tha t presence impinge s powe rfully on each he re -and-now moral choice. The se rious be holde r of space, whe ther in ma crocos m or microcos m, a cknowle dges with awe tha t God meets us in e ve ry me e ting, each mome nt, each twinkling of the eye, e ve ry millime te r of space. God is with us.50 Emma nue l, the Song ofthe inca rna tion, is the gra nd his torical Illumina tor of the blunte r ra tiona l ide a of omnipre s ence . The ve ry idea of the omnipres e nce of God dra ws each be holde r toward a lively awareness of God’s pe rs ona l presence with us. In the light of the gospel, this means be ing dra wn toward the e njoyment of the re concile d divine compa nions hip. This is a ccompa nie d by the wonde r of be ing a re s pons ibly free huma n agent in a world in which God accompanies us in e ve ry mome nt of time a nd space. Each be lie ve r is ca lle d to "ta ke ca ptive e ve ry thought to make it obe die nt to Chris t" (2 Cor. 10:5 NIV), re joicing in God’s continuing presence a ccompa nying each pre se nt mome nt. The re s ulting moral implica tion: measure each mora l choice in re la tion to the s imple fa ct of the e te rnal divine presence. Be havior is tra ns forme d, speech reshaped, thinking re configure d in re la tion to this omnipre s e nt Compa nion. God gives hims e lf to us to make life ha ppy again, as once again rooted in its true ce nte r instead of in tra ns ie nt idola trie s . Believers are ca lle d to "spare no pa ins to pre serve always a deep, a continua l, a lively, a nd a joyful sense of God’s gra cious presence.”51 Those in We s le y’s conne ction of s piritua l forma tion can easily see, by reasonable inference, the rudime nts of other divine a ttribute s from these substantive discussions of omnipre s e nce and e te rnity.52 One of these divine a ttribute s is the oneness of God. 4. The Unity of the Divine Being The te xt of “The Unity of the Divine Be ing" is Ma rk 12:32: “The re is one God” [Homily #120 (1789), B 4:61-71; J #114, VII:264-73]. 48Conce rning the e mpirica l knowle dge de rive d from the senses, see B 4:29-30, 49-51, 200; 11:56-57. 49“On the Omnipre s e nce ofGod,” B 4:42 - 45, sec. 2. 50“On Divine Providence," B 2:539, J VI:316, sec. 11. 51“On the Omnipre s e nce of God,” B 4:47, sec. 3.6. S 2CH 7:370. 44

GOD

a. The Unity ofHum anity The idea of the unity of humanity is a consequence of the pre mis e of the unity of God. It is only because God is one tha t we can glimps e the oneness of ra tiona l cre a ture s a mid the va st divers itie s of huma n culture s . The pe rsona l a nd e thical expression of tha t centeredness is the love of the ta ngible , de finite , pa rticula r one ne a rby (the ne ighbor) as we love ourselves in response to the love of God. Whe re ma ny gods are wors hipe d, we can be sure tha t ne ithe r the true God is wors hipe d nor the unity of humanity grasped.53 The guiding te xt on the unity of God is Ma rk 12:32, whe re a de tra ctor ha ving asked Jesus a bout the mos t importa nt comma ndme nt he a rd his re ply from He bre w S cripture : “‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with a ll your he art a nd with a ll your soul a nd with a ll your mind a nd with all your strength.’ The second is this: ‘Love your ne ighbor as yourself.’ The re is no comma ndme nt gre ate r tha n these” (Ma rk 12:29-31 NIV; cf. De ut. 6:4, 5). b. The Unity of the Divine Attribute s God’s be ing is known from God’s own acts in his tory. God is known from wha t he does. We dis cove r God’s cha ra cte r by re ca lling the long s tory in S cripture of the dis clos ure of his cha ra cte r in huma n his tory.54 Though the divine unity is ma nife s te d by comple me nta ry a ttribute s , a ll unite a nd cohe re in God’s own life . God is e te rna l without ceasing to be omnipre s e nt, omnipre s ent without ceasing to be e mpa thic, a ll-knowing without ceasing to engende r fre e dom. Each divine a ttribute is comple me nta ry to other divine a ttribute s .55 c. The Divine Ne ce s s ity Some a ttribute s can be a s cribe d only to God a nd not in any wa y to creatures. Othe r divine a ttribute s are said to be re la tiona l a ttribute s because the y pe rta in to the re lation God has with cre a tion a nd cre a ture s while re ma ining omnipre se nt, omnipote nt, a nd omnis cie nt.56 The a ttribute s of divine necessity a nd unbe gotte nne s s ca nnot be s imply conveyed to cre a ture s or unilate ra lly tra ns fe rre d to finite, de pe nde nt, pre judice d mortals. For this reason, the y are ca lle d incommunica ble a ttribute s .57 Finite minds and bodie s can ne ve r be in themselves necessary, since a ll creatures are continge nt on the ir cre a tion. The divine a ttribute of aseity (unde rive d be ing or s e lf-s ufficie ncy) ca nnot be re loca te d or communica ted or ma de analogous with a nything tha t cha racterizes ra dica lly de rive d, de pe nde nt huma n existence.58

53“The Unity of the Divine Being.” B 4:61, J VlI:264-73, secs. 1-3. 54“The Unity of the Divine Being," B 4:61, secs. 1-3. 55“The Unity of the Divine Being," B 4:61 - 64, secs. 2-9. ^LJW 3:343 - 44; 5:365; 8:153; B 1:589; 2:540-41; 4:320-21. 57 LJW 2:71; 5:231. 58“The Unity of the Divine Being," B 4:61, sec. 2.

45

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

5. Relational Attributes: Goodness, Mercy, Holiness, Spirit a. Divine Attribute s Pe rtaining to God’s Re lation with Cre ature s All living creatures have the ir be ing in time within na rrow bounds ma rke d by birth a nd death. God transcends time by e xpe rie ncing e te rna l s imultane ity with a ll events of time . God alone is omnipre s e nt to a ll othe r presents, so as to be aware of a ll conce iva ble pasts, in a ll conce iva ble aspects, a nd a ll conceiva ble future s .59 Be ing God is incommunica ble to finite minds in the sense tha t finite minds ca nnot know as fully as God knows . Only God knows how to be God. God alone is omnis cie nt. God knows not s imply the pa rt as we know the pa rt, but he knows inte ns ive ly and e xte ns ively the whole of wha t has occurre d. He knows a ll tha t is ye t to occur a nd a ll tha t is occurring in any conce iva ble mome nt of time a nd space. Tha t pre mis e does not rule out huma n fre e dom but speaks of a n infinite ly free one as huma n fre e dom’s Compa nion a nd Enabler, fore knowing but not fore orda ining fre e acts of will.60 Wha t are these communica ble divine a ttribute s — thos e in which finite creature s are ca lle d to share to some e xte nt with the be ing of God? These divine a ttribute s are proxima te ly communica te d to othe rs : ve ra city, compa s s ion,61 jus tice ,62 a nd s pirituality.63 b. Goodne ss , Me rcy, and Holine s s The me rcy of God, for example, is a cha ra cte ris tic of God tha t he wishes to share with us a nd calls us to share with othe rs .64 God alone is infinite ly good, the Give r of othe r goods, in a goodness be yond finite bounds , a bunda nt in beneficence, as incompa rable in goodness as in powe r a nd knowing. No less tha n seventeen hymns from the 1780 Colle ction ofHym ns for the Use of the People Calle d Me thodists are focuse d on "Des cribing the Goodne ss of God.”65 The mos t fitting response to the goodness of God in cre a tion is a gra teful life of communica ting goodness to othe rs .66 God a lone is incompa ra bly holy.67 In the presence of this Holy One, we who have abused our God-give n fre e dom feel inte ns e ly a ny hint of unholines s in our lives. S cripture calls tha t awareness “conscience.” God has a llowe d us to share in his holines s , even if only negatively, by a llowing us to feel the diffe rence be twe e n our goodness a nd his unsurpassable goodness. S imilarly, the Holy One who is incompa rably me rciful ca lls us to be me rciful.68 59“The Unity of the Divine Being," B 4:61, sec. 3. ““The Unity of the Divine Being,” B 4:61-62, J VII:264-73, secs. 3-6. 61B 1:274-75; 2:422-35; J WO 226f., 385-86,469-70. 62W 3:345; Bl:344-45; 2:12-13; 4:285f.; J WO 435-37,451-52. 63“The Unity of the Divine Being,” B 4:62-65, secs. 7 -11. MB 2:411,424,434; 4:62-63. 65CH 7:107-28. «W8:153. 67“The Unity of the Divine Being,” secs. 5-6. 68“The Unity of the Divine Being,” B 4:62, sec. 7. 46

GOD

c. God Is S pirit The basic Hebraic analogy for “S pirit” is wind moving without being seen, yet knowable by the spiritua l senses. God is not seen as other objects are seen yet is proximately knowable jus t as the wind is knowable even if not seen. To a ffirm with Scripture that God is S pirit is to deny that he can be reduced to matter. As Spirit, God is not an object visible to our eyes, not reducible to finite causality or corporeal matter or material determinants. While sustaining nature in time, God is not reducible to nature. While making natural causality reliable, God remains the ground and premise of its reliability.69 God creates not only all matter but also the whole range of spiritual creatures that transcend matter, all living beings in heaven and on earth, including the whole of angelic creation, humanity, and human history with all their variable possibilities. God creates persons with the proximate capacity to refract his own being, unity, mercy, justice, spirituality, and love.70 6. God, Happiness, and Religion

a. God’s Happine s s Wesley’s reasoning about each divine a ttribute has a practical moral focus. Proper contemplation of God’s attributes always aims practically at human happiness. This is a notion promine ntly accented in Wesley’s instructional homilies and is a conspicuous feature of his teaching.71 God intends from the beginning to enable the happiness of creatures to that full extent to which each creature is capable. The moral order is provided for the happiness of creatures.72 The purpose of creation is the sheer joy of God in creating companionable creatures to share his own goodness to the full extent that creatures are capable of sharing it.73 It is our skewed freedom that absurdly distorts and upsets that order. God does not create the world for the sake of the damnation or alienation of rational creatures.74 God exceedingly enjoys the work of creation. Its whole aspect elicits God’s approval and redounds to God’s glory.75 God "made all things to be happy.” Our freedom is made to be happy in God. God created companionate, free, self-determining personal beings in order that God’s own freedom might be shared in and enjoyed. This happiness is God’s intention for every creature, even as wise parenting seeks the true happiness of the fa mily 76 69“On the Omnipre s e nce of God,” B 4:45, sec. 2.8. 70“The Unity of the Divine Being," B 4:63, sec. 8. 71B 4:209. 72B 1:35, 223-24; 2:195-96; 3:533-34; 4:300 - 301, 305. 73Va rying degrees of happiness are proportiona l to degrees offa ith a ctive in love. B 4:286. 74“The Unity of the Divine Being,” B 4:63, sec. 9. 75B 9:39 - 40; J WO450 - 51. 76“The Unity of the Divine Being," B 4:63 - 65, secs. 9-11.

47

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

b. God’s Be ne vole nce Dis re garde d by Man’s Idolatry Wha t stands in the wa y of happiness? We tre a t the finite goods of cre a tion as if the y are a bs olute goods. Idola try is the dis orde ring of huma n choice, the twisting of huma n fre e dom away from its orde re d good toward its dis orde re d fa ll from goodness.77 An idol is a ny good cre a ture or re la tion tha t we pre te nd is absolute. We wors hip a nd a dore these created goods in the place of the Give r of a ll things .78 The s e e mingly irre ve rs ible proble m tha t emerges e ve rywhe re in huma n his tory is s ummarized in the te rm sin. Thos e who have been offe re d fre e dom have a disastrous his tory of be ing prone to ba rte r it away.79 God does not make things ba d or prone inna te ly to e vil. Only good comes from God’s ha nd as created. We receive these good gifts fre ely and the n pre te nd tha t the cre a tion its e lf is the source of our goodness a nd happiness. We love the cre a ture more tha n the Creator. Tha t s in is prone to e vil is a re s ult not of its ha ving been cre ated in this wa y but of its own willing. The will becomes bound to a ct as idola trous fre e dom would have it.80 Huma n na ture is s imulta ne ous ly a compos ite ofopposites: finitude a nd fre e dom. Fre e dom is capable of tra ns ce nding Finitude but wills to be come bound to it. We be come living souls hous ed in dying bodies. Our s tory is one of s pirit conte nding with flesh. We are give n fre e dom out of the divine goodness on the provis o tha t we exercise our powe rs responsibly. Tha t ca pa city becomes dis torte d e ithe r downhill in the dire ction of s e ns ua lity or uphill in the dire ction of pride . In our acts of excessive sensuality, we be come we ighte d down with body a nd its limitations . We pre te nd tha t we have no s e lf-tra ns ce nding s pirit.81 Oppos ite ly, in our pride we pre te nd tha t we are the ce nte r of the unive rs e , as if we have no body, no grounding finitude . Good things , which are inte nde d for orde re d huma n happiness, be come through the exercise of fre e dom idola trous ly dis orde red towa rd s e ns uality a nd pride .82 7. True and False Religion a. Thre e Form s ofFals e R e ligion Even our re ligious s e ns ibilities a nd our na tive proneness to wors hip e nte r into this unbe nding riva lry with the Incompa ra ble One, who is the Give r of a ll goods. This one is wa tchful on be half of our deeper huma n voca tion. Religion of some s ort is as na tive to the huma n condition as diges tion or sex. It is common to the fa llen huma n s itua tion always to be prone to a dore some object of wors hip, whe the r ge nuine or s purious . Of a ll the idola trie s we are prone to create, the mos t s ubtly nua nce d is re ligion its e lf. 77WorIdly happiness is cons titute d by a ll those forms of fle eting, proxima te happiness tha t rest a nxious ly in or are prone to idolatrie s . B 1:253,624-26,636-37; 3:97-98,105-13,234-36; 4:123-26, 206 - 7. 78“The Unity of the Divine Being,” B 4:63-65, secs. 9-11. 79“S piritua l Idola try," B 3:103-5; I VI:435-44. 80“S e rmon on the Mount, 8," B 1:612 - 32; J V:361 - 77. 8‘FA, pt. 2, B 11:228-34, J VIII:161 -64, sec. 2.16-20. 82This would become Kie rke ga ard’s the me in S ickness unto Death-, cf. NDM, vol. 1. 48

GOD

False re ligion only moves us furthe r away from real happiness. It ma y a ppe a r as de ad conventional re ligion ofopinions or "ofbare ly outward wors hip’,' which has the form but not the powe r of godline ss .83 One who ta lks a good God game ma y fa il e ntire ly to receive the grace and e mbody the love of the re ve a ling God. In speaking s ome time s ha rs hly of dead orthodoxy, We sle y was not oppos ing classic Chris tian orthodoxy, e xce pt as its true te a chings have been falsely re duced to dead opinions without be haviora l consequence.84 False re ligion ma y a ppe a r as a se rvile re ligion of works righteousness in which we hold ourse lve s up be fore God, prete nding, “Look, Lord, how wonde rful,” e xpe cting to be re ce ive d on the basis of our good deeds or services re ndere d or me rits achieved. We conjecture tha t our own mora l acts or re ligious works are the fina l good tha t we offer to God, and we turn our backs on trus ting in God’s incompa ra bly good work.85 Finally, false re ligion ma y appear as an a rid practical athe is m tha t nonetheless continues to uncons cious ly a dore s ome finite obje ct of wors hip. We s le y was less inte re s te d in the oretica l a the is m tha n practical a the ism, by which pe ople a ctua lly live as though God does not e xist.86 b. True Re ligion as Grate ful Be ne volence True re ligion has two inte rconne cte d dime ns ions , like two halves of a whole: gra titude towa rd God a nd be ne vole nce toward huma nity. In contra s t to a ll idola trie s , true re ligion is expressed as a life ofgratitude for God's good gifts and benevolence toward the needy ne ighbor in response to God’s gifts .87 True re ligion lives da ily out of praise for the gifts of God in cre a tion a nd re de mption, gra teful for life and finite fre e dom, a nd whe n fre e dom fa lls , the re s tora tion of fre e dom to its deeper grounding in God.88 True re ligion reaches out to the wounde d ne ighbor with goodwill in response to the good willing of God towa rd our wounde d huma nity. We are ca lle d to share the me rcy of God with those who hunge r for me rcy, the goodness of God with the dispossessed, the love of God with the homeless.89 Thos e who try to de ve lop a re ligious s e ns ibility tha t has nothing in it of the ne ighbor’s good have missed a t least ha lf of re ligion: be ne vole nce towa rd othe rs. Thos e who try to re duce re ligion to huma nis tic e thics lose the other ha lf: the pe rsonal s e lf-giving of God who invite s a nd enables unfe tte re d responsiveness to the ne ighbor.90 83“The Unity of the Divine Being,” B 4:66, J VII:264 - 73, sec. 15, ita lics added. 84Le tte r to Charles Wesley Jr., Ma y 2, 1784, LJW 7:216- 17, conce rning Samuel Wesley who had "changed his re ligion” a nd become a Roman Ca tholic. 85“The Righteousness of Faith,” B 1:204 - 9, sec. 1. 86“ The Unity of the Divine Being,” B 4:66, sec. 15; “On Living without God,” J VIL351, sec. 7. 87“The Unity of the Divine Being,” B 4:67, secs. 16-17. 88B 2:548 - 49. 89“The Unity of the Divine Being,” B 4:66 - 68, secs. 16-18. 90“The Unity of the Divine Being,” B 4:67, secs. 16-17.

49

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

The Fa ther is revealed through the Son as love. “The love of God is shed abroad in our he a rts by the Holy S pirit" (Rom. 5:5). The full response of fa ith a nd love to this one God is the ground of true huma n happiness a nd true re ligion. Such re ligion is a ll too ra re in a his tory dre nche d with s in but is not be yond the reach of grace. The one who is mos t de e ply fre e d to love the ne ighbor is the one who has no other gods be fore him tha n the one who is "eterna l, omnipre s e nt, a ll-pe rfe ct S pirit, is the Alpha a nd Ome ga , the firs t a nd the la st. Not his Crea tor only, but his Susta ine d his Preserver, his Gove rnor; yea, his Father, his Savior, S a nctifie r, a nd Comforte r. This God is his God, a nd his all, in time a nd e te rnity.”91 We s le y e xplicitly ide ntifie d the thre a t to re ligion tha t come s from the great Enlighte nme nt a pos ta te "triumvira te , Rousseau, Volta ire , a nd Da vid Hume ,”92 who e xtolle d "huma nity ... as the ve ry essence of re ligion ... s pa ring no pa ins to e s ta blis h a re ligion which s hould s ta nd on its own founda tion, inde pe ndent of any re ve la tion whatever.” Even whe n fa s hiona ble , it is "ne ithe r be tte r nor wors e tha n Athe is m,” putting a s unde r wha t God has joine d toge the r — love of God a nd ne ighbor. We s le y ma y have s me lle d the a pproa ch of Nie tzs che , Ma rx, a nd Fre ud in his critique of Willia m Wolla s ton’s The R e ligion ofNature De line ated, of Jean-Jacques Burla ma qui’s Principle s of Natural Law, a nd e s pe cia lly of Fra ncis Hutche s on’s Conduct of the Passions. Hutche s on "quite shuts God out” of moral re fle ction by re ga rding it as “incons is tent with virtue ... if in doing a be ne fice nt a ction you e xpect God to re wa rd it.... It is the n not a virtuous but a s e lfis h a ction.”93 The beast of mode rnity wa s a lre ady s louching towa rd Be thle he m, whe re the ce nter would not hold. We sle y ga the re d toge the r a ll the divine a ttribute s whe n he spoke of the wis dom of God. 8. The Wisdom of God's Counsels The te xt of "The Wisdom of God’s Couns els” is Romans 11:33: "O the de pth of the riche s both of the wis dom a nd knowle dge of God!” [Homily #68 (1784), B 2:551-66; J #68, VI:325-37]. Divine wis dom a nd power work toge the r to re vita lize fre e dom whe n it fa lls , to re de e m it from its follie s 94 God’s providence encompasses means as we ll as ends, s ha ping consequences as we ll as a nte ce de nts of huma n choos ing. Fa ith vie ws a ll things as so adapted by divine wis dom to the ends for which the y we re designed, tha t ta ke n toge the r, cre a tion is even ye t seen as ve ry good. The wis dom of God’s counsels saturates the huma n s tory de spite a ll tra ns itory re ca lcitra nce .95 91“The Unity of the Divine Being,” B 4:71, sec. 24. 92“The Unity of the Divine Being,” B 4:68, sec. 18. For We sle ys references to Hume , see B 11:460; JJW 5:458, 491, 523; on Rousseau, see B 4:60, 69; JJW 5:352-53; 6:23; on Volta ire , see //W4:45, 157; 6:211; 7:13; LJW 5:199; 6:123,332, 338. 93“The Unity of the Divine Being, B 4:68, sec. 18, ita lics added. 94“The Wis dom of God’s Counsels," B 2:552, J VL325-37, sec. 2. 9SLJW 3:380; 2:540-41, 552-53; 4:62, 523. 50

GOD

a. God’s W is dom Works Diffe re ntly in Nature Than Hum an Fre e dom God’s guiding hand is present in the realm of the human s pirit in a different way than amid physics. In nature, the creation is ordered by an unbending physical causality.96 In the moral order, freedom its e lf shapes causality. Natural causality is reliable, but within the dependable chains of natural causality, there appears a history shaped by self-determined willing. This freedom that flows within causal determinants is its e lf a codeterminant. If in nature there is no freedom, hence no opposition to God’s will, in actual history there is constant opposition. God’s wisdom therefore is more conspicuous in the arena in which e vil must be counteracted without viola ting the nature of freedom.97 But why would an all-wise God make a vulnerable finite freedom that could stand in defiance of him? Here the mystery of God’s wisdom is profound. God enables human freedom, drawing it by grace constantly toward the good, but when freedom falls, as it so often does, God’s redemptive grace is constantly working to raise it up again.98 b. God’s W is dom in Providence Has a His tory God’s redemptive activity has a history converging on God’s own covenant with a special people, Israel. That history comes to a new beginning, like a seed that is planted grows. Its ultimate revelation is found in the events surrounding the resurrection of Jesus and the gift of the Spirit at Pentecost. Afte r Pentecost, the community of the resurrection grew through hazardous and challenging circumstances, persecutions, defections and apostasies, and violent attempts to resist faith.99 The accurate, descriptive beholding of the his tory of the fa ithful is its e lf an exercise in witnessing the unfolding of God’s providence in history. Wesley knew well the history of the worshiping community. He realized that it was not simply a sentime nta l fabrication but a real history of men and women of fa ith willing to risk their lives for their witness to the truth. The seeds of martyrs did not grow without tria l or peril. Scripture and church history evidence almost every imaginable kind of hardship in successive periods of the church’s struggle. 100 Wesley reflected on providence especially within the frame of reference of the evangelical revival in which he himself had been intensely engaged. In no period of church history is the Christian community fully responsive to the work of the Spirit, though in some periods, such as the apostolic, the ante-Nicene, and the early Reformation and the evangelical revival, the community was much more responsive. 96“The Wis dom of God's Counsels,” B 2:552, sec. 3. 97J WO 450-51. 98“The Wis dom of Gods Counsels,” B 2:553, J VI:325 -37, sec. 4. "“The Wis dom of God’s Counsels,” B 2:553- 54, sec. 5. For references to heresy, see LJW 3:182,200; 7:4-16, 21; B 2:555-56; 3:62-63; 409- 10; 4:394 - 95. 100“The Wis dom of God's Counsels,” B 2:555-57, secs. 8-11. 51

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

Howe ve r apostate, the church by grace s urvive d. "The gates of he ll did ne ve r totally pre va il against it. God always pre s e rve d a seed for hims e lf, a fe w tha t wors hipped him in s pirit a nd in truth." The s e fe w are not a dequate ly re pre s e nte d by s uns hine s oldie rs who "will always have numbe r as we ll as powe r on the ir side.” These fe w will s ome time s be s tigma tize d as "he re tics . Perhaps it was chie fly by this a rtifice of the de vil... tha t the good which was in the m be ing e vil spoke n of, the y we re pre ve nte d from be ing so e xte ns ive ly used as othe rwis e the y might have been. Nay, I have doubte d whe the r tha t a rch-he re tic, Monta nus , was not one of the holie s t me n in the se cond ce ntury.” We s le y spoke of Pelagius as the "a rch he re tic of the fifth century.” We s le y oppose d Pelagianism, but on the que s tion of the grace e na bling huma n fre e dom, he conceded tha t Pelagius was not as ba d as made out by Augus tine , who was "a wonde rful s a int” but a t time s full of pride , passion, bitte rness, a nd censoriousness.101 c. God’s W is dom in the R e vival ofR e ligion We sle y was not one to ide a lize church his tory. He thought it ha d gone through long pe riods of dis gus ting a lie na tion, as in me die va l s cholas ticis m. Just a t the point a t which the church became a lmos t ove rcome with iniquity, “the Lord lifte d up a s ta nda rd against it.”102 Wesley saw Luthe r as a de cisive re ne we r of e va nge lica l fa ith. Yet he thought tha t too fe w fruits a nd ma ny a mbiguitie s ha d be e n produce d by Luther’s pre a ching. We s le y re minde d his flock tha t "to be frie nds with the world means to be a t e nmity with God" (James 4:4 TCNT). 103 In his own time, Wesley was convince d tha t the re was a s ignificant re viva l of re ligion occurring, be yond the ma gis te ria l Re forma tion, in which God’s spe cia l providences we re be ing ma nifes te d.104 He thought tha t God’s provide nce was working in the re viva l, me nding wha t ha d be come broke n, re pa iring God’s cre a tion whe re fa lle n, filling the e a rth with the knowle dge of the glory of God. 105 Wesle y ma rke d the be ginning of this evangelical re a wa ke ning in Brita in as 1627 with the flowe ring of P urita n re viva lis m.106 The seeds of the e ightee nth-ce ntury Eva nge lical Re viva l we re se wn with the te a chings of John Owe n, Jeremy Taylor, a nd Willia m Law. The y we re ma rke d e spe cia lly by a re cove ry of the re s olution to be come ra dica lly responsive to the S pirit, a nd the y we re seen also in the re viva l led by Jonathan Edwards in North Ame rica .107 101“The Wis dom of God’s Counsels," B 2:555 - 56, sec. 9; cf. le tte rs to Ale xa nde r Coates, July 7,1761, and John Fletcher, Augus t 18, 1775. We sley thought tha t the real reason Pelagius offe nde d some was “ne ithe r more nor less tha n this , the holding tha t Chris tians may by the grace of God (not without it; tha t 1 take to be a me re slander), ‘g o on to Perfection.’” 102“The Wis dom of God’s Counsels," B 2:556, sec. 10. 103“The Wis dom of God’s Counsels," B 2:556 - 62, J VI:325 - 37, secs. 10-17. i°4“The Signs of the Times,” B 2:521 - 33. 105“The General Spread of the Gospel," B 2:490 - 99, secs. 13-27. 106“The Wis dom of God’s Counsels,” B 2:557n, sec. 11; cf. John Gillie s , His torical Collections ofthe S uccess of the Gospel (Glasgow, 1754). P urita n re viva ls were regarded by We sle y as the fore runne r of key re forming move me nts before the e ighte e nth-ce ntury evangelical revival. !°7“The Wis dom of God’s Counsels," B 2:558, sec. 12. 52

GOD

God chose to use in these re viva ls ordina ry persons, even ignora nt a nd unlette red minds , to confound the wis dom of the world a nd make his s tre ngth known through human weakness. This is the wis dom of God. These provide nce s ca ll the fa ithful to set aside inordina te worldly s e curitie s a nd fre ely seek the treasures of the coming re ign of God. 108 God e ndows ma ny with the S pirit only to see the m fa ll by the wayside, by neglect or te mpta tion. Even a mid the wors t apostasies, God does not cease to pour out his S pirit to ca ll huma nity to re pe nta nce a nd full responsiveness to grace. If a t firs t fe w fruits are born, a nd if the danger of la ying up tre a sure on e a rth arises a ne w in each ge ne ra tion, God always s upplie s ne w witnesses as the old fa ll away.109 Young persons are e s pe cia lly crucial ins trume nts of God. When olde r witnesses “die in the Lord, or lose the s piritua l life which God had given the m, he will s upply ... others tha t are a live to God, a nd de sire only to spend a nd be s pe nt for him.”110 “Nothing is impos s ible with God" (Luke 1:37). All can re turn if the y choose .111 Te mpta tions can be rejected. Earnest pra yer can prote ct from te mpta tion. 9. The First Article of the Articles of Religion: On God a. Clas s ic Attribute s S um m ariz e d Eve rything necessary for confe ssing the Chris tia n te a ching of God was for We s le y concis e ly s ummarized in the Anglican Firs t Article of Re ligion, which re ta ine d the s ixte e nth-ce ntury language of the Re forme rs: “The re is but one living and true God, e ve rlas ting, without body or pa rts, of infinite power, wis dom, a nd goodness; the ma ke r a nd pre s e rve r of a ll things both vis ible a nd invis ible . And in unity of this Godhe a d there are three persons, of one substance, powe r, a nd e te rnity—the Father, the Son, a nd the Holy Ghost.” No a ppra is a l of We s le y’s te a ching of God is comple te without e xa mining this same First a rticle of the Twe nty-Four Article s of Re ligion We s le y commende d to the Chris tma s Confe re nce of Ame rica n Me thodis ts in 1784. Article 1 is the de finitive te a ching on God cons e ns ua lly he ld by thos e in the Wesleyan conne ction of Churche s (Unite d Me thodis ts , Britis h Me thodis ts , AME, AME Zion, Nazarene, a nd ma ny Wesley-based church bodie s). It encompasses in brie fe s t form the essential features of biblical te a ching on God. This language has been incorporate d into the cons titutions of ma ny in We s le yan-tra dition churches as tha t doctrine of God ha nded down from the a pos tolic fa ith through a ncie nt concilia r, Re forma tion, a nd Anglica n tra ditions to a ll who would choose to stand doctrina lly in We s le y’s conne ction of s piritua l formation.112 It corres ponds complete ly with a ncie nt consensual e cumenical tra dition. 108“The Wis dom of God's Counsels,” B 2:558-59, sec. 13; cf. B 1:496-97,637-38, 697. 109“The Wis dom of God's Counsels,” B 2:559-61, J VI:325-37, secs. 14-16. 110“The Wis dom of God’s Counsels,” B 2:563, sec. 19. “■“The Wis dom of God's Counsels,” B 2:564 - 66, secs. 21 -24. “2Cf. LJW 4:25,60, 115, 131,149,295.

53

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

b. Ke y Te rms ofArticle 1 Explaine d Tha t God is “without body or pa rts ” means tha t God is incorpore a l, hence not to be inve s tiga te d as e mpirica l objects are. If s ome thing ca n be re duce d to e mpirica l inve s tiga tion, we know right away tha t this is not God. Tha t is wha t is me a nt by the “ne ga tive wa y” (via ne gativa) to God. It points to the be ing of God by firs t s e tting aside a ll thos e things tha t are not God. Thos e who vie w the world as God’s body run counte r to the te a ching tha t God is without body. The ide a tha t God ca n be divide d into compone nts or phases or pe riods of de ve lopme nt runs counte r to classic Chris tia n te a ching tha t God is one, hence indivis ible.113 Rejected by this a rticle are a ll pa nthe isms, a ll limita tions of divine powe r e xce pting s e lf-limita tion, a ll views tha t imply tha t fate controls history — a ll ofwhich are we a ris ome but fa milia r follies of more re ce nt popula r culture s . The negative a ttribute s of God (those typica lly be ginning with in- or im -) imply absence or de nia l a nd thus assume an a pophatic (apophas is , de nia l) or negative a rgume nt conce rning the existence of God: God is not finite, not de ficie nt in power, not la cking in jus tice or wis dom, not vis ible as an object.114 In this way the via negativa, the negative wa y of re as oning a bout God, is writte n ce ntra lly into the Wesleyan tra dition of the te a ching of God. If s ome inge nious ne w idea of God might be asserted as if it we re We s ley’s dis tinctive contribution to the doctrine of God, he would be firs t to de ny it. He was a re ce iving conve yor of the a pos tolic witne s s. He a ffirme d the well-e sta blished He bra ic a nd a pos tolic re colle ction of God’s a ction in his tory. It was fa r from his inte ntion to inve nt a n improve d doctrine of God’s power or love. He confide ntly appealed to sacred S cripture , a nd as a n expre ss ion of S cripture , to the three creeds (Apostles^ Nice ne -Cons ta ntinopolita n, a nd Quicunque [i.e., “Atha na s ian”]) as re liable confessions of s criptural te a ching.115 c. Confe ss ing the True God Thos e unde r We s ley’s s piritua l guida nce confessed fa ith in one God, Crea tor, Sovereign, a nd Pre se rve r of a ll things vis ible a nd invis ible . The divine a ttribute s — unity, aliveness, truth, a nd e te rna lity — are expressed in the divine a ctions of cre a ting, gove rning, a nd pre s e rving a ll things . The one who is infinite in power, wisdom, jus tice , goodness, and love rule s with gra cious re ga rd for the we ll-being of huma nity. God’s power, wis dom, a nd love provide a pla n and a means for the salvation of huma nity. God is incompa ra bly capable of a ccomplis hing the divine purpose, cons umma te ly powerful, knowing, a nd good. For thos e who s ta nd in the presence of one who is uns urpa s sa bly jus t, it is inconce iva ble to Chris tia n confessors tha t God would a ct unjus tly.116 When God is alleged to have acted unjus tly, he has been mis unde rs tood by finite minds . ll3As in the classic ecumenical rejection of modalism and Sabellianism. U4B 4:45. nVJW4:424; 8:332. 116W 3:382. 54

GOD

God is infinite in love, ove rflowing with goodness. We le arn of divine love precisely through the pa lpable his tory of God’s a ctua l s e lf-dis clos ure , e spe cia lly on the cross. The same one revealed on the cross is Cre ator, the provide r of a ll things , who exercises providential guida nce a nd cares for a ll tha t happens in cre a tion. One God is Father, Son, a nd S pirit, Crea tor a nd Redeemer of wha t is fa llen in cre a tion, who awakens in our he arts a response to his love, me rcy, a nd grace.117 God has infinite power, knowledge, and goodness be yond tha t which any finite mind ca n conce ive . The one living a nd true God is ma ker a nd pre s e rve r of all, providing for the continuity a nd sustenance of a ll tha t is .118 God is not only the source a nd ground of a ll things tha t we ca n see and e mpirica lly investigate , but also of s piritua l, incorpore a l cre a tures. Eve rything tha t e xists has be e n cre a te d by this one living, true God whom no Finite mind can know exhaustively, ye t the jus t, loving, a nd me rciful cha ra cte r of God has been s ufficie ntly disclose d in the his tory of re ve la tion to a llow trus t a nd be lie f.119 Wha t does it mean to say tha t if “your he art is as my he a rt, give me your ha nd”? Embe dde d in the crucial homily "The Ca tholic S pirit” is a series of pe rsona l questions assumed to be a ffirma tive ly answered by anyone whose life is hid in Christ: “Is thy he art right with God? Dos t thou believe his be ing, a nd his pe rfe ctions ? His e ternity, imme ns ity, wis dom, powe r; his jus tice , me rcy, a nd truth? ”120 How could our he a rts be right with God if we dis trus t God’s e te rnity, wis dom, a nd goodness?

Further Reading on God Bryant, Ba rry Edward. John Wesley on the Origins ofEvil. Derbyshire, UK: Moorle y’s Bible and Bookshop, 1992. Burtner, Robert W., and Robert E. Chiles. A Compend of Wesley's Theology. Nashville: Abingdon, 1954. Collins , Kenneth. A Faithful Witness: John Wesley’s Hom ile tical Theology, 15-34. Wilmore , KY: Wesleyan Heritage, 1993. Kirkpa trick, Dow, ed. The Living God. Nashville: Abingdon, 1971. Mile y, John. S ystematic Theology. Reprint, Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1989.

Oord, Thomas Jay. "Prevenient Grace and Nonsensory Perception of God in a Postmodern Wesleyan Philosophy.” In Between Nature and Grace: Mapping the Interface of Wesleyan Theology and Psychology, edited by Bryan P. Stone and Thomas Jay Oord. San Diego: Point Loma, 2000. --------. "A Process Wesleyan Theodicy: Freedom, Embodiment, and the Almighty God.” In Thy Name and Nature Is Love: Wesleyan and Process Theologies in Dialogue, edited by Bryan P. Stone and Thomas Jay Oord, 193-216. Nashville: Kingswood, 2001.

n7LJW 4:321; 5:213, 294. »8B 1:580-81,690. “’Le tte r to Willia m Law, January 6,1756, LJW 3:343 - 49. 120“The Ca tholic S pirit." B 2:88, sec. 14.

55

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

Pope, Willia m Burt. A Compendium of Nashville: Me thodis t Publishing House Chris tian Theology. 3 vols. London: South, 1888. Wesleyan Me thodis t Book-Room, Truesdale, Albe rt. “Theism: The 1880. Eternal, Personal, Creative God.” In Ralston, Thomas N. Elements of Divinity. A Contemporary Wesleyan Theology, Ne w York: Abingdon, 1924. edited by Charles W. Carter, 103-43. Gra nd Rapids: Zondervan, 1983. Reddish, Robert O. John Wesley: His Way ofKnowing God. Evergreen, CO: Rorge, Watson, Richard. Theological Institutes. 1972. 2 vols. Ne w York: Mason and Lane, 1836,1840; edited by John M’Clintock. Summers, Thomas O. S ystematic Ne w York: Ca rlton & Porter, 1850. Theology. 2 vols. Edited by J. J. Tigert.

B. God the Father, God the Son, God the Spirit 1. On the Trinity The te xt of "On the Trinity” is 1 John 5:7: “The re are three tha t be a r re cord in heaven, the Father, the Word, a nd the Holy Ghos t” [Homily #55 (1775), B 2:373 - 86; J #55, VI:199-206]. a. The Triune Root ofAll Vital Re ligion One ca nnot read the Ne w Te sta me nt, We sle y thought, without cons ta ntly he a ring of the s e nding of the Son by the Fa the r a nd the S pirit’s e na bling a nd fulfilling of the mis s ion of the Son. Triune te a ching is a classic wa y of bringing toge the r the witne s s of the apostles in a cohesive a nd compre he ns ive pa tte rn. We s le y’s vie w was orthodox: God is one as Father, Son, a nd S pirit, not three gods, but one God in three persons. The Fa the r is God, the Son is God, and the S pirit is God. Yet the Fa ther is dis tinguis ha ble from the Son, a nd the Son is distinguis hable from the S pirit. The Son is sent by the Father; the S pirit fulfills and cons umma te s the mis sion of the Son. These three are one in be ing, one in power, e te rnally God.121 The re is a community of discourse within the Godhe a d of persons who are e qually the one God, coe te rna l a nd dis tinguis ha ble as Father, Son, and S pirit. The persons of the Trinity ca n be dis tinguis he d but not separated as if one might cons ide r the mis sion of the Son a part from the mis sion of the S pirit.122 This is the ba ptis m into which we have been ba ptize d. Since the a ncie nt e cume nica l Chris tia n tra dition so Firmly assents to triune te a ching as to make it de finitive of orthodoxy, the triunity of God ca nnot be a point of indiffere nce .123 We sle y was a tra ditiona l Anglica n in trinita ria n be lie f a nd prac121Arts . 1-2. 122“On the Trinity,” B 2:374 - 76, J VI:199 - 206, secs. 1 - 3. 123In a le tte r to Ma ry Bishop, April 17,1776, Wesley comme nde d Willia m Jones’s The Catholic Doctrine ofthe Trinity, 1756, as “more cle a r and more s trong tha n any I e ve r saw.... Ifa nything is wa nting, it is the a pplication... but this is a bunda ntly s upplie d by my brothe r’s Hymns.” LJW 6:213. 56

GOD

tice . He pra ye d da ily with the pra yer book to God the Son a nd God the S pirit who are toge the r with the Fa ther the one e te rna l God. Triune te a ching is the he art of classic Chris tia n te a ching, “the root of a ll vita l re ligion."124 b. The Triune Fact and Triune Language Triunity is a mys tery be yond huma n unde rs ta nding. It is to be joyfully received a nd celebra te d ra the r tha n e xpla ine d us ing e mpirica l judgme nts alone. S hould a nyone propos e to e xha us tive ly de ciphe r the triune mystery, dis count the pre te nde d e xplana tion. We can know that God is triune , not how or why. The ce ntra l point of We s le y’s homily "On the Trinity” is the mode s t conviction tha t God’s triune life is hidde n from ra tiona l-e mpirical ins pection. Wesley spoke of the Trinity as a fact, but not one tha t can yie ld to la bora tory a na lysis. He did not a tte mpt to re nde r any de finitive a ccount of the triune mystery. The m anne r in which God is thre e in one can be le ft to honest, humble a dora tion and cele bration as a mys tery of fa ith.125 That God is Father, God is Son, and God is Holy S pirit stands unassailably as the ce ntra l feature of orthodox Chris tia n te a ching of God. 126 The his tory of exegesis is s tre wn with numerous opinions as to how best to express the ce ntra l fact of the triune mys te ry. The Ne w Te s tame nt te xt me re ly reveals the triune God; it does not e xpla in the Trinity or the orize a bout it or provide a language for cons truing it.127 We s le y did not think it obligatory to side with “this or tha t e xplica tion” of the te xts a tte s ting the triune mystery, but ra the r only to celebrate "the dire ct words , une xplained, jus t as the y lie in the text.”128 c. Thre e Be ar Re cord in He ave n: The De bate ove r 1 John 5:7 The firs t le tter of John ins is ts throughout tha t Jesus Chris t is truly God without ceasing to be truly huma n, a nd truly huma n without ceasing to be truly God. The write r was s howing tha t this God-man was ba ptize d a nd die d. Jesus was the Son of God not only at his ba ptis m but a t his death. If he had die d as if one with a huma n na ture only, his s a crificial de ath would not have been s ufficie nt to re concile the guilt of the whole his tory of huma n sin. It is the Holy S pirit who te s tifie s tha t Jesus is the Son of God the Fa the r by de s ce nding on him a t his ba ptis m, re ma ining with him through his death, a nd e mpowe ring his re s urrection.129 The ma in te xt We s le y chose to a tte s t the triune mys te ry re ma ins re ple te with te xtua l difficultie s . The Authorize d King James tra ns la tion with which We s ley’s 124“On the Trinity," B 2:384, sec. 17. 125According to Bishop Peter Browne, “The mys te ry does not lie in the fa ct 'These Thre e are One,’ but in the manner, the a ccounting how the y are one. But with this I have nothing to do. 1 believe the fact. As to the ma nne r (whe re in the whole mys te ry lies) I believe nothing a bout it,” i.e., not in the sense of disbe lie ving the mystery, but not trying to assign s pe cific language to it. Le tte r to Mis s Ma rch, August 3,1771, L]W 5:270; Peter Browne, Procedure, Extent, and Lim its of the Human Unde rs tanding (1728). 126“On the Trinity,” B 2:376, J VL199 - 206, secs. 1-2; “On the Discoveries of Faith,” B 1:220; 4:27 - 38. 127“On the Trinity,” B 2:376-78, secs. 3-4. 128“On the Trinity,” B 2:378, sec. 5. 129Ibid.

57

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

societies we re fa milia r reads, "The re are three tha t bear re cord in heaven, the Father, the Word, a nd the Holy Ghos t: a nd these three are one” (1 John 5:7). The same te xt in the NRS V reads, "The re are three tha t te s tify: the S pirit a nd the wa ter and the blood, and these three agree,” with the a ccompa nying footnote on ma nuscript va riants: "A fe w other a uthoritie s read (with va ria tions ) ‘The re are three tha t te s tify in heaven, the Father, the Word, a nd the Holy S pirit, a nd these three are one.’ ” Wesley was ponde ring the te xt in its origina l Gre e k, as with a ll his homilies . We sle y offe re d an e xplicit a rgume nt for why this te xt is pre s e nt in some ma nus cripts but absent in othe rs , though he did not wa nt to press his the ory of ma nus cript va ria tions on othe rs . His s us picion was tha t the pos t-Cons ta ntine Aria n the oris ts wa nte d to omit or re da ct Trinita ria n te xts he ld by the e a rlie s t apostles. He hypothe s ize d tha t Aria n tra ns cribe rs so dis like d the triune te xt tha t the y amended or omitte d it. Acknowledging tha t the te xt is mis s ing in some e a rly ma nus cripts , We s le y countere d by this reasoning: (1) Tha t though it is wa nting in many a ncie nt copies, ye t it is found in more, abundantly more, and those copies of the greatest a uthority. (2) Tha t it is cited by a whole tra in of ancient write rs from the time of St. John to tha t of Cons ta ntine .... (3) Tha t we can easily account for its being after tha t time wa nting in many copies when we remember tha t Consta ntine ’s successor was a zealous Arian, who used every means to promote his bad cause... in pa rticula r the erasing this te xt out of as many copies as fe ll into his hands. 130 Although this hypothe s is ma y to modern critics appear doubtful, it offe rs an intriguing glimps e into We sle y as te xtua l critic. We le a rn from We s le y not to be a fra id of rigorous his torica l te xtua l criticis m to search out which received te xt was the e a rlie s t. Even if his hypothe s is is ques tiona ble , it signals tha t he was inviting leaders a nd la ity in his s piritua l conne ction to hone s tly e nte r into re s pons ible te xtual critica l inquiry, a s king wha t is to be made of the diffe re nce s a mong available ma nus cripts . Thos e who disagree with his te chnica l conclus ion can ha rdly disagree with his inte nt. d. Clas s ic Triune Language Affirm e d and Lim ite d We sle y a ffirme d the s pe cific triune language of the three mos t a ncie nt creeds — Apos tle s ’, Nice ne , a nd Athana s ia n — but did not wis h to promote a pa rticula r inte rpre tation of the m. He re fuse d to be locke d into a ny s pe cific language or posta pos tolic te rms cons ide re d necessary for the ir e xpos ition The best tra ditiona l e xplica tion of the Trinity was in We s le y’s vie w the Atha na s ia n Cre e d (Quicunque vult), though he confessed to be ing uneasy with its prologue , which holds tha t thos e who do not assent to it "shall without doubt pe ris h everlastingly.” Wesley a dmitte d tha t he hims e lf had "for some time s cruple d s ubs cribing to tha t creed, till I considered, (1), tha t these sentences only relate to willful, not involunta ry unbe lie ve rs — to those who, ha ving a ll the means of knowing the truth, nevertheless 130“On the Trinity,” B 2:377, sec. 3, amended with numerals; cf. LJW 4:125. 58

GOD

obs tinate ly re je ct it; (2), tha t the y re la te only to the substance of the doctrine the re de live re d, not the philos ophica l illus trations of it.”131 On these grounds he came to accept the Atha na s ia n Cre e d as the best classic s ta teme nt of triune te aching. But he was aware tha t any e xplication takes place in the conte xt of s ome philos ophical worldvie w, which he was not willing to a llow to domina te ove r the wonde r of the triune mystery. Give n the importa nce to We sle y of the triune te a ching of the Atha na s ia n Creed, it seems fitting tha t we quote it dire ctly: We wors hip one God in Trinity, and trinity in Unity; Neithe r confounding the Persons; nor dividing the Substance. For there is one Person ofthe Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, is all one: the Glory equal, the Majesty co-eternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son: and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father uncreate, the Son uncreate: and the Holy Ghost uncreate. The Father incompre hensible, the Son incomprehensible: and the Holy Ghost incomprehensible. The Father eternal, the Son eternal: and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet they are not three eternals: but one eternal. As also there are not three incomprehensibles, nor three uncreated, but one uncreated, and one incomprehensible. So likewise, the Father is Almighty, the Son is Almighty: and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet they are not three Almightie s : but one Almighty.132 We s le y urge d ne wborn be lie ve rs not to ma ke be labore d inquirie s re ga rding pa rticula r words in the classic formula tions , s uch as ous ia a nd hypostasis. Howe ve r a uthorita tive the Atha na s ia n Cre e d, it does not in its e lf provide a de finitive e xpla na tion of the mys te ry of the Trinity. Some te nde r minds may even be made unbe lie ve rs by some pa rticula r e xplica tion of it, or by ha ving a conje ctura l language impos e d on it. We s le y did not wa nt sincere que s tione rs or doubte rs to be unnecess a rily trouble d or disabled or cast out of the circle of fa ith by excessive fondness for some s pe cific nonconse nsua l re a ding of the Ne w Te s ta me nt te xt. Though We sle y reserved room for diffe re nt inte rpre ta tions of the triune myste ry, it was not his inte ntion e ithe r to comme nd obs cura ntis m or to we lcome a wildly la titudina ria n a ccommodation to any a nd a ll conce iva ble inte rpre ta tions . He echoed Augus tine ’s vie w tha t we do not speak of the Trinity because we can speak of it adequately, but because we mus t not be s ile nt.133 We s le y urged ne ithe r s ile nce nor de ta iled e xplica tion, but s imple a ffirma tion of the biblica l te xts a nd the e cume nica l cre e ds.134 Wha t re ma ins s ufficie nt is the a pos tolic te s timony its e lf, not s ubs e que nt a ccretions of inte rpre ta tions tha t have been added in differe nt culture s with va rious philos ophica l languages ove r diverse ce nturie s .135 131“On the Trinity," B 2:377. 132This ve rs ion quote d from the BCP. 133Augus tine , On the Trinity, 1; Wesley, "On the Trinity,” B 2:378, sec. 5. 1340n the e cume nica l s pirit of Wesley, see J WO 90 - 91, 498 - 99. 135"On the Trinity,” B 2:378, sec. 5.

59

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

e. Living within Mys te ry When we s ta nd within this mys te ry of the triune God, we do we ll to a void e ithe r be ing immobilize d by s ke pticis m or ima gining ourselves as set free to assert a nything we wis h. We re ma in a mys tery to ourselves. The deeper we probe the body-s oul interface, the more we are humble d by its comple xity a nd resistance to pe ne tration. We s till live as a body-s oul compos ite even whe n we do not fully unde rs ta nd tha t interfa ce in re a l time . So it is with the Trinity. We have the be ne fit of the sacred te xt of 1 John 5:7. We ca n receive and celebrate it, even while not prete nding once for a ll to de finitive ly grasp its mystery. To thos e who make the counte rclaim tha t we ca nnot be lie ve wha t we ca nnot compre he nd, a nd the re fore s hould omit the triune confe s s ion a ltoge the r, Wesley re joine d tha t the re are ma ny things we pra ctica lly be lie ve in tha t we do not fully compre he nd: We do not unde rs ta nd the e ne rgy of the s un ye t live in its wa rmth. We wa lk by light and bre a the without unde rs ta nding light a nd re s pira tion. We live within gra vita tiona l fie lds but do not fully compre he nd the ir causes. We stand upon the e a rth, but our s ta nding does not de pe nd on our unde rs ta nding of it.136 By s imila r re a soning, We s le y stated, “I be lie ve this fa ct... tha t God is three and one.... I believe jus t so much as God has revealed, a nd no more . But this, the ma nner, he has not revealed.”137 Yet "I do not see how it is possible for a ny to have vita l re ligion who denies tha t these three are one.”138 Thos e who truly be lieve and confess the a ncie nt triune te a ching find the ir lives tra ns forme d by it. This stands as a cre dible pra gma tic a rgume nt for its truth. The Chris tia n community has in ma ny his torica l s itua tions re lie d on a glorious ly myste rious te a ching tha t has re pe a te dly brought it life a nd energy. The te nacious life of this community unde r pe rs ecution is his torica lly unthinkable without the triune te aching. 139 In comme nding Jonathan S wifts s e rmon "On the Trinity,” We sle y a pprove d the vie w tha t the Trinity is a mys te ry so fa r exceeding re a son as to be a ltoge the r above ra tiona l e xplana tion, in contra s t to othe rs who argued tha t the Trinity is ra tiona lly de mons tra ble .140 We s le y did not pre te nd to make any origina l contribution to the inte rpre ta tion of the Trinity.141 The re is a ge ntle s pirit of tolera tion a nd pa tie nt trus t tha t is a t work here, ye t without los ing the ce ntra l e ne rgy a nd substance of classic Chris tia n triune thinking. Tha t We sle y e a rne s tly confessed the triune te a ching is cle a r from the firs t four of the essential Article s of Re ligion he comme nde d to his conne ction: "The re is but one living a nd true God,” a nd “in the unity of this Godhea d there are three persons 136“On the Trinity,” B 2:379-83, secs. 6-13. 137“On the Trinity,” B 2:384, sec. 15. I38“0n the Trinity,” B 2:386, sec. 18. 139“On the Trinity,” B 2:384-86, secs. 15-18. 140Cf.). Tra pp, On the Trinity, 1730; Wesley, “On the Trinity," B 2:377, sec. 3. 141B 1:220; 2:101, 373-86; 4:31-32, 37. 60

GOD

of one substance, power a nd e te rnity—the Father, the Son, a nd the Holy Ghost.” The Son is "the Word of the Father, be gotte n from e ve rla s ting of the Father, the ve ry a nd e te rna l God, of one substance with the Father.” The Holy S pirit, "proce e ding from the Fa the r a nd the Son, is of one substance, majesty, and glory with the Father a nd the Son, ve ry a nd e te rnal God.” All this is s ta nda rd a ncie nt e cume nica l teaching. f Triune Baptis m in the S pirit No one is rightly ba ptize d only in the na me of the Father, or only in the name of the Son, but in the name of the triune God — Father, Son, a nd S pirit. Triune re fle ction is s imply a way of ordering the whole gospel of God into an a rra nge me nt or e xe ge tica l e conomy cons is te nt with the a pos tolic te s timony and ba ptis ma l fa ith. This is the ba ptis m into which we are ba ptized, as the a ncie nt councils ne ve r tire d of re pea ting. His torica lly, a ll the e cumenica lly re ce ive d expressions of the rule of fa ith (as expressed liturgica lly in the three creeds) emerged as ba ptisma l formula e a nd confessiona l s ta teme nts made at ba ptis m, which seek to declare wha t is ha ppe ning in ba ptism. A cre e d is thus a s umma ry way of ta lking of a ll tha t is crucia l to the Chris tian fa ith. The re is no topic of be lief tha t does not fit into tha t pa tte rn in s ome way. It is the S pirit who awakens our a tte ntive ne ss to this Word spoken in ba ptis m a nd Holy Communion. This homily "On the Trinity" mus t be he ld in close connection with a nothe r homily tha t followe d five years later, "S piritua l Wors hip.” Both deal with aspects of the same te xt: 1 John 5:20.

2. Spiritual Worship—On Triune Spirituality The te xt of "S piritua l Wors hip” is 1 John 5:20: "This is the true God, a nd e te rna l life” [Homily #78 (1780), B 3:88-102; J #77, VI:424-35J. a. On Pe rs onal Com m union with the Triune God In John’s firs t e pis tle , the a uthor focuse d on "the founda tion of a ll, the ha ppy a nd holy communion which the fa ithful have with God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.”142 The ve ry s tructure of John’s le tte rs forms a round communion with the Father (1 John 1), communion with the Son (1 John 2 a nd 3), a nd communion with the S pirit (1 John 4). The re ca pitula tion of the whole a rgume nt is found in 1 John 5:18-20 a nd include s the guiding te xt of Homily #77, "S piritua l Wors hip,” 1 John 5:20: this triune one “is the true God, a nd e te rna l life.”143 To commune with the triune God, the true God, is to know him as one God ove r all, Father, Son, a nd S pirit.144 In the Son we me e t the Father.145 The Son was ■^“S piritua l Worship,” B 3:89-90, J VL424-35, proe m 2. 143“S piritua l Worship,” B 3:89-90, proe m 1. 144In a le tte r to He s te r Arm Roe, Fe brua ry 11, 1777, We sley re counte d the ecstatic experience of triune s piritua lity re porte d by Cha rle s P e rrone t, LJW 6:253; cf. Le tte r to La dy Ma xwe ll, July 4, 1787, LJW 7:392. 145B 1:578-79,692.

61

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

with God from the be ginning a nd was God. We sle y wrote to Mrs . Cock, Nove mber 3,1789, "Do you s till find deep a nd uninte rrupte d communion with God, with the Three -One God, with the Fa ther a nd the Son through the S pirit?”146 b. Cre ator, S upporte r, Pre s e rve r, Author, Re de e me r, Gove rnor, Cons ummator ofAll The triune God is “the only Cause, the sole Creator of a ll things ,” a nd as true God "the S upporte r of a ll the things tha t he ha th made,” s us ta ining a ll cre a te d things by the word of his power, “by the same powe rful word which brought the m out of nothing. As this was a bs olute ly necessary for the be ginning of the ir existence, it is e qually so for the continua nce of it: we re his a lmighty influe nce withdra wn the y could not s ubs is t a mome nt longe r. Hold up a s tone in the a ir; the mome nt you withdra w your ha nd it na tura lly fa lls to the ground. In like manner, we re he to withdra w his ha nd for a mome nt, the cre a tion would fa ll into nothing.”147 As Preserver of all, God "preserves the m in tha t degree of we ll-being which is s uita ble to the ir several natures. He preserves the m in the ir several re la tions , conne ctions , a nd de pe ndencie s, so as to compose one system of be ings, to form one e ntire universe.”148 "By and in him are a ll things compacte d into one system."149 Whate ve r moves, moves by a mover. As prima l Author of a ll motion in the universe, the true God has given to free s piritua l creatures (angels a nd huma n beings) "a s ma ll degree of s e lf-moving power, but not to [inorganic] matter. All ma tte r ... is tota lly ine rt... and whe ne ve r any pa rt of it seems to move , it is in re a lity move d by s ome thing else.”150 When Isaac Ne wton spoke of the stars moving or a ttra cting each other in proportion to the qua ntity of ma tte r the y conta in, Wesley wa nte d to cla rify the more funda me nta l premise tha t "the y are continually im pe lle d towa rd each other. Impe lle d, by what? ‘By the subtle matter, the ether, or e le ctric fire,’ ” but even this re ma ins inert matter, cons eque ntly "as inert in its e lf as e ithe r sand or marble . It cannot the re fore move its e lf; but probably it is the firs t ma te ria l mover, the ma in s pring where by the Cre ator a nd Preserver of a ll things is pleased to move the universe.”151 As Redeemer of a ll huma nity, the inca rna te God "ta s te d de a th for e ve ry ma n” (Heb. 2:9) tha t “he might make a full a nd s ufficie nt s acrifice, obla tion, a nd satisfaction for the sins of the whole world.”152 It is this triune God who is Gove rnor of all, “Lord a nd Dispos e r of the whole cre ation,” who presides “ove r each cre a ture as if it we re the universe, and ove r the unive rs e as ove r each individua l creature,” ye t ca ring e s pe cia lly for thos e mos t re sponsive to his revealed grace, who are the apple of his eye, whom he hides unde r the s ha dow of his wings .153 Chris tia nity celebrates the l4bL)W 8:183. 147“S piritua l Worship," B 3:91, secs. 1.2, 3, ita lics added. 148“S piritua l Worship," B 3:91, J VI:424-35, sec. 1.4. 149We sley’s tra ns la tion of Col. 1:17. 150“S piritua l Wors hip," B 3:92, sec. 1.5. 15l“S piritua l Worship," B 3:92-93, sec. 1.6, ita lics added. 152BCP e ucha ris tic pra ye r of consecration. ‘““S piritua l Worship,” B 3:93-94, sec. 1.8. 62

GOD

triune God as Cons um mator of a ll things : "Of him [as Crea tor], a nd through him [as S us tainer], a nd to him [as End], are a ll things ” (Rom. 11:36).154 Triune te a ching confirms a nd concise ly dra ws togethe r the ma jor Chris tia n doctrine s of God as Cre a tor, S upporte r, Preserver, Author, Redeemer, Gove rnor, and Cons umma tor of all. c. Ete rnal Life Is Life in the S on, Be ginning Now with Faith In a ll these ways the Son is truly God, with the Fa ther a nd the S pirit. But how is this one God the Give r of e te rna l life? The triune God, who cre a te d us as finite bodies with s e lf-tra ns ce nding souls, invite s to e te rna l life a ll who are re a dy to receive saving grace. Thos e fa ithful unto de a th will receive the crown of life purcha s e d by God the Son. Ete rna l life is fa r more tha n a future life . It is communion with wha t God the Son “is now.” This triune God, ma de incarna te in the Son, is “now the life of e ve rything tha t lives in any kind or degree,” whe the r of vegetable life, "the lowe s t species of life ... as be ing the source of a ll the motion on which ve ge tation depends,” or of anim al life, the powe r by which the a nima l he art beats, or of rational life, the source of a ll tha t moves and a ll tha t is enabled to move its e lf a ccording to its inte llige nce .155 Whoe ve r has the Son has life e te rna l. This is the te s timony tha t God has given us, “not only a title to but the real be ginning of ‘e te rna l life,’ ”156 comme ncing when the Son is revealed in our he a rts, e na bling us to ca ll him Lord and live by fa ith in him.157 d. The Happine s s ofExpe rie nce d Triune S pirituality The fulle s t happiness is e te rna l life . It begins with fa ith in the love of God shed abroad in our hearts, "ins ta ntly producing love to a ll ma nkind: general, pure be ne volence, toge the r with its ge nuine fruits , lowline s s , meekness, patience, conte nte dness in e ve ry state; an e ntire , clear, full acquiescence in the whole will of God.”158 We are ha ppy whe n God takes “full possession of our he a rt; whe n he re igns the re in without a riva l, the Lord of e ve ry motion there,” which is wha t is me a nt by the kingdom of God,159 whe re in we are made “comple te in him” (Col. 2:10). As the triune God is one, so there is one ultima te happiness for all. Our hearts ca nnot re st until the y re s t in God.160 The vigor of youth may seem a kind of ha ppiness, whe n "our blood dances in our veins ; while the world smiles upon us a nd we have a ll the conveniences, yea, a nd s upe rfluitie s of life,” but in time it "flie s away like a shadow.”161 “Give a ma n e ve rything tha t this world ca n give,” a nd s till, as Hora ce 154“S piritua l Worship,” B 3:94-95, sec. 1.19. '““S piritua l Worship,” 3:95, sec. 2.1-3. ‘““S piritua l Worship,” B 3:96, sec. 2.4. 157“On the Discoveries of Faith," B 4:31-32, J VII:233, sec. 7. ‘“‘S piritua l Worship,” B 3:96, J VI:424-35, sec. 2.5. '““S piritua l Worship,” B 3:96, sec. 2.6. ‘““S piritua l Wors hip," B 3:97, sec. 3.1; from Augus tine , Confessions 1.1; see “Awake, Thou Tha t Sleepest,” sec. 2.5. “'“S piritua l Worship,” B 3:97, sec. 3.1.

63

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

knew, "s omething is always la cking to make one ’s fortune incomplete .... Tha t something is ne ithe r more nor less tha n the knowle dge a nd love of God without which no s pirit can be happy.’’162 We sle y re ca lle d his own e xpe rie nce as a child. Although "a s tra nge r to pa in and sickness, a nd pa rticularly to lowness of s pirits (which I do not re member to have fe lt one qua rte r of an hour since I was born), ha ving plenty of a ll things ... s till I was not ha ppy!” He la cke d the knowle dge a nd love of God.163 "This ha ppy knowle dge of the true God is only a nothe r na me for re ligion; I mean Chris tian re ligion" which consists not in outwa rd a ctions or dutie s or conce pts, but more dire ctly “in the knowle dge a nd love of God, as ma nife s te d in the Son of his love, through the e te rna l S pirit.”164 No one who has turne d aside from this grace is happy, even if s urrounde d with e ve ry possible a e sthe tic de light, as was S olomon, who teaches us pla inly wha t happiness is not, more tha n wha t ha ppine ss is: it is “not to be found in na tura l knowle dge , in power, or in the pleasures of sense or ima gina tion.”165

Further Reading on the Triune Teaching Cannon, Willia m R. Theology ofJohn Wesley: W ith S pecial Reference to the Doctrine ofJustification, 204-14. New York: Abingdon, 1946. Collins , Kenneth. A Faithful Witness: John Wesley’s Hom ile tical Theology, 58 - 62. Wilmore , KY: Wesleyan Heritage, 1993. Mickey, Paul. Essentials of Wesleyan Theology, 29 - 44. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1980. Mile y, John. S ystematic Theology. Reprint, Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1989. Pope, Willia m Burt. A Compendium of Chris tian Theology. 3 vols. London:

Wesleyan Me thodis t Book-Room, 1880. Ralston, Thomas N. Elements ofDivinity. Ne w York: Abingdon, 1924. Summers, Thomas O. S ystematic Theology. 2 vols. Edited by J. J. Tigert. Nashville: Me thodis t Publishing House South, 1888. Watson, Richard. Theological Institutes. 2 vols. Ne w York: Mason and Lane, 1836,1840; edited by John M’Clintock. Ne w York: Ca rlton & Porter, 1850. Willia ms , Colin W. John Wesley’s Theology Today, 93 - 97. Nashville: Abingdon, 1960.

162“Spiritual Worship," B 3:97 -98, sec. 3.1; Horace, Odes 3.24.64. 163“Spiritual Worship," B 3:98, sec. 3.2. Here Wesley anticipated Kierkegaard’s aesthetic pseudonyms: “Look forward on any distant prospect: how beautiful does it appear! Come up to it; and the beauty vanishes away.... Just so is life!” “♦ 'Spiritual Worship," B 3:99, J VL424-35, sec. 3.4. 165“Spiritual Worship," B 3:99-100, sec. 3.5; cf. Matthew Prior, “An English Padlock" (n.p.: Jacob Tonson, 1705). 64

CHAPTER 2

The Primacy of Scripture

A. The Authority of Scripture 1. The Primacy and Normative Authority of the Plain Sense of Scripture We s le ys primary appeal was to S cripture in a ll cases of Chris tia n truth. This is why it is necessary to e sta blish the a uthority of S cripture a t the outse t of the s tudy of We s le y’s te a ching. Thre e a ncilla ry forms of a uthority are necessary in orde r to fully unde rs ta nd how God speaks to us de cis ive ly in S cripture . The y are (1) S cripture confirme d by the a pos tolic tradition, (2) reason enabled by grace, a nd (3) the persona l experience of the S pirit in gra sping the Word of God procla ime d in S cripture . To unde rs ta nd how these three confirming e le me nts work toge the r is to grasp We s le ys the ological me thod, a te rm the ologia ns use toda y to point to how a thinke r approaches the dis ce rnme nt of revealed truth. a. A Man ofOne Book As e a rly as 1730, Wesley stated his firm de te rmina tion to become “ ‘a ma n of one book,’ re ga rding none , compa ra tive ly, but the Bible.”1 We s le y ha d a life long ha bit of ris ing e a rly in the morning for pra yer a nd Bible study. He offe re d a poigna nt a ccount of his inte nt in his preface to the S ermons: [As] a creature of a day, passing through life as an a rrow through the a ir ... just hove ring over the great gulf, till a fe w mome nts hence I am no more seen —I drop into an unchangeable eternity! I wa nt to know one thing, the way to heaven — how to la nd safe on tha t happy shore. God hims e lf has condescended to teach the way: for this very end he came from heaven. He ha th written it down in a book. O give me tha t book! At any price give me the Book of God! I have it. Here is knowledge enough for me. Let me be homo unius libri.2 If a nything appears confus ing in the sacred te xt, it is always possible to pra y for grace to the one who s a id," ‘If a ny be willing to do thy will, he sha ll know.’ 1 am lPACP, 10, J X1:373. 2S OS S , pre f. 5; B 1:104-5.

