Spirit and Truth
A Study of Susanna Wesley, John Wesley, and John Fletcher as
Participants in the Stream of the Spirit’s Work
Patrick Oden June 11, 2010 CH872: Readings in Church History Dr. James Bradley
In the days when I still hated Christianity, I learned to recognize, like some all too familiar smell, that almost unvarying something which met me, now in Puritan Bunyan, now in Anglican Hooker, now in Thomist Dante. It was there (honeyed and florid) in François de Sales; it was there (grave and homely) in Spenser and Walton; it was there (grim but manful) in Pascal and Johnson; there again, with a mild frightening, Paradisial flavor, in Vaughan and Boehme and Traherne. In the urban sobriety of the eighteenth century one was not safe—Law and Butler were two lions in the path. The supposed ‘Paganism’ of the Elizabethans could not keep it out; it lay in wait where a man might have supposed himself safest, in the very centre of The Faerie Queene and the Arcadia. It was, of course, varied; and yet—after all—so unmistakably the same; recognizable, not to be evaded, the odour which is death to us until we allow it to become life: an air that kills From yon far country blows. (C.S. Lewis, On the Reading of Old Books) Contents
Introduction ...... 2
The Stream of the Spirit in History ...... 6
Luther, Protestants, and Protestants Protested ...... 9
Susanna Wesley ...... 13
Letters ...... 17
John Wesley ...... 24
Uses of Christian Antiquity ...... 26
A Christian Library ...... 29
Macarius ...... 32
Puritanism ...... 36
The Society of Friends ...... 39
The Altogether Christian ...... 44
John Fletcher among Wesley’s Successors ...... 47
Conclusion ...... 56
Bibliography ...... 61
1
Introduction
“Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth." (John 4:23-24)
In late Spring of 1725, Susanna Wesley wrote a letter to her second oldest son, whom she called Jacky. After noting some particular frustrations experienced by his brother Charles on a recent journey, frustrations that involved his sister Hester, Susanna turns to more theological musings. John, it seems, included some quotes from Thomas à Kempis in a previous letter, and
Susanna shared her opinion that à Kempis was “extremely wrong” to suggest that God “by an irreversible decree hath determined any man to be miserable in this world.”1 She goes on to write,
“Our blessed Lord, who came from heaven to save us from our sins… did not intend by commanding us to ‘take up the cross’ that we should bid adieu to all joy and satisfaction
[indefinitely], but he opens and extends our views beyond time to eternity. He directs us to place our joy that it may be durable as our being; not in gratifying but in retrenching our sensual appetites; not in obeying but correcting our irregular passions, bringing every appetite of the body and power of the soul under subjection to his laws, [if we would follow him to heaven].”2 We are to take up our cross, she writes to John, as a contrast to “our corrupt animality” in order to fight under “his banner against the flesh.” This fight is not an empty one, because “when by the divine grace we are so far conquerors as that we never willingly offend, but still press after greater degrees of Christian perfection… we shall then experience the truth of Solomon’s assertion, ‘The ways of virtue are ways of pleasantness, and all her paths are peace.’”3
After her brief theological insights, Susanna returns to the topic of à Kempis noting that she
1Charles Wallace, Jr., ed. Susanna Wesley: The Complete Writings (New York: Oxford University Press,1997), 107. 2 Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 108. 3 Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 108. 2 takes “Kempis to have been an honest, weak man, that had more zeal than knowledge, by his condemning all mirth or pleasure as sinful.” Misery is seen as misery to Susanna, who acknowledges how it can be used by God, but is not itself the place God leads us. “We may and ought to rejoice that God has assured us he will never leave or forsake us; but if we continue faithful to him, he will take care to conduct us safely through all the changes and chances of this mortal life to those blessed regions of joy and immortality where sorrow and sin can never enter!” John received this letter when he was nearing his twenty-first birthday, a student at Oxford, and not too long before he was ordained as a deacon in the Church of England.
I open with these extended quotes because it might be easy to gloss over the sometimes radical influence a parent has on a child, especially when this child grows up to be a great historical figure. We read the writings of such a figure, see their significant contributions, and in the case of religious leaders, we analyze their writings so as to formulate a systematic picture of their overall theology. Yet doing this often results in an ahistorical study that pulls the figure out of their context and, in doing this, robs their contributions of vitally important tools of interpretation. For people live and respond to specific contexts, not a generalized reality, and it is only in seeing a figure, a movement, or a mission within specific contexts that we can hope to develop a more accurate, and thus more helpful, understanding of the person and their contributions. It is with this in mind that I now consider John Wesley, seeing him not as a figure who suddenly erupted into this world great and wholly unique. Rather, he was a man whose extremely significant influence was partly a testimony of his own great passion and work ethic, but also very much in keeping with the tradition in which he was born, and in which he was raised.
In an attempt to better understand his core interests and priorities, then, my plan is to begin a
3 study of Wesley’s influences and influence, hoping to, in effect, triangulate an understanding of
John Wesley by looking more closely at those who participated in key ways in his development and ministry. As such, I will start off not with Wesley’s own era but with a brief survey of the
Protestant impulse, as seen in Luther and then in later nonconformists leading up to the early eighteenth century. At this point we will turn more closely to Wesley’s own Puritan roots. Though he has Puritans on both sides of his family, I will choose to focus on his mother Susanna, as she likely was the more directly influential to John, as they shared a similar personality and approach to spirituality. Indeed, the passage I quoted above shows distinct similarity to John’s continued spiritual and theological interests, suggesting his approaches to God were in keeping with his earliest, and maybe most important, guides. Next, I will turn to look briefly at John Wesley himself, attempting to assess his contributions as wrestling with, developing, and clarifying the seeds that Susanna planted. I will argue that Wesley was, in effect, in line with his Puritan roots, though in a way that differs from the trajectory that Puritanism, in later Dissent, emphasized.
Following looking at Susanna and then John Wesley himself, I will very briefly consider John
Fletcher, a key figure who was influenced by John Wesley, and who, it seems, helped sharpen
Wesley’s own considerations. Fletcher died before John Wesley did, so cannot be entirely considered a successor; however, he was an immensely influential follower whose highly developed insights and writing skill help to even better determine John Wesley’s own priorities. How much so is a question still hotly debated.
Because of the immensity of such a study, I do not, by any means, hope to write a substantive, let alone comprehensive, study on any of these three figures. Rather, I have two goals in mind in this present work, a primary goal and a secondary goal. As my secondary goal, I would like to provide a beginning orientation to these figures, establishing a foundation for continued
4 study. Both Susanna Wesley and John Fletcher have received rather scant attention, though there are recent scholarly contributions which help to facilitate further study. Each deserve significantly more attention and more space to better engage their own particular thoughts and contributions, which I am inspired to pursue in future efforts.
My primary goal is to explore Wesley as part of a continual stream throughout history in which a person or a group of people seek to reform the church of their era, pointing towards a renewal and even an expansion of what it means to be the people of God. Although in this present work I will focus on Wesley, I begin with the idea that contemporary religious movements, such as we see in what is now called the emerging church, are not spiritual anomalies, but rather are in keeping with other historical movements in the church. Rather than being strange or outside the bounds of Christian expression, the core values of these contemporary movements are, in fact, part of God’s work in the life of the church, which we can see throughout history in calling and leading the people of God towards reformation and renewal, inspiring them towards renewed expressions of worship, mission, and participation.
However, this assertion cannot begin with descriptions of emerging movements followed by looking back into history for correlating sound bites which give seemingly supportive historical flavor to our present day trends. Rather, for this to be a substantive assertion, historical examples must be studied on their own terms. Similarities can then point to what may indeed be a continuing stream of God’s work, and differences can be sources of constructive criticism in which both contemporary and historical movements can inform the other. It is my argument that current expressions of emerging church movements are not in themselves something new, but are in fact contemporary expressions of a constant trend within the church which help point the church towards a fuller, more holistic, understanding of God’s work in this world. This trend can be seen
5 quite strongly, maybe especially strongly, in the contributions of John Wesley, but as a stream of
God’s Spirit, it did not begin with Wesley’s work and did not end with it, but rather flowed into and out of his significant participation.
The Stream of the Spirit in History
Before I enter into the main content of this present work, then, it would seem important to, at least briefly, note what I mean when I discuss the work of the Holy Spirit in history. The idea of a stream of the Holy Spirit’s work in the life of the church is not necessarily one that can be proven conclusively either in form or content according to traditional historical methods. This is especially the case when we move beyond a general concept, such as the fact that the Spirit works, and attempt to more closely specify what this work is—because in doing this we must also directly or indirectly suggest where the Spirit is not working, or where others spirits may be at work. As such I offer the phrase “stream of the Spirit” tentatively, and rather than declare my own favored traditions stamped with the seal of the Divine Spirit, thus wholly correct in contrast to any who differ or disagree, it is important to begin with some guidelines which would better describe this work of the Spirit. There are many different ways to establish the characteristics of the work of the Spirit, but rather than devote significant space to that task here I will offer a simplified sketch which I believe is supported by more complete studies.4
We read in Colossians 2:6-7: “As you therefore have received Christ Jesus the Lord, continue to live your lives in him, rooted and built up in him and established in the faith, just as you were taught, abounding in thanksgiving.”5 We live in, are rooted and built up in Christ through the
4 See, for example, Jürgen Moltmann, The Spirit of Life, trans. Margaret Kohl (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992), Michael Welker, God the Spirit (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994), Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen, Pneumatology : The Holy Spirit in Ecumenical, International, and Contextual Perspective (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2002), José Comblin, The Holy Spirit and Liberation (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 1989). 5 All Scripture quotations will be from the NRSV unless otherwise noted. 6 power of the Holy Spirit who always points us towards Christ above all, establishing our priorities in Christ’s life and mission, so that everything else is derived from this primary reality. Those who are aligned with the Spirit are conformed to the image of the Son, a reality that does not insist on constraint, but on freedom, nor on monotony but on variety of expressions within the gathered body of Christ.6 In the Spirit, then, there is unity in Christ, but diversity of service to Christ in this world, with God’s people resonating together in the fruits of the Spirit—“love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control.”7 It is the reality of the present state of humanity, however, that the fullness of God’s priorities are not always, or even often, the priorities of men and women, whether in broader society or in the church.
Indeed, we read exhortations to remember the work of Christ and embrace the work of the
Spirit in the letters to Colossae and Corinth, and the other cities, because the church always was, it seems, in danger of falling away from the call of God. The work of the Spirit, however, does not let this happen without resistance or resurrection. There are letters written, stands taken, and arguments offered which call the whole church back to a renewed orientation in Christ. This call to conform to the image of Christ is the constant work of the Spirit pointing towards more fully realized expressions and constantly reformed corrections so as to increasingly reflect the reality of
God’s kingdom in this world. This is, to be sure, a theological reality, but if we assert the reality of
God’s work in this world, this is not simply a theological assertion but one which has expressions throughout history.
The difficulty is that there is not yet a wholly pure expression of the fullness of God in any human expression. We are still, in our own lives and in the course of history, coming to terms with
6 Cf. Romans 8; 1 Corinthians 12. 7 Galatians 5:22ff. 7 the radical revelation of Christ and what this means for our communities and contexts. In light of this, any study which attempts to better understand a stream of God’s work cannot wholly separate movements into good and evil, right and wrong. One may be correct in some elements but erroneous in others. One may fight for a good cause for wrong reasons, and for a wrong cause for right reasons—a reality we constantly discover in any study of history. For instance, in the study of many nonconformist movements in church history, there is a conflict between the ideals of unity and the ideals of diversity, or works versus faith, or submission to human authorities in contrast to submission to Christ. Yet this does not mean that the Spirit is a spirit of chaos or confusion, nor that there is not a more fully realized expression of God’s work in a given era. Rather, this means we are ourselves incomplete in fully realizing God’s holistic revelation and call to humanity.
And so, any attempt to study what seems to be the stream of God’s work in this world that is sometimes reflected not in unity but sometimes in resistance and separation should be done in humility. But this humility should not entirely stifle further exploration and discovery of God’s holistic work, which does seem to be reflected in an increasing fulfillment of the ideals of love, freedom, peace, equality, and participation—ideals that are manifested in the work of Christ and given empowerment in our lives by the presence of the Spirit. Because the primary orientation is centered on Christ, there are sometimes overt and covert conflicts between the various other priorities, reflected in unfortunate divisiveness even as each side purports to be on the side of
Christ. How we determine what are the more fully realized expressions of God’s continuing revelation in his historical presence in this world is the task of both historical study and theological consideration of the work of the Spirit. So, following this all too brief excursus on the underlying theme of the work of the Spirit in this world, let us now turn to what I suggest are aspects of this stream seen in particular ways through particular people and movements, which may differ in some
8 theological expressions but seem to share the radical devotion to a constantly renewed embrace of
Christ in the church and in all our lives.
Luther, Protestants, and Protestants Protested
“Surely Gods people must be seperatists from the world, and from false Churches, to become a pure and holy people unto the Lord… Well then, let it be the first degree of Reformation to begin and call forth all those into several Congregations, who are fitted, and who desire to draw neere unto Christ in a holy Communion with him in the purity of his Ordinances. And thus let Gods word run, and have a free passage, in calling in such as God shall draw unto him, in what place soever they shall be found.” (Henry Burton, 1641)8
In the second half of the year 1520, Martin Luther was nearing the end of Papal patience.
But rather than submit to cautions or embrace the humble conciliation that can arise after vigorous debate and council, Luther pressed more deeply into what he saw as an inevitable cause. He became even less cautious in his declarations, ignited by both his increasingly freed observations and the increasingly severe opposition. Although he was finally threatened with excommunication, he was not cowed by this seemingly ultimate act of the papacy. Instead, he took refuge in the perceived truth that he was proclaiming and in the protection of those who resonated with the renewed zeal for the Christian life and community that he was exploring. Luther was not alone, it seems, in his critiques or his exhortations. His was the voice of many, giving shape to long held frustrations. He was also not entirely unique in his more strident opposition. Others had been vocal before—such as the Czech Jan Hus, who was burned at the stake in 1415.
The list of particular issues was long, but they boiled down to a few key points for the early reformers. The leadership in the Church was corrupt. The people of Christ were not being taught the fullness of the Gospel that leads to salvation. Because of these two elements, the pursuit of
Christ became, for Luther at least, a confusing and exasperating thing. He could not faithfully serve
8 Henry Burton, The Protestation Protested: or, a Short Remonstrance, shewing what is principally required of all those what have or do take the last Parliamentary Protestation, printed in the year 1641. 9 both Christ and the church which was, for his part of the world, the only church of Christ. Nor could he, as so many did, walk contentedly in the contradictions, able to wink at the depravity while dutiful in his own particular calling. There was, for Luther, an inexorable draw, compelling him to act in what initially seemed to go against not only his best interests but also his very life. “I have resisted,” he wrote to Rome in 1520, “and will continue to resist your see as long as the spirit of faith lives in me.”9
This resistance was not, after all, to secure his own authority or to make religious what might otherwise be political or social causes. “Rather ought Christ to be preached to the end that faith in him may be established that he may not only be Christ, but be Christ for you and me, and that what is said of him and is denoted in his name may be effectual in us.”10 The message of Christ is the message of the righteousness of Christ that swallows up all sin. “This is a splendid privilege and hard to attain,” Luther writes, “a truly omnipotent power, a spiritual dominion in which there is nothing so good and nothing so evil but that it shall work together for good to me, if only I believe.”11 He continues by noting that not only “are we the freest of kings, we are also priests forever… worthy to appear before God to pray for others and to teach one another divine things.”
