ESSENTIAL DOCTRINES AND REAL RELIGION:
THEOLOGICAL METHOD IN WESLEY'S SERMONS ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS
by
John R. Tyson
I. Wesley's Sermons as
Theological Resources
The fact that the heirs of John Wesley find themselves
doing theology from his sermons (and to a lesser degree his Notes) is indicative of the
nature of Wesleyan theology. John Wesley described himself as a practitioner of
"practical divinity" and most of his sermons were designed for a popular
audience.(1) It is on this basis that Outler has continued to describe Wesley as a
"folk-theologian" (or "people's theologian"), who was
"technically competent as a theologian, with a remarkable power of creative
sophistication, a revivalist who took special pains to conceal his erudition in the
interest of the edification of his particular audiences" (Sermons, I, 67).(2)
Wesley's published sermons show an increasing awareness
of the changing status of his audience as they move from the First (Nos. 1-53) into the
Second Series (Nos. 54-108). Sermons in the second collection are less likely to be
written drafts of earlier evangelism. They have become theological treatises complete with
all the accoutrements of published compositions. More importantly, the later sermons were
written with a theological task in mind. They were designed to round out the so-called
"standard" contents of the earlier collection. Wesley's "Preface" to
Sermons on Several Occasions (hereinafter SOSO), Second Series, makes it clear that he had
a conscious ordering principle in mind, not when he wrote, but when he compiled these
sermons( 3) This "Preface" (printed in 1788) has several striking parallels to
that more famous one supplied for the 1780, A Collection of Hymns for the Use of the
People Called Methodists. In both cases the arrangement of books possesses theological
significance, and the pattern as well as the contents of both books seeks to unify
"important Christian doctrines" and "Christian Practice."
The First and Second Series of Wesley's sermons are
structured around a soteriological center which establishes the foundation for Wesleyan
theology, and then sermons on the interior life, ethics, and specific doctrines are tied
into that primary axis. The First Series, for example, establishes the soteriological
focus of the revival through sermons such as "Salvation by Faith" (No.1),
"Awake, Thou that Sleepest" (No.3), "Scriptural Christianity" (No. 4),
and "Justification by Faith" (No. 5). In each case salvation is described in its
broadest context. It is a renovation by the Holy Spirit which enables the Christian
"to crucify the flesh with its affections . . . that inward change to fulfill all
outward righteousness, ('to walk as Christ walked, in the work of faith, the patience of
hope, and the labor of love')" (Sermons, 1, 161). On the basis of this foundation
Wesley examined the connection between conversion, Christian dispositions ("religious
affections"), and ethics in sermons such as "The Righteousness of Faith"
(No. 6), and a series of six sermons (Nos. 8-13) which describes the "Witness of the
Spirit" and Christian assurance. Representative of the sermons of this second phase
was The Circumcision of the Heart" (No.7), which characterized "the
distinguishing mark of a true follower of Christ" as ". . . right state of
soul-a mind and spirit renewed after the Image of Him that created it...." (Ibid.,
400). Wesley's concept of sanctification or Christian Perfection (presented specifically
in Nos. 14, 18, 19 and 40) is the lock stitch of the second phase of development, joining
conversion to Christian dispositions and Christian life. Wesley's thirteen sermons
"Upon Our Lord's Sermon on the Mount" (Nos.21-33) are prime examples of the
soteriological bridge between inner dispositions and outward life; similar development is
found in three sermons on the Law and Christian living (Nos. 34-36). After this foray into
"practical divinity" Wesley returns to the soteriological axis in sermons such
as "The Scripture way of Salvation" (No. 43), "Original Sin" (No. 44),
and "The New Birth" (No.45), only to address the practical dimension again
through "The Wilderness State" (No. 46), "The Cure of Evil Speaking"
(No. 49), and "The Use of Money" (No. 50).
The Second Series of SOSO presupposes the soteriological
foundation laid in the earlier material and turns to treat a series of specific doctrines
which, though introduced in the First Series, need further elucidation. Thus sermons such
as "On Eternity" (No. 54), "On the Trinity" (No. 55), "On the
Fall of Man" (No.57) and "On Predestination" (No.58) expound basic Wesleyan
theology with the same attention to inner and outer life registered in the earlier
material. An intervening series of sermons (Nos. 59-64) offers a more sweeping vision, it
marks out Wesley's panoramic view of God's encompassing love as it recreates a fallen
world. Here the reader meets a theology of history that is reminiscent of the
recapitulating of the ancient eastern Fathers (e.g. Irenaeus). Wesley then returns to an
analysis of individual doctrines, in sermons such as "Good" and "Evil
Angels" (Nos.71,72), "On Hell" (73), "On the Church" (No. 74),
and "On Schism" (75). His Second Series closes with a collection of sermons on
practical topics such as "The Danger of Riches" (No.87), "On Charity"
(No. 91), "On Zeal" (No. 92), "On Redeeming the Time" (No. 93),
"Family Religion" (No. 94), "On the Education of Children" (No. 95),
"The Duty of Constant Communion" (No. 101), and "On Attending the Church
Service" (No. 104). Thus, the order Wesley used in compiling his two collections of
SOSO exemplifies the same interest in uniting inner and out religion that one meets in his
separate sermons. The shape of the SOSO communicates "practical divinity" by
demonstrating the interconnection between full salvation, Christian dispositions, and
Christian living.
While many things should be said about the theological
context of these sermons, as we begin to look at them as resources for examining the shape
of his thought, John Wesley's self-confessed traditionalism must be kept in the forefront.
Not only did he persistently align himself with classical Protestant doctrines, as these
are expressed in the Anglican Articles, but for all his pragmatism and ecclesiastical
innovations Wesley could not conceive of himself as an innovator. When dealing with those
he termed "rank antinominans," Wesley argued with characteristic fervor: ".
