TWENTIETH-CENTURY INTERPRETATIONS OF JOHN WESLEY'S ALDERSGATE EXPERIENCE:
COHERENCE OR CONFUSION?

by
KENNETH J. COLLINS

A little more than five months ago, an august assembly gathered at St. Paul's Cathedral in London to commemorate the two hundred and fiftieth anniversary of John Wesley's Aldersgate experience. Similarly, celebrations were held in this country as well as in Australia, New Zealand, and basically everywhere else that Methodism has prospered throughout the years. Plaques were made, paintings were hung, and sermons were given to honor the father of Methodism and his experience. But beneath these joyous voices there were others to be heard, voices that cried that Aldersgate was a "non-event"1 and that its continued celebration constitutes "a product of historical bad-faith and serves not to honor but to bury Wesley."2

The modern debate in this area focuses on two key issues. First, was Aldersgate the real beginning of Methodism and the revival of religion it spawned? Second, is it appropriate to designate this event as the conversion of John Wesley? Both of these questions are vital; both need to be addressed seriously by the heirs of Wesley as they approach the possibilities and problems of the twenty-first century. However, in order to maintain a sharp perspective and to facilitate a more penetrating analysis of the historical record, only the latter question will be entertained here.

My method is simple, although the object under consideration is not. First of all, the secondary materials of the twentieth century, ranging from Curnock's pronouncements in 1909, to the most recent issue of the Wesley Historical Society-all of which view 24 May 1738 as a conversion experience-will be explored. After this, those positions which specifically reject the conversion hypothesis, from Umphrey Lee in 1936 to Albert Outler today, will likewise be considered. I will then conclude with a number of (I hope) pertinent observations in light of Wesley's own writings.

I. Aldersgate As John Wesley's Conversion

The first body of literature to be considered is united in its estimation that 24 May 1738 marks Wesley's "evangelical" conversion. Please note, the term "evangelical" as employed here does not designate the emergence of a theological position vis a' vis the modernist controversy of the twentieth century, nor does it refer to an irenic modification of American fundamentalism. Its use here is more universal than this. In this context, "evangelical" is understood in terms of historical Protestant Christianity's multifaceted emphases on the experience of justification by faith, regeneration of heart and life, and the tension between law and gospel. Therefore, the names of Luther, Melanchthon, Cranmer, and Calvin,3 reverberate in this setting.

In support of the hypothesis that Aldersgate was Wesley's evangelical conversion, we cite the British scholar Nehemiah Curnock. In an uncanny anticipation of Maximin Piette's later view, he writes, "Wesley's awakening began long before he thought of going to Georgia, and before the founding of the Holy Club."4 The reference is, of course, to the year 1725, when Wesley encountered his first religious friend in Betty Kirkham, and when he began to see more clearly the end or goal of religion, which, for him, was holiness. But why include Curnock under this first heading, since he seems to deem the year 1725 as the time of Wesley's awakening? The answer lies in Curnock's reluctance to end the discussion at this point-something which other scholars, as will be apparent shortly, are all too willing to do.

Curnock contends that initially Wesley's spiritual life was characterized by works-righteousness and self-justification. In substantiation of this claim, he writes: "His [Wesley's] standard takes the form of rule and resolution. -..More law, more methods; a new cord to the flagellant's whip, or a new knot in the old cord."5 And he adds: "the first and most striking feature of [Wesley's] Diary is the dominating influence of 'Rules and Resolutions? "6 In other words, in the course of his spiritual trajectory, Wesley was wrestling with the perennial problems of law and grace, works and faith-a very Protestant thing to do-and though he had correctly understood the purpose of religion in 1725, he did not yet see the proper means for its fulfillment. Curnock argues, "He neither knew the meaning of saving faith, nor had he the power to fulfill his Lord's mission."7 For this Aldersgate was required.

Likewise, George Croft Cell observes that Wesley's early spiritual life lacked Protestant substance in two principal aspects: the content of his preaching and the nature of his religious experience. The former deficiency, he states, "was overcome on March 6th (1738) when [Wesley] first preached salvation by faith."8 The latter was "overcome on May 24th, when he first let Luther's belief lay hold of him."9

For Cell, therefore, like Curnock before him, a judicious analysis of Alders-gate requires attention to the religious principles involved in Wesley's understanding fully, accepting finally, and laying to heart the old reformation doctrine of justification by faith.10 Aldersgate, then, was the conclusion of a transition from cognition to fruition, from intellectual assent to radical trust, from fides to fiducia (to use a phrase from Luther).