65

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

willing to do, le t me know, thy will. I the n search a fte r a nd cons ide r pa ra lle l passages of S cripture , compa ring s piritua l things with s piritua l.”3 Compa ris on of te xt with te xt e mploys the classic Chris tia n me thod of analogy, ofte n ca lle d the analogy of fa ith. Fa ith thinks a na logica lly by a llowing a ll s criptura l te xts to illumina te each one, a nd each one to provide an angle of vis ion upon the whole. Fa ith pra ys for grace to be hold God’s will. "If a ny of you lacks wis dom, you s hould ask God, who gives ge ne rous ly to a ll without Finding fa ult, a nd it will be give n to you” (James 1:5 NIV). In de s cribing himse lf as homo unius libri,4 a ma n of one book,5 We sle y did not imply tha t there we re no other books to be us e fully read. He hims e lf was a vora cious reader. Rather, he implie d tha t a ll othe r books are best read in re la tion to this mos t re ve a ling book — mos t re ve a ling of God’s be ing and purpose .6 To those who propos e to read only the Bible , We sle y re torte d, “If you need no book but the Bible, you are not above St. Paul. He ca lle d othe rs to ‘Bring the books,’ says he, ‘but e spe cia lly the parchments.’”7 The pa rchme nts we re prima ry te xts a va ilable to Paul tha t ma y have conta ine d writings of the apostles tha t late r would be re ce ive d worldwide as sacred S cripture . Wesley hims e lfwas e ditor ofsome four hundre d books. He was also a life long avid reader for whom horseback was a moving libra ry.8 He was a publis he r of books on ma ny subjects as well, including physics, language lea rning, history, and social change. b. The Writte n Word ofS cripture as the Norm for Chris tian Te aching It is "the fa ith of P rote s ta nts ” to "be lie ve ne ithe r more nor less tha n wha t is ma nife s tly conta ine d in, and prova ble by, the Holy Scriptures.” "The writte n word is the whole a nd sole rule of the ir fa ith, as we ll as practice.”9 "We be lie ve the S cripture to be of God.”10 We are asked to “be not wise above what is writte n. Enjoin nothing tha t the Bible does not cle a rly e njoin. Forbid nothing tha t it does not cle a rly forbid.”11 "I a llow no other rule , whe the r of fa ith or pra ctice, tha n the Holy S criptures.”12 Because of the ple nary e xte nt of s criptural ins pira tion, there is no hidde n or screened ca non within the ca non.13 We s le y did not de ny tha t the re we re forms of huma n agency in the writing, 3SOSS, pref. 5, John 7:17; B 1:105. *LJW 6:30,130. 5S OS S , pref. 5; B 1:105. bLJW 5:215, 221; 8:192; B 1:57,71; 4:93. 7“Minute s of Several Conversations,” Q33, J VIII:315. *LJW 1:20,65. 9“On Faith,” Heb. 11:6, B 3:4, sec. 1.8; cf. “J us tification by Faith,” sec. 2. Wesley repeatedly he ld "the writte n word of God to be the only a nd s ufficie nt rule both of Chris tian fa ith a nd pra ctice "; see "The Cha ra cte r ofa Me thodis t,” J VIII:340, sec. 1. 10EA 13, B 11:19. “Le tte r to John Dickins , De cembe r 26, 1789, LJW 8:191-92; cf. “The Witne s s of Our Own Spirit," B 1:303, sec. 6, ita lics added. 12Le tte r to James He rve y, Ma rch 20,1739, LJW 1:285; cf. B 9:33-34, 527. 13"I make the Word of God the rule of a ll my actions,” We sle y wrote to the bis hop of London, Edmund Gibs on, a nd "no more follow any secret im puls e ins te a d the re of tha n I follow Ma home t or Confucius.” LLBL 4-5, B 11:337. 66

THE PRIMACY OF SCRIPTURE

tra ns mis s ion, a nd he a ring of S cripture , for "as God has made me n the imme diate ins trume nts of a ll those re ve lations , so e va nge lica l fa ith mus t be pa rtly founde d on huma n te s timony.”14 Othe rwis e , Paul’s idioma tic language would not diffe r from John’s a nd Luke’s, which it does. c. S e e king S cripture ’s Lite ral Sense in Its Conte xt We s le y he ld to the plain or lite ral sense unless irrational or unworthy of God’s m oral characte r15 The seeker is ca lle d to look for S cripture ’s pla in, lite ra l, his torical sense (sensus lite ralis ) unless it has a me taphorica l le ve l or inte nt. Even in tha t case we mus t cons ide r the me ta phor in its pla ine s t sense. The wors hiping community reads S cripture for its s tra ightforwa rd, una dorne d sense, without pre te ntious s pe cula tions on hidde n or a lle gorica l me a nings. We are “ne ve r to de pa rt from the pla in, lite ra l sense, unless it implie s an absurdity.”16 To quote te xt against conte xt is to fa il to see the wa y in which the Holy S pirit inte nds its use. Wesley urged his followe rs to “de pa rt e ve r so little from ...the plain, lite ral m e aning ofany te xt, taken in connection with that context"17 Te xt a nd conte xt be long toge the r. Each re quire s the other. Any te xt of S cripture ca n be wa rpe d for purpose s of priva te inte res t. "Any passage is e a sily pe rve rte d, by be ing re cite d s ingly, without a ny of the pre ce ding or following verses. By this means it may ofte n seem to have one sense, whe n it will be pla in, by obs e rving wha t goes be fore a nd wha t follows after, tha t it re a lly has the dire ct contra ry.”18 S cripture is compose d of sentences. Each te xt seeks to cons ta ntly conne ct with our e xpe rience in wha te ve r s pe cific cultura l or his torical s e tting we find ourselves. We have this book origina lly writte n in He bre w and Gre e k. If we are to come into cre dible conta ct with the te xt, we mus t study.19 Thos e who come s e rious ly to the s e rvice of the Word do we ll to le arn the origina l language of the te xt. We sle y was willing to engage in te xtua l analysis and to search a mong the a va ila ble ma nus cripts for the mos t re lia ble te xt. He offe re d nume rous corre ctions to the Authorize d Ve rs ion in his Explanatory Notes upon the Ne w Testament. 2. The Analogy of Faith a. Each Part ofS cripture Vie we d in Re lation to the Whole Each pa rticula r te xt of S cripture is be st read by a na logy with other correla ted passages of S cripture a nd the whole cours e of s criptural te a ching, a nd in re la tion 14Com pendium on Natural Philosophy B 11:447; J XIII:482 - 87. lsENOT, pref.; cf. J XIV:266. 16“Of the Church,” B 3:50, sec. 12. 17PACP, Q33, J XI:429, ita lics added; cf. "Ca utions and Dire ctions Give n to the Greatest Professors in Me thodis t Societies," 1762; see also J WO l:473n; R. La rry Shelton, "We s le ys Approa ch to S cripture in His torica l Perspective,” W TJ16 (1981): 23 - 50. 18“On Corrupting the Word of God,” B 7:470. 19B 3:192-93. 67

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

to the his tory of its consensual inte rpre ta tion by the grea t teachers of S cripture . By this means we a llow the cle ar te xts to illum inate obscure texts. This is the principle of the a na logy of fa ith (analogia fide i), which in a ccord with classic Chris tia n exegesis, We s le y cons ta ntly s ought to e mploy. S cripture is the best inte rpre te r of S cripture .20 We be gin to a ccumula te through the life time s tudy of S cripture a sense of the wholene ss of fa ith as one te xt illuminate s another. "The lite ra l sense of e ve ry te xt is to be taken, if it be not contra ry to some other te xts ; but in tha t case the obs cure te xt is to be inte rpre te d by thos e which speak more plainly.”21 S criptura l wis dom comes out of a broa dly based dia logue with the ge ne ral sense of the whole of S cripture , not a single set of selected te xts . In the wors hiping community, we bring pre vious me morie s of S cripture ’s prior address to each subsequent reading. Wesley stated his inte nt in Explanatory Notes upon the Old Testament: To give the direct, lite ra l meaning, of every verse, of every sentence, and so far as I am able, of every word in the oracles of God. I design only, like the hand of a dial, to point every man to this: not to take up his mind with some thing else, how excellent soever: but to keep his eye fixt upon the naked Bible, tha t he may read and hear it with unde rs ta nding.... It is not my design to write a book, which a man may read separate from the Bible: but barely to assist those who fear God, in hearing and reading the Bible itself, by shewing the natural sense of every part, in as few and plain words as I can.22 b. Why Chris tians S tudy the Old Te s tame nt We sle y re je cted the te mpta tion of Ma rcion to dis card the Old Te sta me nt. The Ne w Te s tame nt depends on the Old. The Old Te s tame nt looks toward its fulfillme nt in the New. The Ne w Te s ta me nt fulfills the promis e s ofthe Old. The inte rpreta tion of the Old Te s tame nt is assisted by the a na logy of fa ith, whe re a ll S cripture te xts illumine each. Whe n Chris tians read the Old Te s ta me nt, the y read it in the light of its be ing fulfille d in the New. Long be fore mode rn he rmene utics , Wesley made cle ar tha t "the Church is to be judge d by the S cripture , not the S cripture by the Church.” The S cripture s of both the Old a nd Ne w Testaments guide the judgme nts of the church. We s le y added, "And S cripture is the best e xpounder of S cripture . The best way, the re fore , to unde rs ta nd it, is ca refully to compa re S cripture with S cripture , a nd the re by le arn the true mea ning of it.”23 "S cripture interpre ts S cripture ; one pa rt fixing the sense of another.”24 This enables the Chris tia n re a de r of the Old Te s tame nt to vie w the moral commands as covered promis es . Chris tians e a rne s tly s tudy the He bre w Bible in re la tion to its ha ving been fulfille d in Jesus Chris t.25 20B 1:58-59,106; 2:102-3; 4:5-6; 9:201, 353; 11:169, 504. 2‘Le tte r to Samuel Furly, Ma y 10,1755, LJW 111:129. 22ENOT, pref. 15, viii. 23“Pope ry Calmly Considered," J X:142, sec. 1.6. 24“Address to the Clergy,” J X:482, sec. 1.1. 25B 1:381-82, 386-87, 394-95; 2:514. 68

THE PRIMACY OF SCRIPTURE

We s le y’s exegesis focus e d on the pra ctica l a pplica tion of S cripture in wa lking in the wa y of holiness.26 Chris tia n e xpe rience becomes a confirming exercise, not a de termining force , in wis e and balanced forms of s criptura l inte rpre ta tion. S cripture, whe n e xpe rie nce d, acts as a corre ctive to ra s h a nd imba la nce d inte rpre ta tions.27 Reason a nd e xperie nce in this wa y be come s e rva nts , not masters, of the be lie ve r’s unde rs ta nding of re ve la tion his tory.28

3. Spirit and Scripture a. S cripture Judge s All Othe r Alle ge d R e ve lations God’s S pirit accompanies e ve ry step of the thoughtful re a ding of S cripture : Whosoever giveth his mind to Holy Scriptures with diligent study and burning desire, it cannot be tha t he should be le ft without help. For e ithe r God will send him some godly doctor to teach him or God hims e lf from above will give light unto his mind and teach him those things which are necessary for him. Ma n’s human and worldly wis dom or science is not ne e dful to the unde rsta nding of Scripture but the revelation of the Holy Ghost who ins pire th the true meaning unto the m tha t with humility and diligence search.29 “The S cripture s are the touchs tone whe re by Chris tians e xamine all, real or s upposed, revelations.”30 S cripture s are not to be pitte d a ga inst the S pirit. S cripture can be unde rs tood only through the same S pirit whe re by it is give n.31 The S criptures , ins pire d by the S pirit, form the writte n rule by which the S pirit the re afte r leads us into a ll truth.32 “The his torical experience of the church, though fallible , is the be tte r judge ove rall of S cripture's meanings than late r inte rpre te rs .^3 b. Mining the Te xtuary To a tte s t the work of the S pirit, we do we ll to mine the te xtuary of the S pirit’s work and dig thos e je we ls of ins truction out of the ha rd rock of the writte n Word.34 "Eve ry good te xtua ry is a good divine ,” a nd “none can be a good divine who is not a good textuary.” Inte rpre ta tion a t time s may be ha ndica ppe d "without knowle dge of the origina l tongues.”35 If God the S pirit is the one who calls forth S cripture , the n be lie ve rs have good reason to assume tha t God will be pre se nt in the ir re a ding of S cripture . S cripture 26MOB, 89-96. 27B 4:246 - 47; 9:378 - 79; 11:509. 28 B 3:16, 200-201; 4:198-99, 219. 29Preface to the Reader, DSF, J WO 123; B 1:381-82,386-87,394-95; 2:514. This work is Wesleys amended e dition of the Eliza be tha n Homilie s , which for Anglica ns cons titute a worthy guide to s criptura l fa ith. ^Le tte r to Thoma s White he a d, Fe brua ry 10,1748, LJW 11:117. 31 MOB, 97. 32LJW 2:117; cf. B 3:496. 33Albe rt C. Outle r on Wesley, in JWO, 1:58-59. 34CH 7:185-87,474-75. 35“Address to the Clergy," J X:482, sec. 1.2. 69

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

is a means of grace by which God the S pirit leads s inne rs ba ck to the love of the Father ma nife s te d in the Son.36 The re ce ive d ca non is s ufficie nt for fa ith a nd fully adequate to teach the truth.37 "Though the S pirit is our principa l leader, ye t He is not our rule a t all; the S cripture s are the rule whe re by He [the Holy S pirit] leads us into a ll truth.” A rule implie s "s omething used by an intelligent be ing” so as to make e ve rything “plain and clear.”38 The Holy S pirit is fa r more tha n a rule . He is the Guide to make the rule of S cripture plain within the he a rt.

4. Scripture, Conscience, and General Revelation a. The He ave ns De clare God’s Glory The his tory of God’s dis clos ure illumine s a ll other forms of knowing. Special re ve la tion does not on the whole run counte r to general re ve la tion but elucidates it.39 God is pre s e nt in the e ntire book of na ture a nd his tory, for tha t is wha t S cripture its e lf teaches: "The heavens de cla re the glory of God; the skies procla im the work of his hands. Day a fte r day the y pour forth speech” (Ps. 19:1 -2 NIV). Thos e who try to unde rs ta nd the ways of God in his tory a nd the love of God for fa lle n humanity do we ll to dilige ntly s tudy the his tory of divine s e lf-dis clos ure both in na ture a nd huma n his tory.40 It is in huma n his tory through events tha t God has made known his holy, s e lf-giving love, pa rticularly in Jesus Chris t.41 S cripture does not ove rride the priva te sphere of cons cie nce but points to it. Cons cie nce is the inte rna l witne s s te s tifying to mora l awareness pre se nt within e ve ry huma n be ing. “Eve ry ma n has a right to judge for hims e lf, pa rticula rly in ma tte rs of re ligion, because e ve ry ma n mus t give an a ccount of himse lf to God.’’42 b. Ade quacy, Clarity, and S ufficie ncy ofS cripture Holy S cripture is "tha t ‘word of God which re maine th for e ve r’; ofwhich, though ‘heaven and e a rth pass away, one jot or tittle s ha ll not pass away.’ The S cripture , the refore , of the Old a nd Ne w Te s ta me nt, is a mos t s olid a nd pre cious system of divine truth. Eve ry pa rt the re of is worthy of God; a nd a ll toge the r are one e ntire body, whe re in is no de fe ct, no excess. It is the founta in of heavenly wis dom, which the y who are able to taste pre fe r to a ll writings of me n, howe ve r wise or le a rned or holy.”43 We sle y said, "I try e ve ry church a nd e ve ry doctrine by the Bible.”44 "The S cripture , the re fore , be ing de live re d by me n divine ly ins pire d, is a rule s ufficie nt of its elf. 36“The Me a ns of Grace,” B 1:386 - 88; J V:92 - 94. 37“On Corrupting the Word ofGod," B 7:470-71. 38Le tte r [to Thoma s White he a d? ], February 10,1748,1/W2:117; B 1:302-3; 9:114-15, 198. 39“On Working Out Our Own Salvation," B 3:199 - 200, proe m 1, 2. “B 2:536; 1:420 - 21; 2:54-55, 588, 591-92; 3:4, 504. 41B 4:18. 42“Address to the Reader,” 1771 e dition of colle cte d works , quote d in Preface to the Third Edition, 1:4. *3ENNT, pref. 10. **LJW 111:172. 70

THE PRIMACY OF SCRIPTURE

So it ne ithe r needs, nor is capable of, any furthe r a ddition.”45 “If the re be any mis takes in the Bible, the re may as we ll be a thous and. If there be one fa ls e hood in tha t book, it did not come from the God of truth.”46 If a ny wa y "be contra ry to S cripture , it is not good, a nd the longe r we are in it so much the worse.”47 In classic Chris tian re a s oning, supposed "mis ta ke s " in the Bible are misre a dings, e rrors of the reader, a s s uming tha t te xt a nd conte xt have been ta ke n into prope r a ccount as a pplie d by compa ring S cripture with S cripture and the whole with the pa rt. Said Wesley, “The language of [God’s] messengers, also, is e xa ct in the highe st degree: for the words which we re given the m a ccura te ly answered the impre s s ion made upon the ir minds ; a nd he nce Luthe r says, ‘Divinity is nothing but a gra mma r of the language of the Holy Ghost.’ To unde rs ta nd this thoroughly, we s hould obs e rve the e mpha s is which lie s on e ve ry word; the holy a ffe ctions expressed the re by, a nd the te mpe rs s hown by e ve ry write r.”48 We s le y followe d Luthe r and Ca lvin in the ir me thod of re a ding S cripture te xts : unde rs ta nd each word, te xt in context, pre fe ra bly in the origina l language, grasped a na logically in re la tion to the whole te s timony of S cripture . c. Practical Guide to Re ading the S acre d Te xt In the preface to Explanatory Notes upon the Old Testament, Wesley set forth five practical steps to enable serious me dita tive S cripture study: 1. Set apart a specified da ily time for Scripture study. 2. Read the Hebrew Bible in conjunction with the Ne w Testament, reading both “with a single eye to know the whole will of God, and a fixed re s olution to do it.” 3. “Have a constant eye to the analogy of fa ith, the conne ction and ha rmony there is between those grand, fundamental doctrines, origina l sin, jus tifica tion by faith, the new birth, inwa rd and outwa rd holiness.” 4. Let your reading be surrounded by earnest prayer, “seeing ‘Scripture can only be understood through the same S pirit whereby it was given.'” 5. Pause fre que ntly for honest personal self-examination.49

B. The Inspiration of Holy Scripture The S pirit works not only in the mind of the sacred write r but within the he art of the a tte ntive reader: “All S cripture is ins pired of God —the S pirit of God not only once ins pire d thos e who wrote it, but continua lly ins pire s , s upe rna tura lly assists, thos e tha t read it with e a rne st prayer.”50 45“Popery Ca lmly Considered,” J X:141, sec. 1.3. «JJW 6:117. 47Le tte r to James Lowthe r, Octobe r 28, 1754, LJW 111:122. “I build upon no a uthority, a ncie nt or mode rn, but the S cripture . Ifthis s upports any doctrine , it will stand; ifnot, the soone r it fa lls the better." Cf. MOB 113-14. **ENNT, pre f. 12. VENOT, pre f. 18, I; ix; cf. B 1:58-59, 106; 2:102-3; 4:5 - 6, 246 - 47; 9:201, 353, 378-79; 11:169, 504,509. S0ENNT 794, 2 Tim. 3:16.

7J

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

We s le y’s te a ching on the ins pira tion of S cripture has its be ginning a nd end in God’s purpos e to reveal divine grace to huma n persons. In a concis e essay on the ins pira tion of sacred S cripture ,51 We s le y s howe d how the re ve lation of God in S cripture is a ccompa nie d by the S pirit’s work to awaken the mind of the seeker.

1. A Clear and Concise Demonstration of the Divine Inspiration of Holy Scripture a. Four Argum e nts from Miracle s , Prophe cie s, Goodne ss , and Characte r We s le y’s brie f essay “Four Argume nts from Mira cle s, P rophecie s, Goodness, a nd Cha ra cte r” is ha rdly inte nde d to e la bora te a comple te doctrine of s criptura l inte rpre ta tion, but it does offe r a s triking glimps e into the he art of We s le y’s vie w of S cripture . It is de ce ptive ly s hort. The firs t time we read it through we might think, This is theology? Too simple. The second time we be gin to ponde r whe the r something might be hidde n the re but wonde r jus t wha t. La te r a light begins to dawn. Following is the line of reasoning. The re are four gra nd and powe rful inductive a rgume nts tha t s trongly induce us to be lie ve tha t the Bible is from God: 1. the arguments from miracles experienced, 2. the argument from prophecy fulfille d, 3. the argument from the intrins ic mora l goodness of s criptura l teaching taken as a whole, and 4. the argument from the mora l character of those who wrote it.52 Each a rgume nt has both inductive a nd de ductive features. We sle y firs t looke d inductive ly at e mpirica l evidence of the ins pira tion of S cripture . b. Inductive Argum e nts for the Ins piration ofS cripture Whe re mira cle s are attested, the y mus t be true or false. If truly a tte ste d, the y mus t flow from God’s own powe r. Miracle re quire s the pre mis e of one incompa rably powe rful and wise — namely, God. The re ca n be no miracle without one capable of tra ns ce nding norma l huma n e xpe cta tions . La ter whe n we cons ide r provide nce , I will speak of the re la tion of divine ca us a lity a nd the na tura l ca us a lity of physics. Whe re prophe cie s are attested, the y will be prove n in history to be e ithe r true or false. If truly attested, it will be e vident to any reasonable vie wer of his tory tha t the y are fulfille d. If in the process of be ing fulfille d, the y can be seen as be ing precise, based on pre vious evidences made known in his tory. If prophe cies are prove n fulfille d, the y mus t flow from God’s unbounded knowing. P rophe cy re quire s the pre mis e of the wis dom of God. We ca nnot have fulfille d prophecy without pos iting God’s e te rna l wis dom be ing revealed in time . The re can be no fulfille d prophe cy 5ICCD,) XI:484. 52CCD, J XI:484. 72

THE PRIMACY OF SCRIPTURE

without an e te rnally wis e one capable of seeing pa st a nd future . Tha t one the wors hiping community calls God.53 The te achings of S cripture mus t be e ithe r mora lly good or e vil. If the doctrine s of S cripture are good, the y of necessity flow out of the goodness of God. If the y are incompa ra bly good, compa re d to a ll na tura l a nd his torica l knowing, the y mus t come from one who is incompa ra bly good. The de mons tra ted goodness of the te a ching re quire s the pre mis e of the be ne fice nce of God. If the moral chara cte r of the a uthors of S cripture corre s ponds with the ir te a ching, even unde r pe rs e cution a nd torture , a reasonable obs e rve r will take note of tha t corre s ponde nce . It is impla us ible tha t the ma rtyrs of classic Chris tia n fa ith were mis informe d a bout the cre dibility of the re s urrection a nd the promis e of e te rnal life. The ir ve ry a ctions s howe d the ir mora l character. Stephen is the mode l for a ll subsequent witnesses who are willing to die for the ir fa ith. The truth of the ir te a ching is de mons tra te d in the te s timony of the ir mora l character. The ir mora l cha ra cte r mus t presuppose some source a nd ground of mora l character. The holine ss of lives live d out in re la tion to the events a tte ste d in S cripture points to the holine ss of God.54 The re can be no re liable Chris tia n te a ching without pos iting one capable of living out the truth of Chris tia n te a ching unde r adverse circums ta nce s , as Chris t did on the cross a nd as Stephen did in his innoce nt de ath.55 These four a rgume nts can be pictured in s ummary: The Ground of S cripture ’s Authority Hinge s on: Miracles attested Fulfille d prophecy attested Mora l goodness attested Mora l character of human authors of Scripture

The attribute s of God: Powe r of God Wis dom of God Goodness of God Holiness of God

Thus , inductive ly, out of the pe rs ona lly e xpe rienced a nd attested evidences of mira cle s occurring, prophecie s be ing fulfille d, moral goodness be ing ta ught, and the s a ints a nd ma rtyrs living out tha t te s timony even to death, the conclus ion is tha t the sacred S cripture is a re lia ble source of knowing the only one who can be wors hipe d as ha ving incompa ra ble power, wisdom, goodness, a nd holine ss. The infinite power, omnis cience , incompa ra ble mora l excellence, a nd righte ousne ss of God mus t be pos ite d as the ground of these vis ible consequences of s criptura l te stimony to miracle, prophe cy, mora l te a ching, a nd holy lives live d.56 These are a ll e xpe rie ntial a nd inductive a rgume nts —tha t is, a rgume nts based on obs e rvation of pe rsona l a nd his torica l huma n experiences. The y can be tested by ope ning our eyes to the evidence. 53CCD, J XI:484 - 85. 54J WO 89 - 90,181 - 82, 225 - 26,375 - 76. 55CCD, J XI:484 - 86. 56 LJW 2:62,69.90,104. 73

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

We s le y turne d the n to the a rguments for the ve ra city of S cripture based on de ductive re a s oning, including thos e tha t de rive the ir conclus ions logica lly from commons e nse reason. These a rgume nts may go by so quickly tha t ma ny readers ma y not "ge t” the m. As with the ontologica l a rgume nt for the existence of God, readers may have to ponde r the m re pe a te dly to grasp the ir consequence. c. De ductive Argume nts for the Ins piration ofS cripture We s le y was trying to de mons tra te how the ins pira tion of S cripture is not an unreasonable judgment of unreasonable people. It is a reasonable ope rating premise tha t ma y be seen working in ge nera tions of good and thoughtful people. Concis e ly he s ought to de mons tra te tha t the Bible mus t be the cre a tion of e ithe r good human beings or angels or bad huma n beings or devils or God. These are e xha us tive a lte rnative s .57 Afte r these five , there is no sixth. Firs t, he s howe d tha t the Bible could not have been writte n me re ly by good pe rsons, because good pe rsons would have be e n lying whe n the y wrote , “Thus saith the Lord”; for if it we re not the Lord but a ctua lly only the finite pe rs on speaking, jus t his or he r own ps ychology or his tory or reason, tha t pe rs on would be lying. No good pe rs on (and the same a rgume nt applies to good angels) would write or attest such a s ta te ment unless it was the Lord who ca lle d it forth. So we can be sure tha t S cripture is not ins pired by the good huma n beings, or even good angels, for the y would not lie .58 But could the Bible have be e n writte n by de ce ive rs, by e vil pe rsons or fa lle n angels? We ca n be sure tha t S cripture is not ins pire d by e vil persons, because a bad pe rs on or bad angel could not have inve nte d such good doctrine . Evildoe rs could not have inve nte d a set of writings so wholly contra ry to the ir own character. Having thus e lim inate d all of the alte rnative s : ins piration by good humans, good angels, bad humans, and bad angels, as authors ofS cripture , there is no othe r conclusion to draw than that it can only be breathed out as God’s own Word. God’s speech to us, of cours e, is writte n a nd addressed through huma n pe rs ons with huma n language within diffe re nt his torica l conte xts , but its a uthor a nd ins pire r is God.59 We can the n ta ke it for gra nte d in re a ding the te s timony of the prophe ts a nd the apostles tha t this is God’s own s e lf-communication60 to be ta ke n with utte r se rious ness as re lia ble divine address.61 57“A Cle a r and Concise De mons tra tion of the Divine Ins pira tion of Holy Scripture," J X1:484. 58Ibid.; cf.B 2:310-11. ”LJW 2:62 - 69, 90, 100, 104; 5:245. WLJW 2:148; 3:127; B 11:291, 504. 61“A Cle a r and Concise De mons tra tion of the Divine Ins pira tion of Holy Scripture," J XI:484.

74

THE PRIMACY OF SCRIPTURE

Tha t is it. You have jus t read it. If you missed its de ductive logic, read it again. In this s hort essay, We s le y s howe d hims e lf to be a ma s te r of concis e a rgume nt. In fact, this was his mos t importa nt concise a rgume nt on the a uthority of S cripture . Mos t of We s le y’s readers we re laypersons. He did not think tha t this a rgume nt re quire d any extensive knowle dge of philos ophy. He thought tha t ordina ry la ype rsons could unde rs ta nd a nd re ly on this s imple commonse nse reasoning. 2. Wesley as Commentator on Scripture These a rgume nts on the ins pira tion of sacred S cripture may be e xte nsive ly seen a t work in We s le y’s own comme nta rie s a nd homilie s on S cripture . a. Note s upon the Ne w Te s tame nt We s ley’s a rgume nts are e s pe cia lly e vident in his Explanatory Notes upon the Ne w Testament. The re We s le y’s purpos e was to make S cripture a va ila ble in accessible forma t to Chris tia n la ity, e spe cia lly in his own conne ction of s piritua l forma tion, who ha d ne ithe r the means nor the time to read through highly te chnica l tre a tis e s or comme nta rie s . The re la tive cost of books was e normous in his day. So a ll of We s le y’s publis hing was de signe d for the thrifty buyer. He was producing these comme nta rie s a t an e xtre me ly ma rgina l cost. His Notes we re me a nt to guide da ily Bible s tudy for ordina ry pe ople who didn’t have the resources to buy expensive books. He kne w tha t mos t pe ople we re so ha rdworking tha t he ha d to de live r these ins ights pla inly—without s pe cula tion, pos turing, or deceit. In his Notes, We s le y focused e s pe cia lly on a pplica tion of s piritua l truth to ordina ry living.62 He s ought to a da pt the wis e s t comme nta tors of his day for a general re a ding audience. He gra te fully a cknowle dged tha t he worke d fre ely out of Ma tthe w He nry63 and Willia m Poole64 in his Old Te s ta me nt Notes, a nd from John A. Bengel, John He ylyn’s The ological Lectures,16 5 John Guyse’s Practical Expos itor;66 and P hilip Doddridge ’s The Fam ily Expos itor67 Wesley ofte n le t Bengel speak for hims e lf, especia lly in the comme ntary on Re vela tion: "All I ca n do is pa rtly to tra nsla te , pa rtly a bridge the mos t necessary of his obs e rva tions ; a llowing mys e lf the libe rty to a lte r some of the m, a nd to add a fe w notes whe re he is not full.”68 The Notes “we re not principa lly designed for me n of le a rning, who are provide d with ma ny othe r helps; a nd much less for me n of long and dee pe r experience in the ways a nd Word of God. I desire to s it a t the ir fe e t a nd le arn from the m. But I write chie fly for plain, unle ttere d me n, who unde rs ta nd only the ir mothe r tongue, a nd ye t re ve rence a nd love the Word of God, a nd have a de sire to save the ir souls.”69 62LfW 4:93,125; 8:67. 63Expos ition ofthe Old and Ne w Testament, used especially in Genesis. 64Annotations on the Holy Bible. 65John He ylyn, The ological Lectures, 2 vols. (London: We stmins te r Abbey, 1749-61). “John Guyse, Practical Expositor, 3 vols. (London, 1739 - 52). UENNT, pre f. 8. MENNT 932. 69ENNT, pre f. 3,6; JJW4:91 - 92, 361; 7:345. 75

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

We sle y comme nte d, "I have endeavored to make the notes as s hort as possible, tha t the comme nt ma y not obscure or s wa llow up the te xt; a nd as plain as possible, in purs ua nce of my ma in design, to assist the unlea rne d reader. For this reason I have s tudious ly avoided, not only a ll curious a nd critical inquirie s, a nd a ll use of the le a rne d languages, but a ll such me thods of re as oning a nd mode s of expression as pe ople in common life are una cqua inte d with.”70 b. Note s upon the Old Te s tame nt The Explanatory Notes upon the Old Testament71 we re pla nne d to be “de live re d we e kly to s ubs cribe rs ” in 60 ins ta llme nts , be ginning April 25, 1765. Actua lly they e xte nde d to 110 numbe rs , price d a t sixpence each, with the final ma nus cript dated De cembe r 24, 1766. All of these we re la te r bound in three he fty folio volume s .72 Regarding the Old Testa ment Notes, Wesley mode s tly re comme nde d tha t each s ocie ty subscribe , a llowing "two, four, or s ix might join toge the r for a copy, a nd bring the mone y to the ir leader weekly.”73 This a mbitious re a ding progra m was designed for ordina ry folks. We sle y’s dis tinctive , s imple , pe rs onal style shows through even a mid heavy e diting. The Notes are “an a rtful ble nding of the best of other s chola rs’ work into the s tre a m of his own the ologica l perspectives.”74 He took libe rty in re fining a nd a dopting e difying words of othe rs to fit his own minis try of witness. De s pite his be st inte ntions to honor the sacred te xt as God’s own Word, Wesley was fully aware tha t good S cripture might fa ll into ba d hands. How are those who corrupt the Word differe nt from thos e who a llow the Word to speak?

3. On Corrupting the Word of God The te xt of “On Corrupting the Word of God” is 2 Corinthia ns 2:17: “We are not as many, which corrupt the word of God” [Homily #137 (1727), B 4:243-51; J #136, VII:468-73]. Thos e who corrupt the Word of God are contra s te d with thos e who re a d it pla inly as God’s own Word. Today we have critical minds inve s tiga ting the sacred te xt who come a t it with wha t is ca lle d a "he rme ne utic of suspicion,” an a pproa ch tha t seeks to test the truth of S cripture a gainst rigorous modern “his torical-e mpirica l me thods ,” against the sha red consensus of ma ny modern write rs who do not read S cripture as divine re ve lation. Some of these critics may try to be fa ir to give S cripture an opportunity to speak on its own te rms , while othe rs ma y impos e on S cripture te rms a lie n to its inte nt. ™ENNT, pref. 6,7. nJJW 5:112,115. 72Bristol, UK: William Pine, 1765-66; reprint, Salem, OH: Schmul, 1975. 73W 4:312. 74Editor’s Preface, John Wesley’s Commentary on the Bible, ed. G. Roger Schoenhals (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1990), 7. 76

THE PRIMACY OF SCRIPTURE

We s le y ha d some choice words for thos e in his day who ha d s imila r te nde ncies. He thought tha t an obsessive he rme ne utic of s us picion75 re flecte d poorly on its pra ctitioners : “The hone s te r any ma n is, the less a pt is he to suspect a nothe r.... Would not a ny ma n be te mpte d to suspect his inte grity who, without proof, suspe cte d the wa nt of it in a nothe r?”76 To a void corrupting the Word, the reader mus t le t it speak for itse lf. a. Thre e Marks of Corrupte rs of the W ord Thre e “ma rks of dis tinction” be tra y thos e prone to corrupt the Word of God. First, the corrupte rs are pre dis pos e d to ble nd S cripture with political interests, econom ic motive s, or various hum an adm ixtures , diluting the divine Word with the e rrors of othe rs or the fancies of the ir own bra ins , us ua lly without any awareness of the ir own s e lf-dece ption.77 A second type of corrupte r pe rve rts the sense of a passage of S cripture , taking it out ofconte xt, "re pe a ting the words wrong,” or "putting a wrong sense upon the m ... fore ign to the write r’s inte ntion” or even contra ry to it. "Any passage is easily pe rve rte d” by ne gle cting its conte xt.78 Third, othe rs corrupt the Word not by a dding to but s ubtracting from it. They “take e ithe r of the s pirit or substance of it away, while the y s tudy to prophes y only s mooth things , a nd the re fore pa llia te a nd colour wha t the y preach, to re concile it to the taste of the ir hearers,” wa s hing the ir ha nds of “thos e s tubborn te xts tha t will not be nd to the ir purpose.”79 These three ma rks or te nde ncie s dis tinguis h the corruptors of the Word from thos e who are sincere in both the ir lis tening to a nd spe a king of the writte n Word of God. b. S ince rity in He aring and S pe aking the W ord Sincere hearers of the Word of God a ttes t it “ge nuine a nd unmixe d,” without unnatural or a rtificia l inte rpre ta tions . The y do not take away from the Word. They dare to say ne ithe r more nor less tha n tha t which the Word addresses to tha t a udience. The y pre ach the whole counsel of God. The y are willing to discuss hone s tly the real resistances of hearers. The y speak "with plainness and boldness,” not s ofte ning the cha lle nge of the Word.80 Thos e who preach with s ince rity a nd find only re je ction need not fre t, for the y have done the ir duty as wa tchme n (Ezek. 33:1 - 9).81 Such s ince rity is a bs olute ly essential to e ffe ctive pre a ching. It enables the hearer 75A he rme ne utic of s us picion is a defensive a s s umption in re la tion to the te xt or the hearer tha t would begin ad homine m by que s tioning the a rgue r’s motive s or socia l loca tion as de te rmina tive of its conte nt. This s ort ofcritique was la te r developed e xplicitly by the tra dition of Ma rx, Freud, and Jacques De rrida , a nd more judicious ly by Paul Ricoeur. 76“On Corrupting the Word of God,” B 4:246, J VII:469 - 71, pre f. 2, 3. ^“On Frie nds hip with the World,” B 3:126-40. 78“On Corrupting the Word of God," B 4:247, J VII:470, sec. 1.2. 7,“On Corrupting the Word of God," B 4:247 - 48, J VII:470, sec. 1.3. 80“On Corrupting the Word of God,” B 4:248, J VII:470, sec. 1.3; cf. L/W 6:276. 81“On Corrupting the Word of God,” B 4:250, J VI1:473, sec. 3.1. 77

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

to trus t tha t the pre a che r has no e nd in vie w but the cle a r a nd a ccura te address of the Word.82 When it comes from the he a rt, since re communica tion has a capacity to “s tra nge ly ins inua te into the he a rts of others.”83 Its ce ntra l conce rn: "Le t the hearers a ccommoda te themselves to the Word,” not the Word to the hearers.84 As Paul declared, “Unlike so many, we do not pe ddle the word of God for profit. On the contra ry, in Chris t we speak be fore God with s ince rity, as thos e sent from God” (2 Cor. 2:17 NIV).

Further Reading on Wesley's Scriptural Teaching Arne tt, William M. “John Wesley and the Bible." WTJ 3 (1968): 3-9. --------. “John Wesley: Ma n of One Book.” PhD diss., Dre w University, 1954. Artings ta ll, George. A Man of One Book. London: Epworth, 1953. Bullen, Dona ld A. A Man of One Book? John Wesley’s Inte rpre tation and Use of the Bible. Waynesboro, GA: Paternoster, 2007. Clemons, James T. “John Wesley — Biblica l Literalist.” RL 46 (1977): 332-42. Dayton, Dona ld W. “The Use of Scripture in the Wesleyan Tradition.” In The Use of the Bible in Theology, edited by Robert K. Johnston, 121-36. Atlanta: John Knox, 1985. Ferguson, Duncan S. “John Wesley on Scripture: The Hermeneutics of Pietism.”MH 22, no. 4 (1984): 234-45. Green, Joel B. Reading S cripture as Wesleyans. Nashville: Abingdon, 2010. Greenway, Jeffrey, and Joel B. Green. Grace and Holiness in a Changing World: A Wesleyan Proposalfor Postmodern Minis try. Nashville: Abingdon, 2007.

Hilde rbrandt, Franz. Chris tianity according to the Wesleys, 9-27. London: Epworth, 1956. Jones, Scott J. John Wesley’s Conception and Use ofS cripture. Nashville: Kingswood, 1995. Kallstad, Thorva ld. John Wesley and the Bible: A Psychological S tudy. Stockholm: Nya Bokforlags, 1974. Kimbrough, S. T., Jr., ed. Orthodox and Wesleyan S criptural Understanding and Practice. Crestwood, NY: St. Vla dimir’s Seminary Press, 2005. Lawson, John. The Wesley Hymns: As a Guide to S criptural Teachings. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1988. McCown, Wayne G. “Wesley’s Suggestions for Study of the Bible.” In A Contemporary Wesleyan Theology, edited by Charles W. Carter. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1983. Mulle n, Wilbur H. “John Wesley’s Me thod of Biblical Inte rpre ta tion.” RL 47(1978): 99-108. Oswalt, John N. "Wesley’s Use of the Old Testament.” W TJ12 (1977): 39-53. Pellowe, Willia m C. S. “John Wesley’s Use of the Bible.” MR 106 (1923): 353-74.

82B 1:281,683-84:4:365. 83“On Corrupting the Word ofGod," B 4:245, J VII:469, pre f. 2. 84“On Corrupting the Word ofGod," B 4:250, J VIL472, sec. 2.4. 78

THE PRIMACY OF SCRIPTURE

Scoggs, Robin. "John Wesley as Biblical Scholar." JBR 38 (1960): 415-22. Shelton, R. Larry. “Wesleys Approach to Scripture in His torica l Perspective.” W TJ16 (1981): 23-50. Smith, Timothy L. "John Wesley and the Wholeness of Scripture.” Int 39 (1985): 246-62. Turner, George Alle n. “John Wesley as an Inte rpre te r of Scripture.” In Ins piration and Inte rpre tation, edited by John F. Walvoord, 156-78. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957. Yates, Arthur S. “Wesley and His Bible.” MR (1960): 8. Wesley's Sources

Bengel, Johann A. Gnomon of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1983. Guyse, John. Practical Exposition of the Four Gospels. London, 1739. Henry, Matthew. A Commentary on the Holy Bible. 6 vols. Ne w York: Revell, 1935.

Heylyn, John. An Inte rpre tation of the Ne w Testament. London, 1749,1761. Wesley's Explanatory Notes

Arne tt, Willia m M. “A Study in John Wesley s Explanatory Notes upon the Old Testament.” W TJ8 (1973): 14-32. Earle, Ralph. “John Wesley s Ne w Testament.” AS 14, no. 1 (1960): 61-67. Laws, C. H. "Wesleys Notes on the New Testament.” PW HS 18 (1931): 37-39. Schoenhals, G. Roger, ed.John Wesley's Notes on the Bible. Gra nd Rapids: Zondervan, 1987. Simon, John S. “Mr. Wesleys Notes upon the Ne w Te s tam e ntPWHS 9 (1914): 97-105. Smith, Timothy L. “Notes on the Exegesis of John Wesley s Explanatory Notes upon the NV WTJ 16, no. 1 (1981): 107-13.

79

INTERLUDE

God's Particular Method of Working In the homily on "The Promise of Unders ta nding,” We sle y wrote , "It is the Divine S pirit ‘who worke th in us both to will a nd to do of his good pleasure,’ of this, e xperie nce , a nd reason, a nd S cripture convince e ve ry since re inquire r,” which is God’s “pa rticula r me thod of working.”1 This lucid sentence brings us to wha t the ologia ns today ca ll "the ologica l method.” We sle y pre fe rre d to speak more plainly of "God’s pa rticula r me thod of working.” We s le y ta ught the a uthority of S cripture in a wa y tha t honors those who have a ppropria te d it fa ithfully a nd conse nsua lly ove r the ce nturie s . Ne ithe r tra dition nor reason nor experience is a criteria separable from the source of Chris tia n truth: the na rra tive of God’s re ve lation of the me aning of unive rs a l his tory tha t culmina te s in Jesus Chris t. We s le y’s the ologica l me thod ma y be ca utious ly s umma rize d as “the a uthority of S cripture unde rs tood in the light of tra dition, reason, a nd experience.” This formula tion is quite diffe rent from ma king tra dition, reason, a nd e xperie nce equal pa rtne rs in a uthority to God’s revealed Word.

The Quadrilateral Method The s o-ca lle d qua drilate ra l me thod (the a uthority of S cripture unde rs tood in the light of tra dition, reason, a nd e xpe rie nce ) was spelled out or implie d in several locations in We s le y’s writings : (1) in the e a rly pa rt of The Doctrine of Original S in, (2) in the Appe als , a nd (3) mos t e xplicitly in the homily "On Sin in Believers.”2 The me ta phor of qua drila te ral his torica lly has re ferre d to four walls or bulwarks. It is a de fe nsive milita ry me ta phor. It has s ome time s been wrongly inte rpre te d as the “four permissions,” or four ope n doors , ra the r tha n the four bulwa rks of defense. The proble m with the me ta phor is tha t S cripture is the funda me nta l premise of the other thre e . The y s tand as coope ra tive , not Judging, pa rtne rs to S cripture . ‘"The Promise of Unde rsta nding." B 4:284, sec. 1.3. 2“On Sin in Believers,” B 1:318-19, J V:144 - 56, sec. 1.5. Alte rna tive ly, Wesley liste d S cripture , reason, and experience as doctrina l norms, as in “The Repentance of Believers,” sec. 1.2, a nd on othe r occasions “S cripture , reason, and Chris tia n a ntiquity,” as in his preface to his colle cte d works , vol. 1 (1771). This me thod, as de fine d more fully by Albert C. Outle r, Dona ld Thors e n, and Charles Yrigoyen, appears in some form in a ll Unite d Me thodis t Dis ciplines writte n a fte r 1968 a nd revised in 1988. 81

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

Thos e who wis h to ca re fully e xa mine We s le ys s ys te ma tic the ologica l me thod are we ll advised to also inve s tiga te the homilie s on “The Ca tholic S pirit,” “A Ca ution against Bigotry,” “The Case of Reason Impa rtia lly Considere d," “The Promise of Unders ta nding,” "The Impe rfe ction of Human Knowledge,” “A Cle ar a nd Concise De mons tra tion of the Divine Ins pira tion of Holy S cripture ,” a nd the a rgume nt of the “Appe a ls” (“An Earnest Appe al to Me n of Reason a nd Re ligion” a nd “A Fa rthe r Appea l to Me n of Reason a nd Re ligion”).3

3Albe rt C. Outle r, “John We sle y’s He rita ge a nd the Future of Systematic Theology,” in Wesleyan Theology Today, ed. Theodore H. Runyon (Na s hville : Kings wood, 1985), 38 - 46; Albe rt C. Oude r, “John We s le ys Inte re s ts in the Ea rly Fathers of the Church,” in W TH, 97 -110. 82

CHAPTER 3

Tradition

The task at hand is to review Wesley’s teaching on the three supportive voices that confirm and reasonably illumine the Word of God in sacred Scripture. The firs t of these voices is often called simply “tradition.” It deals with the role of the apostolic tradition in transmitting the gospel in history. It is followed by the role of grace-enabled reason and the role of personal experience as shaped inwardly by the Holy Spirit. A. Tradition as the Consensual Reception of the Apostolic Teaching 1. The Unchanging Apostolic Tradition of Scripture Teaching through Changing History a. Chris tian Antiquity: The S pe cial Place ofthe Ancie nt Chris tian W rite rs In the preface of his collected works, Wesley sought to present thoughts "agreeable, I hope, to Scripture, reason and Christian antiquity.”1 In this preface it is clear that the element of experience is correlated with each of these modes of knowing. The te rm antiquity, as Wesley used it, referred to “the re ligion of the primitive church, of the whole church in the purest ages,” with special reference to “Clemens Romanus, Ignatius, and Polycarp ... Tertullian, Origen, Clemens Alexandrinus,2 and Cyprian3... Chrysostom,4 Basil,5 Ephrem Syrus,6 and Macarius.7”8 Wesley grew up in the Anglican tra dition. Honoring ancient Christian writers and ecumenical ‘We sle y’s preface to the 1771 e dition of his works , quote d by Jackson in his Preface to the Third Edition, Ma rch 1771,1:4, sec. 4,; cf. “On Sin in Believers," sec. 3.1 -10. 2For othe r references to Cle me nt of Ale xa ndria , see LJW 2:327 - 28,342,387; 5:43; 6:129; cf. B 3:586; 4:402; 9:31;//IP 5:197. 3For We s le y’s extensive references to Cypria n, see B 2:461-62; 3:196-97, 450-51, 458-59, 469 - 70; LJW 1:277, 323; 2:320, 333-37, 361, 373, 387; B 1:437; J WO 42, 126, 195, 264, 309, 328;//IP 1:416; 2:263; 4:97. 4For furthe r references to John Chrys os tom,s e e FA, B 11:156-62,175; B 1:155-59,381 -453; 2:113; 3:586; 4:402; J WO 131 - 32,264, 328; see also K. Steve McCormick, “John Chrys os tom and JohnWesley" (P hD diss., Dre w Unive rs ity, 1983), for a compa ra tive study of John Chrys os tom a nd John Wesley. 5I/IP 4:176; 11.8. 6JJW 1:276, 279, 284-85, 294-95; 3:284; 4:457 - 59. Tor notes on the ide ntity a nd vie w of"Ma ca rius the Egyptian,” see J WO ix, 9,31,119,252,274-75; //IP 1:254; LJW 2:387. 8“On La ying the Founda tion of the Ne w Chapel," 1777, B 3:586, sec. 2.3; LJW 11:387. 83

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

docume nts of the firs t five ce nturie s was highly va lue d by classic Anglican scholars (Cra nme r, Hooke r, Pearson, a nd ma ny othe rs ). Wesley was steeped in this tra dition. We sle y wrote , "We prove the doctrine s we preach by S cripture a nd reason, and if need be, by a ntiquity.”9 This practice does not pit S cripture against the tra dition of a ntiquity. Rather, it vie ws the origina l a pos tolic pre a ching of the Ne w Te s ta me nt as a wa kening an ongoing tra dition of accurate a nd re lia ble re colle ction of the events of s a lva tion s urrounding the history of Jesus of Na za reth. This re colle ction was mos t vita l a nd pure s t in its e a rlie st pe riods , the e a rlie st Chris tia n ce nturie s . The n the price of witne s s ing was ofte n pe rs e cution a nd a ll too fre que ntly death. The thirdce ntury tra dition did not come without a high cost. b. The Early Church Fathe rs We sle y took ve ry s e rious ly the e a rly Chris tian write rs . In his Chris tia n Libra ry, he fe a ture d the a nte -Nice ne fa thers a nd ma ny write rs who he ld clos e ly to classic Chris tology a nd de e p-going s piritua l formation. No thinking pe rson, wrote Wesley, will easily dis miss and ce rta inly ne ve r "conde mn the Fathers of the Church,” whose vie ws are "indis pens ably necessary” for the practice of minis try. The re is no excuse for “one who has the opportunity, a nd makes no use of it,” to fa il to read the best pa tris tic te xts — the writings of the e a rly church fathers. The re is no wa rra nt for any "pe rs on who has ha d a Unive rs ity e duca tion” to bypass or ignore the wis dom of the a ncie nt Chris tia n write rs .10 Wesley re me mbe re d how his own fa the r ha d e a rly provide d him with the fe rve nt living mode l of "re ve re nce to the a ncie nt church.”11 This fa mily tra ining would prepare We sle y late r to debate in de ta il with le a rne d pa tris tic inte rpre te rs like Richa rd Sma lbroke a nd Conye rs Middle ton on s pe cific pa tris tic references a nd tra ns lation nuances of the works of Ire nae us ,12 Minucius Fe lix,13 Origen,14 Didymus of Alexa ndria ,15 Eusebius,16 Atha na s ius ,17 Epipha nius ,18 Gre gory of Nyssa,19 Gre gory Na zia nzen,20 Augus tine,21 Jerome,22 Pachomius,23 The ophyla ct,24 Pseudo-Dionysius,25 John of Damascus,26 a nd othe rs .27 9FA, pt. 3, B 11:310, sec. 3.28. 10“Address to the Clergy,” J X:484, sec. 1.2. “Thirty years prior to his writing to Willia m Dodd, Ma rch 12,1756 (L/W111:172), hence proba bly a round 1726. 12For furthe r references to Irenaeus, see LJW 2:319, 332, 387; JJW 1:356. 13 W 2:332,348. “For furthe r references to Orige n in Wesley, see LJW 2:91-92, 100, 105, 324, 332, 353, 362, 387; 3:137; 4:176; B4:33n. 15Didymus Ale xa ndrinus (the blind), J WO 129. »6W 2:331. 17FA, B 11:162-63,175; LJW 1:367; B 2:397. 18 LJW 2:360. 19B 1:75,188n; J WO 9-10, 31,119. 20J WO 130. “The bulk of We sle y’s references to Augus tine (St. Aus tin) are to be found in the letters, LJW 1:45;

84

TRADITION

c. Thre e Cre e ds : How Ancie nt Orthodoxy Form e d Me thodis t Doctrine We s ley a rgue d tha t the Me thodis t S ocie tie s from the be ginning ha d been “orthodox in e ve ry point.” The crite rion he ha d in mind for orthodoxy was e qua lly clear: "firmly be lie ving... the Thre e Creeds.”28 "Firmly be lie ving” for Wesley me a nt be lie ving “from the he art” without de ce ption or uncerta inty. Confe s s ing the creeds with re s e rva tions or qua lifie rs was not wha t We sle y had in mind. “We re you to re cite the whole ca ta logue of heresies e nume rate d by Bishop Pearson, it might be asked, ‘Who ca n lay any one of these to the ir [the Me thodists’] charge?’ ”29 This ca ta logue include d the a ncie nt de ce ptions of grace-disabled Pelagianism, inca rna tion-de nying Aria nis m, a nd Ma rcionitic re jection of the Old Te sta me nt, with its cons e que nt te nde ncy to a nti-S e mitis m. It a pplie d to both the ir origina l a nd re curre nt forms . d. The Ancie nt Chris tian W rite rs as S criptural Exe ge tes The Fathers are “the mos t a uthe ntic comme nta tors on S cripture , as be ing both nearest the founta in, a nd e mine ntly e ndue d with the S pirit by whom a ll S cripture was given,” wrote Wesley. “I speak chie fly of those who wrote be fore the Council of Nice [Nica e a , AD 325]. But who would not like wis e de sire to have some a cqua inta nce with thos e tha t followe d the m? with St. Chrys os tom, Basil, Jerome, Aus tin [Augus tine ]; a nd above all, the ma n of a broke n he a rt, Ephra im Syrus?”30 Typica l of the church fathe rs ’ re liance on S cripture was Cyril of Jerusalem, who wrote in his Fifth Ca te chetica l Le cture : "It be hove th us not to de live r, no not so much as the least thing of the holy mys terie s of fa ith without the holy S cripture .”31 Do not try to teach Chris tia nity without cons ta nt reference to ca nonica l S cripture. We s le y was quick to conce de tha t the a ncie nt Chris tia n write rs ma de ma ny occas iona l “mistakes, ma ny we a k s uppos itions , a nd ma ny ill-dra wn conclusions.” None the le s s , “I e xce e dingly re ve re nce the m as we ll as the ir writings ... because the y de s cribe true , ge nuine Chris tia nity.”32 He was thinking of gre a t exegetes like Origen whe n he wrote , "Some of these Fathers, be ing a fra id of too lite ra l a wa y of 2:60, 70; 3:171; 4:176; 6:175; 7:58, 333; see also B 2:548, 566; 11:236, 492; J WO 124 - 26, 131-32, 409; JJW 5:118. V-LJW 2:353; B 2:113; 3:62n; FA, B 11:156,159. 23 B 9:354. 24B 4:6. 2 W 2:365. 26B ll:189n. 27FA, pt. 1, B 11:155-63, sec. 5.16-22. 28Nice ne , Atha na s ia n (Quicunque), a nd Apos tle s ' Creeds; “On La ying the Founda tion of the Ne w Chapel,” B 3:582, sec. 1.3, ita lics added. For va rious comme nts on orthodoxy, see B 1:220,694; 2:415 -16; 3:582, 587; 4:50, 57.146, 175, 398; 11:22, 39,477-78; LJW 3:183, 203; 4:347, 364. 2’FA,pt. 2. B 11:277, sec. 1.9. 30“Address to the Clergy,” J X:484, sec. 1.2; cf. Da ilie s treatise on pa tris tic write rs note d, JJW3:390. 3,“A Roman Ca te chism, with a Reply,” J X:91, sec. 1.Q8; cf. “Popery Ca lmly Considered,” J X:141, sec. 1. 32LCM 3.11 -12, LJW 11:387. For We s le ys somewha t idios yncra tic vie ws on Monta nus , Augustine, and Pelagius, see “The Wis dom of God’s Counsels,” B 2:556, J VI:325 - 37, sec. 9. 85

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

e xpounding the S cripture s, leaned s ome time s to the other e xtre me. Yet nothing can be more unjus t tha n to infe r from hence ‘tha t the age in which the y live d could not re lis h or e ndure any but senseless, e xtra va ga nt, e nthus ia s tic, ridiculous comme nts on sacred writ.”’33 The s e rious re a ding of the church fa the rs34 is e s pe cia lly he lpful a t two de cisive points : “the e xplication of a doctrine tha t is not s ufficie ntly e xplained, or for confirm ation of a doctrine ge ne ra lly re ce ive d.35 Whe n We s le y a ppe ale d a lterna tive ly to “reason, S cripture , or a uthority,” the “a uthority” of which he was speaking was the a uthority of the e a rly e cume nica l tra dition: the a ncie nt e cume nica l creeds a nd councils and the mos t wide ly sensually received consensual classical Chris tian writings 36 On the re la tion of S cripture a nd tra dition, We s le y obse rve d: “The S cripture s are a comple te rule of fa ith a nd pra ctice : a nd the y are cle a r in a ll necessary points . And ye t the ir clearness does not prove tha t the y need not be e xpla ine d; nor the ir complete ne s s , tha t the y ne e d not be e nforce d.... The e s te e ming the writings of the firs t three ce nturie s , not e qua lly with, but ne xt to, the S cripture s , ne ve r ca rrie d any ma n ye t into dangerous e rrors , nor proba bly e ve r will.”37 Although these mos t wide ly received a ncie nt Chris tian write rs we re fa llible , the ir a uthority can be re lie d on more confide ntly tha n tha t of a ny or a ll late r or mode rn inte rpre te rs 38

2. Wesley as Editor of Classic Christian Writings a. The W ide R ange of W e s ley’s W ork as Editor We s le y wrote gra mma rs in seven of the e ight fore ign languages he kne w (He bre w, Gre e k, La tin, French, Ge rma n, Dutch, Spanish, a nd Ita lian).39 His life long fa s cina tion with the le a rning of languages rightly s hould put to re st the ca rica ture of Wes le y as a n une duca ted, nons chola rly, Bible -thumping “e nthusia s t." He read comforta bly in more languages tha n Luthe r, Ca lvin, Jonathan Edwards, Joseph Butler, or Imma nue l Ka nt. He also publis he d a general his tory of Chris tia nity, a history of Engla nd, a libra ry of Chris tia n classics, a system of na tura l philosophy, a general comme nta ry on S cripture , a compendium of logic, a nd considera ble poetry a nd hymnody, some in his own tra ns la tion from the origina l La tin or Greek. The wide range of We s le ys work as an e ditor of the Chris tia n tra dition of s piri33LCM, LJW 11:362, quoting Middle ton's A Free Inquiry into the Miraculous Powers W hich Are S upposed to Have S ubsisted in the Chris tian Church, Etc., 1748. 34J WO 62,119,182,195,307, 336, 365,375; see also “Ma nne rs of the Ancie nt Christia ns." 35“A Roman Catechism, with a Reply," J X:87, pref., ita lics added; cf. JJW 1:367. “FA, pt.l,B 11:176, sec. 5.31. 37LCM, J X:14. 38For Wesley’s implicit use of the Vincentia n canon, see Ouder's introduction, B 1:58 - 59; cf. l:324n, 550n. 39In a ddition to an English gra mma r, We sley wrote gra mma rs in Hebrew, Greek, La tin, French, and Dutch. He also s tudie d Ge rma n in some detail, tra ns la te d Ge rma n poe try, and compile d a dictiona ry and gra mma r of Ge rma n (JJW 1:110-12, 133-34, 209-10, 278, 295, 300); compile d a Spanish gra mma r (JJW 1:237-38, 299); a nd for a time s tudie d Ita lia n (JJW 1:354). He showed hims e lf in debate to be fa r more a ccomplishe d in Greek and La tin tha n ma ny who had re puta tions of be ing highly proficie nt. 86

TRADITION

tua lity is seen in the prefaces of the various works he edited, abridged, and published, found in Prefaces to Works Revised and Abridged from Various Authors40 in volume XIV of the Jackson e dition of Wesley’s Works. The 118 works listed show Wesleys tireless enterprise in making available to the common reader, and especially his societies, the best literature of spiritual formation over the ages, in plain language and thrifty forma t for common use. Wesley was pa rticularly interested in presenting personal histories and te s timonies to the holy life. In a ddition to e diting hagiographies like Foxes Acts and Monuments of the Christian Martyrs , Wesley added his own recensions of more recent Protestant hagiography,41 along with collected letters of Joseph Alleine and Samuel Rutherford. In some cases, Wesley presented controversial materials with which he partly disagreed, yet in which he found sufficient me rit to publish nonetheless due to other benefits. This was the case in An Extract from the Life ofMr. Thomas Firmin, who was a "pious man” even if his "notions of the Trinity were quite erroneous.”42 Wesley also published An Extract ofthe Life ofMadam Guion [s/c] (1766), who "was actually deceived in many instances; the more frequently, because she imagined herself to be infallible,”43 who resisted being "guided by the written word,” and who exaggerated the efficacy of suffering for spiritual formation. Yet even with these limitations, Wesley found in Madame Guyon’s writings an admirable “pattern of true holiness.”44 Wesley’s special interest in the biographies of holy women is seen in his editions of the letters of Jane Cooper and in the lives and spiritual journals of Ma ry Gilbe rt (1769), Elizabeth Harper (1772), and many others. He found in An Extract ofMr. Richard Baxte r’s Aphorisms ofJustification (1745) a “powerful antidote against the spreading poison of Antinomianism.”45 Mos t volumes of the Arminian Magazine (1778 - 91) contained accounts and letters of pious persons, sacred poetry, lives of saints, and classic essays defending the universal offer of free grace.46 Tha t Wesley was interested in what today is called the practice of holistic medicine and the analysis of the body-soul interface is evident from his popular series of advisories on health matters: Advice with Respect to Health (1769, based on a work by Dr. Tissot), An Extract from Dr. Cadogan’s Dissertation on the Gout, and All Chronic Diseases (1774), and his much reprinted Primitive Physic: Or, an Easy and Natural Method ofCuring Most Diseases (23rd edition, 1791), containing “safe, cheap, and easy medicines.”47 As to works on the natural sciences, in addition to his 4«I XIV:199-318. 41 As in An Extract of the Life and De ath of Mr. Thomas Haliburton (1741), Thomas Haliburton, (1741), a nd David Braine rd, Mis s ionary to the Indians (1768). «J XIV:293. 43J XIV: 176. «J XIV:278. «J XIV:216. «J XIV:280. 47J XIV:312. 87

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

five -volume Com pe ndium of Natural Philos ophy: A S urvey of the Wisdom of God in the Cre ation (1784), We sle y wrote The De s ideratum : Or, Electricity Made Plain and Us e ful (1759).48 We s le y’s fa s cina tion with his tory49 a nd its importa nce in s piritua l forma tion is seen in his e ditions ofA S hort Roman His tory (1773), A Concise His tory ofEngland (1776), An Account of the Conduct of the W ar in the Middle Colonies (1780), a nd A Concise Eccle s ias tical His tory in four volume s (1781).50 b. A Chris tian Library We s le y publis he d the fifty volume s of a series of books ca lle d A Chris tia n Library be twe e n 1749 and 1755. Its s ubtitle is Extracts from , and Abridgm ents of, the Choicest Pieces of Practical Divinity W hich Have Been Publis he d in the English Tongue.51 His inte nt was to e dit a nd publis h a t low cos t for his circle of s piritua l forma tion "such a colle ction of Englis h divinity, as (1 believe) is a ll true , a ll agreeable to the oracles of God; as is a ll pra ctical, unmixe d with controve rs y of a ny kind, and a ll inte lligible to plain me n; such as is not s upe rficial, but going down to the depth, a nd de s cribing the he ight, of Chris tia nity; a nd ye t not mys tica l, not obscure to any of thos e who are e xpe rie nce d in the ways of God.”52 We s le y’s hope was tha t the whole series would "cons pire toge the r to make ‘the ma n of God pe rfe ct, thoroughly furnis he d unto e ve ry good word and work.’ ” He fe lt hims e lf "a t full libe rty” not only to a bridge the content but to add his own comme nts a nd corre ctions .53 He was aware tha t one could spend one’s whole life re a ding the classical Chris tia n write rs a nd s till “not read all.” "This ve ry ple nty creates a difficulty,” an informa tion ove rloa d. So his e ditoria l purpos e was to make a fit selection, a voiding those tha t focus ed unnece ssa rily on controve rs y, tha t would more “te nd to promote va in ja ngling, tha n holiness.” He la rgely a voided writings so mys tica l tha t the y found "hidde n me a nings in e ve rything,” seeking "mys te ries in the pla ine s t truths , a nd ma k[ing] the m such by the ir e xplications .” He s hunne d write rs who made things uninte lligible . This was “a fa ult which is not easy for me n of le a rning to avoid.”54 He re ma ined convince d tha t “the ge nuine re ligion of Jesus Chris t has be e n one a nd the same from the be ginning.”55 c. Highlighting the Earlie s t Apos tolic Fathe rs We sle y began his Chris tia n Libra ry with a "Preface to the Epistles of the Apos tolica l Fathers” of the e a rlie s t Chris tia n years. He pre s e nted a nd comme nde d the *»LJW 4:123,166; 5:176, 342; JJW 3:320; 4:190; 5:247. 49//W' 3:499; 6:96; B 2:451; 3:108. “Redacted from the M’La ine tra ns lation of the work of J. L. von Mos he im. 5 W 1:425; 3:391 - 92; 4:91, 94. 52CL, pref., J XIV:222. “Ibid. “CL, pref., J XIV:221. 55CL, pref., J XIV:223.

88

TRADITION

writings of Cle me nt of Rome,56 Igna tius ,57 a nd P olyca rp58 as thos e who de live re d “the pure doctrine of the Gos pe l; wha t Chris t a nd his Apostle s ta ught, a nd wha t these holy me n ha d themselves received from the ir own mouths.”59 The e a rly a pologis ts ha d "the advantage of living in the a pos tolic time s , of he a ring the holy Apostle s a nd conve rs ing with them.” The y had been chosen by the m for le ade rs hip in the nascent church. So we “ca nnot with any reason doubt ofwha t the y de live r ... but ought to receive it, though not with equal ve ne ra tion, ye t with only little less re ga rd tha n we do the sacred writings of those who we re the ir masters and instructors ” a nd “as worthy of a much gre ate r re s pe ct tha n any compos ure s which have been made since.”60 P olyca rp kne w John pe rs ona lly; Ire na e us kne w P olyca rp pe rs ona lly. Irenaeus took the gospel to s outhern France. This closeness to the origina l apostles is wha t made these e a rliest writers worthy of the highe s t respect. As “persons ofcons umma te pie ty; a dorne d with a ll those Chris tian virtue s which the y so a ffe ctiona te ly re commend to us,” these write rs we re “in a ll the necessary pa rts of it... so assisted by the Holy Ghos t, as to be scarce capable of mis ta king.”61 It is not because of the ir cleverness or intelle ctua lity tha t the e a rlie s t pos ta pos tolic writers comma nd our a tte ntion. Rather, the y we re living so close to God tha t the y bre a the d in the same S pirit as did the apostles.62

Further Reading on Wesley's Historical Sources The Christian Library

Dodge, Reginald J. John Wesley's Christian Library. London: Epworth, 1938. "Wesley’s Chris tia n Library." W MM 50 (1827): 310-16. The Freedom to Learn from Tradition

Harkness, Georgia. "The Roots of Me thodis t Theology." In The Me thodist Church in S ocial Thought and Action. Nashville: Abingdon, 1964.

Shelton, R. Larry. "Wesley on Ma inta ining a Ca tholic Spirit.” PM 53, no. 4 (1978): 12,13. Southgate, Wyndha m M. John Jewel and the Problem of Doctrinal Authority. Cambridge: Ha rva rd Unive rs ity Press, 1962. Wesley and Christian Antiquity

Benz, Ernst. Die Protestantische Thebais: Zur Nachwirkung Makarios des Agypters im Protestantismus de r 17. and 18. Jahrhunderts in Europa und

56See also LJW 2:330; 3:137; B 3:586. 57For furthe r references to Ignatius , see W 2:327-28, 387; 3:137; B 1:36, 437; 3:5; JJW 2:467 - 68; 3:65. S»LJW 2:327-30, 362, 387; 3:137. 59CL, J XIV:223. “CL.J XIV:223-25. 61 CL,J XIV:224-25. 62Some re ma rks of Mr. Hill’s “Re vie w ofAll the Doctrine s Ta ught by Mr. John Wesley," J X:387. 89

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

Ame rika. Wiesbaden: Verlag der Academie der Wissenschaften und der Litera tur in Ma inz, 1963. Campbell, Ted A. John Wesley and Chris tian Antiquity: Religious Vision and Cultural Changes. Nashville: Kingswood, 1991. McCormick, K. Steve. “John Chrysostom and John Wesley.” PhD diss., Dre w University, 1983. Orciba l, Jean. “The The ologica l Origina lity of John Wesley.” In A His tory of the Me thodis t Church in Great Britain. London: Epworth, 1965. Outler, Albe rt C. “John Wesley’s Interests in the Early Fathers of the Church.” In The Wesleyan Theological Heritage: Essays ofAlbe rt C. Outler, edited by Thomas C. Oden and Leicester R. Longden. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1991. Petry, Ray C. "The Critica l Temper and the Practice of Tradition." Duke Divinity S chool Review 30 (Spring 1965). Stoeffler, F. Earnest. The Rise of Evangelical Pietism. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1965. Comparative Studies

Baker, Frank. John Wesley and the Church ofEngland. Nashville: Abingdon, 1970. --------. “John Wesley and Willia m Law.” PWHS 37 (1970): 173-77. Brantley, Richard E. Locke, Wesley and the Me thod of English Romanticism. Gainsville: Unive rs ity of Florida Press, 1984. --------. Wordsworth's “Natural Methodism." Ne w Haven, CT: Yale Unive rs ity Press, 1975. Brigdon, Thomas E. “Pascal and the Wesleys." PWHS 7 (1909): 60-63, 84-88. 90

Church, Leslie F. “Port Royal and John Wesley.” LQHR 175 (1950): 291-93. Cragg, Gerald R. The Church and the Age ofReason. Baltimore: Penguin, 1966. Glasson, T. Francis. “Jeremy Taylors Place in John Wesley’s Life.” PW HS 36 (1968): 105-7. Green, J. B. John Wesley and W illiam Law. London, 1945. Hooper, He nry T. "Wesley and St. Francis.” W MM 143 (1920): 527-28. Howard, Ivan. “Wesley versus Phoebe Palmer.” WTJ 6 (1971): 31-40. Hughes, H. Trevor. “Jeremy Taylor and John Wesley.” LQHR 174 (1949): 296 - 404. Hutchinson, F. E. “John Wesley and George Herbert.” LQHR 161 (1936): 439-55. Leach, Elsie A. “Wesley’s Use of Geo. Herbert.” Huntington Library Quarte rly 16(1953): 183-202. Lloyd, A. K. "Doddridge and Wesley.” PW HS 28 (1951): 50 - 52. Ma rriott, Thomas. “John Wesley and Willia m Wilberforce." W MM 68 (1945): 364-65. McDona ld, Frederick W. “Bishop Butler and John Wesley.” MR (1896): 142,156, 172. Moore, Sydney H. “Wesley and Fenelon.” LQHR 169 (1944): 155-57. Pask, A. H. “The Influe nce of Arminius on John Wesley.” LQHR 185 (1960): 258-63. “Pusey and Puseyism: Wesley and Methodism.” MR (1882). Reist, Irwin W. “John Wesley and George White fie ld: The Inte grity of Two Theories of Grace.” EQ 47, no. 1 (1975): 26-40. Simon, John S. Wesley or Voltaire. London: C. H. Kelly, 1904.

TRADITION

Taylor, A. E. “St. John of the Cross and John Wesley.” JTS 46 (1945): 30 - 38. Thomas, Gilbe rt. “George Fox and John Wesley.” MR (1924): 11. Tyson, John R. "John Wesley and Willia m Law: A Reappraisal.” W TJ17, no. 2 (1982): 58-78. Watchhurst, Percy L. "Francis of Assisi and John Wesley.” W MM 128 (1905): 484-86. Weaver, Sampson. “Wesley and Wordsworth.” W MM 127 (1904): 835-37. Wiseman, Frederick Luke. "He rbe rt and Wesley." MR (1933): 14. Assessments of Wesley's Place In History

Baker, Frank. "Unfolding John Wesley: A Survey of Twe nty Years’ Studies in Wesley’s Thought.” QR, no. 1 (1980). Heitzenrater, Richard P. "The Present State of Wesley Studies.” MH 22 (1984): 221-31. ----- . "Wesley Studies in the Church and the Academy.” Perkins Journal 37, no. 3 (1984): 1-6.

Langford, Thomas. Practical Divinity: Theology in the Wesleyan Tradition. Nashville: Abingdon, 1982. Meeks, Douglas M., ed. The Future of the Me thodis t Theological Traditions. Nashville: Abingdon, 1985. Minus, Paul. Me thodis m ’s Destiny in an Ecumenical Age. Ne w York: Abingdon, 1969. Outle r, Albe rt C. "Me thodism’s Theologica l Heritage.” In The Wesleyan Theological Heritage: Essays ofAlbe rt C. Outle r, edited by Thomas C. Oden and Leicester R. Longden, 189-211. Gra nd Rapids: Zondervan, 1991. Rack, He nry D. The Future ofJohn Wesley's Methodism. London: Lutte rworth, 1965. Rowe, Gilbe rt T. The Me aning of Methodism. Nashville: Cokesbury, 1926. Rowe, Kenneth, ed. The Place of Wesley in the Chris tian Tradition. Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow, 1976. Urlin, R. D. John Wesley's Place in Church History. London: Rivington, 1879. Wils on, Woodrow. John Wesley's Place in History. Ne w York: Abingdon, 1915.

91

CHAPTER 4

Reason

Of the four bulwa rks of the qua drila te ra l me thod, we have discussed two — sacred S cripture a nd sacred tra dition, with S cripture always ta king the prima ry place. Now we will s ort out We s le y’s vie w of reason and experience, thus comple ting the a ccount of his the ologica l me thod.

A. On Reason 1. Reason as God's Gift We s le y urged his conne ction not to "despise or lightly esteem reason, knowledge, or huma n le arning.’’1 "To re nounce re a son is to re nounce re ligion,” for “a ll irra tiona l re ligion is false re ligion.”2 Re ligion is hobble d whe n reason is neglected: "It is impos s ible , without re a s oning, e ithe r to prove or dis prove a nything.”3 Reason is God’s gift: "In a ll the dutie s of common life , God has give n us our reason for a guide . And it is only by a cting up to the dicta te s of it, by us ing a ll the unde rs ta nding which God ha th give n us, tha t we ca n have a cons cie nce void of offe nce towa rds God a nd towards man.”4 In his le tter to Dr. Ruthe rforth of Ca mbridge, We sle y re je cted the vie w tha t “huma n le a rning is an impe dime nt to a divine .” "I do not de pre cia te le a rning of any kind,” he said. He defended his tra ve ling preachers as "not ignora nt men,” who though the y did not profess to know languages a nd philos ophy, ye t “some of the m [unde rs tood] the m we ll... be tte r tha n a great pa rt of my pupils at the unive rs ity did.”5

2. Reasoning Out of Scripture Reason a nd S cripture , fa r from be ing pitte d against each othe r, are linke d intima te ly in the a tte mpt to find "the plain s criptural ra tiona l way.”6 We s le y said, "Pass ion a nd pre judice gove rn the world, only unde r the na me of reason. It is our pa rt, 'PACP. J X:429, sec. 25. ^Le tter to Dr. Ruthe rforth, Ma rch 28,1768, LJW 5:364. 3"A Dia logue between an Antinomia n and His Friend,” J X:267. 4“The Case of Reason Impa rtia lly Considered," B 2:592, sec. 2.10. 5“A Le tte r to the Rev. Dr. Ruthe rforth,” B 9:376-80, sec. 2.1-9. 6“The Na ture of Enthusiasm,” B 2:55, sec. 26.

93

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

by re ligion a nd reason joine d, to counte ra ct the m a ll we can.”7 "You ca nnot but a llow tha t the re ligion which we pre ach a nd live to be agreeable to the highe s t reason.”8 We s le y’s ma in dis s a tis fa ction with “mys tic divine s ” was the ir te nde ncy to "utte rly de cry the use of reason.”9 He kne w of “no me thod of bringing any to the knowledge of the truth, e xcept the me thods of reason and persuasion.”10 True re ligion is not irra tiona l: "Chris tianity re quire s our assent to nothing but wha t is pla in a nd intelligible in e ve ry propos ition. Le t e ve ry ma n firs t have a full conviction of the truth of each propos ition in the gospel, as fa r only as it is plain a nd inte lligible , a nd le t him be lie ve as fa r as he understands.”11 In his "Ea rne st Appeal,” We sle y wrote , "So fa r as he de pa rts from true ge nuine reason, so fa r he de parts from Chris tia nity.”12 Yet reason alone ca nnot pass easily "from things na tural to s piritua l.... A gulf is here!”13 “Le t re a son do a ll tha t reason can; e mploy it as fa r as it will go,” re a lizing tha t it is “utte rly inca pa ble of giving e ithe r fa ith, or hope, or love; a nd cons eque ntly of producing e ithe r real virtue , or s ubs ta ntia l happiness.”14

Further Reading on Books and Culture Wesley on Editing, Education, Books, Scholarship, and Culture

He rbe rt, T. W. John Wesley as Editor and Author. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Unive rs ity Press, 1940. Jackson, F. M. “A Bibliographical Catalogue of Books Me ntione d in John Wesley’s Journals.” PW HS 4 (1902-4): 17,47,74,107,134,173, 203,232. Joy, James R. “Wesley: A Ma n of a Thousand Books and a Book.” RL 8 (1939): 71-84. Lawton, George. John Wesley’s English: A S tudy ofHis Lite rary S tyle. London: Alle n and Unwin, 1962. Lewis, Thomas H. “John Wesley as a Scholar.” MQR 73 (1924): 648 - 58.

Mathews, Horace F. Me thodism and the Education of the People, 1791 -1851. London: Epworth, 1949. Rogal, Samuel J. "A Journal and Diary Che cklist of John Wesley’s Reading.” S e rif 11, no. 1 (1974): 11-33. Wesley on Science and Medicine

Collier, Frank. John Wesley among the S cientists. Ne w York: Abingdon, 1928. Hill, A. Wesley. John Wesley among the Physicians: A S tudy of 18th Century Medicine. London: Epworth, 1958. Hunter, Richard A. "A Brie f Review of the Use of Ele ctricity in Psychiatry with Special Reference to John Wesley.” Britis h Journal ofPhysical Medicine 20, no. 5 (1957): 98-100.