. . whatever doctrine is new must be wrong; for the old religion is the only true one; and
no doctrine can be right unless it is the very same 'which was from the beginning' "
(Sermons, I, 324). Thus he defended himself, with equal force, against charges that he was
a "setter forth of new doctrines." Wesley believed he merely proclaimed the
"essential duties of Christianity" (Ibid. I, 401). This mood is reflected in
Wesley's repeated and rather self-congratulatory presentation of the Methodists as a sort
of reincarnation of "Primitive Christianity."(4)
His sermon "On Laying the Foundation of the New
Chapel," continues to protest against charges of innovation: "But you will ask,
What is Methodism . . . Is it not a new Religion? . . . But nothing can be more remote
from the truth.... Methodism, so called, is the old religion of the Bible, the religion of
the primitive church, the religion of the Church of England." (Sermons, III, 585).
The same sermon also lists a host of Church Fathers who, in Wesley's mind, represented the
primitive Church; that hall of fame makes it clear that his concept of "primitive
Christianity" extended beyond the popular use of the term, which looked to the NT
alone.(5)
While primitive Christianity and Anglican orthodoxy set
the outer parameters of Wesley's thought, the theology he constructed within those
boundaries wove doctrinal clarity and vital piety into a single fabric. Wesley's penchant
for "practical divinity" committed him as assuredly to orthopraxis as to
orthodoxy. It is evidenced in his efforts at infusing Anglican theology with Puritan piety
through his Christian Library. His SOSO also evidences his dependence upon the
Puritans-especially with regard to practical matters.(6) William Law and other
"mystical divines," including Roman Catholics and continental Pietists, are also
mentioned, though less frequently than Puritans.(7)
Finally, Wesley's SOSO was shaped by the context and
resources of the Enlightenment to a greater degree than is typically thought.(8) These
sermons are seasoned with references to eighteenth century philosophy (especially
regarding the question of human moral agency), as well as world history and science-such
as they were known at the time. The task of these sermons, as Thomas Langford has noted,
includes "a combination of confessional and apologetic theology."(9) While
certain elements in them, such as Wesley's fatherly advice on personal piety, seem to be
most directly addressed to Methodists, the apologetic and confessional dimension are
inextricably wound together.
II. The Catholic Spirit
Wesley's doctrinal conservatism was mediated through an
amiable theological mood, which he termed "the Catholic Spirit." It found its
classical expression in his sermon bearing that phrase as its title (SOSO No. 39).
Following "A Caution Against Bigotry," (No. 38), which seems to be a practical
treatise on how Methodists should conduct themselves in the face of mounting hostility,
"The Catholic Spirit" fixes upon the issue of theological diversity, a theme
which had already been introduced in No. 38, II:3. The portion of the sermon's text (2
King 20:15) which captured Wesley's attention is the phrase: "Is thine heart right,
as my heart is with thy heart? . . . give me thine hand." Expounding the passage,
Wesley notes that no inquiry was made regarding either Jehonadab's "opinions"
(I.1), or his "mode of Worship" (I.7). The reason for this is clear:
"although a difference in opinions or modes of worship may prevent an entire external
union, yet need it prevent union in affection? Though we can't think alike, may we not
love alike? May we not be of one heart, though we are not of one opinion? With-out all
doubt we may . . ." (Sermons, 11:82). But "catholic spirit" is not to be
confused with "speculative latitudinarianism," "practical
latitudinarianism," or "indifference to congregations" (92-94). In fact, in
the midst of all of this warm catholicity, Wesley responds to the question: "Is thine
heart right, as my heart is with thy heart?" by giving one of his most complete
summaries of what he considers to be the essential doctrines of Christianity(87-89).
The sermon reflects Wesley's weariness with pointless
controversy. This was a rather common theme in SOSO: "How dreadful and how
innumerable are the contests that have arisen about religion!" (Sermons, I, 449). In
fact, a "peacemaker" in Wesley's reading of the Beatitudes is a person who
"being filled with the love of God and of all mankind cannot confine the expressions
of it to his own family, friends, . . . or those of his own opinions . . .(Ibid. I, 518).
In a sense, this "catholic spirit" is the Golden Rule applied to liberty of
thought: "Every wise man . . . will allow others the same liberty of thinking which
he desires they should allow him; and will no more insist on their embracing his opinions,
than he would have them to insist on his embracing theirs" (Ibid., II, 84-85).
This theological "mood" urged one to embrace
the theological and practical verities of one's own tradition, and yet also to embrace
people of vital piety who differed in matters that did not strike at the heart of
Christianity. The person of a "catholic spirit" ". . . is steadily fixed in
his religious principles, in what he believes to be the truth as it is in Jesus; while he
firmly adheres to that worship of God which he judges to be most acceptable in his sight;
... his heart is enlarged toward all mankind.... This is catholic or universal love....
For love alone gives the title to this character-catholic love is a catholic spirit"
(Ibid., 94). The person of "a catholic spirit," while not being indifferent to
"opinions," does not base Christian love and concern upon agreement in
"opinion" (Ibid., 85).