The bicentennial of Wesley's Aldersgate experience produced a spate of articles, a couple of books, and much reflection. That year, 1938, therefore, may present useful evidence for gauging that generation's assessment of the relative value of Aldersgate. In the British journal, Proceedings of the Wesley Historical Society, for instance, the March 1939 edition contains a number of interesting entries. Not only is 24 May 1738 deemed John Wesley's conversion but the date is regarded as "the most important spiritual crisis of the (eighteenth) century?'11 Closer to home, The Christian Advocate of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, maintained in 1938 that "the Alders' gate experience can hardly be overestimated;'12 and employed such phrases as "outstanding event," "transforming experience" and "new creature" to display the inherent quality and texture of this experience.13 Moreover, when the Advocate searched for analogies appropriate in this area, it found the conversions of Paul, Augustine, Luther, and Moody close at hand.14

Perhaps the most important work published on the occasion of the Alders' gate bicentennial was The Conversion of the Wesleys by J. Ernest Rattenbury. In this book, the British scholar/pastor responds to the thesis put forth by Piette the year before that Wesley was converted at the age of twenty-two. Such a view is warranted, Rattenbury reasons, only if conversion be defined in the "Catholic" sense as the turning of a worldly person to God.15 However, if conversion is understood in an evangelical way, as the experience of pardon and new birth-what Philip Schaff has referred to as the Protestant principle16-then the Belgian priest's date simply will not hold.

Rattenbury's greatest contributions to the discussion, however, lie elsewhere. He notes, first of all, that John Wesley's spiritual experience in the spring of 1738 should not be viewed in isolation but should be interpreted, at least in part, in terms of the similar experience of his brother Charles just days before-hence the title of his book.17 When Charles' experience is also taken into account, the conversionist view is greatly strengthened. This is to say that if John and Charles' religious experiences were indeed parallel, as Rattenbury contends, and if Charles referred to his experience as a conversion?' then the same term may be suitably applied to John's experience as well.

Rattenbury furthers his argument by developing a distinction already encountered in Cell's work. But instead of employing negative language and speaking of Wesley's deficiency in preaching and in religious experience early on, Rattenbury prefers to speak more positively and refers to these two elements in terms of Wesley's intellectual and evangelical conversions, respectively. The intellectual conversion occurs in the period from March 5th through April 23, when Wesley held several extensive conversations with the Moravian Peter Bohler concerning the nature of faith. And the evangelical conversion occurs on May 24, 1738, the time when, to use Rattenbury's phrase, "a devout Pharisee became an Evangelical Christian"18 and when "the dogma of justification by faith had become his experience?"19

By the middle of the twentieth century, the interpretation of Aldersgate as John Wesley's conversion was already well established as a modern perspective. Indeed, it was undeniably the most popular view of this era and its dominance in the journals, magazines, and conferences of both British and American Methodism was nothing short of remarkable. Nevertheless, the twentieth century's conversionist position was not just a simple appropriation of what an earlier age had thought, for there was a genuine and earnest reworking of the primary materials that often gave rise to fresh insights. Martin Schmidt, for example, though he too enunciates the by-now-familiar themes of justification by faith, law and grace, and the critical character of the May 24th account in the Journal, makes his greatest contribution to the debate, perhaps, in fixing Wesley's spiritual crisis against the backdrop of his early life as reflected in the Journal. In other words, Schmidt moves beyond a commentary on May 24th and attempts to show the psychological, moral, and spiritual relationship between Aldersgate and the life which preceded it.

Just what does Schmidt discover? He finds reflected in the early pages of the Journal a life often colored by fear, anxiety, and depression, a life which eventually leads to a breakdown of sorts, spiritual if not psychological. And it is precisely Wesley's prior turbulent spiritual state which gives credence to the idea of conversion in Aldersgate Street in that it not only sets the stage for the conversion's occurrence but also renders it intelligible. In other words, Wesley's spiritual high was preceded by a corresponding spiritual low; integration was the result of a prior disintegration, resolution the outcome of prior malaise. Schmidt observes: "Thus it was only after the complete breakdown of his situation that John Wesley came to see the doctrine of justification as the central feature in primitive Christianity."20