Yet, this freedom does not denote a suddenly realized perfection of thought and action. For “as long as we live in the flesh we only begin to make some progress in that which shall be perfected in the future life.” We “attain in this life ‘the first fruits of the Spirit’ because we shall indeed receive the greater portion, even the fullness of the Spirit, in the future.”12 A Christian, then, is free, and as such “he does no works,” but as a servant “he does all kinds of works.” Salvation is not accomplished by performance or by works, but having found salvation in Christ, becoming then a
9 Martin Luther, "The Freedom of a Christian," in Three Treatises (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1970), 268. 10 Luther, “The Freedom,” 292ff. 11 Luther, “The Freedom,” 290. 12 Luther, “The Freedom,” 294. 10
servant to Christ in a new freedom of being, and as such one “has all that he needs, except insofar as this faith and these riches must grow from day to day even to the future life.”13 One must be
subjected “to the Spirit” so as to “not revolt against faith and hinder the inner man, as it is the nature
of the body to do if it is not held in check.”14 These works do not themselves “justify him before
God, but he does the works out of spontaneous love in obedience to God and considers nothing
except the approval of God, whom he would most scrupulously obey in all things.”15 One might
even say, more pithily, that “First, God works; therefore you can work. Secondly, God works,
therefore you must work.”16
There is, of course, quite a difference between a generalized ideal, such as the idea we are
called to continued service after our salvation, and what this means in particular situations, in
particular issues, in particular contexts. Indeed, Luther added a significant extra dimension to what
it means to wrestle with Christian devotion. When the church no longer was anchored in a clear,
unimpeachable authority all manner of new explorations in Christian theology and practice began to
develop. Some of these were fruitful and pointed to the value of the new protestant churches.
Others, however, delved into old errors or discovered new ones that challenged historic orthodoxy
well beyond the topic of ecclesial authority.17
13 Luther, “The Freedom,” 294. 14 Luther, “The Freedom,” 294. 15 Luther, “The Freedom,” 295. 16 Albert C. Outler, ed. The Works of John Wesley, Vols. 1-4, Sermons (Nashville: Abington,1984-1987), III:206. 17 While this does not, certainly, in every case mean such challenges were undeserving or unorthodox, challenges to the establishment church were often met with charges of heresy, sometimes because of blatant claims, often because of suspected leanings or similarities to other actually heretical movements. In his comprehensive three volume Gangreana, which sought to catalogue the “many Errours, Blasphemies and Practices of the sectaries” of his time, Thomas Edwards lists sixteen categories under which the vast—over one hundred seventy five—particular divergences could be organized. “1. Independents. 2. Brownists. 3. Chiliasts, or Millenaries. 4. Antinomians. 5. Anabaptists. 6. Manifestarians or Arminians. 7. Libertines. 8. Familists. 9. Enthusiasts. 10. Seekers and Waiters. 11. Perfectists. 12. Socinians. 13. Arians. 14. Antitrinitarians. 15. Antiscripturalists. 16. Scepticks and Questionists, who question everything in matters of Religion; namely, all the Articles of Faith, and first Principles of Christian Religion, holding nothing positively nor certainly, saving the doctrine of pretened liberty of conscience for all, and liberty of Prophesying.” He then adds, “And in one or other of these sixteen forms, may all the Errors and Blasphemies reckoned up in the following Catalogue be well placed, and unto one of these heads easily reduced; yea, for many of these 11
The question remained what it meant for the Spirit to work in a people, or more narrowly in a congregation or in a person. For many, there remained an ideal of the corporate work of the
Spirit, still linked to the state. In early Calvinism, indeed with Calvin, we see this worked out in the development of Geneva as a city participating with the church. This is echoed later on in early
Puritan settlements in North America.18 In essence, this may be seen as an understanding of the
Spirit who works among great leaders and especially in the State, to more fully build up an increasingly realized expression of God’s kingdom in this world. Indeed, the North American experiments became refuges for Puritan leaders, though never particularly isolated and certainly never free from continued conflicts in attempting to assert a more “pure” Puritanism. This did not, however, mean that the Puritan impulse was entirely transferred across the Atlantic, as at the height of Puritan influence, the king of England himself, the nominal head of the Church of England, was resisted then deposed, and a Puritan-dominated parliament took over, with Oliver Cromwell taking charge.
Though this was not a move supported by all Puritans, it did have enough support to last for eleven years, after which those formerly enjoying civil preference found themselves in a rather changing set of circumstances. Among these was a London Puritan named Samuel Annesley, who while he did not support Cromwell’s rise to power, did find success during that important middle decade of the seventeenth century, as well as tempered success well afterwards. Indeed, in many ways he represented the best aspects of a Puritan spiritual leader.19 Annesley was an accomplished
errours, the very same are held not only by one sort of the forenamed sects, but by divers of them.” Thomas Edwards, The First and Second Part of Gangraena: Or a Catalogue and Discovery of Many of the Errours, Heresies, Blasphemies and Pernicious Practices of the Sectaries of This Time (London: Printed for Ralph Smith, 1646; reprint, Kessinger Publishing), 13. See also Michael R. Watts, The Dissenters, 2 vols., vol. 1 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978), 111ff. 18 These are not theocracies, but rather societies in which the church and civil leadership share mutual goals and interests, though not without conflict between the two separate spheres. 19 See chapter one of John A. Newton, Susanna Wesley and the Puritan Tradition in Methodism, 2nd ed. (London: Epworth Press, 2002) and John A. Newton, "Samuel Annesley (1620-1696)," Proceedings of the Wesley Historical 12 minister in his own right, and was able to gather together other Dissenting ministers for regular preaching, the texts of which he compiled in six volumes.20 In addition to these significant volumes, representing some of the best practical theology of the era, Samuel Annesley was also able to pass on a more significant, lasting legacy. This through his youngest daughter, Susanna, a precocious child and a spiritually minded adult who married another child of Dissent, Samuel Wesley.21
Susanna Wesley
“There’s nothing plainer than that a free-thinker as a free-thinker, an atheist as an atheist, is worse in that respect than a believer as a believer. But if that believer’s practice does not correspond with his faith… he is worse than an infidel.”22
Although it cannot be said that Susanna Wesley has been forgotten to history—either in its popular or its more formal forms—there is a curious emphasis which seems to dominate any mentions of John Wesley’s mother. This emphasis, no doubt, in large part derives less from an interest in Susanna for her own self as it does for a way to better understand the social, spiritual, and psychological quandary which John Wesley has caused for those attempting to understand his motives and issues. This is especially the case if one dismisses outright the religious truth of John
Wesley’s claims, leaving him to be a shell to be filled up with all manner of psychoanalytical theories. Indeed, for this purpose, Susanna Wesley appears to offer a very fruitful source—both in how Wesley related to himself and how he related to other women.
Many biographers have seen Susanna’s form of child raising as being the shaping force in
John’s psychological development. Especially in considering Wesley’s later development and his
Society 45 (1985), 29-45 for excellent brief biographies on Samuel Annesley. Because Annesley was close to his youngest daughter, and maybe for other reasons as well, he asked that she take his library and papers after his death. Unfortunately, these burned in the Epworth fire, leading to the loss of a great deal about what we can know of Samuel Annesley. 20 Samuel Annesley, ed. Puritan Sermons, 1659-1689: Being the Morning Exercises at Cripplegate, St. Giles in the Fields, and in Southwark, 6 vols. (Wheaton, Ill.: R.O. Roberts,1981). 21 For an excellent brief study of the Annesley family see Betty I. Young, "Sources for the Annesley Family," Proceedings of the Wesley Historical Society 45 (1985): 46-57. 22 Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 112. 13 own religious philosophy, it can be said that he was consumed with doubt and feelings of inadequacies. In his study of Wesley, Robert Moore writes that his “personal style as a ‘Methodist’, compulsive, over-organized, perfectionistic in his attempts to obey authorities which he believed to be legitimate, just, and consistent was determined at this early age.” 23 If we understand shame as being a “vague, diffuse sense of falling short of some ideal, then “our ‘fault’ (in biblical terms) is a sin of omission; we have left undone that which we ought to have done.”24 From the time of his earliest youth, Wesley sought internal spiritual order through increasing patterns of discipline and
“methods” which would help him towards the perfection that he thought was the goal of the true
Christian life. At the root of this interpretation is the statement of Susanna about her method of raising children and her “bylaws” which formed the foundation of her approach with each of her children. “Whatever pains it cost, conquer their stubbornness,” she writes, “break the will if you would not damn the child.”25 It is understood that the shame induced by Susanna’s breaking of the will results in John’s later feeling that “he had fallen short of the mark, that he had not reached his spiritual ideal.”26
Thus, in this perspective, it was an underlying sense of doubt and shame which led to his later strivings for full acceptance both before his parents and before his god. Yet, this interpretation runs into numerous difficulties when pressed by more than a desire to explain away John Wesley’s apparent neuroses.27 Indeed, while a discussion of Susanna’s approach to child raising could itself
23 Robert L. Moore, “Justification Without Joy: Psychohistorical Reflections on John Wesley’s Childhood and Conversion,” History of Childhood Quarterly: the Journal of Psychohistory 2(1), 1974: 36. 24 Moore, 36. 25 Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 370. 26 Moore, 36. Cf. James Fowler, “John Wesley’s Development in Faith” in The Future of the Methodist Theological Traditions, M. Douglas Meeks, ed. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1985) and Claire E. Wolfteich, "A Difficult Love : Mother as Spiritual Guide in the Writing of Susanna Wesley," Methodist History 38, no. 1 (1999), 58ff. James Fowler, 183 in fact attributes Wesley’s later identity crisis as being the result of powerfully repressed infantile anger, and a personality which was organized out of his superego. 27 For another interesting perspective on John Wesley’s family life, including both his childhood and his own relationships and marriage, see Anthony J. Headley, Family Crucible: The Influence of Family Dynamics in the Life and 14 take up a large amount of space, it would be more efficient in this present effort to instead try to understand Susanna not from her approaches to her children, but rather to see her as an educated, thoughtful, highly spiritual, strong-willed woman in her own right.28 In approaching Susanna from this direction we find that John Wesley was not a stereotypical conglomeration of the more obvious
Freudian psychoses, but rather the son of a very strong Christian woman who was taught from his earliest age the reality of an active relationship with God, and the priority of pursuing this relationship in the midst of a complicated world.
Susanna exhibited early the independence of thought and action which characterized her throughout her life. Despite the not only dedicated but also sacrificial commitment to the
Dissenting tradition shown by her father, Susanna, at the age of thirteen, made the decision to step away from her family’s identification and return, on her own, to communion with the Church of
England. The specific reasons for this precocious step are not precisely known, yet another sad result of the Epworth fire in 1709. Susanna wrote to her son Samuel in 1709 and told him that she had written a substantial explanation of her reasoning for her return to the Church of England but this, along with so many of her own and her father’s writings, were burned up in the fire.29 She did not, it seems, pen another version of this testimony, so we are left to surmise some reasons for her change. Many researchers make note of the highly influential apologetic preaching of such
Ministry of John Wesley (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2010). Headley seeks to assess Wesley’s relational dynamics through the lenses of Murray Bowen’s Extended Family Systems Theory and Alfred Adler’s concept of family constellation. Although not a trained historian, Headley offers a worthwhile exploration of Wesley’s intimate interactions. However, while he does interact with primary sources throughout, he did not utilize Susanna Wesley’s collected works, relying instead on only about six letters written by her, and similar number written by other members of the family. This quite narrow perspective unfortunately sharply limits Headley’s overall analysis. 28 For more thorough studies on Susanna’s method of child-raising and education see Martha F. Bowden, "Susanna Wesley's Educational Method," Journal of the Canadian Church Historical Society 44, no. 1 (2002);David Butler, ""Look for the Mother to Find the Son" : The Influence of Susanna Wesley on Her Son John," Epworth Review 25, no. 4 (1998): 90-100; Frank Baker, "Susanna Wesley : Puritan, Parent, Pastor, Protagonist, Pattern," in Women in New Worlds (Nashville, Tenn: Abingdon, 1982): 112-131. Henry D. Rack, Reasonable Enthusiast: John Wesley and the Rise of Methodism, 3rd ed. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2002), 54ff.; Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 367ff.; Kenneth J. Collins, A Real Christian: The Life of John Wesley (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1999), 11ff. ; John A. Newton, Susanna Wesley and the Puritan Tradition in Methodism , 106ff. 29 Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 71. 15
Anglicans as John Tillotson, Thomas Tenison and William Beveridge, who were calling Dissenters back into the national church.30 An interesting comment was also made by Susanna’s husband,
Samuel Wesley, who likewise left his family’s Dissenting roots for a return to the Church of
England, though later in life than did Susanna. He was educated in a Dissenting academy but it was here that a nascent distaste for Dissent seemed to take shape. He noted that he was turned off by the
“crude political and religious extremism” of some of his fellow students.31 Whatever the particular reason that Susanna left the family religious tradition, it does not seem that she in any way forsook her father or his spiritual wisdom. Indeed, she was, it seems, quite close to him throughout his life.
This no doubt led to her continuing to read deeply of spiritual writings.
This reading and the spiritual emphasis that permeates her collected writings places the more well-known statements on education within a broader context—a context which shows Susanna to be, above all, interested in serving God in her life, a life in which she was given significant responsibility for raising a brood of likewise very intelligent children.32 We find in her letters, in her journals, and in her other writings that she was a serious, highly intellectual woman with strong, developed opinions which found a curious, profound role in an age in which women were not given anything near equal voice with men.33 She had, as Charles Wallace puts it, “a deeply formed sense of self; a Puritan self-understanding that ultimately values the individual and empowers her when in conflict with ‘the world,’ however that might be construed.” 34 Her occasional conflicts with the
‘world’ were not, however, public battles in which she sought to recreate society. Rather, she was
30 Newton, Susanna Wesley, 59ff. 31 Newton, Susanna Wesley, 65ff. 32 In 1731, she wrote to John: “No one can, without renouncing the world in the most literal sense, observe my method, and there’s few (if any) that would entirely devote above twenty years of the prime of life in hope to save the souls of their children (which they think may be saved without so much ado); for that was my principal intention, however unskillfully or unsuccessfully managed.” Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 150. 33 See Charles Wallace, Jr., "Susanna Wesley's Spirituality: The Freedom of a Christian Woman," Methodist History 22, no. 3 (1984): 158-173. 34 Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 33. 16 her own self within the confines of her context, a conventional woman of the early eighteenth century, yet within these conventions, she revealed a great sense of independence of thought and very well-formed theological insights. “That sense of self allows her not only to love and support her family but also to advise, teach, argue with, and sometimes stubbornly resist even her husband, brother, and sons.”35 Given the strong identity of each of her sons, it is not surprising that different aspects of her personality are revealed in her various interactions with them.