7Le tte r to Joseph Benson, Octobe r 5,1779, LJW 5:203. 8EA, B 11:53, sec. 22. *EA,B 11:55, sec. 30. l0“On La ying the Founda tion of the Ne w Chapel,” B 3:588, sec. 2.11. ““Compe ndium of Na tura l Philosophy,” J 11:448-49. «EA,B 11:55, sec. 27. 13EA,B 11:57, sec. 35. 14“The Case of Reason Impa rtia lly Considered," B 2:600, sec. 2.10. 94

REASON

Oord, Thomas Jay. “Prevenient Grace and Nonsensory Perception of God in a Postmodern Wesleyan Philosophy.” In Between Nature and Grace: Mapping the Interface of Wesleyan Theology and Psychology, edited by Bryan P. Stone and Thomas Jay Oord. San Diego: Point Loma, 2000. --------. "A Process Wesleyan Theodicy: Freedom, Embodime nt, and the Almighty God.” In Thy Name and Nature Is Love: Wesleyan and Process Theologies in Dialogue, edited by Bryan P. Stone and Thomas Jay Oord, 193-216. Nashville: Kingswood, 2001. Pellowe, Willia m C. S. "John Wesleys Use of Science.” MR 110 (1927): 394-403.

Rogal, Samuel J. "Pills for the Poor: Wesley’s P rimitive Physick.” Yale Journal ofBiology and Me dicine 51 (1978): 81-90. Stewart, David. "John Wesley, the Physician.” WTJ 4 (1969): 27-38. Stillings, Dennis. “John Wesley: Philosopher of Electricity.” Me dical Ins trum e ntation 7 (1973): 307. Sweet, W. W. "John Wesley and Scientific Discovery.” ChrCent 40 (1923): 591-92. Turre ll, W. J. “Three Electrotherapists of the Eighteenth Ce ntury: John Wesley, Jean Paul Ma ra t and James Graham.” Annals ofMe dical His tory 3 (1921): 361-67.

3. The Case of Reason Impartially Considered The te xt of “The Case of Reason Impa rtia lly Cons ide re d” is 1 Corinthia ns 14:20: “Bre thre n, be not childre n in unde rs ta nding: howbe it in ma lice be ye childre n, but in unde rs ta nding be me n” [Homily #70 (1781), B 2:587-600; J #70, Vl:350-60]. Reason re ma ins us e ful in its own proper sphe re but a part from tha t sphere is ofte n e ithe r ove rva lue d or unde rva lue d. Reason mus t ne ithe r be e xa lte d to pre s ume to be an ultima te judge of revela tion nor ignore d as a balance to e motive excess.15 The me dium be twe e n these two extremes has been ge ne ra lly a nticipa te d by “tha t gre a t ma s te r of reason, Mr. Locke," but with ina dequa te a pplica tions .16 We s le y fought a twofold ba ttle against both unre a sona ble cha ris ma tic e nthus iasts who overstressed e motive s piritua lity a nd excessive ra tionalis ts who wa nte d to impos e hypers ke ptical criteria on the inquiry into Chris tia n truth. a. On Not Unde rvaluing R e as on Critics s ome time cons ide r re ligion as the e ne my of reason. The re ligious are vie wed by the m as e motive ly charged e nthusiasts who te nd to s ubstitute the ir own dre a ms a nd fantasies for ra tional analysis. We s le y wa rns a gainst s ubs tituting our own ima gina tion for the writte n Word, the re liable re ve la tion of God. So "s top thinking like childre n. In re ga rd to e vil be infa nts , but in your thinking be a dults ” (1 Cor. 14:20 NIV). Thos e who seek to find some de pre ca tion of reason by We sle y mus t look hard. 15B 1:271-72; 2:591-95. 16“The Case of Reason Impa rtia lly Considered,” B 2:587 - 88; J VI:350 - 60, pref. 1-5. 95

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

He was ne ve r a ttra cte d to a nti-inte lle ctua l fide is m. Though not a ra tiona lis t in the re ductionis t sense, he va lue d the place of reason in its own prope r sphere.17 Fa ith is not to be pitte d a ga ins t reason. Growing fa ith searches for the best reasons a va ila ble for its grounding in re ve la tion. Fa ith invite s the be st a rguments it ca n find to a ccount for its own infinite de pth.18 It is pa the tic s te wa rds hip not to use wha t God gives. Wha t God gives to huma ns as dis tinguis he d from brute cre a tion is our minds. De pe nding on our will to exercise reason a nd de pe nding on our va rious stages of de ve lopme nt, huma ns are dis tinguis he d by ha ving some ca pacity for re a s oning.19 b. On Not Ove rvaluing Re ason Othe rs make the oppos ite mis ta ke of ove rva luing the omnicompe te nce of finite reasoning, a dmitting too fe w limits , ima gining tha t reason can be trus te d to analyze the truth with comple te impa rtia lity, forge tting the unive rs a lity of sin. The y lose tra ck of reason’s limita tions , e xpecting reason to ca rry more tha n its poor powe rs a llow. The y mis ta ke themselves as wholly obje ctive observers. This opens the door for finite reason to ove re xte nd its e lf as a censor of divine re ve la tion.20 Reason in this wa y becomes oppressive in its re la tion to the te s timony of re ve lation. S in-dre nche d re as oning mis ta kenly fantasizes its e lf as an omnicompete nt, a utonomous guide tha t needs ne ithe r the e mbrace of divine forgive ne ss nor the light of re ve lation. Thus , some ra tionalis ts have fa ile d to be grasped by the mys te ry of Gods s e lf-dis clos ure in his tory. Ha ving little pa tie nce with ta lk of re ve la tion, and una ble to get the ir minds a round it, the y wa nt to re duce incarna tion a nd re s urre ction to na tura l events a nd biblical his tory to fla t causal e xpla na tions .21 We sle y searched for a right balance fitting to the re al but limite d compe te ncie s of re as oning. He s ought a middle ground tha t would ne ithe r ove r- nor unde re stima te reason’s a bilitie s . He purs ue d the middle wa y by firs t de fe nding reason in two aspects: whe n mode stly vie we d e ithe r as argum e nt or unde rs tanding, reason has a s ignificant role in the nurture of true re ligion. c. On Re as on as Argume nt We sle y vie we d reason firs t as the gra ce -e na ble d power of argum e nt. Argume nt refers to tha t ca pa city of huma n inte llige nce to a ccount for the route by which a pe rs on moves from premises to conclus ions . Reason can serve logica l and sequentia l a rgume nt. It can move from hypothe s is to conclusion s moothly without a leap

l7EA,J XIII:8 -10, secs. 20 - 25. >»JWO 396-97. l9“The Case of Reason Impa rtia lly Considered," B 2:587 - 88, pre f. 1-5. 20Le tte r to Dr. Robe rtson, September 24,1753, LJW 3:104-10. 21In his le tter to Joseph Benson, September 27, 1788, LJW 8:89-90, Wesley re porte d how he had been plunge d into “unprofita ble reasonings " by Isaac Wa tts’s speculations on the glorifie d huma nity of Chris t. 96

REASON

in logic.22 The function of s e lf-cons tra ine d reason is to unpa ck assertions a nd show the layers of judgment tha t lie be hind the m.23 We s le y was an old ha nd a t a na lyzing a rgume nt. He le a rne d his logic at Oxford. This surfaces e s pe cia lly in his writings with a polemica l e dge 24 With Isaiah, he invite d his pa rtne rs in dia logue to "Come now, le t us reason toge the r" (Isa. 1:18). He said, in e ffe ct, whe n you make s ta te me nts , give me your reasons, a nd I will give you mine . Thos e in his conne ction of s piritua l forma tion we re e xpe cte d to be prepared to give reasons for the ir conclus ions . This is a duty owe d to a ll with whom one e nte rs into discourse. To s hout is not to pre se nt a pla us ible a rgume nt. "If you de nounce against me a ll the curses from Genesis to Revelation the y will not a mount to one a rgume nt.”25 These days we dis tinguis h be twe e n le ft-bra in (line a r) functions a nd right-bra in (intuitive ) functions 26 We sle y a nticipa te d this with his dis tinction be twe en ra tional a rgume nt (le ft bra in) a nd ra tional unde rs ta nding (right bra in) in “The Case of Reason Impa rtia lly Considered." d. On R e ason as Unde rs tanding Reason has a nothe r dee pe r a nd more intuitive ly diffus e task: as unde rs tanding, re a son is tha t fa culty of huma n consciousness tha t has a ca pa city to a ppre hend, orga nize comple x data, a nd name e xpe rie ncing; to make judgme nts on the basis of e vide nce as to whe the r s ta teme nts agree or disagree, dis tinguis hing one judgme nt from a nothe r. Reasoning pe rs ons ca n dis cours e , dia logue , a nd inte ra ct with one a nothe r to seek to grasp the truth of va rious a rgume nts . Reason as unde rs ta nding assumes the ca pa city to e mpa thize with a nothe r s ufficie ntly tha t we unde rs ta nd wha t tha t pe rs on is saying. On this ground, intelligible discourse is possible, whe re two minds have the pos s ibility of be ing of one mind. In these two comple menta ry ways —by a rgume nt a nd unde rs ta nding — reason re ma ins an importa nt re source for huma n inte ra ction a nd the good life . The body of Chris t e mbodie s both forms of re a s oning by means of na viga ting the hazards be twe e n premise s a nd conclus ions a nd by unde rs ta nding the truth of assertions. The wors hiping community is found re a ding Holy Writ, dis ce rning its me a ning, a nd living toge the r me a ningfully in a community. All of these re quire the ra tiona l function of unde rs ta nding27

22 We sley publis hed a Compendium ofLogic (1750; B 2:547), an a da pta tion of Dean He nry Aldrichs Logic, for use a t the Kings wood School (JJW 3:459). He highly comme nde d the le a rning of logic to a ll in leadership in his conne ction (JJW 3:391, 285). 23B 2:589-90; 4:21-22. 24Whe n chide d for his te nde ncy to press logica l points so as to "dis tinguis h the m away," Wesley re torte d, "Whe n me n ta ck a bsurditie s to the truth of God with which it ha th nothing to do, I dis tinguis h away those a bsurditie s and le t the truth remain." Le tte r to John S mith, Ma rch 25, 1747, LJW 2:90. 25FA,pt. 1,B 11:138, sec. 4.7. 26“The Case of Reason Impa rtia lly Considered,” B 2:589-90, sec. 1.1; cf. B 1:59-60, 613-14. 27“The Case of Reason Impa rtia lly Considered," B 2:590, sec. 1.2. 97

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

4. What Reason Can and Cannot Do a. W hat R e as on Can Do Some things reason does be tte r tha n othe rs . Wesley plainly set forth the compete ncie s of reason in thre e spheres: physical, re ligious , and mora l. Firs t, re a son is s ingularly us e ful in orde ring the phys ica l world, s e a rching for pla us ible evidences a nd e xpla na tions of causes of effects. Horticulture , music, seama ns hip, a nd the he aling a rts proce ed by reason, as do a ll the sciences, ma the ma tics, philos ophy, gra mma r, logic, law, ma gistra cy, a nd me ta physics.28 Reason uses se nsory e xpe rie nce a nd logic to unde rs ta nd how the world works , how effects are caused.29 We sle y ha d ha rdly a tra ce of a ntis cie ntific pre judice . He was ke e nly inte re s te d in e xperime nt a nd ofte n dis pla ye d an inve s tiga tive a ttitude towa rd the world, as with his s pe cial inte re st in e le ctricity a nd me dicine . Origina l s cie ntific inquiry —obs e rving, te s ting, hypothe s izing, a na lyzing, dis cove ring — We s le y found a ppea ling.30 He was a pra ctica l s cie ntis t in the areas of organiza tiona l le ade rs hip, me dica l re me die s for poor pe ople , a nd motiva tion for socia l change. In a ll these arenas, he wa nte d to le a rn as much as he could firstha nd by e xperime nta tion — s ome thing like Be nja min Fra nklin or Thoma s Jefferson. Second, reason has a key role to pla y in re ligion, both with re ga rd to its foundation a nd its coherence. As to its founda tion, reason is needed to achieve an intelligible re ception of re ve lation. We use our ra tiona l ca pa city critica lly to unde rs ta nd wha t S cripture is saying, to analyze its language, its his torica l s e tting, a nd its mora l consequences. The tra ns la tion of me a ning from one language to a nothe r re quires ra tiona l capacities. This evangelical Oxford don was a pra ctice d classic linguis t who read La tin a nd Gre e k as quickly as he re a d English. He was a t home in the Oxford world of reasoned debate, whe the r a bout God or the huma n condition. In the sphere of re ligion, good re a s oning offe rs us e ful he lp in providing a critique of re ligious conce ptua litie s, orga nizing thinking, a nd s e e king to cla rify the basis of fa ith. It trie s to te ll the truth a bout its evidences a nd make prope r dis tinctions . Reason seeks to provide orde r a nd cohesive s tructure to the te a ching of the truth.31 Reason he lps organize dispa ra te e mpirical data into cohesive re fle ctions , e s pe cia lly conce rning the me aning of his tory.32 We ca nnot give couns e l or a tte s t inte lligibly without ra tional re fle ction. Wha t is said a bout huma n existence mus t corre s pond cons is te ntly with wha t is said a bout cre a tion, the course of huma n history, the pre dica ment of the will, and the future of huma nity. Reason is in these ways a critica l compa nion to the life of fa ith.33 Third, reason recognizes the moral consequences of ideas. It seeks to he lp each 280n ma the ma tics , see L/W 3:104; on metaphysics, see B 3:108-9,235. 29B 2:587-88, 599-600. 30“The Case of Reason Impa rtia lly Considered," B 2:590-91, sec. 1.3. siW 5:357. 32In reference to Peter Browne , “On Huma n Unde rsta nding,” see fJW 4:192: LJW 1:56-58; 6:113. 33EA,B 11:37-95; J VIII:1-45. 98

REASON

moral agent unders ta nd wha t cons cie nce is inwa rdly saying. Cons cie nce needs ra tiona l de libera tion to cla rify its pra ctica l a lte rnative s . Cons cie nce is the witne ss of mora l self-awareness tha t e ithe r accuses or excuses us. We he a r ourselves cons ta ntly assessing ourselves morally. Reason he lps us dis cern tha t assessment accurately.34 b. W hat R e as on Cannot Do If these are services reason can render, wha t can reason not do? Reason is powerless to e licit fa ith or hope or love — a ll the ologica l virtue s - e xce lle nt be ha viors enabled by God’s grace. Firs t, reason ca nnot produce s aving faith. Tha t is enabled only by saving grace unde r the guida nce of God the S pirit. Reason ca nnot of its e lf bring us to a firm conviction of tha t which is not seen. It ca nnot bring us to trus t in God. We can put beliefs to the test of ra tiona l analysis, but we will ne ve r experience saving fa ith s imply from a sequence of re a soning. For fa ith is a de cis ion, a choice we make to trus t Anothe r. We may find reasons tha t will lead us toward an a ct of fa ith, but reason as such lacks the ca pa city to take the ris k-la de n step of sa ving fa ith so as to pa rticipa te de e ply in life in Christ. It is difficult to e nge nde r trus t without s hifting into a na rra tive mode, without te lling a s tory. We le a rn to trus t in God by lis te ning to a his tory of re ve la tion. From this his tory, we le arn tha t the Life -give r is pe rs ona lly trus tworthy. We know this by s ha ring a ctive ly in God’s own pe rs onal coming in the inca rna te , crucified Lord.35 Second, reason is unable to e licit the fullne s s of hope. No ma tte r how much e vidence is pile d la ye r upon layer, tha t does not of itse lf, without fa ith, e licit the fullness of hope.36 Wha t reason can do is analyze the conditions unde r which hope can be grasped. But hope emerges only out of fa ith’s trus t in God revealed in his tory. God is mos t fully revealed in the his tory of his inca rna te Son, Jesus. Third, above all, reason by its e lf ca nnot love. None of us loves because we have come to tha t conclus ion on the basis of ra tiona l a rgume nt.37 So reason is ina de qua te a t the mos t crucial points upon which huma n ha ppiness hinges. Reason can de fine , think a bout, a nd conceptually orde r ideas of the virtue s . It can de s cribe and e licit to some e xte nt actua l be haviora l excellences, such as wisdom, courage, te mpe ra nce , and jus tice . But reason fa lls s hort in e nge nde ring fa ith, hope, a nd love, on which the blessed life depends.38 This means tha t reason ca nnot make us ha ppy unless it is righdy re la te d to the ground of happiness, fa ith tha t loves a ll in God a nd God in a ll.39 The prope r a nd mode s t use of reason does not pre te nd omnicompe te nce . Thos e who be little reason ma y dis honor God because the y fa il to a cknowle dge God’s own 34“The Case of Reason Impa rtia lly Considered,” B 2:592, sec. 1.7. 35“The Case of Reason Impa rtia lly Considered,” B 2:593, sec. 2.1. ^“The Case of Reason Impa rtia lly Considered,” B 2:595-97, sec. 2.5-7. 37“The Case of Reason Impa rtia lly Considered," B 2:598, sec. 2.3, 8. 38Reason offe rs “dim light,” B 2:172, for tha t which leads to e nduring happiness; B 1:60,258; 2:593 - 99. 39“The Case of Reason Impa rtia lly Considered," B 2:598-600, sec. 2.10. 99

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

gift of reasonable re flection. Thos e who fa il to see the limits of reason compound reason’s difficultie s by ima gining tha t reason its e lf can e licit fa ith, hope , a nd love.40

5. The Imperfection of Human Knowledge The te xt of "The Impe rfe ction of Human Knowledge,” is 1 Corinthians 13:9, “We know in pa rt” [Homily #69 (1784), B 2:567 - 86; J #69, V:337 - 50]. a. The De s ire to Know From this tiny window of time , we grasp only slivers, not the whole of reality. How little we know, muse d Wesley. We see s ocie ty a nd his tory a nd na ture from our fle eting glimps e of this mome nt of time a nd space. None the le s s , the desire to know re ma ins as imme a s ura ble as time a nd space, a nd as unive rs a l as it is irrepre s s ible . The re is no circumfe rence to our de sire to know. But on e ve ry ha nd we find our knowle dge limite d. This suggests tha t human me a ning is fore ve r pointe d toward some future state in which our knowle dge shall be comple te .41 If re a s oning a bout the fullne s s of time is impla nte d in our huma n consciousness, tha t fa ct points to some future reason why it is so impla nte d. Not knowing this re a son does not e limina te its tra je ctory to some future knowing. Howe ve r limite d a nd s ubje ct to dis tortion, the de sire to know is intrins ic to huma n consciousness. It is difficult to ima gine huma n beings without a hunge r to know tha t which reaches be yond our grasp 42 Although this de sire has no bounds, our a ctual ra nge of knowing does.43 No ma tte r how wise, we only "know in pa rt” (1 Cor. 13:9), which is the lead te xt of Homily #69 44 b. Cos mology R e veals the Aus te re Lim its ofHum an Knowing Huma n knowing is e xpe rie nce d only within a va st cosmic scale of be ing. Within this inca lcula ble scale, it is possible to some degree to know s ome thing of the things we see in the phys ica l world, living things , a nd to some degree ourselves. But fa r less do we know fully the ground a nd giver of a ll knowing.45 Even the wis e s t “know in pa rt.” Think a bout this: Who knows the e xtent of the universe, or the s tructure of light? How little we know of such e le me nta ry cons titue nts as air, e a rth, fire , and water. How little we know a bout the de pths of the sea, the dyna mics , s tructure , and function of vegetable a nd a nima l life .46 When we trudge through the thought worlds of a s tronomy a nd physics asking a bout the e xte nt of the unive rs e a nd the na ture of phys ica l bodie s , how little we know. Is light compos e d of waves or particles? Of wha t are che mica l pa rticle s made 40Ibid. See Le tte r to Eliza be th Morga n, January 1,1779, LJW 6:335. 41“The Impe rfe ction of Huma n Knowledge," B 2:568, pref. 1. 42EA, J VIII:18 — 20. 43“The Impe rfe ction of Huma n Knowledge,” B 2:568 - 69, pref. 1-4. MB 2:100-103, 568-86; 4:287-88. 45“The Impe rfe ction of Huma n Knowledge,” B 2:570-77, sec. 1.2-13. ■““The Impe rfe ction of Huma n Knowledge,” B 2:572-73, sec. 1.5-7. 100

REASON

up? In geology, wha t lie s be ne ath the e a rth’s surface?47 In biology a nd botany, we are confronte d cons ta ntly by the myste rie s of micros copic orga nis ms a nd pla nt life. Up a nd down the line of this protra cte d cha in of be ing we ofte n le a rn tha t the more we s tudy the less we know. From the s tudy of cre a tion, we ca n reason forma lly tha t God exists, but beyond tha t little is known, except by re ve la tion, of the divine a ttribute s . We can hypothesize divine cha ra cte ris tics s uch as jus tice , e ternity, omnipre s e nce , a nd the divine necessity from na tura l re a soning, but we ca nnot know the m fully unless the y are illumine d by the re ve lation of God in his tory. These are amenable to some pre limina ry ra tiona l analysis, but always only with a heavy re sidue of mystery.48 We le arn of God from his cre a tion, but only indire ctly, from within our fra gile sensory apparatus. And even a mong believers, wha te ve r is known of God’s a toning grace within time te nds to unde rs core our deeper ignorance of his e te rna l counsels be fore time.49 We ma y speak of cre a tion as the be ginning of time , but no speaker was the re whe n it happened. We have a s ma ll a pe rture of vis ion in glimps ing finite, fle e ting time .50 This makes it a ll the more fitting for us "to a dore the wis dom of God who has so e xa ctly proportioned our knowle dge to our state!”51 c. The S tudy ofProvide nce and S uffe ring Y ie lds Only Partial Knowle dge of God But there is much more : how little we know of ourselves, of provide nce , of God’s design, of s uffe ring. P rofound mys te ry is pre s e nt not only in God but also in ordina ry his tory. We ofte n do not know why we suffer. We a ll suffer. S uffe ring is one of the mos t pe rva sive of human experiences. Yet it is there tha t we find how intimate ly one huma n life is conne cte d with others. My s in affects you. Your s in a ffe cts me. My gra ndpa re nts’ s in a ffe cts me, a nd I a ffe ct my gra ndchildre n ye t unborn. S uffering is wra ppe d in mystery. P rovide nce is God’s provis ion for wha t huma ns with s hort vis ion ca nnot see or pre pa re for. It is tha t unde rs ta nding tha t reaches out be yond the mys te ry and a ffirms tha t we are be ing he ld in the hands of God even if our outcome s are e mpirica lly unknowa ble . It re ma ins be yond the compre hens ion even of the mos t fa ithful why one pe rs on ma y be give n a long, s logging pa th, a nd a nothe r an easy one. One may find sa ving grace early, a nd a nothe r is le ft to s truggle for a long time .52 God knows . We do not. 47“The Impe rfe ction of Huma n Knowledge,” B 2:573-74, sec. 1.8-9. 48 B 11:268-69. 49“The Imperfe ction of Huma n Knowledge,” B 2:569-71, sec. 1.1-4. 50“The Impe rfe ction of Huma n Knowledge,” B 2:574-75, sec. 1.10-13. See also We s le ys conclus ion to Com pe ndium of Natural Philosophy, re printe d as Remarks on the Lim its of Hum an Knowledge, 1X111:488-99. 51Condus ion to Wes leys Com pe ndium ofNatural Philosophy, re printe d as Remarks on the Lim its ofHum an Knowledge, J XII1:498. 52“The Imperfe ction of Huma n Knowledge,” B 2:578, sec. 2.2,3. 101

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

Knowle dge of our ignora nce may teach us the firs t steps toward de a ling with our s uffe ring. Though we ma y know some of the ps ychologica l and socia l causes of our own s uffe ring a nd of othe rs , we ne ve r know the m exhaustively. Tha t belongs only to God, who sees the past and future clearly. The ve ry re cognition tha t we do not know the causes of our s uffe ring brings us to a pre cipice in which we are ironica lly be ing fre ed to trus t Anothe r who does unde rs ta nd future time s in a wa y we ne ve r will.53 Even ifwe ma y grasp the general outline s of Gods provide ntia l orde ring, how little we know of its pa rticula rs : why great na tions are "now swept away,” why so many in the “populous e mpire of Indos ta n” live in pove rty, why Africa ns have been "continua lly drive n to ma rket and sold, like cattle, into the vile s t bondage," why "Ame rica n India ns , tha t is, the mis e ra ble re ma ins of the m” are slaughtered, a nd why myria ds of La pla nders a nd Siberians mus t live unde r fre e zing conditions , a nd why "many, ifnot more ... are wa nde ring up a nd down the deserts of Tartary.”54 Why is n’t the me dicine of the gospel s e nt to e ve ry place whe re the conta gion of s in is found? Why is there "little more me rcy or truth to be found a mong Chris tia ns tha n a mong Pagans,” a nd why are ma ny who are “ca lle d Chris tia n... fa r worse tha n the Heathens?” Why does the a ntidote of Chris tia nity at time s be come grievous ly a dulte rate d a nd so mixe d with pois onous ingre die nts tha t it re ta ins little of its origina l virtue , a nd a t time s "adds te nfold ma lignity to the disease which it was de signe d to cure”?55 We may speculate, but without ce rta in a nd comple te knowing. Me a nwhile we confess tha t God knows the future, since God is pre se nt a lre a dy to a ll future mome nts . d. Eve n the S tudy of God’s Grace Y ie lds Only Lim ite d Knowle dge of the W is dom of God’s Couns e ls The limits of huma n knowing a pply to revealed re ligion as we ll as na tura l re ligion.56 How ca n we e xpla in why "a Hotte ntot, a Ne w-Ze a la nde r, or an inha bita nt of Nova-Ze mbla ” does not have an equal chance a t a de ce nt e duca tion? 57 The s e ques tions are s till be ing asked in our churche s with re ga rd to Bangladesh a nd Somalia. The profundity of these mys te rie s te nds to drive some be yond a suspension of the oretica l judgment a nd toward the de cisive choice be twe e n a the is m a nd saving fa ith. The force of such enigmas is so s trong tha t the y ca nnot be a voided e xce pt "by re s olving a ll into the unsearchable wis dom of God, toge the r with a deep conviction of our own ignora nce , a nd ina bility to fa thom his counsels.”58 “Even a mong us ... to whom are e ntrus te d the oracles of God ... the re are s till ma ny circums ta nce s in his dis pe ns a tions which are above our compre he ns ion. We know not why he suffered us so long to go on in our own wa ys ... or why he made use 53“The Impe rfe ction of Huma n Knowledge,” B 2:578 - 79, sec. 3.4, 5. M“The Impe rfe ction of Huma n Knowledge," B 2:578 - 80, sec. 2.1-6. 55“The Impe rfe ction of Huma n Knowledge," B 2:581, sec. 2.8. 56Cf. We sle ys re ma rks on Lord Karnes in "Mora lity a nd Na tura l Religion,'' J/W 6:21; B 3:493; B 4:151; ]JW 6:21; B 3:493; B 4:151. 57“The Impe rfe ction of Huma n Knowledge,” B 2:582 - 83, sec. 3.1,2; cf. B 3:348-49. 58“The Impe rfe ction of Huma n Knowledge," B 2:583, sec. 3.2; cf. 7:247.

102

REASON

of this or the other ins trume nt.... It is e nough tha t God knowe th.... God undoubte dly has reasons; but those reasons are ge ne ra lly hid from the childre n of men.”59 Since we re ma in in time even whe n re ce iving the re ve lation provide d in S cripture , the knowle dge of believers is less tha n God’s own knowle dge . S cripture reveals wha t is necessary for salvation. We see this re ve lation with dim eyes. We know in pa rt. e. What We Le arnfrom Our Own Ignorance The greatest lesson we le arn from the s tudy of huma n consciousness is of our own ignora nce . Each pe nite nt be lie ve r is be ing ta ught humility, trus t, a nd re signation pre cis e ly by these limits . The ve ry shallowness of our knowing e licits • Humility. The knowledge of our impe rfe ction teaches us to be a little less proud and assertive about how inclusive is our knowing. • Trust. To le a rn most profoundly from our ignorance is to le a rn to trus t Gods incompa ra bly adequate knowing of us so as to awaken fa ith. The abysmal nature of our ignorance moves us ever closer to the personal decision to trus t in God. "A full conviction of our own ignorance may teach us a full trus t in his wisdom.”60 • Resignation. To learn from our ignorance is to develop a yie lding s pirit, as Jesus expressed in Gethsemene.61 Our limits as human beings are fina lly brought to deepest awareness in the re a lity and fact of death. There we come absolutely to terms with our finitude . The re we are given the most complete opportunity to learn to say, “Yet not my will, but yours” (Luke 22:42 NIV).62 “As thinking is the a ct of an e mbodie d s pirit, pla ying upon a se t of ma te ria l keys, it is not strange tha t the soul can make but ill mus ic whe n he r ins trume nt is out of tune.” Awa re tha t “finite ca nnot measure infinite ... there always will be s ome thing incompre he ns ible , s ome thing like Hims elf, in a ll his dispe nsa tions. We mus t the re fore be conte nt to be ignora nt, until e te rnity opens our unde rs ta nding.”63 P a rticipa tion in Chris t e licits fa ith tha t in the future we will know wha t we do not know now.

B. Natural Philosophy 1. Whether There Is Gradual Improvement in Natural Philosophy a. S urve y ofthe Wis dom ofGod in the Cre ation, or a Compe ndium ofNatural Philos ophy In his introduction to the Com pe ndium of Natural Philos ophy64 (la te r publishe d unde r the title Of the Gradual Im prove m e nt of Natural Philosophy), Wesley 59“The Impe rfe ction of Huma n Knowledge.” B 2:583 - 84, sec. 3.3 - 5. ““The Imperfe ction of Huma n Knowledge.” B 2:585, sec. 4; CH 7:96 - 97. 61“The Impe rfe ction of Huma n Knowledge,” B 2:584-86, sec. 4. ““The Impe rfe ction of Huma n Knowledge,” B 2:585 - 86, sec. 4.2, 3. “Le tte r to Mrs . Elizabeth Bennis, Octobe r 28, 1771, LJW 5:284. 641777, following the work of Charle s Bonnet of Geneva, 3rd Ame rica n ed.; note s by B. Ma yo, 2 vols. (Ne w York: N. Bangs and T. Ma s on, 1823); cf. B 1:60, 90 - 91; 3:108, 272; B 1:91-92; 2:362-65, 394,571-76. 103

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

dis tinguis he d two phases of na tura l philos ophy: "S pe culative philos ophy ascends from ma n to God; pra ctica l descends" from God to cre a tures. The mind trie s to reach up to God while God is re a ching down for huma nity. The issues of na tura l philos ophy "ascend from the cons idera tion of ma n through a ll the orde r of things , as the y are fa rthe r and fa rthe r re move d from us, to God the ce nter of a ll knowledge.”65 We sle y cons is te ntly cha llenge d the pre judice tha t assumed a ll s ignificant scientific discoveries are re ce nt and tha t the a ncie nts ha d little knowle dge of the na tura l world. The a rts of genetics, che mis try, a nd gla ssma king we re s tudie d a nd "in some measure known long ago. But... cultiva te d in our age, with fa r gre a te r accuracy.” The micros cope is not a re ce nt inve ntion; rather, it s hould be regarded as a re invention. The e mpirical e vide nce We s le y pre s ente d for this is a tiny fifte en-hundre dye a r-old seal of France, “which to the na ke d eye pre se nts only a confus ed group, but unde r a micros cope, dis tinctly e xhibits trees, a rive r, a boa t, a nd s ixte e n or seventeen persons."66 Ma ny othe r forms of e vide nce s how tha t the a ncie nts were va s tly more intelligent tha t our pre judice s imagine . “It is commonly supposed tha t our age has a va st advantage ove r a ntiquity” in the s tudy of the huma n body. "But this will bear a dis pute . For ... the chie f of our hypotheses are not new, but known long ago,” a nd in truth the mode rn studie s ofte n “te rmina te in mere conjectures.”67 This is seen in the two le a ding a ncie nt tra ditions ofinquiry — He bre w a nd Greek. The He bra ic mind vie ws the vis ible world in re la tion to its Creator. The Gre e k intelle ctual tra dition seeks to dis cove r "the ma te ria l causes of na tura l things .”68 Among Gre e k schools, the s ubje ct of divinity became the special preoccupa tion of the Platonis ts , logic of the Pa ripa te tics, mora lity of the Stoics, a nd s e ns ua lity of the Epicureans. Mos t of the ma jor que s tions had be e n we ll fra me d by the third ce ntury BC. The me die va l scholastics ne gle cte d wha t was commendable in Aris totle and te nded “to obscure and pollute a ll philos ophy with a bstra ct, idle, va in s pe cula tion. Yet some of the m, a fter the Ara bia ns ha d introduce d the knowledge of che mis try into Europe, we re wis e above the age the y live d in,” notably the thirte e nth-ce ntury Franciscan Roger Bacon a nd the Dominica n Albe rtus Ma gnus .69 b. The S cie ntific Ente rpris e S ince Francis Bacon Later, Francis Bacon (1561 -1626) grasped "the defects ofthe s chool philosophy, incite d a ll lovers of na tural philos ophy to a diligent search into na tura l his tory ... by ma ny e xpe riments a nd obs e rva tions .”70 From this followed Willia m Ha rve y’s s e ve nte e nth-ce ntury dis cove ry of the circula tion of the blood, John Pecquet’s s tudy ofthe thora cic duct, a nd other e xpe rime nts in ge netics a nd blood tra ns fus ion. Wesle y was we ll ve rse d in these dis cove rie s . Physicians have ma de s uch discove rie s 65“Of the 66“Of the 67"Of the 68“Of the 69“Of the 70“Of the 104

Gra dua l Improve me nt of Na tura l Philosophy,” J XIII:482, sec. 1. Gra dua l Improve me nt of Na tura l Philosophy,” J XIII:485 - 86, secs. 11-19. Gra dua l Improve me nt of Na tura l Philosophy,” J XIII:487, sec. 23. Gra dua l Improve me nt of Na tura l Philosophy,” J XIII:482, secs. 2,3. Gra dua l Improve me nt of Na tura l Philosophy,” J XIII:483, secs. 4, 5. Gra dua l Improve me nt of Na tura l Philosophy,” J XIII:483, sec. 6; cf. //U/7:162; LJW 3:5n.

REASON

conce rning the huma n body so as to provide a providentia l reason to a the odicy even for diseases: “In diseases themselves, the wonde rful wis dom of the Author of na ture appears; a nd by means of the m ma ny hidden recesses of the huma n fra me are une xpe cte dly discovered.”71 This ins ight into the me a ning of disease has largely been forgotte n or ignore d in our society, whose science is unpre pa re d to grasp it. The divis ions of na tural inquiry ma y be conve nie ntly s orte d out in re la tion to the four a ncie nt elements: (1) air (as in the dis cove ry of the ba rome te r, the rmometer, a nd a ir pump); (2) e arth (ge ology; te le scopy; the s tudy of s uns pots , pla ne t motions , and the Milky Wa y; a nd va rious cos mic the orie s , from P tole ma ic to postCope rnica n); (3) fire (as in the dis cove ry of gunpowde r a nd phos phorus ); and (4) water (as in the diving be ll a nd s ubma rine , a nd a tte mpts to conve rt s a ltwa te r into fre s hwa te r uses).72 We s le y was intrigue d with the his tory of science. In the a tte mpte d ascent of philos ophica l re flection from humanity to s piritua l cre a tures (angels) a nd fina lly to God, "we ca n ne ithe r de pend upon re a son nor e xpe rime nt” but do we ll ultima te ly to turn to the wis dom of S cripture . “Here, the re fore, we are to look for no ne w improve me nts ; but to s ta nd in the good old paths; to content ourselves with wha t God has been pleased to reveal.”73

2. On Human Understanding In 1781 We s le y wrote an illumina ting critica l essay title d “Re ma rks upon Mr. Locke’s Essay on Huma n Unders ta nding." “For some days 1 have e mploye d mys e lf on the roa d in re a ding Mr. Locke s Essay’,' a “s olid, we ighty tre a tis e ” tha t shows evidence of a “de e p fear of God.” Whe n compa re d to “the glitte ring trifle of Monte s quie u,” Locke is like gold.74 From Locke, the notion “tha t a ll our ideas come from se nsa tion or re fle ction is fully proved.”75 He re we see the intellectua l powe r of We s ley’s mind going headto-he ad with the a chieve me nts a nd limita tions of one of the e ighte e nth ce ntury’s le ading minds . a. W e s le y’s Critique ofLocke The following mistakes of Locke, on which the re ma rks focus, Wesley thought to be compe nsa te d by his ma ny use ful re fle ctions .76 Note the rich bre a dth a nd de pth of the knowle dge base We sle y was a rticula ting. Firs t, Wesley thought tha t Aris totle ’s s imple r thre e fold divis ion of the mind into a ppre he ns ion, judgme nt, a nd dis cours e is a more a ccura te a ccount tha n Locke’s 71“Of the Gradua l Improve me nt of Na tura l Philosophy,” J XIIL484, sec. 11. 72“Of the Gradua l Improve me nt of Na tura l Philosophy," J XIII:486, secs. 18-21. 73“Of the Gradua l Improve me nt of Na tura l Philosophy,” J XIII:487, sec. 24. 74“Remarks upon Mr. Locke s Essay on Huma n Unde rsta nding," J XIIL455 - 56; cf. Richa rd E. Bra ntley, Locke, Wesley, and the Me thod of English R omanticis m (Gaine sville : Unive rs ity of Florida Press, 1984). For more of We sle y’s re fle ctions on Locke, see JJW 3:179; 4:192; B 2:571n, 589n; 3:361-62; LJW 1:136; 2:314; 7:228. 75“Remarks upon Mr. Locke's Essay on Huma n Unde rsta nding,” J XIIL455 - 56. 76“Remarks upon Mr. Locke's Essay on Huma n Unde rsta nding,” J XIII:455. 105

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

a ccount of pe rce ption, judgme nt (which include s dis ce rning, compa ring, compounding, a nd a bs tra cting), a nd me mory. Pleasure de te rmine s the will as ofte n as pa in. De s ire mus t be dis tinguis he d both from the e njoyment of pleasure a nd the avoidance of pain. Second, Locke wrongly argued tha t a pe rs ons body undergoes dra ma tic changes within a life time tha t e s s e ntia lly obscure the pe rs on’s continuing ide ntity. Rather, it is the huma n s oul tha t gives a nima tion a nd unity to the body. “I ca ll Ca to the same pe rs on a ll his life , because he has the same soul. 1 ca ll him the same ma n, because he has the same body too, which he brought into the world.”77 Wesley disagreed with Locke ’s infe rence tha t "Socrates asleep a nd Socrates awake is not the same person.” Abs urdly, “Mr. Locke thinks , ‘consciousness makes pe rs ona l ide ntity’; tha t is, knowing 1 a m the same person, makes me the same pe rs on.... Does knowing I e xis t make me exist? No; I a m be fore I know I am.”78 Third, Locke’s “gra nd design was ... to drive Aris totle ’s logic out of the world, which he ha te d cordia lly, but ne ve r unde rs tood.”79 We sle y doubte d tha t Locke ever read the fifte e nth- a nd s ixte enth-century "s choolme n” against whom he ra ile d. He too re a dily a ba ndone d the usefulness of logic, judging its use by its abuse. Rightly e mploye d, logic is the best means “to pre ve nt or cure the obs curity of language. To divide s imple te rms a ccording to the logica l rule s of divis ion, a nd the n to de fine each me mbe r of the divis ion a ccording to the three rule s of de finition, does a ll tha t huma n a rt can do, in orde r to ha ving a cle a r and distinct idea of every word we use.’’80 This essay shows how a s tute ly We sle y was following the course of na tura l philos ophy in his day, a nd how he was capable of intellige nt critical assessment of it. b. The Manne rs of the Pre s e nt Tim es In “An Es tima te of the Ma nne rs of the Present Times,” We s le y a nticipa te d the s pirit of mode rn na rcissism by de s cribing a world without God. “See here the gra nd cause (toge ther with inte mpe ra nce ) of our innume ra ble ne rvous complaints !” “How many, even young, he a lthy me n, are too la zy e ithe r to wa lk or ride !... The y waste away in ge ntle a ctivity.” Our "luxury increases s loth, unfitting us for exercise e ithe r of body or mind.... And how ma ny does a re gula r kind of luxury be tra y a t last into gluttony and drunke nnes s ; yea, a nd the lewdness too of e ve ry kind? "81 The best tha t the de ism of We s le y’s day could say a bout God in such a s itua tion was tha t God "set this whirligig a-spinning,” he le ft it, and e ve rything the re in, to spin on its own way. Whe the r this is right or no, it is almost the universal se ntime nt of the English na tion.... The y do not take God into the ir account; they can do the ir whole business without him.... The y take it for granted, tha t the race is to the s wift, and the battle to the strong ... [and] impute all to na tural causes.... "“Remarks upon Mr. Locke’s Essay on Human Understanding," J XIII:459. 78“Remarks upon Mr. Locke’s Essay on Human Understanding," J XIIL458. "’“Remarks upon Mr. Locke’s Essay on Human Understanding," J XIIL460. 80“Remarks upon Mr. Locke’s Essay on Human Understanding," J XIIL462. 81“An Estimate of the Manners ofthe Present Times,” J XI: 156, sec. 1. 106

REASON

We ta lk indiffe re ntly on e ve rything tha t comes in the way; on e ve rything —but God. If any one were to name him in good company, with any degree of seriousness, suppose at a Gentleman or Nobleman’s table, would not they all stand aghast? Would not a profound silence ensue, till someone started a more agreeable subject?82 c. W e s ley’s Critique ofMonte s quie u In his "Thoughts upon Ba ron Monte s quie us S pirit of Laws," 1781, Wesley cha llenged Monte s quie u’s s e lf-a dmira tion, fa ddis m, a nd ra tiona lis tic “a ir of infa llibility, as though he we re the Dicta tor not only of France, but of Europe.”83 Ae s the tica lly, Monte s quie u "touche s none of the passions,” “gives no ple a sure ... to a thinking mind.” “The more I study, the less I compre hend.... I ve rily believe he did not compre he nd [his own words ] hims e lf.” Wors e , We s le y said, Monte s quie u took "e ve ry opportunity to de pre cia te the ins pire d writers .’’84 “Othe r ta le nts he undoubtedly had; but two he wa nte d — re ligion and logic.” Compa re d to Pascal, Ma le bra nche , or Locke, We sle y conside red Monte s quie u infa ntile .85 He re we glimps e Wesley, a fte r s pe nding hours riding on horseback while re a ding Monte s quie u, in a mome nt of pe rce ptive comme nta ry on the follie s of his own culture . The a vid re a der of We s le y will find ma ny such glimpses. d. Natural His tory Ma ny of We s le y’s critica l thoughts on ge ologica l a nd na tura l his tory are found in his intriguing “Remarks on the Count de Buffon’s ‘Na tura l His tory,’ ” in Arm inian Magaz ine , 1782.86 Decades be fore Da rwin’s research, We sle y agreed with the Count tha t ma ny pa rts of the e a rth we re once covere d with the sea for ma ny ages, tha t s tra ta we re forme d, a nd tha t stones we re once a s oft paste.87 Yet We sle y argued pithily against the hypotheses tha t there is no fina l cause or purpos e in na tura l his tory; tha t in mos t beings the re are fe wer us e ful or necessary organs tha n thos e tha t are useless or re dunda nt; tha t the re is no essential diffe rence be twe e n vegetables a nd a nima ls ; tha t the world e xiste d from e te rnity; tha t the e a rth is "only a slice of the sun, cut off from it by the s troke of a come t”; tha t the inne r core of the e a rth is glass; tha t the sea covere d the whole e arth for ma ny ages ("I think this is highly improba ble ; though it has doubtle ss covere d ma ny parts of it for some time ”); a nd tha t the world was cre a te d by chance. On these grounds We sle y ra nked Count de Buffon “fa r be ne ath Volta ire , Rousseau, a nd Hume (a ll of whom a cknowle dge the be ing of a God) in re ligion as in unde rs ta nding.”88 All this is concis e ly stated in this s hort a rticle , easily re ad in a s hort time . 82“An Es timate of the Ma nne rs of the Present Times," J XI:160-61, secs. 13-16. 83“Thoughts upon Ba ron Monte s quie u's S pirit of Laws,” J XI1I:415. 84Ibid. 85“Thoughts upon Ba ron Monte s quie us S pirit of Laws,” J XI11:416. 86B 2:588n. 87“Remarks on the Count de Buffon’s 'Na tura l His tory,'” J X11I:448—51 (AM, 1782, J V:546 - 48). 88“Remarks on the Count de Buffon’s 'Na tura l History,' ” J XIIL455. 107

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

e. Natural R e ligion: An As s e s s m e nt ofHinduis m In his “Re ma rks on Mr. H.’s ‘Account of the Ge ntoo Re ligion in Hindus tan,’ ” 1774,89 We sle y offe re d a critique of a roma nticizing a dmire r of the Hindu re ligion in India . He was e s pe cia lly s ke ptica l re ga rding the e xtre me a ntiquity cla ime d for Hinduis m. It s hould be re membe re d tha t because of his Ge orgia mis s ion with the America n India ns , We sle y could plaus ibly have ta ke n on the role of ha ving some practical e xpe rtis e in re porting on non-Chris tia n re ligions.90 Who else a mong his readers ha d de a lt ha nds -on with the noble savage or a n a lterna tive civiliza tion? He re ma rke d, "Are these twe lve a rticle s of his cre e d ‘the funda me nta l points of [na tura l] re ligion?’... I ne ve r me t with an Ame rica n India n who be lie ve d ha lf of them.”91 The points cove re d included the fa nta s y of me te mps ychos is ,92 the tra ns migra tion of souls through e xte nsive e the re a l spheres of purifica tion, a nd the a ccount of the cre a tion (with the e a rth s itting on the head of a snake on the back of a tortois e ).93 For We sle y this was proof tha t “the y tha t do not believe the Bible will believe anything.’’94 The la ck ofe xte rnal ve rifica tion suggests tha t these cla ims are to be ra nked with the fa iry tales 95 It is circula r re as oning to argue tha t the a ntiquity of the writing is prove d by the tra dition tha t the y we re pe rpe tuate d in a ntiquity. At this time of his life (1774), We s le y was ha ving second thoughts a bout his pre vious roma ntic te nde ncy to ide a lize some individua lis tic forms of mys ticis m, including thos e P rote s tants who ha d gone too fa r with the m. Whe re a s once the Wesleys ha d he ld the "Mys tic Divine s ... in gre a t ve ne ra tion, as the best explaine rs of the gospel,” now the ir tune ha d changed: "We are now convinced, tha t we the re in gre a tly e rre d, not knowing the S cripture s , ne ithe r the powe r of God.”96 We sle y was wa rning the Me thodis t Societies tha t the mys tics would e dify the m by a "s olita ry re ligion,” not troubling a bout outwa rd works , but only "to work virtues in the will.” “Dire ctly oppos ite to this is the gospel of Chris t. S olitary re ligion is not to be found the re . ‘Holy s olitarie s’ is a phrase no more cons is te nt with the gospel tha n holy a dultere rs . The gospel of Chris t knows of no re ligion, but social; no holiness but s ocia l holiness.”97 This now fa mous comme nt on socia l holines s was pointedly made in a critique of the te mpta tion of a ll forms of mys ticis m, s uch as the Ea s tern re ligions , to forge t the socia l implica tions of the gospel.

89Cf. LJW 6:118; B 2:38In. *>]JW 1:156 - 62,236 - 39,248 - 50,297 - 98, 346,406 - 9; B 1:502; 3:449; 4:52; 5:226,8:289,317; LJW 1:201-3; 8:24. ’‘“Remarks on Mr. H.’s ‘Account of the Ge ntoo Re ligion in Hindus ta n,”’ J XIII:407. 92 W 2:279. 93“Remarks on Mr. H.’s ‘Account of the Ge ntoo Re ligion in Hindus ta n,’ ” J XIII:404. ’’"Remarks on Mr. H.’s Account of the Ge ntoo Re ligion in Hindus ta n,’ ” J XIII:408. 95“Remarks on Mr. H.’s Account of the Ge ntoo Re ligion in Hindus ta n,’ ” J X1II:405. 9bHS P (1739), pref. 1; J XIV:319; see also Wesley’s “Thoughts upon Jacob Behmen (Boehme)” (1780), J 1X:509 -14; a nd "A Specimen of the Divinity and Philosophy of the Highly-Illumina te d Jacob Behmen,” J IX:514-19, on the limits of speculative mys ticis m; cf.//W3:17,282; 4:411; 5:46, 521; S S 1:240; B 2:48n. 97HS P (1739), prefs. 4, 5; J XIV:321. For Wesley’s a mbiva le nt re fle ctions on mys ticis m, see LJW 1:289, 243; on kinds of mys ticis m, see J WO 252; on Quie tism, see LJW 1:276; on the pois on of mysticis m, see

108

REASON

Further Reading on Reason and Philosophy Mystical Experience and the History of Religions Brigde n, Thoma s E. "The We s le ys a nd Isla m.” PW HS 8 (1911): 91-95. Turne r, E. E. “J ohn We s le y a nd Mys ticis m." MR 113 (1930): 16-31. Va n Va lin, Howa rd F. "Mys ticis m in Wesley." AS 12, no. 2 (1958): 3-14. Wils on, Da vid D. “J ohn We s ley a nd Mys tica l Prayer." LQHR 193 (1968): 61-69.

Wesley and Philosophical Wisdom Ba rbe r, F. L. “We s le ys P hilos ophy." Biblical W orld 54 (1920): 142 - 49. Ca nnon, Willia m R. “Me thodis m in a P hilos ophy of His tory.” MH 12, no. 4 (1974): 27-43. Eayrs, Ge orge . John Wesley: Christian Philos ophe r and Church Founder. London: Epworth, 1926. Eckha rt, Ruth Alma . "We s le y a nd the P hilos ophe rs ." MR 112 (1929): 330-45.

------. "J ohn We sle y, Gre gory Lopez a nd the Ma rquis de Renty.” PW HS 35 (1966): 181-84.

Fox, Ha rold G. “J ohn We s le y a nd Na tura l P hilos ophy.” Unive rs ity of Dayton R e vie w 7, no. 1 (1970): 31-39.

------. "J ohn We s le y’s Bre ak with Mys ticis m Re cons ide re d.” PW HS 35 (1965): 65-67.

Ma tthe ws , Re x D. “‘Re ligion a nd Reason J oine d’: A S tudy in the The ology of J ohn Wesley." ThD diss., Ha rva rd Univers ity, 1986.

Reason and Authority Cra gg, Ge ra ld R. Reason and Authority in the Eighte enth Ce ntury. Ca mbridge : Ca mbridge Unive rs ity Press, 1964.

---------. “‘We Wa lk by Fa ith, Not by S ight’: Re ligious Epis te mology in the La te r S e rmons of John Wesley.” Paper priva te ly circula te d.

Fros t, S ta nle y B. Authoritate sle hre in de n We rke n John Wesleys. Munche n: Erns t Re inha rdt, 1938.

Outle r, Albe rt C. The ology in the Wesleyan S pirit, 1 - 23. Na s hville : Tidings , 1975.

Lacy, H. E. "Authority in J ohn Wesley.” LQHR 189(1964): 114-19.

S himizu, Mits uo. "Epis temology in the Thought of J ohn Wesley.” P hD diss., Dre w Univers ity, 1980 (revis e d for publica tion in Tokyo, 1993).

S toe ffle r, F. Erne s t. “The We s leya n Concept of Re ligious Ce rta inty — Its P re history a nd S ignifica nce ." LQHR 33 (1964): 128-39. "We s ley’s Epis te mology.” W TJ10 (1975): 53-55.

JJW 5:28; J WO 45 - 46, 63, 375 - 76, 394. On the French mystica l write rs , see comme nts on Ma da me Guyon,//U73:18; 5:382 - 83; 6:130; 7:319; LJW 5M1 - 42; 6:39,42 - 44,125,233; 8:18; on Ma da me Antoine tte Bourignon, see LJW 7:66, 126; JJW 1:170, 191-92; 2:15-16; 6:11; 8:277; and Ma rquis Ga ston de Renty, see B 1:36, 61,75, 344; 3:166 - 67, 627; JJW 1:414, 450; LJW 4:184, 264, 293, 321; 5:129, 268, 271; 7:127.

109

CHAPTER 5

Experience

A. On Experience Through e xperie nce one may “obse rve a pla in, ra tional sense of God’s re ve a ling himse lf to us, of the ins piration of the Holy Ghos t, a nd of a be lie ve r’s fe e ling in hims e lf the mighty working of the S pirit of Chris t.”1 The mighty work of the S pirit of Chris t is a ble to be obs e rve d a nd fe lt by be lie ve rs in themselves. Reason a nd e xperie nce work toge the r inwardly to confirm saving fa ith. We sle y had witne sse d this assurance in his own e xpe rience a nd seen it attested by thousands in the course of the re viva l. In this chapter, we will see how he e xpla ined wha t he and othe rs have fe lt in the ir e xpe rie nce of divine grace.

1. The Necessity and Limits of Experience in Religion In the homily on "The Witne s s of the S pirit,” Wesley wrote : And here prope rly comes in, to confirm this s criptura l doctrine , the experience of the childre n of God — the experience not of two or three, nor of a few, but of a great multitude which no man can numbe r.... It is confirme d by your e xpe rience and mine. The S pirit its e lf bore witness to my s pirit tha t I was a child of God, gave me an evidence hereof, and I imme dia te ly cried, "Abba, Father!” And this I did (and so did you) before I reflected on, or was conscious of, any fruit of the S pirit.2 Believers of a ll ages have fe lt this: The S pirit is be aring witne ss to God’s saving work within, which enables the be lie ve r to so trus t in God tha t it is e ffortle s s to call out to God in the mos t intima te way, “Abba , Father!” The S pirit is be a ring witne s s within our s pirits tha t we are childre n of God. Expe rie nce confirms but does not ove rride S cripture . Expe rie nce is not a private ma tte r alone, but a ma tte r tha t believers share in a community of me mory. It is our e xperie nce togethe r—yours and mine —tha t confirms the ve ry s ons hip and da ughterhood promis e d in S cripture . We s le y was not ta lking jus t a bout huma n e xperie nce in general. He was ta lking 'FA, pt. 1; B 11:167, sec. 5.24, ita lics added. 2“The Witne s s of the S pirit,” pt. 2, B 1:290, sec. 3.6. Ill

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

a bout a pa rticula r e xperie nce tha t multitude s have had: the re cognition tha t "I am a child of God.” This occurs whe n the S pirit is be a ring witne ss to tha t e xperie nce promis e d by the gospel. We s le y was like a re porte r, re porting the e vide nce of the assurance of saving fa ith. a. Pe rs onal Expe rie nce of Trus t in Chris t Wesley had his own te s timony to re port. In the Aldersgate experience, Wesley wrote one of the mos t quoted of a ll his writings : "I fe lt my he a rt strangely wa rme d. I fe lt I did trus t in Chris t, Chris t alone for salvation. And an assurance was given me, tha t he had taken away m y sins, even mine , and saved me from the law of s in a nd death.’’3 The he art is "stra nge ly wa rmed’’ whe n this awareness dawns. It is s ome thing felt. It provide s assurance tha t our re la tion to God has be e n tra ns forme d. It is “our sins” tha t have been ta ke n away. We know by this e xpe rience tha t our re la tion with God has be e n fore ve r changed. It is of this e xperie nce tha t We s le y was speaking, not jus t a ny e xpe rience in general, or some general ca te gory of consciousness ca lle d experience. It is not the idea of e xpe rience but of m y experience. It is my pe rs ona l awareness of my ne w re la tion with God as “Abba , Father.” It is fe lt in the ve ry core of a pe rson whos e he art has be e n s oftene d by the S pirit a nd le d to fa ith. b. Ente r Pe te r Bohle r In the events le a ding to the Alders ga te experience, We s le y’s dia logue with the Mora vian Peter Bohle r focuse d on the close inte rconne ction be twe e n "S cripture a nd experience.” Bohler ha d argued tha t true fa ith would have “two fruits inseparably a tte nding it, ‘dominion ove r s in and cons ta nt peace from a sense of forgiveness.’ ” We sle y looke d for e vide nce of these fruits of fa ith firs t in S cripture , whe re he found the m a bunda ntly attested. Yet he did not feel the evidence inwa rdly a nd personally. Before his ta lks with Bohler, We s le y had not he a rd of this a biding peace from a sense of forgive ness pla us ibly attested. He ha d long wa ite d “ ‘till I found some living witnesses of it.’ He [Bohle r] re plie d he could s how me s uch a t any time ; if I desired it, the ne xt day. And a ccordingly the ne xt day he came again with three othe rs , a ll of whom te s tifie d, of the ir own pe rs ona l experience, tha t a true living fa ith in Chris t is ins e pa ra ble from a sense of pardon,” a nd tha t this fa ith was “the free gift of God; a nd tha t he would s ure ly be s tow it upon e ve ry s oul who e a rne s tly a nd pe rse ve ringly s ought it.”4 Bohle r brought him living witnesses to the e xpe rience of assurance. c. The Expe rie nce ofAs s urance The crite rion of e xperie nce 5 pe rta ins e s pe cia lly to the inne r te s timony of the assurance of sa lvation. No words "will a dequate ly express wha t the childre n of God W, Ma y 24,1738, B 1:475, sec. 14. *JJW, Ma y 24,1738, B 1:471-72, sec. 12. 5For furthe r reference to Chris tia n experience, see B 1:154, 293, 297, 323; J WO 79-80, 191-94, 209 -19; 387 - 88, 392 - 93; CH 7:3.

m

EXPERIENCE

e xpe rie nce ... an inwa rd impre s s ion on the soul, where by the S pirit of God directly witnesses to my s pirit, tha t 1 am a child of God ... a consciousness of our ha ving received, in a nd by the S pirit of a doption, the te mpe rs me ntione d in the word of God ... a consciousness tha t we are inwa rdly conforme d, by the S pirit of God, to the image of his Son.”6 This consciousness is offe re d as a birthright for a ll be lie ve rs.7 We s le y would tra vel to Ge rma ny in 1736 to lea rn more from the Mora vians and Ge rma n pietis ts .8 We s le y witne s s ed in his own e xperience the truth tha t ha d been promis e d in S cripture : "I now am assured tha t these things are so: I experience the m in my own breast. Wha t Chris tia nity (cons ide re d as a doctrine ) promis e d is a ccomplis he d in my own soul.”9 This form of re ligious e xpe rience is more an appropriation of s criptura l a uthority tha n the source of a uthority.10 The a ppropria tion of the promis e of S cripture is received by the s piritua l senses. 2. On Spiritual Senses a. Natural and S piritual S enses S piritua l knowle dge is dis ce rne d with s piritua l senses.11 We s le y agreed with Locke tha t “our ideas are not innate , but mus t a ll origina lly come from our senses.” But unlike Locke, he dis tinguis he d be twee n two types ofsenses: natural senses and s piritual senses.12 The s piritua l senses make it possible to discern s piritua l good and evil. It is necessary tha t you have the hearing ear and the seeing e ye ... tha t you have a new class of senses opened in your soul, not depending on organs of flesh and blood, to be "the evidence of things not seen;’ as your bodily senses are of visible things, to be the avenues to the invisible world, to discern s piritua l objects, and to furnis h you with ideas of wha t the outward "eye hath not seen, ne ithe r the ear heard.” And till you have these inte rna l senses, till the eyes of your understanding are opened, you can have no apprehension of divine things, no idea of the m at a ll.13 It is a diminution of our se nsory ca pacity to vie w huma ns as only ha ving senses tha t see a nd he a r e mpirica l evidence. We have la tent a bilitie s built into our created huma nity tha t make it possible to be hold s piritua l e vide nce of "things not seen” (He bre ws 11:1). We s le y offe re d this analogy: “As you ca nnot reason conce rning colours if you 6“The Witne s s ofthe S pirit," pt. 1, B 1:273 - 74, sec. 1.6,7. ’"Ma rks of the Ne w Birth,” B 1:423, sec. 2.3. 8For Wesley’s vis it to Ha lle to meet the son of Augus t He rma n Francke, “whose name is indeed as pre cious ointme nt, Oh may 1 follow him, as he did Chris t,” see JJW2:58; 2:16-17; cf.//U71:116,121,124. 9LCM 2.12, LJW 11:383, ita lics added. iOjwTT' 33. cf LJW 1:172; 3:137; 5:17; 6:129,132,136; S S 2:349. "On We s le ys s piritua l the ory of pe rce ption, see J WO 190-91, 209-10, 293-95, 395-96; B 11:46 - 47. "For We s le ys physical the ory of pe rce ption, see J WO 284-85,475-76,487 - 88 I3EA, B 11:57, sec. 32; cf. J WO 47; B 4:170-71; 1:145 - 46. 113

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

have no na tura l s ight... so you ca nnot reason conce rning s piritua l things ifyou have no s piritua l sight.”14 Eve ryone has some ca pa city for s piritua l sight, but the gospel releases these senses to an incompa ra ble extent. b. The Gre at W ork of God We sle y a rgued tha t "a gre at work of God” was unde r wa y in the re viva l on the basis of “common sense. I know it by the e vide nce of my own eyes a nd ears. I have seen a conside ra ble pa rt of it; a nd I have a bundant te s timony, such as excludes a ll possible doubt, for wha t I have not seen."15 We sle y said, "I do not unde rva lue tra ditiona l e vide nce.... And ye t I ca nnot set it on a le ve l with this ” — the e xpe rience of the inne r witne s s of the S pirit with our s pirits tha t we are childre n of God. “Tra ditiona l evidence is of an e xtre me ly complica te d na ture , necessarily including so ma ny a nd so va rious cons ide rations tha t only me n of s trong a nd cle a r unders ta nding can be sensible of its full force. On the contra ry, how plain a nd s imple is this! And how le ve l to the lowe s t capacity! Is not this the sum? ‘One thing I know: I was blind, but now I see.’ An a rgume nt so plain tha t a pe a s a nt... may feel its force.”16 The gre a t work of God occurring in the re viva l may be grasped by pla in common sense: those who we re blind now see. Wha t do the y see? God’s forgiving love to the m as sinners.

3. On Living without God—The Parable of the Tree Toad The te xt of the homily “On Living without God” is Ephesians 2:12: “Without God in the world” [Homily #130 (1790), B 4:169-76; J #125, VII:349-54]. We sle y de ve lope d a curious , a lmos t comic, me ta phor of a cre a ture re ce iving renewed ca pa city to see a nd hear the world: the plight of the person “without God in the world” is compa re d to the condition ofa ve ry large toad re portedly discovered alive inside the core ofan a ncie nt oak tree. Whe n the tree was s plit open, the frog inside was found sightless. It ha d never had any sensory experience wha teve r ofthe visible world. Wesley took this re pute d e mpirica l re port as a parable for e xpe rie ntia l de priva tion. The sensory de priva tion of the ungodly life is set forth by a na logy with such a cre a ture who inde e d possesses eyes but has no s ight a nd no exercised pra ctice of seeing, who has senses such as he a ring but has re ma ine d tota lly de s titute of any actual sensations. La cking sensation, there is no re flection, me mory, or ima gination.17 The pa ralle l is be twee n this sequestered cre a ture a nd the pe rs on who is living “without God in the world," ha ving no sense of God.18 Like the toa d who was “s hut up from the sun, moon, a nd stars, and from the be a utiful face of nature; inde ed from the 14EA, B 11:55 - 56, sec. 32. 15Le tte r to the a uthor of The Enthusias m ofMe thodis ts and Papists Com par'd (Bishop George Lavington), sec. 32, LJW 11:374; cf. B 2:526 - 31; 3:452 - 53. 16LCM, LJW 11:383 - 84. l7“On Living without God,” B 4:179, sec. 5. 18“On Living without God,” B 4:170, secs. 5-7. 114

EXPERIENCE

whole visible world, as much as if it had no being,’’19 such a person has no experience whatever of the invisible world on which to reflect, no memory or imagination concerning any spiritual reality. Such is the deprived condition of the sensory apparatus in which the spiritual senses have remained entirely undeveloped, as in the practical atheists who have “not the least sight of God, the intellectual Sun, nor any the least attraction toward him,”20 who have never once had "God in all their thoughts.”21 Like the tree toad, the atheist — without God in the world — lives as though the spiritual world has no being. “He has not the least perception of it; not the most distant idea."22 4. The New Birth of the Spiritual Senses

a. The R e viving of S piritual S enses in the Ne w Birth New life in the Spirit is like receiving a new sensory capacity, so that we can see with newly opened eyes that we have “an Advocate with the Father” (1 John 2:1), can hear the voice of one who is the resurrection, fe el the love of God “shed abroad in our hearts.”23 The moment the S pirit strikes our hearts, God breaks the hardness, like the s plitting of the oak tree. All things become new. The sun of righteousness appears, revealing “the light of the knowledge of God’s glory displayed in the face of Christ” (2 Cor. 4:6 NIV).24 Like being born, his eyes now see, his ears now hear. He is able to taste how gracious the Lord is, how "Jesus’ love is far better than wine.”25 He is consumed with the ecstatic joy of enjoying and using his entire sensory apparatus to soak up knowledge and love of God through all available means: reason, nature, and above all the his tory of revelation.26 “This change from spiritua l death to spiritua l life is properly the new birth,”27 which empowers a fundamental change of heart. It is not merely a conceptual shift of ideas. The entire sensory apparatus is awakened to a new way of living and sensing the reality at hand. The new birth and the filling of the Spirit are like the opening up of a new life, while the old, closed-down self is seen by analogy as the ensconced condition of the sinner, withdra wn from the exercise of all capacities of the spiritual senses.28 To respond in fa ith to grace is to become a new creature in Christ.29 We move from the spheres of natural appetite and tedious mora lity to new life in the Spirit, from natural to legal to evangelical life.30 19“On Living without God,” B 4:170, sec. 3. 20“On Living without God,” B 4:171, sec. 8. 21“On Living without God,” B 4:171, sec. 7. 22“On Living without God,” B 4:171, sec. 8; I/U74:60; 7:263. 23“On Living without God,” B 4:173, sec. 11; Rom. 5:5. 24“On Living without God,” B 4:172, sec. 9. 25“On Living without God,” B 4:172-73, secs. 9-11. 26Le tte r to Eliza be th Ritchie , January 17, 1775, LJW 6:136. 27“On Living without God,” B 4:173, sec. 11. 28“On Living without God,” B 4:172-73, secs. 9-11. 29“On Living without God,” B 4:173-74, secs. 12,13. 30“On Living without God,” B 4:174-76, secs. 14-16. 115

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

b. Expe rie ntial Excesses in Baron S we de nborg The re are dangers in ove re mpha s izing e xpe rience. This was ma de cle a r in “Thoughts on the Writings of Ba ron Swedenborg,” in which We s le y dire ctly dis pute d ma ny idios yncra tic ideas of tha t popula r write r tha t we re troubling some in his societies: tha t God ca nnot be a ngry; tha t cre a tion was not ex nihilo; tha t those who die go through three states be fore the y e nte r e ithe r heaven or he ll, providing ins truction a nd dis cipline for re proba te s; tha t angels we re once huma n beings; tha t he ll is me re ly s ymbolic; tha t the re is s till time for re pe nta nce in he ll; tha t S cripture is full of bla sphe my; tha t a ll who be lie ve in the Trinity are possessed of the de vil; tha t the Nicene Cre e d gave “birth to a fa ith which has e ntire ly ove rturne d the Chris tian church.”31 Ail false. S we de nborg e xe mplifie s the da nge r of e xa lting our own pe rs onal e xpe rience above the e xperie nce of the Chris tia n community ove r the ce nturie s . The gra nd e rror of Ba ron S we de nborg was in his re je ction of the triune te a ching in fa vor of his own priva te experience. All of this is best e xpla ined in re la tion to S wede nborg’s own a ccount tha t “in the year 1743 the Lord was pleased to ma nife s t hims e lf to me in a pe rsona l appearance ... to enable me to converse with s pirits a nd angels; and this privile ge I have e njoye d ever since.”32 As if this we re not enough, We sle y wryly added an a ccount of the “ve ry serious Swedish Cle rgyma n,” Mr. Ma the s ius , who re porte d an incide nt whe n Swedenborg became “tota lly de lirious ... ra n into the s tre e t s tark naked, procla imed hims e lf the Messiah, a nd rolled hims e lf in the mire . I suppose he dates from this time his a dmiss ion into the s ocie ty of angels."33 Mode rn Chris tia nity, whe ther libe ral or evangelical, has a ll too ma ny examples of thos e who appeal to priva te e xpe rience e xa lte d above the his torica l experience of believers whos e lives have been tra ns forme d by the gospel.

B. On Enthusiasm 1. The Nature of Enthusiasm The te xt of the homily “The Na ture of Enthus ia s m” is Acts 26:24: “Paul, thou a rt beside thys e lf" [Homily #37 (1750), B 2:44-60; J #37, V:467-79]. “A re ligion of form ... pe rforme d in a decent, re gula r ma nne r” will not provoke othe rs to say, as the y said of Paul, “Much re ligion doth make the e mad.” The re ligion of the he art where one is “a live to God, a nd dead to a ll things he re be low” may prompt othe rs to pass the sentence: “Thou a rt beside thyself.”34 Enthus ias m is a te rm s ome time s used to re fe r e ithe r to a divine impuls e tha t for

31“Thoughts on the Writings of Ba ron Swe de nborg,") XIIL429. 32“Thoughts on the Writings of Ba ron Swedenborg,” J XIII:425. 33“Thoughts on the Writings of Ba ron Swedenborg,” J XIII:426. ^“The Na ture of Enthusiasm,” B 2:46, s e c.l; Rom. 6:11; Acts 26:24. 116

EXPERIENCE

the moment suspends reason and sense,35 or to an uncommon a bility in which the natural faculties are elevated to a higher degree than normal.36 In Wesley’s day, enthusiasm was more popularly viewed as a disorder of the mind that shuts the eyes of understanding, greatly hindering the exercise of reason. It was regarded as a species of madness in which one draws right conclusions from wrong premises.37 While true religion manifests the s pirit of a sound mind, enthusiasm was defined by Wesley as “a religious madness arising from some falsely imagined influence or inspiration of God; at least, from imputing something to God which ought not to be imputed to him, or expecting something from God which ought not to be expected from him.”38 Enthusiasm talks loosely as if God were acting directly within the self without any correctives of s criptura lly informe d reasoning.39 Enthusiasts “undervalue the experience of almost every one in comparison” with their own.40 2. Types of Enthusiasm

Wesley provided examples of the dangers of enthusiasm. He spoke of those who imagine they have grace, which they have not, so as to result in pride, excessive sentimentality, and distance from the mind of Christ. Wesley also cautioned those who imagine they are champions of fa ith but produce no fruits:41 "Ah, poor self-deceivers! Christians ye are not. But you are enthusiasts in an high degree. Physicians, heal yourselves. But firs t know your disease: your whole life is enthusiasm, as being all suitable to your imagination.”42 He especially warned Thomas Maxfie ld against "overvaluing feelings and inward impressions ... and undervaluing reason, knowledge, and wisdom in general."43 Among other enthusiasts found in revival circles are "those who imagine they have such gifts from God as they have not” and feel they are "directed by the Spirit when they are not.” Some think they can defy laws of nature or prophesy the literal future, or they feel that God is dictating the very words they say when they are carrying out their own private interests. Wesley said to beware of mediums, sorcerers, fortune -te lle rs, and spurious 35“The Na ture of Enthusiasm,” B 2:48, sec. 8. ^“The Na ture of Enthusiasm,” B 2:49, sec. 9. 37“The Na ture of Enthusiasm,” B 2:49, secs. 10-11; JJW 2:130; B 1:267 - 68; 1:269-70; 2:44-60; 2:587 - 88; FA, B 11:96 - 98; cf. 11:354 - 56,361 - 74,382 - 83; 468 - 81,491 - 95; LJW 2:204 - 6; CH 7:199. 38“The Na ture of Enthusiasm,” B 2:50, sec. 12. 39Ans wer to Thoma s Church, J VIII:405-13; Z./W72:204-11,241 -42. ■^Letter to Mrs . Ryan, June 28, 1766, LJW 5:17-18. Cf. We sle ys comme nts on Montanus , B 1:76, 268; 2:461, 555; LJW 2:357, 360; 4:133, 327-29, 336. 41“The Na ture of Enthusiasm,” B 2:50-52, secs. 13-17. 42“The Na ture of Enthusiasm,” B 2:52, sec. 17. 43Le tte r to Thoma s Ma xfield, Nove mbe r 2,1762, LJW 4:193. 117

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

teachers who ima gine the y are re ce iving pa rticula r dire ctions from God e ve n in the mos t trifling circums ta nce s of life. He also said to be ware of thos e who ne gle ct the means of grace in common wors hip. The re are those e nthusia sts “who think the y a tta in the e nd without using the means, by the imme dia te powe r of God.” Some ima gine the y ca n unde rs ta nd S cripture without s tudying it. The y are ofte n found speaking in public without any pre me dita tion.44 Finally, We s le y wa rned thos e e nthusiasts who tre a t na tura l effects as if the y are acts of spe cia l provide nce . Such pe ople ofte n ignore the multila ye re d aspect of the Chris tia n doctrine of general providence available to a ll.45 The re me dy: God has give n believers reason as a guide . Chris tians mus t never exclude the quie t assistance of the Holy S pirit to a id the unde rs ta nding. The y mus t pra y for the S pirit to illumine the ir pe rce ption of the will of God by the powe r of the S pirit.46 a. The Bitte r Fruits ofEm otional Exce s s Believers are ca lle d to e xa mine the ir own live s for signs of excess.47 Enthus ia s m breeds pride and s e lf-dece ption. It ma y block persons from the a ctua l grace of God a nd from seeking the good counsel of fa ithful frie nds . The re is no ne e d to ha s tily e mploy the vola tile word e nthusiasm. We do fa r be tte r by s imply s tudying ca refully the te mpta tions to s e lf-de ce ption.48 “Think before you speak.” Do not ra s hly label othe rs unfa irly as e nthus ia sts .49 Apply "the plain S cripture rule , with the he lp of e xpe rie nce a nd reason, a nd the ordina ry assistance of the S pirit of God” to dis ce rn the will of God, us ing the "ordina ry channels of his grace,”50 e xpecting to grow da ily in pure a nd holy re ligion, so as to be de s e rving of the charge of e nthus ia sm in a pos itive sense of fa ithful zeal, and a voiding the s ort of e nthus ia s m tha t is "me re ly nomina l Chris tia nity.”51 The “ordina ry channels of grace” are pra ying, re a ding S cripture , a nd a ttending public wors hip, e spe cia lly re ce iving Holy Communion. I will discuss these late r in conne ction with the homily on “The Me a ns of Grace.” b. W he the r Inward Fe e lings Confirm S aving Faith according to S cripture In “A Le tte r to Dr. [Thoma s ] Ruthe rforth," Regius P rofe s s or of Divinity at Ca mbridge , Ma rch 28, 1768 [B 9:373-88; J XIV:347-59; LJW 5:357-69], Wesley 44“The Na ture of Enthusiasm,” B 2:56, sec. 27; PACP,) Xl:429-30. 45“The Na ture of Enthusiasm,” B 2:56, sec. 28. ■““The Na ture of Enthusiasm,” B 2:52 - 56, secs. 18 - 26. 47Le tte r to Bishop Wa rburton, LJW 4:358 - 59. 48Wesley hims elf ha d been charged with “enthusiasm”; see 39:114 - 21,182 - 83,196 - 213, 228 - 29, 304 - 6. 49“The Na ture of Enthusiasm,” B 2:59, sec. 39. ““The Na ture of Enthusiasm,” B 2:59, secs. 38 - 39. 51“The Na ture of Enthusiasm,” B 2:60, sec. 39.