Writing two years after Schmidt, V. H. H. Green, the author of the work John Wesley, strikes a similar chord. Wesley's spiritual breakdown, he argues, liberated pent-up emotions and prepared the way for a re-integration of personality; "the crisis was resolved," to use his own words, "by a harmony, an assurance of faith that provided an answer to the immediate problems, and a foundation for the future"21 Green also expounds this same theme, interestingly enough, in terms of Wesley's early spiritual narcissism as evidenced by his excessive concern over his own salvation. But many modern scholars reject this thesis and date Wesley's release from such self-absorption from the time that he began his life-long practice of field preaching. Cautiously, Green concurs with this opinion so long as Wesley's itinerant activity is seen as a significant outgrowth of the Aldersgate experience, not as anything apart from it.22 That is to say, Wesley was not transformed as a result of his works, but prior to exercising them. His field preaching, then, was not the cause of his spiritual enlightenment so much as its flowering. "Slowly, with maturing age and growing absorption in the tremendous work he was undertaking," Green writes, "[Wesley] began to relinquish the problem of his own personal salvation and only then did the experience of 22 May fully fructify."23 The point is that Wesley was a changed man before he hit the fields.

Frank Baker in his piece "the Challenge of Aldersgate," which was produced for the 225th anniversary of this event, in 1963, champions the idea that John Wesley described his experience in May of 1738 as a conversion, as did his brother Charles.24 But Baker, realizing that the meaning of this word is often debated, draws some of the same distinctions already encountered. He, therefore, readily concedes that John was converted in the moral sense of the word years before, in 1725. But not content with this, he goes on to cite approvingly Schmidt's position that conversion is to be understood "in Lutheran terms of justification by faith."25 Baker writes: "The letters, the sermons, the hymns, in which the two Wesley brothers reveal directly or indirectly their own views of what happened at Aldersgate, suggest that they thought of it as basically an experience of justifying faith."26 And he adds: "Whatever their psychological or theological views, all students of the influence of Aldersgate on Wesley agree that something happened to release new spiritual vigor."27 Nevertheless, in a piece written three years later, Baker modifies his position somewhat and concludes that although Aldersgate was "not conversion in the conventional sense... it was undoubtedly an epochal event."28

In light of the preceding, it is evident that Curnock, Cell, Rattenbury, Schmidt, Green, and Baker, among others, though each has a particular emphasis, are united in understanding the meaning of Aldersgate against the backdrop of such theological themes as justification by faith, regeneration, and assurance themes which for many scholars constitute the very heart of what is meant by conversion. However, this traditional interpretation which is both well supported and established is now being challenged in a most thoroughgoing way. Three scholars in particular, Umphrey Lee, Albert Outler, and Theodore Jennings, when they explore this same historical record, find little evidence of Aldersgate as the moment of Wesley's evangelical conversion. Indeed, Jennings discovers not health but a disease, a disease whose name is "Aldersgateism" which, of course, has not infected John Wesley himself but his heirs.

II. The Aldersgate Experience Is Not Wesley's Conversion

A position which is becoming increasingly popular in Wesley studies today-no doubt due in large measure to Albert Outler's approval is that the Aldersgate experience does not constitute the conversion of John Wesley. It would appear that Outler's view has in fact won the day in the United Methodist press. In the May 1988 issue of Circuit Rider, for example, many of Outler's conclusions are cited as if they were well established facts. That is to say they are cited without the proper documentation. Among these is Outler's opinion that Wesley "almost never referred to Aldersgate again in his writings."29 However, Outler himself would agree, I am sure, that the primary sources must be scrupulously examined and that any position taken must be adequately substantiated not by mere authority but on the basis of evidence and reason.

At this point, one would observe that non-conversionist views share some remarkable similarities. Therefore, the following discussion may be facilitated by organizing them under four separate headings. These headings state the principle theses brought in contradiction to the conversionist position. For the sake of clarity, criticism will be offered in each major section rather than in a general concluding critique.