Letters
Susanna’s relationship with her husband, Samuel, is well-known. In a famous passage she wrote to John about his thoughts on considering ordination she notes, “I was much pleased with it and liked the proposal well, but ‘tis an unhappiness almost peculiar to our family that your father and I seldom think alike.”36 She continues, “Mr. Wesley differs from me, would engage you, I believe in critical learning.” She then adds, “I earnestly pray to God to aver that great evil from you of engaging in trifling studies to the neglect of such as are absolutely necessary.”37 What is absolutely necessary is not to listen to his father, but for young John to pursue that which leads to the fullest relationship with God. John did, of course, pursue ordination and upon doing so finally did have the support of his father, who apparently had changed his mind about career choices. Yet, in their disagreements about all manner of issues, Susanna remained loyal to Samuel in public and in private. This is most evident in a letter she wrote to her brother, Samuel Annesley, Jr., who had been successful in business in India, and who had some unfortunate financial dealings with Samuel
Wesley. She admits her husband is not a wise man of business, ample evidence was easily convincing, but she adds
“And did I not know that almighty Wisdom hath views and ends in fixing the bounds of our
35 Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 33. 36 Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 106. 37 Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 107. 17
habitation which are out of our ken, I should think it a thousand pities that a man of his brightness and rare endowments of learning and useful knowledge in relation to the church of God should be confined to an obscure corner of the Country, where his talents are buried and he is determined to a way of life for which he is not so well qualified as I could wish.”
She will admit to his lack of business acumen—which caused the family suffering—but continues to admire and respect his learning and spirituality, which is for her a more important reality. No doubt this was a factor in their early relationship. After her return to the Church of
England, she notes that she was for a time tempted to the position of the Socinians, but a wise man helped her better understand and appreciate the orthodox teaching on the Trinity.38 Susanna, with her defined priorities, ended up marrying this man. It seems having a spiritual insight and wisdom was something Susanna respected in her father, in her husband, and in her sons and her daughters.39
We see in her letters to each of her sons a slightly different expression of Susanna. Indeed, the very distinctions in her response and in the personalities of her children—all who continued strong in the faith—argue as much as anything against her as a psycho-social oppressor. In her letters to her eldest son Samuel, we find a spiritual and emotional counselor sharing insights to her eldest son, apparently in response to questions he had sent.40 Her comments during his school days in the early years of the eighteenth century are not merely emotional encouragement meant to bolster his attitude during his education, and go well beyond reminders for him to attend church and his studies. In a letter written in March 1704, Susanna reveals an intellectual and insightful theology, and hopes to remind her eldest of his spiritual responsibilities by means of what is in effect a short philosophical treatise on the nature of religion. “We may,” she writes as she gets into
38 Newton, Susanna Wesley, 66. 39 Though we have significant more evidence of her interaction with her sons, and they each seem to have found more opportunity than any of the Wesley daughters. Unfortunately, society at that time did not give ample space for educated women to find their own place in this world, and the Wesley daughters, for the most part, were victims of this reality. See esp. Rack, 51ff. and also Samuel J. Rogal, "The Epworth Women : Susanna Wesley and Her Daughters," Wesleyan Theological Journal 18, no. 2 (1983): 80-89. 40 See Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 41-75. Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 41 writes, “That the letters survived at all is a tribute to the young man’s heedful discipline. They are preserved not in original form but in response to his mothers’ request as part of a letter book, into which he laboriously copied them nearly word for word.” 18 the heart of the letter, “distinguish the propositions of natural religion into theoretical and practical.
I’ve already said enough of the first. I proceed to the second and shall divide the propositions of a practical natural religion into two parts: first the internal, second the external worship of God.”41
At the end of the long letter she notes that going well beyond her own counsel, that young
“Sammy” should seek God continually in his own devotions. “That you may more perfectly know and obey the law of God, be sure you constantly pray for the assistance of the Holy Spirit.” She continues, “Observe that assistance implies a joint concurrence of the person assisted; nor can you possibly be assisted if you do nothing. Therefore, use your utmost care and diligence to do your duty and rely upon the veracity of God, who will not fail to perform what he has promised.”42 In later letters, she specifies more what this diligence involves including watching how much he drinks and taking note of his specific temptations.
A summary of her approach might be found in a letter she wrote to Samuel in August of
1704:
“The mind of a Christian should always be composed, temperate, free from all extremes of mirth or sadness, and always disposed to hear the still small voice of God’s Holy Spirit, which will direct him what and how to act in all the occurrences of life, if in all his ways he acknowledge him and depend on his assistance. I cannot now stay to speak of your particular duties. I hope I shall in a short time send you what I designed.”43
These early letters to Samuel are important not simply as insights into Susanna’s relationship with her eldest son, but also as an indication of her theological and intellectual life in John Wesley’s earliest years, showing the atmosphere in which he was raised was filled with very engaged theological thought. To be sure, the letters sent to a young man in school were not the complete picture of the relationship Susanna had with her eldest son. Indeed, after his untimely death in
41 Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 42. 42 Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 48. 43 Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 50. 19
1739, Susanna wrote Charles with her expressions of grief. “Your brother was exceedingly dear to me in his life, and perhaps I’ve erred in loving him too well. I once thought it impossible for me to bear his loss, but none knows what they can bear till they are tried.”44
She then adds an honest expression of her spiritual need in her grief. “As your good old grandfather often used to say, ‘That’s an affliction, that God makes an affliction.’ For surely the manifestation of his presence and favour is more than an adequate support under any suffering whatever. But if he withhold his consolations and hide his face from us the least suffering is intolerable.” After her husband’s death, she had lived with her eldest son and was dependent on him for her own needs. But she writes she had not even thought about this, as she had indeed felt
God’s provision, felt called to “a firmer dependence” on him. “That, though my son was good, he was not my God—and that now our heavenly father seemed to have taken my cause more immediately into his own hand; and therefore even against hope, I believed in hope that I should never suffer more.”45
In her letters to her youngest son, we find Susanna showing the same interest in spiritual guidance, acting as a sought-after spiritual counselor, giving practical and theological advice. Yet, there are other aspects shown as well, especially later on in her life when Charles has gained a fair amount of his own spiritual confidence. After the Wesley brothers had their enlightening experiences of renewed faith, it seems Charles was eager to share the fruits of their discovery with his mother, and may have been a bit zealous in his own attempts to convince her that his own faith was lacking prior to his new experience, and apparently implying her understanding was deficient as well. After quoting a long passage from the French-born Anglican priest, Pierre du Moulin, she
44 Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 179. 45 Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 180. Indeed, her lifelong poverty and experiences with the death of almost half of her children, as well as frequent ill health suggest a near continual experience of suffering which underlies all her spiritual writings. 20
writes, “I think you are fallen into an odd way of thinking. You say that till within a few months
you had no spiritual life nor any justifying faith. Now this is as if a man should affirm he was not
alive in his infancy, because, when an infant he did not know he was alive. A strange way of
arguing, this!”46 At the top of the letter which he also had copied over, is a note in Charles Wesley’s hand: “My mother (not clear) of faith Dec. 6, 1738.”47
Despite this sharp disagreement, with both holding their ground, the letters as a whole reflect a continued interest in worthwhile conversation. In 1735, she writes, “…that as pleases God, but if while I have life and any remains of health, it may be useful or pleasing to you, that we hold a correspondence together by letters, I shall gladly do it. But then, dear Charles, let us not spend our
46 Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 176. She goes on to write, “Do you not consider that there’s some analogy in spiritual to natural life? A man must first be born and then pass through the several stages of infancy, childhood, and youth, before he attain to maturity. So Christians are first born of water and the spirit and then go through many degrees of grace, be first infants, or babes in Christ, as St. Paul calls them, before they become strong Christians. For spiritual strength is the work of time, as well as of God’s Holy Spirit. All then that I can gather from your letter is that till a little while ago you were not so well satisfied of your being a Christian as you are now. I heartily rejoice that you have now attained to a strong and lively hope in God’s mercy through Chris. Not that I can think you were totally without saving faith before, but then ‘tis one thing to have faith and another thing to be sensible we have it. Faith is the fruit of the Spirit and is the gift of God, but to feel or be inwardly sensible that we have true faith requires a further operation of God’s Holy Spirit. You say you have peace but not joy in believing. Blessed be God for peace. May his peace rest within you. Joy will follow, perhaps not very close, but it will follow faith and love. God’s promises are sealed but not dated. Therefore patiently attend his pleasure. He will give you joy in believing. Amen” Her understanding of a further and continual work of the Holy Spirit in the life a maturing Christian is something that John Wesley, and later John Fletcher, continue to consider and hone, as this further work is increasingly not seen in sudden stages, but in gradual transformation. 47 It has been suggested that as John was reflective of his mother’s personality, Charles was much more like his father in thought, temperament, and interests. Samuel liked to think of himself as a poet—even as he seems to have gained more approval as a theologian—while Charles, of course, is best known now for his hymnody. See Rack, 51. It does seem, however, the questioning of salvation was not entirely solved, as a letter dated October 2, 1740 contains this response from Susanna: “I thank you for your kind letter. I call it so because I verily believe it was dictated by a sincere desire of my spiritual and eternal good. There is too much truth in many of your accusations; nor do I intend to say one word in my own defence, but rather choose to refer all things to him that knoweth all things.” It seems that Charles had once again accused his mother of not quite having a firm salvation. Yet, Susanna adds, “Alas, it is far worse than you apprehend it to be! I am not one of those who have never been enlightened or made partaker of the heavenly gift or of the Holy Ghost, but have many years since been fully awakened, and am deeply sensible of sin, both original and actual.” She is not discouraged either by her own awareness or Charles’ accusations: “…for all my transgressions are the sins of a finite person, but the merits of our Lord’s sufferings and righteousness are infinite.” She follows with an interesting passage suggesting Charles was worried about his own salvation—again. “I cannot conceive why you affirm yourself to be not Christian; which is, in effect, to tell Christ to his face that you have mothering to thank him for, since you re not the better for anything he hath yet done or suffered for you. O, what great dishonour, what wondrous ingratitude, is this to the ever-blessed Jesus! I think myself far from being so good a Christian as you are, or as I ought to be; but God forbid that I should renounce the little Christianity that I have: nay, rather let me grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Amen.” Susanna was, it seems, a spiritual and theological foil for her sons—providing counsel in either caring or combative fashion, as they needed. 21 time in trifling, in talking of impertinent matters that will turn to no account.” Indeed, while her letters do contain the occasional tidbit of personal information—especially as it seems Charles was in closer contact with several of the Wesley daughters, there was a frank spiritual conversation that
Susanna continued to pursue. In one of her last letters, when she was seventy-two, she finishes her brief comments to Charles by expressing her confidence in God’s work in John’s life and also in his, saying “my fears are at an end” for she sees her life’s work taking not only shape but also exhibiting great fruit. She sought to teach both her sons the ways of God, and they were incomparably active in teaching this to others. She finishes with an exhortation to continue in service to God. “Proclaim his universal love and free grace to all men. And that ye may go on in
[the power of the Lord and in] the strength of his might and be preserved from yielding place to those bold blasphemers so much as for an hour is the hearty prayer of your loving mother. I send thee my love and blessing.”48
It is not surprising that her letters to John are the most numerous of all that have been preserved. Throughout these letters she shows the same quality of affection and deep interaction that she reveals in her letters to Charles and Samuel. Indeed, as in the example with which we opened this study, Susanna was willing to engage in theological musings with her son, interacting with him about readings in spirituality and theology. It seems John was curious about his mother’s opinion on topics, knowing that she was well-read.49 Throughout the letters to John, there does
48 Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 190. 49 While her letters indicate some of her reading, it is in her journals that we learn much more about the extent and depth which she read. She reads both intellectually and devotionally, assessing what she reads with a critical eye. Among her dialogue partners in her journals are Aristotle, Plato, Beveridge, along with many other writers from throughout history. and of course Scripture. She especially seemed to value the works of Richard Lucas, George Herbert, John Locke, Pascal, and Richard Baxter, with each of these providing, it seems, profound influence in her expressions, her spirituality and in her overall philosophy of life. See Charles Wallace, Jr., ""Some Stated Employment of Your Mind" : Reading, Writing, and Religion in the Life of Susanna Wesley," Church History 58, no. 3 (1989): 354-366. See also Wallace, Susanna Wesley, ch. 5. Given Susanna’s own strong interest in these writings, an interesting further study comparing John Wesley and these various writers would be quite helpful. This has been done in more thorough studies with John Locke and Richard Baxter. For Locke see esp. Richard E. Brantley, Locke, Wesley, and the Method of English 22 seem to also reflect a lot of mutual respect. In March of 1734, she responds to a letter of his, in which she addresses a particularly troublesome interaction John experienced, and then replies to his apparent questions about his own devotions. She writes, “You want no direction from me how to employ your time. I thank God for his inspiring you with a resolution of being faithful in improving that important talent committed to your trust.”50 She admits her own haphazard devotions, adding that because of her circumstances, likely related to her health, “I can’t observe order, or think consistently, as formerly. When I have lucid interval I aim at improving it, but alas, it is but aiming.”51
However, she always does seem to have an opinion or a suggestion, adding that while she sees nothing of his use of time “but what I approve, unless it be that you do not assign enough of it to meditation, which is (I conceive) incomparably the best means to spiritualize our affections, confirm our judgments, and add strength to our pious resolutions of any exercise whatsoever.”52 She then proceeds on a passionate meditation on God. “And what is so proper for this end as deep and serious consideration of that pure, unaccountable love which is demonstrated to us in our redemption by God Incarnate! Verily, the simplicity of divine love is wonderful! It transcends all thought, it passeth our sublimest apprehensions! Perfect love indeed!”53 She continues on, “And yet this great, incomprehensible, ineffable all-glorious God deigns to regard us! Declares he loves us!”