118

EXPERIENCE

replied to Anglican charges that Methodists reject the aid of human learning and exaggerate inward feelings and divine assurances. Wesley argued that his sentiments on Christian experience during the "last thirty years” (1738-68) had been consistent, with “few, if any, real contradictions,” though there may have been “some seeming contradictions, especially considering I was answering so many different objectors.”52 This was Wesleys position: (1) "Few, but very few, Christians have an assurance from God of everlasting salvation,” or the "plerophory, or full assurance of hope.” (2) "More have such an assurance of being now in the favour of God as excludes all doubt and fear." (3) “A consciousness of being in the favour of God... is the common privilege of Christians.” "Yet I do not a ffirm, there are no exceptions to this general rule. Possibly some may be in the favour of God, and yet go mourning.”53 Wesley summarized for Dr. Ruthe rforth the position he had held consistently for "above these forty years” (at least since 1728) on the role of “inward feelings”54 in religious knowledge: "(1). The fruit of (the S pirit’s] ordinary influences are love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, meekness. (2). Whoever has these, inwardly feels them. And if he understands his Bible, he discerns from whence they come. Observe, what he inwardly feels is these fruits themselves-, whence they come he learns from the Bible.”55 "By ‘feeling’ I mean being inwardly conscious of.”56 "I look upon some of these bodily symptoms [in reference to fits and tears] to have been preternatural or diabolical, and others to have been effects which in some circumstances naturally followed from the strong and sudden emotions of mind... springing from gracious influences.”57 Wesley appealed to article 17 of the Anglican Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion, which teaches that "godly persons fe e l in themselves the working of the S pirit of Christ, mortifying the works of the flesh ... and drawing up their mind to high and heavenly things.”58 3. How Scripture Corrects Experience

The scriptura l rule is not reversed by alleged private revelations. In Wesley’s Letter to a Person Lately Joined with the People called Quakers,59 1748, he stated his objection to the teaching of the premier Quaker theologian Robert Barclay that private revelations “are not to be subjected to the examination of the Scriptures,” and that "the Scriptures are not the principal ground of all truth,” but are secondary 52Le tte r to Dr. Ruthe rforth, LJW 1.3,9:375. 53Le tte r to Dr. Ruthe rforth, LJW 1.4, 9:375 - 76. 54Cf. B 11:399,492; EA, B 11:35; LJW 4:359; 6:18. 55Le tte r to Dr. Ruthe rforth, LJW 9:381, sec. 3.1, ita lics added. “FA, pt.l,J V:2,B 11:139 - 40. 57Le tte r to Dr. Ruthe rforth, LJW 9:387, sec. 3.12. 58Art. 17, XXXIX; DS WT117, ita lics added; cf. B 9:384. “For furthe r reference to Qua kers , see LJW 2:116-28; 4:123; B 2:265; 3:257, 260, 589; FA, B 11:171-72, 254 - 60,290. 779

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

a nd "s ubordina te to the S pirit."60 Rather, "the S cripture s are the rule whe re by [the S pirit] leads us into a ll truth. The refore , only ta lk good English: ca ll the S pirit our guide , which s ignifie s a n intellige nt be ing, a nd the S cripture s our rule , which s ignifies s ome thing used by an inte llige nt being.”61 The S cripture s are the me a s uring rod for e xa mining all, re a l or supposed, re ve la tions . The inordina te focus on priva te re ve la tion ma y te mpt toward "fla t jus tifica tion by works,"62 towa rd a ntipathy towa rd re a s oning, towa rd a form of wors hip tha t is re duced to quietis m, towa rd ne gle ct of the s inging of psalms, toward the comple te e limina tion of vis ible signs in ba ptis m a nd the Lord’s Supper, towa rd ordination without the la ying on of hands, toward prohibitions against s wea ring be fore magistra te s, a nd towa rd any form of kne eling or bowing. Thos e who have “an hone st he art but a weak he a d” are called to a ba ndon such trifle s , a nd re turn to “s piritua l, ra tiona l, s criptural re ligion.”63

Further Reading on Experience Bence, Clarence L. “Experimental Religion." PM 56, no. 1 (1980): 50-51. Brown, Robert. John Wesley's Theology: The Principle of Its Vitality and Its Progressive S tages ofDevelopment. London: Jackson, Wa lford and Hodder, 1865. Dieter, Me lvin. “John Wesley and Creative Synthesis.” AS 39, no. 3 (1984): 3-7. Dreyer, Frederick. “Faith and Experience in the Thought of John Wesley.” AHR 88, no. 1 (1983): 12-30. Garrison, R. Benjamin. "Vita l Inte ra ction: Scripture and Experience.” RL 25 (1956): 563-73. Gunter, W. Steven. Chap. 1, “Enthusiasm”; chap. 5, “Quest for Ce rtainty”; chap. 9, “John Wesley as Imprope r Enthusiast”; and chap. 10, “More Heat Tha n Light.” In The Limits

ofDivine Love: John Wesleys Response to Antinom ianis m and Enthusiasm. Nashville: Kingswood, Abingdon, 1989. Langford, Thomas. Practical Divinity: Theology in the Wesleyan Tradition. Nashville: Abingdon, 1982. Linds trom, Harald. “Experience in Wesley s Theology.” In Wesley and S anctification. Nashville: Abingdon, 1946. Monk, Robert C. “Experience.” In John Wesley: His Puritan Heritage, 70ff. Nashville: Abingdon, 1966. Starkey, Lycurgus. “Freedom of the Holy S pirit and Authority of Chris tia n Faith.” In The Work of the Holy S pirit, 140ff.; also 15ff. Nashville: Abingdon, 1962. Willia ms , Colin. “Authority and Experience.” In John Wesley's Theology Today, 23ff. Nashville: Abingdon, 1960.

“A Le tte r to a Person Lately Joined with the People ca lle d Quakers, J X:178, sec. 3. 61 Ibid., ita lics added. 62A Le tte r to a Person Lately Joined with the People ca lle d Quakers, J X:179, sec. 7. 63A Le tte r to a Person Lately Joined with the People ca lle d Quakers, J X:187, sec. 15. 120

EXPERIENCE

C. The Catholic Spirit 1. The Premise of Tolerance Ca n Chris tians be of one he art e ve n if the y have diffe ring opinions? Wesley preached a homily on "The Ca tholic S pirit” to a ns we r this ques tion. a. A R ight He art The te xt of the homily "The Ca tholic S pirit” is 2 Kings 10:15: "Is your he art right?” [Homily #39 (1749), B 2:79-96; J #34, V:492-504; J WO 91ff.]. The me mora ble te xt for the homily on the ca tholic s pirit is “If your he art is as my he a rt, the n give me your ha nd” (2 Kings 10:15, We s le ys paraphrase). The te xt refers to the me e ting be twee n the ruthles s Jehu a nd the re ligious fa na tic Jehonadab. Sensing tha t Jehonadab might be a va lua ble asset, Jehu asked, "Are you in accord with me, as I a m with you?” Whe n Jehonadab64 answered, "I am,” Jehu re plie d, "If so ... give me your ha nd” (2 Kings 10:15 NIV). We sle y was conce rne d here not with Jehu’s mixe d motive s but with the form of re concilia tion of human e stra nge me nt tha t is due not to inte lle ctua l agreement but to goodwill. He ca lle d it a "right heart.” The ma jor thesis is tha t we m ay be of one he art even though not of one opinion.65 Huma n ba rrie rs are ove rcome by the love of God a nd huma nity, which reaches be yond huma n a ntipa thie s and cultura l differences. b. Honoring Le gitim ate Fre e dom to Hold Dive rs e Opinions Howe ve r dis s imila r our cultura l, mora l, or re ligious opinions may be, persons of goodwill ma y be come unite d by grace in trus ting a ffe ction. Partisan dis puta tion us ua lly fa ils to grasp how he a rts can be knit toge the r de spite conce ptua l, cultural, political, a nd e conomic differences. Persons holding dive rge nt opinions and shaped by diffe re nt ge ne ra tions of thinking a nd wors hip ma y s till be joine d in love, wa rmth, a nd mutua l a ffe ction. We s le y’s te a ching on this te xt offe rs a de cis ive clue to the a ffectiona te te mpera me nt of the Me thodis t move me nt.66 As inve te ra te sinners , we are fore ve r prone to s horts ighte dne s s in the forma tion of our opinions . The knowing process is shaped by our s ocia l loca tion, our wa y of looking at the world from a highly pa rticula r his torica l a nd class status. Thinking emerges always out of highly circums ta ntia l a nd culture -s pe cific conte xts . This is e nde mic to the wa y a ll huma ns think: always out of a s pe cific cultura l loca tion. Combine this vie wpoint with our pride , a nd it re s ults in e goce ntric a nd e thnoce ntric his tory. None of us can know with full adequacy jus t how much our social pre judice s shape our pre se nt vis ion. Conce ptua l a nd s ocia l diffe re nce s in re ligion are an una voidable consequence of our finitude, dullne ss of huma n unde rsta nding, a nd lack of empathy. ^J e hona da b was the biblica l type of one who had vowe d to live always in te nts away from a corrupt civiliza tion, a bsta in from wine and s trong drink, a nd s truggle against idola try. S S 1:128. 6 W 3:178 - 80; B 9:31 - 34,125 - 26. 254 - 55,285 - 86; LJW 2:110. ^LJW 3:35, 180-83. 121

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

Wesley e xhibite d an unre mitting resistance to pe tty pre judice and social bias. He was aware tha t Chris tia n te a ching is always expressed through cha nging, va ria ble s ocia l me morie s . By "opinions " We s le y me a nt ideas none s s e ntia l for Chris tia n te a ching. These ideas ofte n focus on a ncilla ry ma tte rs (adiaphora) ne ithe r comma nde d nor forbidde n by S cripture tha t could be ma tte rs of fre e inte rpre tation without s tra ining the limits of ge nuine Chris tia nity.67 Dis cipline d believers honor the le gitima te fre e dom of fe llow Chris tia ns to hold diverse opinions. From his mothe r, We sle y had inherite d a P urita n sense of dis cipline . From his father, he ha d inherite d an e nduring Anglica n loya lty to the a ncie nt Chris tian consensus of fa ith. Howe ve r de e ply committe d to classic Chris tia n essentials,68 John We s le y resisted the notion tha t the y could be ca pture d in a s ingle una lte ra ble form of language. c. Love , the Core of True R e ligion The essential core of true re ligion is "as I have love d you, so you mus t love one a nother” (John 13:34 NIV)69 "This is love: not tha t we love d God, but tha t he loved us a nd sent his Son as an a toning s a crifice for our sins” (1 John 4:10 NIV).70 "True re ligion is right te mpe rs towa rd God a nd ma n. It is, in two words, gra titude and be nevolence : gra titude to our Cre ator a nd s upreme Be ne factor, a nd be ne vole nce to our fe llow creatures. In other words, it is loving God with a ll our he a rt, and our ne ighbor as ourselves.”71 The re re ma in "grand, general hindra nce s ” to the practice of such love: “We can’t a ll think a like”; hence, we do not a ll wa lk a like .72 "So long as ‘we know’ but ‘in part,’ a ll of us ‘will not see things alike,’ ” as an "una voida ble consequence of the present weakness a nd shortne ss of huma n unde rs ta nding.”73 It is a re gre tta ble cha ra cte ris tic of huma n finitude tha t e ve ry ego "ne ce ssa rily believes tha t e ve ry pa rticula r opinion which he holds is true (for to believe any opinion is not true is the same thing as not to hold it).”74 Egotis m intrude s into re ligion and into the re la tion of re ligious groups with othe rs : “A diffe re nce in opinions or mode s of wors hip ma y pre ve nt an e ntire e xte rnal union, ye t ne e d it pre ve nt our union in a ffe ction?”75 We s le y’s golden rule of tolera nce states, “Eve ry wis e ma n the re fore will a llow 67 W Q 161. I.s Stated cle a rly in “The Wa y to the Kingdom," sec. 1.6; a nd his “A Le tte r to a Roma n Ca tholic,” 1749. For We sle y’s distinction between opinion and essential (or funda me nta l) Chris tia n teaching, see LJW 2:110; 4:297; 5:224; 7:216; 8:47; B 1:175, 508; 2:374-76; 3:588; 4:146; J WO 77-78, 99-100; JJW 3:178 - 80; B 9:31 - 34, 125 - 26, 254 - 55, 285 - 86. 69Wesley also spoke of true re ligion as ha ving the mind ofChris t (B 9:527) and, s imila rly, the restoration ofthe image of God in huma nity (B 9:255). 70B 1:530; 3:389,313,448, 585-86; 4:57, 66-67; 9:502. 71“The Unity of the Divine Being,” sec. 16; cf. EA sec. 1.11-45. 72“The Ca tholic S pirit," B 1:82, proe m 3. 73“The Ca tholic Spirit,” B 1:83, sec. 1.3. 74“The Ca tholic Spirit,” B 1:83-84, sec. 1.4. 75“The Ca tholic Spirit,” B 1:82, sec. 1.4. 122

EXPERIENCE

othe rs the same libe rty of thinking which he desires the y s hould a llow him”76 We do we ll to hold opinions in good conscie nce but not impos e the m unila tera lly on one a nother as if to make e ve ry minor opinion a te s t case of re ligious principle .77 d. R e s pe ctfor Cons cie nce We s le y was a ppe a ling to the fre e dom to hold opinions , even pe culia r ones, tha t do not dis lodge the he art of Chris tia n te a ching. It is possible to e mbra ce a nothe r a ffe ctiona te ly who has a diffe re nt persuasion on ma tte rs not essential to saving fa ith. Amid the multiplicity of s e ntime nts a nd inclina tions , the re re ma ins room for the address of conscience, for each one fina lly mus t s ta nd be fore God.78 No one s hould seek to rule the conscience ofa nothe r. I mus t not impos e on your conscience wha t my conscience is a tte s ting to me. Better, ra the r, to seek inwardly a he art of s ince re ly pe nite nt fa ith, le aving plenty of room for ca ndid cons ulta tion, the fre e interplay of ideas, a nd a tole rance for a lte rna tive pathways. “Everyone mus t follow the dicta te s of his own conscience in s implicity a nd godly s ince rity ... the n a ct a ccording to the best light he has.”79 “1 dare not the re fore pre s ume to impos e my mode of wors hip on any other. 1 be lie ve it is truly primitive a nd a pos tolica l. But my be lie f is no rule for another.”80 From this there follows a s pirit of proportiona l tole ra nce tha t has become deeply writte n into the Wesleyan e va nge lica l ethos. On ma tte rs of opinion, “we think and le t think.”81 This conviction he lped e s tablis h a nd re fine the Anglica n tra dition of tolera tion and the Re forma tion a chie ve ment of "the right of priva te judgme nt.”82 It took special form in the Evangelical Revival, whe re s ince rity of the he art became jus t as highly va lue d as de ta ile d confessiona l agreement. The bands a nd societies came toge the r on the basis not of s trict doctrina l concurre nce but of a ctive repentance. 2. Challenging Latitudinarianism a. Think and Le t Think Doe s Not Im ply Indiffe re nce to Doctrine and W ors hip The ca tholic s pirit mus t not be confus e d e ithe r with la titudina ria nis m on the one ha nd or pa rtis an bigotry on the othe r. Wesley was conce rne d a bout va lid a rgume nt a nd de fens ible exegesis conce rning cla s s ic conse ns ua l te a ching, which he ca lle d the old ca tholic fa ith, but he was less inte nt upon s pe cific doctrina l de finition of minutia e tha t do not arise from the he art of fa ith.83 This does not imply tha t a nything goes, or tha t doctrina l truth is diminis hed in 76"The Ca tholic Spirit,” B 1:84, sec. 1.6. 7W 7:389. 78EA 11 -19; J VIII:6 - 8,124-28, 206 - 7. 79“The Ca tholic S pirit," B 1:85, sec. 1.9; 2 Cor. 1:2; cf. Le tte r to the Rev. Mr. Potter, Nove mbe r 4, 1758, J IX:88 - 89. 80“ The Ca tholic S pirit," B 1:86, sec. 1.11. 81B 2:59, 341, 376; 4:145; //W77:389. 82“The Ca tholic S pirit” B 1:86, sec. 1.10; cf. J V:136. 83Le tte r to Ada m Clarke, September 10, 1756, J XIII:213 — 15. 123

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

importa nce . We s le y s trongly re siste d the indiffe re ntis m tha t he te rmed “speculative la titudina rianism" — an indiffe rence to a ll opinions .84 He ca lle d it “the spa wn of he ll, not the offs pring of heaven.” It re s ults in “be ing ‘drive n to a nd from, and tossed a bout with e ve ry wind of doctrine .’ ” Tha t is “a great curse, not a blessing; a n irre concila ble enemy, not a frie nd to true Ca tholicis m. A ma n of a truly ca tholic s pirit has not now his re ligion to seek. He is fixe d as the sun in his judgment conce rning the ma in branches of Chris tia n doctrine ,” though “always re a dy to he a r a nd we igh wha ts oe ve r can be offe re d against his principle s .” We s le y said thos e who think the y have a ca tholic s pirit ma y have only “a muddy unde rs ta nding; because your mind is a ll in a mist; because you have no se ttle d, cons is te nt principle s , but are for jumbling a ll opinions toge the r.... Go firs t a nd le arn the firs t elements of the gospel of Chris t, a nd the n sha ll you le a rn to be of a truly ca tholic s pirit.”85 Nor is the ca tholic s pirit a practical la titudina ria nis m tha t would be come indiffe re nt to public wors hip and the observance of common prayer.86 The Anglica n la titudina ria ns appealed to an age we a ry of re ligious controve rsy. While re ma ining in the Church of Engla nd, the y a ttache d minima l importa nce to dis tinct doctrina l de finition, s a cra me nta l pra ctice, a nd church dis cipline , appealing to re a son a nd tole ra tion, a nd promoting only ire nic plura lis m. The y formula te d Chris tia n te a ching always in a mbiguous and minima lis t te rms , a vie w tha t Wesley s ha rply resisted. b. How the S ince rity of the Catholic He art Is Te s ted The re is a brillia nt re ve rsa l of mome ntum in the homily “The Ca tholic S pirit” in s e ction 1, s ubs e ctions 12-18. In counte ring la titudina ria nis m, it is wis e to te s t the s ince rity of the ca tholic he a rt. Wes le y propos e d a series of que s tions asking whe ther one has be come pe rs ona lly a ccounta ble to the core of Chris tia n teaching. P ivota l to the s tructure of the homily is this reversal. It cons is ts of fifty-thre e que s tions to be put s obe rly not to the head but to the he a rt. How do I assess whe the r “my he art is as your he art”? Ins te a d of a confessional a pproa ch tha t would say, “He re are confe s s iona l de finitions on which we mus t agree,” Wesley ca lmly addressed the he a re r with this powe rful series of highly pe rsonal ques tions , tre a ting the uprighte d he art as a ma tte r of inte ns e pe rs onal selfe xa mina tion. This is a diffe re nt a pproa ch to the ologica l truth-te lling tha n is typica l in tra ditiona l confes s iona lis m. Personal hone sty is here pa ra mount. Wha t ma tte rs mos t is the state of the he art in the presence of God. These s e lf-e xa mina tion que s tions have a triune s tructure and sequence: the firs t series of issues for s e lf-a ppra is a l deals with God the Father, the second with Chris t the Savior, a nd the third with the work of the Holy S pirit. Que s tions are raised from one’s own he art to one ’s own he a rt. First, conce rning God the Father, each pe rs on is to ask inwa rdly: Do I experience 84B 2:92 - 93; 4:312; J WO 101-2, 306. 85“The Ca tholic Spirit,” B 1:83, sec. 3.1, ita lics added. 86“The Ca tholic Spirit,” B 1:92, sec. 3.1. 124

EXPERIENCE

God as eternal? Incompa rably just? Me rciful? 87 Have I pe rs ona lly a ppropria te d the Chris tia n te a ching of the a ttribute s of God? Second, conce rning God the Son, a m I jus tifie d by fa ith in his a toning a ction on the cross, or do I e xpe ct my own works to jus tify me?88 Third, conce rning God the S pirit, a m I re ce ptive to God’s own working to bring jus tifying grace to a full pe rsona l expression of ma turity? 89 Ha ving our he arts right be fore God is not s imply an e motive ma tte r tha t can brus h aside s criptural doctrine , but it re quire s pressing these que s tions with inwa rd inte ns ity a nd honesty. We sle y was a rguing for doctrina l purity ma nife s te d in "ca tholic love,” not for doctrina l plura lis m.90 It is by a ll persons a ns we ring inwa rdly a cascade of fifty-thre e profoundly doctrina l a nd pe rsona l que s tions tha t the y come to dis cove r whe the r the ir he arts are right with God a nd rightly pre pare d for the openness of fa ith a ctive in love. Each que s tion is asked in God’s presence as a ttes te d by the inne r court of conscience. Each asks whe the r a pe rson’s conscience attests a serious, probing s e lf-a ppra is al91 Some have ta ke n We s le y’s the me "If your he art is as my he a rt, the n give me your hand,” a nd his phrase "Think a nd le t think,”92 a nd turne d the m into an appeal for a bs olute tole rance . The y do we ll to ponde r one by one these fifty-thre e test questions for the ca tholic he a rt. c. An Invitation to a True and Ge ne rous Catholicity If your he a rt, as de fined a fte r this exercise in s e lf-e xa mina tion, is right with God, the n e xte nd to me your hand. This is an invita tion to fe llows hip based not on mora l rule s or opinions but on inwa rd s e lf-e xamination of the rightne s s of one’s he art in the presence of God.93 If your he art is as my he a rt, we are invite d by the S pirit to be joine d toge the r into a bonde d s ociety of persons whose lives are committe d to ra dica l a ccountability to God. Though some read the ca tholic s pirit as if to imply tha t doctrina l sta ndards 94 are minimize d, or tha t there are fe w or no ins ignifica nt confessiona l bounda rie s in this life tha t we share with God in Chris t, this is ha rdly the inte ntion of We s le y’s te xt. By “Give me your hand,” “I mean, firs t, love me ” with a "ve ry te nde r affection," as if "clos e r tha n a brother,” because it comes from be ing a “compa nion in the kingdom.” "Love me with the love tha t ‘is not provoke d’ e ithe r a t my follie s or infirmitie s , or even a t my a cting (if it s hould s ome time s so appear to thee) not a ccording to the will of God. Love me so as to ‘think no e vil’ of me.” Love me with “the love tha t ‘cove reth a ll things ,’ ” tha t" ‘be lieve th a ll things ,’ tha t is always willing to think the best, 87“The Ca tholic Spirit,” B 1:87, sec. 1.12. 88“The Ca tholic Spirit,” B 1:87, sec. 1.13. 89“The Ca tholic Spirit,” B 1:88-89, sec. 1.14-18. 90“The Ca tholic S pirit,” B 1:88-89, sec. 1.14-18; Hym ns and S piritual S ongs, 21st ed., 1777, pref., J XIV:338-39. 91 Minute s , Ma y 13,1746, J VlII:288-89. 92B 2:59, 341, 376; 4:145; //W7:389. 93“The Ca tholic Spirit,” B 1:89, sec. 2.1. 94For a fulle r discussion of Wesleyan doctrina l standards, see DS W T; cf. JJW 4:32; 8:70 - 71. 125

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

to put the fa ire s t cons truction on a ll my words a nd actions,” hoping "to the end tha t wha te ve r is amiss will, by the grace of God, be corre cte d.”95 Thos e whose he arts are in a ccord will s how the ir care by inte rce ding for each othe r, hoping tha t s hortcomings ma y be a me nded to be tte r fulfill God’s will. By this means be lieve rs s tir each other to good works , to acts of mercy, a nd to loving not in word only but in de e d a nd truth.96 Such is the ca tholic s pirit, not a s pirit tha t seeks firs t to get a gre e ment on forma l confessions, but unde r the rule of S cripture , seeks to reach out in dia logue ,97 honoring good conscience, fa ith, a nd fe rve nt inte rce ssion for the pa rtne r in dialogue. "With ope n arms the world embrace, but cleave to those who cleave to thee.”98

3. To a Roman Catholic—An Irenic Letter In "A Le tte r to a Roma n Ca tholic," We s le y gives us a model of wha t is me a nt by the ca tholic s pirit. We sle y ha d ofte n been accused of be ing a pa pis t by thos e who inaccura te ly vie wed his doctrine of s a nctification as e choing ce rta in phrases in the Council of Tre nt.99 He shared typica l Anglica n he s ita tions a bout Rome a nd a nxie ties a bout Roma n abuses. Yet he became aware during his Iris h vis its of 1747 and following tha t Ca tholics s howe d up fre que ntly in Me thodis t pre a ching services a nd we re eager to hear him. Tha t was the conte xt of this le tte r. Ca tholics a nd P rotes ta nts s hould not be “looking on the other as monsters.”100 He ca lle d for "a llowing both sides to re ta in our own opinions ” for “the s ofte ning [of] our he arts towa rd each other." "I do not suppose tha t a ll the bitte rne s s is on your side. I know there is too much on our side also. So much tha t I fe a r ma ny P rote s tants (s o-ca lle d) will be a ngry a t me, too, for writing to you,” thinking you deserve no spe cia l tre a tment. “But I think you do ... deserve the te nde ris t re ga rd I ca n show, we re it only be ca us e... the Son of God has bought you a nd me with his own blood.”101 Ca tholics we re we lcome d into the pre a ching events of the e va nge lica l re viva l in Ire la nd. "I a m not pe rs ua ding you to leave or change your re ligion, but to follow a fte r tha t fe a r and love of God without which a ll re ligion is vain.”102 “A true Protesta nt believes in God” a nd "loves his ne ighbor (tha t is, e ve ry ma n, frie nd or enemy, good or bad) as hims e lf, as he loves his own soul, as Chris t love d us .... This , and this a lone , is the old re ligion. This is true primitive Chris tia nity. O whe n ... shall it be found both in us and you?”103 "The n if we ca nnot as ye t think alike in a ll things , 95“The Catholic Spirit," B 1:90-91, sec. 2.3,4. %“The Catholic Spirit," B 1:91, sec. 2.5-7. 97 W 3:180. 98“Catholic Love,” P WVL71-72. "Cf. LJW 4:140; 6:371; 7:7; JJW 2:469; 3:409. 100“A Letter to a Roman Catholic,” J X:80, sec. 1, JWO 492. 101“A Letter to a Roman Catholic," JWO 493-94, secs. 3-4. 102“A Letter to a Roman Catholic," JWO 496, sec. 13. 103“A Letter to a Roman Catholic," JWO 498, sec. 14. 126

EXPERIENCE

a t least we ma y love alike .... Le t us resolve, firs t, not to hurt one a nothe r..se condly ... to speak nothing ha rsh or unkind of each othe r. The sure way to a void this is to say a ll the good we can, both of and to one a nothe r...; thirdly, resolve to ha rbour no unkind thought, no unfrie ndly te mpe r towa rds each othe r...; fourthly, e nde a vour to he lp each other on in wha te ve r we are agreed leads to the Kingdom.”104

D. A Caution against Bigotry The te xt of the homily "A Ca ution a ga inst Bigotry” is Ma rk 9:38: "We saw one casting out de vils in thy na me” [Homily #38 (1750), B 2.61-78;J #38, V:479-92].

1. Why Bigotry Is an Offense against the Catholic Spirit a. De m onic Divis ions We sle y vividly spoke of a de monic e le ment in huma n divis ions a nd tendencies to unnecessary socia l conflict. He wrote with unne rving re a lis m a bout the e mbitte re d a dve rs ary’s e fforts to divide huma n beings into e ne my camps. Who but the De vil could so e njoy ne e dling, segregating, dis joining, and a liena ting? The ca tholic s pirit wa nts to reach out, me nd, tra ns ce nd diffe re nce , include , we lcome , a nd embrace. Its oppos ite , the s pirit of bigotry, is divis ive , exclusive, and s e lf-righte ous . 105 The de monic e le me nt is promine ntly fe a ture d in S cripture . It mus t not be forgotte n in the e va nge lica l re viva l. We sley was ke e nly aware of the ingra ine d e goce ntricity tha t pervades a ll huma n culture s . He hims e lf ha d been through culture s hock, ha ving s pe nt two years106 in frontie r Ame rica on the inte rfa ce be twe e n minis trie s to Cre e k India ns and colonia l settlers. He kne w s ome thing a bout cros s -cultura l dia logue . Wesley beheld bigotry in every s ocie ty he knew. He had an especially vivid me mory of the slave tra de in Savannah, Ge orgia , a nd of the cus tom of Na tive Ame rica ns in roa s ting the ir pris oners to death. 107 He was dee ply conce rne d a bout the genocides of his time . He s pe cifica lly spoke of the e xte rmina tion of whole na tions not only by pagans a nd Mus lims but by s upposedly Chris tia n Spanish, Dutch, a nd English. He ha d a cros s -cultura l conce ption of bigotry. He was de eply a wa re tha t it pe rva de d the Englis h a nd Ame rica n cultures in which he hims e lf ha d ministe re d. S urve ying the re ca lcitrance of his own society, We s le y cite d a long lis t of the ways in which bigotry ha d conta minate d his own na tiona l e nvironme nt.108 104“A Le tte r to a Roman Ca tholic," J WO 496 - 99, secs. 13-17. For othe r references to Roman Ca tholic teaching, see B 1:77-79, 87,128-29, 508; 2:292,374-75, 581; 3:450 - 51. 105“A Ca ution against Bigotry,” B 1:64, sec. 1.2; cf. LJW 1:200; 2:300; 4:367. i°6February 5, 1736-De ce mbe r 22,1737. 107“A Ca ution against Bigotry," B 1:67, sec. 1.9. 108“A Ca ution against Bigotry," B 1:67, sec. 1.10. 127

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

b. The Re proofofPre judice We s le y ma de an a rde nt ple a for re conciling na rrowly e mbitte re d pa rtis ans hips .109 Bigots are de fine d as those who have too s trong an a tta chme nt to or fondness of the ir own pa rty, opinion, church, race, or re ligion.110 Bigotry is excessive pa rtis a ns hip due to an inordina te sense of the rightnes s of our own causes a nd inte res ts . It is based on too sha rp a dis tinction be twe e n us a nd the m, which te mpts cons ta ntly towa rd pre judice.111 It is an inve te ra te , at time s diabolica l, proneness to na rrow pa rtia lity. The bigot vie ws the othe r pa rty in the wors e light conce iva ble ,112 ofte n as an e xte ns ion of supposed “humor.” The proble m of bigotry a mong the fa ithful is tha t it unde rmine s love and unity in the body of Chris t. The bigot hesitates to a dmit tha t othe rs who have wide ly diffe re nt opinions could also have the same fa ith and be re cipie nts of the same S pirit. Thus bigotry is seen as an offense against the ca tholic s pirit.113 The te xt for this homily is the episode in which the dis ciple s discove re d a ma n "driving out de mons in your na me a nd we told him to stop, because he was not one of us” (Ma rk 9:38 NIV). The diffe rence be twee n "us” a nd "the m” becomes easily exaggerated. In this case, the “us” re ferre d to one who was a be lie ver but not ye t a mong the core of Jesus’ disciple s. This be lie ve r was a cting in Jesus’ na me a nd a ccomplis hing wha t the disciple s had been una ble to do. "Ca s ting out de mons " becomes in this homily a broad me ta phor for any concrete, he lpful, re de mptive a ctivity.114 Ironica lly, in this na rra tive it was Jesus’ own dis ciple s who we re the bigots , saying, "The y are not following us; the y are so diffe re nt from us.”115 We sle y de plore d any a ttitude tha t would dis tort huma n pe rce ptions by exaggera ting diffe rences be twe e n be lie ve rs , e s pe cia lly if these exaggerations undermine d the unity of the wors hiping community. He re cognize d tha t s ocia l loca tion re ma ins a cons ta nt te mpta tion to bias. He was ke e nly aware of the obstacles to tra ns ce nding one’s own spe cia l e conomic inte re sts. 116

2. How the Spirit of Bigotry Is Tested The te xt of “A Ca ution against Bigotry” leads ne xt to Jesus’ response to the bias 109 Ha ving been charged by Anglica ns with excessive ze a lotry and disregard for pa ris h boundaries, Wesley re plie d to Bishop Joseph Butler, “I a m a prie st of the church universal. And be ing orda ine d a Fe llow of a College, I was not limite d to any pa rticula r cure, but have an indete rmina te commis s ion to preach the word of God in any pa rt of the Church of England.” He nry More , Wesley, 1:465; l:61n. Arguing tha t va lid minis try s hould be measured by its fruits ra the r tha n me re ly by its form, on Ma rch 28, 1739, Wesley wrote , "I look upon all the world as m y paris h" B 25:616. 110“A Ca ution against Bigotry," B 1:76, sec. 4.1. 11‘Especially, in Wesley’s s e tting, prejudices with respect to plausible e xpe rie ntia l evidences of the work ofGod in the re viva l, B 2:84; 3:515; FA, B 11:280-81, 515-16. “2“A Ca ution against Bigotry,” B 1:64-68, sec. 1.1 -14. 1I3“A Plain Account of the People Ca lle d Me thodis ts ,” J VII1:257, sec. 5. 1I4“A Ca ution against Bigotry," B 1:63 - 64, proe m 1-3; cf. "S e rmon on the Mount 13,” B 1:687-92, a ca ution against false prophets ; and LJW 2:351; 3:348. 115“A Ca ution against Bigotry,” B 1:69, sec. 2.1, paraphrased. 1I6“A Ca ution against Bigotry,” B 1:65-68, sec. 1.

128

EXPERIENCE

of his followe rs . How are we rightly to re s pond whe n we see de mons cast out by one whose opinions are politica lly incorre ct or biased or ill informe d? We s le y ins is te d tha t we mus t firs t become aware of our own bigotry, of the ways in which we ourselves are ofte n unwilling to a llow the be ne fit of the doubt to othe rs who vie w the world from a diffe re nt history of va luing.117 Jesus gave this injunction: Do not hinder othe rs from us ing wha te ve r powe r God has give n the m. Do not be quick in judgme nt. When you a nd I diffe r, you pra y for me tha t my gift ma y be used of God, a nd 1 will pra y tha t yours will. “'Do not stop him,’ Jesus said. ‘For no one who does a mira cle in my na me can in the ne xt mome nt say a nything bad a bout me, for whoe ve r is not against us is for us. Truly 1 te ll you, anyone who gives you a cup ofwa ter in my na me because you be long to the Messiah will ce rta inly not lose the ir re ward’” (Ma rk 9:39-41 NIV). Thos e who, be longing to Chris t, offer acts of me rcy in his name, a nd who are be ing le d by the S pirit who e licits fa ith a ctive in love, will not go ba dly wrong if the ir hearts are right.118 So we s hould not think it our ma jor business to undermine a miracle done in Chris t’s na me by one who appears to be outs ide our own fold. We s hould not dump out the wa ter of me rcy offere d in Chris t’s na me because a diffe re nt language is used. We need to look ca re fully toward the corres ponde nce be twe e n othe rs’ be ha viora l outcome s a nd the ir doctrina l teachings. Ins ofa r as the y corre s pond, the rule of Ga ma lie l applies: God is a t work in the corre s ponde nce . Le t God be the judge of it.119

3. How to Examine Our Own Bigotry The homily conclude s with a thoughtful s e lf-e xa mina tion seeking to tra ck the steps of one’s own bigotry. We s le y asked a tough pe rsona l que s tion: Are you s orry whe n God blesses s ome one who holds e rrone ous views? Ins ofa r as the fruits of the S pirit are ma nife s te d through cons tructive pe rs onal change, you do we ll not to forbid tha t pe rs on le st you sentence yours e lf as guilty of bigotry. 120 The best exercise in tra ns ce nding bigotry is to pra y those who are diffe re nt from you. Rejoice in the ir gifts . Enlarge the ir good work. Speak we ll of thos e who are diffe re nt. S how the m kindne s s .121 Even if you mus t be a r the brunt of a nother’s bigotry, do not be bigoted in re turn. Do not ima gine tha t the intole ra nce of othe rs jus tifie s your own. Le t the m have a ll the bigotry to themselves. If the y speak e vil of you, speak a ll ma nne r of good of the m. Do not be phony or pre te nd to like wha t you do not like , but look for wha tever is truly good in thos e who are dis simila r.122 This s pirit of tole rance is de e ply writte n into the Wesleyan e va nge lica l revivals, “7“A Ca ution against Bigotry,” B 1:73-75, sec. 3. “"Le tte r to John Ne wton. April 9,1765, LJW 4:293. “9“A Ca ution against Bigotry,” B 1:73-75, sec. 3.1 -10. 120"A Ca ution against Bigotry," B 1:77, sec. 4.2-4. m“A Ca ution against Bigotry,” B 1:77, sec. 4.5. 122“A Ca ution against Bigotry," B 1:78, sec. 4.6; cf. 1:253; 3:315, 588. 129

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

which, like the Anglica n ethos, was more a culture of cons e nt tha n dissent. Its successors have not ma nife s te d a tra dition domina te d by church tria ls or pe tty divis iveness or cons ta nt ideological comba t. It is a rich je wel fore ve r s ubje ct to be coming misplaced. 123

Further Reading on Theological Method Theological Method

Coppedge, Allan. “John Wesley and the Issue of Authority in Theological Pluralism.” In A S pectrum of Thought. Wilmore , KY: Francis Asbury, 1982. Dunning, Ray. “Systematic The ology in a Wesleyan Mode.” W TJ17, no. 1 (1982): 15-22. Frost, Stanley B. Die Autoritats lehre in den Werken John Wesleys. Munich: Ernst Reinhardt, 1938. Gunter, W. Stephen, Ted A. Campbell, Rebekah L. Mile s , Randy L. Maddox, and Scott Jones. Wesley and the Quadrilate ral: Renewing the Conversation. Nashville: Abingdon, 1997. Lawson, John. Notes on Wesley’s FortyFour S ermons. London: Epworth, 1964. Ma ddox, Randy L. “Responsible Grace: The Systematic Perspective of Wesleyan Theology.” WTJ 19, no. 2 (1984): 7-22. Ma tthews, Rex D. ‘“Religion and Reason Joined’: A Study in the The ology of John Wesley.” ThD diss., Ha rvard University, 1986. Moore, Robert L. John Wesley and Authority: A Psychological Perspective. Missoula, MT: Scholars, 1979. Outle r, Albe rt C. "The Wesleyan Qua drila te ra l in John Wesley.” In The Wesleyan Theological Heritage. Essays

ofAlbe rt C. Outler, edited by Thomas C. Oden and Leicester R. Longden, 21-38. Gra nd Rapids: Zondervan, 1991. Reddish, Robert O. John Wesley: His Way ofKnowing God. Evergreen, CO: Rorge, 1972. Shimizu, Mits uo. "Epistemology in the Thought of John Wesley.” PhD diss., Dre w University, 1980. Thorsen, Dona ld A. D. The Wesleyan Quadrilateral: S cripture, Tradition, Reason, and Experience as a Model of Evangelical Theology. Gra nd Rapids: Zondervan, 1990. Doctrinal Standards

Beet, Joseph Agar. “The First Four Volumes of Wesley's Sermons.” PWHS 9(1913): 86-89. Collins , Kenneth. “On Reading Wesley’s Sermons: The Structure of the FiftyThre e Standard Sermons, Ordo Salutis Displayed in the Sermons.” In Wesley on S alvation, 129-39. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1989. Cushman, Robert E. John Wesley’s Expe rim e ntal Divinity: S tudies in Me thodis t Doctrinal S tandards. Nashville: Kingswood, Abingdon, 1989. Davies, Rupert E. "Our Doctrines.” Chap. 5 in vol. 1, A His tory of the Me thodis t Church in Great Britain, 147-79. London: Epworth, 1965.

123“Advice to the People Ca lle d Me thodis ts ,” 1745, B 9:123 - 31; J V1II:351 - 59.

130

EXPERIENCE

-------- . “The P e ople of God." LQHR 184 (1959): 223-30. He itze nra te r, Richa rd. Mirror and Me m ory: R e fle ctions on Early Me thodis m . Na s hville : Kings wood, Abingdon, 1989. Hughe s , He nry Ma ldwyn. Wesley's S tandards in the Light of Today. London: Epworth, 1921. Cf. LQHR 128 (1917): 214-34. Lockye r, Thoma s F. "Wha t Are ‘Our Doctrine s ’?" LQHR 134 (1920): 46-63. Ne e ly, Thoma s . Doctrinal S tandards of Me thodis m . Ne w York: Re vell, 1918. Ode n, Thoma s C. Doctrinal S tandards in the Wesleyan Tradition. Gra nd Rapids: Zonde rva n, 1988; rev. ed., Na s hville : Abingdon, 2008. Ogde n, S chubert M. "Doctrina l S ta nda rds in the Unite d Me thodis t Church.” Pe rkins Journal 28 (Fa ll 1974). Redd, Alexa nde r. The Proble m of Me thodis m R e vie we d: or, John Wesley and the Me thodis t S tandards De fende d. Mount S te rling, KY: Advoca te , 1893. Rowe, G. S tringe r. "A Note on We s le y's De e d Poll.” PW HS 1 (1897): 37, 38. S imon, J ohn S. "J ohn We s ley s De e d of De cla ra tion.” PW HS 12 (1919): 81-93. Wa rre n, Sa mue l. "S ta te me nt of the P rincipa l Doctrine s of We s le ya n Me thodis m." In vol. 1 of Chronicle s of Wesleyan Me thodis m , 3 - 30. London: J ohn Ste phe ns , 1827.

We s t, Ans on. “The Doctrina l Unity of Me thodis m.” In The Me thodis t Epis copal Church in the U.S ., 245 - 55. Ne w York: P hillips a nd Hunt, 1885. Catechetics

Ma cDona ld, James A., ed. Wesley's R e vision of the S horte r Cate chis m . Edinburgh: Ge orge A. Morton, 1906. McGonigle , He rbe rt. "We s le y s Re vis ion of the S horte r Ca te chis m.” PM 56, no. 1 (1980): 59-63. The Articles of Religion

Bla nke ns hip, Paul F. "We s le ys Abridgme nt of the Thirty-Nine Article s as Seen from His De le tions .” MH 2, no. 3 (1964): 35-47. Ha rmon, Nola n B., a nd John W. Bardsley. "J ohn We s ley a nd the Article s of Re ligion.” R L 22 (1953): 280-91. Pope, Willia m Burt. A Com pe ndium of Chris tian Theology. 3 vols . London: We s leya n Me thodis t Book-Room, 1880. Ra ls ton, Thoma s N. Ele m ents of Divinity. Ne w York: Abingdon, 1924. Wa ts on, Richa rd. The ological Ins titute s . 2 vols . Ne w York: Ma s on a nd Lane, 1836,1840; e dite d by J ohn M’Clintock, Ne w York: Ca rlton & P orter, 1850. Whe ele r, He nry. His tory and Expos ition of the Twe nty-Five Article s ofR e ligion of the Me thodis t Epis copal Church. Ne w York: Ea ton a nd Ma ins , 1908.

131

CHAPTER 6

Creation, Providence, and Evil

A. The Goodness of Creation We s le y’s te a chings on God's cre a tion and provide nce are conce ntra te d in his homilies “God’s Approba tion of His Works,” “On Divine Providence,” a nd “The Wis dom of God’s Counsels,” a dis cours e "On God’s Sovereignty,” a nd a series on s piritua l creatures. The y serve as his e xte nde d comme nt on tha t a rticle of re ligion tha t confesses tha t God is “ma ke r a nd pre s e rver of a ll things , both vis ible a nd invis ible .”1 Regrettably, We sle y is s e ldom re membe re d as one who had me mora ble re fle ctions on e ithe r cre a tion or provide nce .

1. God's Approbation of His Works The te xt of the homily “God’s Approbation of His Works ” is Genesis 1:31: "It was ve ry good” [Homily #56 (1782), B 2:387-99; J #56, VI:206-15]. Eve rything is created “good in its kind.” Viewe d pote ntia lly a nd de ve lopme nta lly, each cre ature is cre a te d by God to be "s uite d to the e nd for which it is designed; adapted to promote the good of the whole , a nd the glory of the gre at Creator.”2 This truth was re cognized as e a rly as the firs t cha pte r of Genesis. a. God’s Enjoym e nt of the Goodne s s of Prim ordial Cre ation Wha t is created, ins ofa r as given by God, is truly good in e ve ry way. “God saw a ll tha t he had made, a nd it was ve ry good” (Ge n. 1:31 N1V). The cre a tion is not by design cons titutiona lly prone to pe rvers ion. It becomes distorte d only through the exercise of idola trous fre edom. We s le y e vide nce d no te mpta tions toward e ithe r Ma nicha ea n or Ne opla tonic a ntima te ria lis m. The re is nothing tha t re se mble d gnos tic fantasies of cre a tion its e lf as incorrigibly dra gging the s oul downwa rd. Cre a tion is good. God he a rtily approves of his own work in giving time , space, a nd life proportiona lly to diverse cre a tures.3

'XXV, a rt. 1. 2"God's Approba tion of His Works.” B 2:387, proe m 1; cf. B 1:513-16; 2:387-99,437-50,537-38, 552 - 53; 4:25 - 26,42 - 43, 63 - 64, 69 - 70,153 - 54,307 - 8. 3“God’s Approba tion of His Works,” B 2:387-99; LJW 6:91. 133

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

b. Cre ation Falle n S cripture dis tinguis he s s ha rply be twe e n the good of cre a tion be fore s in a nd the fallenness of cre a tion a fte r wille d sin. As created, each cre a ture is fit to promote the good of the whole .4 As falle n, the good of the whole has be come grossly dis torte d. We live out of a le ngthy history of s in tha t has ta ke n this good cre a tion a nd brought it to the los t condition in which huma n his tory is now enmeshed.5 No huma n now lives in tha t origina l uns ullie d state of cre a tion. The gift of fre edom has been poorly spe nt. In the journe y from birth to e me rging consciousness, we a ll will to assert our intere s ts inordina te ly. Tha t is a wille d a ction even a mong childre n, as any pa re nt ca n attest. Sadly, whe ne ve r we me e t other persons, we me e t the m always in a fla we d condition. The y me e t us as fla we d. Since Eden the course of his tory has be e n shaped by fla we d pe rsons who assert the ir intere s ts inordina te ly. Exce pt perhaps a t birth and in the ne onata l s ituation, we s e ldom get a glimps e of tha t prima l goodness. We live in a cre a tion origina lly give n as good ye t now fa lle n through a his tory of idola try, pride , sensuality, a nd twiste d ima gina tion.6 Fallenness comes logica lly a nd chronologica lly only a fte r cre a tion, not as if e mbedde d within cre a tion or ne cessitate d by cre ation. Cre a tion as such re ma ins good ins ofa r as created, even a fter the fa ll. Ne ve r does the fa ll of fre e dom a bsolute ly take away the image of God. Since no finite cre a ture was there a t the cre a tion, a ll creatures with physica l eyes have a limite d unde rs ta nding of cre a tion. All we ca n do is make conje cture s a bout the goodness of origina l cre a tion based on its fra gme nte d forms of goodness in the pre se nt orde r of experience. But we can believe in tha t hypothe s ize d origina l goodness because it is cle a rly a tte ste d in S cripture .7 We who now be hold fa lle n cre a tion are always a lre a dy e nta ngled in a protra cte d his tory of sin. Each dis cre te cre ature is always more prone to see his or he r own priva te good more cle a rly tha n the good of the whole or the infinite Source of the whole good. Our pe rce ption of the cre a te d orde r is thus fore ve r limite d not me re ly because we are cre a ture s but because we are cre a ture s configure d by a grim history of sin. c. Unpollute d Air, Earth, Wate r, and Ene rgy: An Ecological Axiom We find in We s le y an uncommonly high doctrine of the origina l goodness of unfa lle n physical cre a tion. Cre a tion as origina lly give n by God is “ve ry good,” ha ving no a dmixture of e vil, ins ofa r as re ce ive d from the ha nd of the Crea tor. Us ing a rgume nts from both reason a nd re ve la tion, We sle y s urve ye d the know*LJW 3:333-35. 5“Doctrine of Origina l Sin,” J IX:191 -92. bCH, “The Goodness of God,” 7:107 - 29. 7B 2:387 - 99,437 - 50, 537 - 38; 4:25 - 26,42 - 43,63 - 64. 134

CREATION, PROVIDENCE, AND EVIL

able created orde r in a wa y tha t encompassed its basic cons titue nt physical elements — the subde combina tions a nd va ria tions of e a rth, air, fire , a nd wa ter — compris ing a ll forms of the cre a te d orde r in the ir s pe cific pe rmuta tions .8 Each a nd a ll togethe r we re regarded as good as origina lly give n, "a ll e s s e ntia lly dis tinct from each other a nd ye t so intima te ly mixe d toge the r in a ll compound bodie s tha t we ca nnot find any, be it e ve r so minute , which does not conta in the m all.”9 We s le y cre dite d the a ncie nt Gre e k phys icis ts with pe rce ptive ins ight into the basic e le me nts of these pe rmutations . By e arth the a ncie nts s ymbolica lly pointe d to a ll pa lpa ble ma tte r, a ll physical, nonliquid, nongaseous cre ation. We are give n the phys ica l e nvironme nt as a gift for our s te wa rds hip. As created, the e a rth is fille d with una dulte ra te d, unta inte d cre a ture ly goods. As such, it is be a utiful; though whe n dis torted by s in, it can be te rrifying.10 The re was origina lly no pollution in the air, a nd the wa ter s upporte d a bunda nt forms of sea life .11 By fire we point to a ll of the diverse pa rticle s of e ne rgy pre s e nt in cre ation. A s plendid balance of light a nd fire e xists in the cre a te d order. The s pe cific dista nce be twe e n the s un a nd the e a rth is a s pe cta cular e xa mple of how God has offe re d the e a rth light a nd fire in e xquis ite proportion. The s un is a pre cis e ly balanced source of good for cre a ture s who need light a nd heat in s pe cific congruity a nd e quilibrium. The re la tion of e a rth a nd light e licits a ve ritable ce lebra tion of God’s goodness in the created order.12 By air we point to the unseen move me nts of gaseous cre a tion. By water vie point to a ll tha t is liquid. By e arth we point to a ll things s olid. Byfire we point to a ll forms of energy. We s le y rumina te d a lmos t e cs tatically on the cre a te d excellence of a ll biologica l forms , vegetable a nd a nima l, s ome time s e mbra cing curious ideas a bout the ir original goodness. Re asoning out of s criptura l te s timony, he pos ite d a n untramme le d innocence in the unfallen na tura l orde r in its origina l pe rfe ction (la cking weeds a nd unple a s ant inse cts, for example, a nd no a nima ls pre ying on one a nothe r). A world without s in is a place of incompa ra ble happiness, since it is not s poiled by the s lighte s t hint of twis te d se lf-asse rtive ne ss.13 By sleep,14 which fa intly re fra cts the prima l condition be longing “to innoce nt huma n nature,” "the s prings of the a nima l ma chine we re wound up from time to time.”15 8B 2:383 - 90, 504 - 8,573 - 74; 4:136 - 37. 9“God’s Approba tion of His Works,” B 2:388, sec. 1.1. >°B 2:389 - 90, 506 - 8, 573 - 74; LJW 4:282 - 87; cf. WHS , 39 - 40. "“Gods Approba tion of His Works,” B 2:389-91, sec. 1.2-5; 505-6. "“God's Approba tion of His Works,” B 2:392, sec. 1.7. "“God’s Approba tion of His Works,” B 2:393-96, sec. 1.8-14. 14On sleep, see B 2:134,392; 3:267,322-24; 4:110. "“God's Approba tion of His Works,” B 2:392, sec. 1.7. In a le tte r to He s te r Ann Roe dated June 2, 1776, We sley asked, “Do you commune with God in the night season? Does He bid you even in sleep, Go on? And does He 'make your ve ry dre ams de vout’?" LJW 6:223. 135

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

d. Pride in the Dis orde r ofCre ation The king of Ca s tile ima gine d, “If 1 had ma de the world, I would have made it better.” God re plied, I "did not make it as it is now.”16 The diffe re nce be twe e n the n a nd now is the intrus ion of s in on God’s good cre a tion. This paradise became los t a nd fa llen through pride , idola try, va nity, sensuality, a nd twis ted ima gination.17 Human pride ima gines tha t it could have done a fa r be tte r job tha n God in orde ring cre a tion and so fantasizes a re orde ring of a ll things a ccording to our s inful imaginings . Out of this pre te nde d improve ment comes a ll ma nne r of e vil.18 The cre a te d world thus becomes dis torte d by inte rge nera tiona l sin, as s ymbolize d by the le ngthe ning his tory of the proge ny of Ada m and Eve. The world we now see is not the origina lly good cre a tion but a world grossly dis torte d by the e vil tha t fre e dom has colle ctive ly chose n a nd rechosen. God did not unila te ra lly ins e rt this e vil into the world, but fre e dom a bsurdly elected it. God gives fre edom, a nd fre edom a bsurdly debauches the goodness of cre a tion. 2. The Free-Will Defense a. God Is Not the Author ofEvil The "fre e -will defense” stands s ta unchly a ga inst the prete nse tha t God is the a uthor of e vil. This a rgume nt is fe a ture d in this homily on God’s a pprobation of his works : World history is an a ccumula tion of de cisions in which each pe riod affects subsequent pe riods , la ye r upon layer. "God made ma n upright,” but ma n "found out to himse lf ‘ma ny inve ntions ’ of happiness inde pe nde nt of God.”19 We as a huma n species have outra ge ous ly wors e ne d cre a tion through the licenses we have ta ke n by our idola trous fre e dom. Conse quently, the whole cre a tion, the cosmos, the na tura l orde r now groans in tra va il. Huma ns have done damage to the e ntire origina l crea tion by our sin, a nd caused a ll creatures to suffer.20 The Manicha e ans of Augus tine’s time pos ite d a conflict built into God’s cre a tion be twe e n two equal divine forces: a good God a nd an e vil God. His tory was vie we d as the arena of conflict of these two. The re is not a hint of Ma nicha ea n flavor in Wesley, for whom the cre a tion as such was una mbiguous ly good. Only a fter the fa ll of fre e dom, whe n cre a tures, be nt towa rd pride a nd idola try, by the ir own s e lf-de te rmining fre e dom fa ll, does a tra in of disastrous effects follow. Some of We s le y’s conte mpora rie s wrongly assumed tha t "e vil mus t e xist in the ve ry na ture of things.”21 We s le y answered, “It mus t, in the pre s e nt nature of things , l6“God s Approba tion of His Works,” B 2:397, sec. 2. I7B 1:208: 2:561:3:183-84:4:341. 18“On Faith,” B 4:190 - 97. 19“God’s Approba tion of His Works,” B 2:399, sec. 2.3; Eccl. 7:29. 20“God’s Approba tion of His Works,” B 2:397, sec. 2.1. 21Soame Jenyns, Free Inquiry into the Nature and Origin of Evil (n.p.: R. and J. Dodsley, 1757), 15-17,108-9. 136

CREATION, PROVIDENCE, AND EVIL

s uppos ing ma n to have re be lle d a gainst God. But e vil did not e xis t a t a ll in the origina l na ture of things.”22 The pre se nt condition of huma ns in history is ra dica lly fa lle n but not be yond divine grace. The funda me nta l goodness of cre a tion re ma ins de spite a ll his torica l a bsurditie s. God does not take away human libe rty a ltoge the r but a llows it to pla y its e lf out in judgme nt, a ddre ssing it pa tiently with the ca ll to re penta nce within the limits of time . Just because huma n fre e dom has muddle d cre a tion does not me a n tha t God accedes to the disarray. God persists a mid the fallenness of huma n his tory to pe rmit this corrupte d chronicle to continue , pa tiendy offe ring the promis e of re de mption to a ll who are fa lle n. The biblical te s timony of heavenly bliss a t the e nd of his tory echoes the prima l vis ion of the genesis of unta inte d good in divine cre ation.23 b. Counte ring W illiam Law’s Quas i-Manichae an S pe culations We s le y wrote an ope n le tter to Willia m La w on January 6,1756 (LJW 3:332 - 70; J 1 V:466 - 509), to cha lle nge La w’s uns criptura l views. La w’s e a rly works on Chris tia n s piritua lity, A Practical Treatise upon Chris tian Perfection (1726) a nd A S erious Call to a De vout and Holy Life (1728), ha d de cis ive ly influe nce d the young Wesley a nd his colle a gue s in the Oxford Holy Club. By 1735, howe ve r, La w ha d be gun to read Jacob Boe hme a nd de lve into va rious ve rs ions of P rote s tant mys ticis m of dubious orthodoxy, influe nce d by the the os ophic gnos ticis m of Paracelsus and the fa r-le ft s piritua lis t wing of the Re forma tion. Afte r a decade of quiescence during the 1740s, Willia m La w began to publis h his thoughts on mys ticis m in The Way to Divine Knowledge (1752), The S pirit ofPraye r (1749-50), and The S pirit of Love (1753 - 54), in which he criticize d the classic Chris tia n unde rs ta nding of the means of grace a nd s ubs titute d a gnos tic cos mology and unive rs a lis t mys ticis m, a tte s ting a “S pirit of Chris t” de e ply hidde n within e ve ry na tura l huma n be ing, pre s uma bly quite a pa rt from sa ving grace a nd without need for justifying grace. Ba ffle d by the follies of his forme r me ntor, by 1756 We s le y de termine d to write an ope n le tter to Law, re s pe cting his forme r vie ws but a dmonishing him against his foolis h turn towa rd "s upe rfluous , unce rta in, dangerous, irra tiona l, and uns criptura l philosophy,” tha t is so "ofte n fla tly contra ry to S cripture , to reason, a nd to its e lf24 Re me mbe ring tha t La w ha d once a dmonis he d We sle y a bout s poiling re ligion with philos ophy, We sle y now turne d the tables by s howing this is wha t La w was doing: Reverend Sir, — In matters of religion I regard no writings but the inspired. Tauler, Behmen [Boehme], and a whole a rmy of Mys tic authors, are with me nothing to St. Paul.... At a time when I was in great danger of not va luing this a uthority enough, you made tha t importa nt obs e rva tion:"... So fa r as you add philosophy to re ligion, jus t so fa r you spoil it.” This remark I have never forgotte n.... But have not you?25 22“God's Approba tion of His Works,” B 2:398-99, sec. 2.2. ““Gods Approba tion of His Works,” B 2:397-99, sec. 2.1-3. 24 LJW 3:332 - 33. “Le tte r to Willia m Law, LJW, 3:332, proem. 137

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

c. Critique ofLaw’s Excesses We sley criticize d La w’s s pe cula tions unde r four headings: (1) na ture a nte ce de nt to cre ation, (2) cre a tion, (3) paradise, a nd (4) the fa ll. In each case, he pre cise ly quoted a nd re fute d La w point by point on the basis of s criptura l te s timony. As to La w’s vie w tha t “na ture as we ll as God is a nte ce de nt to a ll creatures,” Wesley puzzle d, "Is the n na ture God? Or are there two ete rna l, unive rsa l, infinite beings?"26 As to the fa nta s tic notion tha t “God brought gross ma tte r” out of the "s inful prope rtie s ” the fa lle n angels ha d impa rte d to na ture , Wesley asked La w to e xpla in how physical e leme nts as s uch can have e ithe r s in or virtue .27 As to how the e a rthly body of Ada m might have conta ine d la tent e vil, Wesley asked, “Was the re e vil in the world, a nd even in Ada m ... a t his firs t cre a tion? ” We sle y thought tha t Willia m Law, in his cos mologica l s pe cula tions , ha d ta ke n uncons cionable libe rtie s with both re ve lation a nd reason, ha d gone fa r be yond the plain sense of S cripture , a nd offe re d weak, incons is te nt proofs 28 d. How Bad Philos ophy Attracts Bad Divinity: As s e ss ing a He rm aphrodite Vie w ofAdam In La w’s conje cture s , Ada m "ha d at firs t the na ture of an angel,” hence was "both ma le a nd female.” We s le y que s tione d whe ther “angels are he rma phrodites ,” cha lle nging La w’s curious s pe cula tions tha t “Eve would not have been had Ada m stood,” tha t Adam would have brought forth the second Ada m, Chris t, without Eve, and tha t “Chris t was both ma le a nd female.”29 It is e vide nt tha t Jesus was ma le , not male a nd female, a fa ct tha t shows his true huma nity. Jesus would have been ha rdly re cogniza ble as huma n if a he rma phrodite . As to the notion tha t Adam "los t much of his pe rfe ction be fore Eve was ta ke n out of him,” We sle y asked for some shre d of te xtua l evidence on which to ground such s pe culation.30 “Bad philos ophy has, by ins ens ible degrees, paved the wa y for bad divinity.”31 Dis as trous re pe rcus s ions follow from La w’s loose s uppos itions : "You de ny the omnipote nce of God” by a s s e rting an inexora ble de ge ne ra tion of s piritua l na ture into ma te ria l na ture . God is limite d both be fore a nd a fter cre ation.32 The re is Ma nichae a nis m lurking in the notions tha t "ma tter could not pos s ibly be but from sin” a nd the huma n body is "curdled s pirit.”33

26Letter to William Law, LJW, 3:333 - 34, sec. 1.1. 27Letter to William Law, LJW, 3:335 - 36, sec. 1.2. 28Letter to William Law, LJW, 3:338-43, sec. 1.3-4. 29Letter to William Law, LJW, 3:338-42, sec. 1.3-4. ^Le tte r to William Law, LJW, 3:338-43, sec. 1.3-4. 31Letter to Willia m Law, LJW, 3:343, sec. 2.1. 32Letter to Willia m Law, LJW, 3:343-44, sec. 2.1. 33Letter to Willia m Law, LJW, 3:343, sec. 2.1; Willia m Law, The S pirit ofLove (1752; repr., New York: Paulist Press, 1978), 1:23.

138

CREATION, PROVIDENCE, AND EVIL

B. Spiritual Creation God is give r not only of physical cre a tion but also of s piritua l cre a tion, the unseen sphere of cre a tion not accessible to the eye. These incorpore a l s piritua l beings and powe rs are also cre a tures, not coe te rna l with God, but continge nt e ntire ly on the gift of the ir cre a tion. The re is a ra dica l diffe re nce be twe e n any cre a ture a nd its Crea tor.