A. Aldersgate Almost Never Referred to Again

We have already noted that Albert Outler (joined by Theodore Jennings) attempts to play down the importance of 24 May 1738 by arguing that there is a "paucity of Wesley's own references to Aldersgate,"30 and by maintaining that this experience was simply "one in a series of the turning points in [Wesley's] passage from don to missionary to evangelist"31 However, George Cell, referred to earlier, has discerned a chronology, a way of reckoning time, in Wesley's writings that makes Aldersgate its center. He writes:

In addition to the human way of timing events Anno Domini-there are scattered throughout the twenty-five volumes of his writings references, not a few cases, but numbered by the score to his conversion experience, anno meae conversionis.32

In fact, in Wesley's sermons, theological treatises, and letters there are some specific references to 24 May 1738, as well as some general references to the year 1738, that cannot be denied as references to conversion, although they have often been misunderstood. The following pieces of evidence, numerous though by no means exhaustive, appear to support Cell's claim.

1. Four days after his Aldersgate experience, Wesley told some friends at the house of Mr. Hutton that "five days before, he was not a Christian."33

2. On October 30, 1738, John wrote to his older brother Samuel: "By a Christian I mean one who so believes in Christ as that sin hath no more dominion over him. And in this obvious sense of the word I was not a Christian till May 24th last past."34

3, Wesley's comment in his Journal on January 4, 1739, which is often used to diminish the significance of May 24th actually supports it by referring specifically to that day He writes: "My friends affirm I am mad, because I said I was not a Christian a year ago.... Indeed, what I might have been I know not, had I been faithful to the grace then given..."35

4. In a letter to "John Smith" on December 30, 1745, Wesley said: "For it is true that from May 24, 1738, 'wherever I was desired to preach, salvation by faith was my only theme: ... And it is equally true that 'It was for preaching the love of God and man that several of the clergy forbade me their pulpits before that time, before May 24, before I either preached or knew salvation by faith."36

5. On June 22, 1740, Wesley wrote in one of his letters, "After we had wandered many years in the new path of salvation by faith and works, about two years ago it pleased God to show us the old way of salvation by faith only."37

6. In a lengthy letter to Thomas Church on February 2, 1745, Wesley repeated his claim put forth on June 22, 1740, just cited and added, "Let us go no farther, as to time, than seven years (1738) last past."38

7. Again in a letter to Thomas Church on June 17, 1746, Wesley traced the course of his ministry along the following lines: "From the year 1725 I preached much, but saw no fruit of my labor. ... From the year 1729 to 1734.,. I saw a little fruit, . -- . From 1734 to 1738 I saw more fruit of my preaching....From 1738 to this time., the word of God ran as fire among the stubble."39

8. In the year 1765, Wesley wrote to John Newton, "I think on Justification just as I have done any time these seven-and-twenty years, and just as Mr. Calvin does."40

9. And in that same year he wrote to Dr. Erskine, "In. .. justification by faith I have not wavered a moment for these seven and twenty years."41

10. In November 1765, in his sermon, "The Lord Our Righteousness, "Wesley stated concerning justification by faith, "this is the doctrine which I have constantly believed and taught for near eight and twenty years. This I published to all the world in the year 1738... .'"42

11. In 1772, Wesley observed: "With regard to [the doctrine] that we are justified merely for the sake of what Christ has done and suffered, I have constantly and earnestly maintained [that] above four and thirty years."43

12. Wesley affirmed in 1778: "I am not sensible that this has made any essential addition to my knowledge in divinity. Forty years ago I knew and preached every Christian doctrine (including justification by faith) which I preach now."44 Once again, the reference is to 1738.45

Albert Outler concedes the pivotal nature of the year 1738, on the basis of such documentation as we have just presented, but he interprets the evidence as evidence of a process of change from a faith in faith to faith itself, from aspiration to assurance;'46 and he argues that "the Aldersgate story as such drops abruptly out of sight after its publication in the second extract of the Rev. Mr. John Wesley's Journal (1740)'"47

However, Outler's last statement is incorrect. As we have seen, Wesley's correspondence with "John Smith" on 30 December 1745, specifically refers to the May 24th event.

Theodore Jennings, who accepts Outler's verdict concerning the data, contends that Aldersgate was a non,event.48 Of him it may be asked: would Wesley have remembered a humdrum day seven years after its occurrence? The implication is clear.

Wesley expressly refers to the Aldersgate experience on at least four occasions in the years from 1738 to 1745 (first four items above). After this time, his references are a bit less explicit, but he repeatedly refers to the year 1738. And given his own earlier highlighting of 24 May as the day above all others in 1738, we may, in contrast to Outler's view, then, argue, even given the general nature of these later references, that Wesley had 24 May 1738 in mind as he wrote this material.