She presses on with her passionate reminder, proceeding back to her counsel, reminding John of how God reaches out to his people. “How oft doth he call upon us to return and live! By his
Romanticism (Gainesville: University Presses of Florida, 1984) and Frederick Dreyer, "Faith and Experience in the Thought of John Wesley," American Historical Review 88, no. 1 (1983): 12-30. For Richard Baxter see Robert C. Monk, John Wesley: His Puritan Heritage, 2nd ed. (Lanham, Md.: Scarecrow Press, 1999). Also interesting for future efforts would be a study of Wesley in light of An Enquiry after Happiness by Richard Lucas, especially the third part which concerns religious perfection. See Richard Lucas, An Enquiry after Happiness, 3 vols., vol. 3 (London: W. Innys and R. Manby, 1735; reprint, Nabu Press). 50 Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 165. 51 Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 165. 52 Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 165. 53 Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 166. 23 ministers, his providence, by the still, small voice of his Holy Spirit! By conscience, his viceregent within us and by his merciful corrections and the innumerable blessings we daily enjoy!” She notes we cannot truly contemplate God as he is in himself, but she gives hope. “But when we consider him under the character of a Savior we revive, and the greatness of that majesty which before astonished, and confounded our weak faculties now enhances the value of his condescension towards us and melts our tempers into tenderness and love.”
Susanna realizes that she is running out of paper, so tries to conclude, steering the note back to his state of life, and adding encouragements. “Therefore you must not judge of your interior state by your not feeling great fervours of spirit and extraordinary agitations, as plentiful weeping, etc. but rather by the firm adherence of your will to God.”54 She then adds, “follow Mr. Baxter’s advice, and you will be easy.”55 Given the course of these middle years of the 1730s, it seems John was not quick to take Baxter’s or Susanna’s advice, and he was not easy. He did, however, eventually come to realize for himself the truth of Susanna’s words. “I felt my heart strangely warmed,” he writes in his journal on May 14, 1738. “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.”56
Susanna ended her note, written four years prior to John’s Aldersgate experience, with these words: “Dear Jacky, God Almighty bless thee!”
It seems God answered Susanna’s prayers.
John Wesley
54 Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 166. 55 She here refers to Richard Baxter, a Puritan preacher from the 17th century and one of both Susanna’s and John’s favorite guides. Here is the quote: “Put your souls, with all their sins and dangers, and all their interests, into the hand of Jesus Christ your Saviour; and trust them wholly with him by a resolved faith. It is he that hath purchased them, and therefore loveth them. It is he that is the owner of them by right of redemption. And it is now become his own interest, even for the success and honour of his redemption, to save them.” Charles Wallace, 170n42, notes that he cannot “find the exact passage amid Baxter’s voluminous works.” 56 Jackson, Works, 1:103. 24
Ye see your calling brethren. We are called to be ‘an habitation of God through his Spirit;’ and through his Spirit dwelling in us, to be saints here, and partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light. So exceedingly great are the promises which are given unto us, actually given unto us who believe! For by faith ‘we receive, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God,’—the sum of all the promises,— “that we may know the things that are freely given to us of God.’ The Spirit of Christ is that great gift of God, which, at sundry times, and in divers manners, he hath promise to man, and hath fully bestowed since the time that Christ was glorified. (John Wesley, 1742)57
In coming to terms with the extensive literary, social, and spiritual contributions of John
Wesley, it soon becomes clear that we cannot simply assess his writings in isolation from any other influence. Indeed, Wesley was significantly influenced, admittedly so, by a vast range of other sources. As we have seen, his earliest and most direct influence came in his own home, through the teaching and guidance of his mother, whom we have looked at briefly, as well as his father whose influence was different but still important. Samuel Wesley was, no doubt, an influence in
Susanna’s reading as well, and thus he serves both as a direct and indirect influence to his children, sometimes filtered through Susanna’s independent reading. From his parents, we not only can see the direct impact of their spiritual and theological musings, but also in their education and strongly developed interest in reading Christian literature. The Wesley parents were both quite well-read, and each came from families which were well-read, leading John Wesley from a very early age towards an embrace of Christian literature from a variety of eras and traditions.58 These readings blended, in a complicated way, with his other vital influences of peers, social context, and his own theological wrestling. Ted Campbell writes, “Samuel Wesley functioned as a sort of funnel through which the
Anglican culture of the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries flowed into the rectory at
57 From his sermon “Awake, Thou That Sleepest,” in Outler, Sermons, 1:153. 58 Indeed, he was well-read in more than just Christian literature. Onva Boshears writes that “one may safely say that few, if any, eighteenth century Englishman were better read men than John Wesley. His reading tastes were catholic in scope, yet disciplined and purposeful. He seized on the most important points of ay book he read, and his warmed heart did not mean a dulled mind. Rather he was an alert and critical reader. He was contemporary and yet mindful of the books of the ages. He did not despise wisdom, and through him books and reading reached the English masses as they never had before.” Onva K. Boshears, Jr., "The Books in John Wesley's Life," Wesleyan Theological Journal 3, no. 1 (1968), 55. 25
Epworth and saturated its inhabitants.”59 This “Anglican culture” involved a strong interest in classical sources.
Uses of Christian Antiquity
John Wesley was committed to the Church of England, but his interest was not only in confirming its doctrine and practices. His interest was also in deepening and enlivening the congregations, one might even say purifying the Church of England so as to better reflect what it already claimed to honor. In this, we can see Wesley as someone who pushed influences to their limits. If a church said it was modeling the early church, then this meant a lot more than reading old books. Likewise, if a person said they were a follower of God, this meant much more than attending a Sunday service or tithing.
This is not to say that Wesley’s own theological and spiritual contributions were merely an amalgamation of diverse tributaries which poured into his life, which were compiled and then summarized. Wesley was, as we learn from his father’s statement about him, someone who always wanted to know the reasons behind an event or a teaching. His use of sources were wide ranging, but not without discernment and his encouragement to others reading key sources were not without his own particular advice and editing. In his questioning, he sought after those who had asked similar questions, developed helpful studies on Scripture, theology and Christian spirituality, and indeed pointed to the rich stream of Christian living which he saw as honed throughout history in the writings of men and women of faith, which itself could help guide the present church into an
59 Ted Campbell, John Wesley and Christian Antiquity: Religious Vision and Cultural Change (Nashville: Kingswood Books, 1991), 23. Campbell, 24 notes the extensive reading list that Samuel suggested to others, much of which was included in his Advice to a Young Clergyman, which John later published in 1735. Campbell goes on to add, “From his father, then, John Wesley received the impetus to study Christian antiquity in the context of Anglican writers who had appealed to Christian antiquity in order to vindicate the doctrines and practices of the Church of England.” Yet this was not Wesley’s goal. Campbell, 25ff. adds, “If John Wesley had followed his fathers’ prescription, his vision of ancient Christianity would have been tied to the culturally conservative Anglicanism of the seventeenth century which Samuel represented, but there is very little evidence that John took up his program.” Or rather, I might suggest that John took up his program but added significantly to it. 26 embrace of constant renewal.
Ted Campbell has, helpfully, suggested three uses of Christian antiquity in Wesley’s era, which helps to better understand Wesley’s own approach to these documents.60 The first is the polemical use, in which ancient Christian sources are used in support of Scripture, not to add to the teaching but to defend Scriptural principles. Indeed, “there was, then, a strong current in
Protestantism, well represented in England, which questioned whether post-canonical sources for
Christian teaching and practice could be granted any credence unless they had explicit warrants in
Scripture.”61 However, ancient Christian writers were still used, but as a support rather than an argument and proof unto themselves. They were especially useful, it seems, in arguments against other contemporary writers or early Christian writers.62 “Nevertheless,” Campbell writes, “the central religious vision of these Protestants was dominated by the image of the church in the New
Testament to such an extent that Christian antiquity (beyond the New Testament age) played only a trivial role in it.”63 Early Christian writers were used to develop arguments and in debate, but not for primary guidance in primary church issues. They were understood to have their own conflicts which undermined their unimpeachable use.
The second approach to Christian antiquity in Wesley’s era is the conservative use.
Campbell writes, “If Anglicanism never developed an official theological perspective, it did develop in the seventeenth century a characteristic method of theological reflection, in which their vision of Christian antiquity figured prominently in demonstrating the continuity of Anglicanism with the ethos of the church in its pure ‘primitive’ state.”64 The chief use of Christian antiquity here
60 Campbell, ch. 2. 61 Campbell, 11. 62 Campbell, 11 writes, “Such person felt a special freedom in using the early Christian writers to refute their opponents’ views and practices, as Cartwright did against Richard Hooker. Daillé himself called upon early Christian writings in order to question the authority of early Christian writings!” 63 Campbell, 11. 64 Campbell, 13. 27 was to defend contemporary theology and practices of the Church of England against nonconformists on one side and Roman Catholics on the other. For the former, the epistles of
Ignatius became especially important, especially for his strong, very early support of submission to bishops, thus establishing a strong role of ecclesiastical hierarchy. However, this hierarchy was not absolute in one position, the Pope, with conservatives arguing that it was an important but not dominating position in the early church, and one which certainly could be resisted.65 The earliest
Christian writings were understood as both shaping and confirming Anglican belief and practice, thus sparking significant interest in their translation, discussion, and promulgation. Samuel
Wesley’s own interests could be seen as reflecting this approach.
The usage of the ancient Christian writings were not broken into three isolated categories, but rather one built on the other.66 Conservative Churchmen used the Christian writing polemically as well as to support the established Church of England. Developing from this was a programmatic use that included and went beyond the polemic and conservative interest. Campbell writes about this third group who “also affirmed Christian antiquity as an authority for Christian doctrine and practice, but differed from the former group in that they viewed the Church of England more as the best possible setting for the realization of the primitive Christian ethos, than as fully realizing that ethos in its present life.”67 This programmatic use arose especially strong in the context of the flurry of religious and spiritual movements during the seventeenth century. While most were broadly seen as exhibiting unseemly or ultimately unsatisfying traits leading to incomplete answers or more scandalous exhibitions, they had raised significant questions and proposed often stimulating
65 Campbell notes that letter seventy-five of Cyprian, in which he condemns Pope Stephen, was a key source for the conservatives, though their claims were not free from debate as other parts of Cyprian seemed to support papal primacy. Because of this, textual criticism became an important part of the assertions. See Campbell, 15. 66 Campbell, 21 writes, “The uses of Christian antiquity tend to build upon one another, with polemical uses being the most common, conservative uses somewhat more distinctive, and programmatic uses the most distinctive of all.” 67 Campbell, 16. 28
answers that provoked more thought as they enabled a broad participation.
Campbell notes four types of programmatic usage: Latitudinarian, Protestant Free-Thinkers,
liturgical, and moral and spiritual.68 While reflecting a great deal of his father’s conservative
leanings, John Wesley’s writings suggest a very early programmatic interest in the early church
fathers which emphasized the moral and spiritual aspect. This is seen not only in the fact that he
read widely in Christian antiquity but also in the particular sources he seems to have emphasized
and the quotes he provided throughout his writings.69 Indeed, this is not surprising if we consider
that it was probably Samuel who most influenced John to read in Christian antiquity but it was
Susanna who shaped how he read and why. Later influences, at Oxford, pushed Wesley even more
in this direction, accentuating and encouraging his leanings and giving him a small community to
explore the lessons in practice.70
A Christian Library
It becomes interesting, then, who Wesley, as a programmatic reader, recommended that others read, and how. In these works, he saw a great deal of immensely helpful, auxiliary teachings which would fill out and deepen his own attempts in preaching and teaching. Indeed, these suggestions can be seen not only as a programmatic reading of Christian antiquity but also a
68 Campbell, 16ff. 6969 See Luke L. Jr Keefer, "John Wesley: Disciple of Early Christianity" (PhD diss., Temple University, 1982) for another very useful study of Wesley’s use of these early sources. Campbell, 125ff. lists Wesley’s references to ancient Christian works in his writings. See Thomas C. Oden and Leicester R. Longden, eds., The Wesleyan Theological Heritage: Essays of Albert C. Outler (Grand Rapids: Zondervan,1991), 97-110. Outler, on page 107, writes, “Wesley’s assessments of some of the figures in Christian Antiquity were neither conventional nor discriminating.” Outler proceeds to note that Wesley, curiously, “had a warm spot in his heart for Montanus” and even was willing to defend Pelagius, “to absolve him of Pelagianism.” Curious because Montanus had argued for a broader work of the Spirit, and Pelagius because of his arguments against Augustine on the topic of works. 70 Campbell, 28 makes note that it was John’s friend John Clayton who first suggested regular fasting, adding, “The fact that Clayton identified himself with a group of Non-Jurors who laid an extraordinary stress on the writings of the early church most adequately explains the renewal of interest in early Christian life and thought which appears in Wesley after 1732.” This is an interesting aspect as well because John Wesley was born a little less than a year after a long separation by his parents had ended. This separation was caused by Susanna refusing to say amen to Samuel’s prayer of blessing for William III, and Samuel responding vowed he would not share a bed with a woman who did not share his king. See Newton, Susanna Wesley, 86ff. and Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 12ff. John Wesley, it seems, was inclined to those who shared his mother’s position. 29 programmatic reading of Christian writings throughout history, acknowledging, it seems, a stream of Christian spirituality that Wesley felt part of and saw worth communicating to his followers.
This stream was explicitly tied together in John Wesley’s massive venture of publishing A Christian
Library, a fifty volume collection of writings which he felt were advantageous to all Christians, and were especially important to his Methodist ministers.71
“Wesley’s avowed purpose,” Robert C. Monk writes, “was to publish the ‘choicest Pieces of
Practical Divinity.’”72 This collection was meant “to present, from among the variety of available writings, those most edifying.”73 For Wesley, however, being most edifying and most accessible required more than compiling and translating, when necessary, whole documents. Rather, there was an intentional editing process in which Wesley freely adapted the many documents for his own purposes. How he adapted them, then, becomes as much an insight into his theology and goals as does his inclusion of the documents. For the sake of his intended general readers, or less than sophisticated preachers, Wesley “regularly eliminated and revised technical language and speculative theological argumentation.”74 Beyond this, Wesley sought to edit out what he saw as theological controversies, or simply aspects of a writers theology that he disagreed with.
He did not see a need to agree wholly with a particular author in order to include their works in his Library—so their inclusion does not mean Wesley’s unreserved stamp of approval—but at the same time, it seems he did not see it vital to include in his edited edition aspects which would cause controversy, contention, or misunderstanding among his congregations or those outside of
Methodism. Some argued he was a little too free in his editing. Monk writes, “Such liberties with the materials of other authors, though questionable by present-day standards, were much more
71 See Monk, 247ff. for a complete list of authors and writings in these volumes. 72 Monk, 18. 73 Monk, 19. 74 Monk, 19. 30 common before the establishment of modern copyright laws. Nevertheless, Wesley’s willingness to change any treatise he saw fit certainly left him open to many questions and criticisms.”75 Yet, what this suggests overall is that while Wesley saw his own efforts as part of a consistent stream of intentional spirituality found in a great variety of writers and eras, he did not simply gather together well-regarded writings, but embraced this stream with a sense of discernment and intent. This intent we might call a cautious ecumenism, with the goal being a more mature embrace of a holistic faith.
Rather than asserting, for instance, that Methodists were people of the Bible alone, and then building yet another separatist theology off their particular interpretations, or seeing his own highly influential mentors of the faith as being unimpeachable in every regard, Wesley sought to include
Methodists within what he saw as the consistent thread of Christian spirituality that had witnesses throughout history, though especially in the early church and in the later Reformers, especially those in England.