1. Of Good Angels The te xt of the homily “Of Good Ange ls” is He bre ws 1:14: “Are the y not a ll minis te ring s pirits ? ” [Homily #71 (1783), B 3:3-15; J #71, VI:361 -70]. a. W hy Discus s Ange lic Be ings ? Why spe a k of angels? Because S cripture ta ke s the ir re a lity as a cons ta nt a s s umption. We sley offe re d two te a ching homilie s on angelic powe rs. He was not fixa te d on this issue, but he did have to a nswe r que s tions from his community of s piritua l forma tion. He found cle a rly a tte ste d in S cripture a range of s piritua l cre a tion locate d in the cha in of be ing be twe e n corpore a l humanity and uncre ate d divinity. It would be a s tupendous gap in the orde r of cre a tion if the unive rs e had inorga nic ma tte r, pla nt and a nima l life, a nd huma n life growing in comple xity a nd s piritua lity, a nd the n va ulte d through the heavens a ll the way from huma n existence to God in the highe st. It is more pla us ible to assume tha t the re mus t be s ome thing in be twe en.34 "The re is one cha in of be ing, from the lowes t to the highe s t point, from an unorganize d pa rticle of e a rth or water, to Micha e l the archangel. And the scale of cre a ture s does not advance pe r s alturn, by leaps, but by s mooth a nd gentle degrees; a lthough it is true tha t these are fre que ntly impe rce ptible to our impe rfe ct faculties.”35 We s le y found solace in the te xt from He bre ws 1:14, which asks, “Are not a ll angels minis te ring s pirits sent to serve thos e who will inhe rit s a lva tion?” (NIV). We have now come to the juncture of discussing these incorpore a l agencies in the cre a te d orde r—not as to whe the r the y e m pirically ca n be s hown to e xis t (a fruitless wa y of putting the que s tion with respect to invis ible creatures), but as to the ir m inis try, wha t the y do. It would seem te mpting to s kip ove r this discussion of good a nd bad angels, but whe ne ve r I have ve ntured to discuss these ma tters with mode rn audiences, the y have found the m e xce ptiona lly intriguing. The ordina ry pe ople We sle y served were inte re s te d in these biblical ques tions , even though the guild biblical scholars largely ignore the m. This may seem at firs t to be a qua int corne r of We s le y’s thinking, but whe n we e mpa thize with his voca bula ry a nd e nter s e rious ly into it, his language 34“Of Good Angels,” B 3:4-15. 35“Of Evil Angels," B 3:16, pref. 1; cf. "Gods Approba tion of His Works ," sec. 1.14. 139

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

be comes s urpris ingly pla us ible a nd capable of re s ona ting in our contempora ry culture .36 b. Ange ls Atte s te d in Both the His tory ofPhilos ophy and in S cripture These minis te ring s pirits we re wide ly known a nd re cognized in the a ncie nt lite ra ture of Socrates, He s iod, Plato, a nd Aristotle , and virtua lly a ll the classical writers of Gre e k a ntiquity. These e a rly writings were, on this point, “crude , impe rfe ct, a nd confus e d... fra gments of truth, pa rtly de live re d down by the ir fore fa the rs , and pa rtly borrowe d from the ins pire d writings .”37 The y offer only a pre limina ry a tte mpt to unde rs tand the unseen minis tering s pirits who we re to be more fully attested gra dua lly in the unfolding history of God’s s e lf-dis clos ure . Though ma ny have ha d va rious opinions of ange lic cre a tion, it is only in the history of re ve la tion tha t we obta in a re lia ble picture of the ir minis trie s . S cripture provide s "a clear, ra tiona l, cons is te nt a ccount of thos e whom our eyes have not seen or our ears heard.”38 We s le ys a rgume nt for s upe rpe rs ona l s piritua l creatures comes from reason illumine d by re ve la tion, us ing the wis dom of his toric tra dition, a nd from his own experience in the e va nge lica l re viva l as s upporting e vidence.39 He was content to le t othe rs argue a bout angels from s trictly ra tiona lis t or e mpiricis t premises. c. S criptural Te s tim ony to Minis te ring S pirits God has the power to work e ithe r imme dia te ly (through dire ct means) or me dia te ly (through other tha n direct means). Through minis te ring s pirits , God has chosen to work for the good of cre a tion through incorpore a l s piritua l be ings, using the m to dra w us to God a nd to one a nothe r. God has e ndue d the m with "unde rs ta nding, will, a nd libe rty, essential to, if not the essence of, a s pirit.”40 The good minis te ring s pirits ca n read the thoughts of huma n beings because the y see the ir "kindred s pirit more cle a rly tha n we see the body.”41 The ir ministra tions are grounded in this a bility, which, ha ving long e xis te d through time , has a ccumula ted wis dom from "s urve ying the he a rts a nd ways of me n in the ir successive generations.”42 God is capable of ma king the “winds his messengers, flame s of fire his s e rva nts ” (Ps. 104:4 NIV). Ange ls do not ne e d phys ica l bodie s or finite ma gnitude to serve the Lord.43 The y have e xtra ordina ry vis ion, but without physical eyes, a nd possess wha t seems to us a n a lmos t unlimite d s ight a nd pe rce ption. The y communicate , yet 36“Of Good Angels," B 3:4-7. 37“Of Good Angels,” B 3:4, pref. 1. 38"Of Good Angels," B 3:6, pref. 4. 39CH 7:511-12; cf. 4:346 - 49; JJW6:229. ““Of Good Angels," B 3:6, sec. 1.1. 41“Of Good Angels," B 3:7, sec. 1.2; cf. 3:72; 4:229. 42“Of Good Angels," B 3:8, sec. 1.3. 43“Of Good Angels," B 3:6, sec. 1.1. 140

CREATION, PROVIDENCE, AND EVIL

without the sound of speech.44 They have an extraordinary capacity to see many things at a glance that we corporeal observers miss or do not see well or wholly. With intuitive brilliance, they see at one glance the truth presented to them, as distinguished from our crude and laborious reasoning and data-gathering processes. They have immediate intellectual apprehension and the a bility to penetrate human hearts. They know the hearts of those to whom they minister. They have a high degree of wisdom compared to our finite faculties.45 The angels are not just individua lly active but belong to an ordered community. Those unfallen angels who celebrate Gods life are found to be continually ministering to our souls. Care of souls is the work of these ministering spirits. Our pastoral care is a pa rticipa tion in the ir ministry. Good angels work to enable our goodness as ministers of God the S pirit. The y have a guardianship role, especially to the faithful.46 Minis te ring spirits attend our souls, addressing us in our fallen condition, never fla tly overwhelming human freedom or dictating terms. They work as persuasive, not coercive, agents. The premise is synergistic (with coagency), not monergistic (with a single agent of action). They counter and thwa rt the destructive work of evil spiritual powers. They work to ove rturn the intentions and effects of e vil in myriad unperceived ways. The good angels minister in ways analogous, from our limite d point of view, to the best ministries of human agents of reconciliation, yet with greater agility and subtlety. Think of the best caregivers you know, and that is something like the work of the ministering spirits of God. They minister quie tly through interpersonal relationships, even when persons remain unaware of their ministries. The good angels minister not merely to the righteous but also to the unrighteous, calling them to repentance and accountability, assisting in the search for truth.47 The good angels work through illness toward wholeness. They minister through dreams. The fa ithful need not fear these ministering spirits, for they are given for our good. Through them God works in our hearts to e licit happiness and holiness. We cannot fully understand their ministrations on our behalf as long as we dwell in the body.48 Though not omnipresent, these ministering spirits have been given “an immense sphere of action,”49 including governments and empires, political and economic orders, and cultura l processes. But they work chiefly within the silent reaches of the human heart and through human relationships.50 They have power to cause or remove pain, knowing all the intricacies of the human body. ““Of Good Angels,” B 3:7, sec. 1.2. 45“Of Good Angels,” B 3:7-8, sec. 1.2-3. ““Of Good Angels,” B 3:11 -12, sec. 2. 47“Of Good Angels,” B 3:12-14, sec. 2.3-8. 48“Of Good Angels,” B 3:11 -12, sec. 2.2. 49“Of Good Angels,” B 3:9, sec. 1.6. 50“Of Good Angels,” B 3:13-14, sec. 2.7-9. 141

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

Though good, the y are not to be wors hipe d, for only God is worthy of wors hip, ye t God does inde e d work through the m. The minis tering s pirits are not ide ntica l to the Holy S pirit, who re ma ins the one uncre ate d God through whom these creature ly s pirits are sustained.51 d. On Guardian Ange ls The te xt of the homily “On Gua rdia n Ange ls ” is Psalm 91:11: “He s hall give his angels cha rge ove r thee, to keep thee in a ll thy ways” [Homily #135 (1726), B 4:224-35 (not in Jackson e dition)]. Even a mid we a lth, power, or glory, it is scarcely possible to forge t tha t human be ings "are weak, mise ra ble , helpless creatures,” une qua l to the dangers tha t s urround us, riddle d with guilt a nd disease. Our phys ica l live s e nd "a t le ngth with a total dis s olution. The meanest obje ct of our s corn — a beast, an ins e ct, nay, even things tha t themselves have no life — are s ufficie nt e ithe r to take away ours, or to make it a curse ra the r tha n a blessing.”52 If life is so mise ra ble, how ca n God be re ga rde d as good? Evil is pe rmitte d “to humble our na tura l pride a nd se lf-sufficie ncy.” We ma y be te mpte d to be defeated by worldly powe rs. But "unless by our own pos itive volunta ry act, the y ‘s hall have no advantage ove r us.’” The fre e -will defense thwarts any hint of injus tice in God. e. W he the r Incorpore al Minis te ring S pirits Atte nd Us at Ce rtain Time s Ministe ring s pirits "are always re a dy to assist us whe n we need the ir assistance, always pre se nt whe n the ir presence ma y be of service, in e ve ry circums tance of life whe re in is da nge r of any sort.”53 The y are to keep us in a ll our ways (Ps. 91:11). Whe the r in bodily pa in or the te mpta tion of our souls, whe ther we are aware of a pproa ching e vil or not, the y make “the ir time ly inte rpos ition.”54 Thus , even a mid a fflictions , "we ca nnot doubt" God’s goodness ins ofa r as we "cons ide r wha t pe culia r care he ha th ta ke n” for our prote ction by giving “his angels charge ove r [us], to keep [us] in a ll [our] ways.”55 It would exceed the commis s ion the y have re ce ive d, howe ve r, if minis te ring s pirits a bs olute ly pre ve nte d e vil, so as to try to outwit the pos itive challenges of s uffe ring and limita tion. To a void any pos s ibility ofvice is to forgo any pos s ibility of virtue . Be ha viora l excellence (virtue ) exists only whe n it faces finite obstacles. The mis s ion of the minis tering s pirits is not to de live r the soul from a ll te mpta tion or bodily pa in, as if to coerce choice, but to a ccompa ny choice. For "where there is no choice , there can be no virtue . But ha d we been without virtue , we mus t have been conte nt with some lower happiness tha n tha t we now hope to pa rta ke of.”56 51“Of Good Angels," B 3:15, sec. 2.10. 52“On Gua rdia n Angels," B 4:225, pre f. 1. 53"On Gua rdia n Angels," B 4:226 - 27, sec. 1.1. M“On Gua rdia n Angels," B 4:227, sec. 1.2. 55“On Gua rdia n Angels," B 4:226, pre f. 3. 56“On Gua rdia n Angels,” B 4:227-28, sec. 1.4-5. 142

CREATION, PROVIDENCE, AND EVIL

f. W he the r Incorpore al Minis te ring S pirits Know Us Be tte r Than We Know Ours e lve s Exce lling in s tre ngth a nd wis dom, minis te ring s pirits ma y a lte r "some ma terial cause tha t else would have a pe rnicious e ffe ct: the cle ansing [of] (for instance) ta inte d air.”57 The y have power to raise or a lla y human passions. “Tha t one immate rial be ing, by touching a nothe r, s hould e ithe r incre a se or lessen its motion, tha t an angel s hould e ithe r re ta rd or quicke n the s tre a m whe re with the passions of an angelic substance flow, is not more to be wonde re d a t tha n tha t one piece of ma tte r s hould have the same e ffe ct on its kindre d substance.”58 Ange ls may touch our a ffe ctions . The y ma y ins pire good thoughts in our he a rts . The y may prote ct the righte ous from s piritua l dangers.59 The fa ithful pra y for the ir a ctive presence. Minis te ring s pirits know us be tte r tha n we know the m: It is not improbable the ir fellowship with us is fa r more sensible than ours with the m. Suppose any of the m are present, the y are hid from our eyes, but we are not hid from the ir sight. They, no doubt, clearly discern a ll our words and actions, if not a ll our thoughts too. For it is hard to think these walls of flesh and blood can inte rce pt the vie w of an angelic being. But we have, in general, only a fa int and indis tinct perception of the ir presence, unless ... by an inte rna l sense, for which human language has not any name.60 g. W he the r Errands ofMe rcy Are As s igne d to Incorpore al Minis te ring S pirits The Omnipote nt One does not a rbitra rily use his own imme dia te power to a ccomplis h his purpos e but may e mploy these minis te ring s pirits . Even if God’s purpose in doing so is hidde n in a “knowle dge ... too wonde rful for [us ]” (Ps. 139:6), it “ca nnot be unla wful to e xte nd our search as fa r as our limite d fa cultie s will pe rmit." God assigns me dia te d powe r to minis te ring s pirits because the y de light in finding such e mployme nt, in conducing othe rs towa rd the paths of happiness.61 "In doing good to us the y do good to themselves also,” for “by e xe rcis ing the goodness the y have already," the y continua lly increase in the ir joy in s e rving the Lord.62 “The gre a te r goodwill the y be a r to me n, the gre ate r mus t be the ir joy whe n these men, in the fullne s s of time , are re ce ive d into tha t glory a ppointe d for them.”63 Blessed is the one who enjoys the prote ction of minis te ring s pirits! "No te mpora l e vil shall be fa ll him, unless to cle a r the wa y for a gre a ter good!” "Le t him but be true to hims e lf, le t him but fix his love on the ir common Cre a tor, a nd nothing in the cre ation, a nimate or ina nima te , by design or chance, s ha ll have power to hurt him.” 57“On Gua rdia n Angels," B 4:229, sec. 2.3. 58“On Gua rdia n Angels," B 4:230, sec. 2.6. 59"On Gua rdia n Angels," B 4:231, sec. 2.8. “Le tte r to Mis s Bishop, June 12,1773, J XI1I:24. 61 “On Gua rdia n Angels," B 4:231-32, sec. 3.1. 62“On Gua rdia n Angels," B 4:232, sec. 1.2. 63“On Gua rdia n Angels," B 4:232, sec. 1.3. 143

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

God’s own minis te ring s pirits offe r us "cons ola tion a mong the numbe rle s s evils whe rewith we are s urrounde d."64

2. Of Evil Angels The te xt of the homily “Of Evil Ange ls ” is Ephesians 6:12: “We wre stle ... against principa litie s ” [Homily #72 (1783), B 3:16-29; J #72, VI:370-80], Origina lly a ll angels we re of the same na ture : s pirits with jus tly orde re d a ffe ctions . The y had s e lf-de te rmining libe rty by which the y could choose to be loya l to God, ye t some of the m a bs urdly chose to be dis loya l.65 a. W he the r S om e Incorpore al S piritual Cre ature s , Though Cre ate d Good, Have Falle n from Grace Le a ving the origina l orde ring of God, the e vil angels abandoned a ll goodness and took on the oppos ite nature: pride , arrogance, s e lf-e xa lta tion, envy, rage against the divine order, a nd de s pa ir ove r the ir condition. The y are dilige nt in the pros ecution of the ir design, ye t God has set limits on the ir power to destroy. The y do not me re ly a ct individua lly but are unite d to a common head, "the prince , the god ofthis world,” Satan, the Adve rsa ry, in whose kingdom a hie ra rchy exists and s pe cific tasks appear to be assigned.66 Like huma n beings, angels may fa ll. Some have proved corruptible . Tha t is pa rt of the risk of s piritua l fre e dom. Evil angels have the same powe rs of inte llige nce , move me nt, a nd communica tion but are fa lle n from grace, a nd ultima te ly the ir works will be thwa rte d67 Good angels are enabled by grace to persevere. The re is a tra ns pe rs ona l s truggle going on in the he a ve nly spheres be twe e n thos e incorpore a l s upe rpe rs ona l agents who have fa lle n a nd those who are servants of God, doing wha t angels are cre a te d to do: praise God a nd incre a se the love of God in cre ation.68 The re a son for the apostasy of the e vil angels a nd the causes a nd precise effects of the fa ll of pe rhaps one -third of the angels re main a mys te ry. It ma y be due to je a lous y or pride . The y may have been e nvious of the Son of God, whose fa vor is decreed in Psalm 8:6 - 7 conce rning the one who is a ppointe d Lord "ove r a ll creatures.” We might speculate tha t this e licite d e nvy a nd pride in the firs tborn cre ature s. The y may have said in the ir he a rts, “I will e xa lt my throne above the stars of God.... I will be like the mos t High” (Isa. 14:13 -14).69 By re ve lation we le a rn the truth a bout these incorpore a l powe rs, tha t while a ll we re created holy, some fell. Paul s ummarize d the a pos tolic te a ching of fa lle n angels in a s ingle sentence: "For our s truggle is not against fle s h and blood, but a ga inst the rule rs , a gainst the a uthoritie s , a gainst the powe rs of this da rk world a nd against 64“On Gua rdia n Angels," B 4:234-35, sec. 5. 65“Of Evil Angels," B 3:17-19, sec. 1.1 -4. “"Of Evil Angels," B 3:20 - 21, sec. 2.1-3. 67On Satan’s devices, see B 2:138-51; 4:144 - 47. ““Of Evil Angels," B 3:17-19, sec. 1.1-3. ““Of Evil Angels,” B 3:18, sec. 1.3. 144

CREATION, PROVIDENCE, AND EVIL

the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms” (Eph. 6:12 NIV). Paul called on believers to “put on the full a rmor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand" (v. 13 NIV). Our present wrestling is not finally against human ingenuity, evil appetites, or passions, but against powers with such superhuman force and competence that they are called in Scripture the "rulers ... of this dark world” (v. 12 NIV). Though some fallen angels remain in the ir citadel, others go about ruinously sowing evil.70 b. The Employme nt ofEvil Ange ls Evil angels constantly seek to govern the world, encouraging ignorance, unrighteousness, and error. Any weakness leaves us open to temptation, which they are clever to exploit. They attempt to extinguish the love of God when it inflames, to blind hearts to God’s power and promise. They are ready to take advantage of circumstantial shortcomings and inattentiveness.71 The ir most furious attacks are directed against the emergence of faith, hope, and love. They oppose the love of the neighbor as vigorously as the love of God, fomenting dissension, war, and conflict. They not only draw us toward doing evil but also seek to prevent us from doing good by infusing evil thoughts, e liciting doubt, and subverting good motivations. When an evil thought occurs without any obvious or reasonable connection with a previous thought, there is reason to suspect the work of evil angels. They aggravate evil passions by “touching the springs of the animal machine,” easily disturbing the vulnerable e quilibrium of the body-soul interface.72 This is why Satan is constantly viewed in Scripture as te mpte r and a rchdeceiver.73 Both believers and unbelievers are tempted to sin. The hosts of demonic powers are actively tempting and deceiving amid the symptoms of illness, anxiety, addictions, and psychological disturbances.74 No good is done without the assistance of God, no evil without the tempting of the Adversary.75 Wesley conjectured that many illnesses of our body-soul condition (the psychosomatic interface), “both of the acute and chronical kind, are either occasioned or increased by diabolical agency; particularly those tha t begin in an instant.” Merely describing these as nervous illnesses is a ra tionaliza tion ignotum pe r ignotius (explaining something unknown by something even more unknown). “For what do we know of nerves themselves? Not even whether they are solid or hollow!”76 c. S piritual Combat Scripture calls us to put on the whole a rmor of God in this conflict, having the mind of Christ, calling upon his name, walking the narrow way, avoiding offense, 70“Of Evil Angels," B 3:20, sec. 1.6. 71 “Of Evil Angels,” B 3:21-23, sec. 2.2-4; cf. Le tte r to the Bishop of Glouce ste r 11:495 - 96. 72“Of Evil Angels," B 3:20-27, sec. 2. 73B 1:187-88; 3:566; 9:385; FA, B 11:123-24. 74“Of Evil Angels," B 3:20-27, sec. 2. 75“Of Evil Angels," B 3:24, sec. 2.9; cf. 1:29-30; FA, B 11:120-21. 76“Of Evil Angels," B 3:25-26, sec. 2.12. 145

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

gra s ping the s hield of fa ith to cast aside the de vil’s fie ry da rts , we a ring the he lme t of s a lva tion against doubt, re ma ining steadfast in fa ith even a mid the roa r of lions .77 The fa ithful are urged to be wa ry of the time whe n Satan “tra ns forms hims e lf into an angel of light.” The n “wa tch a nd pra y tha t you e nter not into te mpta tion.”78 When te mpta tions come, the y are vie we d by fa ith as “occasions of fighting tha t you may conquer. If there is no fight, there is no victory.”79 The tria l continue s da ily: "Ea ch day will bring jus t te mpta tion e nough a nd power e nough to conque r it.... The unction of the Holy One is give n to be lie ve rs for this ve ry e nd — to enable the m to dis tinguis h (which othe rwis e would be impos s ible) be twe e n s in a nd te mpta tion. And this you will do not by any general rule , but by lis te ning to Him on a ll pa rticula r occasions a nd by your cons ulting with thos e tha t have e xperie nce in the ways of God.”80 God pe rmitte d Satan to te mpt a nd deceive Job because God kne w Job would be give n grace to re s is t te mpta tion. God gives our fre e dom a wide range of ope ra tion but hedges fre e dom a t the point a t which it becomes s e lf-des tructive .81 The mora l la w functions to prote ct us from te mpta tion. As a pa re nt is gracious in ins tructing a child not to pla y ne a r a pre cipice , so God is gra cious in giving us the Ten Comma ndme nts , which begin, “Thou s ha lt not.” The good pa re nt is a living pa rtne r who knows whe n to say no out of love, a nd whe n to leave fre e dom room to play. The he dging of the La w is motiva te d by prote cting love. To those who asked why God bothe rs with these s e conda ry incorpore a l agencies a nd why he does not s imply a ct unila te ra lly a nd dire ctly, We s le y appealed to S cripture , whe re the re is s pe cific te s timony to these s upe rpe rs ona l agents. The y assist in a ccomplis hing God’s purpose s. The y re main an e nduring fa ct of the history of re ve la tion. God is working through good minis te ring s pirits a nd s piritua l powe rs against a ll re s idual e vil s piritua l powers towa rd a fina l cons umma tion of his purpos e in cre a tion.82 d. In Earth as in He ave n The te xt of the homily “In Ea rth as in Heaven” is Ma tthe w 6:10: “Thy will be done in e a rth, as it is in heaven” [Homily #145 (1734), B 4:346-50 (not in the Jacks on e dition)]. We are ca lle d to do the will of God on e a rth as the angels do it in heaven. The whole scope of an e thic of obe die nce is implie d in the te xt. We s le y’s purpos e was to s how the extens ive na ture of angelic obe die nce as a pa tte rn for the obe die nce of fa ith a mong huma ns .83 The prototype of a ll pra yer is “Thy will be done in e a rth, as it is in heaven” (Ma tt. 6:10). 77“Of Evil Angels," B 3:27 - 29, sec. 3.1-3; CH 7:250 - 52, 785 - 86. 78"Of Evil Angels," B 3:28 - 29, sec. 3.4 - 6. 79Letter to Damaris Perronet, March 30,1771, LJW 5:234. “Letter to Elizabeth Briggs, April 14, 1771, LJW 5:237. 8I“Of EvU Angels," B 3:26, sec. 2.14. 82“Of Evd Angels," B 3:27-29, sec. 3. 83“In Earth as in Heaven,” B 4:348, pref. 146

CREATION, PROVIDENCE, AND EVIL

The re are three de fining aspects in a ngelic obedie nce : doing what God wills , in the m anner God wills , a nd with the m otive God inte nds . The obe die nce of fa ith follows the same pa tte rn. Ne gative ly, fa ith seeks “to do nothing but wha t is the will of God.” Positively, fa ith seeks "to do all tha t is the will of God: i.e., conta ine d in the Scripture s," as inte rpre te d by the a ncie nt Chris tia n writers , whe the r le ft to huma n reason for conte xtua liza tion, or whe the r indire ctly bidde n by God in obe die nce to the “laws of the church a nd state.” In any case, we are ca lle d to do a ll tha t is God’s will as he wills it, "in tha t measure a nd with tha t a ffe ction only,” a nd with “right motive ... because he wills it.”84 “Ange ls do a ll tha t is the will of God, a nd tha t only,” pre cis ely as God wills it, “in tha t measure a nd with tha t a ffe ction only,” a nd with the “right motive , i.e., tha t we do all, a nd do a ll thus , only because he wills it.”85 Given these parameters, Wesley asked, is such obe die nce possible for the fa ithful in this life? “Without idly dis puting whe the r we can do thus or no, le t us do wha t we can. And we can, if we will, make his will a t least the sine qua non in a ll our actions. And if we do this , we sha ll in time do more.”86 All who follow Chris t are invite d to say with him firs t, “Not my will,” a nd on this basis, "but thine , be done " (Luke 22:42). "So fa r only as s e lf goes out,” a nd s e lf-will is conque re d, ca n God come in. We are be ing ca lle d to “do the will of God on e a rth as it is done in heaven.”87

C. Providence 1. On Divine Providence The te xt of the homily “On Divine Provide nce” is Luke 12:7: “Even the ve ry ha irs ofyour head are a ll numbe re d” [Homily #67 (1786), B 2:534-50; J #67, VL313-25]. a. Only God Could Give a Full Account of Provide nce Much in God’s purpos e ful a ctivity re ma ins for finite crea ture s a mystery. This is for a good reason: only the e te rnally Omnis cient One could offe r a re lia ble a ccount of God’s "ma nner of gove rning the world.” Only the e te rnally Omnipre s e nt One could adequately grasp the origina ting vis ion and goal a nd interme dia ry links and ove ra ll de s ign of provide nce. S ufficie nt intima tions of this gove rna nce , however, have be e n give n in general oudine in S cripture , which is vie we d as the ve rita ble “his tory of God.’’88 Although the He bra ic-Chris tia n te a ching of provide nce has be e n intuitive ly grasped by the wise ofa ll ages from Ca to to the Chickasaws, and indis tinctly attested by a ncie nt poets a nd philosophe rs , it a waited the his tory of Israel to be come more 84“In Ea rth as in Heaven,” B 4:349, sec. 2, ita lics added. 85“In Ea rth as in Heaven,” B 4:348 - 49. 86“ln Ea rth as in Heaven,” B 4:349, sec. 3.3. 87“In Ea rth as in Heaven,” B 4:349 - 50, sec. 3. 88“On Divine Providence,” B 2:536, sec. 4. 147

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

e xplicitly unders tood.89 Among the fore mos t classic Chris tia n doctrine s , "the re is scarce any tha t is so little regarded, and perhaps so little unde rs tood” as provide nce.90 As sole Crea tor who has “ca lle d out of nothing, by his a ll-powerful word, the whole unive rse , a ll tha t is,” God da ily sustains cre a tion "in the be ing which he has give n it."91 The same one who cre a te d all, ma inta ins all, as omnipres e nt pa rticipa tor in a nd omniscie nt dis cerne r of a ll tha t is.92 At e ve ry mome nt, God sustains wha t God has created, even if mis e ra bly fa llen.93 The guiding te xt of the homily on provide nce is “Inde e d, the ve ry ha irs of your head are a ll numbe re d. Don’t be a fra id; you are worth more tha n ma ny s pa rrows” (Luke 12:7 NIV). God’s care extends not only to the ma crocos mic design of the whole but to every microcos mic e xpre s s ion, each discre te ha ppe ning, as s ymbolized by a pa rticula r ha ir on a s pe cific head. Eve ry dis tinct aspect of cre a ture ly be ing is quie tly uphe ld in be ing by provide nce , for “nothing is so s ma ll or ins ignifica nt in the s ight of me n as not to be an obje ct of the care a nd provide nce of God.”94 Though it is be yond “our na rrow unde rs ta ndings ” how a ll this works toge ther, we may le arn pe rs ona lly to trus t the Orde re r a nd Sustainer.95 This is le a rne d be havior: to trus t God without be ing able to see as God sees. The e te rna l, a ll-knowing God sees a t each mome nt the mutual interconne ctions of each dive rs e cre a ture a nd of the whole as it works toge the r.96 This knowle dge include s the "inanimate pa rts of cre ation," as we ll as pla nts , a nima ls , incorpore a l s pirits , a nd huma ns with a ll the ir thoughts , feelings, a nd conditions . God “sees a ll the ir s uffe rings , with e ve ry circums ta nce of them.”97 “His te nde r me rcie s are over a ll his works ” (Ps. 145:9).98 "It is hard, inde e d, to compre he nd this; nay, it is ha rd to be lie ve it, cons ide ring the complica te d wicke dne ss, a nd the complica te d mis e ry, which we see on every side. But belie ve it we mus t, unless we make God a liar; a lthough it is sure, no ma n ca n compre he nd it.... Ca n a worm compre he nd a man? How much less ca n it be supposed tha t a ma n can compre he nd God!”99 b. W he the r Fre e dom and Moral Age ncy Are Cons is te nt with Provide nce P rovide nce does not e limina te but ra the r gua rds fre e dom, even whe n fre e dom fa lls. Sin emerges as a toxic waste product of fre e dom. Free will does not contra dict 89“On Divine Providence,” B 2:535-36, secs. 1-4; cf. FA, pt. 2, B 11:227. ‘'‘’“On Divine Providence,” B 2:537, sec. 7. 91“On Divine Providence,” B 2:537 - 38, secs. 8-9; cf. “S piritua l Wors hip,” B 3:91. 92“On Divine Providence," B 2:537 - 39, secs. 8 - 12. 93B 1:523-26; 2:534-50, 577-82; 3:595-608; 4:365-66; J WO 187-88. 94“On Divine Providence,” B 2:537, sec. 6. 95“On Divine Providence," B 2:538 - 39, secs. 9-11. 96“On Gua rdia n Angels," B 4:233 - 34; “The One Thing Needful,” B 4:356; LCM, J X:70 - 71. 97“On Divine Providence,” B 2:539, sec. 12; cf. "On Vis iting the Sick,” 3:391. 98“On Divine Providence," B 2:542, sec. 16. 99“On Divine Providence," B 2:540, sec. 13. 148

CREATION, PROVIDENCE, AND EVIL

provide nce. Thos e give n the gift of fre e dom mus t live with the consequences of abusing it. 100 Suppose one ima gine s tha t it would be be tte r to have a world tha t has no fre edom in it—only stones, no choices. Tha t is not the kind of world God has chosen to create, as is e vide nt from the a ctua l his tory of stones a nd of huma n fre e dom. God creates free human beings both with the ca pacity to e njoy life with him and an a ptitude for dis torting the created world. 101 It is the ore tica lly conceivable tha t God could decree the imme dia te de s truction of a ll forms of e vil. But if the pos s ibility of vice we re a bs olute ly de stroye d, so also would be the pos s ibility of virtue , since virtue a nd vice are conne cte d expressions of fre edom. We ca nnot have it both ways: both fre e dom a nd the prote ction of fre edom from a ll its pote ntia l follie s . If we have a world in which fre e dom ca n exercise its e lf in the dire ction of virtue , we mus t a llow thos e conditions in which fre edom might fa ll into vice. God does not desire to see fre e dom fa ll, but in the inte re s t of fre e dom, he pe rm its the conditions in which fre e dom is able to fa ll. Othe rwis e we would be ha rd-pre s se d to e xpla in the obvious fa ct tha t fre e dom has inde e d fa lle n in this world.102 God does not pe rmit any te mpora l e vil tha t does not “cle a r the way for gre a ter good.”103 Ha d God a bolis he d s in by fia t, he would be re pudia ting his own wis dom in cre a ting free compa niona te beings. P rovide nce is not vie wed s imply as the unila te ral decree of God but ra the r as working s yne rgis tica lly a mid comple x layers of causality.104 It is God’s wa y of working within the fre e dyna mics of s e lf-de te rmina tion e mbe dde d in na tura l ca us a lity so as to e licit our fre e responses through grace. 105 Huma n choos ing is gove rne d by its Orde re r as ha ving ra tional fre edom, “not as s tock or stone."106 Provide nce acts not only through the re lia ble rule s of na tura l ca us a lity but a mid a fre ewhee ling, proxima te ly inde te rmina te his tory, he dging and pe rs uading a nd cons training huma n folly. In re s ponding to the cons ta nt pe rmutations of fre e dom in his tory, God does not e ve r a bdica te his own cha ra cte r or a ba ndon his purpos e in cre a tion, for God ca nnot “de ny hims e lf... counte ra ct hims e lf, or oppose his own work.”107 God “has ne ve r pre clude d himse lf from ma king e xce ptions” to the laws of na ture “whe n so ever he pleases.”108 100“On Divine Providence,” B 2:541, sec. 15. 101“On Divine Providence," B 2:540 - 41, secs. 14- 15. 102“ The Image of God," B 4:294-95. For an illus tra tion of how God's provide nce pe rmitte d the independence of the Ame rica n colonie s to work its e lf out towa rd a greater end, see “The Late Work of God in North Ame rica," B 3:594-608. 103“On Gua rdia n Angels,” B 4:234. 104For comme nts on Arminia nis m and synergism, see LfW 5:89; 6:331; 7:247; B 9:65; JJW 2:473. I05“On Divine Providence," B 2:541, secs. 12-13; for a furthe r dis tinction be twe e n cre a tion and provide nce , see "Thoughts upon God’s Sovereignty,” J X:361. 106“On Divine Providence," B 2:540 - 41, sec. 15. 107“On Divine Providence," B 2:539-41, secs. 13-15. 108“On Divine Providence," B 2:546, sec. 22. 149

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

c. Comple me ntary S phere s of Provide nce The re are three concentric circle s in which the provide nce of God is working with va ried te mpo a nd intention: all of nature and human his tory (general providence) all the baptized who have been claimed into the redemptive community (professing providence) and especially in a ll those who, having confirme d and earnestly received the ir baptism and having been jus tifie d, are actively responding to sanctifying grace (pe rfe cting providence)109 In the la st of these circle s are thos e who inde ed wors hip the revealed God in s pirit a nd in truth.110 Firs t, the whole of na ture a nd history is the pe riphe ra l circle , the wide s t arena of God’s s us ta ining a nd providing. The re we see his ca ring a ction. God foresees the needs of a ll things , a ccording to the ir gra ce -give n pla ceme nt in the orde r of cre ation. God, whose “love is not confine d,” does not s imply cre a te a nd a bandon but sustains, nurture s, a nd cares for the cre a te d orde r in tha t wa y tha t best suits the whole .111 This is wha t has been us ua lly ca lle d "general providence,”112 though We s le y had his mind tra ine d on seeing the ge ne ra l always in pa rticula rs : “God acts in heaven, in e a rth, a nd unde r the e a rth, throughout the whole compass of his cre a tion; by s us ta ining a ll things , without which e ve rything would in an insta nt s ink into its primitive nothing; by gove rning all, e ve ry mome nt s upe rinte nding e ve rything tha t he has made; s trongly a nd s we e tly influe ncing all, a nd ye t without de s troying the libe rty of his ra tiona l creatures.”113 Second, this provide ntia l a ctivity, which is ge ne ra lly pre s e nt in a ll na ture and huma n his tory, is more s pe cifica lly and inte ns ive ly e ffe ctive in the wors hiping community, where the Word is procla imed a nd the s a cra me nts a dminis te re d. This s ma lle r circle of providence encompasses a ll the ba ptize d who profess to believe in Chris t, who by honoring God receive from him "a ne a re r conce rn for them.”114 Third, the providence tha t is be he ld ge ne ra lly in a ll of huma nity, and more inte ns ive ly within the wors hiping community, is mos t powe rfully dis ce rne d in those who a ctive ly a nd inte ntionally share life in Chris t. Within this profe s sing community, the re are some who vita lly live the ir fa ith, live out the ir da ily wa lk in Christ, a nd mos t truly e mbody te s timony to God’s saving work e ve rywhe re . The re may be othe rs who are a tta che d s upe rficia lly to the cove na nt community but have not re s ponde d in fa ith to its Word a nd sa cra me nts. Within the ba ptize d community there are whe at a nd ta re s .115 109“S piritua l Worship,” B 3:94, sec. 9; J VI:428. 110“On Divine Providence," B 2:541 -42, secs. 16-18. 11‘“On Divine Providence," B 2:542, sec. 16. “2Cf. B 2:56-57, 544-48; FA, B 11:226-27, 530-31. m“On the Omnipre s e nce of God,” B 4:42 - 43, sec. 2.1. 114“On Divine Providence," B 2:542-43, sec. 17. 115“On Divine Providence," B 2:543, sec. 18.

150

CREATION, PROVIDENCE, AND EVIL

This a ctive third circle of providence circums cribe s those who, ha ving committe d themselves ra dica lly to re orde r the ir live s in re la tion to God’s s e lf-giving, have set the mse lve s to a dis cipline d life in Chris t. The y are the living be lie ve rs whom We s le y de note d as "re a l Chris tia ns ,” who "wors hip God not in form only but in s pirit a nd in truth.”116 This community tha t e mbodie s fa ith a ctive in love is whe re the providentia l a ction of God is mos t e mpha tica lly witnes s e d a nd e xpe rie nce d. This is the arena of God’s providential a ctivity whe re he is mos t a ctive ly s a nctifying a nd comple ting his purpos e in huma nity. It is on this inte rior circle , whe re fa ith becomes a ctive in love, tha t much of the e ns uing dis cus s ion of providence is focus ed.117 2. Special Providence a. Dis tinguis hing Ge ne ral and S pe cial Provide nce We s le y was suspicious of a ny notion ofge ne ral provide nce tha t might implicitly de ny spe cia l provide nce.118 S pe cialprovide nce refers to the ca ring of God in s pe cific ways towa rd pa rticula r persons in s pe cific s itua tions . If God is to a ct in his tory to re de e m wha t is los t, this mus t come to focus in a ctua l concrete events, in unre pe a table time s a nd places whe re tha t divine ca ring is made known a nd e xpe rie nced.119 God does not ne gle ct the whole in ca ring for the pa rt or the pa rt in ca ring for the whole . A general provide nce tha t excludes pa rticula r provide nce is “s e lf-contra dictory nonsense.’’120 We ca nnot reasonably pos it God’s provis ion of the general laws ofnature and the n absolutely dis a llow tha t God may a ct towa rd the special fulfillme nt of his will in pa rticula r s itua tions .121 Tha t would disavow God’s omnipote nce . “Eithe r, the re fore , a llow a pa rticula r provide nce, or do not pre te nd to believe a ny provide nce a t a ll. If you do not be lie ve tha t the Gove rnor of the world governs a ll things in it, s ma ll a nd gre a t; tha t fire a nd ha il, s now a nd va pour, wind and s torm, fulfil his word; tha t he rule s kingdoms a nd citie s , fle e ts a nd a rmie s , a nd a ll the individua ls where of the y are compos e d (a nd ye t without forcing the wills of men, or necessitating any of the ir actions ), do not a ffe ct to be lie ve tha t he governs a nything.”122 b. Dis ce rning S pe cial Acts of Provide nce The re cognition of spe cia l provide nce is a highly pe rs ona l form of knowing. We s le y was convince d tha t his own minis trie s we re a bundantly a ccompa nie d by s pe cial evidences of quiet provide ntia l orde ring. Almighty God is fre e to bre a k U6“On Divine Providence,” B 2:543, sec. 18. u7“On Divine Providence," B 2:543 - 44, secs. 18-19. 118“On Divine Providence,” B 2:546; cf. FA, pt. 2, B 11:226-27; LCM, J X:71; “Wa nde ring Thoughts,” 2:132; JJW 4:211, July 6,1781. Wesley thought the idea ofgeneral provide nce could devolve into “a s ounding word which means jus t nothing,” “The Na ture of Enthusiasm,” B 2:56. 1,9“On Divine Providence,” B 2:546 - 48, secs. 23-26; cf. 2:56 - 57, 544 - 48; FA, B 11:226-27, 530-31. 120“On Divine Providence," B 2:548, sec. 26. 121"P rinciple s of a Me thodis t Fa rthe r Explained,” B 9:207 - 22,396 - 97; 11:147 - 53,468 - 69,512-17. 122“An Estimate of the Ma nne rs of the Present Times,” J XI:160, sec. 13, ita lics added. 151

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

through the us ually re liable arena of na tura l ca us a lity.123 To cons truct a vie w of re a lity tha t omits any pos s ibility of divine inte rve ntion re quire s an a rbitra ry na rrowing of re a lity.124 We sle y was inte ns e ly inte re s te d in inve s tiga ting pa ra norma l a ctivitie s , special acts of provide nce , from he alings to earthquakes, seeking to dis cern the contours of God’s judgment a nd grace in his tory.125 Whe n he vis ited his bands, he asked each one how God was e na bling a nd he dging the ir way, a nd how the y we re interpre ting the providence of God in the ir pe rs ona l e xpe rie nce .126 This e ncoura ge d believers to furthe r trus t God’s providing a nd to be come aware of each unfolding gift of provide nce . Be lie ve rs are ca lle d to receive e ve rything e xce pting s in as give n by the ha nd of God.127 God’s care for the world in general a nd the fa ithful in pa rticula r calls us to wholly trus t the Sustainer of a ll things , to tha nk God for cons ta nt providential care, to wa lk humbly as we celebrate God’s pe rsona l intere s t in cre a tures, a nd to use the means of grace provide d.128 Thos e who obs tina tely turn the ir backs on providence make themselves vulne rable to despair. Thos e who orde r the ir live s a round it are in tha t measure ope ne d to une xpe cte d blessings. A special form of happiness comes from knowing tha t God is ca ring for us even unde r conditions of adversity. 129 If spe cia l provide nce s are rule d out by some logic a lie n to S cripture , the n “the ha irs of our he a d are no longe r numbe re d, a nd not only a s pa rrow, but a city, an e mpire , may fa ll to the ground, without the will or care of our heavenly Father.”130 The general providing a ctivity a t time s has spe cia l e xpressions of the divine inte ntiona lity in discre te provide ntia l events. S cripture ma inta ins tha t providence extends to every individua l in the whole system of beings which [God] hath made; tha t a ll natural causes of every kind depend wholly upon his will; and he increases, lessens, suspends, or destroys the ir efficacy, according to his own good pleasure; tha t he uses pre ternatural causes at his will, —the ministry of good or of e vil angels; and tha t he hath never yet precluded hims e lf from e xe rting his own imme dia te power, from speaking life or death into any of his creatures, from looking a world into being or into nothing.131 123“Serious Thoughts Occasioned by the Late Earthquake at Lisbon,” J XI:1 -13. 124"On Divine Providence," B 2:546 - 47, secs. 22-25. 125’Serious Thoughts Occa sioned by the La te Earthquake at Lisbon,”) XI:3-4. 126Cf. "The P rovide ntia lly Prote cte d Person,” in The Elusive Mr. Wesley: John Wesley, His Own Biographe r, ed. Richa rd He itze nra te r (Na s hville : Abingdon, 1984), 125-30. 127“The Na ture of Enthusiasm," B 2:56-57. 128“On Divine Providence," B 2:548-50, secs. 27-29. 129These same ideas of provide nce are embedded in Homily #39, "The Ca tholic Spirit,” B 2:79-80, in a series of personal questions assumed to be a ffirma tive ly answered by anyone whose life is hidde n in Chris t: “Dos t thou believe tha t he now upholde th a ll things by the word of his powe r’? And tha t he governs even the mos t minute , even the mos t noxious, to his own glory, a nd the good of the m tha t love him?” 130To those who a llow “only a general Providence," Wesley confessed, “1 do not unde rsta nd the term.” FA, B11:227, J VIIL159. 131FA,B 11:227, J VIIL159. 152

CREATION, PROVIDENCE, AND EVIL

Wesley was vexed that so “few persons unde rsta nd... the doctrine of a Particular Providence ... at least, not practically, so as to apply it to every circumstance of life.” He was particularly irritate d to hear God’s "government of the world continua lly found fault with.”132 Yet at times an excessive or highly subjective stress on special providence caused Wesley to caution against "enthusiasm.”133 3. On God's Sovereignty

a. Thoughts on God’s S ove re ignty We next focus on "Thoughts upon God’s Sovereignty” [J X:361 — 63]. God creates according to his sovereign will and governs justly all that has been created.134 God does not overleap and displace human freedom by coercing human decision making. Rather, he supplies humanity with sufficient grace to which freedom can respond and for which freedom is accountable. It is no diminution of the sovereign freedom of God to hold that human beings are morally free and responsible. Only an incomparably wise and powerful God could abide having vulnerable human freedom in a good universe. Wesley posited a divine freedom that transcends all human freedom while s till preserving moral accountability.135 No finite creature is in a moral position to ask the Creator whether the creation was created jus tly or not, for creation is always sheer gift. There is no reasonable basis for the contingent creature to lodge a complaint of injustice toward the sovereign Creator.136 Prior to creation, God was free to create as he pleased. Having created, as Governor, God does not act by fiat as “a mere Sovereign ... but as an impa rtia l Judge, guided in all things by invariable justice,” which presupposes "free-agency.”137 "In some cases, mercy rejoices over justice .... God may reward more, but he will never punish more than s trict justice requires.” It belongs to the omniscient justice of God to reproach no one "for doing anything which he could not possibly avoid” or for “omitting anything which he could not possibly do.”138 b. W he the r Miracle s Have Ceased Here we will look at Wesley’s "Letter to the Rev. Dr. Conyers Middleton Occasioned by His Late ‘Free Inquiry’” (LCM), dated January 4, 1749 [J X:1 -79; LJW 2:312ff.; last section in JWO, 181ff.; first part reprinted as “A Plain Account of Genuine Chris tia nity”]. Dr. Conyers Middleton of Trinity College, Cambridge, published in 1748 A Free 132Le tte r to Ebene zer Blackwell, Augus t 31,1755, LJW 3:139. m“The Na ture of Enthusiasm," B 2:56 - 57. 134J WO 435 - 36,452 - 53, 486. 135J X:361 -62. ■36J X:361. 137J X:362. 138J X:363. 153

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

Inquiry into the Miraculous Powers W hich Are S upposed to Have S ubsisted in the Chris tian Church, Etc., in which he a rgued tha t no a uthe ntica te d miracle s took place a fte r the time of the a pos tle s .139 His de e pe r motive was to dis cre dit anteNicene sources a ltogethe r by te nde ntious ly s howing the m to be a lre a dy fome nting re ligious corruption. We sle y thought the essay importa nt e nough to cause him to cancel a pla nne d trip to Holla nd and set imme diate ly to answer it, s pe nding "almost twe nty days in tha t unple a s ing e mployme nt.”140 We sle y na rrowed the debate to the ce ntra l point in dis pute : "whe ther the te s timony ofthe Fathers be a s ufficie nt ground to believe tha t mira culous gifts subsisted a t a ll a fte r the days of the Apostles.”141 Wesley cha lle nge d each shre d of propos e d e vide nce pre s e nte d by Middle ton, who s ought to prove tha t wha te ve r mira culous powe rs might have be e n impa rte d to the apostles we re withdra wn from the pos ta pos tolic write rs , who turne d out to be "cre dulous a nd s upe rs titious .” Middle ton offe re d only we a k a rgume nts tha t mira culous powe rs we re withdra wn in the midst of inte ns e ly incre a s ing pe rs e cution. He had charged the pa tris tic writers with e ncoura ging the wors t me die va l corruptions , s uch as mona s ticis m, re lic wors hip, a nd pra ying for the dead, ye t his evidences we re flims y a nd his a rguments dis conne cte d.142 A de va s ta ting critique is offe re d ofthe s chola rs hip underlying the five proposals of Middle ton’s Free Inquiry. We sle y s howe d tha t Middle ton hims e lf quote d nume rous sources (The ophilus of Antioch, Te rtullia n, Minucius Fe lix, Origen, Cypria n, Arnobius , La cta ntius ) contra dicting his own origina l a s s e rtion tha t mira cle s ceased a fte r the time of the apostles. A ve ry loose re a ding of Igna tius "convinces me you have not re a d... one page of it.”143 Me a nwhile , “the fa rthe r you go, the more things you imagine ... yours e lf to have prove d.”144 We s le y de fe nded the cha ra cter a nd inte grity of Cle me nt of Rome, P olyca rp, J us tin Ma rtyr, a nd Ire na e us as trus ta ble write rs willing to die for the truth. 145 Middle ton was na ive ly fixa te d on "gle a ning up e ve ry scrap of he athe n scandal a nd pa lming it upon us as unques tionable evidence.”146 So wha t if Celsus re presented Chris tia n wonde r-worke rs as common cheats, a nd Lucia n vie we d the m as mone y-hungry con a rtis ts ? This did not cons titute re liable e vidence . Us ing bad tra ns lations , pa ra phra se s, mis quota tions , wrong a ttributions , thrown-toge the r se le ctions, incons is te ncie s, a nd non s e quiturs , Middle ton had cons tructe d his case te nde ntiously. Wesley, the itine ra nt pre a che r of the re viva l, was dire ctly ta king on a le ading Ca mbridge te a che r whom ma ny regarded as an e xpert in pa tris tic studies. “P oor Celsus ha d not a second; though he multiplie s , unde r your forming ha nd, into 139W 1:235; 2:88,101,105-6, 207, 210, 229, 350,362. 141W 3:390. 141LCM, J X:5. 142LCM, J X:7-14. 143LCM, J X:19. 144LCM, J X:24. 145LCM, J X:16-24. 146LCM, J X:25. 154

CREATION, PROVIDENCE, AND EVIL

a cloud of witnesses.”147 "You are re s olve d to dra w out of the we ll wha t was ne ve r in it.”148

The incidenta l ina ccura cie s of Justin Ma rtyr a nd Ire nae us ca nnot be used to discre dit a ll of the ir te s timony to the mira culous in the ir time s . Tha t the Fathers s tudie d de monic influe nce s does not cons ign the m to the "grossest cre dulity.”149 Middle ton fa nta s ize d s upers titious jugglers and s windle rs a nd cha rla ta ns at every turn, ye t "the re is no more proof of the ir e ve r e xis ting, tha n of a witch’s s a iling in an egg-shell.”150 Even if some of the e a rly Chris tian write rs we re a t time s mista ke n, tha t “by no means proves tha t the y we re a ll knaves together.” Middle ton had “promis e d great things , a nd pe rforme d jus t nothing” with a "la me piece of work.” We s le y said, "At e ve ry dead lift you are sure to play upon us these dear cre a ture s of your own ima gina tion ... your te nth legion.”151 c. Counte ring Naturalis tic R e ductionis m S implis tic na tura lis tic re ductions for va rious type s of mira cle s are less plausible tha n the origina l re ports . The ca s ting out of de monic powe rs ca nnot be re duced to e pile ptic fits or ve ntriloquis m.152 The he aling mira cle s re porte d in the pos ta pos tolic pe riod ca nnot be re duced to the na tural e ffica cie s of oils .153 The se rious his toria n does not select only thos e data tha t re inforce his pre dis pos ing pre judice s. Admitte dly, the hea the n as we ll as e a rly Chris tians cla imed mira culous cures, a nd oil may cure some diseases by na tura l efficacy. We do not know the precise bounds of na tura l causality, ye t "a ll this will not prove tha t no mira culous cures we re pe rforme d ... in the three succeeding ce nturie s” a fte r the apostles.154 The visions and ecstasies of e a rly church write rs we re not of the same kind as thos e of the De lphic P ythia or the Cuma e a n S ibyl.155 The re is no e vide nce tha t vis ions a nd prophe cie s we re “contrive d” by church leaders. To make his case, Middle ton ha d to inve nt nume rous "a dditions of his own” to the te xt "in orde r to make s ome thing out of nothing.”156 As to the gift of tongue s, ma ny cases ma y have gone unrecorde d, but Irenaeus wrote tha t ma ny in his day spoke with tongues. And it is s imply "a n his torical mis take” to assume tha t “this gift has ne ve r once be e n he a rd of” since the Re forma tion, for "it has be e n he a rd of more tha n once, no fa rthe r off tha n the va lle ys of Da uphiny” less tha n fifty years ago.157 147LCM, J X:26-27. 148LCM, J X:29. 149LCM, I X:36. 150LCM, J X:37. 151LCM, J X:38. 152LCM, J X:44-46. 1S iLJW 1:235; 2:88,101, 105-6,207, 210,229, 362, 350. 154LCM, J X:41. 155LCM, J X:47. 156LCM, J X:48. 157LCM, J X:54.

15 5

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

It is a futile e ffort to try to prove tha t ma rtyr a pologis ts we re fra uds. For “they we re ha te d.... And this ve ry ha tre d would na turally prompt [oppone nts ] to examine the ground of the challenges da ily repeated by the m the y hated; we re it only tha t, by dis cove ring the fra ud ... the y might have ha d a be tter pre te ns e for throwing the Chris tia ns to the lions.”158 The re is no room to “doubt of the truth of the facts the rein asserted, seeing the a pologists consta ndy de sired the ir enemies ‘to come and see the m with the ir own eyes’ — a hazard which those ‘cra fty me n’ would ne ve r have run, ha d not the facts themselves be e n ce rtain.’’159

Further Reading on Creation and Providence Collins , Kenneth. A Faithful Witness: John Wesley’s Hom ile tical Theology, 25-29. Wilmore , KY: Wesleyan Heritage, 1993. Lipscomb, Andre w A. “Providence of God in Methodism.” In Wesley Me m orial Volume, e dite d by J. O. A. Clark, 383-403. Ne w York: Phillips & Hunt, 1881. Mile y, John. S ystematic Theology. Reprint, Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1989. Pope, Willia m Burt. A Compendium of Chris tian Theology. 3 vols. London: Wesleyan Me thodis t Book-Room, 1880. Rack, He nry D. “Piety and Providence.” In Reasonable Enthusiast, 420 - 71. Philadelphia: Trinity Press Inte rnationa l, 1985.

Ralston, Thomas N. Elements ofDivinity. Ne w York: Abingdon, 1924. Slaatte, Howa rd A. Fire in the Brand: Introduction to the Creative Work and Theology ofJohn Wesley, 115f£ New York: Exposition, 1963. Summers, Thomas O. S ystematic Theology. 2 vols. Edited by J. J. Tigert. Nashville: Me thodis t Publishing House South, 1888. Watson, Richard. Theological Institutes. 2 vols. Ne w York: Mason and Lane, 1836,1840; edited by John M’Clintock, Ne w York: Ca rlton & Porter, 1850. Wood, R. W. “God in His tory: Wesley a Child of Providence.” MQR 78 (1929): 94-104.

D. Theodicy The odicy means an a tte mpt to jus tify God in full re cognition of the presence and powe r of e vil. A the odicy offe rs re a s oning a bout how e vil a nd s uffe ring are to be unders tood in re la tion to re a s oning a bout divine jus tice , powe r, a nd love. In his homilie s "The P romise of Unde rs ta nding” a nd "The Ge ne ra l Deliverance,” and in nume rous letters , We sle y e xplicitly set forth a pe netra ting the odicy. At age twe ntysix, We s le y wrote to his fa the r a s e a rching the ologica l re fle ction on e vil [Le tte r to His Father, January 15, 1731, on Archbis hop Willia m King’s Origin of Evil, B 25:264 - 67], which we will now examine. I58LCM, J X:60. 159LCM, J X:60-61. 156

CREATION, PROVIDENCE, AND EVIL

1. Whence Comes Evil? a. Unde Malum ?160 How came e vil into the world? 161 The Ma nicha e an s uppos ition of "two supreme, inde pe nde nt principle s is ne xt door to a contra diction in te rms.... Nay, if the re can be two essentially dis tinct absolute infinitie s , there may be an infinity of such absolute infinitie s ."162 “It is jus t as re pugna nt to Infinite Goodness to create wha t it foresaw would be spoile d by a nothe r as to create wha t would be spoile d by the cons titution of its own na ture .... But if it could be prove d tha t to pe rmit e vils in the world is cons is te nt with, nay, necessarily re s ults from, infinite goodness, the n the difficulty would vanish.”163 Why does God pe rmit pain? Pain is necessary to make us wa tchful against it, and to wa rn us of wha t it tends toward, as is the fear of death likewise, which is of use in many cases tha t pain does not reach. From these all the passions necessarily s pring.... But if pain and the fear of death were extinguished, no animal could long subsist. Since therefore these evils are necessarily joine d with more than e quiva le nt goods, the n permitting these is not repugnant to, but flows from, infinite goodness. The same observation holds as to hunger, thirs t, childhood, age, diseases, wild beasts, and poisons. The y are all therefore pe rmitte d because each of the m is necessarily connected with such a good as outweighs the e vil.164 Why does God pe rmit the fre e exercise of huma n libe rty? By libe rty I mean an active, s e lf-de te rmining power, which does not choose things because they are pleasing, but is pleased with the m because it chooses the m.... Tha t man partakes of this principle I conclude, (1) because experience shows it; (2) because we observe in ourselves the signs and propertie s of such a power. We observe we can counteract our appetites, senses, and even our reason if we so choose; which we ca nnot otherwise account for than by a dmitting such a power in ourselves.... If, therefore, this be the noblest of a ll our faculties, then our chie f happiness lies in the due use of [this libe rty].165 This libe rty s ome time s yie lds “pa in, na me ly whe n it fa lls s hort of wha t it chooses, which may come to pass if we choose other things impos s ible to be had, or incons is te nt with each othe r, or such as are out of our powe r.... And into these foolis h choice s we may be be tra ye d e ithe r by ignora nce , negligence, by indulging lb0“Unde Malum , or Whe nce Comes Evil? A Response to Archbis hop Willia m Kings De Origine Mali: LJW 1:64, 68; 8:254; B 2:234. 161 “Evil is a de via tion from those measures of e te rna l, une rring order a nd reason not to choose what is worthy to be chosen ... [thus ] we may fa irly a ccount for the origin of e vil from the pos s ibility of a va rious use of our liberty.” Le tte r to His Father, De ce mbe r 19,1729, on Humphre y Ditton's vie w of the origin of e vil (B 25:242). ‘“Paraphrasing Humphre y Ditton, in Le tte r to His Father, De ce mbe r 19, 1729, B 25:241. ‘“Le tte r to His Father, January 15,1731, B 25:264-67; cf. B 4:279-80, 285-86. 164Le tte r to His Father, January 15,1731, B 25:265. '“Le tte r to His Father, January 15, 1731, B 25:265-66, para phra sing Willia m King. 157

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

the exercise of libe rty too far, by obstina cy, or ha bit; or la s tly by the importunity of our na tural appetites. He nce it appears how ca utious we ought to be in choosing.”166 b. Thre e Pos s ible Ways God Could Have Hinde re d Cre ature s from Abus ing The ir Libe rty P re te nd ins ofa r as possible to put yours elf in God’s place by a sking wha t God’s options we re in a llowing libe rty to be come abused. The re are three ways by which God might have hinde red his cre a ture s from thus abusing the ir libe rty: 1. By not creating any being free. But had this me thod been taken, then • the whole universe would have been a mere machine; • tha t would have been wa nting which is most pleasing to God of a nything in the universe — namely, the virtuous fre edom of his reasonable creatures; • his reasonable creatures would have been in a worse state tha n they are now; for only free agents can be pe rfectly happy, as without a pos s ibility of choosing wrong, there can be no freedom. 2. By ove rruling this power and constra ining the m to choose right. But this would have been to do and undo, to contra dict himself, to take away what he had given. 3. By placing them where they should have no te m ptation to abuse it. But this, too, would have been the same in effect as to have given the m no libe rty at all.167 Without a llowing fre e dom to fa ll, God would have de prive d huma nity of its mos t dis tinctive gift. Rather, God honore d humanity by gra nting libe rty the poss ibility of choos ing wrongly, with its tra in of pa inful consequences.

2. The Promise of Understanding in the Future The te xt of the e a rly homily "The Promis e of Unde rs tanding” is John 13:7 (paraphrased): “Wha t God does we know not, but sha ll he re a fte r” [Homily #140 (1730), B 4:279-89 (not in the Jackson e dition)]. How a dequate ly ca n we know the purpose s of God in pe rmitting fre e dom to fall? We s le y found comfort in the e s cha tologica lly orie nte d Ne w Te sta me nt te xt: “You do not re alize now wha t I a m doing,” Jesus said as he washed the fe e t of Peter who resisted him, "but late r you will unders ta nd” (John 13:7 NIV). From this inte rchange, We s le y me dita te d on the pre va iling ignora nce of huma n finitude. a. The De s ire to Know: Ordinate and Inordinate Rightly bounde d, the de sire to know is ple a s ura ble a nd fruitful. This desire prompts us to improve our re a soning, awakens curios ity, a nd readies us to receive knowledge . "So long as this is conta ine d within prope r bounds a nd directe d to prope r obje cts , there is scarce in the mind of ma n a more de lightful or more useful inclina tion” tha n the de sire to know. It is "one of the e a rlie st principle s in the soul.”168 166Le tte r to His Father, January 15,1731, B 25:266; for subseque nt reference to the origin of e vil, see B 2:401 - 3,434, 476; LJW 1:44,64n, 68, 305, 309; 5:117; IJW 8:285. 167Le tte r to His Father, January 15,1731, B 25:267, paraphrasing Willia m King, ita lics added. !68“The Promise of Unde rsta nding," B 4:281, pref. 1. 158

CREATION, PROVIDENCE, AND EVIL

This pleasurable desire to know, which when bounded makes joyful the heart and enlightens the eyes, may become idolatrously fixed on improper objects so as to e licit pain. Whe n this desire extends its e lf beyond its proper boundaries, the searching is never content, ever unsatisfied. 169 Wesley was intrigued by the scriptural paradox that we are able to know so little in this life, yet we are promised full knowing at the final resurrection. No one can in this flesh "find out the Almighty to perfection,” yet this is no intrins ic tragedy or evil, for we are scripturally promised that we shall adequately “know hereafter.”170 b. Pre s ent De ficits in our Knowle dge ofNature Wesley set forth a series of scriptural arguments on why finite minds cannot know how the infinite God has ordered the world, the heavens, the heart, grace, or life in the Spirit; why it is impossible to say why evil is permitted a temporary place in creation; why God has not made humanity from the outset perfect; why inequalities are permitted among free creatures shaped by varied temperaments; and why God permits the noblest of creatures to remain so long in such wretched ignorance. No finite mind can fully grasp how God has ordered the world, even if fragmentary evidences of this ordering abound “daily before our eyes.”171 From the far reaches of our cosmological ignorance to the inward depths of our self-ignorance, the lia bility is the same: we can know that the cosmos and the self are ordered but not exhaustively why. Wesley employed Newton’s theory of gravity as an example: It is clear that there is an attraction, a “tendency in every natural body to approach to every other," that there is a secret chain by which all parts of the universe are meaningfully connected. But when we ask how this tendency has become universally balanced and what the universal cohesion and spring of the whole of nature precisely is, we can appeal only to such rational concepts as a "law of nature” or to such metaphors as “the finger of God." At some point our knowledge of the "infinite variety” and "perfect regularity” of natural processes comes to its limit.172 c. W he the r the S prings ofHum an Action Are Uns e archable The psychosomatic interface is jus t as much a mystery to human knowing as is the heavenly panoply. “Who knows how the thought of [a man’s] inmost soul immediately strikes the outmost part of his body? How an impression made on the outmost part of his body immediately strikes his inmost soul,”173 as in the case of a blush, for example, or a prick of the skin? How is life knit with the body? In what way is s pirit enclosed in matter? These are open to empirical inquiry. We are not without rational competencies to describe some aspects of this interface, but finally 169B 1:208; 2:561; 3:183-84; 4:341. 170“The Promise of Unde rsta nding,” B 4:282, pref. 5. 17‘“The Promise of Unde rsta nding,” B 4:282, sec. 1.1. 172“The Promise of Unde rsta nding,” B 4:283, sec. 1.1; on gra vita tion see B 3:93; 4:283. I73“The Promise of Unde rsta nding,” B 4:283, sec. 1.2. 159

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

“ma n is a ll a mys te ry to hims e lf. That God does work wonde rfully in him he knows , but the m anner of his working he ca nnot know; it is too wonde rful for his present capacity. Whe the r he surveys his own ha nd or he art or head, he sees numbe rle ss foots te ps of the Almighty, but va inly does he a tte mpt to tra ce the m up to the ir s pring: ‘clouds and darkness are round a bout him.' ”174 More ove r, the s prings of grace are unsearchable. Effe ctua l pra yer avails much, "but how it avails we ca nnot e xplain. How God acts upon us in consequence of our frie nds’ prayers ... we ca nnot know.”175 All whys beg for e s cha tologica l reference. d. Vie wing Natural, Moral, and Pe nal Evil Es chatologically Why and how God acts a nd hedges a nd opens a nd closes doors re ma ins in this time a nd space unknowa ble but is prom is e d to be known he re after At pre se nt we cannot say why God suffered e vil to have a place in his creation; why he, who is so infinite ly good himself, who made a ll things "ve ry good”... pe rmitte d what is so e ntire ly contra ry to his own nature, and so destructive of his noblest works. "Why are sin and its attendant pain in the world?” has been a question ever since the world began, and the world will probably end before human understandings have answered it with any certainty.176 We s le y’s the odicy argued tha t all e vil is e ithe r natural, moral, or penal; tha t na tura l e vil or pain is no e vil at all if it be overbalanced with the following pleasure; tha t mora l evil, or sin, cannot possibly befall anyone unless those who willingly embrace, who choose it; and tha t penal evil, or punishme nt, ca nnot possibly be fall any unless they likewise choose it by choosing sin. This e ntire ly cuts off all imputa tion on the justice or goodness of God, since it can never be proved tha t it is contrary to e ither of these to give his creatures [the] libe rty of embracing e ithe r good or evil, to put happiness and misery in the ir own hands, to leave them the choice of life and death.177 But “why did God give the m tha t choice? It is sure, in so doing he did not act contra ry to a ny of his a ttribute s ." But might God have compounde d us in some other way? Suppose God had de termine d tha t ma n could be happy complete ly apart from his own choice, “to have le t him know only life,” “to have tie d him down to ha ppiness, to have given him no choice of misery.” Such choicelessness could ha rdly be te rme d huma n. “The All-wis e could not do a nything without s ufficie nt motive s .... But wha t the y are is hid from huma n eyes ... reasons the y are which the ear of man ha th not heard, nor can it ye t e nte r into the he art to conceive.”178

l74“The 175“The 176“The 177Ibid. 178“The 160

Promise of Unde rsta nding,” B 4:284, sec. 1.2; Ps. 97:2, ita lics added. Promise of Unde rsta nding," B 4:284, sec. 1.4. Promise of Unde rsta nding,” B 4:285, sec. 2.1. Promise of Unde rsta nding,” B 4:285 - 86, sec. 2.1.

CREATION, PROVIDENCE, AND EVIL

e. Why Ine qualitie s and Boundarie s Pre vail in Te mporal Cre ation Even a mong thos e who choose the blessed, holy wa lk, the re are ine qua litie s tha t none can e xpla in. Even if we are give n life within s pecific bounds , God has not "so bounde d any ofhis ra tiona l cre a ture s” but tha t the y ma y obta in some degree of ha ppiness. Such bounds e licit the virtue s of e mpa thy a nd perseverance. In much s uffe ring we may "commonly tra ce the immedia te reason of the s uffe ring. We ma y commonly observe tha t [the ] pa rticula r a ffliction unde r which a ma n la bors e ithe r is pointe d a t the pa rticula r vice to which he na tura lly incline s , or is conducive to tha t virtue he pa rticula rly wa nts . But if we move one step further, we are los t again. We ca nnot te ll why it was tha t he was s uffe red to be na tura lly incline d.”179 Even if I ca n ide ntify tha t my s uffe ring is due to pride , which has the good purpos e of bringing me to humility, “ye t the difficulty re curs — ‘But why did the good God s uffe r me to be so prone to pride?’" I am le ft to e xcla im, “How unse a rcha ble are his judgments , a nd his ways past finding out!” (Rom. 11:33). 180 f. Why Ignorance ofthe Caus e s ofEvil Re mains Our Portion in This Life We s le y offe re d four a rgume nts 181 in de fe ns e of God pe rmitting huma n ignora nce : 1. Such “ignora nce may teach us the us e fulle s t knowledge, may lead us to humility, tha t, cons cious how little we can know of him, we ma y be the more inte nt upon knowing ourselves.” By coming to te rms with "our utte r ina bility to unde rs ta nd ... we may s e rious ly a pply to wha t we are able to unde rs ta nd — the ma nne r and reasons of our own [a cting].” Wha t else could teach us a more re a lis tic assessment of ourselves “tha n to have so ma ny instances da ily be fore us of the impe rfe ction of our noble s t e ndowme nt? If reason, boaste d reason, be so impe rfe ct, wha t mus t be the me a ne r pa rts of our frame?”182 2. By pride of knowing the angels fe ll, so le st huma n cre atures also would fa ll by too much knowle dge , "God pe culiarly gua rde d” humanity a gainst s uch profus ion of knowle dge tha t would te mpt toward pride . He nce a blessing flows pre cise ly from our ignorance , which we in our inexpe rience have difficulty gras ping.183 By lim iting our knowledge, God is the reby lim iting our te m ptation to pride . We are thus ta ught humility pre cis e ly by "the pre se nt weakness of our unde rsta nding,” which calls us to a cknowle dge our limits more re a dily a nd hence points towa rd repentance. 184 3. Be twe e n birth a nd death, we are ca lle d to "live by fa ith, not by s ight” (2 Cor. 5:7 NIV). God’s ce ntra l design is not tha t we now see a nd know but tha t we fre e ly believe, with “such an assent as we we re free to give or withhold as de pe nded wholly 179“The Promise of Unde rsta nding,” B 4:286, sec. 2.2. i8°“The Promise of Unde rsta nding,” B 4:286 - 87, sec. 2.2. 181 Wesley divide d these a rgume nts into thre e , with points 1 and 2 be ing he ld toge the r in this passage as a single argument. i82“The Promise of Unde rsta nding,” 4:287, sec. 3.1. 183B 2:131 - 35; 3:172,191 - 92; cf. 2:429 - 30; 4:344. 184“The Promise of Unde rsta nding,” B 4:288, sec. 3.2. 161

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

on our choice. And this inte ntion of our Cre a tor is e xce lle ntly served by the measure of unde rs ta nding we now enjoy. It suffices for fa ith but not for knowledge. We can be lie ve in God — we ca nnot see him.”185 4. The mos t compe lling a pology for the jus tice of re la tive huma n ignora nce is grasped only by be ing vie wed e s cha tologica lly: We s hall know hereafter. We are ignora nt now in orde r to provide an e nte rta inme nt for heaven. And wha t an e nte rta inme nt! To have the curta in drawn at once, and enjoy the full blaze of God’s wis dom and goodness! To see clearly how the Author of this visible world fastened all its pa rts toge the r... tha t amazing union between the body and the soul of man, tha t astonishing correspondence between s pirit and matter, between pe ris hing dust and immorta l fla me !... why he suffered sin and pain to mingle with those works of which he had declared tha t the y were ve ry good! Wha t unspeakable blessings those are which owe the ir being to this curse; wha t infinite beauty arises from, and overbalances this de formity ... fitly reserved for tha t state wherein, being clothed with glory and immorta lity, we shall be ... pure and strong enough to see God!186

E. Evil 1. On Natural Evil Wesley found in the tra gic occurre nce of a de va s tating e a rthqua ke in P ortuga l an occa sion for ca lling Engla nd to come to its senses ["Se rious Thoughts Occa sioned by the Late Ea rthqua ke a t Lis bon” (1755), J XI:3 —10]. The time for re pe nta nce is always limite d.187 Among disasters tha t We sle y re ga rde d as evidences of divine judgme nt — and thus a me rciful ca ll to re pe ntance —we re war, pestilence, severe s torms, and mos t s tunningly, e a rthquake s .188 He we nt to gre at le ngths to inquire e mpirica lly into the causes of the fa lle n rock a t Whits on Cliffs ("I wa lke d, cre pt, a nd climbe d round and ove r a gre a t pa rt of the ruins ”), seeking na tura l ca us a tion ye t ne ve r be ing fully satisfie d tha t the e ve nt could be re duced to “me re ly na tura l cause.”189 We s le y would not leave roma nticis ts in a false peace. "Wha t think you of a come t?... The late inge nious a nd accurate Dr. Ha lle y (ne ver ye t suspected of e nthusiasm) fixes the re turn of the gre a t come t in the year 1758 [thre e years hence]; and he observes tha t the last time it revolved, it move d in the ve ry same line which the e a rth describes in he r a nnua l course round the sun,” which would ‘set the e a rth on fire.’190 Allowing tha t there are na tura l causes in disasters, “the y are s till unde r the dire c185“The Promise of Unde rsta nding," B 4:288, sec. 3.2. 186“The Promise of Unde rsta nding," B 4:288 - 89, sec. 3.3. 187The suppos ed cause of divine judgme nt in Lis bon’s case was in Wesley's vie w proba bly the Portuguese Inquis ition; cf.//W4:141; 5:40. l88Concerning earthquakes, see B 2:390, 507; LJW 3:156; 6:150, 284; JJW 3:453-57; 4:117-20; CH 7:727. 189“Serious Thoughts Occasioned by the Late Earthquake at Lisbon," J XI:3,4; cf. XL496 - 504. 190“Serious Thoughts Occasioned by the Late Earthquake at Lisbon,” J XI:9. 162

CREATION, PROVIDENCE, AND EVIL

tion of the Lord of nature; nay, what is nature itself, but the a rt of God, or God’s method of acting in the material world.”191 Those who live in friendship with God need “not fear, though the earth be moved, and the hills be carried into the midst of the sea.”192 2. The Groaning of Creation and the General Deliverance

The text of the homily "The General Deliverance” is Romans 8:22: “The whole creation groaneth, and travaileth in pain together until now” [Homily #60 (1781), B 2:437-50; J #60, VL241-53]. a. Toward a Future Ecology Closer to a philosophical ecology than anything else found in Wesley, the homily on "The General Deliverance” views plant and animal life in relation firs t to the original human condition prior to the fall, then after the fall, and fina lly in the light of the resurrection. The predicament of plants and animals and even of the inorganic world is viewed in the context of salvation his tory — creation, fall, the history of sin, redemption, and consummation. The mercy of God is over all of his works: rocks, plants, animals, humans, angelic creatures.193 Therefore we are being called to express the same goodness and mercy toward creation that God has shown toward us, to be merciful in whatever sphere of responsibility we are given — not only with respect to our own human suffering, but with respect to nonhuman creation’s suffering as well. b. The Gre at Chain ofBe ing Wesley posited a great chain of being in which the one who is incomparably good brings forth a created order (not an emanation) that exhibits vast variety and complexity, wherein less conscious elements are ordered to benefit, enable, and serve more freely conscious elements.194 As plants sustain and provide energy for animal life, so animals provide sustenance for human life.195 Inorganic ma tte r196 sustains and feeds organic matter, which in turn is the basis of a food chain that sustains animals, who in turn supply sustenance for human beings who live precariously in this curious juxtaposition of fmitude and freedom, this special arena of creation with our roots in nature yet with astonishing capacities for imagination, reason, and self-determination. Huma nity experiences the psychosomatic interface that straddles finitude and freedom, standing in the middle of creation, “a creature capable of God, capable of knowing, loving, and obeying his Creator.”197 m“Serious Thoughts Occasioned by the Late Ea rthqua ke at Lisbon," J XI:6,7. 192“Serious Thoughts Occasioned by the Late Earthquake at Lisbon," J XI:10; see also Charles We sley: "The Cause and Cure of Ea rthqua ke s,") VIL386 - 99. m“The General Deliverance," B 2:437, proe m 1. 194“The General Deliverance," B 2:348 - 41, proe m 1.1-2; see also B 2:396-97,436; 3:464. 195“The General Deliverance," B 2:441, sec. 1.5. !96B 11:269. 197“The General Deliverance," B 2:439, sec. 1.2. 163

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

c. The Hum an Com pos ite: Ante ce de nt to the His tory of Sin Huma n cre a tion is vie we d as a dis tinct compos ition (La t. com pos itum ), a unique inte rfa cing of body a nd s pirit, finitude a nd fre edom. Like a nima ls , we have bodies, but unlike a nima ls we have linguis tic, ra tiona l, ima ginative, a nd s piritua l capacities tra ns ce nding brute cre a tion. Anima ls do not have those compe te ncie s to the degree tha t we do. Human fre e dom has capacities for re fra cting the goodness and me rcy of God tha t nonhuma n creatures in va rious degrees la ck.198 “Ma n is capable of God” in fa r gre a te r measure tha n nonhuma n cre a tion.199 Like a nge lic cre a tion, we have s piritua l capacities, ye t unlike a nge lic powe rs, we have phys ica l bodie s s itua te d in time . Before the his tory of s in began to unfold, humanity in its origina l condition had unfallen fre e dom, deathless life , a nd no guilt or a nxie ty.200 Each cre ature re fle cts the divine glory in its own way, huma ns by ima ging the mora l na ture of God,201 and a nima ls by the ir vita l life .202 In paradise, huma ns we re pe rfe ctly happy, re fle cting the ima ge of God, with fre e dom of choice , without which the y would have been "as inca pa ble of vice or virtue as any pa rt of the ina nima te cre a tion. In these, in the power of s e lf-motion, unders ta nding, will, a nd libe rty, the na tura l ima ge of God consisted.”203 d. The Original Plant and Anim al Cre ation Humanity s tood right a t the cos mic ce nte r as s te wa rd a nd na me giver, be ing give n re sponsible dominion ove r this cre a te d order.204 No a nima l has ever received a na me e xcept by huma ns , who we re the re by be ing give n the ta sk of s te wa rds hip of the whole pla nt a nd a nima l world.205 Through humanity the blessings of God were inte nde d to flow to other creatures. In this way, nonhuma n cre atures have from the outs et been de pe nde nt on the de s tiny of humanity for the ir happiness.206 Humanity’s goodness lies in re flecting Gods goodness. The cre a tures ’ goodness is in s e rving the whole of the cre a te d orde r in the ir a ppropriate a nd proportiona l way. Eve ry cre a ture is gifte d with some pa rticula r way of s e rving the whole. No creature serves the whole in the same wa y a ny othe r cre a ture does. Brute cre a tion prior to the fa ll is vie we d biblica lly as a garden in which there is ple nty of food, pleasure, gra titude, a nd immorta lity. Wha t ha ppe ned whe n humanity wille d to disobe y and broke this inte nde d re lations hip? The consequences for the whole cha in of be ing we re dis a s trous . Through s in huma n life has ma de its e lf inca pa ble of tra ns mitting these blessings tha t were i98“The General Deliverance.” B 2:439, sec. 1.2. 199“The General Deliverance.” B 2:441, sec. 1.5. 200“The General Deliverance," B 2:438, sec. 1.1. 201“The Ne w Birth,” B 2:188, sec. 1.1. 202LJW 3:108; S S 2:230n. 2°3“The General Deliverance," B 2:438-39, sec. 1.1; cf. “The End ofChris ts Coming," B 2:474, sec. 1.3. 2°4“The General Deliverance,” B 2:440, sec. 1.3. 205On stewardship, see B 1:548 - 49; 2:266-67,276-98; 3:231-32,239-40; 4:183-84. 2°6“xhe General Deliverance," B 2:440-41, sec. 1.3-5. 164