Wesley's theological posture reflects a weariness with
the sort of religious disputes that ravaged both continental and English Protestant
orthodoxy. Where an earlier generation of English evangelicals tried to draw up lists of
"fundamental doctrines" (and have them passed by Parliament), Wesley lamented an
obsession with "opinions" and looked to matters of practical divinity to
identify genuine Christianity. This was certainly the approach he advocated in his
apologetic tract, "A Farther Appeal to Men of Reason and Religion" (Pt. III):
. . . I am sick of opinions. I am weary to bear them. My
soul loathes this frothy food. Give me solid and substantial religion. Give me an humble,
gentle lover of God and Man; a man full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and
without hypocrisy; a man laying himself out in the work of faith, the patience of hope,
the labor of love. Let my soul be with these Christians, . . (19)
His handling of the predestination controversy, presents
an interesting study of Wesley's difficulty in maintaining the balance between theological
essentials,' a "catholic spirit," and his growing distaste for controversy over
"opinions." His sermon, "Free Grace," preached and published in April,
1739, signaled an open break with the Calvinistic wing of Methodism, and caused a division
90 deep that later attempts to reconcile John Wesley with George Whitefield and the
Countess of Huntingdon amounted to papering over a chasm. Paragraphs 1-9 of the sermon
oppose eternal predestination, particular election and irresistible grace on doctrinal
grounds. The position Wesley polemicized was a caricature of what Whitefield and others
were preaching, and Wesley made no attempt to be conciliatory in his approach. A longer
section of the sermon drew a connection between Calvinist soteriology and serious
practical abuses.(11)The sermon's twice-recorded insistence that predestination was
blasphemous was difficult for the Calvinists to overlook (Sermons, III, 554-555). By 1746,
however, Wesley's mood may have softened, since "Free Grace" did not appear in
his SOSO (First Series), issued that year. But "Free Grace" breathed none of the
"catholic spirit" of the 1750 sermon by that title.(12)
By the mid-forties John Wesley's attitude toward the
predestinarians had moderated somewhat. The "Minutes of a Conversation" from the
1745 Methodist Conference at Bristol could not allow that it was appropriate to come
"within a hair's breadth" or "to the very edge of Calvinism."(13) That
he was coming to see the Calvinist interpretation of God's eternal decrees not as heresy
but as an "opinion" is indicated by Wesley's journal entry for April 7, 1746:
"I spent an agreeable hour with an old fellow laborer Mr. Joseph Humphreys. I found
him open and friendly, but rigorously tenacious of the unconditional Decrees. O that
opinion should separate chief friends! This is bigotry all over."(14) In another
letter, in 1751, Wesley went as far as to admit that he was learning "a catholic
spirit" over the long haul ". . . It is true that for thirty years last past I
have "gradually put on more and more catholic spirit,' finding more and more
tenderness for those who differed from me either in opinions or modes of worship . .
."(15) And his letter to John Newton, May 14, 1765, describes "particular
election and final per severance" as being compatible with his definition of an
"opinion."(16)
Wesley's sermon "On the Death of George
Whitefield" (1770) was, as Outler has said so well, "a labor of love, an
exercise in honest candor, and an unaccustomed venture in diplomacy" (Sermons, II,
329). The third section of that sermon is of most interest for our discussion since in it
Wesley establishes a distinction between "grand scriptural doctrines" which
Whitefield preached "everywhere" and those "doctrines of a less essential
nature . . . which even the sincere children of God . . . are and have bee divided for
many ages. In these [latter] we may think and let think, we ma agree to disagree.' But let
us hold fast to the essentials of the faith . . ." (Ibid., 341).
When Wesley identified Whitefield's "fundamental
doctrines" as those which could be "summed up, as it were, in two
words-"the New Birth, and justification by faith" (Ibid., 343)-he ran afoul of
the preachers in connection with Calvinistic Methodism. William Romaine aired his
displeasure with Wesley's sermon in the Gospel Magazine, and Wesley responded in a letter
to the editor of Lloyd 's Evening Post (Feb. 26,1771). Romaine charged that Wesley had
misrepresented the "fundamental doctrines" which Whitefield preached. Romaine's
recollection of Whitefield's proclamation was that it was based in "the everlasting
covenant between the Father and Son and the Absolute Predestination flowing
therefrom."(17)
John Wesley's published reply to Romaine was controlled
and factual, but his editorial work in SOSO suggests that he had given up on attempts at
reconciling with the Calvinists. It is in this respect that "The Lord our
Righteousness" is a landmark sermon. Written in 1765, and then inserted in the
soteriological section of SOSO (First Series) in 1771, it is out of chronological but not
theological sequence. The sermon begins with a rather typical lament: "How dreadful
and how innumerable are the contests that save arisen about religion!" (Sermons, I,
449). Wesley applies the title phrase, "The Lord Our Righteousness," to describe
real religion as righteousness in the inward person, based in the doctrine of
justification by faith alone, which he views (citing Luther) as the doctrine upon which
the Church stands or falls (articulus stantis vel cadentis ecclesiae). This is a
"fundamental doctrine" around which revolve well-established differences of
"opinion" (450). Thus, in the context of the Calvinist controversy, "The
Lord Our Righteousness" had the two-fold task of demonstrating Wesleyan solidarity
with the rest of catholic Christianity on the doctrine of "imputed
righteousness" through justification by faith (contrary to the Calvinists'
critiques), and then delivering a Wesleyan nuance, viz. "I believe God implants
righteousness in every one to whom he has imputed it." (458-459).
By 1788, however, Wesley seems to have come to terms
with this issue and could insert "On Predestination," which was written in 1773,
into the Second Series of SOSO as No. 58. In that sermon he reached the tone he
professedly sought and presented his case without the polemical rancour of the sermon,
"Free Grace."
III. Religious Opinions
Wesley did not leave a prescriptive list of which
matters should be considered "opinions," but his willingness to describe these
opinions" as "notions" suggests a clear discounting of their relative
value.(18) His sermon, "The Catholic Spirit," offered the most extended
indication of what he considered to be "opinions" (Sermons, II, 82-86). A
distillation from that discussion includes matters such as forms and practices of worship,
congregational polity, forrns of prayer, posture and liturgy for the Lord's Supper, the
manner of administration of Baptism, and whether those two sacraments need to be
administered at all. Almost everything Wesley suggested as an example of an
"opinion" was not a doctrine of the "primitive church," in fact, his
list of examples is long on Christian practices and short on Christian doctrines.