These writings seem to be reflective of what Wesley found personally valuable, and in an extroverted approach, he generalized his spirituality to what others would find helpful. This collection seem to be writings which came into Wesley’s life at a key point of his own theological wrestling and caused, it seems, a decided disruption in his own ecclesial contentment. At the same time, these various tributaries pointed his eventual spiritual contributions into developing what can be understood as a well-rounded, well-considered theological synthesis of what seems to be, on the surface, decidedly contrasting traditions.76 That his theology developed, arguably, this direction certainly does not imply that it was so well integrated early on.77 Indeed, it likely can be said that
75 Monk, 19. 76 Of course, this is a matter of debate. As his theology may also be considered haphazard, contradictory and asystematic. This is, however, precisely why continued, more thorough studies of his various influences should be pursued, as any synthesis is only understood within the vast array of different influences. 77 This is likely best indicated in his experiences in Georgia early in his ministry, which did not end at all well. Some of the charges brought against him were on account of his unusual liturgical “experiments.” One of his parishioners reportedly told Wesley, “The people… say they are Protestants. But as for you, they cannot tell what religion you are of. 31
the process of integrating the wide range of his spiritual influences was the underlying task of his
entire life in both his public ministry and in his private spirituality.
Macarius
He begins his library with four writers from the early church: Clement of Rome, Polycarp,
Ignatius, and Macarius. These first three are among the earliest, post-New Testament writings, and
are obvious inclusions for any interested in the witness of early Christianity. Indeed, as Ignatius has
already been mentioned as a key source for the support of episcopacy by conservatives, it is likely
that the inclusion of these earliest writings were both an expression of early Christian spirituality as
well as a continued call for Christian unity, something Wesley struggled to assert in the face of
increasing calls for open Methodist separation from the Church of England. His fourth entry is a
little bit more curious. Wesley’s very wide reading and use of the Church Fathers suggests a much
wider influence by and interest in Christian antiquity, but it was Macarius whom he promoted as
one of the key readings for “practical divinity.”78 In his preface to Pseudo-Macarius’ homilies,
Orthodox bishop Kallistos Ware writes, “Yet, however unsystematic in form, the Homilies
presuppose a single underlying pattern of the Christian life. Beneath an ever-varying imagery,
They never heard of such religion before. They do not know what to make of it.” Quoted in Albert C. Outler, ed. John Wesley (New York: Oxford University Press,1980), 12ff. His nicknames of “a papist”, “a Jesuit”, “a Jacobite”, and a “Presbyterian papist” indicate that those of his day simply had no “box” to put Wesley in. Considering his attempted combining of Puritan, Eastern monastic, Anglican, Moravian, and other spiritualities, however, it is also the case Wesley had yet to find a box to put himself in, leading to exasperation from those who were his congregants and especially those few throughout his life who he awkwardly pursued as a confused suitor. 78 In his second appendix, Ted Campbell provides a very helpful list of references to ancient Christian works in John Wesley’s works. See Campbell, 125ff. The precise authorship of the homilies of Macarius which Wesley treasured and edited, is now considered unknown, as scholars have found significant problems with attributing these works to Macarius of Egypt. See George A. Maloney, ed. Pseudo-Macarius: The Fifty Spiritual Homilies and the Great Letter (New York: Paulist Press,1992), 6ff. Maloney writes, “From internal evidence of the Macarian texts, we see that the author is a person of high culture. He speaks and writes Greek correctly and with ease. He is a citizen of the Roman Empire. He belongs to the Greek world as well as the Syrian. His language also betrays Latinisms that could be explained by a period he may have passed in the army or in imperial administration before he became a monk. His numerous comparisons are taken from the political, military, and economic world of Late Antique Rome. “ While keeping in mind the doubt and questions of authorship, for the sake of convenience, and to align with Wesley’s own usage, I will continue to refer to the author of the homilies as Macarius. 32 evocative and colorful, the basic message of Macarius is very simple.”79 Ware suggests that for
Macarius there are three main stages of the spiritual journey. The first is that “initially the heart is under the dominion of evil.” The second is “the stage of spiritual struggle, when the heart is indwelt simultaneously by both sin and grace, the one fighting against the other.” The third is “the stage when sin is cast out from the heart by the Holy Spirit, working in cooperation with our human will.
Cleansed from evil, the soul is now united to Christ the heavenly Bridegroom and is ‘mixed’ or
‘mingled’ with the divine Spirit, in this way attaining a state higher than that enjoyed by Adam before the fall.”80 It is this latter stage, clearly, that brings the most theological controversy, and this is especially the case in the West, which did not have the same correlative theological considerations, nor as rich of an overall pneumatology, to help orient Christians to what this meant practically.
What this practically meant was an answer to the question about what happens after conversion. For those wrestling with the purpose of the Christian life—indeed with all of life itself—there was a push to see that conversion was not simply a single event in which we are “safe” from a judgmental God, put on the right side of the fence, there to sit safe from eternal punishment.
At the heart of so much theological wrestling was the question of life with God, first in how we are restored to relationship with him, then what it means for our life and our relationships to be in relationship with him. A simplistic description of the differences between theological priorities in the East and in the West is to say that the West has prioritized questions of the former issue while the East has emphasized those related to the latter. The West is interested in the process of salvation, the East in the process of sanctification, with different categories, emphases, terminology, and argumentation taking place based on these different foci. Orthodoxy argues that while
79 Maloney, xiii. 80 Maloney, xiii. 33 humanity retains that original image of God, we have lost the likeness of God. We are lost, emptied, confused, trapped in sin, and unable to relate properly to God or to each other. In our sin, we tend towards corruption and death, unable to become who we properly are.
With the death, resurrection and ascension of Christ, we have redemption. He who is the second Adam overcomes corruption and death, bringing freedom to those who embrace his sacrifice and renewed life. Christ is a hand of a God, working to bring a fallen humanity back into the embrace of the Father. The Spirit is the other hand of God, working always with Christ, gathering those who participate with him into an increasing awareness of God’s fullness and power, so that as we participate in the power of the Spirit we are conformed to the likeness of Christ in eternal unity with God, a unity that brings freedom within the celebration of our true diversity. We are united with Christ in the work of the Spirit who does not awaken us only to bind us to sameness but rather enlivens us to be fully who we are, distinct from others in our participation with God, in our gifts and contributions and roles.
Christ and the Spirit work within the context of the church, building a holy community of holy people who are being restored to the wholeness of being, finding stillness and peace in the increasingly realized love of God’s eternal communion. We are raised to participate in this communion, not becoming God in his essence, but rather becoming able to commune with him in his energies, becoming divinized by the work of the Spirit who conforms us to the likeness of God.
This work begins in the present becoming fulfilled in eternity with God, by God. This is not a passive transformation. Instead it is a dynamic interaction, in which we are called to share with the
Spirit an increased openness to divine perspective, choosing to find unity with God rather than with the world, which seeks to undermine, distort, and destroy the hope that God invites us to celebrate.
But what does it mean to be conformed to the likeness of God? What is the image of God in
34
this world that the Spirit moves us towards and enables us to live? In Macarius, one discovers a representative of the great monastic tradition of the Eastern Orthodox, who sought a fully realized participation with the Spirit in overcoming sin, in finding deep and true discernment, living a life of prayer and worship. “What is the purpose of Christ’s advent?” Macarius asks. He answers:
“The restoration and reintegration of human nature in Him. For He restored to human nature the original dignity of Adam, and in addition bestowed upon it the unutterable grace of the heavenly inheritance of the Holy Spirit. Leading it out of the prison of darkness, He showed it the way and the door to life. By traversing this way and knocking on this door we can enter the kingdom of heaven. As He said, “Ask and it will be given to you… knock and it will be opened to you” (Mt. 7:7). By passing through this door it is possible for everyone to attain the freedom of his soul, to cut off even thoughts, and to become Christ’s bride and consort through the communion of the Holy Spirit. Such is the ineffable love of the Lord towards humanity, whom he has created in His image.”81
John Wesley, early in his life, encountered the writings of Macarius and these writings radically shaped his perspective and his ministry.82 It is the “Christian’s quest for holiness and
perfection” that is a consistent theme throughout the Homilies, and in Wesley’s Christian Library,
Macarius serves “as a fourth-century advocate of the quest for holiness Wesley believed to have
characterized the church as a whole in its purest ages.”83 Yet rather than embracing the monastic life that enabled a spirituality as it retreated from active participation in the world, Wesley saw that
81 The Philokalia: The Complete Text, trans. G. E. H. Palmer, Philip Sherrard, and Kallistos Ware, 4 vols., vol. 3 (London: Faber and Faber, 1984), 352. 82 See Randy L. Maddox, Responsible Grace: John Wesley's Practical Theology (Nashville: Kingswood Books, 1994). Maddox strongly emphasizes Wesley’s interest in Eastern Orthodoxy and Macarius in particular as part of his theological development. Maddox, 23 writes, “Recently, some have drawn attention to a specific aspect of Anglican patristics scholarship—it devoted particular emphasis to Greek authors who had receded from Western consciousness following the fourth century of the Church’s existence. Wesley not only became aware of many of these Greek authors through his study, he seems to have imbibed a marked preference for them over the Latin writers!” He goes on to compare a key theological distinction between East and West, writing that in “Eastern Orthodoxy soteriology typically emphasized more the therapeutic concern for healing our sin-diseased nature.” He adds, “ The point is that these scholars have become convinced that the defining emphasis of Wesley’s understanding of sin and Christian life is also therapeutic, and they see his exposure to early Greek theologians as part of the explanation of this.” This leads to the direction of his own study which emphasizes the Eastern perspective. “My ongoing dialogue with Wesley convinced me that he is indeed best understood as one fundamentally committed to the therapeutic view of the Christian life.” For an excellent collection of essays on Wesleyanism and Eastern Orthodoxy see S. T. Kimbrough, Orthodox and Wesleyan Spirituality (Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 2002). 83 Campbell, 66ff. For a brief study of Wesley’s concept of holiness see Laurence W. Wood, "The Origin, Development, and Consistency of John Wesley's Theology of Holiness," Wesleyan Theological Journal 2, no. 43 (1998): 33-55. 35
being conformed to the likeness of Christ, participation in the Kingdom of God that the Spirit
represents in power, meant not only an ethical holiness but also mission and helping those in need.84
His was a public holiness, an exocentric holiness that risked participation with the world in order to reflect more wholly the model of Christ in this world. Far from being works meant to earn salvation, these are works that come out of salvation. We work because God has already worked, and is working, and works in and through us to join with others in a communal, active holiness. We can work because of the Spirit’s work in us; we must work because of the Spirit’s work in us.