B. Wesley's "Disclaimers" in His Revised Journal

Others have sought to reduce the value of Aldersgate as Wesley's moment of conversion by contending that Wesley's alterations in the edition of the Journal printed in the 1771 edition of his works reveal that he changed his mind about this experience. They bring forward such references as: "I had even then the faith of a servant,"49 "I'm not sure of this;'50 "I believe not,"51 and "I then lacked... the full Christian salvation:'52 Umphrey Lee, for example, writing in 1936, uses such references to reason that the proper approach to an evaluation of 1738 is to study "Wesley's subsequent religious life and his own more mature conclusions concerning his 'conversion.'53 When this is done, Lee argues, Aldersgate appears as a stage in Wesley's religious experience, "but it was neither the beginning of his Christian life nor the end of it?'54

In a more eristic tone, Theodore Jennings states that "the plausibility of the conversionist reading of Aldersgate depends on the assumption that before May 24th Wesley did not have faith."55 Therefore, after referring to the four editorial comments noted above, which do show that Wesley, in fact, had faith quite early on, Jennings concludes: "It is clear that the conversionist reading of Wesley's early Journal requires a systematic suppression of Wesley's fifty years of insight into the nature of faith, grace and the Christian life"56

In fact, Jennings' argument is flawed since its premise is obviously false. Wesley's later notes are damaging to conversionist views only if one makes the untenable claim that this Oxford don had no measure of faith in his early years. But who asserts this? . . . The celebration of Aldersgate as a crucial event in Wesley's life does not need and is not dependent upon such an assertion. Jennings has tied the plausibility of the conversion model to an overdrawn contrast-a contrast that few scholars, moderate or otherwise, would care to make.

Moreover, both Jennings57 and Lee58 assume that by the phrase "faith of a servant" Wesley meant Christian faith. However, when Wesley's own use of the phrase in his writings is consulted, in particular the usage’s found in his sermon "The Spirit of Bondage and of Adoption" and those found in his commentary on Romans 7, it becomes immediately evident that the "faith of a servant" is not the faith of a Christian. It is, however, a measure of faith, to be sure, and this is precisely Wesley's point in his editorial changes: it is a "legal" faith. Ironically, in the very passage which Jennings quotes on this score, Wesley states: "Hitherto you are only a servant, you are not a child of God."59 What all this means, then, is that the father of Methodism did not utterly reject his earlier interpretation, but instead modified it through subtle nuances. Jennings, among others, has failed to appreciate these.

C. Wesley's Emotional and Spiritual State After Aldersgate

Even the most cursory reading of Wesley's Journal reveals that spiritual depression and temptation were continuing problems for the Methodist leader beyond the year 1738. In the hands of both Outler and Jennings, however, these factors are employed to controvert the conversion hypothesis. Outler, for example, notes that Wesley was still troubled by "those symptoms of spiritual unsettlement which real faith was supposed to remove."60 And Jennings, for his part, opines that the conversionist view would be obliged to show that Wesley's mood swings, especially those involving doubt and fear, ended on May 24th"61-clearly an impossible task.

But just how are Wesley's post-Aldersgate malaises to be understood? One must first of all understand the nature of this spiritual distress and the reason for its existence. Then, and only then, can some judgment be made with respect to its relationship to the May 24^th event. The mere citation of Wesley's more somber moods and his subsequent spiritual struggles, as, for example, that of January 1739, in itself proves nothing, for it must then be shown in what way and to what extent these experiences are inconsistent with Wesley's having been converted at Aldersgate-something which neither Outler nor Jennings do.

Clearly, other assessments of this evidence can and should be offered. Could it be, for example, that Wesley's own spiritual turmoil after Aldersgate was precipitated, for the most part, by his painful realization that justifying faith neither destroys the whole body of sin (which must await the further work of entire sanctification) nor does it remove all manner of fear and the heaviness that results from manifold temptations? Again, could it be that Wesley's experience was similar to that of Christian David which Wesley saw fit to record in his Journal on 10 August 1738, in the following words:

I saw not then that the first promise to the children of God is, "sin shall no more reign over you"; but thought I was to feel it in me no more from the time it was forgiven. Therefore, although I had the mastery over it, yet I often feared it was not forgiven, because it still stirred in me, and at some times thrust sore at me that I might fall: because, though it did not reign, it did remain in me; and I was continually tempted, though not overcome.62