One of Wes1ey's letters to John Newton, May 14, 1765,
accepted the definition of an "opinion" which Newton had offered (if only
Newton's letter were extant!): "You have admirably well expressed what I mean by an
opinion contradistinguished from an essential doctrine. What is 'compatible with a love to
Christ and a work of grace' I term an opinion. And certainly the holding Particular
Election and Final Perseverance is compatible with these."(19) Thus, Wes1ey evaluated
"opinions" from the standpoint of their being acceptable as notions which
maintain the vitality of an evangelical soteriology (e.g. justification by faith and
sanctification). With the insight to be expected from a "folk" or
"practical" theologian, Wesley connected the suitability of an
"opinion" with its ability to accord with the transforming realities of the
Christian faith; that is to say, he assesses the suitability of "opinions" with
respect to their theological function. Yet, while "a love to Christ and a work of
grace" are not optional features of Christian faith-they stand well within the outer
boundary-these transforming realities can take various forms of expression and those
various "forms" can also be considered "opinion." A useful example of
this approach emerged in Wesley's sermon "On the Trinity" where he introduced a
distinction between the "act" and the "manner" of that doctrine
(Sermons, II, 383):
. . . as strange as it may seem, in requiring you to
believe, "there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the
Holy Ghost; and these three are one;" you are not required to believe any mystery....
The Bible barely requires you to believe such facts, not the manner of them. Now the
mystery does not lie in the fact, but altogether in the manner.
A specific conceptualization of the Trinity was not
something Wesley considered an "essential"; the "manner" of it is an
"opinion." But the "fact" (that God is Three in One) is not a matter
of opinion for Christians. Thus, Ray Dunning is certainly correct to urge that for Wesley
"the substance or fact" of this doctrine is "soteriological rather than
ontological."(20) In a similar fashion, Wesley's sermon entitled "The Lord Our
Righteousness," shuns "a particular mode of expression" in order to remove
contention and preserve unity in Christian faith and service (Sermons I, 464-65).
The recognition of the existence of religious
"opinions" should engender "a catholic spirit" regarding opinions, a
willingness to "think and let think." On a practical level this distinction is a
platform for religious liberty within the larger boundaries of primitive Christianity.
What Wesley wrote concerning "modes of worship" seems thoroughly reflective of
the dispositions that ought to accompany this liberty:
And how shall we choose among so much variety? No man
can choose for or prescribe to another. But everyone must follow the dictates of his own
conscience in simplicity and godly sincerity. He must be fully persuaded in his own mind,
and then act according to the best night he has. Nor has any creature power to constrain
another to walk by his own rule. God has given no right to any of the children of men thus
to lord it over the conscience of his brethren. But every man must judge for himself, as
every man must give an account of himself to God" (Sermons, II, 85).
The acknowledgment of the difference between
"opinions" and ''essentials" enables one to have "a catholic
spirit" with respect to peripheral matters of the Christian faith and to have
charitable attitude about the forms or expressions which that vital faith might take, but
"opinions" do pose a persistent danger to the Christian faith. Since
"opinions" are not essentials of genuine "religion," faith can too
easily lose its vitality and degenerate into a bare assent to religious truth:
Whatsoever the generality of people think, it is certain
that opinion is not religion: no not right opinion; assent to one or to ten thousand
truths. There is a wide difference between them: even right opinion is as distant from
religion as the east is from the west. Persons may be quite right in their opinions, and
yet have no religion at all. And on the other hand, persons may be truly religious who
hold many wrong opinions. (Sermons, II, 374).
The later Wesley often opposed contentiousness about
"opinions" since ". . . fervor for opinion is not Christian zeal! And how
innumerable are the mischiefs which even this species of false zeal has occasioned in the
Christian world!" (Ibid., III, 317, cf. I, 451). He willingly distanced
"opinions' from the core of vital religion. In "a truly religious man," he
wrote, "'right opinions are a very slender part of religion, [and] . . . in an
irreligious, profane man, they are not any part of religion at all; such a man not being
one jot more religious because he is orthodox."(21) According to Wesley's definition,
a true Christian is not to be distinguished by his or her opinions of any sort, and the
expectation of "entering into the Kingdom of heaven upon [the basis of] my orthodoxy
or right opinions . . . is building a house on sand; or rather on the froth of the
sea!" (Sermons, I, 694)(22)
IV. Essentials and Real Religion
Just as John Wesley distinguished between
"opinions" and Christian. essentials, so also he distinguished between
"essentials" and "real religion." While "essentials" were
those theological matters which constituted primitive Christianity, "real
religion" recognized that even orthodox doctrine could become an idolatrous hindrance
to vital faith. Acknowledging that every truth which is revealed in the oracles of God is
. . . of great importance,' Wesley urged that "it may be allowed that some of these .
. . are of greater importance than others." His epistemological rod for measuring
whether a doctrine is more or less important was located in the given doctrine's
connection to the Scripture's soteriological core: was it "more immediately conducive
to the ground and end of all [others], the eternal salvation of men" (Sermons, III,
31)? A second consideration was the frequency with which a given doctrine appeared within
the Biblical record, hence "we may judge of their importance from this circumstance,
that they are not mentioned only once in the sacred writings, but are repeated over and
over" (Ibid.).