Puritanism
Wesley’s Christian Library did not merely assert an Eastern Orthodox perspective, nor was he a restorationist seeking an uncritical return to the earliest Christian communities. The Christian life, as called for in Macarius, was significantly helped by further elucidation. Following his four ancient Fathers, Wesley included writings from a small selection of foreign writers, which he translated: John Arndt, Blaise Pascal, Antoinette Bourignon, Don Juan D’Avila, and Miguel de
Molinos, as well as anonymous devotional tracts. There were two more anonymous English treatises, then a selection of twenty-nine Church of England authors, primarily from the early to mid-seventeenth century, with Charles Howe (1661-1742) the youngest of the selection. Although,
84 Campbell, x notes, “Although my researches have indeed shown that Wesley was attracted to the doctrine of sanctification expressed in the Spiritual Homilies attributed to Macarius, they also show that Wesley consistently omitted references to ascetic life and to the notion of theiosis—‘divinization’ or ‘deification’—perhaps the most distinctively Eastern note in the Macarian literature.” That Wesley omitted references to these should not, I suggest, indicate his disagreement with these topics but rather awareness of the broader public perception. Wesley’s own emphasis on sanctification draws deeply from Orthodox notions of theosis, to the point they are arguably equivalent, and his own wrestling with topics such as spiritual disciplines, as well as his very inconsistent relationships with women, point to his own appreciation for asceticism yet realizing it was not something to be copied exactly in his own day both because of his more social action oriented spirituality and because of the high suspicion that Catholic monasticism was perceived. Wesley’s goal was to spread the underlying message, not to get distracted by arguments over misunderstood words or practices. On page 66, Campbell writes that “Wesley eliminated this controversial term from his edition of the Homilies.” He continues, noting that in Wesley’s translation, the “Spiritual Homilies assert that the Christian ought to do good ‘by violence’ until he can do it freely; they also describe ‘Degrees of Perfection.’ The Homilies speak of a ‘Sanctification of the Spirit’ which can be termed ‘an Entire Redemption from Sin,’ or ‘the Baptism of Fire and of the Holy Ghost.’ Similarly, those who attain to spiritual perfection are described as ‘baptized into the Holy Spirit.’” 36
a further examination of Wesley’s interest in these particular authors would be a helpful and useful
study, because of his own strong commitment to the Church of England these are not surprising
inclusions and point to Wesley’s own continued interest in the spirituality of his own, and his parents, chosen tradition. More curious is the thirty-one Puritan writers who Wesley commends for his preachers and all his followers, curious because he is commending their deep insights even as he continues throughout his life to heartily fight against Methodism leaving the Church of England and embracing a more explicit nonconformity.85 Only two of the authors he chose lived into the eighteenth century, and both of them were born around 1630.86 Robert Monk writes, “Wesley’s distinction between ‘Noncomformist’ (understanding here those Puritan ministers ejected in 1662) and ‘Dissenters’ allowed him to identify with the ‘moderate’ Puritans who, like himself, sought to renew the church from within rather than to separate from it.”87
At the end of his extensive study of the similarity of Puritan thought with Wesley, Monk
concludes with some observations about the “foundational attributes of the church that grew out of
Puritanism and out of Wesley’s work.”88 He notes that both Wesley and the Puritans recaptured the
85 Not surprisingly, Wesley chose four sermons from his grandfather Samuel Annesley to be included in this collection. 86 Monk, 2nd edition, 22 notes that Wesley selection of Puritan authors was “principally confined to authors who were active after 1640. Only five of those who were leaders in the movement during its earlier days are included.” On the other side, “With only two exceptions, Wesley chose not to use works by Nonconformist authors of his own period, although a number had been suggested by Doddridge.” 87 Monk, 2nd edition, 239. A couple pages later, 241, Monk does add some caution for interpretation of Wesley and Puritans. “Once again, however, we need to be warned against overemphasis on this important relationship. Wesley’s movement, for all its similarities to the earlier movement, was not a renewed Puritanism, nor was Wesley a Puritan. We must recognize the contribution of the multifarious roots of Wesley’s theology and teachings, which, when combined, gave his movement its unique character.” With this in mind, “when we do that, Puritanism must appear among those roots and should not be discounted as a significant contributor to the uniqueness of Methodism.” Concerning the idea of “moderate” Puritans, Monk, 245 writes, “Richard Baxter’s name and teachings have run like a thread throughout this study. Baxter is a prime example of this moderate position and it is with him that Wesley most closely identifies himself.” 88 Monk, 2nd edition, 241. In the conclusion of the first edition of his book, Monk specifies seven conclusions based on his investigation. This list is not included in his second edition, though there is no indication that Monk would disagree with his earlier conclusions. While I suspect the change is more stylistic rather than a change in view, I am wary about asserting these as representing the most recent thinking of Monk on this topic. These seven conclusions, 245ff., are as follows. “First, the use of Puritan writings, properly abridged and edited, was, to a large extent motivated by Wesley’s desire to make use of expressions of truth as he understood it no matter what the source.” The second conclusion is “correlations between the two traditions are principally to be found in their interpretations of particular doctrines, 37
essential truth that “every person—in Wesley’s terminology ‘I, even I’—has the possibility and promise of a relationship to God” with this being an “existential confrontation that lies at the very core of meaningful religious life, be it personal or corporate.” He continues, noting, “Out of a personal relationship to God, made possible through grace and appropriated through human faith in
Jesus Christ, comes a vibrant awareness of new possibilities for meaningful life. The dynamic energy of this experience demands expression by both precept and example in daily living.”89 This expression in daily living was not a matter of keeping certain religious laws or performing regular practices. Though these were elements of both Methodist and Puritan piety, at the core of both
Puritan and Methodist spirituality was “the changed lives of individuals who committed themselves
to Christ through these movements.”90
These changed lives were not lived out in isolation from the world but within the world,
working to bring change to the world based on their renewed sense of life in God. “Involvement in
the social and political life of the community kept the Puritans from the quietist tendencies of
specific teachings, and actual practice. In these Wesley does not necessarily gain his own insights from Puritan writers but he does, on the whole, recognize his agreement with them, consciously comment them, and establish them as valid interpretations and practice for his own followers.” Third, the “correlation is most definite and distinct in those areas in which Wesley’s use of Puritan precept and example becomes the very pattern and manual of practice for Methodists.” Fourth, “it is with the ‘moderate’ Puritans that Wesley most closely identifies himself. Fifth, “Wesley’s attitude toward the Puritans showed evidence of growing appreciation as early as 1737-38 when he began to read some of their major works.” Sixth, there was a similarity of concerns in how Wesley and the Puritans of 1662 responded to the Church of England. Seventh, “the similarity between the spirit, theology, and practice of Wesley and the Puritans, the real relationship evident in theology and teachings, and his definite dependence upon that tradition for instances of precept and pattern make it possible to affirm a conscious, distinct, and significant connection of Wesley with the Puritans tin their interpretation of, and compulsive concern for, the Christian life.” 89 Monk, 2nd edition, 241. 90 Monk, 2nd edition, 242. Scott Kisker has rightly noted that Wesley was not drawn to Puritanism in general but rather “a type of experiential piety which found expression certain wings of English Puritanism.” Scott Kisker, "John Wesley's Puritan and Pietist Heritage Reexamined " Wesleyan Theological Journal 99, no. 2 (1999), 266. Wesley rejected the Calvinism of the Puritans, or more specifically he rejected their idea of election. However, he was able to maintain a stable relationship with George Whitefield throughout Whitefield’s life, though this was not without its troubles along the way. In fact, what may have been the most influential of all Susanna Wesley’s writings—showing her tremendous, sophisticated theological reasoning—was an anonymous treatise she wrote responding to a perceived attack by Whitefield. In this she forcefully defends Wesley’s theology and attacks the Calvinistic doctrine of election held by Whitefield. See “Some Remarks on a Letter from Whitefield” in Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 462. Kisker suggests that Wesley was interested in Pietistic Puritanism, though Kisker does overemphasize Wesley’s devotion to Pietism in both its Puritan and its Continental forms, especially given Wesley’s very broad readings and influences. 38 seventeenth century Continental Pietism, to which they were otherwise closely related in emphasis and spirit.”91 They did not insist on a perceived holy work in the church over and against a separate sphere where religion did not influence their involvement. “Their conviction that God actively works to transform all spheres of life, including ‘life in the world,’ with all its ramifications, undergirded their insistence on involvement in the world.”92 Puritan and Wesleyan piety insisted on a social awareness, though it seems that generally Puritan efforts in the seventeenth century sought more explicit political leadership, asserting a “top down” approach while Wesley tended to emphasize personal change and to influence society from the bottom up, suggesting a differing underlying pneumatology. Though, while this differed from key expressions, it may not have been different than what was an inherent, core part of Puritan pneumatology.93
The Society of Friends
Indeed, it is this aspect of pneumatology that might both be an aspect of Wesley’s strong connection with Puritanism and explain some of his distinctions. Because of this, it may help to consider what some understand as the most radical expression of Puritanism, as it gives a sense of the theology which could arise from within the thought and practice of seventeenth century
Puritanism. Geoffrey Nuttall, in the beginning of his book The Holy Spirit in Puritan Faith and
Experience, writes, “In the present study early Quakerism is treated as of the first importance, because it indicates the direction of the Puritan movement as a whole.”94 He goes on to write that some “may hold that Quakerism is true Puritanism, purged of extraneous elements and carried to a
91 Monk, 2nd edition. 242ff. 92 Monk, 2nd edition, 243. 93 This is, of course, a generalization reflecting an influential trend in Puritanism that shaped both the Massachusetts colony and the overthrow of Charles I. However, it is very much the case this was not a universal approach among Puritans as Roger Williams reveals in New England (even if we limit the view to his opinions to his earliest career as an approved, though questioned, Puritan in Massachusetts) and John Wesley’s own grandfather, Samuel Annesley, indicates in England. 94 Geoffrey F. Nuttall, The Holy Spirit in Puritan Faith and Experience (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992), xxviii. 39
conclusion not only logical but desirable, and that it is Quakerism, with its fresh perception of the
implications of the doctrine of the Holy Spirit, is the beginning of a new cycle, full of promise for
the future.”95 Given Wesley’s own strong interest in Puritan writers, it is interesting to note his
opinion of Quakerism, which he provides in a letter responding to a person who had recently joined
the Society of Friends. “You ask me,” it opens, “ ‘is there any difference between Quakerism and
Christianity?’ I think there is. What that difference is, I will tell you as plainly as I can.”96 He
frames the letter not around contemporary writings or expressions, but around what he sees as the
key account of Quaker theology, the theological theses that open the Apology of Robert Barclay.97
Of the fifteen propositions, John Wesley finds no major disagreement with the first through the
sixth, though he has some quibbles with language and expression, especially in regards to Scripture.
As early Quaker understanding and use of Scripture was misunderstood from the beginning, this is
not surprising.98 After quoting the seventh proposition, Wesley notes, “Here there is a wide
difference between Quakerism and Christianity. This is flat justification by works.”99 He suggests that Barclay does not understand the “meaning of the word justification” with Barclay’s problem
95 Nuttall, 14. He adds, “ It could be shown that Presbyterianism represents not only the most conservative but the oldest party in Puritanism, Quakerism the youngest as well as the most radical. Moreover, the rise in turn of the Presbyterians, the Congregationalists, the Baptists, and the Quakers, and, after the appearance of Quakerism, the passage of individuals through the whole gamut, repeating the sequence in their own lives, might be presented, so far as concerns the doctrine of the Holy Spirit, as a largely logical development.” While Nuttall does not dispute this as a generalization, he does suggest that this is 1) an oversimplification, 2) as a chronology it does not represent an actual sequence in some cases, 3) it lacks “the clarity of a treatment confessedly logical.” 96 “A Letter To a Person Lately Joined with the People Called Quakers,” in Thomas Jackson, ed. The Works of John Wesley, 3rd ed., 14 vols. (Grand Rapids: Baker Books,2002), 10:177. This letter was written in Bristol, on February 10, 1747-48. 97 Robert Barclay, An Apology for the True Christian Divinity, 6th ed. (London: T. S. Raylton and L. Hinde, 1736; reprint, Google Books PDF). 98 Both Robert Barclay and George Fox honored Scripture, and felt it was the core teaching of Christianity. Their prioritizing of the Spirit was not meant to supersede Scripture, but rather was seen as an authoritative interpretation of Scripture, in which the Spirit would lead even uneducated Quakers to the right interpretation of a passage, even if educated clergyman supported a different perspective on a passage. 99Jackson, Works, 10:179. The seventh proposition is, as Wesley quotes from Barclay, “7. As many as receive the light, in them is produces a holy and spiritual birth, bringing forth holiness, righteousness, purity, and all other blessed fruits. By which holy birth, as we are sanctified, so we are justified.” 40 being that he confounds it with sanctification.100
Wesley moves on, noting that there is “no difference between Christianity and Quakerism” in the eighth and ninth propositions. This is not surprising, as the eighth proposition argues that those in whom “this holy birth is fully brought forth” are “to be free from actual sinning and transgressing of the law of God, and, in that respect, perfect.”101 He goes on to add a comment that
“The uncommon expression, ‘This holy birth brought forth,’ is taken from Jacob Behmen. And indeed so are many other expressions used by the Quakers, as are also many of their sentiments.”102
Wesley also approves the great part of proposition ten on ministry, but goes on to say there is
“manifest difference” between Christianity and Quakerism concerning an aspect of this proposition that Barclay notes in his full chapter on the topic. Barclay wrote, “We judge it no ways unlawful for a woman to preach in the assemblies of God’s people.”103 Wesley sharply disagrees with this, using 1 Timothy 2:11-12 as his main text. Given the later ministry of women in Methodism, however, Wesley seems to have altered his views on this matter, or at least softened them enough so as to allow those women who were gifted teachers to be justified in their public speaking.104
It is beginning with the eleventh proposition that Wesley finds his strongest, and most serious, disagreements with Quakerism. It is here that Barclay is beginning his statements on the
100 Jackson, Works, 10:179. For Wesley’s views on Justification see esp. Kenneth J. Collins, The Theology of John Wesley: Holy Love and the Shape of Grace (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2007), 155-193 and Maddox, Responsible Grace: John Wesley's Practical Theology , 166-172. 101 Jackson, Works, 10:179. 102 Jackson, Works, 10:179. “Jacob Behmen” was the common English spelling of Jakob Böhme in Wesley’s era. Carol Dale Spencer, Holiness: The Soul of Quakerism (Colorado Springs: Paternaster, 2007), 276 n5, writes, “Of all the mystics, Wesley had the strongest aversion to Boehme.” She adds, page 279, that “Some time later a strong antipathy towards Jacob Boehme apparently further cooled his fervor for the mystics. In 1742, after reading Boehme, he wrote in reaction that he wished Methodists would ‘drop quietists and mystics.’” See “Thoughts upon Jacob Behmen” in Jackson, Works, 9:509-518. 103 Barclay, 328. 104 For example, Laurence W. Wood, "The Need for a Contextual Interpretation of John Wesley's Sermons," Wesleyan Theological Journal 45, no. 1 (2010), 260 writes, “Mary Fletcher often met Wesley at designated locations where Wesley preached and she ‘exhorted.’ A likely scenario is that Wesley would preach on the theme found in The General Spread of the Gospel (1783)… Following Wesley’s sermon, Mary Fletcher would ‘exhort,’ urging her hearers to expect a ‘personal pentecost’ (a pneumatological focus) in anticipation of that future millennium…” 41 distinctives of Quaker practices in worship and in public society. Wesley affirms Barclay’s comments that “all true worship to God is offered in the inward and immediate moving of his own
Spirit’ and that “we ought to pray and preach, only where and when we are moved thereto by his
Spirit.”105 The sharp distinction comes in the practical expressions of this underlying value. Wesley writes, “I fear you do not in anywise understand what the being ‘moved in the Spirit’ means.”