CREATION, PROVIDENCE, AND EVIL

inte nde d for the be ne fit of other crea ture s.207 In wha t follows we see the outline s of a primitive Wesleyan a nticipa tion of an e nvironme nta l the ology a nd e thic. e. The Cre ation Groaning in Travail: R om ans 8:19-22 In Romans 8, Paul compa re d the pre se nt s uffe rings of the cosmos to the glory to be revealed. The whole cre a tion is groaning in tra va il, in pa in a wa iting this glory.208 “I cons ide r tha t our pre se nt s uffe rings are not worth compa ring with the glory tha t will be revealed in us" (Rom. 8:18 NIV). The glory to be revealed in us is the work of the Holy S pirit tha t is a lre a dy in process but not ye t comple te. Paul ha d in mind the whole physical cosmos, including inorga nic, orga nic, and a nima l life : “The cre a tion wa its in eager e xpe cta tion for the childre n of God to be revealed. For the cre a tion was s ubje cte d to frus tra tion, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who s ubjecte d it, in hope tha t the cre a tion its e lf will be libe ra te d from its bonda ge to decay a nd brought into the fre e dom and glory of the childre n of God. We know tha t the whole cre a tion has been groaning as in the pa ins of childbirth right up to the pre s e nt time ” (Rom. 8:19-22 NIV). 209 This means tha t the phys ica l cosmos, with a ll its living cre a ture s , a wa its the re s urre ction. It is worth pa ying pa rticula r a tte ntion as to how this correlates with the pre se nt e cologica l crisis. We s le y de ve lope d a dis tinctive notion of the inchoa te hunge r of a nima l cre a tion for the re s urre ction. The whole cosmos is a wa iting this fina l ma nife s ta tion of divine mercy, which is a lre a dy in the process of coming. 910 f. The Failure of Hum anity to Com m unicate Divine Ble s s ings to Brute Cre ation Much unne ce ssa ry s uffering a nd pa in in the bios phe re is due to huma n sin. For this reason, "the cre a tion was s ubjecte d to frus tra tion, not by its own choice ” (Rom. 8:19 NIV). These a nima ls did not get a chance to choose but we re subjected by the wills of thos e who s ubjecte d the m — namely, huma nity, once s plendid but the n a bs urdly fa lle n. The history of s in s ubje cte d othe r nonhuma n life forms to the huma n fate.211 So whe n human beings fa ll by the ir own choice, the a nima l and plant world s uffe r for our colle ctive inte rge ne ra tiona l huma n choices. The his tory of s in thus forms the de finitive juncture , a hinge for the subsequent conveyance of design a nd me a ning be twe e n Cre a tor a nd brute cre ation.212 “As all the blessings of God in paradise flowe d through ma n to the infe rior cre a tures; as man was the gre at cha nne l of communica tion, be twe en the Cre ator a nd the whole brute cre ation; so whe n ma n ma de hims e lf incapable of tra ns mitting thos e blessings, tha t communica tion was necessarily cut off."213 207“The General Deliverance," B 2:442, sec. 2.1. 2°8“The General Deliverance," B 2:438, proe m 2. 209 LJW 3:107. 210“The General Deliverance," B 2:438-39, sec. 1.1-2. 2u“The General Deliverance," B 2:442, sec. 5. 212“The General Deliverance," B 2:441, sec. 1.5. 213“The General Deliverance," B 2:442, sec. 2.1. 165

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

Human s in comes to have de va s ta ting effects on pla nt a nd a nima l life. Because we have los t the source of our blessedness, we are no longe r able to be a source of blessing for the pla nt a nd a nima l world. In this way, pla nt and a nima l life to some degree share the los t blessedness a nd opera tive mis e ry of huma nity.214 The biosphere has come to de pe nd on the ca pa city of the huma n mind and s pirit to re fle ct the holine ss a nd goodness of God, a nd to s uffe r whe n this fails to occur.215 g. The W e s le yan Ecological-Es chatological The odicy for Brute Cre ation In our ina tte ntive ne s s to our true good, we, as wa rned, fe ll and los t our holiness a nd blessedness, a nd de stined the body toward death. When we lose our origina l trus t-fille d libe rty, the beasts lose the ir more limite d spheres of e nfra nchis e me nt. The y are de prive d of the ir proxima te blessedness by the huma n fa ll. So a nima l and plant life on this vulne rable e a rth has be come profoundly implica te d in the his tory of sin. The re is s uffe ring not only in huma n his tory but also in the whole of the na tura l orde r as a re s ult of our sin.216 If the cre a tor of a ll things does not despise a nything tha t has be e n made, a nd wills tha t a ll cre a ture s be happy, how has it ha ppe ned tha t there is so much tra va il in na tura l creation? Why do so ma ny e vils oppress a nd ove rwhe lm creatures (plants, a nima ls , a nd humans)? The a nswe r ca nnot be given within the bounds of his tory, but only in re la tion to the e nd of his tory. The re is no adequate a nswe r to the que s tion of the odicy except in e s cha tologica l reference. We ga in no adequate grip on the proble m of s uffe ring without seeing it in re la tion to the last judgme nt. S uffering mus t now be unde rs tood in re la tion to a gra dually unfolding process tha t is only now be ing revealed. Thos e who de ma nd imme dia te ra tional answers to why we s uffe r rule themselves out of this e s cha tologica l pe rspe ctive . In We s le y’s vie w, the s uffe re r’s s uffe ring ca nnot be unders tood a part from its s ocial his tory. Each s uffe re r has ide ntity only within a pa rticula r socia l ma trix. You ca nnot pluck suffe re rs from the ir time nor de ta ch the m from the ir his tory, which is a ve ry long a nd complica te d his tory involving free agents who s in a nd whose sins a ffe ct other choices a nd subse que nt cha ins of s in in succe e ding genera tions. Sin is not a s imple proble m to be solve d individua lis tica lly. The his tory of s in has a de va s ta ting impa ct on huma n na ture .217 h. The Groaning ofFalle n Cre ation: On Anim al Pain We are ta lking a bout the cris is of the pla nt a nd a nima l world. We a nd the y live in a fa llen world, the only world we have ever seen. "We ” in the corpora te , re presentative, Ada mic sense we re once in the garden, but “I” as an individua l was not born in tha t time . You a nd I we re born into a world in which a nima ls are de prive d 214In this way misery is the "daughter of sin." B 2:410; 4:299. 2l5“The General Deliverance." B 2:438, proem 2. 2l6“The General Deliverance,” B 2:44 2 - 5, sec. 2; cf. B 2:400,428 - 29, 509; 4:285. 2l7“The General Deliverance," B 2:442-45, sec. 2. 166

CREATION, PROVIDENCE, AND EVIL

of the ir origina l condition by the huma n fa ll. Intuitive ly, mos t a nima ls know this a nd ins tinctively flee from huma ns. Fallen huma nity is the common enemy of birds, beasts, fish, a nd pla nts . The hunting of a nima ls is vie we d as prima facie evidence of the fallenness of huma nity. The huma n s ha rk has be come the prototype pre da tor in this s tra nge ly de forme d order.218 We s le y thought tha t a fe w dome s tica te d a nima ls have re ga ine d some ca pa city to re fra ct the ir origina l dis pos ition.219 Even thos e “friendly creatures,” the “generous horse,” toward which We s le y ha d deep lifelong a ffe ction, “tha t serves his ma s te rs necessity or pleasure with unwe arie d diligence," a nd "the fa ithful dog, tha t wa its the motion of his ha nd, or his eye” — the y too s uffe r va rious ly from the dis tortions of huma n fre edom. Much of the re st of the a nima l world is fille d with savagery and crue lty. The y live by de s troying each othe r. The huma n fa ll diminis he s the ir origina l be a uty a nd splendor. Though la cking the guilt a nd a nxie ty tha t cha ra cte rize human fre edom, the y experience ma ny othe r forms of bodily pa in through huma n sin.220 The whole cre a tion groa ns unde r the powe r of sin. It is groa ning as if “in the pa ins of childbirth right up to the pre s e nt time ” (Rom. 8:22 N1V). Me a nwhile we ourse lve s "groa n inwa rdly” (v. 23 NIV), wa iting eagerly for our a doption as childre n of God. We look towa rd the cons umma tion of a process of re de mption of our bodies tha t is be gun but ye t not comple te . “In this hope we are saved” (v. 24 NIV)221 i. The Ge ne ral De live rance and Brute Cre ation Will brute cre a tion always re ma in in its pre se nt condition? We can only ima gine tha t, judge d e mpirica lly, a part from God’s promise s, it always will re ma in as it now is. But on the basis of s criptural re ve la tion, a general de livera nce is promis e d for a ll cre a tion. The a nima l cre a tion is de s tine d to be re s tore d whe n a nd to the e xtent tha t huma n e xiste nce is re s tore d to its origina l cre a tion of ima ging the mora l goodness of God.222 We s le y was a diffe rent kind of e cologis t who was trying to place e cologica l re flection in the conte xt of the history of sin, the divine -huma n re concilia tion, and the e s cha tologica l vis ion of general deliverance. The re follows an e xte nde d, a lmos t surre a l, vis ion of wha t the re s tore d cre a tion will be like in its re cove red beauty, liberty, true a ffections , a nd origina l vigor. His was not an a rgume nt for a nima l rights but ra the r an a rgume nt for e scha tologica l the odicy tha t a ffe cts brute cre a tion. The future of a nima l a nd pla nt life is seen in re la tion to the be ginning a nd the end, e s pe cia lly the re s urre ction. The e s cha tologica l de s tiny of pla nt a nd a nima l life is continge nt on the re s toration of the fa llen huma n will, which its e lf has caused the fallenness of pla nt and a nima l life .223 218“The 219“The 220“The 22'“The 222“The 223“The

General Deliverance," B 2:442-44, sec. 2.2-4. General Deliverance," B 2:442, sec. 2.2. General Deliverance," B 2:444, sec. 2.3. General Deliverance," B 2:445, sec. 3.1. General Deliverance," B 2:445, sec. 3.1. General Deliverance," B 2:444 - 48, sec. 3. 167

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

“Cre a tion its e lfwill be libe rate d from its bondage to decay” (Rom. 8:21 NIV). Paul was speaking here not only a bout the libe ra tion ofhuma n his tory, but by it the libe ra tion of the cosmos a nd a ll its creatures, which will be include d a nd brought into the "glorious fre e dom ofthe childre n of God” (v. 21 NIV). The re s toration ofthe fre e dom of the childre n of God will have spectacular influence on the cosmos its elf.224 j. The Jus tice of God am id the Alie nation of Cre ature ly Life We are now ca lle d to unde rs ta nd our pre se nt e cologica l a ccounta bility within cre a tion as a final a ccounta bility to which we will be ca lle d on the la st day. God’s me rcy will fina lly e xte nd ove r a ll God’s works . God’s jus tice continue s in the mids t of the a lie na tion of cre a ture ly life a nd will e ve ntua lly work its e lf out.225 Me a nwhile, we are e ncoura ge d to be me rciful as God is me rciful. The promis e of ge ne ral de live ra nce softe ns our he a rts towa rd the little ones for whom the Lord cares. It enlarges our he a rts towa rd thos e whom God does not forge t. It re minds us tha t we are diffe re nt from nonhuma n cre a tures ye t even in our diffe re nce s a kin to the m, a nd we are give n a me dia ting role in re la tion to the m. It encourages us to hope , to look forwa rd to the time of de live ra nce God has pre pa re d.226 Brute cre a tion has s ome thing at stake in the future hope tha t is procla ime d in the gospel — to be de live re d from its pre se nt bondage, a nd to share in the re cove ry of the glorious libe rty of the childre n of God.227 In the fina l re demption of huma nity, God may raise brute creatures highe r in the ir scale of be ing tha n was the ir primitive condition be fore the fa ll. If huma n consciousness in the glorious re s urre ction will ris e to a ne w le ve l of a gility a nd s piritua lity like the angels, so ma y a n analogous tra ns muta tion occur in a nima l life :228 "Ma y I be pe rmitte d to me ntion he re a conjecture conce rning the brute cre ation? Wha t if it s hould please the a ll-wis e , a ll-gra cious Cre a tor to raise the m highe r in the scale of be ings ” so tha t "s ome thing be tte r re ma ins a fter de a th for these poor cre a tures ” — would not tha t nullify the obje ctions to the lack of divine jus tice in the ma tte r of a nima l pain?229 As God is in time turning the fa ll towa rd the fina l advantage of the whole crea tion, a nd not me re ly of huma n his tory, so in the ge ne ra l de livera nce, he promis e s to enhance the glory of nonhuma n creatures in a wa y tha t will tra ns ce nd the ir origina l condition.230 He re we have a wonde rful vis ion of a nima ls be ing blessed by the re covere d holiness, happiness, and goodness of huma nity, now by grace made more able to re flect the holine ss a nd goodness of God. The origina l garden existence will be re s tore d, in which there is no s orrow or pa in or death, a nd whe re there is order, fre edom, ha rmony, ce le bra tion, a nd incompa ra ble beauty.231 224“The General Deliverance," B 2:445-47, sec. 3.1-5. 225“The General Deliverance," B 2:445 - 48, sec. 3. 226“The General Deliverance," B 2:447-49, sec. 3.5-8. 227“The General Deliverance," B 2:445, sec. 3.1, 2. 228“The General Deliverance,” B 2:448, sec. 3.6. 229Ibid. 230Cf. “The Gre a t Assize”; “God’s Love to Fallen Man.” 231“The General Deliverance,” B 2:445 - 46, sec. 3.2, 3. 168

CREATION, PROVIDENCE, AND EVIL

In this way, the doctrine s of cre a tion a nd e s cha ton be come intima te ly tie d together. Es cha tology re quire s a unive rs a l vis ion of his tory. Tha t e ss entia lly is wha t e scha tology is, a pa nora mic vie w of unive rs a l his tory as seen from its end. It is an a tte mpt to see pre se nt history in re la tion to the e nd of his tory, a nd the e nd in re lation to its be ginning. A Chris tia n unde rs ta nding of history from be ginning to end is an eschatology.232

Further Reading on Theodicy Bowmer, John. "John Wesley’s Philosophy of Suffering.” LQHR 184 (1959): 60-66. Collins , Kenneth. A Faithful Witness: John Wesley’s Hom ile tical Theology, 29-34. Wilmore , KY: Wesleyan Heritage, 1993. Hubba rtt, G. F. “The The odicy of John Wesley.” AS 12, no. 2 (1958): 15 -18. Mile y, John. S ystematic Theology. Reprint, Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1989. Oord, Thomas Jay. “A Process Wesleyan The odicy: Freedom, Embodime nt, and the Almighty God." In Thy Name and Nature Is Love: Wesleyan and Process Theologies in Dialogue, edited by Bryan P. Stone and Thomas Jay Oord, 193-216. Nashville: Kingswood, 2001.

Pope, Willia m Burt. A Compendium of Chris tian Theology. 3 vols. London: Wesleyan Me thodis t Book-Room, 1880. Ralston, Thomas N. Elements of Divinity. Ne w York: Abingdon, 1924. Summers, Thomas O. S ystematic Theology. 2 vols. Edited by J. J. Tigert. Nashville: Me thodis t Publishing House South, 1888. Walls, Jerry. "The Free Will Defense: Calvinism, Wesley and the Goodness of God.” Chris tian S cholar's Review 13 (1983): 19-33. Watson, Richard. Theological Institutes. 2 vols. Ne w York: Mason and Lane, 1836,1840; edited by John M’Clintock, Ne w York: Ca rlton & Porter, 1850.

232"Scriptural Christianity," B 1:169-72, sec. 3. 169

CHAPTER 7

Man

A. Human Existence: Created, Fallen, and Redeemed The s e lf ca nnot be unde rs tood as if a bs tra cte d out of tha t history in which s e lfhood is give n by God, falle n into sin, and redeemed by grace. To unde rs ta nd my human existence, I mus t see my individua l existence in re la tion to my social his tory, a history of sin. We s le y’s a nthropology cons ta ntly re turne d to this thre e fold s ociohis torical inte rpre tation of huma n existence: cre a te d in the image of God, fa lle n by its own volition, re s tore d and re cla ime d by Gods mercy. This is mos t tightly s umma rize d in the language of the Article s of Re ligion a nd Doctrina l Minute s , a nd set forth more fully in selected te a ching homilies , e spe cia lly "The Image of God,” "Wha t Is Ma n? " (two discourses), “He a ve nly Tre a sure in Ea rthe n Vessels,” "Human Life a Dream,” “On the De ce itfulne s s of the Human He a rt,” “On the Fall of Man,” "S piritua l Idolatry,” a nd “The One Thing Ne e dful.” It is fully e labora te d in We s le ys ma jor extended the ologica l treatise, The Doctrine of Original S in.

1. The Anthropology of the Articles of Religion a. Far Gone from Original Righte ous ne s s and Incline d to Evil Continually Wha t God gives in huma n na ture is good as cre a te d but becomes dis torte d by inte rge ne ra tiona l huma n de cis ion into a condition of corpora te wre tche dne ss and mise ry. The s e ve nth of the Twe nty-Five Article s of Re ligion re je cts the roma ntic optimis m tha t holds to the Pelagian vie w of humanity (tha t it was by the mora l e xa mple of Ada m tha t dis tortions in consciousness came to be learned). The a rticle sets forth the P a uline -Augus tinia n-Re forma tion te a ching of sin, re je cting Pelagia nis m as not s ufficie ntly a tte ntive to the corpora te a nd his torica l na ture of sin, for “origina l sin s ta nde th not in the following ofAdam (as the Pelagians do va inly talk).”1 Biblica l te a ching holds tha t s in east of Eden "is the corruption of the na ture of e ve ry ma n, tha t na tura lly is engendered of the offs pring of Adam, whe re by ma n is ve ry fa r gone from origina l righteousness, a nd of his own [fa lle n] na ture incline d to ‘XXV, a rt. 7; cf. LJW 2:23-, 4:158; 6:175.

171

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

e vil, a nd tha t continua lly.” Present huma n existence is fa r gone from tha t unble mished integrity. We do not me re ly s tumble or fa ll incons e quentia lly, so we might volunta rily ba cktrack and corre ct it a t a ny mome nt. Tha t is not the way his tory works . Rather, it is as though humanity has a lre a dy volunta rily fa lle n down a huge cliff and ca nnot get back up to the s ta rting place, the Eden of origina l righte ousness.2 This falle n cre a ture is “of his own na ture incline d to e vil, a nd tha t continua lly.” Ins ofa r as huma n na ture resists pre ve nie nt a nd s us ta ining grace, it is incessa ntly dra wn by a pe rs is te nt ye tz e r hara (inclina tion to e vil), which is e vide nce d in the a ctua l history of idola try, pride , a nd s e ns ua lity so cha racte ris tic of huma n his tory. La te r we will see how pe rs is te ntly We s le y e mphas ize d pre ve nie nt grace as always working to re de e m wha t has be come fa lle n, but tha t is a doctrine of re dee ming grace, not fa llen huma n na ture . b. Human Nature as Cre ate d and Human Nature as Falle n Note tha t Wesley, like Augus tine a nd Ca lvin, used the te rm hum an nature diale ctica lly in two diffe re nt ways: huma n na ture as cre ate d and huma n na ture as falle n. The cre a te d na ture of humanity is capable of re fle cting the goodness of God but has be come dis a s trous ly fa llen into s yndromes of s in tha t have be come repeatedly re inforced by pe rsona l choice a nd passed on pe rsis tently from one ge ne ra tion to the ne xt, through fa milie s , socia l s tructure s , e conomic orders , a nd inte rpe rs ona l re lations hips , a nd through each s inners own individua l fre e will. Evil has become invasive of the ve ry na ture of fa lle n humanity — unremitting, continuous , ubiquitous . This is why s in is univers a l in huma n his tory. S in has be e n tra ns mitte d to a ll descendants of Ada m a nd Eve so as to be come a kind of “se cond na ture” to human progeny. The re s ult is a disastrous practical impa irme nt but not comple te de s truction of the origina l righte ous ne s s give n in cre ation. The ravages of s in are ma nifested in the continuous proneness of the will to fa ll ever again into sin. This is an e xce e dingly s e rious conception of huma n fallenness. Huma n existence is a lie na te d not only on the scale of the individua l person but as a whole fe de ral his tory, a sociohis torica l type unde r the head, Adam. 2. Free Will after the Fall (Article 8)3 "The condition of ma n a fter the fa ll of Ada m is s uch tha t he ca nnot turn and pre pare himse lf by his own na tura l s tre ngth a nd good works to fa ith a nd ca lling upon God; whe refore we have no powe r to do good works , pleasant a nd acceptable to God, without the grace of God pre ve nting us tha t we ma y have a good will, a nd working with us whe n we have tha t good will” (a rt. 8). Apa rt from grace, it is not poss ible not to s in (non posse non peccare) a fte r the fa ll. Once ca ught in this inte rgene ra tiona l s yndrome of sin, s inne rs as s ocia l cre a ture s do not escape the ir de te rmina nts a nd consequences. By the ir own na tura l s tre ngth, there is no wa y to 2B 1:118,495-96; cf. 0/7:213, 652, 691. 3Anglica n a rticle 10 became the e ighth a rticle of Wesley s twe nty-four. 172

MAN

happiness in the absence of gra ce -e na ble d fa ith, hope, a nd love. The huma n s pirit is e nta ngle d in a maze of s e lf-dece ptions . The re s ulta nt impa irme nt: we are unable to change ourselves, to reverse our fa lle n tra je ctory; he nce whe n conside red a part from grace, "The re is no one who does good, not even one ” (Rom. 3:12 N1V, from Ps. 53:1).4 Fallen me n and wome n ca nnot turn to re pe nt without grace pre ce ding the m. The re is no way to get back to the origina l condition of righteousness by dint of our own earnest mora l ca listhe nics or social e nte rpris e or politica l fortitude. Whate ve r na tural s tre ngth we might seem to have had to do good works has be come ra dica lly ble mishe d, unable to ca ll on God, execute or even prope rly e nvis ion a good work. The re is no way for sinners to achieve a good will or sustain it without grace preceding. Only on these te rms (gra ce -e na ble d fa ith a ctive in love ) may s inne rs will tha t which is good a nd ple a sing to God. Ins ofa r as s inne rs have a good will, it emerges only through coope ration with divine grace moving ahead of the m, with a nd through the ir fa lle n fre e dom. Supposing a man to be now void of fa ith and hope and love, he ca nnot effect any degree of the m in hims e lf by any possible e xertion of his understanding and of any or a ll his othe r natural faculties, though he should enjoy the m in the ir utmost perfection. A dis tinct powe r from God, not implie d in any of these, is indispens ably necessary before it is possible he should a rrive at the ve ry lowest degree of Chris tia n fa ith or hope or love .... He must be created anew.5

B. The Image of God 1. In His Own Image The te xt of the homily "The Image of God" is Genesis 1:27: “God created man in his own ima ge ” [Homily #141 (1730), B 4:290-303 (not in the Jackson e dition)]. If made in the ima ge of God, “whe nce flow those numbe rle s s impe rfe ctions tha t s ta in a nd dishonor” huma n nature? Huma n beings are so prone to sickness, pain, ignora nce , a nd unruly passions tha t it may seem fa r more pla us ible to ma ny to think the y are a t time s ra the r ma de in the ima ge of a nima l or de monic cre ation.6 “‘God cre a te d ma n upright; in the image of God cre ate d he him; but ma n found out to hims e lf ma ny inve ntions ’ Abus ing the libe rty whe re with he was e ndowe d, he re be lle d against his Cre ator, a nd willfully changed the ima ge of the incorruptible God into sin, mise ry, a nd corruption.”7 4Wesleyan a nthropologica l assumptions are rehearsed pithily in the a rticle of the E. U. B. Confession tha t says huma nity is "fa lle n from righteousness and, a pa rt from the grace of our Lord Jesus Chris t, is de s titute of holiness and incline d to e vil. Except a ma n be born again he ca nnot see the kingdom ofGod. In his own s tre ngth without divine grace ma n ca nnot do good works pleasing and acceptable to God. We believe howe ve r tha t ma n influe nce d and e mpowe re d by the Holy S pirit is re sponsible in fre e dom to exercise his will for good.” 5Le tte r to John S mith, June 25,1746, LJW 2:71. 6"The Image of God," B 4:292, proe m 1-3. 7“The Image of God," B 4:293, proe m 4, confla ting Gen. 1:27 and Eccl. 7:29; B 4:294-303; 11:269. 173

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

a. Whe the r Humanity Was Originally Made Righte ous in the Image ofGod Human be ings we re origina lly ma de in the image of God, able to dis tinguis h truth from fa lse hood, able to pe rce ive things as the y were, able to judge jus tly and s wiftly, a ble to na me things congrue ntly with s ufficie nt unde rs tanding, “not a rbitra rily, but expressive of the ir inwa rd natures.” In these ways the y re s e mble d and re fra cte d God’s own wis dom a nd jus tice .8 Along with cle a r unde rs ta nding, huma n be ings we re origina lly give n "a will e qua lly pe rfe ct” so long as it “followe d the dicta te s of such an unde rs ta nding.” Hence a ll the affe ctions of ma n a nd woma n, unde r the conditions of origina l righte ousness, we re ra tiona lly orde re d a round a single a ffe ction: love. "Love fille d the whole e xpans ion of [ma n’s] soul; it possessed him without a riva l. Eve ry move me nt of his he art was love.”9 “Wha t ma de his ima ge ye t pla ine r in his huma n offs pring” was “the libe rty he origina lly enjoyed; the pe rfectfre e dom impla nte d in his nature, a nd inte rwove n with a ll its parts.” He could e ithe r “keep or change his firs t estate: it was le ft to hims e lf wha t he would do; his own choice was to de te rmine him in a ll things . The balance did not incline to one side or the othe r unless by his own deed.”10 As a re s ult of an “unerring unde rs ta nding, an uncorrupt will, a nd pe rfect fre edom,” huma n beings we re happy, for the ir “unde rs ta nding was sa tisfie d with truth,” the ir will with good, a nd the y we re “a t full libe rty to e njoy e ithe r the Crea tor or the cre ation; to indulge in rivers of pleasure, ever new, ever pure from any mixture of pain.”11 b. A Conje cture on How the De ath ofOriginal Righte ous ne s s Occurre d Gradually as through He art Dis e as e "The libe rty of ma n necessarily re quire d tha t he s hould have some tria l, else he would have ha d no choice.” The tre e of knowle dge of good a nd e vil was prohibite d. The consequence of e a ting from it was cle a rly stated: “You will ce rta inly die” (Gen. 2:17 N1V). “Yet ma n did eat of it, a nd the consequence a ccordingly was de a th to him a nd his descendants, a nd prepa ra tory to death, sickness a nd pa in, folly, vice, a nd slavery.”12 We s le y offe re d a s pe cific conje cture on the tra ns ition of the ps ychos oma tic inte rfa ce from its origina l to its fa llen condition. As “compound of ma tte r and s pirit,” it was orda ine d tha t “ne ithe r pa rt of the compound s hould a ct a t a ll but toge the r with its compa nion.” The body ha d be e n pre pare d for immorta lity, with the vessels conta ining the bodily juice s "ever cle a r and open.” By me re ly e a ting of the 8“The Image of God,” B 4:293 -94. sec. 1.1; cf. “J us tifica tion by Faith,” B 1:184, sec. 1.1. On huma nity as origina lly “capable of God,” see B 2:439 - 41, 448 - 49. 9“The Image of God,” B 4:294-95, sec. 1.2. 10“The Image of God,” B 4:295, sec. 1.3, ita lics added. ““The Image of God,” B 4:295, sec. 1.4, ita lics added. n"The Image of God,” B 4:296, sec. 2; “J us tification by Faith,” B 1:185, sec. 1.5. 174

MAN

forbidden fruit of "whos e dea dly na ture [ma n] was fore wa rned seems to have conta ine d a juice , the pa rticle s of which we re a pt to cleave to wha te ve r the y touched.” Entering the body, the y we re prone to "adhere to the inne r coats of the fine r vessels, to which again othe r pa rticle s tha t be fore floa te d loose in the blood, continually joining, would na tura lly lay a founda tion for numbe rle ss disorders.” Eve ry day the y “lose s ome thing of the ir s pring.... The s ma lle r cha nne ls would gra dually fill up,” le ading to de ath.13 Dea dly lipid buildup in a rte ria l vessels causing he art disease were he re be ing intuitive ly de s cribe d with cons ide rable accuracy. The a rte ria l disease tha t Ada m a nd Eve got from the forbidde n fruit, s low in coming, could have been avoided. c. The Cons e que nce s ofthe Fallfor Human Unde rs tanding, Will, Libe rty, and Happine s s With the ps ychos oma tic "ins trume nt be ing now quite untune d,” four consequences of the fa ll ensued: 1. The understanding “mistook falsehood for truth," perceiving as if "through a glass darkly,” followe d by doubt, error, confusion and slowness, now "unable to trace out fully” the nature of things once understood so we ll.14 2. The will, its guide blinded, became “now seized by legions of vile affections. Grie f and anger and hatred and fear and shame, at once rushed in upon it.... Nay, love itself, tha t ray of the Godhead, tha t balm of life, now became a torme nt. Its light being gone, it wandered about seeking rest and finding none; till at length” it resorted to “the guilded poison of e a rthly enjoyments."15 3. Libe rty "we nt away with virtue.” "The subject of virtue became the slave of vice.”16 4. “The consequence of... being enslaved to a depraved understanding and a corrupte d will could be not othe r than the reverse of tha t happiness which flowe d from the m when in the ir perfection." Thus it was "not the good God, but man hims e lf made man what he is now.”17 2. Whether the Image of God May Be Recovered Human unde rs tanding mus t be brought by humility to re pe nta nce , true selfknowledge, and fa ith. The will the n mus t be re dire cte d by the re ne we d unde rs ta nding toward cha rity, "to colle ct the s ca tte re d beams of tha t a ffe ction which is truly huma n, truly divine,” forgiving as we have been forgive n. By be ing re s tore d “firs t to knowledge, a nd the n to virtue ,” we are de live re d to “fre e dom a nd happine s s ... tha t libe rty which not only implie s the absence of a ll pa in, unless wha t is necessary to future pleasure, but such a measure of pre se nt happiness as is a fit introduction to 13“The Image of God," B 4:296-97, sec. 1.1. 14“The Image of God,” B 4:298, sec. 2.2. 15“The Image of God," B 4:298, sec. 2.3. 16“The Image of God,” B 4:298 - 99, sec. 2.4. 17“The Image of God," B 4:299, sec. 2.5; for furthe r reference to the consequences of the fa ll, see B 1:185-87; 2:189 - 90,400 - 412,467 - 68,476 - 77, 508 - 9; 4:162-63,295-99; LJW 3:340, 373. 175

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

tha t which flows a t God’s right ha nd for e ve rmore !”18 This re s toration is available to a ll who will gladly receive the means of grace.19 a. The One Thing Ne e dful: The Re s toration ofthe Falle n Image The te xt of the homily "The One Thing Ne edful” is Luke 10:42: “One thing is ne e dful” [Homily #146 (1734), B 4:351 - 59 (not in the Jackson e dition)]. Though humanity was cre a te d in the ima ge of God, s in has profoundly effaced tha t image, as e vide nce d by the loss of fre edom, now so bound by "he avy chains" of “vile a ffe ctions ” tha t it is not possible even to "lift up an eye, a thought to heaven.” "The whole head is sick, a nd the whole he art fa int” (Isa. 1:5).20 The one thing ne e dful: “to re cove r our firs t estate ... to be born again, to be formed a ne w a fte r the likeness of our Cre a tor... to re-exchange the image of Satan for the ima ge of God, bonda ge for fre e dom, sickness for he a lth ... to re ga in our na tive freedom.”21 This is "our one gre a t bus ine s s... the one work we have to do.” b. The One End ofOur Cre ation and Re de mption “The one e nd of our cre ation is tha t we might love God s upre me ly a nd a ll things in God, for love is pe rfe ct fre e dom, the ve ry image of God. “Love is the he a lth of the soul, the full e xe rtion of a ll its powe rs, the pe rfe ction of a ll its faculties.”22 The one end ofour re de m ption is tha t we be re s tore d to he a lth a nd fre edom, tha t e ve ry s piritua l sickness of our na ture might be healed. This is the purpos e of the incarna tion, life, death, a nd re s urre ction of Chris t: to proclaim libe rty to captives, to e njoin wha t is necessary for our re covery and re form wha t is obs tructive of it.23 The one e nd of all God's provide ntial dispensations is "s ole ly our s a nctifica tion; our re cove ry from tha t vile bondage, the love of his cre a tures, to the fre e love of our Creator."24 The one e nd of the ope rations of the S pirit in us is to do this one thing ne edful, “to re s tore us to he a lth, to libe rty, to holiness.”25

C. What Is Man? Two Discourses 1. Man in Space, Man in Time (First Discourse) a. Ofthe Finite Magnitude ofHuman Existe nce in the Unive rs e as Vie we d Phys ically The te xt of the firs t discourse on “Wha t Is Ma n?” is Psalm 8:3,4: “Wha t is man?” [Homily #103 (1787), B 3:454-63; J #103, VIL167-74]. Wesley placed huma n life within the unive rs e of space a nd the fle e ting na ture of time . 18“The Image of God," B 4:299 - 300, sec. 3.1 - 3. 19B 2:482 -83;4:299 -301,354 -55. 20“The One Thing Needful,” B 4:354, sec. 1.3; Isa. 1:5. 2l“The One Thing Needful,” B 4:355, sec. 1.5; cf. 2:483. 22“The One Thing Needful,” B 4:355, sec. 2.1, 2, italics added. 23“The One Thing Needful,” B 4:356, sec. 2.3. 24“The One Thing Needful," B 4:356 - 57, sec. 3.4. 25“The One Thing Needful,” B 4:357, sec. 2.5. 176

MAN

We sle y s ought to vie w the s ta ture of mora l, corpore a l, ra tiona l creatures in compa ris on to the whole cosmos a nd e te rnity. Howe ve r importa nt huma n life is to us, whe n te mpora lly a nd phys ica lly vie we d, it takes up only a sma ll speck of space and a fle e ting streak of time in an imme ns e cosmos. The loca tion of huma n e xiste nce within time a nd space in this va s t unive rs e was be ing more adequately unde rs tood in We s le y’s e xperimenta lly orie nte d ce ntury tha n before. “Wha t is the space of the whole cre a tion, wha t is a ll finite space tha t is, or can be conceive d, in compa ris on of infinity? ”26 Reason, whe n taken alone, suggests "tha t so diminutive a cre ature would be ove rlooke d” by the “One tha t inhabite d e te rnity,” e spe cia lly whe n we cons ide r duration.27 b. The Duration of Hum an Existe nce in the Unive rs e as Vie we d Te m porally As to duration, huma ns a t be st may live a bout fours core years, but wha t does tha t add up to against the a ctua l cos mic scale? The bre vity of huma n life is viewed by We sle y not me re ly in re la tion to pre his toric time but more so in re la tion to the infinite dura tion of e te rnity. So he took as his te xt “Whe n I look a t your heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon a nd the stars tha t you have e sta blishe d; wha t are huma n beings tha t you are mindful of the m, morta ls tha t you care for them? Yet you have made the m a little lowe r tha n God, a nd crowne d the m with glory a nd honor. You have give n the m dominion ove r the works of your ha nds” (Ps. 8:3 - 6 NRS V). From Cypria n, We s le y re fa s hione d this compa ris on: “Suppose there was a ba ll of sand as la rge as the globe of e a rth, a nd suppose one grain of this we re to be a nnihila te d in a thous a nd years; ye t tha t whole space of time whe re this ba ll would be a nnihila ting... would be a r... infinite ly less proportion to e te rnity, tha n a single grain of sand would be a r to tha t whole mass.”28 Augus tine ma rvele d tha t s inful humanity is a llotte d any portion a t a ll of space a nd time . Even whe n vie we d against the imme ns ity of cre ation, "so sma ll a portion” it is 29 2. On the Greatness of the Human Soul within Space and Time So s ma ll and brie f is huma n life tha t it may seem incons e que ntia l. Viewe d ma teria lis tica lly, this can only lead the mos t glorious of a ll creatures to de s pa ir ove r the huma n condition.30 Only whe n humanity is be he ld in re la tion to God, who cares infinite ly for s inners, does the true greatness of the huma n appear.31 The va lue of even a single soul is so grea t tha t it exceeds the whole of the ma te ria l order. "The body is not the man,” who is “not only a house of clay, but... an incorruptible picture of the God of glory, a s pirit tha t is of infinite ly more value tha n the whole e a rth, or more va lue tha n the 26“Wha t Is Ma n?” Ps. 8:3,4, B 3:457, sec. 1.6. 27“Wha t Is Ma n?” Ps. 8:3,4, B 3:458, sec. 1.7; Isa. 57:15. 28“Wha t Is Ma n?” Ps. 8:3,4, B 3:458, sec. 2.3. 29Confessions, 1.1, 3:459n. 30“Wha t Is Ma n?” Ps. 8:3,4, B 3:459 - 60, sec. 2.4-5. 31B 2:284, 289-90,382; 4:22-25, 30-31,292, 298. 177

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

sun, moon, a nd stars, put toge the r, yea, tha n the whole ma te ria l creation,” since "not lia ble e ithe r to dis s olution or decay.”32 Tha t is inte nde d not to be a diminution of ma tte r but an e xa lta tion of the true va lue of the s oul,33 of e ve ry individua l s oul to whom God’s me rcy is gra cious ly offe re d in Jesus Chris t, to whom the good news of God’s coming is continuous ly addressed. Tha t which makes the body a live is va luable be yond compa re , because God acts gra cious ly firs t to offe r life , the n to jus tify the life of the s inne r whe n fa lle n, a nd fina lly to s a nctify the life of the jus tifie d. The living s oul of the huma n pe rs on is of a highe r orde r tha n phys ica l cre a tion, and more dura ble .34 So humanity is a s ubje ct of intense inte re s t to God.35 To e limina te a ny re ma ining s ha dow of fear, God gave his Son to s uffe r de a th on the cross “for us ... a nd for our salvation.”36

3. Suppose There Were Other Worlds We s le y a pproa che d again the puzzling que s tion of the poss ible plura lity of inha bite d worlds , "a fa vorite notion with a ll thos e who de ny the Chris tia n Revelation,” because it seems to a fford the m a pla us ible critique of divine jus tice .37 In his time , whe ther other worlds might e xis t in the cos mic expanse a nd how tha t might a ffe ct Chris tia n te s timony was be ing debated. One le ading speculator, Chris tia n Huyge ns, hypothe s ize d tha t the moon might be popula te d, a nd ma ybe other unknown worlds in the cosmos existed. But even Huygens, "be fore he died, doubte d of this whole hypothesis.”38 Resisting the te mpta tion to speculate on ma tte rs a bout which little evidence was available, We sle y argued from the key the ologica l pre mis e tha t the cre a tion is one cre a tion of the one God, le aving it as a ma tte r of e mpirical inquiry as to whe ther other unknown spaces within cre a tion e xis t or are popula te d. It would be as easy for God to "create thous a nds or millions of worlds as one.”39 Whe the r one or many, the same comparis on pre va ils; the whole of huma n his tory is infinite ly s horte r in time tha n e te rnity a nd of less ma gnitude in space tha n infinity.40

4. I Find Something in Me That Thinks (Second Discourse) a. The Human Compos ite ofBody and S oul The second discourse on “Wha t Is Ma n? " continues with the same te xt: Psalm 8:4: "Wha t is man?" [Homily #116 (1788), B 4:19-27; J #109, VII:225 - 30]. I am doubtle ss “a curious ma chine , 'fe a rfully a nd wonde rfully made,’ ” but the re 32“Wha t Is Ma n?” Ps. 8:3,4, B 3:460, sec. 2.5. 33B 2:284, 289 - 90, 382; 4:22 - 25, 30-31, 292, 298. MCf. Augus tine , “On the Greatness ofthe Soul”; Thoma s Aquina s , “On the Soul.” 35“Wha t Is Ma n? " Ps. 8:3,4, B 3:460-61, sec. 2.5-8. 36BCP, Communion, Nicene Creed. 37“Wha t Is Ma n?” Ps. 8:3,4, B 3:461, sec. 2.9. 38“Wha t Is Ma n? " Ps. 8:3,4, B 3:462, sec. 2.11. 39“Wha t Is Ma n?” Ps. 8:3,4, B 3:462, sec. 2.12. ““Wha t Is Ma n?” Ps. 8:3,4, B 3:461 - 63, sec. 2.8 -14. 178

MAN

is fa r more to me.41 The re is no de nying tha t “the huma n body is compos e d of all the four e le me nts [air, e a rth, fire , wa te r] duly proportioned a nd mixe d toge the r ... whe nce flows the a nima l heat.”42 But “Who a m I?” goes be yond the re ductionis t e xpla na tions . All such re ductionis ms fa il to unders ta nd the re la tion of s oul a nd body, by re ducing s oul to body. Such a ttempts we re cons ta ntly e me rge nt in the tra dition of Britis h e mpiricis m (as re pre se nte d by the tra ditions following Hobbes a nd Hume).43 Thus , whe n we s e rious ly ask a ne w the a ncie nt ps almis t’s que s tion —“Who am I?" or "Wha t is man?” (Ps. 8:4), or wha t is the cons titutiona l na ture of human e xistence? — the inquiry re ma ins pe re nnia lly pe rtine nt a mid the continuing challenges of re ductive na tura lis m a nd ma te ria lis m. So wha t am I besides mud a nd bones? Wes le y said, 7find s om ething in me that thinks-, which ne ithe r e a rth, wa te r, air, fire , nor any mixture of the m, can possibly do," a nd s ome thing tha t perceives obje cts by the senses,44 "forms inwa rd ideas of the m. It judges conce rning the m,... reasons,... re fle cts upon its own ope ra tions ,... e ndue d with ima gina tion and me mory.”45 My passions a nd a ffe ctions are “dive rs ifie d a thous a nd ways. And the y seem to be the only s pring of a ction in tha t inwa rd principle I ca ll the soul.”46 b. On Human Libe rty The huma n self, ha ving libe rty, is capable of de te rmining its e lf fre e ly within the cons tra ints of na tura l causality, a ccording to its pe rce ive d good. We are capable of us ing our fre e dom to de te rmine ourselves re s pons ive ly or nonre s pons ive ly in re lation to the grace offe re d. We are not fla tly de te rmine d by e xte rnal circums ta nce s 47 The s oul is free, hence capable of sha ping its e lf in response to differe nt continge ncies.48 Huma n libe rty has both the power of choos ing e ithe r to do or not to do (libe rty of contra diction) or to do this or the contra ry (libe rty of contra rie ty) 49 Contra rie ty is the a bility to choose, whereas contra diction is the a bility to a ct on tha t choice or to re frain from the exercise of choice .50 The purpos e of huma n life is to love a nd e njoy God a nd serve the Crea tor through the full use of our re de e me d powe rs. The huma n proble m is tha t we have re be lle d a ga ins t this inte nde d wa y of orde ring our live s . The fe licity for which 41“Wha t Is Ma n?” Ps. 8:4, B 4:20, sec. 1; cf. 3:9, 24; LJW 3:336. 42“Wha t Is Ma n?’ Ps. 8:4, B 4:20, sec. 2. «B 4:29 - 30,49 - 51,200; 11:56-57. 44 B 1:409; 2:285, 288-89, 294; 4:21; on a nima l senses, see B 2:394-95. 45“Wha t Is Ma n? " Ps. 8:4, B 4:21, sec. 5, ita lics added. •^“Wha t Is Ma n? " Ps. 8:4, B 4:22, sec. 7. 470n chance, see LJW 1:103; 6:339; 7:45. 48“The Ge ne ra l Spread of the Gospel," B 2:488 - 90, secs. 9-12. 49TUN, J X:468 - 69, sec. 3.9; cf. B 1:130n, 576n. “I am full as ce rta in ofthis, tha t I am fre e ... to speak or not... to do this or the contra ry, as I a m ofmy own existence. I have not only what is te rme d a 'libe rty of contra diction’ — a powe r to do or not to do; but wha t is te rme d, a ‘libe rty of contrariety,’— a powe r to act one way, or the contrary.” “Wha t Is Ma n?” Ps. 8:4, B 4:24, sec. 11; see also "The End ofChris t’s Coming," sec. 1.4-5; and TUN, sec. 3.9. 50“Wha t Is Ma n? " B 4:24, sec. 11; cf. “The End of Chris t’s Coming," sec. 1.4, 5; TUN, sec. 3.9. 179

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

our live s are fa s hione d is thwa rted by our own fre e dom, inte rge ne ra tiona lly and s ocia lly conceive d. We huma ns are an unha ppy lot as long as the purpos e of our lives re ma ins obs tructe d a nd unfulfille d. The wa y to happiness is holine ss, where by we are enabled again to re fle ct God’s ima ge as holy.51 c. The Ps ychos om atic Inte rface Human existence is cha ra cterize d by a continuing dia le ctica l s truggle be twee n this e a rthly na tura l body a nd the living s e lf’s ca pa city for reason, conscience, and ima gina tion. This is wha t we me a n by the body-s oul compos ite .52 S oul e nlivens body, awakens body to life , tra ns ce nds sheer corpore a lity. S oul is not de pende nt on body for its life ; ra ther, body is de pe nde nt on s oul for its life . Body and soul are intima te ly unite d in huma n fre e dom, each a ffe cting the other so profoundly and cons ta ntly tha t sickness can a t time s be brought on through de mora liza tion. Acts of s piritua l ins ight, courage, and will can ove rcome some forms of illness. The body, la cking soul, has no ca pa city for s e lf-motion53 From the e nlive ning S pirit, "the source of a ll the motion in the universe,” the soul has "a n inwa rd principle of motion, whe re by it governs a t pleasure e ve ry pa rt of the body,” e xce pting those involunta ry motions “a bs olute ly ne e dful for the continua nce of life,” s uch as blood circula tion, inha ling, a nd e xha ling. "We re it othe rwis e , grievous inconve nie nce s might follow,” such as los ing one’s life through ina tte ntion.54 Tha t “I am s ome thing dis tinct from my body,” is e vide nt from the fa ct tha t “whe n my body dies, I sha ll not die.”55 Though huma n existence is roote d in the body and na ture , it is ye t capable of tra ns ce nding tha t roote dne s s by reason, ima gina tion, a nd consciousness. De a th is the s e pa ra tion of s oul a nd body, in which the body dies a nd the s oul lives on. Only God knows pre cis ely whe n de a th occurs , but in general te rms de a th occurs whe n life (psuche, "s oul”) leaves the body.56 In the re s urre ction, the unity of soul a nd body is re cove re d in its intrins ic ps ychos oma tic inte rfa ce in a glorified body. For one e nd only is life give n to the body: to prepare for e te rnity. “You we re born for nothing else ... you we re not created to please your senses,” but “by seeking and finding happiness in God on e a rth, to secure the glory of God in heaven.”57

5. Human Life a Dream The te xt of the homily “Human Life a Drea m” is Psalm 73:20: “As a dre a m whe n one awaketh, so, O Lord, whe n thou awakest, thou s ha lt despise the ir image ” [Homily #124 (1789), B 4:108-19; J #124, VII:318 -25], 51“Wha t Is Ma n?” Ps. 8:4, B 4:24, sec. 11.

52B 4:279 -83;cf.2:129 -34,382 -83,405 -6,438 -39. 53 W ,177-79.

M“Wha t Is Ma n?” Ps. 8:4, B 4:22-23, secs. 8, 9. 55“Wha t Is Ma n?” Ps. 8:4, B 4:23, sec. 10. 56 Whe the r this occurs pre cise ly at the point of the e nding of re s pira tion, or circula tion ofblood, or rigor mortis , we ca nnot say. "Wha t Is Man?” Ps. 8:4, B 4:23 - 25, secs. 10-12. 57“Wha t Is Ma n?” Ps. 8:4, B 4:26, sec. 15. 180

MAN

a. Dre am Life and R e al Life This homily springs out of a single penetrating metaphor —the re la tion of dream life and real life. Temporal life is like a dream. When I wake up, what 1 was dreaming about is not there anymore. It has vanished. The analogy is between the transiency of life and the dura bility of eternity. Real life is eternal. Human life is like a dream in relation to the eternal. It is ephemeral, passing. The life that awaits is everlasting.58 As long as the psalmist meditated on the "prosperity of the wicked” (Ps. 73:3 NRSV), the arrogant scoffers whose "hearts overflow with follies” (v. 7 NRSV), he was wearied by this thought of the temporality of creatures — that is, he said, "until I went into the sanctuary of God; then I perceived the ir end. Truly you set them in slippery places; you make them fall to ruin” (w. 17-18 NRSV). For they can be swept away in a moment. “They are like a dream when one awakes; on awaking you despise their phantoms” (v. 20 NRSV).59 The psalmists thoughts show "how near a resemblance there is between human life and a dream.”60 b. The Ephe me ral Quality ofDre am ing Wesley offered some intriguing observations on the origin of dreams.61 Few human phenomena are more mysterious. Whence come dreams? From diverse strata of causal determinants: through the body and physical condition; through the recollected passions of the previous day; perhaps even through incorporeal spiritual powers that should not be ruled out as having a potential effect on the shaping of dreams 62 Though God may at times speak through dreams, we are always susceptible to misjudge God’s address in dreams, instances of which are abundantly attested in Scripture.63 The more interesting question is whether we can know we are dreaming while s till in the dream state. Rather, the dream is best recognized only in relation to the contextual real life in which it is occurring. “It is a kind of parenthesis, inserted in life, as that is in a discourse, which goes on equally well either with it or without it." By this we may know a dream: "by its being broken off at both ends,” by its radical contingency in relation with the real things that flow before and after.64 God, who sees everything in simultaneity, sees creation in something like the manner in which we see in a dream, with many things happening simultaneously, not merely linearly but a ll at once. The dream thus signals some remnant of the eternal in human life. Wesley was here comparing dreaming to time not eternity, 58“Huma n Life a Dream,” B 4:109-10, secs. 1-2; cf. CH 7:398. 59“Huma n Life a Dream,” B 4:109-10, sec. 1. 60“Huma n Life a Dream,” B 4:110, sec. 2. 6‘See also B 2:54,130, 289,577;4:108-19; 11:496 - 97. 62Cf. JJW 4:229 - 30; 6:495 - 96. 63“Huma n Life a Dream,” B 4:110-11, secs. 3-5. Dreams are “not s imply to be re lie d upon without corrobora ting evidences.” JJW 2:226. ^“Huma n Life a Dream,” B 4:111, sec. 5. 181

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

but even dre a ming holds some a ffinity to e te rnity in the sense tha t it is a fle e ting re fle ction of e te rnity s till e xisting within the conditions of the his tory of sin.65 c. The R e s e m blance ofHum an Life to a Protracte d Illus ion We s le y’s re a l intere s t was in ne ithe r the origin nor the inte rpre tation of dreams, but on the dre a m as a n a rche type of illus ion, a nd huma n life in this fa lle n world as a protracte d illus ion.66 Though this may s ound a t firs t as if it resonates with the Ea s tern re ligions ’ vie w of m aya (illus ion), We s ley’s s tronge r motive was pre s e nt a wa ke ning, while time re ma ins, to the decisive conditions of this worldly re ality, so as to be pre pa re d for e te rnity.67 A dre a m is a condition in which ima gined e ve nts are pre s ente d to our minds in sleep but have no pa lpa ble be ing except in the ima gina tion. The dre a m state is a fantasy, a pla y with the energies of huma n experiences. Precisely tha t e phe me ral — as passing as a dre a m — is te mpora l life compa re d to e te rnity. We awaken from te mpora l life into e te rnity68 The resemblance is be twee n the fle eting na ture of the dre am and the infinite continua tion ofe te rna l life .69 In such an a wa ke ning, we would pe rceive our old lives a nd world with e ntirely ne w eyes. We have no more to do with those poor tra ns ie nt shadows. Now we see, hear, and feel but without tha t body of clay. Now we are a ll eyes, a ll ears, a ll pe rce ption.70 In this ne w world of s piritua l re a litie s in e te rnity, the ma tte rs of this vis ible world would not be ta ke n with a bs olute seriousness or fina lity 71 Wesley was not de me a ning the va lue of curre nt life in this analogy but e le vating it by pla cing it in its e te rna l conte xt. d. Dre am and R e ality: An Analogy be twe e n Te m porality and Ete rnity The vita l que s tion: Whe re would you s ta nd if your “dre a m of life” we re to end now une xpe cte dly? How would you va lue your e a rthly treasures a nd a ccomplis hments? To know real e te rna l life is fa r more cons eque ntia l tha n to be gre a t in the eyes of the world while s piritua lly dead 72 Will our a ffe ctions be so turne d to those things above tha t whe n we awake from the dre am of e a rthly life , we will re lis h life in the light of God? Or will our a ffe ctions be so fixa te d on thos e tra ns itory shadows of this dre am life tha t whe n we awake we will wa nt to fle e the light of heaven? How diffe re nt will be the a wa kening of thos e who ye a rne d for e te rnity as oppose d to thos e who ye a rn now for e a rthly things .73 At some point, each of us mus t awaken from dre am life to re a l life , from te mporality to e te rnity. Re ligion provide s the founda tion a nd means for corre la ting these two worlds a nd lives: te mpora l and e te rna l. The good news tha t God is with 65“The General Deliverance,” B 2:436 - 50. ““Huma n Life a Dream," intro., B 4:109. 67B 4:112-18. 1:245; 5:68, 229. ““Huma n Life a Dream,” B 4:112, secs. 6-7. 70“Huma n Life a Dream,” B 4:112-13, sec. 7. 7l“Huma n Life a Dream,” B 4:113, sec. 8. 72“Huma n Life a Dream," B 4:113-15, secs. 9-10. 73“Huma n Life a Dream,” B 4:115 -17, secs. 12 -13.

182

MAN

us brings eternal life already into the sphere of temporality in the incarnate Lord.74 We retain a constant sense of the connection between heaven and earth when we remember that our present lives are comparatively but a dream and that soon we will awake to real life.75 The homily ends with a fervent plea to take time seriously, hence this life seriously, in relation to eternal life. For the dream of corporeal life will be over soon. Perhaps tonight your soul may be required of you. 6. Heavenly Treasure in Earthen Vessels

The te xt of the homily "Heavenly Treasure in Earthen Vessels” is 2 Corinthians 4:7: "We have this treasure in earthen vessels” [Homily #129 (1790), B 4:161 - 67; J #124, V1L344 - 48]. a. Man as a R iddle to Him s e lf Ma n has long been a "riddle to himself,” a vexing mixture of “nobleness and baseness.” The deeper our self-exploration proceeds, the more mysterious we may become to ourselves.76 The biblical account is clarifying: the reason for human greatness is that humanity is made in the image of God; the reason for human baseness is that freedom has fallen. By juxtaposing the creation with the fall of humanity, “the greatness and littleness, the dignity and baseness, the happiness and misery, of [man’s] present state, are no longer a mystery, but clear consequences of his original state and his rebellion against God. This is the key that opens the whole mystery, that removes all the difficulty,” by showing the difference between what God originally made and “what man has made himself.”77 Though fallen into a dismal history of sin and rebellion against God, the human self is being made capable by grace of reflecting to a greater or lesser extent the image of God. This is the mystery of human existence, its grandeur and misery, its glory and shame. This is the wonderful compositum of humanum — the human capacity for re fle cting the goodness of God precisely while rooted in the natural causality and time, and prone to sin. This is what we are made up of, a tautly nuanced conflation of opposites, a blend of God’s grace working within distorted human freedom —made in the image of God yet fallen into a history of sin. I not only have a body but more so am a body, subject to the vicissitudes of history.78 b. The Tre as ure We Now Have Paul provided the prevailing metaphor for grasping this compositum of opposites: “We have this treasure in jars of clay to show that this all-surpassing power is from God and not from us” (2 Cor. 4:7 NIV). The “we” is firs t considered as “all huma nity” and then as those born anew through saving faith. 74“Huma n Life a Dream,” B 4:117 -18, secs. 14 -16. 75“Huma n Life a Dream,” B 4:118- 19, secs. 16-18. 76“Heavenly Treasure in Ea rthe n Vessels,” B 4:162, proe m 1. 77“Heavenly Treasure in Earthen Vessels,” B 4:162-63, proe m 2, 3; 2:188-89,540-41; 4:293-95. 78“Heavenly Tre a sure in Ea rthe n Vessels,” B 4:163, sec. 1.1. 183

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

The tre as ure in which all hum anity now alre ady shares is the “re ma ins of the ima ge of God”: firs t, the tre a sure of libe rty, a s piritua l na ture with fre e will, cha ra cte rize d by unde rs ta nding, libe rty, s e lf-moving, a nd s e lf-gove rning powe r;79 and second, the tre a s ure of a natural conscience able roughly to disce rn be twee n good a nd e vil. Conscience, tha t form of consciousness tha t accuses and excuses us, bears te s timony to the s plinte re d image of God in us, even though fore ve r be ing dilute d a nd dis torte d by wille d s in a nd qua s i-cons cious s e lf-dece ption. These treasures of libe rty a nd conscience are found a mong all, including the ists , nonthe is ts, Mus lims , pagans, a nd "the vile s t of savages.”80 The y indica te the re mnant of the divine image s till re ma ining even a mid fa lle n huma n his tory. “Such tre a s ure have a ll the childre n of me n, more or less, even whe n the y do not ye t know God.”81 The tre as ure that Chris tian believers have received is the fullne s s of jus tification by faith, whe re by be lie ve rs are born a ne w from above. The love of God is shed abroad in the ir hearts. In the m is be ing re ne we d the whole ima ge of God, not me re ly a re mna nt.82 The y have fa ith in God’s working in the m, “a peace which sets the m above the fe a r of death,” a "hope full of immorta lity.”83 The tre as ure of the re born is God the Son forming in the m —a s piritua l na ture capable of re fra cting divine goodness, always placed within na tura l causal de te rminants , ye t gra cious ly made capable of a tte s ting God in time. c. In Earthe n Vessels We have this tre a s ure in e a rthe n vessels. We are morta l, corruptible , and in fa ct corrupte d as an e ntire huma n his tory.84 We are capable of ta king this tre a sure and grossly dis torting it. The tre a s ure is lodge d within brittle , vulne rable bodie s s ubje ct to sickness, e rror, a nd death. Not only is the body debased and depraved, but the mind, by which the dire ction of the soul is guide d, is also dis orde red towa rd e rror “in te n thous a nd shapes.”85 God pe rmits s uch a tre a s ure s till to be lodge d in such poor e a rthen vessels “to s how tha t this a ll-s urpa s s ing powe r is from God a nd not from us” (2 Cor. 4:7 NIV).86 The ma in design of God is to keep these te mpora l, bodily vessels humble , so tha t wha te ve r comes — limita tion, weakness, a ffliction — we s hall by our weakness learn whe re our s tre ngth lies.87 79W 7:16. 80“He a ve nly Tre a sure in Ea rthe n Vessels,” B 4:163, sec. 1.1, 2. Whe n Wesley spoke of the honesty of the heathen (B 1:131-32, 135, 669), the ir proxima te jus tice (B 1:500-501, 655-56), the ir s ince rity (B 1:263, 307), and the ir s tructure s of mora lity (B 1:488-89; 2:66-67, 472-73; 3:199-200), and of pre pa ra tory virtue s of re fine d heathen (LJW 8:219), he was assuming the crucia l premises of libe rty and conscience as pre pa ra tion for the gospel. 81“He a ve nly Treasure in Ea rthe n Vessels,” B 4:163, sec. 1.1, 2. 82“He a ve nly Treasure in Ea rthe n Vessels,” B 4:163 - 64, sec. 1.2,3. 83"He a ve nly Treasure in Ea rthe n Vessels,” B 4:164, sec. 1.3. ^B 1:177-78; 2:406-8; 3:195-96,456-60. 85“He a ve nly Treasure in Ea rthe n Vessels,” B 4:164 - 66, sec. 2.1,2; on tota l de pra vity see “The Righteousness of Faith,” sec. 1.4-6, cf. S S l:141n; LJW 5:231. 86“He a ve nly Treasure in Ea rthe n Vessels,” B 4:166-67, sec. 2.4. 87“He a ve nly Treasure in Ea rthe n Vessels," B 4:166-67, sec. 2.4-7. 184

MAN

Huma n reason, will, a nd me mory, howe ve r dis torte d, re main a tra ns cript of the triune God: You, whom he ordained to be Tra ns cripts of the Trinity... You, of reason’s powers possessed, You, with will and me mory blest: You, with fine r sense endued, Creatures capable of God; Noblest of his creatures, why, Why will you for ever die?88 And when we rise in love renewed, our souls resemble thee, An image of the triune God to a ll e te rnity89 7. Countering the Overreach of Natural Science a. On Ne ce s s ity We sle y discusses the idea of necessity in two essays: “Thoughts upon Neces sity” [J X:457-74] a nd “A Thought on Ne ce s s ity” [J X:474 - 80]. Wesley was especially inte re s te d in the analogies be twe e n ps e udore ligious monergis tic re ductionis ms , such as a bs olute double pre de s tina tion, a nd ps e udos cie ntific ma te ria lis tic mone rgisms, such as those of Da vid Ha rtle y and Lord Ka rnes —pe ople who in Wesley’s day were saying wha t the B. F. Skinne rs a nd Be rtrand Russells have asserted in our time . Wes le y could not believe “the noble s t cre ature in the vis ible world to be only a fine piece ofclock work." Rather, the human pe rs on is a free agent, "s e lf-de te rmine d in action,” not de termine d by another. Ada m’s prototypica l s in was to plead coercion by a nothe r: "It is true , I did eat; but the cause of my e ating, the s pring of my a ction, was in another.”90 b. Type s ofNaturalis tic R e ductionis m : Ancie nt, S cie ntific, and R e ligious Among le a ding a ncie nt the ories of necessity we re the Ma nicha e a ns , who made a whole dua lis tic system of such a de nial, a nd the Stoics, who saw huma n a ction fa te fully bound up in an indis s oluble cha in of causes a nd e ffe cts.91 Da vid Ha rtle y argued tha t a ll our thoughts de pe nd on vibra tions in the bra in, from which proceed re fle ctions , passions, dis pos itions , a nd a ctions .92 If so, a ll be ha vior would the n be de te rmine d by causes e xte rna l to the self. Even virtue s a nd vices are hypothe s ize d as be ing caused by vibra tions of the bra in.93 S imilarly, Lord Karnes de s cribe d the unive rs e as an imme ns e machine, an amazing piece of clockwork cons is ting of innumera ble wheels fidy fra me d, into which are s8 CH 7:88, cf. 390, 395, 527. 8’CW 7:390. "TUN, J X:457, sec. 1.1. 91TUN, J X:457, sec. 1.2; cf. B l:76n, 386n; 2:130n, 285n; 3:493n. 92Da vid Ha rtle y, Observations on Man (London: S. Richardson, 1749). 93“A Thought on Necessity,” J X:474 - 75. 18 5

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

squeezed huma n beings. People think the y are free but are not.94 Amid a ll supposed “ra tiona l” schemes, reason its e lf re ma ins impote nt as it cons ide rs free will.95 P re de s tina ria ns are pa rtly re s pons ible for s e tting a disastrous pa tte rn for scie ntific inquiry in the ir a s s e rtion tha t “wha te ve r ha ppe ns in time was uncha nge a bly de te rmine d from a ll e te rnity.... The greatest a nd the sma lle st events we re e qua lly pre dete rmined.... It follows tha t no ma n can do e ithe r more or less good, or more or less e vil, tha n he does.”96 We s le y s ought to re fute both s cie ntific a nd re ligious de te rminis ms . c. Counte ring Naturalis tic R e ductionis m If pe ople we re gove rne d by ma te ria lis tic causes wholly e xte rnal to themselves (whe ther physical, ps ychologica l, s ociologica l, or e conomic), the n there could be no mora l good or e vil, no virtue or vice , hence no judgme nt to come, contra ry to the biblical vie w of huma n a ccounta bility 97 Abs urditie s necessarily follow from the scheme of necessity. “It is not easy for a ma n of common unde rs ta nding ... to unra ve l these fine ly woven s che me s .... But he knows , he feels, he is ce rta in, the y ca nnot be true ; tha t the holy God ca nnot be the a uthor of sin.”98 Even Ha rtle y a dmitte d tha t "upon this scheme, a ll the mora l cons titution of our na ture is ove rturne d... ma n is no longe r a mora l agent.”99 With huma n fre e dom mispla ce d, huma n dignity is lost. 100 We sle y said, “If I ca nnot believe wha t I feel in myself, namely, tha t it depends on me, a nd no othe r be ing, whe the r I sha ll now ope n or s hut my eyes, move my head hithe r a nd thithe r, or s tre tch my ha nd or my foot, if I a m necessitated to do a ll this , contra ry to the whole both of my inwa rd a nd outwa rd sense, I can believe nothing else, but mus t necessarily s ink into univers a l skepticism.”101 Jonathan Edwards seems to have found a wa y to ma inta in both necessity and mora l culpa bility. Yet "Edwa rds ’ whole mistake,” in We s le ys view, was tha t the will on this "s uppos ition, is irre s is tibly impe lle d; so tha t [pe ople ] ca nnot he lp willing thus or thus. If so, the y are no more bla ma ble for tha t will tha n for the a ctions which follow it. The re is no bla me if the y are unde r a necessity of willing. The re can be no mora l good or e vil, unless the y have libe rty as we ll as will.”102 Agains t na turalistic de te rminis ms , We s le y a rgued tha t pe ople ca n re sist the ir motive s a t time s , e ve n whe n the y wa nt to proce e d with a n a ction. It is not the case tha t "choice mus t be de te rmine d by tha t motive which appears be st upon the 94He nry Home Lord Karnes, Essay on Libe rty and Necessity (Edinburgh, 1731); see Wesley, "A Thought on Necessity,” J X:474 - 80. 95TUN, J X:477 - 78. %TUN,J X:459, sec. 1.7. 97TUN,J X:463 - 64, sec. 3.1-2; cf. B 3:493, 498 - 99; 4:50. 98TUN, J X:463, sec. 3.1. 99TUN,J X:465, sec. 3.3. “•OB 2:486; 4:151. 101TUN, J X:472, sec. 4.3. 102TUN, J X:467, sec. 3.7. 186

MAN

whole,” for pe ople e vide ntly choose a t time s against the ir be tte r motive s . The ve ry thing we desire mos t to do, we do not. People are not passive in re ce iving a ll sensory impre s s ions . Huma n judgme nts may be changed. The mind has the intrins ic powe r of cutting off the conne ction be twe e n the judgment a nd the will. People’s outwa rd a ctions do not necessarily follow the ir will. 103 Rather, God cre a te d huma n beings with unde rs ta nding, will, a nd libe rty. The unde rs ta nding needs the will to execute its de cis ions , a nd the will needs libe rty to de termine its e lf. To de ny libe rty is to de ny the essence of the huma n s pirit. God does not necessitate huma ns to be ha ppy a ny more tha n to be mis e rable. Tha t depends on wha t the y do with the ir fre edom, by grace.

Further Reading on the Human Condition Barker, Joseph. A Review of Wesley's Notions Concerning the Prime val S tate ofMan and the Universe. London, ca. 1855. Collins , Kenneth. A Faithful Witness: John Wesley’s Hom ile tical Theology, 105 - 24. Wilmore , KY: Wesleyan Heritage, 1993. Ma tsumoto, Hiroa ki. "John Wesley’s Unde rsta nding of Man.” In Japanese Contributions to the S tudy ofJohn Wesley, 79 - 96. Macon, GA: Wesleyan College, 1967. Als o in WQR 4 (1967): 83-102. Mile y, John. S ystematic Theology. Reprint, Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1989. Outle r, Albe rt C. "Diagnosing the Huma n Flaw: Reflections upon the Huma n Condition.” In Theology in the Wesleyan S pirit, 23-45. Nashville: Tidings, 1975. Pope, Willia m Burt. A Compendium of Chris tian Theology. 3 vols. London: Wesleyan Me thodis t Book-Room, 1880.

Prince, John W. "The ory of Human Nature.” In Wesley on Religious Education, 13ff. Ne w York: Me thodis t Book Concern, 1926. Ralston, Thomas N. Elements of Divinity. Ne w York: Abingdon, 1924. Reist, Irwin W. “John Wesley’s Vie w of Ma n: Free Grace versus Free Will.” WTJ 7(1972): 25-35. Shelton, R. Larry. "Wesley’s Doctrine of Man.” PM 55, no. 4 (1980): 36,37. Summers, Thomas O. S ystematic Theology. 2 vols. Edited by J. J. Tigert. Nashville: Me thodis t Publishing House South, 1888. Vogel, John Richard. "Faith and the Image of God." Ma s ter’s thesis, DePauw University, 1967. Walls, Jerry. "The Free Will Defense: Calvinism, Wesley and the Goodness of God." Chris tian S cholar’s Review 13 (1983): 19-33. Watson, Richard. Theological Institutes. 2 vols. Ne w York: Mason and Lane, 1836,1840; edited by John M’Clintock, Ne w York: Ca rlton & Porter, 1850.

103TUN, J X:472, sec. 4.3; on the dis tinction be twe e n inwa rd a nd outwa rd s in, see B 1:239-40, 245 - 46,336 - 44; 2:215-16. 187

CHAPTER 8

Sin

Wesley dealt firs t with voluntary sin and then with origina l sin. A. On the Deceitfulness of the Human Heart The text of the homily “On the Deceitfulness of the Human Heart” is Jeremiah 17:9: “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” [Homily #128 (1790), B 4:149-60; J #123, VIl:335-44]. 1. Why Optimists Forever Misjudge the Human Heart Inordinate optimism about progress in history was a characteristic of Wesleys age. Many believed that human beings are naturally good, virtuous, wise, and happy — far from being prone to sin. The cultured despisers of his day engaged in “labored panegyrics” on the dignity of human nature and absence of sin.1 Afte r such deep drafts of optimism, it seems that the wise men of Wesley’s era might have learned little more than the pagans of old.2 Today we remain captive to extravagant illusions about our autonomous human potential. The pious Lord Karnes and the skeptical David Hume were more inclined to blame God for sin than to call human will to account. The fault seems to be with the Creator for creating the problem in the firs t place.3 Wesley pointed out the typical evasions. Some plead psychological determinations: "I often act wrong, for want of more understanding.” Others plead somatic or physical determinations: “1 frequendy feel wrong tempers,” but they do not regard this as a sin, "for it depends on the motions of my blood and spirits, which I cannot help.”4 Others argue sociological determinations, that individual human beings cannot be blamed for the evil so widely evident and disbursed in the world. Others go so far as to exaggerate demonic determinations, saying that it is Satan who “forces men to act as they do; therefore they are unaccountable.”5 Even Satan, remarked Wesley, never uttered such a blasphemy. ’“On the 2“On the 3“On the 4Ibid. 5“On the

De ce itfulnes s of the Huma n Heart,” B 4:150 - 51, proe m 1-3. De ce itfulnes s of the Huma n Heart," B 4:149 - 51, proe m 3. De ce itfulnes s of the Huma n Heart,” B 4:151, proe m 3. De ce itfulnes s of the Huma n Heart,” B 4:151, proe m 4, ita lics added.

189

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

2. Toward Scriptural Realism about the Human Heart: Why Desperately Wicked? The s criptura l view of the origin of s in gives an e ntire ly diffe re nt a ccount: “The he art is de ceitful above a ll things a nd be yond cure. Who can unde rs ta nd it?” (Jer. 17:9 NIV). The s ubje ct is the huma n he a rt, de s cribe d firs t in this homily as despera te ly wicke d, the n as de ce itful above a ll things , and fina lly as so de ce itful tha t none of us can know ourselves a pa rt from saving grace. Why this desperate wickedness? We do we ll not to focus too quickly on pa rticular sins tha t are "no more tha n the leaves, or, at mos t, the fruits ” tha t s pring from the root of sin: pride a nd s e lf-will, inordina tely loving the cre a ture above the Creator. The y s pring from ce nte ring our va luing on ourselves, from judging e ve rything by how it a ffe cts us individually, our own intere sts, our own passions, our own de s tinies.6 We love created goods so excessively tha t we e xalt the ir limite d, finite values to the ultima te le ve l of an idol. In doing so, we fa il to s ta nd a ccounta bly be fore the source a nd ground and give r of the world, and hence the whole cosmos suffers from our s piritua l dis orde r.7 It is this he art of s in tha t gives ris e to individua l acts of sin.8 All s inne rs have the ir ce nte r in "idola try, pride , e ithe r thinking of the mse lve s more highly tha n the y ought to think, or glorying in s ome thing which the y have received, as though the y had not received it... seeking happiness out of God."9 De s pite diffe ring individua lly in a thous a nd ways, e ve ryone is like e ve ryone else in "e nmity a gainst God.”10 Such is the unive rs a l huma n condition: “No crime ever pre va ile d a mong the Turks or Ta rta rs , which we ca nnot pa ra lle l in e ve ry pa rt of Chris te ndom.”11 To this is added a nothe r frightful dime ns ion: the a tte s te d world of s upe rpe rsonal, noncorpore a l, dis embodie d inte llige nce s de te rmine d to us urp both human fre e dom a nd divine power. Tha t is wha t the a rchde ce iver a nd his a ffilia te d powe rs seek to do, said Wesley, quoting S cripture . We do not he a r a lot of loose ta lk of Satan by Wesley. But the de monic dis tortion of le gitima te powe r he took seriously. It stands as ba ckground to any se rious discussion of pe rsona l a nd socia l s in.12 Whe n Satan asserted his s e lf-will a nd s e lf-pride into huma n his tory, the his tory of s in was la unche d a nd s oon cove re d the whole world, infecting e ve ry fa ce t of the huma n condition.