Outler, at least, remains unpersuaded by such possibilities. "Real faith," says Outler, should remove the possibility of subsequent spiritual depression, but, he contends, there were several instances after 24 May 1738, when Wesley even denied that he was or ever had been a Christian.63 Thus, in his book John Wesley, Outler refers the reader to a very dark though remarkably honest letter from John to his brother Charles in June 1766, part of which reads as follows:

In one of my last I was saying I do not feel the wrath of God abiding on me; nor can I believe it does. And yet (this is the mystery) [I do not love God. I never did.] Therefore [I never] believed in the Christian sense of the word. Therefore [I am only an] honest heathen, a proselyte of the Temple, one of the God-fearers.64

But how is such an obscure and unrepresentative passage to be interpreted? If one employs it as Cutler does-in order to "debunk" Aldersgate as the moment of Wesley's conversion-then a question immediately emerges: why stop there? At face value, the letter reveals that Wesley never was a Christian in 1738 or in 1725 or at any other time prior to 1766 for that matter. Surely Cutler, and those who follow in his train, such as Jennings, really would not wish to claim this. Indeed, the inordinate difficulty of such an interpretation should indicate all the more clearly that the language of this letter is a fine instance of Wesley's tendency, on occasion, towards hyperbole pure and simple.

Now it is one thing to argue and to note correctly that there were times, after Aldersgate, when Wesley was dissatisfied with his spiritual walk, and quite another thing to maintain, as Cutler and Jennings do, that this detracts from the crucial character of Aldersgate. Wesley does not claim that the new birth cannot be followed by a measure of doubt, fear, or even depression. The before, the implication that Wesley by reason of the candor displayed in his journal was not regenerate cannot stand. By extension, Cutler's logic makes it doubtful whether anyone at all could be deemed born of God…since any subsequent negative evidence could be used to sustain the contrary.

D. Aldersgate: Simply the Time of Wesley's Assurance.

Referring to Peter Bobler's advice to Wesley on 4 March 1738 that he should "Preach faith till you have it; and then, because you have it, you will preach faith,"65 Cutler writes: "that is, preach the doctrine of justification by faith (which Wesley had always believed) until he had the personal assurance of it."66 Clearly, Cutler prefers to view the Aldersgate experience, which followed the conversation with Bobler, not as Wesley's conversion to vital Christianity but as the time when he moved from "faith in faith to faith itself, from aspiration to assurance. '67 In a similar vein, Jennings modifies his exaggerated language slightly and now Aldersgate appears not as a 'non-event"68 but as "one of many moments of reassurance."69 But a question immediately arises: Is an appeal to the doctrine of assurance sufficient to explain all that occurred on May 24th? Observe the many elements in Wesley's own account of Aldersgate:

In the evening I went very unwillingly to a society in Aldersgate Street, where one was reading Luther's preface to the Epistle to the Romans. About a quarter before nine, while he was describing the change which God works in the heart through faith in Christ, I felt my heart strangely warmed. I felt I did trust in Christ, Christ alone for salvation; and an assurance was given me that He had taken away my sins, even mine, and saved me from the law of sin and death.70

Notice that Wesley connects a number of items in the selection above with the conjunction "and": trust in Christ alone, and assurance, and freedom from the law of sin and death. If there ever were a good example of Wesley's conjunctive theology, to which Cutler is so fond of pointing,71 this is it. Therefore, it is certainly not denied that assurance is an integral part of a total picture. What is denied, however, is that assurance is the whole of Aldersgate. The reference to freedom from the law of sin and death-and trust in Christ alone for that matter must neither be minimized nor repudiated in any assessment of this experience. And it is Wesley, himself, who first of all focused on this last aspect of power over sin, and not the Methodist hagiographers.

III. Conclusion

Not surprisingly, like Piette before them, both Outler72 and Jennings73 consider the year 1725 as the year of Wesley's conversion. But here we must ask what constitutes conversion, and that not on our own terms, but on Wesley's. If conversion means a call to the ministry, sincerity in spiritual life, and an earnestness displayed in missionary service, then Wesley, of course, was converted prior to May 1738. If, however, the term is understood in an existential and evangelical way, as the time when one experiences both forgiveness and freedom from the guilt and power of sin, and the assurance which results from this, then by no stretch of the imagination was Wesley converted prior to Aldersgate. Moreover, that the latter definition is more appropriate to Wesley's own consideration of the matter is substantiated by the theology displayed in his Standard Sermons, especially in the pieces on the prerogatives of the children of God ("The Marks of the New Birth," "The Great Privilege of Those that Are Born of God" and "On the Spirit of Bondage and of Adoption") which in many places actually reflect the general sense of the Aldersgate account.