Wesley proceeds to protest against the Quietist aspects of Quaker worship—which had become especially dominant in the eighteenth century—as well as arguing against Quaker rejection of baptism and the Lord’s supper. “In what Robert Barclay teaches concerning the Scripture, justification, baptism, and the Lord’s supper,” Wesley writes, “lies the main difference between
Quakerism and Christianity.”106
Wesley finds no disagreement with the fourteenth proposition which addresses the idea that
God alone can rightly instruct and govern the conscience, thus arguing it is “not lawful for any whatsoever to force the consciences of others.”107 But he does have issues with much of the fifteenth proposition, which deals with the unique Quaker response to authority and civil involvement. He rejects the Quaker prohibition against the use of titles, calling it a superstition, as is the Quaker use of thee and thou, which he suggests is a trifling habit and can hide hypocrisy, as these words suggest a piety that can easily be followed by dissembling or flattery. Wesley affirms the Quaker custom against “superfluities in apparel” but notes this is not a matter of color or shape of the apparel as much as it is about the expense, calling the specific Quaker style also a “mere superstition,” adding “let the difference lie in the price, that you may have the more wherewith to clothe them that have none.”108
105 Jackson, Works, 10:181. 106 Jackson, Works, 10:185. 107 Jackson, Works, 10:185. 108 Jackson, Works, 10:187. 42
Overall, Wesley’s argument against the Quakers is not against their underlying embrace of the work of the Holy Spirit, but is, in effect, using this underlying theology to address much Quaker practice as a new form of legalism and superstition. “You was zealous,” Wesley writes to his reader:
“… once for the love of God and man, for holiness of heart and holiness of life. You are now zealous for particular forms of speaking, for a set of phrases and opinions. Once your zeal was against ungodliness and unrighteousness, against evil tempers and evil works. Now it is against forms of prayers, against singing psalms or hymns, against appointing times of praying or preaching; against saying you to a single person, uncovering your head, or having too many buttons upon your coat. O what a fall is here! What poor trifles are these that now well-nigh engross your thoughts! Come back, come back , to the weightier matters of the law, to spiritual rational, scriptural religion. No longer waste your time and strength in beating the air, in vain controversies and strife of words; but bend your whole soul to the growing in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ, to the continually advancing in that holiness, without which you cannot see the Lord.”109
For Wesley, the emphasis of the Holy Spirit was far too important to be caught up in what he saw as trifling distinctions and internecine conflicts that did not have specific Scriptural authority on the topics of worship and civil interaction. The more active evangelistic priorities of early
Quakerism had, by Wesley’s era, come to emphasize precisely those aspects he found most distasteful, and in the light of a shared fundamental emphasis on personal holiness and the work of the Holy Spirit, he did not want to lose his followers to what he saw as a people caught up in so many distractions.110
He did not want those who had once seen the light to devolve back into what he understood as “almost Christians.” He sought to keep his followers focused on the primary goals of the Holy
Spirit in their own lives and in their own ministry, a task that was reflected in the fruit of the Spirit
109 Jackson, Works, 10:187ff. 110 For an excellent brief survey of Wesley’s response to Quakers, written from a Quaker perspective see Spencer, 271- 292. She concludes, “Wesley realized that when other controversies receded, William Law and the Quakers, the eighteenth century’s most faithful interpreters of the Christian mystics in the Age of Reason, were in the end his greatest and most steadfast allies in promoting holiness, a passion to which Wesley had devoted his entire life and vocation.” 43 and, most of all, in the love that the Spirit brings to the people of God. Inasmuch as Quakers reflected this, they were allies, inasmuch as Quakers emphasized their own particular interpretations of how this was to be expressed, Wesley found them dangerous. His ministry was one that shared the same roots, and the same priorities, but had different public expressions, ones that may have better reflected the popular Puritanism of his grandfather, and as such may have been more fully the
“logical” and “desirable” expression of a maturing Puritanism with an, arguably, more well- considered pneumatology that had over a century of lessons in orthodoxy and heresy to draw upon.111
The Altogether Christian
What is it that the Christian is supposed to focus on? It was not a matter of being honest and a good citizen, paying attention to truth, justice, and good works.112 Nor is it merely about watching what words are used, avoiding not only “all actual adultery, fornication, and uncleanness, but every word, or look, that either directly or indirectly tends thereto.”113 Indeed, according to Wesley, a person could be exceedingly moral—acting in a way one would expect a Christian to act, avoiding all vices and being quite involved at church, even praying with family and in private—but only be an “almost Christian.” All these actions suggest a person might even be entirely sincere, having “a real design to serve God, a hearty desire to do his will.”114 Instead of these seemingly identifiable signs, however, for Wesley for someone to be “altogether a Christian” a person has to experience real love, truly loving God and truly loving their neighbor, with this love being fully realized only in
111 For more thorough studies of Wesley’s pneumatology see Collins, Theology of John Wesley, 121-149; Maddox, Responsible Grace, 119-140; Lycurgus Monroe Starkey, Jr., "The Work of the Holy Spirit in the Theology of John Wesley" (Ph.D diss., Columbia University, 1953); Norman Lawrence Kellett, "John Wesley and the Restoration of the Doctrine of the Holy Spirit to the Church of England in the Eighteenth-Century" (PhD diss., Brandeis University, 1975); William M. Arnett, "The Role of the Holy Spirit in Entire Sanctification in the Writings of John Wesley," Wesleyan Theological Journal 14, no. 2 (1979): 15-30; Oden and Longden, Wesleyan Theological Heritage, 159-174; Winfield H. Bevins, "Pneumatology in John Wesley's Theological Method," Asbury Theological Journal 58, no. 2 (2003): 101-113. 112 See John Wesley, “The Almost Christian,” in Outler, Sermons, 1:131ff. 113 Outler, Sermons, 1:132ff. 114 Outler, Sermons, 1:134ff. 44 the context of a deep faith in Christ.115
This is a faith that works by love, bringing repentance and trust in the constant salvation of
God, purifying the heart from sin because of love that is stronger than death itself. This is a “love that doeth the works of God, glorying to spend and to be spent for all men, and that endureth with joy” the corrections of Christ and even the persecutions of others who try to undermine the faith.116
This is, to be sure, a high bar, separating the almost from the altogether based on a perception of love and faith, a perception which may not always be the most accurate indicator. Indeed, it is this understanding of sincerity in God’s service, and the description of an “almost Christian” that
Charles Wesley likely had in mind in his letter to Susanna. Being a true Christian is, it seems, limited to those who have already achieved a significant maturity in their faith, no doubt discouraging many—such as Charles and John themselves—even as others, like Susanna, may have appreciated the goals but not the labels.
Indeed this could discourage many who, like Susanna, had a real faith even through periods of trial and suffering that caused that faith to be less than joy-filled in every moment while at the same time falsely encouraging those who were less than faithful but more self-confident. This is a reality John Wesley came to realize, and added a response to his preaching. “How many,” he asks,
“have mistaken the voice of their own imagination for this witness of the Spirit of God, and then idly presumed they were the children of God, while they were doing the works of the devil! These are truly and properly enthusiasts; and, indeed, in the worst sense of the word.”117 On the other side of the enthusiasts, Wesley notes, are those who so despair of any absolute evidence they will not
115 Outler, Sermons, 1:137ff. 116 Outler, Sermons, 1:139. 117 “The Witness of the Spirit” in Outler, Sermons, 1:269. This was written in 1746. 45 believe any who speak of a true work of God.118 Instead of these two extremes, Wesley asks, “May we not steer a middle course?” This middle course involves keeping “ a sufficient distance from that spirit of error and enthusiasm without denying the gift of God and giving up the great privilege of his children.”119 He answers this with an exploration into what it means for God’s Spirit to testify with our spirit, and how this testimony can be “clearly and solidly distinguished from the presumption of a natural mind, and from the delusion of the devil.”120 The testimony of the Spirit, according to Wesley is “an inward impression on the soul, whereby the Spirit of God directly
‘witnesses to my spirit, that I am a child of God.’” This means that the Spirit is witness to the fact that “Jesus hath loved me, and given himself for me; and that all my sins are blotted out, and I, even
I, am reconciled to God.”121 This witness of the Spirit is accompanied by a transformation of life, with Wesley noting “By the fruits which he hath wrought in your spirit, you shall know the testimony of the Spirit of God.”122
This emphasis on the fruit of the Spirit is later taken up again in a sermon Wesley wrote twenty years later on the exact same passage, and given the exact same title.123 He notes that the
“immediate result of this testimony is, ‘the fruit of the Spirit;’ namely, ‘love, joy, peace, long- suffering, gentleness, goodness:’ And without these the testimony itself cannot continue. For it is inevitably destroyed, not only by the commission of any outward sin, or the omission of known
118 “Who can then be surprised if many reasonable men, seeing the dreadful effects of this delusion, and laboring to keep at the utmost distance from it, should sometimes lean toward another extreme? “ in Outler, Sermons, 1:270. 119 Outler, Sermons, 1:270. 120 Outler, Sermons, 1:270. 121 Outler, Sermons, 1:274. He continues with this: “That this ‘testimony of the Spirit of God’ must needs, in the very nature of things, be antecedent to the ‘testimony of our own spirit’ may appear from this single consideration: we must be holy of heart and holy in life before we can be conscious that we are so, before we can have ‘the testimony of our spirit’ that we are inwardly and outwardly holy. But we must love God before we can be holy at all; this being the root of all holiness. Now we cannot love God till we know he loves us: ‘We love him, because he first loved us.’ And we cannot know his pardoning love to us till his Spirit witnesses it to our spirit. Since therefore this ‘testimony of his Spirit’ must precede the love of God and all holiness, of consequence it must precede our inward consciousness thereof, or the ‘testimony of our spirit’ concerning them.” The Spirit works first, in witness and power. 122 Outler, Sermons, 1:283. 123 Both these sermons were based on Romans 8:16. 46
duty, but by giving way to any inward sin; in a word, by whatever grieves the Holy Spirit of
God.”124 There cannot be, Wesley asserts, any “real testimony of the Spirit without the fruit of the
Spirit,” however, he seems to soften the nature of this experience from being either there or not
there by suggesting there are degrees of this experience. He writes that “the fruit of the Spirit
immediately springs from this testimony; not always indeed in the same degree, even when the
testimony is first given: and much less afterwards. Neither joy nor peace is always at one stay; no,
nor love; as neither is the testimony itself always equally strong and clear.”125 We do not have to
have the fullness of a complete transformation to be considered a participant with the Spirit.
However it may be experienced in any given moment, Wesley continues to insist that the witness of
the Spirit is always accompanied by the fruit of the Spirit, writing the “true witness of the Spirit is
known by its fruit.”126
John Fletcher among Wesley’s Successors
If I know anything of real charity (which I very often doubt) it harmonises with divine love, as the sounds of different parts, in Music, harmonise with each other; their unison comes from the exactness of their difference, and they are sometimes all the more delightful as they appear more conflicting: the conflict between sentiments of brotherly love and those of divine love, and the subordination of the former, shape the sweet struggle in the soul of the Faithful, this sunecomai en twn duo of the Apostle which concludes with a Sacrifice of renunciation of which the unfeeling man is not capable: the expression “Spread the moral Sense all o’er” which you somewhere use, gives me the Idea of that Charity which I seek. (John Fletcher, 1759)127
Because of John Wesley’s long life, and a long life that was filled with activity almost to the
very end, we have a much stronger sense of his trajectory as a minister and as a theologian, not only
124 Outler, Sermons, 1:286. 125 Outler, Sermons, 1:288. 126 He writes of the fruit, “however this fruit may be clouded for a while, during the time of strong temptation, so that it does not appear to the tempted person, while Satan is sifting him as wheat; yet the substantial part of it remains, even under the thickest cloud. It is true, joy in the Holy Ghost may be withdrawn, during the hour of trial; yea, the soul may be ‘exceedingly sorrowful,’ while ‘the hour and power of darkness’ continue; but even this is generally restored with increase, till we rejoice ‘with joy unspeakable and full of glory.’” Outler, Sermons, 1:297ff. 127 From a letter written to Charles Wesley on September 29, 1759, in Peter S. Forsaith, ed. "Unexampled Labours": Letters of the Revd John Fletcher to Leaders in the Evangelical Revival (Peterborough: Epworth,2008), 79ff. 47
for his own career but for the expectations and directions he anticipated for Methodism in general.
This includes not only the standard interpretations and practices he expected for his Methodist
ministers, which he helped codify in his Sunday Service and his Notes on the Old and New
Testament, but also takes shape in those he sought to help lead the movement after his death. 128 A
key leader Wesley seemed to particularly groom for this role was John Fletcher, born Jean
Guillaume de la Fléchère, an Anglican minister from Switzerland who had immigrated to England
in his early twenties. His recent biographer, Patrick Streif, writes, “The youngest of a family of five
girls and three boys, he was born in the Swiss town of Nyon, on Lake Geneva, probably on 11
September 1729. His parents belonged to the lower ranks of the nobility. His father held local
political offices, and owned vineyards.”129 Upon arrival in England in 1750, Fletcher first was a private tutor with the Hill Family. While religious even early on, his spiritual life seemed to become especially important not long after starting in this role.130 It was not long after this that he first heard
about the Methodists while he and the Hill family were in the country.131 When they returned to
128 John Wesley, John Wesley's Sunday Service of the Methodists in North America, ed. James F. White (Nashville: United Methodist Publishing House, 1984); John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament, 2 vols. (Kansas City, Mo.: Beacon Hill Press, 1983); John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Old Testament, 2 vols. (Salem, Ohio: Schmul Publishers, 1975). 129 Patrick Streiff, Reluctant Saint?: A Theological Biography of Fletcher of Madeley, trans. G.W.S. Knowles (Peterborough: Epworth, 2001), 3. 130 Streiff, 23. He writes, “By the time the second letter was written in December [1752], the balance between these areas of interest had shifted. Fletcher now liked to immerse himself more deeply in spiritual things. He wanted to take time to reflect upon himself and God. Instead of going out hunting, he would pay attention to his own soul. He told of extraordinary examples of God’s protection, while he was out riding, and described how he found solitude and isolation more congenial than the receptions which Mr. Hill gave before parliamentary elections… Near the estate he got to know a seventy-year-old minister distinguished by his gentle character and piety—qualities which, according to Fletcher, were rare in this country.” In regards to his childhood faith, in a letter written to Charles Wesley in 1757, Fletcher writes, “…I question whether I should not have dropt into hell under that burden that very night If the Lord had not come to my relief. He came and heaven came with him, my proud heart was melted and I began to love and weep much because much was forgiven me. I was about 7 years old when the Lord made thus his goodness to pass before me for the first time.” Forsaith, ‘Unexampled Labours’, 42. He notes a little later in the later that by age ten he had fallen back into a life of sin, but “had frequent returns of repentance and some times fresh assurances of my forgiveness, but without minding it much I sin’d it away as often as I received it: When I was sixteen the Lord Shewd me that it was not possible to serve two masters…” 131 Forsaith, 45. 48
London, he found local Methodists, began attending services, and joined a ‘society.’132
In 1756, after a period of lively faith and renewal, John Fletcher began to think about ordination, and so he sought advice from John Wesley, whose answer is not extant, but seems to have almost certainly been encouraging to the young tutor.133 His employer, Mr. Hill, a Member of
Parliament for Shrewsbury, helped him significantly with the process.134 John Fletcher became a deacon in the Church of England on March 6, 1757, and an ordained priest on March 13. The next day he was appointed to the position of curate in Madeley, though he stayed on with the Hill family for three more years.135 He continued on in service with the Hill family until the two sons reached university age, at which point he took up the position as Vicar of Madeley.136 John Wesley was opposed to Fletcher taking this new role, as Wesley saw this as tying Fletcher down into one location and keeping Fletcher in a dangerous amount of solitude. “It seemed to John Wesley that
John Fletcher, would be lost forever if he settled in a remote Anglican parish.”137 This was to be an area of disagreement between Fletcher and Wesley throughout most of the rest of Fletcher’s life.