3. Why Deceitful above All Things? As a re s ult, it is folly to think tha t if we e a rne s tly seek s e lf-unde rs tanding a pa rt from divine grace, we will achieve it easily. For our he arts are de ceitful. If‘“e ve ry 6On s e lf-will see B 1:337 - 38; 3:353 - 55; 4:152 - 54. '“On the Deceitfulness of the Huma n Heart,” B 4:152, sec. 1.1. 8Ibid. 9“On the De ce itfulnes s of the Huma n He a rt," B 4:154, sec. 1.4. 10“On the De ce itfulne ss of the Huma n Heart,” B 4:155, sec. 1.4; Gen. 6:5. ““On the De ce itfulne ss of the Huma n Heart,” B 4:156, sec. 2.4. 12“On the De ce itfulne ss of the Huma n Heart,” B 4:154, sec. 1.3. 190

SIN

imagination of the thought of man’s heart is evil,’ only evil, and that continually," self-knowledge is hard to come by. This deceit leads us to imagine that we are much wiser and better than we are. It leads us to deceive not only ourselves but others who depend on our truth te lling. Ofte n truth seekers do not even recognize their own untruthfulness. Wesley was as intensely interested in the psychology of self-deception as Kierkegaard and Freud would later be.13 “Who can discover it in all the disguises it assumes, or trace it through all its latent mazes?”14 How a rtfully we conceal from others, and from ourselves. Why are so few conscious of this self-deception? We might have learned long ago from Scripture that the heart is deceitful “in the highest degree, above all that we can conceive. So deceitful, that the generality of men are continually deceiving both themselves and othe rs ... not knowing either their own tempers or characters, imagining themselves to be abundantly better and wiser than they are.” No one is "willing to know his own heart” except the person humbly taught of God, who comes in the incarnation as Servant Messiah.15 Socrates extolled knowledge of oneself, assuming that the unexamined life is not worth living. Wesley puzzled about the extent to which we in our fallen condition are even able to adequately know ourselves, because we see ourselves constantly from the vantage point of our own narrow self-interests and egocentricities. This ruse tends to trap us in a hedge of layered self-deceptions.16 4. Toward the Mending of the Self-Deceived Will

But thanks be to God, even this desperate state can be overcome through saving faith. In those born of God, the “heart is ‘renewed in righteousness and true holiness.’” Wesley then made a decisive qualification: "Yet the heart, even of a believer, is not wholly purifie d when he is justified. Sin is then overcome, but it is not rooted out; it is conquered but not destroyed. Experience shows him, first, that the roots of sin, self-will, pride, and idola try remain s till in his heart. But as long as he continues to watch and pray, none of them can prevail against him. Experience teaches him secondly, that sin ... cleaves to his best actions.”17 None of us can know our own hearts; only the One who made them can. Nothing can cure them but convicting, jus tifying, and sanctifying grace. Without the help of grace, we remain self-deceived and a mystery to ourselves. Only through the disclosure of God’s love can we know ourselves rightly. How desperate we are without God. "He that truste th in his own heart is a 13B 3:98-99; 4:149-60. 14“On the De ce itfulne ss of the Huma n Heart,” B 4:157, sec. 3.5. 15“On the De ce itfulne ss of the Huma n Heart,” B 4:155, sec. 2.1. lbLJW 6:139; on delusions of the senses, see B 3:538. I7“On the De ce itfulnes s of the Huma n Heart,” B 4:157, sec. 2.5. 191

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

fool.”18 Thos e who are wis e in the ir own eyes are mos t foolis h. "At wha t dista nce from wis dom mus t tha t ma n be who ne ve r suspected his wa nt of it? And will not his thinking so we ll of himse lf pre vent his re ceiving ins truction? ... No fool is so inca pable of a me ndme nt as one tha t ima gine s himse lf to be wise.”19 Thos e who mos t a s s uredly think the y are s ta nding alone are on the s lippe ries t ground.20 The fa ithful ca n only cry to God to search the ir he a rts a nd lead the m into the wa y of unde rsta nding. We sle y echoed ca utious ly the re a lis tic hopes for mode s t improve ments of the huma n condition through s cie ntific inquiry a nd te chnologica l innova tion. He was not re s ista nt to the na tura l sciences ofhis day a nd saw the m as an a tte mpt to unde rs ta nd God’s providential ordering of na ture a nd his tory. But this a tte mpt does not s uffice to a lte r thos e who are a ddictive ly prone to dis tortions of pride and ca rna lity.21 Chris t came to enable us to know ourselves comple te ly. Howe ve r desperately wicke d huma n pride ma y be, it is cons ta ntly be ing addressed by divine forgive ness. It is the self-assertive s inne r to whom God reaches out to re concile , pa rdon, redeem, a nd s a nctify inside out.22

B. On the Fall of Man The te xt of the homily "On the Fall of Ma n” is Genesis 3:19: “Dus t thou a rt, a nd unto dust s ha lt thou re turn” [Homily #57 (1782), B 2:400 - 412; J #57, VI:215-24].

1. Why Does God Allow Misery and Heartache in the World He Loves? “Why is there pain in the world, seeing God is ‘loving to e ve ry ma n, a nd his me rcy is ove r a ll his works ? ’ Because the re is sin. Ha d the re been no sin, there would have be e n no pa in. But pa in (s uppos ing God to be jus t) is the necessary e ffe ct of sin. But why is the re sin?”23 Because ma n a nd woma n, ha ving s pirit, will, reason, a nd libe rty, a kin to God, nonetheless "chose evil.” This is S cripture ’s "pla in, s imple a ccount of the origin of evil.” Without it ma n re ma ins an “e nigma to himself.”24 S in began with Eve’s unbe lie f a nd Ada m’s idola try, with Eve be lie ving the Te mpte r ra the r tha n God, a nd Ada m loving creatures idola trous ly more tha n God 25 Only this de a dly combina tion of two wills of ma le a nd female toge the r initia ted this loss of origina l righte ousne ss. As we will see later, Ada m was re s pons ible for headship, so a ll re s pons ibility ca nnot be s hifte d to Eve. But for Eve, the pa in a nd curse of childbe a ring ensue. And for Adam, the sweat of ha rd la bor followe d this free choice 18“On the Deceitfulness ofthe Human Heart,” B 4:159, sec. 3.1. l9“On the Deceitfulness ofthe Human Heart,” B 4:159, sec. 3.2. 20“On the Deceitfulness ofthe Human Heart,” B 4:160, sec. 3.3. 2l“On the Deceitfulness ofthe Human Heart,” B 4:159-60, sec. 3. 22CH, “Exhorting and Beseeching to Return to God,” B 7:79-94. 23“On the Fall of Man," B 2:400; cf. LfW 1:88, 97,102. 24“On the Fall of Man,” B 2:401, proem 1; cf. LJW 3:375-87. 25“On the Fall of Man,” B 2:401-3, sec. 1.1. 192

SIN

of e vil. The loss of innoce nce me a nt the loss of happiness. P rior to the fa ll the re was no inequa lity of wome n a nd no ha rd labor for me n.26 2. The Consequence of Sin for the Body-Soul Composite a. Dus t and S pirit God did not make huma n beings as “me re matter, a piece of... clay; but a s pirit, like hims e lf, a lthough clothe d with a ma te ria l vehicle.”27 Huma ns are not me re ly dust, but dus t shaped by living soul. The interfa ce of body a nd soul is the huma n s pirit. Be ing tra pped in a s yndrome of re bellion holds ma ny pos s ibilitie s for s tumbling a nd fa lling. Give n the mome ntum of the history of sin, soon "e ve ry child of ma n is in a thous a nd mistakes, a nd is lia ble to fre sh mistakes e ve ry mome nt,” not me re ly out of ignora nce , but in collus ion with the whole of huma n his tory’s willingne s s to ignore the divine will. The ps ychos oma tic e quilibrium (body/s oul; s oma/ps yche ) easily tilts out of kilter. The living s oul plays its e lf out “upon a set of ma te ria l keys” a nd ca nnot "make a ny be tte r mus ic tha n the na ture a nd sta te of its ins trume nt a llows.” Thinking becomes dis torte d by the passions of the corruptible body, which "hinde rs the soul in its ope ra tions : and, a t best, serves it ve ry impe rfe ctly. Yet the s oul ca nnot dispense with its service.”28 b. To Dus t You S hall R e turn As an outcome of a history full of this se lf-a sse rtion, “we are a ll tra ve ling towa rd death.” De a th comes to a ll huma ns .29 The e xe cution of the decree of de a th is built into the ve ry na ture of the huma n body a fter the fa ll. This body consists of “innume rable me mbra nes e xquis ite ly thin” tha t are fille d with circula ting fluids , which reach the ir full measure of functioning in youth and e arly a dulthood. By middle age, the body acquires some stiffne ss a nd stenosis, a nd a fte r s ixty years or so, "wrinkle s s how the proportion of the fluids to be lessened.” The re is a diminution of the juice s, "finer vessels are filled up," a nd in “e xtre me old age the a rte ries the ms e lve s ... be come ha rd” a nd “de a th na tura lly ensues.” From the outs e t of life, “we are pre pa ring ... to re turn to the dus t from whe nce we came!”30 Yet God does not despise the work of his ha nds but provide s a re me dy for a ll who are fa llen by be a ring our sins in his body on the tre e .31 As God is jus t in punis hing sin, so he is me rciful in providing a unive rs a l remedy, in his Son through his S pirit, for a univers a l e vil. The righte ousne ss of one suffices as jus tifica tion for all.32 26"On the Fall of Man," B 2:403 - 5, sec. 1.2-3. 27“On the Fall of Man,” B 2:409, sec. 2.6. 28“On the Fall of Man," B 2:403, sec. 2.2. 29“On the Fall ofMan," B 2:407, sec. 2.4. Exce pting special biblica l examples ofthose who so walked with God tha t the y ma y not have die d — Enoch, Elija h, and John the a pos tle —the sentence of death for sin is passed on a ll of Ada ms and Eves posterity. 30“On the Fall of Man," B 2:407 - 8, sec. 1.5; cf. 3:269 - 70. 31“On the Fall of Man," B 2:410, sec. 2.8. 32“On the Fall of Man," B 2:411 -12, sec. 2.9. 793

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

C. Spiritual Idolatry 1. Keep Yourselves from Idols The te xt for the homily "S piritua l Idola try" is 1 John 5:20 - 21: "Ke e p yourselves from idols” [Homily #78 (1781), B 3:103-14; J #78, VI:435-44]. To make a n idol firs t re quire s s ome thing good, some gift of the cre a ture ly orde r tha t we the n take to be be tte r tha n it is a nd elevate to a pre te nde d deity. An idol is a nything tha t te mpts the he art away from centeredness in God, a ny good thing in the cre a ture ly e nvironme nt tha t is capable of be ing a dore d,33 a nything good e nough in this world to seem worthy of wors hip out of twis ted desire, shaped by the figme nts of imagina tion a nd pride .34 "S piritua l idola try” is s ha rply dis tinguis hed from triune “s piritua l wors hip.”35 We s le y e ntre a ted, "Ke e p yourse lve s from idols” (1 John 5:21). Our idols be come impla cable "rivals of God.” The pos s ibility of ma king idols is endless. But Wes le y thought the y we re usually made a ccording to one of three motiva tions : as objects of sense, pride , or im aginationThis thre e fold pa tte rn was s ummarize d in 1 John 2:16: “For e ve rything in the world — the cravings of s inful ma n, the lus t of his eyes a nd the boas ting of wha t he has a nd does — comes not from the Fa ther but from the world” (NIV [1984], ita lics a dde d).37 We sle y ca lle d this the three layers of re be llion (triple x concupisce ntia): s e ns uality (lus t), pride (boa s ting), a nd imagina tion (cravings).

2. Idolatry in the Form of Sensuality The proxima te goodness of s e ns ua lity te mpts us to be dragged down into the false ima gina tion tha t wha t life re a lly a mounts to is our own se nsory experiences a nd physical s a tis fa ctions , of which we seem ne ver to get e nough.38 The idolatry of sense feeds off of the desire of the flesh, “the cra vings of s inful ma n” (“a ll tha t pa nders to the appetites," 1 John 2:16 NEB). We ma y idolize good things like sex, food, s e curity, money, or any ma te ria l good. We are sensory beings, so we love these good things . The proble m is tha t we may love the m in such a wa y tha t inste ad of seeing the m in re la tion to the ir giver, we pre te nd tha t the y are good in a nd of themselves. Tha t is the sensual side of the proble m of idola try. We are te mpte d to wors hip se ns ory obje cts linke d with the fulfillme nt of bodily a ppe tite s . Exa gge ra ting the ir goodness, we make idols of thos e things tha t make 33See also “Original Sin," sec. 2.7; "On the De ce itfulne ss of the Huma n Heart,” sec. 1.4; and “On the We dding Garment,” sec. 12, on the the me of idola try. 34“The Unity of the Divine Being,” B 4:65-67, secs. 12-18; J VII:267-69. 35Writte n on the same te xt, 1 John 5:20-21, at the same time, Chris tma s season of 1780, a nd publishe d toge the r in Arminian Magazine. 36These thre e forms of idola try are also considered in "S piritua l Idola try." 37Wesley concurre d with Augus tine tha t “a ll sins may be include d within these thre e classes of vice,” Augus tine , Enarratio in Ps alm um , 8.13, MP L 36:115; "The Wa y to the Kingdom," sec. 2.2, a nd “The Almos t Chris tia n," B l:137n, sec. 2.1; cf. B 1:409; 3:89, 282, 351, 534-35; 4:65,182-83. 38“The Unity of the Divine Being,” B 4:64 - 66, secs. 11-13. 194

SIN

our lives temporally more comfortable or pleasant. Sensuality is prone to become a spiritual disease of both rich and poor, either of whom can become inordinately attached to worldly things.39 3. Idolatry in the Form of Pride

If the idols of sensuality e xploit our capacity for bodily and corporeal life, the idols of pride exploit our capacity for self-transcendence.40 While sensuality pulls us inordinately downward, pride raises us inordinately upward, beyond our limits and competence. Pride tempts us toward the pretension that we have no limita tions.41 In our pride, we absurdly imagine our egocentric selves to be the center of all other values, so that we ourselves become adversaries to the true God by boasting of who we are and what we do. By the pride oflife we seek our happiness through the praise of others. We exalt our finitude to the laughable pretense that other values revolve around us.42 Prototypical pride is seen in the demonic aspiration of the fallen angels who desire despairingly to be God. From this absurdity springs the lie that has saturated human history,43 the pretense that creatures can feign being God. As a result, we assess each value only in relation to its value for ourselves.44 4. The Idols of Imagination

Pride and sensuality pull us in two conflicting directions, intensified by the exercise of the idolatrous imagination.45 Idola try escalates the objects of fancy by the devices of the imagination. We fantasize finite creatures as God. We prolifically imagine that which is not God as if it were truly God. Imagination is a marvelous human faculty capable of engaging in a relation with possibility —with what might occur.46 But when imagination takes over inordinately and becomes controlled by idolatrous sensuality and pride, this elicits anxiety and guilt. The escalated imagination of sensory ecstasy or egocentric pride may lead toward compulsive addictions to lust and hubris. The wonde rfully created capacity of imagination in this way falls increasingly into distortions as great as its native powers. By imagination we come to love more that which is less worthy of love than God. Sensuality and pride, when intensified by the idolatrous imagination, are basic 39“The Unity of the Divine Being,” B 4:65, sec. 12. ■*°B 1:197-98; 1:337-38; 2:179; 4:287-88. •••Idola try as sense, ima gina tion, and pride is also discussed in "The Unity of the Divine Being.” 42“On the Educa tion of Childre n," B 3:348 - 49, secs. 5-16; I VIl:89-94; FA, J VHL141. 43On the s piritua l pride of the English, see B 11:238-39; of a ncie nt Israel, see B 11:2008-9; of the Me thodis ts , see B 11:387 - 89. In these passages, Wesley counte re d the common mode rn compla int tha t re ligious discussions of pride are cha ra cte ristica lly ne gle ctful of socia l s e lf-criticis m, a nd of one s own social location or tra dition. 44“The Unity of the Divine Being,” B 4:65, sec. 12. 45Z./W4:305; 5:336; B 1:338-39; 3:106-7, 183-84, 524-25; 4:123-24; 11:128. •^On the right use of ima gina tion, see B 2:294. 195

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

ingredie nts in the oft-repe a ted, e ve r-unfolding fa ll of huma n his tory.47 The idola try of ima gina tion feeds off of the desire of the eye, in finding gra tifica tion in gra nd and be autiful obje cts , apparel, a nd amusements. A ke y fe a ture of We s le ys ps ychologica l analysis of imagina tion is the crucia l function of nove lty in the idol-ma king process. The a e sthe tic imagina tion is cons ta ntly hunge ring for s ome thing ne w to enjoy, so it is imme rs e d in dive rs ions and a museme nts a nd the pleasure tha t is ta ke n in seeking curios itie s . Nove lty appears to he ighte n the pleasure of music, poetry, a nd philos ophy. We sle y was we ll aware of the intima te conne ction be twe e n idola try a nd e duca tion s upe rficia lly conceived. Aca de mics are "so fa r from s us pe cting" this re lations hip tha t "the y s e rious ly be lie ve it is a ma tte r of gre a t praise to ‘give ourselves wholly’ ” to the ques t for nove l ideas.48

5. Inordinate Love of Money and Sex The inordina te love of the world is mos t cle arly seen in the huma n fixa tion on the love of money, not me rely mone y functiona lly unders tood, but the obsession with money, seeking money for its own sake, a nd thus pla cing happiness pre cise ly in a cquiring or possessing it. This is “e ffe ctua lly to re nounce the true God, and to set up an idol in his place.”49 Even more compuls ive ly, the inordina te love of the world may a ppea r in distortions of the good gift of s e xuality, in fixing our love on be loved huma n cre ature s , not with a pure he art grounde d in e nduring cove nant love, but by ma king of a nothe r little more tha n an immedia te obje ct of fle e ting pleasure for oneself. Wesley a dmonis he d spouses not to "put a ma n or a woma n in the place of God.... Le t this be ca re fully cons idered, even by those whom God has joine d together.”50 The goal of good ha bitua tion is happiness. Idolatry, always looking be tte r tha n it is, never e licits happiness.51

6. Whether Penitent Faith Can Break the Bondage of Idolatry We keep ourselves from idols firs t by be coming de e ply convicte d tha t no idol ca n bring the happiness it promis e s .52 Idola try is initia lly comba te d by pra ying for the grace to be come aware of our own te mpta tions a nd the n for the grace to trus t in God inste ad of the gods.53 We do not ove rcome idola try without coming to our senses, a wa ke ning from sleep, choos ing the be tte r way, a nd re s olving to seek ha ppiness in the true ground of happiness.54

47“The Unity of the Divine Being,” B 4:65 - 66, secs. 12-14. 48“S piritua l Idola try," B 3:106 - 9, sec. 1.7 -14. 49“S piritua l Idola try," B 3:110, sec. 1.17. ““S piritua l Idola try," B 3:111, sec. 1.18. 5l“S piritua l Idola try," B 3:110-11, sec. 1.17-18. ““S piritua l Idola try," B 3:111, sec. 2.1. 5W 7:194. ““S piritua l Idola try," B 3:113, sec. 2.3. 196

SIN

No idolatry can be overcome without repentance, which becomes fille d with consciousness of our own impotence, guilt, and the madness of idolatry. So “cry for a thorough knowledge of yourself.... Pray that you may be fully discovered to yourself, that you may know yourself as also you are known.”55 Only on the basis of such realistic awareness of our own impotence to change our idolatries can they be overcome by grace through the faith that exclaims, "Lord, 1 would believe! Help thou mine unbelief. And help me now!”56

Further Reading on Sin Arne t, Willia m. “The We s le ya n/ Arminia n Te a ching on Sin.” In Ins ights into Holines s , e dite d by K. Ge ige r, 55-72. Kansas City: Be a con Hill, 1962. Collins , Ke nneth. John Wesley on S alvation, cha p. 1. Gra nd Rapids: Zonde rva n, 1989. Cox, Le o Ge orge . "J ohn We s le y’s Concept of Sin.” BETS 5 (1962): 18 - 24.

Fle tche r, John. An Appe al to Matte r of Fact and Com mon S ense: A Natural De m ons tration ofMan’s Corrupt and Los t Es tate. Bris tol, UK: Willia m Pine, 1772. Outle r, Albe rt C. "Dia gnos ing the Huma n Flaw.” In The ology in the Wesleyan S pirit, 23-24. Na s hville : Tidings , 1975.

55“Spiritual Idolatry,” B 3:113, sec. 2.4. ““Spiritual Idolatry,” B 3:114, sec. 2.5. 197

CHAPTER 9

Original Sin

A. The Doctrine of Original Sin according to Scripture, Reason, and Experience 1. Why Wesley Wrote His Longest Treatise on Sin Nothing in human history is more original than sin. The underlying reason for giving so much attention to the study of original sin is not a fixa tion on sin its elf but on theodicy and redemption. Wesley thought that a solid doctrine of origina l sin was required for two reasons: firs t, to free God of the charge of being responsible for huma nkind’s sinful condition, and then to exalt the gospel of jus tifica tion, new birth, and especially, transforming, sanctifying grace.1 a. The Doctrine ofOriginal S in according to S cripture , Reason, and Expe rie nce Wesley wrote only one full-le ngth systematic treatise, and it happened to be on a perennially unpopular topic — original sin.2 It comprises most of the ninth volume of the Jackson e dition [1756-57, J IX:191 — 464], a large tome with almost three hundred packed pages devoted to exhaustive exegetical analysis. The few who have carefully read it discover the side of Wesley most frequently ignored by his modern romantic sycophants and by those who imagine him to be Pelagian. The secondary literature has focused so much more on his soteriology and ecclesiology that it has almost tota lly ignored his most detailed treatise —on original sin. This extensive tome is among the most demanding and intrica te of Wesley s writings . The reader must pay astute attention to the quotation marks to identify who is quoting or refuting whom. There are profuse quotations without the benefit of modern stylistic conventions.3 'D05.pt. 2, J IX:273 - 85. sec. 2. Tor references to origina l sin a pa rt from DOS , see JJW 3:374; 4:199; B 1:64 - 65, 185 - 89,211 -13, 225 - 29; 2:170 - 85; 4:152 - 55; 9:50 - 52; 11:163 - 64, 519 - 20; 1/U74:48, 67. 3The a nnota te d Bice nte nnia l e dition of the tre a tise on origina l sin will make it easier for the reader to dis ce rn the diffe re nce between Wes leys own views and those nume rous points whe re he is quoting othe rs e ithe r fa vora bly or unfavorably.

199

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

Though some of the ma te ria l from pa rt 1 of The Doctrine of Original S in found its wa y into one of the S tandard S ermons, Homily #44, "Origina l Sin,”4 do not assume tha t it is me re ly a s umma ry of the longe r treatise. Though We s le y like d to write with a tight e conomy of style a nd scale, in The Doctrine of Original S in, he was de te rmine d to go into wha te ve r le ngth re quire d to na il down his his torica l, exegetical, a nd e thica l points . He re he functione d more tha n elsewhere as a de libe ra te s ys te ma tic the ologia n re fle cting on a ll the a ttending issues re la ting to the de pth of the huma n pre dica me nt.5 Howe ve r clos e ly argued, this inquiry is addressed less to the a ca demic world tha n to the le a ders hip of thos e in We s le y’s dire ct conne ction of s piritua l forma tion — his socie tie s a nd bands6 — as a caveat against dilute d vie ws of sin. And he s till is capable of ma king conta ct with minds seeking his counsel in mode rn time s. But why write on origina l s in so extensively? Wesley saw the proble m of s in as a profound dile mma re quiring probing, untiring analysis. He re he was less tha n ever willing to s uffe r fools gladly. Even toda y it is not unus ua l to he ar We s le y or Wesleyans pole mica lly dismissed as roma ntic, na tura lis tic, huma nis tic Pelagians, de s pite a ll dis cla imers . This dismissal shows a fa ilure to take Wesley s e rious ly on origina l sin. b. A Dis mal S ubje ct Some people ima gine tha t Wesley espoused an optimis tic vie w of huma n nature. This treatise deserves to be read by anyone thinking such foolishness. Te mpe ra me nta lly, We sle y was indee d incline d toward the pos s ibilitie s of grace, ra the r tha n forever be moa ning the endless consequences of fa lle n huma n nature . He was engaged in the life long a ct of re cons truction of the huma n condition, both pe rs ona l and social. He did not he sita te to seek the inclusive re forma tion of the huma n character. Amid the cha racte ris tic optimis m of his pe riod, however, he appears as a re a lis tic a nd tough-minde d a na lys t of s in a nd a t time s a grie ving obs e rve r of inexora ble huma n fallenness.7 We will not pe ne trate fa r into We s le ys the ology until we take s e rious ly his doctrine of origina l sin.8 It is, he a dmitte d, a dis ma l subject, but one tha t mus t be presupposed in any e ffort to unde rs ta nd other essential Chris tia n doctrine s , such as inca rna tion, jus tifica tion, a nd re de mption. Those who have no wa y to grasp the pe rple xity, de pth, a nd re ca lcitra nce of huma n sin have little motiva tion to speak of Chris t on the cross. We ca nnot get to a toneme nt or re de mption until we take se riously the pre dica me nt to which Chris t is an answer. It is a foundational locus of theology. 4"Original Sin” (1759), B 2:170-85; J VL54-65. sDOS , pt. 1, pref. 5, J IX:194. 6Though Wesley often spoke in first person to John Taylor, and though the argument was couched in an academic format, more so than usual for Wesley, it was nonetheless a moral admonition for those who might otherwise be led astray. 'DOS , pt. 1, pref., JIX: 193-95. 8Wesley viewed original sin as a “grand doctrine,” LJW 4:146,153, 237; 5:327; 6:49, among the doctrina l essentials. 200

ORIGINAL SIN

c. W he the r the Origin ofS in Is a Fit S ubje ctfor S e rious Inquiry In public wors hip, Chris tians confess the ir sins. My sins, not thos e of othe rs , are the focus of the a ct of confe s s ion of sin. S ome time s in mode rn forms of common wors hip, we have te nded to circumve nt e ntire ly the a ct of confe ssion — one of the least Wesleyan aspects of We s le y’s mode rn progeny. The s ubje ct of origina l s in so a vidly ne gle cte d by mode rn Chris tia nity was not ne gle cte d by Mr. Wesley. Few libe ral P rote s tants have ever he a rd a s e rmon on origina l sin, e xce pt in the guise of a politica l appeal a gainst e conomic injus tice or wa r or ra cis m or s ocia l oppre ss ion. We s le y a nticipate d modern analyses of the dyna mics of the ps ychogene tic tra ns mis s ion of ne urotic pa tte rns as we ll as the socia l a nd inte rge ne ra tiona l consequences of injus tice . Mode rn ps ychologica lly orie nte d Chris tia ns fa milia r with the ideas of re pre ssion, the unconscious , a nd ne urotic behavior, thos e who know much a bout how ps ychologica l dys function gets passed on from pa rents to childre n, ofte n know a lmos t nothing a bout classic Chris tia n unders ta nding of inte rge nera tional tra ns mis s ion of e vil.9 2. Whether Sin Is a Socially Transmitted Disease10 The dyna mics of socia l a nd class tra ns mis s ion of e conomic oppre s s ion are we ll known to mode rn Chris tia ns , especially a mong those who refuse to take origina l sin seriously. Yet these mode rn vie ws of socia l loca tion a nd class conflict we re astutely a nticipa te d by classical Chris tia nity ge ne ra lly a nd by We s le y in pa rticula r during the e a rly phase of the Indus tria l Re volution, a nd are re fle cted with special dis ce rnme nt in We s le y’s te a ching on origina l s in.11 Long be fore Ma rx or Le nin or Niebuhr or Gutie rre z, We s le y and othe rs be fore him (nota bly John Chrys os tom, Augus tine , Gre gory the Gre a t, a nd Thoma s Aquina s ) we re s pe a king of s ocia l loca tion, e conomic inte res t, a nd class conflict as basic dis torting influe nce s on our pe rce ption of re ality, fa ls ifying our ca pa city to see the common good. The implicit intergene ra tiona l doctrine of s in tha t became s e cula rized in Ma rx a nd Freud was e xplicitly a nticipa te d by We sle y a nd othe r Chris tia n teachers. These mode rn categories of interpre ta tion may s till be s ome wha t use ful in e xplica ting the Chris tia n doctrine of origina l sin. Yet the y are fina lly inadequate, re fus ing as the y do to unde rs ta nd the huma n condition as a volunta ry a lie na tion s ta nding in fina l re lation to the ground a nd source of life . This is worth noting in a pre limina ry ma nne r so tha t some readers may make conta ct with We s le y’s vie w of origina l s in in a way the y might not othe rwis e be able to recognize. We ima gine tha t our mode rn ps ychologica l analyses of the huma n pre dica me nt are unpre ce de nte d in the ir a ccura cy a nd a cume n. Fre ud ha d a comple x analysis of the origins of ne uros is , e s pe cia lly as it e me rge d out of re la tions with ’Albe rt C. Outle r, Theology in the Wesleyan S pirit (Na s hville : Tidings , 1975), chap. 1. 10On s in as disease, see B 1:404, 586; 2:184,342; 3:134-35, 533-34; 4:86-87. "DOS , pt. 1, J IX:208-38, sec. 2.1-15. 201

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

prima ry persons, ke y voice s tha t shape the growth of individua l consciousness. Long be fore Freud, the classic Chris tia n tra dition ha d unde rs tood tha t sin is s ocia lly a nd inte rpe rs ona lly tra ns mitte d, tha t pa re nta l inputs a ffe ct ne urotic responses, ye t ne ve r unilate ra lly and ne ve r without the collus ion of our own fre edom. The inte rge ne rationa l tra ns miss ion of dis torte d s e xua lity is a nother wa y of ta lking a bout origina l s in.12 Ma ny ima gine tha t our mode rn s ociologica l analyses of the huma n pre dica me nt are unpre ce de nte d. Ma rx offe re d a comple x e conomic analysis of the origins of s ocia l conflict, e s pe cia lly as it e me rge d out of class consciousness a nd oppres sive e conomic pa tte rns . Yet ce nturie s be fore Ma rx, the classic Chris tia n tra dition ha d unde rs tood how profoundly s in is s ocia lly and e conomica lly tra ns mitte d, and tha t class biases miss ha pe the truth of our re la tions with one a nothe r. Our location in a s ocioe conomic orde r powe rfully impa cts our ways of thinking a bout moral judgme nts a nd ideas. We be come na tive ly bia s e d in re la tion to our own class. The inte rge ne ra tiona l tra ns mis s ion of unjus t e conomic a nd class oppre ssions is a s urroga te speech for origina l sin, but fa r less profound tha n tha t of classic Chris tia nity. Cons cious ne s s ra is ing was for Ma rx the ra is ing of the consciousness of the underclass to be come outra ged a t the injus tice s of class oppre s s ion, ca lling upon pe ople to unite a nd bre a k the ir cha ins of e conomic bonda ge through re volution. Now we find tha t the ir re volution ove r time be ca me a poverty ma chine , which its e lf has re quire d the release of ne w fre e doms to ove rcome . Such is the his tory of sin. Rightly unde rs tood, origina l s in is not a lie n to mode rn consciousness. Even whe n we he a r nothing of s in from modern pulpits , it is a de e ply fa milia r mode rn the me in our culture . We s le y s hie d away from the orizing a bout a glib unila tera l e xpla na tion of the tra ns mis s ion of sin: "The fa ct I know, both by S cripture and by experience. I know it is tra ns mitte d; but how” pre cis ely it is tra ns mitte d is s hroude d unde r “the mys tery of iniquity.13 Mode rnity does not use the te rm s in to ta lk a bout s in, but s in none the le ss re ma ins an intense mode rn pre occupa tion. We ca nnot ope n our eyes without seeing how deeply our s ocie ty is in trouble — our citie s, our sexuality, our compuls ions . Our sense of s in is deep-seated. We s le y re ga rde d the doctrine of origina l s in as the firs t line of defense against the de a dly optimis ms of the Enlighte nme nt. To the e xtent tha t he fa iled, the tas k mus t again be unde rta ken in our time .14 We s le y asked, "Wha t is the re a l state, with re gard to knowle dge a nd virtue , whe re in ma nkind have been from the e a rlie s t times? And wha t state are the y in at this day?"15 12B 1:533 - 41; S S 1:382. 13Le tte r to John Robe rtson, September 24, 1753, 3:107; cf. "The Mys te ry of Iniquity," B 1:32-34; 2:466 - 68; CH 7:115 -17. HDOS , pt. 1, J IX:230 - 38, sec. 2.12 -15. l5DOS , pt. 1; J IX: 196. 202

ORIGINAL SIN

3. Combating the Deist Denial of Original Sin: A Searching Response to John Taylor

Wesley never imagined that he was doing any original thinking in his explication of the traditional doctrine of original sin. Rather, he thought of hims e lf merely as defending the received fa ith against crypto-Aria ns of his time, as represented by a leading deist, John Taylor (1694-1761) of Norwich, a proto-Unita ria n who had written a popular book in 1740 title d The S cripture-Doctrine of Original S in, Exposed to Free and Candid Examination,16 in which he challenged the basic premise of original sin. Wesley thought that Taylor was working out of a deistic theism, a Pelagian anthropology, a reductionist Christology, a works-righteousness ethic, and a universalist eschatology, all of which were undermining substantive Christian teaching.17 Wesley considered Taylor’s unitarianism as tending toward antinomianism, toward the trivia lizing of Christ’s work on the cross, the weakening of Chris t’s deity, and finally the impugning of God’s character by making God responsible for present human sinfulness.18 Taylor viewed sin benignly as an imbalance of appetites propagated by habit, following the classical Greek views of habituated vice.19 It was an "old Deism in a new dress; seeing it saps the very foundation of all revealed religion, whether Jewish or Chris tia n.... If, therefore, we take away this foundation ... the Christian system falls at once.”20 All of these tendencies to which Wesley was trying to respond remain epidemic in popular modern Christianity. If so, it may be that this least-read treatise on original sin is among his most relevant for contemporary audiences.21 Wesley considered Taylor’s views as a deadly toxin being diffused insidiously throughout the church, to which an antidote was urgently needed. “I ve rily believe no single person since Ma home t has given such a wound to Chris tianity as Dr. Taylor," whose books “have poisoned so many of the clergy, and indeed the fountains themselves — the universities in England, Scotland, Holland, and Germany.”22 In the absence of an adequate re joinde r by others, Wesley believed he "dare not be silent any longer.” He considered it his solemn pastoral duty to admonish and amend these misunderstandings on behalf of all who looked to him for spiritual l6John Taylor, The S cripture -Doctrine of Original S in, Exposed to Free and Candid Exam ination (London: J. Waugh, 1740). A second e dition in 1741 conta ine d a s upple ment re plying to Jennings and Wa tts ; a third e dition appeared in 1746, eleven years be fore Wesley entered the fray. 17Ta ylor s othe r works include The S cripture -Doctrine ofAtone me nt and The Lord's S upper Explaine d upon S cripture. l*LJW 3:180, 208; B 1:461; 3:474; 4:100,151n, 522. ■’Oppos ing a ll fe de ra list inte rpre ta tions of Ada m’s s in, and vie wing a ll guilt as personal and nontransferable, Ta ylor conclude d, "If we come into the world infe cte d and depraved with s inful dis pos itions , the n sin mus t be na tura l to us; and if na tura l, the n necessary; a nd if necessary, the n no sin ” Taylor, S cripture -Doctrine of Original S in, 129. 2°DOS , pre f. 4, J IX: 194. 2lDOS , pref., J lX:192-94. 22Le tte r to Augustus Toplady, De ce mbe r 9,1758. 203

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

couns e l.23 We s ley’s re futa tions we re comple me nte d by Da vid Jennings’s Vindication24 a nd John He rve y’s dia logue, The ron andAs pas io, as we ll as ca reful studies of origina l s in by Isaac Wa tts,25 Samuel He bde n,26 a nd Thoma s Bos ton.27 All this is, by wa y of preface, to put We s le y’s tre a tis e in its s e tting. It reveals the Anglica n e va nge list in a comple x the ologica l debate in which he s ince re ly thought tha t the inte grity of Chris tian te a ching was decis ively a t stake. Ins ofa r as the pre s uppos ition of origina l s in is mispla ce d, a ll else becomes more difficult to unde rs ta nd in the ology.28

B. Evidences of Sin Displayed in the History of Sin 1. Human History Attests the Universality of Corruption We see We s le y’s qua drila te ra l the ologica l me thod more cons cious ly unfolding he re tha n a nywhe re else in his writings. We see him firs t working with his torical a rgume nts , the n e xperie ntia l a nd s ociologica l a rgume nts , a nd the n mos t cle a rly with s criptural and pa tris tic exegesis of S cripture . We sley began with his torica l te s timony to origina l s in, s e tting forth massive layers of his torica l e vide nce for the unive rs ality of huma n mis e ry a nd sin.29 It was this firs t portion of The Doctrine of Original S in tha t Wes le y re printe d separately in 1762 unde r the ironic title of The Dignity ofHum an Nature . It would be foolis h to expect tha t an e ighte e nth-ce ntury mind could have already grasped in de ta il the ps ychologica l and socia l analyses of the nine te e nth and twe ntie th ce nturie s . We do not e xpe ct pe rsons to know me thods a nd worldvie ws tha t emerge only a fter the y die. Yet those who dismiss Wesley ofte n do so on such absurd grounds . Mode rn cha uvinis m, which ima gine s a sense of the mora l s upe riority over a ll pre mode rn mode s of consciousne ss, vie ws We s le y’s his torica l a rgume nts as qua int a nd dis mis s ible , a t time s even humorous . It re quire s a dee pe r e mpa thy tha n mode rn cha uvinis t conte mpt for a ntiquity to get back into We s le y’s fra me of reference so as to grasp wha t he was seeing a bout 23DOS , pre f. 2, J IX: 193. In his journa l of Augus t 28,1748, Wesley note d tha t he had e ncounte re d at Shackerley some “disciples of Dr. Ta ylor; la ughing at Origina l Sin, and consequently, at the whole frame of S criptura l Chris tia nity.” He said whe n he re turne d to Shackerley on April 10,1751, “Being now in the ve ry mids t of Mr. Ta ylor’s disciples, I enlarged much more tha n I a m accustomed to do on the doctrine of Origina l Sin; a nd de te rmine d, if God s hould give me a fe w years’ life, publicly to a nswe r his ne w gospel." 24Da vid Jennings, A Vindication of the S cripture -Doctrine of Original S in (London, 1740). 25Isaac Wa tts , The R uin and Recovery of Mankind (London, 1740). 26Samuel Hebden (1692-1747) was an inde pe nde nt minis te r of Wre ntha m, Suffolk. He wrote The Doctrine of Original S in, as Laid Down in the Assembly's Catechism, Explaine d. 27Thoma s Bos ton, Human Nature in Its Fourfold S tate, 10th ed. (Edinburgh, 1753), e xtra cte d in DOS , pt. 7. Jonathan Edwards did not publis h The Gre at Chris tian Doctrine of Original S in Defended until 1758. 28DOS, pref., J IX: 193-95. 29Note the full title The Doctrine of Original S in according to S cripture , Reason, and Experience. The role of tra dition, pa rticula rly pa tris tic tra dition, is here vie we d unde r the ca te gory of exegesis of S cripture . In a s imila r sense, tra dition is rightly vie we d unde r "experience,” ina s much as it attests the experience of the his toric Chris tia n community, pa rticula rly in its classical consensual phase. 204

ORIGINAL SIN

the unive rs a l evidences of s ocia l a nd pe rs onal corruption. Only thos e who s urve y the huma n condition from its e a rlie s t time s see the de pth of its pre dicame nt, with its pe re nnia l te nde ncy to mis judge the a tta inability of knowle dge a nd virtue .30

2. Whether Human Corruptibility and Misery Are Found Universally With the primordia l fa ll of fre e dom into corruption, the consequences have pe rva de d e ve rything tha t has ha ppe ned s ubse quently within the intens ely interconne cte d s tory of huma n his tory. Each one’s pe rs ona l de cis ions a ffe ct the succeeding flow of inte rpe rs ona l a nd s ocia l sin. The wonde rful ca pacity for ima gina tion becomes dis torte d by pride a nd sensuality, turning the he art towa rd thinking and doing e vil continually so tha t a ll flesh becomes a dulte ra te d. Tota l de pra vity does not mean tha t there is nothing good in huma n cre a tion, but tha t s in ta ints e ve ry corne r a nd aspect of huma n choosing. a. The His tory of S in Dis playe d in the Old Te s tam e nt S tory a fte r s tory reveals this corruption. The prima ry s criptural te xt We sle y was working out of was Genesis 6:5: “And God saw tha t the wickedness of ma n was great in the e a rth, a nd tha t e ve ry ima gina tion of the thoughts of his he art was only e vil continua lly.” Alre ady "the conta gion ha d spread its e lf through the inne r ma n; had ta inte d the seat of the ir principle s , a nd the source of the ir actions.”31 We s le y’s s urve y of the history of s in is ha rdly a che e ry a rgume nt. Its ve ry purpose is to prove his torica lly the unive rs a lity of pride a nd s loth, not jus t a mong pagans, but a mong thos e also to whom sa ving grace has be e n e xte nde d, ye t who have turne d again to apostasy a nd fallenness. In We s le y’s thinking a bout the whole course of huma n his tory, the biblica l na rra tive forme d the core of it, though not its e ntirety. He was fa r be tte r e duca te d in classical He lle nis tic a nd Roma n lite ra ry sources in the ir origina l Gre e k a nd La tin tha n s ta nda rd guild academics today.32 The s tory of Noa h offe rs a s umma ry wa y of ta lking a bout the general corruption of his tory, the ra dica l de teriora tion of God’s gift of a ccounta ble fre e dom. When Plan A (paradise) de gene rate d to re bellion, Plan B (e xpuls ion from paradise) was put in e ffe ct. When Plan B fa ile d, Plan C was re quire d —a flood, a ne w be ginning, a ra inbow cove na nt, and a ne w promis e . Noa h attes ted not only the ne ga tion of the old but a ne w be ginning as we ll, a ne w covena nt with a ll huma nity, not jus t with a pa rticula r pe ople .33 Afte r the flood, the relentless s tory of corruption continue d, scene upon scene: The a ccount of the Towe r of Babel typifie s the univers a lity of the corruption of language. Human speech becames confus e d, twis te d, a nd conta mina te d. Idola trous huma n beings did not communicate we ll with one a nothe r. Tha t re ma ins a y>DOS , pt. 1. J IX:196. sec. 1.1. 3lDOS , pt. 1, J IX:197, sec. 1.1, quoting John Hervey, Theron andAs pas io, Dia logue 11; cf. LJW 6:121. i2DOS , pt. 1, J IX:196-97, sec. 1.1-2. 33DOS, pt. 1, J IX:197, sec. 1.3. 205

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

profound evidence of the general fallenness of huma nity.34 The re is no hint in the e a rlie st a ccounts of a ncie nt his tory tha t primitive humanity was ever pe rva s ive ly re formed. S odom, ha ving not e ve n te n righte ous pe rsons, was de s troye d by fire a nd brimstone . In Ca na a nite culture , s in was a tte ste d a t e ve ry hand. War, torture , infa nticide , and e xploita tion a bounde d.35 The ca lling of Abra ha m offe re d a ne w be ginning for the covena nt pe ople , but again s in came to re ign even a mong the proge ny of Israel. Though one might have e xpe cte d the m to excel in virtue because of God’s la w a nd promis e s , the y behaved much like those who ha d ne ve r known God. The cove na nt of la w was give n to bless the pe ople a nd offe r the promis e of happiness, but the y re pe a te dly ne glected it and re turne d inve te ra te ly to s in.36 The s yndrome of idola try le d to Ba bylonia n ca ptivity, which s hould have corre cte d it but did so only te mpora rily. Ca ptivity ha d the re de mptive inte nt of bringing the fa ithful back to the cove na nt promis e . Fa ith was re covere d in ca ptivity, only to be los t again in idola try a nd na tiona l waywardness.37 b. The His tory ofS in Dis playe d in the Ne w Te s tame nt The s tory of a ctua l huma n his tory a part from grace is a s tory of s in winning again a nd again. Jesus hims e lf set forth a dis ma l picture of the pe rs is te nt de te riorations of his tory. He vie we d the re ligious leaders of his time as white wa s he d se pulchres "full of dead me ns bone s” (Ma tt. 23:27), displaying e ve ry imagina ble stench of uncleanness.38 The a postle Paul offe re d the de finitive te xt for origina l s in in Romans 1 and 2: we are give n huma n e xiste nce as good, but we wors hip the cre a ture ra ther tha n the Cre ator. Out of our pe rs is te nt idola trie s , a ll other forms of huma n dis tortion emerge, from the collapse of na tura l s e xua lity to e ve ry other ima gina ble offense.39 c. The His tory ofS in Dis playe d in Ancie nt His tory We sle y the n turne d to Gre co-Roman history, a sking the same que s tions of Hesiod, Home r, Ae schylus, a nd the a ncie nt his toria ns , poe ts, a nd tra ge dia ns. These led to the same dis ma l conclusion: no s ociety re corded in a ncie nt his tory comes even close e ithe r to mora l a ccounta bility or happiness. Even the be s t of s ocie tie s are a tte nde d by pa inful huma n costs. Even the best of persons live d within profoundly na rrowed horizons . The suppose d virtue s of Rome we re give n the lie by the crue lty of its mos t noble citize ns , such as Ca to a nd Julius Caesar. Of Pompey, Wesley observed, “a less a mia ble cha ra cte r is not easy to find.”40 Infa nt s a crifice through e xposure was in We s ley’s mind a pa rticula rly horrid e xa mple of an accepted unjus t s ocia l practice in Rome. To this he a dded the torture “Ibid. 3sDOS , pt. 1, J IX:200, sec. 1.8. ^DOS , pt. 1, J IX: 198, sec. 1.4. 37DOS , pt. 1, J IX:200 - 201, sec. 1.8 -10. 3sDOS , pt. 1, J IX:201, sec. 1.11; Ma tt. 23:27. 39DOS , pt. 1, J IX:202 - 3, sec. 1.12. *°DOS , pt. 1, J IX:202-4, sec. 1.12-13.

206

ORIGINAL SIN

ofvictims in war, as we ll as abusive politica l a nd sexual pra ctice s. Wes le y was a sens itive mora l his toria n who ha te d injus tice s . He was a good Oxford classics s chola r who ha d read Thucydide s , Ta citus , and Cice ro from e a rly s chool days in the ir original Gre e k and La tin. He found no pa rt of the s tory the y told unta inte d by sin. The unive rs ality of s in is e vident to anyone who reasonably looks a t the e vidence .41 We see this especially whe n we vie w huma n history le ngthening out ove r ma ny ge ne ra tions . Origina l s in implie s tha t no one ca n e nter his tory as if s ta rting with an a bs olute ly clean mora l slate, as if nothing uns e emly had ever ha ppe ned before. P re vious ly dis torte d huma n his tory ha ppene d be fore I got here. I a m not pe rs ona lly re s pons ible for the choices of othe rs , but the ir choices a ffe ct me. The ir his tory has e nte re d into my his tory. The e xpe rience of my pa re nts’ ge ne ra tion has entered de cis ive ly into my his tory. In this way, huma n fallenness has a socia l a nd his torica l character. Whole s ocieties can a ffe ct the form s in takes in a give n pe riod. Mode rn individua ls think of themselves unde r a ra dica lly individua lis tic pre mise . But S cripture thinks corpora tely a bout huma n life . Sin has vast inca lcula ble inte rge ne ra tiona l effects.42

C. Sociological Evidences of the Universality of Human Corruption 1. The Universality of Sin in Nontheistic Cultures If it seems tha t We sle y was functioning as an a mate ur s ocia l a nthropologis t, it is only fa ir to re member tha t the me thods of fie ld a nthropology ha d not ye t been inve nte d in the mode rn sense. The te rm heathen re fe rre d de s criptive ly to those who did not share the premises of We s te rn the ism.43 Wesley inquire d firs t into the mora l happiness of nonthe is tic culture s and the n of the is tic culture s . We s le y followe d Edwa rd Bre rewood’s popula tion ge ogra phy in concluding tha t if the world we re divide d into thirty pa rts , nine te e n would be he a the n, six Is la mic, a nd only five Chris tia n.44 Chris tia ns of a ll confessions added up to a minority in his day. More ominous ly, a dis turbing percentage of thos e forma lly vie we d as ba ptize d Chris tia ns obvious ly would fa ll fa r s hort of the ma rk of e ffective mora l a ccounta bility.45 We s le y’s inte ntion in pa rt 1.2 of The Doctrine of Original S in was to present a multicultura l s urve y of huma n societies, a s king whe the r any have s urmounte d the outra ge ous e ffe cts of sin. He ranged wide ly in re ma rking on culture s a bout which he had more firstha nd informa tion — Na tive Ame rica n culture , which he had experie nced to some degree firs tha nd — a nd the n he turne d to the de s criptions he could find of African and As ia n culture s . 41DOS, pt. 1, J IX:202-8, sec. 1.12- 18. 42DOS, pt. 1, J IX: 196-97, sec. 1.1-2. 43LJW 1:188, 225, 286; 4:67; 5:327. 44 Edward Bre re wood .Enquirie s Touching the Dive rs ity ofLanguages, 1614. 45DOS, pt. 1, J IX:210, sec. 2.2. 207

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

No one would cons ide r We s le y to be a norma tive or even re lia ble inte rpre te r of these gre a t culture s , as he shared ma ny ste re otype s common to his ge ne ra tion. But it is e vident tha t he was inte re s te d in bringing into his te a ching wha t he kne w of these culture s , even though limite d by wha t we toda y would re ga rd as re la tive ly s ma ll databases a nd ma ny conje cture s .46 Among Na tive America ns with whom he ha d s ome immedia te e xpe rie nce ,47 We sle y obs e rve d as evidence of s in the ir cons ta nt inte rtriba l wa rfa re . He was especia lly dis turbe d by the ir practice of torturing defenseless victims . As one of the fe w Englis h write rs of his day who had a ctually s pe nt time in the imme dia te e nvironme nt of Na tive Ame rica ns , We s le y did not share the dis tantly conce ive d infla te d picture of the noble savage tha t pre va ile d a mong e nlighte ne d Fre nch lite ra ti of the e ighte e nth ce ntury. We s le y puncture d this picture , providing a gra phic de piction of how these na tive s we re as de e ply e mbedde d in s in as the a va ricious colonia l Britis h.48 Turning to As ia, We s le y was dis turbe d by wha t a ppe a re d to him as the comple te immobility of Chine s e s ocie ty, una ble to yie ld to a ny s ignificant changes, tra ppe d in cultura l pre judice s a nd odditie s, s uch as the crippling of women by binding the ir fe e t, a nd the ir 300,000-cha ra cte r a lpha be t, which he thought de bilita ting to s ocial progre ss a nd a means of s ocial control by knowle dge -a nd-powe r elites. He suspected tha t the a ris tocra tic class be ne fite d from this immobility, ofte n in a bs urd a nd de me a ning ways, s uch as be ing fe d by s e rva nts a nd ha ving feces prese rve d.49 We sle y’s picture of e ighte enth-ce ntury bla ck Africa n culture was shaped by conte mpora ry ste re otypes. He e s pe cia lly note d the cons ta nt wa rfa re be twe e n tribe s a nd the la ck of inte rtriba l jus tice , ye t he was capable of a ppre ciating ma ny aspects of na tive Africa n culture . Above a ll, he was impla ca bly oppose d to slavery, which he ha d pe rs ona lly obs e rved in Savannah, as ra dica lly de me a ning a ll who touche d it. The a ntis lave ry moveme nts in Engla nd a nd Ame rica would follow in We s le ys footste ps. We sle y’s purpos e in a ll of this was to s how not jus t a s ma ll slice of huma n history but the whole of it in a swe eping pa nora ma . The whole of his tory is thoroughly s a tura ted with corruptions a na logous to thos e de s cribe d s ummarily in Genesis 3 a nd Romans 1-2. The re is, Wesley thought, a cohe sion in the biblical de s cription of s in tha t is illus tra te d a t e ve ry turn of subse que nt s o-ca lle d secular huma n his tory.50 In "Thoughts on a Late P ublica tion” (1789), a critique of a re port by H. Wils on a nd Ge orge Keate on the ir travels to the Pelew Islands, We s le y took s trong exception to the roma ntic hypothe s is tha t the natives of Pelew cons titute d "a na tion who “DOS , pt. 1, J IX:208 - 9, sec. 2.1. 47See Wesley’s journa l accounts of inte ra ctions with Na tive Ame rica ns in his minis try to the m in Ge orgia , JJW 1:156 - 62, 236 - 39,248 - 50,297 - 98, 406 - 9. 48DOS, pt. 1, J IX:210-13, sec. 2.3. “DOS , pt. 1, J IX:213-15, sec. 2.4, 5. “DOS, pt. 1, J IX:208 -15, sec. 2.1-5.

208

ORIGINAL SIN

are by na ture fre e from sin, without a ny ill te mpe rs , without a nything bla ma ble e ithe r in the ir words or actions.”51 Even this re port shows tha t the y murde re d pris one rs in cold blood a nd pra ctice d polyga my a nd s uffe red fre que nt the ft. “1 have conversed, in fours core years, (be twee n forty a nd fifty ofwhich I have, a t an average, tra ve lle d four thous and mile s a year,) with more persons tha n these two ge ntle me n52 put toge the r; a nd ma ny of the m India ns of va rious na tions , Creeks, Cherokees, Chickasaws, and no ways infe cted with Chris tia nity: But one such man as [described in the Pelew a ccount] I have not found.”53 "If ma nkind are faultless by na ture , na tura lly e ndue d with light to see a ll necessary truth, a nd with s tre ngth to follow it... re ve lation is a me re fable.”54 Home r fa nta s tically supposed tha t the Ethiopia ns were s imila rly unbla ma ble , but even Homer did little jus tice to huma nkind if the a ccount of the Pelew natives be true . 2. The Universality of Sin in Theistic Cultures If these proble ms with s in pe rvade the nonthe is tic his tory of huma nity, to wha t degree are the y mitiga te d in the the is tic world, as one might hope? We sle y addressed firs t the Mus lim world as he kne w it, a gain by ce rta in exaggerated cha ra cte rizations . But keep in mind his purpos e . It was to s how the unive rs a lity of corruption a nd mise ry —not to s how tha t Mus lims are intrins ically more corrupt tha n Chris tia ns a nd a nimis ts but e qua lly prone to be so.55 He de cried Is la mic holy wars unde rta ken with re ligious rhe toric dis guis ing e conomic motiva tions . He said tha t Mus lims had e a rned the ir re puta tion as "wolve s a nd tige rs to a ll other nations.” He vie wed the rigid a tta chme nt of Is la mic followe rs to an untrans lata ble Kora n as the he ight of immobile irra tionality. He wa rne d of the te nde ncie s to fa na ticis m in Is la mic de te rminis m, whos e e xpone nts are prone to "be at each othe rs bra ins from ge ne ra tion to ge ne ra tion!”56 We s le y’s vie ws of a lte rnative cultures are not to be ta ke n as norma tive for our time . Wha t we are s e e king to gra sp is his funda me nta l point of vie w toward the general corruptibility of huma n na ture a nd how it corre la te s with the huma n condition e ve rywhe re . 3. The Universality of Sin in Predominantly Christian Cultures Ha ving addressed the univers a lity of s in in nonthe istic a nd the is tic culture s , We sle y the n proceeded to speak a bout the special forms ofs in pre va iling in suppos e dly Chris tia n culture s , firs t Gre e k Orthodox and the n Roma n Ca tholic, le a ving his mos t de va s ta ting dis a pprova l for Prote sta nts. With both the Orthodox a nd Roman 5l“Thoughts on a Late Publica tion,” J XIII:411. 52Ca pta in W. Wils on a nd George Keate, An Account ofthe Pelew Islands-, JJ U77:464; 8:29; AM (1790): 545; (1791): 38-39. 53“Thoughts on a Late Publication,” J X1IL412. 54“Thoughts on a Late Publication,” J X1IL413. 55For furthe r reference to Isla m, see LJW 1:277; 5:250; 6:118,123,371; JJW5:242; 1:31 - 32; CH 7:608. “DOS, pt. 1. J IX:215-16, sec. 2.6. 209

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

tra ditions , he was quick to see the abuses of s a cra menta l te a ching a nd the resistance to re forma tion. The Counte r-Re forma tion inquis ition revealed the layered hypocrisies tha t he thought we re rife in Roma n ca non law.57 Give n the withe ring powe r of his censure of these tra ditions , one might expect him the n to have be e n a little s ofte r on P rote s ta ntis m. But again his critique only intens ifie d. For in none of the pre ce ding cultura l criticis ms would he be more s tringe nt tha n in his own. He a ime d s qua rely a t the ira s cible P rotes ta nt te nde ncies toward divisive ne ss, how the y ha d fa iled to be come a tra dition of continuing re form, a nd e spe cia lly the ir fa ilure to re form the ir own socia l abuses. Among key examples of the pe re nnia l injus tice s of socie tie s shaped by P rote s tant re ligion were pove rty, war, socia l oppre s sion, pros titution, and litigiousne s s, with "villa ins exalted to the highe s t places.”58 The court its elf, s worn to uphold jus tice , ha d be come an ins trume nt for pe rve rting jus tice . Hone s ty a mong la wye rs was ve ry thinly spread.59 "If my ne ighbor has a mind to my cow, he hire s a la wyer to prove tha t he ought to have my cow from me. I mus t hire a nothe r to de fe nd my right, it be ing against a ll rule s of law tha t a ma n s hould speak for hims e lf. In ple a ding, the y do not dwe ll on the me rits of the cause, but upon circums ta nce s fore ign the reto.”60 We s le y’s point: s in is e ve rywhe re an e mpirica l fa ct, even whe re civilized virtue s a tte mpt to shine brighte s t. Whe re ve r we see the huma n will a t work, we see its miserable products . The re is nowhe re to look in huma n history whe re we will not find a his tory of injus tice , a dis ma l a ccount of the socia l a nd interpe rs ona l tra ns mis sion of s in a nd mis e ry.61

4. Whether War Is a Prototype of Social Sin We sle y’s mos t re curre nt example of socia l sin was war. He e xa mine d re a lis tica lly wha t happens whe n leaders be come inordina tely a mbitious for power. Innoce nts are kille d. He was s tunne d by the endless ways we deceive ourselves, pre te nding in our na tiona lis m tha t we are e xce e dingly a dva nce d morally — ra tiona l a nd we ll inte ntione d, a ll while promoting the e nte rpris e s of institutionalize d horror. Now, who can reconcile war, 1 will not say to religion, but to any degree of reason or common sense?... Here are forty thousand men gathered toge the r on this plain. Wha t are they going to do? See, there are thirty or forty thousand more at a little distance. And these are going to shoot them through the head or body, to stab them, or s plit the ir skulls, and send most of the ir souls into everlasting fire as fast as the y possibly can. Why so?... The y do not so much as know the m.... Wha t a me thod of proof! Wha t an amazing way of de ciding controversies! All our declamations on the strength of human reason, and the eminence of our S7DOS . pt. 5SDOS , pt. S9DOS , pt. 60DOS , pt. 6lDOS . pt. 270

1, J 1, J 1, J 1, J 1, J

IX:217-19, sec. 2.7-9. IX:219-21, sec. 2.9. IX:228-30, sec. 2.11. IX:219-21, sec. 2.9, quoting Abra ha m Cowley. IX:230 - 38, sec. 2.12-15.

ORIGINAL SIN

virtues, are no more than the cant and jargon of pride and ignorance, so long as there is such a thing as wa r in the world.62 5. Experiential Self-Examination Confirms the Universality of Sin As if this indictme nt we re not enough, Wesley invite d each re ade r to “s urve y” he r or his own behavior. Whate ver ma y be the obje ctive s itua tion in huma n his tory, the que s tion may be asked even more pe rs ona lly a nd inwa rdly by any serious pe rson: Am I pleased with my own be ha vior? The la st time 1 made a re s olution, how long did it take to a ctually corre ct my behavior? Each he a re r is ca lle d to press such que s tions in the mos t ca ndid way directly home to the scenes of da ily de cisions.63 How long has it be e n since my conscie nce told me tha t I did s ome thing contra ry to justice ? Who has not e nterta ine d "unre a s ona ble desires” one knows are wrong? Who has not ta ke n one’s a nger furthe r tha n the cause re quire d?64 Only the he a re r can a nswer in the de pths of inwa rdne ss.65 Few can hone s tly a ns we r these que s tions without a tinge of repentance. He nce thos e with a ny re ma ining doubt a bout origina l s in do we ll to e xa mine themselves in comple te honesty, s crutinizing skewed motive s a nd the bad consequences of the ir good inte ntions . We sle y probe d re le ntle s s ly into whe the r pe ople ha d made promis e s tha t re ma ined unfulfille d, whe the r the ir spouses we re tre a ted fa irly, wha t childre n thought of the ir pa re nts’ fa irness, how thos e closest to the m judged the ir trus ta bility. When guilt creeps in a nd we wonde r whe re it came from, is this not the voice of conscience? We resolve to change but re ma in the same. We say things contra ry to truth or love tha t we late r re gre t.66 If a ll we re hone st, would writte n re ce ipts be re quire d? In any se rious s e lf-e xamina tion, those who look a t the ir be havior know how fa r be low the ma rk the y fall. Long be fore s ociologis t Erving Goffma n spoke of impre s s ion ma na ge me nt, We s le y was obs e rving tha t “the ge ne rality of me n do not we a r the ir wors t side outwa rd. Rather, the y s tudy to appear be tte r tha n the y are, a nd to conceal wha t the y can of the ir faults.” We conceal pa rts of ourselves tha t othe rs ma y not see the whole. Our mode s of impre s s ion ma nage ment always make us put on a face be tte r tha n the re a lity.67 For We sle y a ll such s ociological truis ms s ta nd as e mpirical te s timony to the unive rs ality of huma n corruption.68 Guilt plays a key role in bringing us to ourse lve s by he lping us see whe re we are fa iling to re flect the goodness of God in huma n re la tions hip. Guilt functions “DOS, pt. 1, J IX:221-23, sec. 2.10. 62SS 2:215. 64This stands in the P urita n tra dition of pe nite ntia l s e lf-e xa mina tion of conscience. B 1:299; 2:215, 511; 3:124n. “DOS, pt. 1, J IX:236-38, sec. 2.15. “DOS, pt. 1, J IX:231 -34, sec. 2.12. 67DOS , pt. 1, J IX:234, sec. 2.13. bgJW TT 56. 211

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

pos itive ly to ca ll us to ourselves in God’s presence. Conscie nce is tha t unive rsa lly e xpe rie nce d huma n awareness tha t relentlessly notice s whe ne ve r we fa ll s hort ofthe image of God trying to shine through our huma n finitude .69

6. The Unhappiness of Universal Human History Is Due to the Unholiness of Human Choices "Unive rs a l mis e ry is a t once a consequence a nd a proof of this univers a l corruption. Me n are unha ppy (how ve ry fe w are the e xce ptions !) because the y are unholy... .‘Pain accompanies a nd follows sin.’ ’70 As long as “vicious te mpers ” rule the he a rt, peace has no place the re . "Sin is the root of trouble , and it is unholines s which causes unhappiness.” Unha ppine s s is ne ithe r a ttributa ble to e conomic ha rdship nor pre vente d by fruga lity or abundance.71 No mome nt of huma n his tory is le ft una ffe cte d by this mise ry. The ground of our mise ry is our lack of a ctually re fle cting the holine s s of God, the ima ge of God origina lly give n in huma n cre a tion. We do not exercise our origina l ca pacity for proxima te ly re flecting or imaging God. Our pe rs is te nt unholine s s is the basis for our unhappiness. Afte r untold ce nturie s of a ctua l a nd volunta ry sin, huma n his tory is not rightly de s cribe d as ra the r a bit unha ppy. Much s tronge r te rms are re quire d: wretche dness, mise ry. “Sin is the ba le ful source of a ffliction; a nd conse que ntly, the flood of mis e rie s which covers the face of the e a rth — which ove rwhe lms not only single persons, but whole fa milie s , towns , citie s , kingdoms — is a de mons tra tive proof of the ove rflowing of ungodline s s in e ve ry na tion unde r heaven.”72 All of this we can lea rn ra tiona lly a nd e xpe rientia lly, from the s tudy of his tory, society, a nd self. All of this we can le arn from e xperie nce a nd his torica l obs e rva tion, a part from sacred S cripture .

D. Learning from Scripture about Original Sin Although We s le y found a bunda nt evidences for origina l s in in his torica l, s ociologica l, a nd e xpe rie ntia l inquirie s , it was chie fly from S cripture tha t he s ought to counte r the de is tic73 a rguments against inte rge ne ra tiona l guilt a nd s piritua l death as a re s ult of the history of sin.

1. From the Beginning Original means "first.” Origina l s in is the firs t form of s in in huma n history tha t dates ba ck to the primordia l be ginning of the huma n s tory. Tha t s in is origina l which is the a rche type of s ubs e que nt sin, de rivative from the firs t sin, a nd be ing 69B 1:301-4; 3:479 - 90. 70DOS , pt. 1, J IX:235, sec. 2.14; culpam poe m pre mit comes. 71 DOS , pt. 1, J IX:237, sec. 2.15; cf. B 1:197-98; 4:287-88. 77DOS , pt. 1, J IX:235 - 38, sec. 2.14-15. 73For We s le ys comments on deism, see B 3:452, 494, 499; FA, B 11:175-76; LJW 2:75, 96, 313; 7:263-65; JJW 1:357; 3:433. 272

ORIGINAL SIN

configure d from the fa lle n huma n condition be comes the forma tive pa tte rn for other sins in his tory. No s oone r did God give huma nity fre e dom tha n we managed to corrupt a nd a dulte ra te it. This is wha t huma n beings have been doing from the ve ry origins of huma n his tory. Tha t is essentially wha t origina l s in means. Fallen human his tory has been molded by s in in ways tha t influence a ll subse que nt communica tion. The biblical wa y of portra ying a nd corpora te ly s ignifying the ra dica l fallenness of humanity is by re he a rsing the a ccount of Ada m a nd Eve.74 The y fe ll from holiness a nd happiness in a wa y tha t has de cis ive ly impa cte d the e ntire subsequent his tory of fre edom.75 Each of us has be come involve d in the ir s tory. The ir s tory has be come our own — the huma n s tory, the his tory of sin. Wha t the y did has consequences for us, jus t as wha t we do has consequences for a ll who follow us. Broke n fre e dom makes whimpe rs a nd howls tha t echo endlessly towa rd the future. The consequences of my s in do not end with me but impa ct othe rs a fter me whom I will ne ve r see. 2. Whether One Suffers from Another's Sin The e vil lodged at the he art of huma n his tory ca nnot be e xpla ine d me re ly in te rms of ha ving followe d a bad e xa mple or be ing curse d by a bad e nvironment or upbringing. It re quire s the more se a rching s criptural pre mis e of the corrupted and corrupting will.76 The firs t s criptura l evidence of origina l s in is tha t a fte r Ada m a nd Eve sinned, the y we re fille d with shame, e liciting a sense of nakedness, fear, a nd guilt, a nd loss of the graces the y ha d e a rlie r re ce ive d. And even the ir shame in the presence of the holy God was de ce ptive ly cove re d up because of the ir pride , which refused to a cknowle dge the ir guilt.77 S criptura lly, the consequence of Ada m’s s in was de a th not only for Ada m but for a ll his progeny.78 In Ada m a ll die as the consequence of the disobe die nce of one.79 It is false to assert tha t Ada m’s pos te rity could not be jus tly punis he d for the tra nsgre ss ion of the prototypica l huma n sin. For tha t would be to de ny the inte rconne cte d cha ra cte r of huma n his tory passed on from ge ne ra tion to ge ne ra tion. This inte rconne cte dnes s is e vide nt in the fa ct tha t we s uffe r for each othe r. “So we do in fa ct s uffe r for Adam's sin, a nd tha t too by the sentence inflicte d on our firs t parents. We s uffe r death in consequence of the ir transgression. The re fore we are, in some sense, guilty of the ir sin. I would ask, Wha t is guilt, but a n obliga tion to suffe r punis hme nt for sin? Now since we s uffe r the same pe na l e vil which God thre a te ne d 74B 4:366. 75In DOS , pt. 4., Wesley de veloped this point by including a s ubs ta ntia l e xtra ct from Isaac Wa tts’s response to John Ta ylor: The R uin and Recovery ofMankind (1741); DOS , pt. 4; J IX:397 - 415. 7bDOS , pt. 2, J IX:238-39, sec. 1.1. 77DOS , pt. 2, J IX:241-42, sec. 1.4; cf. B 1:442-43. 76 S S 1:157. 79DOS , pt. 2, J IX:240 - 41, sec. 1.3; Gen. 2:17. 213

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

to, a nd inflicte d on, Adam for his s in.... The re fore we are a ll in some wa y guilty of Ada m’s sin.”80 But how does s in lead to death?

E. Sin and Death 1. Distinguishing Temporal Death from Spiritual Death Ta ylor ha d a rgue d individua lis tica lly tha t the only re s ult of the fa ll was individua l physical de a th for Ada m. He did not grasp tha t it ha d vast consequences for the corruption of huma n na ture s ocia lly. We s le y re s ponde d tha t de a th in Ada m implie s fa r more tha n the loss of his own pe rs onal bodily life . The de a th expressed in the origina l a dmonition a nd pronounce d on humanity include d a judgment on a ll e vils tha t a ffe ct the te mpora l body: “de a th te mpora l, s piritua l, and eternal,” both a te mpora l de a th (dis s olution of the body) a nd a s piritua l de ath (loss of e te rna l life ).81 The re s ult of origina l s in was a continuing prope ns ity to sin, which its e lf re sulte d in a ctua l sins of individua ls in huma n his tory. Ta ylor could not ima gine how a jus t God could hold proge ny a ccounta ble for the ir pa re nts’ sin. We s le y appealed to the corpora te a nthropology of the s criptural na rra tive s tha t s how tha t the sins of the fa the rs are ofte n vis ite d on the ir pos te rity.82

2. Whether Redemption in Christ Makes Up for Losses Suffered in Adam By one ma n s in e ntere d the world. The punis hme nt thre a tene d to Ada m is now inflicte d on a ll huma nity, so tha t a ll are deemed s inne rs in the presence of God. By one offense, de a th re igned in huma n his tory. All huma n beings are involve d in this s ingle judicia l sentence. As s uming s ocia l connectedness, a ll of Ada m’s proge ny live in a de fault s itua tion of e nduring the consequences. As by the offense of one ma ny are dead, by one, grace is e xte nde d to a ll huma nity. In one, Ada m, ma ny are made dead. In one, Christ, ma ny are made alive. Wha t is los t by one is re s tore d by the other. Through our re la tion with Ada m, we a ll suffer. But there is good news: through our re la tion with the second Ada m, a ll are offe re d ne w life , and a ll who be lie ve e ffe ctive ly receive ne w life.83 Though a ll huma nity die d s piritua lly in Adam,84 huma nity has none theles s ga ine d more blessings through Chris t tha n it los t in Ada m. Whe re s in a bounds, grace a bounds more .85 The be ne fit we a tta in through Chris t fa r surpasses wha t we mis la y in Ada m. For thos e who re pe nt a nd be lie ve Chris t removes a ll sin, a nd not origina l s in only. Chris t raises believers to a fa r ha ppier state tha n tha t which Ada m e njoyed in paradise.86 S0DOS , pt. 2, J slDOS , pt. 2, J 82DOS, pt. 1, J 83DOS, pt. 2, J MDOS , pt. 2, J 85DOS, pt. 2, J &bDOS , pt. 2, J 214

IX:242-43, sec. 1.5, with reference to Jennings’s Vindication. IX:244 - 45, sec. 1.6; on physical and spiritual death, see B 1:142-47, 227-28. IX:244 - 46, sec. 1.6-7. IX:255 - 57, sec. 1.16. IX:257-61, sec. 1.17-18. IX:253 - 55, sec. 1.14. IX:242 - 46, sec. 1.5-7.