In his early, apologetic writings, Wesley was willing to
call the components of the soteriological axis "fundamentals." In An Earnest
Appeal (1743), for example, he identified "salvation by faith" as "the
fundamental doctrine of the Church."(23) Affirmation of the "common fundamental
principles of Christianity" was to be the only distinguishing mark of a
Methodist(.24) By 1775, with the appearance of his sermon "On the Trinity,"
Wesley relinquished the term "fundamentals" as a way of describing those
doctrines, practices and attitudes which he believed the Bible demanded of every
Christian, but he continued to emphasize their "close connection to vital
religion" as a way of determining which truths "are more important than
others."(25)
Wesley expressed the content of these
"essential" doctrines in a variety of ways- Often he treated them summarily by
their doctrinal connections: 'there are two grand heads of doctrine which contain any
truths of the most important nature, . . . I mean which relate to the eternal Son of God,
and the spirit of God-to the Son of God giving himself to be a 'propitiation for the sins
of the world,' and to the Spirit of God, renewing men in that image of God wherein they
were created . . ." (Ibid., III, 200). In his "preface" to the 1765 Notes
on the Old Testament Wesley offered a short list of "those grand fundamental
doctrines, which included: original sin, justification by faith, the new birth, inward and
outward holiness."(26)
With a rhetorical flourish, familiar to teachers and
preachers alike, Wesley occasionally identified thus or that doctrine as the "whole
of real religion" or the "foundation of Christianity." Even a casual
catalogue of these descriptions takes on surprising dimensions.(27) Colin William's list
of Wesley's 'essential doctrines" appropriately reflects the fact that John
emphasized all of the basic beliefs of classical Christianity:
A review of Wesley's writings indicates that the
essential doctrines on which he insisted included Original Sin [Works IX, 429], the Deity
of Christ [VIII,340], the atonement ,JW. Letters, VI, 297-8], justification by faith alone
[Sermons, II, 226-227], the work of the Holy Spirit [Letters, VII,231] and the Trinity
[Works, VI, 200]-(28)
But such a list is also misleading in several respects,
since in constructing such a list of "essential doctrines" one misses the fact
that Wesley described each of these as the foundation or fundamental truth (not the list
as a whole but each item in it). The role of John Wesley as a rhetorician and evangelist
looms in the background of any attempt to construct a list of "essentials." In
fact, such a project seems to fly in the face of his own statements about the
inappropriateness of such an undertaking.
Further, the list Williams produced, while aptly
capturing the standard content of Wesley's "essentials," directs one away from
the atypical breadth and shape of Wesley's affirmations. A more complete list would also
have to rank "Divine Providence," "Charity" or Agape love,
"Hell," the "New Birth" and "Sanctification," among Wesley's
self-confessed essential themes. But more importantly, when Wesley set forth each of these
"essentials" it was in its connection with the formation of vital piety. They
were, as Outler recognized "distillates for edification rather than doctrinal
formularies demanding a yes or no response" (Sermons, I, 55-56). These
"essentials" were not intended to function as loci communes. Wesley's
theological common-places were get by the outer perimeter of Anglican Orthodoxy. They
marked out, instead, the proclamation of vital piety and an apologetic statement of the
core of the Gospel. This recognition carries us to the practical dimension of Wesley's
"essentials"-real religion.
"Religion," for Wesley was a term that carried
none of the negative connotations that it acquired later (e.g. Bonhoeffer's
"religionless Christianity"). In fact the term served him well since it enabled
him to fuse doctrine, practice, and inner dispositions into a functional whole. Thus, in
response to his own question, "What is the proper nature of the religion of Jesus
Christ?," Wesley replied: "It is Therapeia psuchas ["healing of
souls"], God's method of healing a soul which is thus diseased [with sin]"
(Ibid., II, 184). In a similar fashion, "the great end of religion is to renew our
hearts in the image of God, to repair that total 1099 of righteousness and true holiness
which we sustained by the sin of our first parent" (Ibid.). This "religion of
the heart was larger than the sum-total of its parts. It included "essential
doctrines" but was more than theological orthodoxy:
I say of the heart. For neither does religion consist in
orthodoxy or right opinions; which, although they are not properly outward things, are not
in the heart, . . . he may think justly concerning the incarnation of our Lord, concerning
the ever blessed Trinity, and every other doctrine contained in the oracles of God. He may
assent to all three creeds-that called Apostles', the Nicene, and the Athanasian-and yet
"tis possible he may have no religion at all.... He may be almost as orthodox as the
devil ... and may be all the while a stranger as he to the religion of the heart"
(Sermons, II, 220-21).
Although "real religion" manifests itself in
true Christian dispositions and practices, praxis, no more than "orthodoxy" or
"opinions," is the constitutive feature of true religion. Wesley's sermon on
"The Way to the Kingdom of God" (I.1-6) stated this point emphatically: ".
. . although true religion naturally leads to every good word and work, yet the real
nature thereof lies deeper still even in 'the hidden man of the heart' " (Sermons, I,
21~-220). When he sought to define religion "truly so-called" Wesley followed
Rom. 14:17, where "the Apostle sums it up in three particulars-'righteousness, peace,
and joy in the Holy Ghost' " (Ibid). In a later sermon ("The Important
Question," 1775), Wesley returned to this question with his characteristic gift for
compacting and clarifying his earlier statements: "What is religion then? . . . it
lies in one single point; it is neither more nor less than love; . . . Religion is the
love of God and neighbor; . . . This love ruling the whole life, animating all our tempers
and passions, directing all our thoughts, words, and actions, is 'pure religion and
undefiled' " (Sermons, III, 189).
The establishment of this "real religion," was
"The End of Christ's Coming" (SOSO No. 62). It is nothing less than ". . .
a restoration not only to the favor but likewise to the image of God, implying not barely
deliverance from sin, but being filled with the fullness of God . . . nothing short of
this is Christian religion" (Sermons, II, 482-83). It is the establishment of
"Spiritual Worship" (SOSO No. 77), which ". . . does not lie in this or
that set of notions, vulgarly called faith; nor in a round of duties.... It does not
consist in any number of outward actions. No: It properly and directly consists in the
knowledge and love of God, as manifested in the Son of His love, through the eternal
Spirit. And this naturally leads to every heavenly temper, and to every good word and
work" (Sermons, III, 99).