Why, then, are Cutler and Jennings, among others, still not convinced? Perhaps because they, and other scholars like them, are deeply impressed by the zeal of the early Wesley in his many activities on behalf of the Church. But do works, earnestness, sincerity, and zeal constitute conversion? Do they make a Christian? Wesley thought not, and this is the key to his spiritual autobiography.

Perhaps Cutler and Jennings have not fully considered the idea implicit in sola fide that so much which matters can happen in a relatively short period of time. It is truly remarkable that their position defines conversion without respect to the exercise of justifying faith. But if salvation, hence being a real Christian, is by faith, then why not a conversion that occurs rather quickly? Is the theology of these scholars predisposed to misprize brief, powerful, and significant crisis experiences? At times, their argumentation, their attempt to re-interpret Aldersgate and its significance, reminds one of Mrs. Hutton's protestation in the face of Wesley's own claim on 28 May 1738, that five days earlier he was not a Christian: 'If you was not a Christian ever since I knew you," she spoke, "you was a great hypocrite, for you made us all believe you was one."74

The view of Cutler and Jennings is not a new one, but an old one; not an original position but a borrowed one. Just as Piette's scholarship, published a generation ago, failed to overturn the conversion hypothesis in the twentieth century-as evidenced by the continuing success of the interpretations of Curnock, Cell, Rattenbury, Schmidt, et al., so too will these views fail. They will neither be able to bear the test of time nor will they satisfy the demands of a spiritually hungry people. As Elmer T. Clark quipped in 1938: "If there had been no Aldersgate, we should be under the necessity of inventing one."75

Therefore, despite the new wave in Wesley studies, the importance of the Aldersgate account as a hermeneutical device through which one can gain insight into Wesley's spiritual dynamic cannot be denied. The dramatic structure of this account, the allusions to other significant conversion experiences within it (Paul, Augustine, Luther), the spiritual autobiography which precedes it, the indication of spiritual power and victory which conclude the record, and Wesley's numerous references to this event well after it occurred all illustrate that this was an extraordinary occurrence. Moreover, the very fact that scholars today are still discussing its value only serves to underscore its perennial significance.

Notes

1Theodore W Jennings Jr., "The Myth of Aldersgate: The Subversion of Wesleyan Theology;" paper presented at the American Academy of Religion, Boston, Massachusetts, 5 December 1987, p.25.

2lbid., p.3.

31n the year 1765, Wesley wrote to John Newton, "I think on Justification just as I have done any time these seven-and-twenty years, and just as Mr. Calvin does." Cf. John Telford, ed., The Letters of John Wesley, A.M. 8 vols. (London: The Epworth Press, 1931), 4:298.

4Nehemiah Curnock, The Journal of the Rev. John Wesley, A.M., 8 vols. (London: The Epworth Press, 1938), 1:12.

5lbid., p.34.

6lbid., p.47. Bracketed material mine.

7lbid., p.33.

8George Croft Cell, The Rediscovery of John Wesley (New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1934), p.73. Bracketed material mine.

9lbid.

10Ibid., p.182.

11R. Kissack, "Wesley's Conversion: Text, Psalm, and Homily;' Proceedings of the Wesley Historical Society 22 (March 1939): 1.

12H. A. Boaz, "What Came Out of Aldersgate," Christian Advocate 99 (April 8, 1938): 6.

13William P. King, "A New Creation in Christ," Christian Advocate 99 (April 8,1938): 1.

14lbid., p.5.

15J. Ernest Rattenbury, The Conversion of the Wesleys (London: The Epworth Press, 1938), p.42.

16Rabert E. Webber and Donald Bloesch eds., The Orthodox Evangelicals: Who they are and what they are saying (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Inc., Publishers, 1986), p.46.

17Rattenbury, Conversion, p.25. The conversion of Charles Wesley, by his own admission, took place on May 1738. For a detailed account of this spiritual transformation see: Thomas Jackson, ed., The Journal of the Rev Charles Wesley, M.A. (2 vols.; Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1980), 1:9Off. Moreover, for another treatment of John's experience in light of that of his brother Charles', cf. A. Skevington Wood, The Inextinguishable Blaze (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1968), p. 90ff.