ORIGINAL SIN

3. The Westminster Catechism on Original Sin A de ta ile d e xe ge tica l inquiry ensued into principa l passages of S cripture on origina l sin, pa rticula rly thos e cite d by s ix propos itions on origina l s in of the Larger Ca techism of We s tmins ter,87 which formed a us e ful s tructure on which to organize his exegetical study, though We sle y added, “To this I ne ve r s ubs cribe d, but 1 think it is in the ma in a ve ry e xce lle nt compos ition, which 1 s hall the refore che e rfully e nde a vour to defend, so fa r as I conce ive it is grounde d on cle a r S cripture.”88 Ta ylor oppos e d a ll s ix propos itions of the We s tmins te r Confe s s ion because he thought the y (1) de me ane d huma n fre e dom a nd mora l agency, a nd (2) inte nsifie d the impasse of the odicy. We sle y answered both obje ctions . Origina l s in does not imply tha t huma nity lacks moral choice, for through pre ve nie nt or initia ting grace, God is fore ve r offe ring to lead humanity toward saving grace. As with Ca lvins te a ching of common grace, this form of grace gives the opportunity of re s toring some measure of free will to a ll who seek it. It is not by the ir fa llen na ture but by common grace tha t ra tiona l moral agents are able to seek re la tive forms of jus tice in politica l society. S ufficie nt pre ve nie nt grace is give n to a ll humanity to enable us a t least to pray for the grace furthe r necessary to re pe nt and believe.89 Since God acted to redeem huma nity, providing “a S a vior for the m a ll... this fully a cquits both his jus tice and his mercy.”90 The te ns ions cre a te d for the odicy by the doctrine of origina l s in are re solve d not by huma n logic but by God’s own saving deed — the re de e ming a ction of God's grace on the cross through the Son a nd in our he a rts through the Holy S pirit. A high doctrine of origina l s in is the pre mis e a nd compa nion of a high doctrine of grace. Since the whole of huma nity is involve d in guilt a nd punis hme nt, ha ving no pos s ibility of s e lf-s a lva tion, we do we ll to ca st ours elves s ole ly on the grace offe re d in Chris t.

F. Adam's Headship with Eve's Cooperation 1. Adam as a Public Person: On Federal Headship We s le y de fe nde d We s tmins te r P ropos ition 1: "The covena nt be ing made with Ada m not only for hims e lf, but for his pos te rity, a ll ma nkind de scending from him by ordina ry ge ne ra tion, s inne d in him, a nd fe ll with him, in his firs t tra ns gre ssion.”91 Origina l s in best explains the unive rs ality of sin. All a lte rna tive e xpla na tions — e xa mple , cus tom, e duca tion, or the passage of time —are ine pt ins ofa r as the y s kip ove r the de cis ive firs t cause, thus fa iling to gra sp why s in is so pe rvas ive in huma n his tory. 87 DOS , pt. 2, J IX:261-88, sec. 2.1. 88DOS , pt. 2, J IX:261, sec. 2.1. 89DOS , pt. 2, J IX:273, sec. 2.9, 10. ^DOS . pt. 2, J IX:285, sec. 2.18. 91COC 111:679; DOS , pt. 2, J IX:262, sec. 2.2. 215

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

Ada m stands a t the head of huma n his tory as a “public person.”92 The divine comma nd to "not eat” a nd the deadly consequence of its ne gle ct we re addressed not me re ly to Ada m pe rs ona lly but to a ll humanity corpora te ly.93 Ne ither representative he ad norfe de ral he ad are s criptura l te rms , hence for Wesle y the y we re ha rdly worthy of le ngthy dis puta tion. Nonetheless, he argued tha t both Ada m a nd Chris t are portra ye d in S cripture as re prese nta tives of a ll huma nity. Both include both genders. Ada m as a "public pe rson” was an a nticipa tive type or figure of Christ, for as a ll juridica lly die in Ada m, a ll are by grace made alive in Chris t. As God la id on a ll of humanity the iniquitie s of Ada m, so God la id on Chris t the iniquitie s of us all.94 Though Eve’s choice preceded Ada m’s, Ada m by cons e nting became the re pre se nta tive figure for s in in the whole of the his tory tha t followe d him.

2. The Consequence of Adam's Fall for Subsequent Human History We sle y de fe nde d We stmins te r P ropos ition 2: “The fa ll brought ma nkind into an estate of s in a nd misery.”95 Adam’s dis obedie nce brought guilt and s piritua l de ath to all, not jus t physical s uffe ring a nd de a th to Ada m. Humanity as a whole was swept into a corpora te state of s in a nd s uffering, ma king a ll pe ople corrupt a nd guilty and s ubje ct to punis hme nt.96 In the fa ll, the image of God in a ll humanity was gravely damaged, though not e ntire ly oblite ra te d (Gen. 5:1-3; Eccl. 7:29). Romans 5 and 1 Corinthia ns 15 de scribe the s itua tion as one of s piritua l death. Be fore the fa ll, Adam was pe rfe ct, but his pe rfe ction was not a bsolute , since he could grow and change a nd a lte r his future by his own decisions. He was te mpta ble as a re s ult of his na tura l libe rty. In response to Ta ylor’s inte rpre ta tion of de a th not as a punis hme nt for s in but as a be ne fit to a ll huma nity inte nde d to increase the va nity of e a rthly things a nd abate the ir force to de lude us, S cripture counte rs cons ta ntly tha t it is a punis hme nt.97 We sle y de fe nde d We stmins te r P ropos ition 3:" ‘Sin is any wa nt of conformity to, or tra ns gre s s ion of, the la w of God,’ give n as a rule to the reasonable creation.’’98 By the fa ll, such s in comes to be “of our nature,” or a kind of se cond na ture to a ll who share in huma n his tory. We are de s cribe d as ha ving a la w of s in in our me mbe rs (Rom. 7:23), be ing dead in s in (Eph. 2:1).

3. The Abyss into Which Humanity Plunged We s le y de fe nde d We s tmins te r P ropos ition 4: "The s infulne s s of tha t estate whe re into ma n fe ll, cons is ts in the guilt of Adam’s firs t sin, the wa nt of origina l 92L)W 4:98, 155. "DOS , pt. 2, J IX:262, sec. 2.2. "DOS , pt. 3, J IX:332 - 34, sec. 6. Both Ada m and Eve are jointiy responsible for the origina l fa ll of huma nity into these syndromes of sin, but in Genesis Ada m took on a headship or federal role in the debacle. "DOS , pt. 2, J IX:263, sec. 2.3; COC 111:679. "DOS , pt. 1, J IX:263, sec. 2.3. 97DOS , pt. 2, J IX:258 - 59, sec. 1.18. "DOS , pt. 2, J IX:264, sec. 2.4; quoting We s tmins te r S horte r Catechism, Q 14, COC 111:678. 216

ORIGINAL SIN

righteousness, a nd the corruption of his whole na ture , which is commonly called origina l sin; toge the r with a ll a ctua l tra nsgre ssions which proce e d from it.”99 “The Lo r d saw how grea t the wickedne ss of the huma n race had be come on the e a rth, a nd tha t e ve ry inclina tion of the thoughts of the huma n he art was only e vil a ll the time ” (Ge n. 6:5 NIV). "Now the e a rth was corrupt in God’s s ight a nd was full of viole nce ” (Ge n. 6:11 NIV).100 It is not fitting to hedge with e la bora te excuses the cle a r biblical de s cription tha t “our ve ry na ture exposed us to the Divine Wra th, like the re st of ma nkind” (Eph. 2:3 TCNT, so tha t we “we re by na ture the childre n of wra th,” KJ V).101 “The mind gove rne d by the fles h is de a th.... Thos e who are in the re a lm of the fle s h ca nnot please God” (Rom. 8:6, 8 NIV).102 “Without s upe rna tura l grace, we can ne ithe r will nor do wha t is plea sing to God.”103 We s le y corroborate d Da vid Jennings ’s s ubtle a rgume nt in response to Ta ylor’s vie w tha t if s in is na tural, it is necessary. “If by s in is me a nt the corrupt bias of our wills , tha t inde e d is na tura l to us, as our na ture is corrupte d by the fa ll; but not as it came origina lly out of the ha nd of God.... A proud or passionate te mpe r is evil, whe the r a ma n has contra cte d it hims e lf, or de rive d it from his parents.” If by s in is me a nt thos e s inful a ctions to which this corrupt bias of the will incline s us, it is not s e lf-e vide nt tha t these are necessary. "If a corrupt bias makes s in to be necessary, a nd conse quently, to be no sin, the n the more any ma n is incline d to sin, the less sin he can commit.... And so the ma n, instea d of growing more wicke d, grows more innocent.”104 “Is God the cause of thos e s inful motions ? He is the cause of the motion... [but] of the sin, he is not... otherwis e you make God the direct a uthor of a ll the s in unde r heaven.” This vie w of origina l s in has a ncie nt e cume nica l concilia r assent, be ing he ld in the Gre e k East and the La tin We st, a nd e cume nica lly, "so fa r as we can learn, in e ve ry church unde r heaven.”105

4. Distinguishing Original Sin from Actual Sin We s le y the n de fe nde d We s tmins te r P ropos ition 5: “Origina l s in is conve ye d from our firs t pa re nts to the ir pos terity by na tural ge ne ra tion, so as a ll tha t proceed from the m in tha t wa y are conce ive d a nd born in sin.”106 Actua l sins s pring from within the context of origina l sin. Evil works proceed from an e vil he a rt. We choose to follow a na tura l inclina tion to sin. As the ps a lmist expressed it: "S ure ly I was s inful a t birth, s inful from the time my mothe r conce ive d me ” (Ps. 51:5 NIV). Othe rwis e the work of saving grace in Chris t would ha rdly be necessary, we re the re no ins idious ca ptivity in the huma n pre dica me nt. We s le y found e mpirica l evidence "COC 111:679; DOS pt. 2, J IX:264, sec. 2.5; on sin as indebtedne ss, see B 1:586. '°°DOS . pt. 2, J IX:272, sec. 2.9. ■°>DOS, pt. 2, J 1X:266- 69, sec. 2.6. ,02DOS , pt. 2, J IX:271, sec. 2.8. l03DOS , pt. 2, J IX:273, sec. 2.10. 104lbid„ in reference to Vindication, 68. 105DOS, pt. 2, J IX:274, sec. 2.11. '0bDOS , pt. 2, J IX:275, sec. 2.13. 217

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

for this in the primitive e gocentricitie s of neonates, and in the fa ct tha t some s till sin without even be ing te mpte d, which he thought to be confirma tion of an inte rna lly rooted re be lliousne ss a ga inst the give r of good. One pe rs ons s in a nd its cons e que nt punis hme nt are in fa ct vis ited on othe rs. This is the s olemn principle of the s ocia l a nd corpore a l na ture and consequence of s in in huma n his tory. For progenitors ’ sins, descendants in fa ct ofte n mus t suffer. This is a pa rt of the high price we pay for the pre cious gift of fre e dom. But by grace we are e mpowe re d to conque r this primordia l inclination.107 Even though we we re "conce ive d in s in a nd shapen in iniquity," the re is always s ufficie nt grace in God’s saving deed to re move wha te ve r s in has been wille d. Tha t “my mothe r conce ive d me ” does not re fe r fla tly to sexual copula tion but to the general his tory of s in in which my physical conce ption took place. Eve is the mothe r of us a ll.108 “Who can bring wha t is pure from the impure ? No one !” (Job 14:4 NIV).109 Yet no one can plead being excused from culpa bility by a ppe a ling to a nothe r’s depravity.

G. Answering Questions on the Insidious Spread of Sin 1. The Intergenerational Sociality of Sin The pre mis e of the s ocia lity of s in is a de e ply he ld s criptura l a s s umption. It goes directly against the s tre a m of na ive individua lis m, which assumes tha t we are re s pons ible only for our priva te , individua l a ctions , not for others or for how our be ha vior touche s othe rs . He bra ic consciousness pa s s iona te ly he ld to the socia l na ture of huma n existence. We sle y shared tha t a s s umption of re lationa l huma nity a nd tra ns late d it into e ightee nth-ce ntury te rms , controve rs ie s , a nd mora l choices. Your s in can a ffe ct me; my s in ca n a ffe ct my gra ndchildre n; my gra ndfa ther’s s in can a ffe ct me in ways difficult to unde rs ta nd exhaustively, ye t to some degree s ubje ct to e mpirica l analysis. The s e causal cha ins are not wholly mys te rious or be yond inquiry, ye t the re re ma ins a s tubborn e le ment of the mys te ry of iniquity in a ll huma n fre edom, since these causal cha ins are ofte n hidde n in the comple x history of fre e dom’s outcome s . Sin’s effects re ve rbe rate from age to age. We s le y rule d out an individua l conce ption of s in popula te d only by two parties, God a nd me. The individua listic fa nta sy is tha t my foible s do not a ffect a nybody else, or if so, s ure ly not a ll tha t seriously, or if seriously, s ure ly not e te rna lly. Wrong. We s le y vie we d the huma n pre dica me nt as ra dica lly bound toge the r in socia l cove na nt. This was ultima te ly s ymbolize d by the notion of the fe de ra l he a dship of Ada m re pre s e nting huma nity, and a ll whose life a nd bre a th de rive fina lly from Eve, the mothe r of a ll living. All it took was one ma n a nd one woma n to toge the r lead a ll humanity astray. The ir choices, fre e choice s, we re not fa te d, not de te rmine d, but chosen, and these preferences we re pe rmitte d by God as the one who origina lly offe re d a nd subl07DOS , pt. 2,) IX:275, sec. 2.12. 108DOS, pt. 2,J IX:275 - 79, sec. 2.13. i09DOS , pt. 2, J IX:279 - 80, sec. 2.14-15. 218

ORIGINAL SIN

sequently honored human self-determination. God does not want sin but permits sin in the interest of preserving free, companionate, self-determined persons with whom to communicate incomparable divine love and holiness. 2. The Communication of the Sin of Adam and Eve to All Humanity

It is predictable that my generation is going to have its good and bad effects on the next generation, and the next on the next. No one begins with a clean slate, because all finite freedom lives in an actual history, not a fantasy world. We truly affect the destinies and possibilities of others. This is a highly realistic assumption about the moral consequences of human choices. Wesley found this doctrine of sin clearly attested throughout Scripture, Genesis to Revelation, especially in the prophetic and apostolic witnesses, and in no voice more definitely than Jesus’. All other less realistic hypotheses for explaining sin are deficient. Some wish for a crafty escape hatch from responsibility in the notion that sin occurs exhaustively by social determination, that since we learn by example, custom, and social processes, sin is transferred without our willing it. Wesley answered that social processes obviously transfer sin but not without our willing it. Each of us reinforces and relives the history of Adam and Eve’s fallenness. 3. Whether Loss of Communion with God Sharpens the Sting of Unexplained Suffering

Wesley defended Westminster Proposition 6: “All mankind by the ir fall lost communion with God, are under his wrath and curse, and so made liable to a ll the miseries in this life.”110 "The faded glory, the darkness, the disorder, the impurity, the decayed state in all respects of this temple, too plainly show the Great Inhabitant is gone.”111 God originally created our natures pure. Evil is the absurd corruption of nature brought on by Ada m’s free choice under God’s permissive will. Otherwise God would be guilty of authoring evil. God is the prim um mobile, the spring of all motion throughout the universe, thus the firs t cause of every vegetable, animal, and human activity. Yet sin is not God’s will but due to the willing of men and women. Even at our conception, we are drenched in the history of sin. Tha t is not God’s doing but comes as a result of that measure of human pride, envy, and rebelliousness pe rmitted by God. God “who this moment supplies the power by which a sinful action is committed is not chargeable with the sinfulness of that action.”112 To those who challenge the justice of God in allowing the history of sin, Wesley had an eschatological answer: the provision of "a Saviour for them all; and this fully acquits both [God’s] justice and mercy.”113 11°COC 111:679 - 80; DOS , pt. 2, J IX:282, sec. 2.17. 11‘DOS, pt. 2, J IX:288, sec. 2.20; quote d from John Howe , The Living Temple (London: Parkhurst, 1703). “2DOS, pt. 3, J IX:335, sec. 7. mDOS, pt. 2, J 1X:285, sec. 2.18. 219

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

4. Whether There Remains a Natural Tendency to Sin Are we now in worse mora l circumsta nces tha n Ada m? Yes, if by "mora l circumstances” we me a n the de cline of re ligion and virtue . No, ifby “moral circums ta nce s” we are re fe rring to some provision of s piritua l improve me nt, for in tha t case we are fa r be tte r off tha n Ada m, due to the history of grace.114 We de rive from Ada m a na tura l prope ns ity to sin, within the pe rmis s ive will of God, but this does not make God the source, only the pe rmitte r, of wrongful acts of huma n fre e dom. All born into his tory’s corruptions have "a na tura l prope ns ity to sin. Ne ve rthe le s s , this prope nsity is not necessary, if by necessary you mean irres is tible . We can re sist a nd conque r it too, by the grace which is ever a t hand.”115 In response to Ta ylor’s a rgume nts against a prope ns ity to s in in our fa lle n nature, We s le y conte nde d tha t we commit s inful acts because we are sinners: "I (a nd you too, whe ther you will it or no) a m incline d, a nd was ever since I ca n re member a nte ce de ntly to any choice of my own, to pride , revenge, idola try.”116 Do the vices of pa re nts in fa ct ofte n infe ct the ir childre n? The mos t common obs e rvation shows tha t the y do. This ca nnot s ta nd as a charge a gainst the jus tice of God. If we la ck the pre mis e of origina l sin, it is ha rd to a ccount for the fa ct tha t childre n be gin to s in so soon. As soon as the ir fa cultie s appear, the y appear to be disorde re d. The use a nd abuse of reason grow up toge the r.117 Huma n fre e dom has always s hown its e lf prone , give n time , to espouse and imple me nt this fa lle nne ss . The s ocia l his tory of s in incline s pe rsonal fre e dom towa rd ha rmful ha bitua tion. The inclina tion to e vil appears ine vita bly with the gift of fre edom. Individua l, s e lf-de te rmining fre e dom finds its own dis tinctive ways to furthe r dis tort the his tory of s in and s ubtly collude with te mpta tions to choose the lesser good.

5. Whether Guilt May Be Imputed from One to Another As guilt was impute d to the scapegoat in He bra ic s a crificia l liturgy, so are our sins borne by Chris t on the cross. No jus t God would punis h the innocent, but "God does not look upon infa nts as innoce nt, but as involve d in the guilt of Ada m’s sin,” a nd a t time s s uffe ring mightily from the ir pa re nts’ sins, even as the y may be ne fit from the ir pa re nts’ righteousness. us Tha t a ll are unde r the curse of s in is e vident from the fa ct tha t a ll suffer.119 Suffe ring ma y re s ult even whe re there is no pe rsona l, individua l sin, but only indire ct, corpora te sin. Brute s and infa nts may s uffe r even without e xe rcis ing the ir wills s in■'“DOS, pt. 2,) IX:289, sec. 3. n5DOS, pt. 2,J IX:284, sec. 3. n6DOS, pt. 2, J IX:294, sec. 3. "7DOS, pt. 2, J IX:295, sec. 3. 118DOS, pt. 3,J IX:316, sec. 1. 119DOS , pt. 3,J IX:317-19, sec. 2. 220

ORIGINAL SIN

fully as individua ls , because the ir lives are fra me d in the context of corpora te s in.120 Huma n toil a nd pa in in childbirth are the prototype s criptura l evidences tha t progeny s uffe r for the sins of the ir parents. Howe ve r gre a t the ir s uffe rings, “the best of me n ca nnot be made unha ppy by any ca la mities or oppressions whatsoever,” for the y have le a rne d to be conte nt in e ve ry poss ible state, re joicing and giving tha nks .121 The te a ching of huma n na ture as ra dica lly fa llen does not indica te tha t one despises huma nity, “since, wha te ve r we are by na ture , we ma y by grace be childre n of God, a nd heirs." Even whe n s inne rs have los t the power to pe rform the ir duty by na ture , the y s till by grace may pe rform it, a nd thus it does not cease to be the ir duty.122

H. The Hidden Link between Redemption and Original Sin I. Original Sin and New Birth Re gene ra tion does not mean the s e lf-initiate d process of "ga ining ha bits of holiness,” for tha t would loca te it as a na tura l change, while it is a change enabled by s uperna tura l grace. "The ne w birth is not, as you supposed, the progress, or the whole, of s a nctifica tion, but the be ginning of it; as the na tura l birth is not the whole of life , but only the e ntra nce upon it. He tha t is ‘born ofa woma n,’ the n begins to live a na tura l life ; he tha t is ‘born of God,’ the n begins to live a s piritua l.”123 “The re is no pos s ibility of the powe r of godline ss” without firs t unde rs ta nding sin. "No ma n truly believes in Chris t till he is de e ply convince d of his own s infulness, a nd helplessness. But this no ma n e ve r was, ne ithe r can be, who does not know he has a corrupt nature.”124 Origina l sin, fa r from be ing a thre at to mora l endeavor, is a s pur to the re pe nta nce tha t readies the will for fa ith a ctive in love. Far from turning pe ople away from God in mora l disgust, it turns s inne rs towa rd God in the more ra dica l sense of trus ting in grace. The doctrine , tha t we are by na ture "dead in sin,” and the re fore "childre n of wrath,” promotes repentance, a true knowledge of ourselves, and thereby leads to fa ith in Chris t, to a true knowledge of Chris t crucified. And fa ith works the love; and by love, all holiness both of heart and life. Consequently, this doctrine promotes (nay, and is absolutely, indispensably necessary to promote) the whole of tha t re ligion which the Son of God live d and died to establish.125 In the ne w birth, believers “put on the ne w ma n” (Col. 3:10) by a re al inwa rd change, noDOS , pt. 12‘DOS, pt. 122DOS, pt. 123DOS, pt. 124DOS, pt. 125DOS, pt.

3, J 3, J 3, J 2, J 2, J 2, J

IX:320-26, sec. 3. IX:324-26, sec. 3. IX:327, sec. 4. IX:310, sec. 3. IX:313, sec. 3. IX:312, sec. 3. 221

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

a re ne wa l of the soul in “righte ousne ss a nd true holine s s” (Eph. 4:24), a re ne wa l of the image of God in us —whe re God’s love governs the senses, a ppe tite s, a nd passions, as was the case in the pre fa lle n Ada m. 126

2. Reframing Wesley's Doctrine within Contemporary Culture We s le y’s vie ws s till ha unt the pre se nt inhe ritors of the P rotes ta nt tra ditions , though the y inha bit a s ocie ty in which these a ss umptions seem easily dis mis s ible .127 Thos e who pre a ch can no longe r assume tha t mode rn P rote s tant audiences unde rs ta nd the pre mis e of origina l s in a round which othe r biblical te achings pivot. To re fix the pivot mus t the n be come a pa rt of the te a ching of dis ciple s hip. The re s pons ibility to e nte r this arena falls to those to whom the te a ching ta sk is committe d. They have a duty to teach this sobe r biblica l truth to persons today, even and e s pe cia lly while the culture is re s is ting it. To do so re quire s a n ins urge ncy against the romanticis t optimis m of a modern cultura l mome ntum tha t a ppea ring sweet has gone sour. We have wa tche d drug abuse spread, tra pping s e e ming innoce nts be fore the y know the y are ca ught in a s yndrome the y can ha rdly escape, fe eling the y mus t s upply the ir ha bit, colluding with mixe d motive s , doing viole nce to re main a ddicted. This de scribe s origina l sin. The ke y te rms above are seeming, hardly, fe e ling, and colluding. The y are not wholly innoce nt due to the ir collus ions with e vil, a nd the ir fe e ling of bondage is not a bs olute ly una ffe cte d by the ir own prior choices. We sle y intuite d (as Re inhold Niebuhr would la te r state e xplicitly) tha t the only Chris tia n doctrine s upporte d by extensive e mpirica l evidence is origina l sin: “Origina l s in... is no pla y of ima gina tion, but pla in, cle a r fact. We see it with our eyes and he a r it with our ears da ily. He athe ns, Turks , Jews, Christia ns , of e ve ry na tion, as such me n as are there de s cribed. Such are the te mpe rs , such the ma nne rs, of lords , ge ntle me n, cle rgyme n, in Engla nd, as we ll as of tra de s me n a nd the low vulgar. No ma n in his senses can de ny it; a nd none can a ccount for it but upon the s uppos ition of origina l sin.”128 Wha t is toda y ironica lly ca lle d "ne ws” sets forth this pe re nnia l e vide nce a ne w each day. The me dia function cons ta ntly as e xploite rs of huma n corruption, but fe w think of this as origina l sin.

I. Conclusion We s le y did not think the proble m of s in could be solved politically, but ra the r only by a dra stic change ofhe art one pe rs on a t a time . Ma ny e conomic proble ms emerge

126DOS, pt. 3,1 IX:339-45, sec. 8. 127Robe rt Chile s , The ological Trans ition in Am e rican Me thodis m 1790- 193S (1965; repr., Ne w York: Unive rs ity Press of Ame rica , 1983), argues tha t the tre nd of the Me thodis t the ologica l tra dition has been to move away from origina l sin, from fre e grace to fre e will. 128Le tte r to Samuel Sparrow, July 2,1772, LJW 5:327. 222

ORIGINAL SIN

out of s in but are not re s olva ble e conomically. Renewed humanity be gins afresh with a ne w birth ma de possible only by response to the me rciful love of God the Son, who e nte re d our huma n scene a nd offe re d hims e lf on the cross. The ne w birth reshapes the e ntire circumfe re nce of our lives. Though origina l s in is a massive s ubje ct s tre tching from the be ginning to the end of huma n his tory, rightly unde rs tood it brings each s inne r to a pe rsona l de cis ion, a change of he a rt, an opportunity for repentance. 129 The re is no othe r or be tte r wa y to e xpla in the unive rs a l e xte nt of s in if huma nity has re ma ine d fore ve r upright by na ture . The only pla us ible e xpla na tion for the e xtent a nd de pth of s in is the biblica l a ccount of origina l s in.130 Our s inning, though the re s ult of our fa llen na ture , is s till our re s pons ibility. We are re s pons ible for sins continua nce , even if not pe rs ona lly re s pons ible for its prima l origin. In the a ppe ndixe s to The Doctrine of Original S in, there are s ubs ta ntia l e xtra cts from Isaac Wa tts ’s response to John Ta ylor, The R uin and Recovery of Mankind, 1741 (pa rt 4); Samuel He bde n’s tra cts in response to Ta ylor (pa rts 5 a nd 6);131 and Thoma s Bos ton’s Fourfold S tate of Man (pa rt 7). In a concluding le tte r to John Ta ylor, We s le y spoke of his de e p motivation: “We re it not on a point of so deep importa nce , I would no more e nte r the lis ts with Dr. Taylor, tha n I would lift my ha nd against a gia nt.... I am grie ve d for you.... O Sir, think it possible tha t you may have be e n mis take n! Tha t you may have leaned too far, to wha t you thought was the be tte r e xtre me ! Be persuaded once more to re vie w your whole cause, a nd tha t from the ve ry founda tion.”132 Thos e who seek a re me dy to this dile mma are invite d to read the ne xt volume .

Further Reading on Original Sin Bainbridge, W., and M. Riggall. "Wesley and Dr. John Taylor of Norwich.” PW HS 16 (1928): 69-71. Baker, Frank. "Wesley and Arminius ." PW HS 22 (1939): 118,119. Blaising, Craig. “John Wesley’s Doctrine of Origina l Sin.” PhD Diss., Dallas Theologica l Seminary, 1979, microfilm. Burtner, Robert W., and Robert E. Chiles. A Compend of Wesley’s Theology, 107ff. Nashville: Abingdon, 1954.

Collins , Kenneth. "Prevenient Grace and Human Sin.” In Wesley on S alvation. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1989. Dorr, Donal. “Total Corruption and the Wesleyan Tra dition: Prevenient Grace.” Iris h Theological Quarte rly 31 (1964): 303-21. Hannah, Vern A. "Origina l Sin and Sanctification: A Problem for Wesleyans." W TJ12 (Spring 1977): 47-53.

129CW 7:513, 550, 560. 130DOS, pt. 2,) IX:286-88, sec. 2.20. 131“Ma n’s Origina l Righteousness,” "Ba ptis ma l Regeneration Disproved," and “The Doctrine of Origina l Sin,” 1740 - 41. 132DOS, pt. 6, J IX:431 -33. 223

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

Harper, Steve. John Wesley's Message for Today, 27 - 30. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1983. Joy, James R. "Wesley: A Ma n of a Thousand Books and a Book.” RL 8 (1939): 71-84. Keefer, Luke L., Jr. “Characteristics of Wesley's Arminia nis m.” WTJ 22 (Spring 1987): 88-100. Linds trom, Harald J. Wesley and S anctification. Nashville: Abingdon: 1946. Mile y, John. S ystematic Theology. Reprint, Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1989. Payne, George. The Doctrine of Original S in. London: Jackson and Walford, 1845. Pope, Willia m Burt. A Compendium of Chris tian Theology. 3 vols. London: Wesleyan Me thodis t Book-Room, 1880. Ralston, Thomas N. Elements of Divinity. Ne w York: Abingdon, 1924. Rose, De lbe rt. “The Wesleyan Understanding of Sin.” In Dis tinctive

224

Emphases ofAs bury Theological S eminary, 7 - 30. Slaatte, Howa rd A. Fire in the Brand: Introduction to the Creative Work and Theology ofJohn Wesley, 115ff. New York: Exposition, 1963. Smith, H. Shelton. Changing Conceptions of Original S in. Ne w York: Scribner, 1955. Starkey, Lycurgus M. The Work of the Holy S pirit. Nashville: Abingdon, 1962. Summers, Thomas O. S ystematic Theology. 2 vols. Edited by J. J. Tigert. Nashville: Me thodis t Publishing House South, 1888. Watson, Richard. Theological Institutes. 2 vols. Ne w York: Mason and Lane, 1836,1840; edited by John M’Clintock, Ne w York: Ca rlton & Porter, 1850. Willia ms , Colin. “Original Sin.” In John Wesleys Theology Today, 47ff. Nashville: Abingdon, 1960. Willia ms , N. P. The Ideas of the Fall and of Original S in. London and Ne w York: Longmans Green, 1927.

APPENDIX A

Alphabetical Correlation of the Sermons in the Jackson and Bicentennial Editions The Bicente nnial e dition is re pre s e nte d by B. The Jackson e dition is represented by J. S e rmon numbe rs are ofte n pre ce de d by the pound s ign (#). An a s te ris k (*) indica te s tha t the homily was wrongly a ttribute d to Mr. We sle y in a t least one of its e a rly e ditions , with the corre ct a uthor s upplie d, or has va rying title s or numbe rs in diffe re nt e ditions . The Almos t Chris tia n (#2, B 1:131-41 = #2, J V: 17-25)-Acts 26:28 Awake, Thou That Sleepest (#3, B 1:142-58 = #3, J V:25- 36) — Ephesians 5:14 A Call to Backsliders (#86, B 3:201 - 26 = #86, J VI:514 - 27) - Psalm 77:7 - 8 The Case of Reason Impa rtia lly Considered (#70, B 2:587-600 = #70, J VI:350 - 60) — 1 Corinthia ns 14:20 The Catholic S pirit (#39, B 2:79-96 = #2, J V:492-504) — 2 Kings 10:15 ‘The Cause and Cure of Earthquakes (by Charles Wesley —#129, Jackson ed. only, V1I:386 - 99) — Psalm 46:8 The Causes of the Ine fficie ncy of Chris tia nity (#122, B 4:85 - 96 = #122, J VII:281 -90)-J e re mia h 8:22 A Ca ution against Bigotry (#38, B 2:61 - 78 = #38, J V:479 - 92) - Ma rk 9:38-39 Chris tia n Perfection (#40, B 2:97 -124 = #40, J VI:1 - 22) - Philippians 3:12

The Circumcis ion of the He a rt (#17, B 1 398 - 414 = # 17, J V:202 -12) Romans 2:29 The Cure of Evil Speaking (#49, B 2:251 - 62 = #49, J VI: 114 - 24) Ma tthe w 18:15-17 The Danger of Increasing Riches (#131, B 4:177 - 86 = #131, J VI1:355 - 62) — Psalm 62:10 The Danger of Riches (#87, B 3:227-46 = #87, J VU:1 -15) -1 Timothy 6:9 Death and Deliverance (#133, B 4:204 -14; not in Jackson) Dives and Lazarus (#115, B 4:4-18 = The Rich Ma n and Lazarus, #112, J VIL244 - 55) — Luke 16:31 The Duty of Constant Communion (#101, B 3:427-39 = #101, J VII: 147 - 57) — Luke 22:19 The Duty of Reproving Our Ne ighbor (#65, B 2:511 - 20 = #65, J VL296 - 304) — Le viticus 19:17 The End of Chris t s Coming (#62, B

225

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

2:471 - 84 = #62, J VI:267 - 77) 1 John 3:8

In Wha t Sense We Are to Leave the World (#81, B 3:141-55 = #81, J VI:464 - 75) — 2 Corinthia ns 6:17 -18

The First Fruits of the S pirit (#8, B 1:233 - 47 = #8, J V:87 - 97) - Romans 8:1

An Israelite Indeed (#90, B 3:278 - 89 = #90, J VIL37-45) —John 1:47

Free Grace (#110, B 3:542-63 = #110, J VIL373 - 86) — Romans 8:32

Justification by Faith (#5, B 1:181 - 99 = #5, J V:53 - 64) — Romans 4:5

The General Deliverance (#60, B 2:436 - 50 = #60, J VI:241 - 52) Romans 8:19-22

The Late Work of God in North America (#113, B 3:594-609 = #131, J VIL409-29)-Eze kie l 1:16

The General Spread of the Gospel (#63, B 2:485 - 99 = #63, J VI:277 - 88) - Isaiah 11:9

The Law Established through Faith, 1 (#35, B 2:20 - 32 = #35, J V:447 - 57) — Romans 3:31 The Law Established through Faith, 2 (#36, B 2:33 - 43 = #36, J V:458 - 66) — Romans 3:31

God’s Approba tion of His Works (#56, B 2:387 - 99 = #56, J VI:206 -15) Genesis 1:31 God’s Love to Fallen Ma n (#59, B 2:422 - 35 = #59, J VI:231 - 40) Romans 5:15 The Good Steward (#51, B 2:281 - 99 = #51, J VI: 136-49) —Luke 16:2 The Great Assize (#15, B 1:354-75 = #15, J V:171 -85) - Romans 14:10 The Great Privilege of Those Tha t Are Born of God (#19, B 1:431-43 = #19, J V:223-33)-l John 3:9 Heavenly Treasure in Earthen Vessels (#129, B 4:161-67 = #129, J VIL344 - 48) — 2 Corinthia ns 4:7 Heaviness through Ma nifold Temptations (#47, B 2:222 - 35 = #47, J VI:91 -103) — 1 Peter 1:6 He ll (#73, B 3:30-44 = #73, J VL381-91) — Ma rk 9:48 Huma n Life a Dre am (#124, B 4:108-19 = #124, J VII:318 - 25) - Psalm 73:20 The Impe rfe ction of Huma n Knowledge (#69, B 2:567 - 86 = #69, J VI.-337 - 50) — 1 Corinthia ns 13:9 The Importa nt Que stion (#84, B 3:181 - 98 = #84, J VI:493 - 505) Ma tthe w 16:26 226

Lord Our Righteousness (#20, B 1:444-65 = #20, J V:234 - 46)Jeremiah 23:6 Ma rks of the Ne w Birth (#18, B 1:415-30 = #18, J V:212 - 23) — John 3:8 The Means of Grace (#16, B 1:376-97 = #16, J V: 185 - 201) — Ma la chi 3:7 The Minis te ria l Office (#121, B 4:72-84 = #115, J IV:72-84)-He bre ws 5:4 More Excellent Way (#89, B 3:262 - 77 = #89, J VIL26-37) — 1 Corinthia ns 12:31 The Mys te ry of Iniquity (#61, B 2:451-70 = #61, J VI:253 - 67) — 2 Thessalonians 2:7

Na tiona l Sins and Miseries (#111, B 3:564 - 76 = #111, J VII:400 - 408) 2 Samuel 24:17 The Na ture of Enthusiasm (#37, B 2:44 - 60 = #37, J V:467 - 78) - Acts 26:24 The Ne w Birth (#45, B 2:186-201 = #45, J VL65-77) —John 3:7 Ne w Cre ation (#64, B 2:500 - 510 = #64, J VI:288 - 96) — Revelation 21:5

ALPHABETICAL CORRELATION OF THE SERMONS IN THE JACKSON AND BICENTENNIAL EDITIONS

Of the Church (#74, B 3:45 - 57 = #74, J VI:392-401) —Ephe s ia ns 4:1-6

On Fa ith (#106, B 3:491-501 = #106, J VIL195- 202) -He bre ws 11:6

Of Evil Ange ls (#72, B 3:16-29 = #72,

On Fa ith (#132, B 4:187 - 200 = #122, J VIL326-35)-He bre ws 11:1

J VL370- 80) -Ephe sia ns 6:12 Of Forme r Time s (#102, B 3:440 - 53 = #102, J VI1:157-66)-Eccle s ia s te s 7:10

On the Fa ll of Ma n (#57, B 2:400-412 = #57, J VI:215-24)-Ge ne s is 3:19

Of Good Angels (#71, B 3:3-15 = #71, J VI:361 - 70) — He bre ws 1:14

On Fa mily Re ligion (#94, B 3:333-46 = #94,1 VII:76-86)-J os hua 24:15

On Atte nding the Church S e rvice (#104, B 3:464 - 78 = #104, J VII:174 - 85) — 1 S a muel 2:17

On Frie nds hip with the World (#80, B 3:126-40 = #80, J VI:452- 63) — James 4:4

On Cha rity (#91, B 3:290-307 = #91, J VII:45 - 57) — 1 Corinthia ns 13:1-3

On Gods Vine ya rd (#107, B 3:502-17 = #107, J VIL203 -13) - Is a iah 5:4

On Cons cience (#105, B 3:478-90 = #105, J VIL186-94) — 2 Corinthia ns 1:12

*On Grie ving the Holy S pirit (by Willia m Tilly —#137, Jacks on ed. only, J VII:485 - 92) — Ephe s ia ns 4:30

On Corrupting the Word of God (#137, B 4:244-51 =#137, J VIL468 - 73)2 Corinthia ns 2:17

*On the Holy S pirit (by J ohn Ga mbold — #141, Jackson ed. only, VII:508-20) — 2 Corinthia ns 3:17

On the De a th of Mr. White fie ld (#53, B 2:325-48 = #53, #133, J VL167-82) — Numbe rs 20:10

On Knowing Chris t a fte r the Fle sh (#123, B 4:97 -106 = #123, J V1I:291 - 96) 2 Corinthia ns 5:16

On the De a th of Rev. Mr. John Fle tche r (#133, B 3:610-29 = #133; J VIL431 - 52,1785) - P s a lm 37:37

On La ying the Founda tion of the Ne w Cha pe l (#112, B 3:577-93 = #112, J VIL419 - 30) - Numbe rs 23:23

On the De ce itfulnes s of the Huma n He a rt (#128, B 4:149 - 60 = #128, J VIL335-43) —J e remia h 17:9

On Living without God (#130, B 4:168 - 76 = #130, J VIL349 - 54) Ephe s ia ns 2:12

On the Dis cove ries of Fa ith (#117, B 4:28 - 38; #117, J VII:231 - 38) He bre ws 11:1

On Love (#149, B 4:378 - 88 = #149, J VIL492 - 99) -1 Corinthia ns 13:3

On Dis s ipa tion (#79, B 3:115-25 = #79, J VL444 - 52) — 1 Corinthia ns 7:35 On Divine P rovide nce (#67, B 2:534-50 = #67, J VL313-25) - Luke 12:7 On Dre s s (#88, B 3:247-61 = #88, J VIL15-26) —1 P e te r 3:3-4 On the Educa tion of Childre n (#95, B 3:347 - 60 = #95, J VII:86 - 98) P rove rbs 22:6 On Ete rnity (#54, B 2:358-72 = #54, J VI: 189-98)-P s a lm90:2

On Mourning for the De a d (#136, B 4:236 - 43 = #136, J VII:463 - 68) 2 S a muel 12:23 On Obe die nce to P a re nts (#96, B 3:361 - 72 = #96, J V1L98 -108) Colos s ia ns 3:20 On Obe die nce to P a s tors (#97, B 3:373 - 83 = #97, J VII: 108 -16) He bre ws 13:17 On the Omnipre s e nce of God (#118, B 4:39 - 47 = # 118, J VIL238 - 44) J e remia h 23:24 227

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

On Patience (#83, B 3:169-80 = #83, J VI:484 - 92) — James 1:4 On Perfection (#76, B 3:70-87 = #76, J VI:411-24) —Hebrews 6:1 On Pleasing a ll Me n (#100, B 3:415-26 = #100, J VII: 139-46)-Roma ns 15:2 On Predestination (#58, B 2:413-21 = #VI:225 - 30) - Romans 8:29 - 30 On Redeeming the Time (#93, B 3:322 - 32 = #93, J VII:67 - 75) Ephesians 5:16 “On the Resurrection of the Dead (by Benjamin Calamy; see appendix B of B 4:528-30 = #137, Jackson e dition only, VII:474-85) —1 Corinthia ns 15:35 On Riches (#108, B 3:518 - 28 = #108, J VII:214- 22) — Ma tthe w 19:24 On Schism (#75, B 3:58-69 = #75, J VI:401 -10) -1 Corinthia ns 12:25 On Sin in Believers (#13, B 1:314-34 = #13, J V: 144-56)-2 Corinthia ns 5:17 On a Single Eye (#125, B 4:120-30 = #125, J VII:297 - 305) - Ma tthe w 6:22-23 On Te mpta tion (#82, B 2:156-68 = #82, J VI: 175 - 84) — 1 Corinthia ns 10:13 On the Trinity (#55, B 2:373-86 = #55, J VI:199 -206) — 1 John 5:7 On Vis iting the Sick (#98, B 3:384-98 = #98, J VII: 117 - 27) - Ma tthe w 25:36 On the We dding Garment (#127, B 4:139-48 = #127, J VII:311-17) — Ma tthe w 22:12 On Working Out Our Own Salvation (#85, B 3:199-209 = #85, J VI:506-13) — Philippia ns 2:12 -13 On Worldly Folly (#126, B 4:131 - 38 = #126, J VII:305-11) —Luke 12:20 On Zeal (#92, B 3:308 - 21 = #92, J VII:57 - 67) — Galatians 4:18 Origin, Nature, Property, and Use of 228

Law (#34, B 2:1 -19; #34, J V:433-46) — Romans 7:12 Origina l Sin (#44, B 2:170-85 = #44, J VI:54-65)-Ge ne s is 6:5 Prophets and Priests (#121, B 4:72-84 = The Minis te ria l Office, #115, J IV:72 - 84) — Hebrews 5:4 Public Diversions Denounced (#143, B 4:318 - 28 = #143, J VII:500 - 508) — Amos 3:6 Re forma tion of Manners (#52, B 2:300-324 = #52, J VI: 149-67)Psalm 94:16 The Repentance of Believers (#14, B 1:335 - 53 = #14, J V:156 - 70) - Ma rk 1:15 The Reward of Righteousness (#99, B 3:399 - 414 = #99, J VII:127 - 38) Ma tthe w 25:34 ‘The Rich Ma n and Lazarus (#115, see Dives and Lazarus, B 4:4-18 = #112, J VII:244 - 55) — Luke 16:31 The Righteousness of Faith (#6, B 1:200 - 216 = #6, J V:65 - 76) - Romans 10:5-8 Salvation by Faith (#1, B 1:117-30 = #1, J V:7 -16) — Ephesians 2:8 Satan’s Devices (#42, B 2:138-52 = #42, J VI:32 - 43) — 2 Corinthia ns 2:11 S criptura l Chris tia nity (#4, B 1:159-80 = #4, J V:37 - 52) — Acts 4:31 The Scripture Way of Salvation (#43, B 2:153-69 = #43, J VI:43-54)Ephesians 2:8 Self-Denial (#48, B 2:236-59 = #48, J VI: 103 -14) — Luke 9:23 Sermon on the Mount, 1 (#21, B 1:466 - 87 = #21, J V:247 - 61) Ma tthe w 5:1-4 Sermon on the Mount, 2 (#22, B 1:488 - 509 = #22, J V:262 - 77) Ma tthe w 5:5-7

ALPHABETICAL CORRELATION OF THE SERMONS IN THE JACKSON AND BICENTENNIAL EDITIONS

Sermon on the Mount, 3 (#23, B 1:510-30 = #23, J V:278-294Ma tthe w 5:8-12 Sermon on the Mount, 4 (#24, B 1:531-49 = #24, J V:294-310)Ma tthe w5:13-16 Sermon on the Mount, 5 (#25, B 1:550-71 = #25, J V:310-27)Ma tthe w 5:17-20 Sermon on the Mount, 6 (#26, B 1:572 - 91 = #26 J V:327 - 43) Ma tthe w 6:1-15 Sermon on the Mount, 7 (#27, B 1:591-611= #27, J V:344 - 60) — Ma tthe w 6:16-18 Sermon on the Mount, 8 (#28, B 1:612 - 31 = #28, J V:361 - 77) Ma tthe w 6:19-23 Sermon on the Mount, 9 (#29, B 1:632-49 = #29, J V:378-93)Ma tthe w 6:24-34 Sermon on the Mount, 10 (#30, B 1:650-63 = #30, J V:393-404)Ma tthe w 7:1-12 Sermon on the Mount, 11 (#31, B 1:664 - 74 = #31, J V:405-13) — Ma tthe w 7:13-14 Sermon on the Mount, 12 (#32, B 1:675 - 686 = #32, J V:414 - 22) Ma tthe w 7:15-20 Sermon on the Mount, 13 (#33, B 1:687 - 98 = #33, J V:423 - 33) Ma tthe w 7:21-27 The Signs of the Times (#66, B 2:521-33 = #66, J VI1:409 -19) - Ezekiel 1:16 The Signs of the Times (#66, B 2:521-33 = #66, J VI:304-13)-Ma tthe w 16:3 Some Account of the Late Work of God in North Ame rica (#113, B 3:594-608 = #131, J VIL409- 29) -Eze kie l 1:16 The S pirit of Bondage and of Adoption

(#9, B 1:248 - 66 = #9, J V:98 -111) — Romans 8:15 S piritua l Idola try (#78, B 3:103-14 = #78, J VL435 - 444)-1 John 5:21 S piritua l Wors hip (#77, B 3:88-102 = #77, J VL424-435) -1 John 5:20 The Trouble and Rest of Good Men (#109, B 3:531-41= #109, J VIL365 - 32) — Job 3:17 True Chris tia nity Defended (#134, Jackson ed. only, V1L452 - 62) — Isaiah 1:21 The Unity of the Divine Being (#120, B 4:61-71 = #114, J VIL264-73) — Ma rk 12:32 The Use of Mone y (#50, B 2:263 - 80 = #50, J VI: 124-36)-Luke 16:9 Wa lking by Sight and Wa lking by Faith (#119, B 4:48 - 59 = #113, J VIL256 - 64) — 2 Corinthia ns 5:7 Wa nde ring Thoughts (#41, B 2:125-37 = #41, J VL23-32) — 2 Corinthia ns 10:5 The Way to the Kingdom (#7, B 1:217 - 32 = #7, J V:76 - 86) - Ma rk 1:15 Wha t Is Man? (#103, B 3:454-63 = #103, J VII: 167-74)-P s a lm 8:4 Wilderness State (#46, B 2:202-21 = #46, J VL7-91) —John 16:22 The Wis dom of God’s Counsels (#68, B 3:551 - 66 = #68, J VI:325 - 33) Romans 11:33 The Wis dom of Winning Souls (#142, in Bicentennial ed. only, B 4:305 -17) — 2 Corinthia ns 1:12 The Witness of the S pirit, 1 (#10, B 1:267-84 = #10, J V:111-23)Romans 8:16 The Witness of the S pirit, 2 (#11, B 1:285-98 = #11, J V:123-34)2 Corinthia ns 1:12

229

APPENDIX B

Bicentennial Volume Titles Published to Date Note: Volume 1 was published in 1984. Subsequently, ten more volumes have been published. As of this date of publication, nineteen Bicentennial volumes remain to be published. They are marked with an asterisk (*). Here we have used the Jackson, Sugden, Telford, Curnock, and othe r editions to supplement the preferred Bicentennial edition. 1. S e rmons 1-33

*15. P a s tora l a nd Ins tructiona l Writings II

2. S e rmons 34-70

*16. Editoria l Work

3. S e rmons 71-114

*17. Na tura l P hilos ophy a nd Me dicine

4. S e rmons 115-51

18. J ourna ls a nd Dia ries I

*5. Expla natory Note s upon the Ne w Te s ta me nt I

20. J ourna ls a nd Dia ries III

*6. Expla natory Note s upon the Ne w Te s ta me nt II

22. J ourna ls a nd Dia ries V

7. A Colle ction of Hymns for the Lise of the Pe ople Ca lle d Me thodis t *8. Forms of Wors hip a nd Pra ye r 9. The Me thodis t S ocie tie s , His tory, Na ture , a nd De s ign *10. The Me thodis t S ocie tie s : The Confe re nce 11. Appe a ls to Me n of Reason a nd Re ligion a nd Ce rta in Re la ted Ope n Le tte rs *12. Doctrina l Writings : The ological Trea tis e s

19. J ourna ls a nd Dia ries II 21. J ourna ls a nd Dia ries IV 23. J ourna ls a nd Dia ries VI 24. J ourna ls a nd Dia ries VII 25. Le tte rs I *26. Le tte rs II *27. Le tte rs III *28. Le tte rs III *29. Le tte rs IV *30. Le tte rs V *31. Le tte rs VI *32. Le tte rs VII

*13. Doctrina l Writings : The De fe ns e of Chris tia nity

*33. Bibliogra phy of the P ublica tions of J ohn a nd Cha rle s We s le y Le tte rs VIII

*14. P a s tora l a nd Ins tructiona l Writings I

*34. Mis ce lla ne a a nd Ge ne ra l Inde x

231

Subject Index A Account of the Conduct of the W ar in the Middle Colonies, An, 88 Acts and Monuments of the Chris tian Martyrs , 87 Ada m and Eve, 136,138,172,175,192, 213-17,219 Advice with Respect to He alth, 87 Aeschylus , 206 a ir (element), 105,134-35,179 Alexandrinus, Clemens, 83 Alleine, Joseph, 87 Ancie nt Chris tian Comme ntary on S cripture, 25 Andrewes, Lancelot, 22 angels, 139-47 e vil angels, 144-47 good angels, 139-44 in philosophy, 140 in Scripture, 140-41 Anglican tra dition, 22, 53, 83-84,123 Apostles’ Creed, 58 Apostolic fathers, 88 - 89 apostolic tra dition, 83 Appeals, 81-82 Aquinas, Thomas, 21, 26,201 Aris totle , 104-6,140 Arm inian Magazine, 87,107 Arnobius, 154 Article s of Religion, 53-54, 60,119,171 Athanasian Creed, 58-59 Athanasius, 84 atheists, 114-15 Augustine, 84, 85,172, 201 B Bacon, Francis, 104 Bacon, Roger, 104 Barclay, Robert, 119 Barth, Karl, 29 Basil, 83, 85 benevolence, 48 - 50 232

Bengel, John A., 75 biblica l references, 14 Bicentennial edition, 225-29 Bicentennial volume titles, 231 bigotry, 127 - 30 body and soul, 178-80,193 Boehme, Jacob, 137 Bohler, Peter, 112 Boston, Thomas, 204,223 boundaries, 161 brute creation, 165 -68 Burlamaqui, Jean-Jacques, 50 Butler, Joseph, 86

c Caesar, Julius, 206 Calvin, John, 21,22, 26, 35, 71, 86,172, 215 Catholic letter, 126-27 Catholic s pirit, 121-28 Cato, 106, 147,206 Celsus, 154 “chain of being," 163 - 65 Chris tia n cultures, sin in, 209-10 Chris tia n doctrine, 21-23, 27-30,118,124, 148, 200 - 204, 222 Chris tia n libra ry, 84,88 - 89 Chrysostom, John, 83, 85, 201 church fathers, 84 - 86 churches, 23 - 25 Cicero, 207 Classic Chris tianity: A S ystematic Theology, 25 Clement of Rome, 89,154 Compendium ofNatural Philosophy: A S urvey of the Wisdom of God in the Creation, 88 Concise Ecclesiastical His tory, A, 88 Concise His tory ofEngland, A, 88 Conduct of the Passions, 50 conscience, respect for, 123 conscience, Scripture and, 70-71 consequences of fall, 175-76,192-93

SUBJECT INDEX mora l consequences, 44, 98 - 99,219 pa inful conse quences, 157-58 of sin, 193 contemporary culture , 222 Cooper, Jane, 87 corruption human nature and, 204 - 9,214 Word of God and, 76-77 Council of Nicaea, 21 Cranmer, Thomas, 21, 22,84 creation brute creation, 165-68 disorder of, 136 e te rnity and, 39 evil and, 133-70 fallenness of, 134,166 - 67 goodness of, 133-36 human existence and, 98,167,171-73 of plants and animals, 164-66 primordial creation, 133-34 providence and, 133-70 redemption and, 49,163,176 spiritua l creation, 139-40 study of, 43,101-2 suffering and, 165 cultura l differences, 121-22 Curnock, Nehemiah, 15, 231 Cyprian, 83,154 Cyril of Jerusalem, 21,26, 85 Cyril the Great, 27 D death, spiritua l, 214-15 deceitfulness, 189-98 deliverance, 163 - 64,167 - 68 demonic divisions, 127 Desideratum: Or, Ele ctricity Made Plain and Useful, 88 Didymus of Alexandria, 84 Dignity ofHum an Nature , The, 204 disorder, 136 divine attributes, 35-56 divine being, unity of, 44-45 divine inspira tion, 71-75 divine necessity, 45 divine omnipresence, 41-44 divine providence, 147-51. S ee also providence

divinity bad divinity, 138 “whole compass" of, 22 - 23 Doctrine of Original S in, The, 81,171,199, 200, 204, 207,223 Doddridge, Philip, 75 dream as illus ion, 182-83 dream life, 180-83 dust and s pirit, 193-94 E earth (element), 105,134-35,179 earth, and heaven, 146-47 earthen vessels, 183-85 ecological accountability, 163-68 Edwards, Jonathan, 52,86,186 emotional excess, 118 enthusiasm, nature of, 116-19 Epiphanius, 84 eschatology, 166-69 e te rnity dream life and, 182-83 eternal life, 63 of God, 35 - 36 material creation and, 39 temporal life and, 181 - 83 Eusebius, 84 evangelical connection, 23-24 evil. S ee also evil causes of, 161 -62 creation and, 133-70 examining, 156-63 God and, 136-37 ignorance of, 161-62 inclina tion to, 171-72 mora l evil, 160 natural evil, 160,162 - 63 origins of, 157,192 penal evil, 160 providence and, 133-70 evil angels, 144-47 experience, 111-32 of assurance, 112-13 excess of, 116,118 limits of, 111-12 in religion, 111-12 Scripture correcting, 119-20 Explanatory Notes upon the New Testament, 67,75 233

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1

Explanatory Notes upon the Old Testament, 71,75-76 Extractfrom Dr. Cadogan’s Dis s e rtation on the Gout, and All Chronic Diseases, 87 Extractfrom the Life ofMr. Thomas Firm in, An, 87 Extract ofMr. R ichard Baxte r’s Aphorisms of Justification, An, 87 Extract of the Life ofMadam Guion, An, 87 Extracts from , and Abridgments of, the Choicest Pieces ofPractical Divinity Which Have Been Published in the English Tongue, 88

F fa ilure of humanity, 165 - 66 fa ith analogy of, 67-69 decision and, 40-41 eternal life and, 63 God and, 39-41 idola try and, 196-97 Scripture and, 67-69, 86 te mpora l world and, 39-40 fa ll of man, 171 - 73, 192 - 93, 215-16 fallen creation, 134,166 - 67,171-72 fallen image, 176 Fam ily Expositor, The, 75 Felix, Minucius , 84,154 fire (element), 105,134-35,179 “four bulwarks,” 81-82 “four permissions," 82 Fourfold S tate ofMan, 223 Foxe, John, 87 Franklin, Benjamin, 98 Free Inquiry into the Miraculous Powers Which Are S upposed to Have S ubsisted in the Chris tian Church, 153 - 54 free will, 136-38,172-73 freedom gift of, 148-49 human freedom, 51-52,153,164,183,186, 215, 218, 220 sovereign freedom, 153 vulne ra bility of, 153 Freud, Sigmund, 50,191, 201-2 Further Reading sections on creation and providence, 156 234

on culture and books, 94-95 on experience, 120 on God, 55-56 on historical sources, 89-91 on human condition, 187 on origina l sin, 223 - 24 on reason and philosophy, 109 on s criptura l teaching, 78-79 on sin, 197, 223-24 on theodicy, 169 on theological method, 130-31 on triune teaching, 64 on Wesleys theology, 30-33

G general deliverance, 163-64,167-68 general providence, 151. S ee also providence Gilbe rt, Mary, 87 God as almighty, 43-44 Article s of Religion on, 53-55 a ttributes of, 35 - 56, 73 as Author, 62 benevolence of, 48 - 50 as Consummator, 62-63 corrupting Word of, 76-77 as Creator, 62 as divine being, 44-45 e te rnity of, 35 - 36, 39 evil and, 136-37 fa ith and, 39-41 as Governor, 62 - 63 happiness and, 47-48 image of, 173-74 justice of, 168-69 living without, 114-15 method of working, 81-82 omnipresence of, 41-44 as Preserver, 62 as Redeemer, 62-63 relational attributes of, 46-47 re ligion and, 48 - 50 sovereignty of, 153-56 as Spirit, 47 as Supporter, 62 te mpora l world and, 39-40 time and, 37-41 trinity of, 56-64 true God, 54 will of, 63,71,118,125,146-47, 220

SUBJECT INDEX

wisdom of, 50-53,72-73,88,101 -4,133 Word of, 65,70, 75-78, 83 work of, 114,133-34 world without, 42-43 Goffman, Erving, 211 good angels, 139 - 44. S ee also angels Green, V. H. H„ 28 Gregory of Nyssa, 84 Gregory the Great, 201 Gutierrez, Gustavo, 201 Guyse, John, 75

H Halevy, Elie, 28 Halley, Dr., 162 happiness, 47 - 48, 63 - 64 Harper, Elizabeth, 87 Hartley, David, 185-86 Harvey, Willia m, 104 heaven, and earth, 70,146-47 heavenly treasure, 183-85 Hebden, Samuel, 204, 223 1 leidelberg Confession, 35 Heitzenrater, Richard, 28 Henry, Matthew, 75 Hervey, John, 204 Hesiod, 140,206 Heylyn, John, 75 Hill, Roland, 22-23 Homer, 206,209 homile tic tra dition, 22 homilies as Christia n doctrine, 21-23 earliest homilies, 22 exposition of, 26-29 inte rpre ta tion of, 26-29 systematic ordering of, 21-22 Hooker, Richard, 21,84 human action, 159-60,185 human composite, 164,178 - 79 human existence creation and, 98,167,171-73 divine necessity and, 45 dura tion of, 177 fallenness and, 171-73,192-93,215-16 his tory ofsin and, 206 human freedom and, 183

justice of God and, 168 - 69 magnitude of, 176-80 nature of, 218 spiritua l creatures and, 36 - 38 human freedom enabling, 51-52 his tory of sin and, 164, 215, 218, 220 human dignity and, 186 human existence and, 183 liberty, 157-58 vulne ra bility of, 153 human heart, 189-98 human knowledge impe rfe ction of, 100 -103 limits of, 100-103 human liberty, 157 - 58,175 - 76,179 - 80. S ee also human freedom human nature corruptibility of, 204-9, 214 dignity of, 189 fallen human nature, 172, 200, 221 image of God and, 173-74 opposites and, 48 sin and, 166 human understanding, 105-6,175-76 humanity, failure of, 165-66 humanity, rede mption of, 168 Hume. David, 50,107,179,189 Hutcheson, Francis, 50

I idola try fa ith and, 196-97 imagination and, 195-96 of man, 48,194 pride and, 195-96 sensuality and, 194-96 Ignatius, 83,89 ignorance, learning from, 103 ignorance, of evil, 161-62 image of God, 173-74 indiffe re ntism, 123-24 inequalities, 161 inorganic matter, 62,139,163-64 inte rpre ta tion method, 26 - 29 “inwa rd feelings," 118-19 Irenaeus, 26, 84, 89,154-55 Ire nic letter, 126-27 235

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1 J Jackson, Thomas, 13,15, 225 Jackson e dition, 225 - 29 Jefferson, Thomas, 98 Jennings, David, 204, 217 Jerome, 84, 85 Jesus death and, 214 disciples of, 128-29 his tory of, 84 as Lord, 45 love of, 115 as male, 138 mercy through, 178 promise of understanding, 158 re ligion of, 88 resurrection of, 51 revelation through, 81 sin and, 206, 214, 219 as son of God, 57, 70, 99 Jewel, John, 21,22 John of Damascus, 21, 26, 84,89 John Wesley’s S criptural Chris tianity: A Plain Exposition ofHis Teaching on Chris tian Doctrine (JWS C), 16 justice of God, 168 - 69

Locke, Mr., 95,105-7,113 Luther, Ma rtin, 35,52,71,86

K Kant, Immanuel, 86 Karnes, Lord, 185, 189 Keate, George, 208 Kierkegaard, Soren, 191 King, Willia m, 156 knowledge desire for, 100,158-59 impe rfe ction of, 100-103 limits of, 100-103 of nature, 159

M Macarius, 83 Magnus, Albertus, 104 man. S ee also human existence discourses on, 176-78 dura tion of, 177 fa ll of, 171 - 73,192 - 93, 215 -16 idola try of, 194 as riddle, 183 in space, 176-78 in time, 176-78 “man of one book,” 65 - 66 Manichaeanism, 136-38,157 Ma rtyr, Justin, 154-55 Ma rx, Karl, 50,201, 202 Mathesius, Rev. Aaron, 116 Ma xfie ld, Thomas, 117 mentor, 27 - 28 Me thodis t movement, 24,119, 121,126 Me thodis t Societies, 85,108 Middleton, Conyers, 23, 84,153-55 minis te ring spirits, 139-46. S ee also angels miracles cessation of, 153-55 naturalistic re duction of, 155-56 mise ry and suffering, 192 - 93,204-12, 216, 219 money, love of, 196 Montesquieu, Baron, 107 mora l consequences, 44, 98 - 99, 219. S ee also consequences mora l evil, 160. S ee also evil mystery, living within, 60 mystery, of human action, 159-60

L Lactantius, 154 la titudina ria nis m, 123-24 Lavington, George, 23 Law, Willia m, 52,137-38 “law of nature," 159 Lenin, Vla dimir, 201 liberty, 157-58,175-76,179-80. S ee also human freedom life as dream, 182-83

N natural evil, 160,162-63. S ee also evil natural history, 107 natural philosophy, 103-4 natural religion, 108. S ee also religion natural science, 185-87 natural senses, 113-14 na tura listic reductionism, 155-56,185-86 nature, knowledge of, 159 Nazianzen, Gregory, 84

236

SUBJECT INDEX

“new birth,” 71,115-16,199, 221-23 Ne wton, Isaac, 62,159 Nicene Creed, 58,116 Niebuhr, Reinhold, 201, 222 Nietzsche, Friedrich, 50 nontheistic cultures, sin in, 207 -9

O omnipresence of God, 41-44 order, sense of, 21 Origen, 83, 84,154 Origin ofEvil, 156-57 origina l sin, 199 - 24. S ee also sin actual sin and, 217 -18 in Chris tia n cultures, 209 -10 contemporary culture and, 222 death and, 214-15 denial of, 203-4 doctrine of, 81,171,199-201, 204, 207, 223 evidences of, 204 -5 guilt and, 220- 21 learning about, 212-13 in nonthe istic cultures, 207 -9 redemption and, 199 - 200, 221 - 22 self-examination and, 211-12 social sin, 210-11,218-19 social transmission of, 201-2, 218 -19 in the is tic cultures, 209 universality of, 207 -12, 215 other worlds, possibility of, 178-79 Outler, Albert C., 15,27-28 Owen, John, 52

P Pachomius, 84 pain and suffering, 157,192-93, 204-12, 216, 219 pa inful consequences, 157 - 58. S ee also consequences Parker, Matthew, 22 pa tristic tra dition, 24 - 25, 204, 204n29 Pearson, John, 21,26,84, 85 Pecquet, John, 104 penal evil, 160. S ee also evil personal vocation, 24 - 27 philosophical ecology, 163 - 64 philosophy, 103 - 4,138,140 physical elements, 105,134-35,179 Plato, 140

Polycarp, 83, 89, 154 Poole, Willia m, 75 Practical Expositor, 75 Practical Treatise upon Chris tian Perfection, A, 137 Prefaces to Works Revised and Abridge d from Various Authors, 87 present times, manners of, 106-7 pride and idolatry, 195-96 prima cy of Scripture, 65 - 80. S ee also Scripture Prim itive Physic: Or, An Easy and Natural Me thod of Curing Mos t Diseases, 87 primordia l creation, 133-34. S ee also creation Principles ofNatural Law, 50 providence creation and, 133-70 divine providence, 147-51 evil and, 133-70 general providence, 151 God and, 35-64 special providence, 151-53 spheres of, 150-51 study of, 101-2 Pseudo-Dionysius, 84 psychosomatic Interface, 145,159,163,180 purpose and mission, 24 - 27 Q

“quadrilateral method," 81 - 82,93

R real life, 180-83 reason, 93 -10 as argument, 96-97 as gift from God, 93 overvaluing, 96 from Scripture, 93-94 as understanding, 97 undervaluing, 95 - 96 usefulness of, 93-94,98-100, 220 valuing, 95 - 97 redemption in Chris t, 214 creation and, 49,163,176 of humanity, 168 one end of, 176 origina l sin and, 199-200, 221-22 process of, 167 promise of, 137 237

JOHN WESLEY'S TEACHINGS—VOLUME 1 re de mption cont. s in a nd, 163,199 - 200, 221-22 re fe re nce s , tra cking, 13 -14 re ge ne ra tion, 221 - 22. S ee als o "new birth” re ligion e xpe rie nce in, 111 -12 false re ligion, 48-49 God and, 48 - 50 na tura l re ligion, 108 re viva l of, 52 - 53 true re ligion, 49-50

de a th a nd, 214-15 e vil a nd, 160 guilt a nd, 220-21 his tory of, 134,163-67,171-72,182-83, 190,193,202-7, 212 -15,218-20 prope ns ity to, 220 re de mption a nd, 163,199-200, 221-22 s ocia l s in, 210-11, 218-19 s prea d of, 201-2,218-19 univers ality of, 207 -12, 215 volunta ry s in, 189-98

R e ligion ofNature De line ate d, The, 50

s ince rity, 77-78,124

Roma n Ca tholic le tte r, 126-27 Roma nus , Cle me ns , 83

S kinne r, B. F., 185

Rousseau, 50,107

s ocia l diffe re nce s , 121-22

Ruin and R e cove ry ofMankind, The, 223

s ocia l s in, 210-11,218-19. S ee als o s in

Russell, Be rtra nd, 185

S ocra te s , 106,140,191

Ruthe rford, Samuel, 87

s oul, 178-80,193

Ruthe rforth, Dr. Thoma s , 93,118-19

s ove re ignty, 153 - 56

s

“space be yond space,” 42

s a lva tion, assurance of, 112-13 Satan, 144 - 46,176, 189 - 90 S chle ierma che r, Frie drich, 29 S cripture angels in, 140-41 a pos tolic tra dition of, 83 for Chris tia n te a ching, 66-67 cons cie nce a nd, 70-71 corre cting e xpe rie nce , 119-20 fa ith and, 67 - 69, 86 ins pira tion of, 71-75 lite ra l sense of, 67 prima cy of, 65 - 80 re a s oning from, 93-94 S pirit a nd, 69-70 S cripture -Doctrine of Original S in, Expos e d to Fre e and Candid Exam ination, The , 203 s e lf-de ce ption, 77,118,173,184,190 - 91 s e lf-e xa mina tion, 71,124-25,129,211-12

S ma lbroke , Richa rd, 84

s pe cia l provide nce , 151-53. S ee als o provide nce S pirit dus t a nd, 193-94 God as, 47 S cripture a nd, 69-70 triune ba ptis m in, 61 S pirit ofLove , The , 137 S pirit ofPraye r, The , 137 s piritua l comba t, 145-46 s piritua l cre a tion, 139-40 s piritua l de a th, 214-15 s piritua l forma tion, 22 - 24 s piritua l idola try, 194 s piritua l senses, 113-16 s piritua l wors hip, 61-64 S ta nda rd S e rmons , 22. S ee als o homilie s s te wa rds hip, 96,135,164 - 66

S e rious Call to a De vout and Holy Life , A, 137

s uffe ring cre a tion and, 165 mis e ry a nd, 192-93, 204-12,216,219 unde rs ta nding of, 101-2

s e rmons , lis t of, 225 - 29

Sugde n, Edwa rd H„ 15, 231

sex, love of, 196

S we de nborg, Ba ron Ema nue l, 116

S hort R oman His tory, A, 88

S wift, J ona tha n, 60

s in. S ee als o origina l sin a ctua l s in, 217 -18

S yrus , Ephre m, 83, 85

senses, s piritua l, 113-16 s e ns ua lity a nd idola try, 194-96

238

s ys te ma tic orde r, 21-23

SUBJECT INDEX

systematic theologian, 21-23, 28-29

u

T

unity of divine being, 44-45 universes, possibility of, 41-42

Tacitus, 207 Taylor, Jeremy, 52 Taylor, John, 203 - 4, 214-17,220, 223 teaching homilies, 21-22. S ee also homilies Telford, John, 15, 231 temporal death, 214-15 temporal life, 37,181 -83 temporal world, 39-40 te mpta tion to bias, 128 critique of, 108 to pride, 161 rejecting, 53, 68,178,1% of self-deception, 118 sin and, 220 weakness and, 142-46 Te rtullia n, 83,154 textuary, mining, 69-71 theistic cultures, sin in, 209 theodicy, 156-57,166-68 Theological Lectures, 75 “theological method,” 81 Theophilus of Antioch, 154 Theophylact, 84 Theron and Aspasio, 204 Three Creeds, 54,61, 85 Thucydides, 207 time, flow of, 37-41 tolerance, 121-23 tra dition, 83 - 92 tree toad parable, 114-15 trinity, 56-64 triune language, 57-59 triune spirituality, 61-64 triune teaching, 56 - 60,63 - 64,116 true religion, 49-50. S ee also re ligion

V Vindication, 204 Voltaire, 50,107 volunta ry sin, 189 - 98. S ee also sin

W water (element), 105,134-35,179 Watts, Isaac, 204,223 Way to Divine Knowledge, The, 137 Wesley, Charles, 15 Wesley, John background of, 22 charges against, 22-23 as editor, 15, 86-89 exposition of, 26-29 intent of, 13,21-22 inte rpre ta tion of, 26-29 systematic orde ring by, 21 - 22 teachings of, 13, 21-22 Wesleyan connection, 24 Wesley’s Works, 14-15, 87 Westminster Catechism, 215-17 “whole compass of divinity,” 22-23 wickedness, 148,190,205,217 will of God, 63,71,118,125,146-47, 220 Wilson, Henry, 208 wisdom of God, 50-53,72-73,88,101-4, 133 Wollaston, Willia m, 50 Word of God corrupting, 76-77 grasping, 65,70,75, 83 hearing, 77-78 speaking, 77-78 work of God, 114,133-34 Works of the Rev. John Wesley, The, 13-15

239

Scripture Index Genesis 1:27 1:31 2:17

173 133 174

3

208

3:19 5:1-3 6:5 6:11

192 216 205, 217 217

Deuteronomy 64:4 2 Kings 10:15 Job 14:4 Psalms 8:3-6.. 8:3

8:4 8:6-7. 19:1-2 51:5 53:1 73:3,7... 73:17-18 73:20

90:2 91:11 104:4 139 139:6............ 145:9............

5,45 121 218

177 176 176,178,179 144 70 217 173 181 181 180,181 35

142 140 41 143 148

Ecclesiastes 7:29

216

Isaiah 1:18 14:13-14

97 144

240

Jeremiah 17:9 23:24

189,190 41

Ezekiel 33:1-9....

77

Matthew 6:10 23:27

146 206

42 216 217 114 144,145 145

158 122

Colossians 2:10 3:10

63 221

116

Hebrews 1:14

176 147,148 103,147

John 13:7 13:34 Acts 26:24

5

5:5 7:23 8

8:6 8:8

8:18 8:19-22 8:21 8:22

8:23,24

2 Corinthians 2:17 4:6 4:7

100 95 216

Ephesians 1:23 2:1 2:3 2:12 6:12 6:13

Luke 10:42 12:7 22:42

3:12

1 Corinthians 13:9 14:20 15

10:5

127,128 129 45 44,45

2

50,161 63

76,78 115 183,184 161 44

Mark 9:38 9:39-41. 12:29-31 12:32

Romans 1-2. 1

11:33 11:36

208 206 206 173 216 . 50 216 165 217 217 165 165 168 163,167 167

5:7

2:9 James 1:5 4:4 1 John ! 2 2:16 3

4 4:10 5:7 5:18-20 5:20-21 5:20

139 62 66 52

61 61 194 61 61 122 56, 57, 58,60 61 194 61