What was most characteristic about John Wesley's
"essential doctrines" was not his affirmation of standard Protestant theological
content. Rather it is his unwillingness to speak of Christian doctrine, disposition, or
practice in isolation. This is certainly the approach one meets in the SOSO, where Wesley
cements together Biblical words, phrases, and themes to form montages of doctrine,
disposition, and practice. These extended summaries not only emerge in soteriological
sermons such as "Salvation by Faith" (pt. II. 1-7), "The Almost
Christian" (pt. II. 1-11), or "Scriptural Christianity" (Intro. 4-1.10)-
they are equally prevalent in sermons treating Christian dispositions, as in "The
Catholic Spirit" (I. 12-18), or "On Patience" (para. 9-10) for example.(29)
These summaries of basic Christianity also appear in what might seem to be unusual
contexts, such a9 "On the Death of Whitefield" (III. 1-8), "Original
Sin" (III.3), "The Case of Reason" (I.6), "Of the Church"
(II.21-26), and "On Family Religion" (I. 1-4)(30) Several of Wesley's apologetic
works also present "real religion" by weaving together "essential"
Christian doctrines, dispositions, and practices. Chains of Biblical phrases and teaching
emerge in treatises such as A Farther Appeal, A Letter to a Roman Catholic, and the
Character of a Methodist and the contents of these summaries mirror the substance of
Wesley's sermons. (31)
V. The Analogy of Faith
An inquiry after Wesley's "essential"
doctrines, while accurately communicating his theological content, does not deliver what
was most distinctive about his theology. This causes one to wonder whether there is a
Wesleyan description that might characterize the Methodist theological task in a way that
is more in harmony with Wesley's own method. His application of the phrase "the
analogy of faith" seems to offer real promise in that direction.
The term, "analogy," based on the Greek
analogian in Rom. 12:6, was originally a mathematical term meaning "proportion."
In the hands of the philosophers "analogy" also described relationships of
similarity or correspondence. In the Romans passage the term suggests a correspondence
between prophetic preaching and the Christian community's received standards of doctrine
and practice. Because of this type of application the "analogy of faith" stood
in close connection with the "rule of faith." The latter term referred to the
contents of Christian tradition and the former to the hermeneutical process that made
received tradition the litmus test for new doctrines or practices.
Romans 12:6 was of interest to the Protestant Reformers
and their orthodox successors. Martin Luther followed Erasmus and Faber in sing
"rule, comparison, proportion, or similarity" to translate the term, and he
applied it hermeneutically.(32) Calvin described the "analogy of faith" as the
hermeneutical correspondence between exposition and "the first principles of
religion, and whatever doctrine is not found to correspond with these is here condemned as
false."(33) Francis Turretin used the term to describe the "constant harmony or
agreement of all of the articles (capita) of faith in the most glorious words of the
revealed Scripture, to which all expositions must conform....(34) Similar development can
be found in the commentators of Lutheran orthodoxy, such as Abraham Calovius and Paul
Gerhard, who used the term to emphasize the revelatory unity within Scripture and the
hermeneutical unity between Scripture and Creed.(35)
The English divines also connected the harmony of
Scripture with hermeneutics and the inter-relationship of Biblical exposition and
Christian tradition. William Whitaker's Disputation on Holy Scripture, for example
described the "analogy of faith," as "the sum of those central doctrines of
the Christian faith which we believe on the authority of the clear and constant teaching
of Scripture." Whitaker offered the Creed, the Articles, the contents of the Lord's
Prayer, the Decalogue, and the whole Catechism as examples of these "central
doctrines," and hence "whatever exposition is repugnant to this analogy must be
false."(36) John Wesley's use of the term "analogy of faith" stood within
this larger tradition. The fullest example of his use of the phrase is found in his
comment on Romans 12:6:
Let us prophesy according to "the analogy of
faith" St. Peter expresses it as the oracles of God; according to the grand tenor of
them; according to that grand scheme of doctrine which is delivered therein, touching upon
original sin, justification by faith, and present, inward salvation. There is a wonderful
analogy between all these; and a close and intimate connection between the chief heads of
that faith which was once delivered to the saints. Every article therefore, concerning
which there is any question, should be determined by this rule, every doubtful scripture
interpreted, according to the grand truths which run through the whole.(39)
While Wesley continued his predecessors' interest in the
hermeneutical role of the analogy of faith, for him the focal point for interpreting
"every doubtful scripture" is not so much to be found in the Creed or Articles
but in basic Biblical doctrines, in "the grand truths which run through the
whole." His emphasis upon the "harmony" suggested by the "analogy of
faith" is found in the inner coherence of Biblical teaching ("that grand scheme
of doctrine"), as opposed to an explicit linkage between Biblical exposition and a
creedal "rule of faith." A similar sort of emphasis emerges in Wesley's
"Preface" to his Notes Upon the OT ~1765), where he describes "the analogy
of faith," as "the connection and harmony there is between these grand
fundamental doctrines, original sin, justification by faith, the new birth. inward and
outward holiness."(38) In the SOSO the hermeneutical focus of the "analogy of
faith" is more explicit. In Wesley's sermon "Justification by Faith," for
example, it has the function of demonstrating the utter consistency of the "oracles
of God" (Sermons, I, 182-83). In some instances. the substance of the principle is
present when the term is not, as in Wesley's first homily "Upon our Lord's Sermon on
the Mount," where "all parts of the discourse . . . are all connected together,
joined together as the stone in an arch, of which you cannot take one away without
destroying the whole fabric" (Sermons, I, 473). In the third sermon on the same
topic, Wesley punned the Greek word for "analogy" to describe the
inter-connection he saw between the "fundamentals" of Jesus' discourse (the
Beatitudes) on "genuine religion": ". . . What beauty appears in the whole!
How just a symmetry! What exact proportion in every part! How desirable is the happiness
here described! How venerable, how lovely the holiness! This is the spirit of religion;
the quintessence of it. These are indeed the fundamental of Christianity. O that we may
not be hearers of it only!" (Sermons, I, 530).
John Wesley's later work, like his sermon on "The
End of Christ's Coming" (1781), extended the hermeneutical application of the analogy
of faith" toward a more programmatic use, which he described as "that grand
scheme of doctrine" delivered in the Bible. In "The End of Christ's Coming"
was to be found that plan of "restoration, not only to the favor but likewise to the
image of God, implying not barely deliverance from sin, but the being filled with the
fullness of God. It is plain, . . . that nothing short of this is Christian religion....