18Ibid., p.35.

19lbid., p.82. Emphasis mine.

20Martin Schmidt, John Wesley: A Theological Biography (2 vols.; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1962), 1:223.

21V. H. H. Green, John Wesley (London: Thomas Nelson Ltd., 1964), pp. 60-61. 22Ibid., p.63. Rupert Davies also develops the idea of Wesley's spiritual narcissim as a key to the Aldersgate experience. Cf. Rupert Davies, Methodism (London: The Epworth Press, 1963), p.52.

23Ibid., emphasis and bracketed material mine.

24Frank Baker, "Aldersgate 1738-1963: The Challenge of Aldersgate," Duke Divinity Bulletin 28 (Spring 1963): 73. 25Ibid.

25Ibid.

26Ibid., p.75

27Ibid., p.76.

28Frank Baker, "Aldersgate and Wesley's Editors," The London Quarterly and Holborn Review 191 (1966): 310.

29Scott R. Somers, "What Happened at Aldersgate: Then and Now?" Ciruit Rider Vol.12 No. 4, (May 1988): 9.

30Albert C. Cutler, "Towards a Re-Appraisal of John Wesley as a Thelogian," The Perkins School of Theology Journal 14 (Winter 1961) p.8. 31Albert C. Cutler, ed., John Wesley (New York: Oxford University Press, 1964), p.52.

32Cell, The Rediscovery of John Wesley, p.185.

33Curnock, Journal, 1:480.

34Frank Baker, ed., The Works of John Wesley (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1980), 25:575.

35Curnock, Journal, 2:125.

36Baker, op. cit, 26:183.

37Curnock, Journal, 2:354.

38Telford, Letters, 2:175ff.

39Ibid., p.264.

40Telford, Letters, 4:298.

41Ibid., 4:295. 42Albert C. Cutler, ed., The Works of John Wesley (34 vols.; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1984), 1:456.

43Thomas Jackson, ed., The Works of John Wesley (14 vols.; Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1978). 10:388.

44Curnock, Journal, 6:209. 45For further evidence of this "chronology" see Telford, Letters, 5:90, 258- 59; 6:331, and Jackson, Works, 7:317, 10:403.

46Outler, John Wesley, p, 14.

47Ibid.

48Jennings, "Myth," p.25.

49Curnock, Journal, 1:423.

50Ibid., p.422.

51Ibid., p.423.

52Ibid., p.442.

53Umphrey Lee, John Wesley and Modern Religion (Nashville: Cokesbury Press, 1936), p.90. Lee is included in this context even though he does refer to Wesley's Aldersgate experience as a "mystical" conversion (p.104). The reason for this is that Lee so empties the term of meaning that it is in reality a non-conversionist view.

54Ibid., pp.102-3.

55jennings, "Myth," p.25.

56Ibid., p.27.

57lbid. 58Ibid. 59Ibid. 60Albert C. Cutler, "Towards a Re-Appraisal of John Wesley as a Theologian;' The Perkins School of Theology Journal 14 (Winter 1961): 8.

61jennings, "Myth;' p.30.

62Curnock, Journal, 2:30. See also Wesley's comment in the Journal where he states that the faith he wants is that which "whosoever hath it, is freed from sin, the whole body of sin is destroyed in him..:' (1:424). Emphasis mine.

63Outler, Wesley, p.51.

64Telford, Letters, 5:16. The bracketed material was written in shorthand which meant that it was for Charles' eyes only.

65Outler, Wesley's Works, 1:442.

66Out1er, "Re-Appraisal," pp.8-9.

67Outler, John Wesley, p.14.

68jennings, "Myth," p.25.

69Ibid., p.36.

70Curnock, Journal, 1:475-76.

71Outler, "Beyond Pietism: Aldersgate in Context;' Motive 23, No 8 (May, 1963), p.13.

72Albert C. Cutler, "John Wesley as a Theologian-Then and Now;' A. M. E. Zion Quarterly Review Methodist History News Bulletin (July 1974):

71-2.

73jennings, "Myth;' p.36.

74Curnock, Journal, 1:479-80.

75Ehner T. Clark, Ed., What Happened at Alders gate (Nashville: The Methodist Publishing House, 1938), p.40.

Edited by 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.