It runs through the Bible from the beginning to the end, in one connected chain; and the
agreement of every part of it, with every other, is, properly, the analogy of faith"
(Sermons, II, 482-83). The "analogy" is only to be found in the wholeness of
this "connected chain" (Ibid.). The harmony of the analogy of faith not only
extends throughout the Biblical witness, its inner harmony is found in its identification
as "real religion," and in the inter-connection of doctrine, practice, and
dispositions that the term "real religion" implied for Wesley. Geoffrey
Wainwright is certainly correct to identify the "proportion of the faith" as one
of Methodism's chief contributions to Ecumenism, for "the connected, coherent and
balanced configuration of the great doctrinal truths of Christianity . . ." seems
endemic to Methodism and "real religion."(39)
VI. Conclusion
Even a casual reading of Wesley's SOSO indicates that he
presented the doctrines which he emphasized rhetorically as being "essential" or
"fundamental" aspects of the Christian faith. But an approach which delineates
his thought only in terms of those theological "essentials" hits a bit wide of
the mark. Wesley repeatedly returned to those teachings he considered to be constitutive
of "primitive Christianity," but his emphasis was on the issue of "real
religion."
Wesley's "catholic spirit," albeit a bit thin
with respect to Calvinists in his earlier years, eventually reached the scope that his
soteriology demanded. His distinction between "opinions" and
"essentials" leaves room for variance at the point of personal convictions
(though primarily in areas of Christian practice) while his distinction between the
"fact" (or reality) and the "matter" (or explication) of even
essential doctrines (such as the Trinity) points to the heart of his approach. For Wesley,
theological "essentials" were those "primitive Christian" doctrines
which held the potential for producing "real religion." The truthfulness of a
doctrine inhered not only in its veracity, but also in its vitality. We noted that, in
fact, Wesley believed that even "essential" doctrines could become idolatrous or
have debilitating effects. He also showed a willingness to re-consider whether a articular
doctrine, such ag the Calvinistic concept of predestination, was an "essential"
or an "opinion."
What seems most "essential" about Wesley's
doctrines was his willingness to affirm classical Christian teaching in solid connection
with the larger context of Christian living. He had a pervasive sense of the inner
symmetry of Christian theology. His appreciation for "the analogy of faith" felt
the wholeness within Christian teaching and sought to apply lt in order to produce whole
Christian lives.
NOTES
1 John Wesley, The Works of John
Wesley A.M. 14 vols. (London: WesIeyan Methodist Book Room,1878, various reprints), XIV,
p.340 [hereafter Works and etc.]
2 Albert Outler, ed., Sermons
(Vol. I-III: The Works of John Wesley [Nashville: Abingdon, 1984-1986]) Since the majority
of citations will be from this new edition of John Wesley's sermons they will be indicated
by in-text notation using Sermons, vol. and page.
3 John Wesley's
"Preface" to the Sermons on Several Occasions (hereinafter, SOSO), Second
Series, makes it clear that he had a theological agenda in mind as he compiled that
edition:
To make these plain Discourses
more useful, I purpose now to range them in proper order; placing those first which are
intended to throw light on some important Christian doctrines; and after-wards those which
more directly relate to some branch of Christian practice: And I shall endeavor to place
them all in such an order that one may illustrate and confirm the other. There may be the
greater need of this, because they were occasionally written, during the course of years,
without any order or connection at all; just as this or the other subject either occurred
to my own mind, or was suggested to me at various time by one or another friend (Works,
VI, 185-186).
4 Works, VIII, p. 340f.
5 Wesley's concept of
"primitive Christianity" was drawn from a host of Church Fathers. Clement of
Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp, Tertullian, Origen, Clement of Alexandria, Cyprian,
John Chrysostom, Basil the Great, Ephrem Syrus, and Macarius the Egyptian are listed in
his sermon "On Laying the Foundation of the New Chapel," (1777) (cf. Sermons,
III, 585). The list is certainly incomplete since Irenaeus and Augustine, who figure
prominently into Wesley's soteriological constructs, are not mentioned there. The sermon
does give a useful delineation of the breadth of his concept of "primitive
Christianity."
6 Robert Monk's John Wesley: His
Puritan Heritage (Nashville: Abingdon, 1966~, and his recent paper "John Wesley and
Richard Baxter," presented at the Wesley Studies Group of AAR (1986), draw some
striking parallels between the soteriology of the two men. Interestingly, both struggled
mightily with the issue of imputed grace and empowered human works as a response to grace.
My reading of the results of such a comparison is that Wesley's position is more Catholic
than Baxter's, since Wesley directly affirms both imputed and imparted righteousness.
7 William Law heads the list of
"most cited sources" from the area of practical divinity in the SOSO, but once
again the scope of Wesley's readings is surprisingly broad for a man who touted himself as
homo unius libri.In alphabetical order his most cited practical sources are: a' Kempis,
II:274; III:69; 122; William Arndt, III: 124; Robert Barclay, I: 460; Behmen (goehme), II:
506; De Castaniza, III:506; De Renty, II:375,385; III:166,375;Utilliarn Law, I:246, 247,
460, 613, 628; II:198, 274; III:120, 123, 128, 183,268,349, 357, 392, 397, 504, 507, 524;
Blaise Pascal, III: 182; Jeremy Taylor, I: 407; 111:79, 285.
8 Sermon II,184, cites Thomas
Hobbes on reason; II: 254, Francis Hutcheson on the locus of natural evil; II: 570-72,
Issac Newton and John Hutchinson on "the limit of human understanding;" II: 587
looks to Hobbes in support of the use of reason; II: 589 cites John Locke on the nature of
reason. In Sermons III: 93, Wesley returns to Newton and Hutchinson, this on the issue of
naturalism; III: 200, Andrew Ramsey; III: 279-80, Francis Hutcheson on human moral decay;
III: 499, Wollaston on faith; in III: 361, Wesley dialogues with Locke and the Cambridge
Platonists on the nature of ideas in the mind; III: 444 cites William Derham's
Physio-Theology, and Samuel Clarke; and III: 480 refers to La Placette and Francis
Hutcheson on conscience.
9 Thomas Langford,
"Constructive Theology in the Wesleyan Tradition," in Ted Runyon ed., Wesleyan
Theology Today: a Bicentennial Theological Consultation (Nashville: Kingswood Books,
1985), pp. 58-59.
10 Gerald R. Cragg, ed., The
Appeals to Men Of Reason and Religion (Vol. XI: The Works of John Wesley [London: Oxford
University Press, 1975]), p. 321 (Hereinafter, Cragg, Appeals, etc.)
11 Wesley argued that the
Calvinistic concept of predestination under-mines several particular branches of holiness:
"such as i) 'the hope of future reward and fear of punishment,' ii) 'meekness and
love' iii) 'the happiness of Christianity' that is the experience of assurance, iv) 'the
zeal for good works,' and v) it tends to 'overthrow the whole Christian revelation.'
" Sermons, III, pp. 547-552. '2Cf.
12 Sermons, II, pp. 79-97, No.
39, "Catholic Spirit."
13 Works, VIII p. 284-285. '
14 Nehemiah Curnock, ed., The
Journal of John Wesley, A.M. 8 Vol. (London: Charles Kelley, n.d.), III, p. 238.
[Hereafter, JW Journal and etc.]
15 Cragg, Appeals, "The
Enthusiasm of the Methodists," p. 423.
16 John Telford, ed., The
Letters of John Wesley, A.M. 8 Vol. (London: Epworth Press, 1931), IV, p. 297. [Hereafter,
JW. Letters and etc.]
17 JW. Letters, V, pp. 224-225.
18 James Murray, ed., A New
Dictionary on Historical Principles (Oxford: Clarendon Press,1908], Vol. VI, pt. 2, p.
233, OED. The OED indicates that within the Wesleys' life-time the word "notion"
began to take on a "slightly or virtually negative connotation."
19 JW. Letters, IV, 297.
20 H. Ray Dunning,
"Perspective for a Wesleyan Systematic Theology," in Runyon, ed., op. cit., p.
52.
21 Cragg, ed., Appeals,
"The Enthusiasm of the Methodists," p. 425.
22 Works, VIII, p. 340.
23 Cragg, ed., Appeals, p. 82.
24 Works, VIII, p. 346.
25 Sermons, II, "On The
Trinity," p. 376: ". . . there are some truths more important than others. Its
seems there are some truths which are of deep importance. I do not term them fundamental
truths, because that is an ambiguous word, and hence there have been so many warm disputes
about the number of 'fundamentals.' But surely there are some which it really concerns us
to know, as having a close connection with vital religion."
26 Works, XIV, p- 253-
27 Among these
"essentials" were: "The Office and Operation of the Holy Spirit"
(Letters, IV, p. 339~; "The New Birth and Justification by Faith alone,"
(Sermons, II, p. 343~; "Divine Providence," (Sermons, II, p. 537); "Faith,
as a confidence in a pardoning God" (Appeals, p. 70); "Sanctification,"
(Letters, VIII p. 38~; "Justification and Sanctification by Faith," (Sermons, I,
p. 241~; "The Trinity," (Sermons, II, 182-183~; "Original Sin,"
(Sermons, II, 182-183~; "Hell," (Sermons, III, 31~; "The Propitiation of
Christ," (Sermons, I, 2143; and "Charity," or Agape love (Sermons, III, p.
306~.
28 Colin Williams, John Wesley
's Theology Today (Nashville: Abingdon, 1960~ pp. 16-17.
29 For doctrinal summaries in
John Wesley's soteriological sermons see: Sermons, I, pp. 121-124; 137-141; 160-161;
187-193; 221; 650; Sermons, II, pp. 187-189; Sermons, III, 174-176.
30 Sermons, II, pp. 184ff;
341-344; 597; Sermons, III, pp. 53-54; 336.
31 Cragg, ed., Appeals, pp.
105-107; Albert Outler, ed., John Wesley (New York: Oxford University Press, 1964), pp.
494-496; Works, VIII, pp. 340-346.
32 Wilhelm Pauck, ed., Luther:
Lectures on Romans (Philadelphia: FortresY Press, 1961), p. 334.
33 John Owen, ed., Calvin 's
Commentary on the Epistle of Paul The Apostle to the Romans (Grand Rapids: William B.
Erdmans, 1947~, pp. 460-461.
34 William Beardslee, ed.,
Francis Turretin: The Doctrine of Scripture(Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1981), p. 207.
35 Heinrich Schmidt, ed., The
Doctrinal Theology of the Evangelical Lutheran Church (Minneapolis: Augsburg Press, 1899~.
pp. 70 and 77.
36 P. E. Hughes, The English
Reformation (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 19663, p. 41.
37 John Wesley, Explanatory
Notes Upon the New Testament [reprint edition] (Salem, Ohio: Schmul Pub., 1976), p.
397.-1 7x-
33 Works, XIV, p. 253.
39 Geoffrey Wainwright,
"Ecclesial Location and Ecumenical Vocation," in Douglas Meeks, ed., The Future
of Methodist Theological Traditions (Nashville: Abingdon, 1985), p.131.
Edited by Jason Gingerich, George Lyons
and Michael Mattei for the
Wesley Center for Applied Theology
at Northwest Nazarene University
© Copyright 2000 by the Wesley Center for Applied Theology
Text may be freely used for personal or
scholarly purposes, provided the notice below the horizontal line is left intact. Any use
of this material for commercial purposes of any kind is strictly forbidden without the
express permission of the Wesley Center at Northwest Nazarene University, Nampa, ID 83686.
Contact the webmaster for
permission or to report errors.
|