Fletcher, however, continued to be committed to both his parish and his solitude—which provided significant time for study. His time in his parish lasted longer than his solitude, however. At the age of fifty two, in 1781, he finally married Mary Bosanquet, one of the earliest and most important female leaders and preachers in Methodism.138 Their nuptials came after decades of interactions,
132 Streiff, 26. 133 Streiff, 47ff. 134 Streiff, 49. 135 Streiff, 49ff. 136 Streiff, 60. 137 Streiff, 65. 138 While it is well beyond this present study to devote any, let alone significant, space to Mary Fletcher, further consideration of her life and work would not only be interesting, but indeed given the almost entire lack of contemporary study it is a necessary task. While there has been a recent upsurge in study of John Fletcher, there has not been an accompanying interest in his wife, who was indeed an important Methodist leader prior to her marriage and well after John Fletcher’s death. A study of her life, which included her personal journal and letters was reprinted many times soon after her death and well into the 19th century. See Henry Moore, ed. The Life of Mrs. Mary Fletcher, Consort and Relict of the Rev. John Fletcher, Vicar of Madeley, Salop, Compiled from Her Journal and Other Authentic Documents (New York: Published by T. Mason and G. Lane, for the Methodist Episcopal Church,1840; reprint, Nabu 49
mostly by letter, in which it was clear they had long been romantically interested in each other, but
he did not follow through on a more developed relationship until late in his life.139 He died four
years later, on Sunday, August 14, 1785, at the age of fifty-six.140
On the same day that he was ordained a priest, John Fletcher visited John Wesley who was, it seems, in poor health and in need of assistance. He returned on March 20, something Wesley notes in his journal:
Mr. Fletcher helped me again. How wonderful are the ways of God! When my bodily strength failed, and none in England were able and willing to assist me, he sent me help from the mountains of Switzerland! And an help meet for me in every respect; where could I have found such another?141
This close, intimate relationship continued for the rest of Fletcher’s life. Indeed, Fletcher
went beyond being a helper to John in his infirmities, to being a helper in his leadership, his
Press). This has, however, been long out of print, with very little interest in her shown since this time. In the most contemporary manner of gauging popular and academic interest, it is notable that Mary Fletcher does not, as of this writing, even have her own Wikipedia page. Indeed, significant further study is needed on many of Wesley’s women leaders, such as Hester Ann Rogers. See Hester Ann Rogers, A Short Account of the Experience of Mrs. Hester Ann Rogers (New York: Published by Daniel Hitt, for the Methodist connection in the United States. Paul & Thomas, printers, 1811). Such biographies that included a great deal of the subjects own writings were quite popular in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, but seem to have been ignored for the most part since this time, for reasons which are unclear but may relate to the overall discussion about women in Christian leadership. See Christina Marie Devlin, "Piety Promoted: Female First-Person Narratives in Eighteenth-Century Quakerism and Methodism" (PhD diss., University of Chicago, 2001). She writes, 182, that “Methodist writers… showed that female first-person narratives operated in tandem with other religious literature—sermons, journals, doctrinal tracts, hymns, poems, and biography— to convey a didactic message about the universal meaning of true religion.” 139 Streiff, 268 notes that John Wesley “wrote to say that he would not have wanted to see Mary Bosanquet joined in marriage to any other person than John Fletcher.” On the same page, Streiff quotes a letter Charles Wesley wrote to Mary Fletcher soon after their marriage: “Yours I believe is one of the few marriages that are made in heaven. Better late than never—My friend had thoughts of proposing to you (I am his witness) 20 years ago: but he bore false witness against himself, that he then sought not you but yours… I sincerely rejoice that he has at last found his Twin-soul, and trust you will be happier by your meeting thro’ all eternity.. When I heard of your marriage I said—It will be adding 2 or 3 years to his life. Many will rejoice if it should be a Dozen.” All indications suggest theirs was an extremely happy and peace-filled marriage. 140 Streiff, 298. In a clear indication of the affection and respect John Wesley held for John Fletcher, at the time of his death Wesley penned a brief biography. See “The Life and Death of Mr. John Fletcher” in Jackson, Works, 11:275-365. On the last page, Wesley writes, “Within fourscore years, I have known many excellent men, holy in heart and life: But one equal to him, I have not known; one so uniformly and deeply devoted to God. So unblamable a man, in every respect, I have not found either in Europe or America. Nor do I expect to find another such on this side of eternity. Yet it is possible we may be such as he was. Let us, then, endeavour to follow him as he followed Christ.” 141 John Wesley, Works 21, 89 (20.3.1757) quoted in Streiff, 50. 50
theology, and in the direction of the Methodist movement.142 This was so much the case that John
Wesley saw Fletcher as his eventual successor as the spiritual and practical leader of the
Methodists. As such, it is worthwhile to briefly look at what some consider Fletcher’s key
contributions.143
In discussing Fletcher’s theology, Patrick Streiff writes:
In the 1760s Fletcher was still expecting Christ’s return in the near future, but by now the dominant theme was the hope of being filled with the Holy Spirit. Throughout his life, Fletcher’s view of the future was marked by the expectation of a new, more comprehensive operation of God’s grace, but for the later Fletcher, with his pneumatological preoccupations, apocalyptic gave way more and more to the expectation of a new Pentecost and a church of the Spirit.”144
A little later, Streiff notes:
“Throughout Fletcher’s life, the new birth continued to be his central concern. Because the new birth is a work of the Holy Spirit, and because its goal is perfection, being filled with the Holy Spirit, or baptized with the Holy Spirit (which for Fletcher amounted to the same thing), became the main content of his hope.”145
With this, the experience of holiness is not about a person’s own ability, but rather is a reflection of the work of the Holy Spirit in the person, leading them towards a deeper experience of the fullness of God’s identity even in this present, a present that can, in the power of the Spirit, more fully reflect the Kingdom of God. This explicit pneumatology emphasizing Pentecost and a baptism of the Spirit is, obviously, one that is now emphasized in the contemporary Pentecostal charismatic,
142 John Wesley wrote, “Nor was ours a slight or ordinary acquaintance; but we were of one heart and of one soul. We had no secrets between us for many years; we did not purposely hid anything from each other. From time to time he consulted me, and I him, on the most important occasions; and he constantly profess, not only much esteem, but, what I valued far more, much affection.” Jackson, Works, 11:275. Laurence Wood writes, “Fletcher is Methodism’s first systematic theologian.” Laurence W. Wood, Pentecostal Grace (Wilmore, Ky.: Francis Asbury Publishing, 1980), 177. 143 In this present discussion, I will be narrowly limiting my discussion of Fletcher’s thought. His writings, however, are worth continued, thorough study. His collected works remains the best starting place for study of his thought: John Fletcher, The Works of the Reverend John Fletcher, Late Vicar of Madeley, 4 vols. (Salem, Ohio: Schmul Publishers, 1974). Recently there have been some more significant contributions to these works. For additional, recently published primary sources see Peter Forsaith, Unexampled Labours, and Laurence W. Wood, "[John Fletcher, Containing Unpublished Works of J Fletcher, Wesley's "Coadjutor"]," Asbury Theological Journal 53, no. 1 (1998), 5-96. 144 Streiff, 46. 145 Streiff, 54. 51 and holiness movements. If we see Fletcher as both the successor and developer of a more robust
Wesleyan theology, one that Wesley himself would approve of, then there not only is a strong connection between contemporary movements, but indeed it might even be said these movements more fully express the intended direction of Methodism. At the same time, seeing such a strong connection encourages those in these movements to return to the well and find a great deal of counsel, insight and direction from both Fletcher and Wesley.
Methodist theologian Laurence Wood has been a key voice in emphasizing a strong return to
Fletcher studies and has argued for a very intimate connection between Fletcher and Wesley, suggesting that Fletcher’s interpretation of Wesley is a key area of continued study for Wesley scholars. Wood has done significantly more than suggesting this, as he has provided key major studies exploring Fletcher’s writings in an exhaustive fashion and providing key points of interpretation. His most important work in this regard is The Meaning of Pentecost in Early
Methodism. Wood writes:
I will show in this study that the roots of the Wesleyan-Holiness tradition and Pentecostalism extend back to John Wesley by way of John Fletcher. I will show that it is found in early Methodism, both in America and Britain. It will be seen that early Methodist preachers such as Thomas Coke, Adam Clarke, John Bangs, Nathan Bangs, and Richard Watson specifically linked the ‘baptism of the Spirit’ and entire sanctification. It will be seen that the early Methodist devotional literature highlighted ‘the baptism of the Spirit’ as the meaning of entire sanctification, including Henry Moore’s biography of Mary Fletcher (1817) and Adam Clarke’s biography of Mary Cooper (1814), as well as Wesley’s and Benson’s biography of John Fletcher. I will show that Francis Asbury promoted and required to read Fletcher’s writings, including his main treatise on Christian perfection that highlighted ‘the baptism of the Spirit,’ which was first published in America in 1796. It will be seen that the idea of Pentecostal perfection was explicit in early Methodism and self-consciously embraced by Wesley and his preachers. It will also be seen that Wesley gave his imprimatur to Fletcher’s writings.146
This text won the “Smith/Wynkoop Book Award” from the Wesleyan Theological Society
146 Laurence W. Wood, The Meaning of Pentecost in Early Methodism : Rediscovering John Fletcher as Wesley's Vindicator and Designated Successor (Lanham, Md.: Scarecrow Press, 2002), xvi. 52
in 2003, suggesting it was well received by many.147 It was not, however, well-received by all. Peter
Forsaith, in his recent edition of Fletcher’s letters, noted that “Larry Wood’s The Meaning of
Pentecost in Early Methodism is a theological rather than biographical essay and sails against the
wind as it seeks to read Fletcher—and, indeed, Methodism—against the themes of the Wesleyan
Holiness movement. Wood’s arguments have been challenged and the work is undermined by poor
use of primary sources.”148 Kenneth Collins has been even more dismissive of Wood. In a recent
article, after a particularly harsh overview of Wood’s work, in which he accuses him of some of the most sophomoric logical fallacies in his arguments, Collins writes, “Wood’s work has been criticized by leading scholars in Wesleyan/Methodist Studies, namely by the late Robert Lyon,
Donald Dayton, and Randy Maddox.”149 He proceeds to list these scholars’ chief arguments against
Wood’s theses, as has been published over the last thirty years. He then concludes with these strong
147 In his review of the text, Melvin Dieter writes, “Renowned historian Douglas Southall Freeman, according to his biographer David E. Johnson, questioned whether or not he should publish the manuscript for his highly acclaimed volume on the Civil War. He realized that his research had utilized so many formerly ignored or unknown primary sources critical to any history of the conflict that I would call for a reassessment and possible revision of much that already had been written in that field of study. His book would refuse to be ignored! Laurence Wood’s volume on John Fletcher and Fletcher’s enduring influence upon John Wesley and Methodism also will not be ignored! Any knowledgeable review of the bibliography of the field of Wesley Studies over the past half-century will reveal that Wood’s research and conclusions introduce a similar dynamic into past and future scholarship in this more limited field of studies.” Melvin E. Dieter, "The Meaning of Pentecost in Early Methodism: Rediscovering John Fletcher as John Wesley's Vindicator and Designated Successor," Wesleyan Theological Journal 38, no. 1 (2003), 242. Cf. J. Steven O'Malley, "The Meaning of Pentecost in Early Methodism: Rediscovering John Fletcher as John Wesley's Vindicator and Designated Successor," Methodist History 42, no. 3 (2004): 185-186. 148 Forsaith, 7. In his footnote, Forsaith points to ‘A Brief Sketch of Fletcher's Life’ which opens Woods’ first chapter , and he adds, “which contains serious inaccuracies.” Forsaith does not, however, point out what these inaccuracies are. In a private email sent to me on May 26, 2010 Laurence Wood writes, “Peter's comment in his book which you refer to below is unfortunate. He was influenced to say those things after talking with Randy Maddox and he does not understand the American issues on this topic that have been debated within the Wesleyan Theological Society. By his own admission, he is not interested in theology, but only the pure history of things related to Fletcher. It's funny that the thing he objected to in my book that was an error came directly out of Wesley's own life of Fletcher, concerning whether or not Fletcher pursued "the normal course of study" at Geneva. This particular issue was a minor point, and of course as a result of Patrick Streiff's work on Fletcher it is now recognized that Fletcher probably did not follow the "normal course" of study, but only attended the academy at Geneva for one year. That information was not available to me at the time because it had not yet been published.” Wood also noted that he has an upcoming article titled "John Fletcher as the Theologian of Early American Methodism" which will be published in a book Peter Streiff is editing. Streiff’s own lack expertise in the theological aspects of the topic are also not hidden, as it was Kenneth Loyer who provided theological additions and comments in Streiff’s text on how Wesley’s theology has been understood in recent North American scholarship. 149 Kenneth J. Collins, "The State of Wesley Studies in North America: A Theological Journey," Wesleyan Theological Journal 44, no. 2 (2009), 34. 53
words:
In light of the preceding evidence from Collins, Lyon, Dayton, and Maddox it is evident that Wood’s pentecostal paradigm is a failed one. It is unable to walk the gauntlet, so to speak, of the probing and critical questions that must ever be a part of sound scholarship in Wesley studies. In fact, the only reason that the paradigm repeatedly surfaces is because Wood has used this paradigm to criticize the work of leading Wesley scholars throughout the decades, scholars who then respond and thus give continuing life to what they should have laid to rest.150
Collins neglects, however, to note that much of Wood’s “criticism” of these Wesley scholars has been part of his response to their critiques of his various articles, in which he has been meticulous in his use of primary sources and fair in his treatment of broader Wesley scholarship.
Collins also neglects to note that Wood has repeatedly, and I believe successfully, responded to the particular critiques that Collins lists. Indeed, Wood again provides a thorough response to Collins in an article published earlier this year.151
A more thorough examination of the scholarly conversation concerning how to best understand John Fletcher’s theological contributions and how much he should be considered an authoritative interpreter of John Wesley is well beyond the scope of this present work. It is a conversation that is continuing, and one that has seemingly developed into sharply divided camps.
Despite Collins’ insistence that the state of Wesley scholarship has decided firmly against Wood and his use of Fletcher, this appears to be entirely not the case.152 Indeed, considering Wood’s
150 Collins, “The State of Wesley Scholarship,” 36. 151 See Wood, "The Need for a Contextual Interpretation of John Wesley's Sermons," 259-267. Given the strident tone of Collins response to Woods, one cannot help but suspect a fair amount of truth to the quote from Melvin Dieter above, and the effect such a radical reassessment would have on already strongly established scholars, some of whom may respond with significantly more charity if their own life’s work was not itself being challenged. O’Malley, 186 notes, “It appears that criticism of the author’s position, which surfaced before the book was published and so did not have the benefit of his full documentation, is more a reflection of the unequivaocal style of his argumentation than a substantial critique of his evidence.” It is, though, curious that much of the earlier criticisms of Wood have been repeated in later articles, such as we find in Collins recent contribution. Much of the content of Wood’s responses have been pointing back to the evidence he showed in his larger work. It seems the critiques are, in part, attempts to dissuade reading this larger, more significant work, rather than entirely accurate responses to Wood’s fuller study. 152 I note this humbly and with great respect for the scholarship of Collins, Dayton, and Maddox. Yet, in my own, albeit, initial studies, I find Woods to be entirely convincing both in his own work and in use of the primary sources Fletcher has left behind. Woods is a serious theologian and historian whose efforts deserve continued study and much 54
scholarship and his continued responses on this matter, I would suggest that it will be Wood who
will be proven to be right, both on the particular topics at hand and in the continued interest that
Fletcher’s writings will no doubt provoke in future scholarship.153 “I suggest,” Wood writes, “ there
is a great need among Wesley scholars today to explore Fletcher’s interpretation of Wesley, which
might provide some additional insight for understanding the complexity of Wesley’s theology.” I
not only agree with this sentiment, but have been inspired to, at least in part, continue to take up this
challenge. For it seems that in Fletcher we find not only a theological connection with
contemporary Pentecostal and charismatic terminology, but also a significant theologian whose
insights are immensely helpful guides and critiques for continuing pneumatologically-charged
movements.154 The emphasis on a new Pentecost and the phrase, “baptized with the Spirit” we see
more regard than some recent articles have suggested. Indeed, a problem with entering into this debate, however, is that the expertise of the various scholars is so profound, and their reading of Wesley so vast, that it will take younger scholars a great deal of time to come to terms with not only the voluminous writings of Wesley but also the large collection of Fletcher’s work, some of which has only been quite recently published. 153 The conversation about Wood’s work is extensive. A partial list of contributions to this continuing dialogue besides those already mentioned includes: Donald W. Dayton, "John Fletcher as John Wesley's Vindicator and Designated Successor? A Response to Laurence W. Wood," Pneuma 26, no. 2 (2004): 355-361; Randy L. Maddox, "Wesley's Understanding of Christian Perfection: In What Sense Pentecostal?," Wesleyan Theological Journal 99, no. 2 (1999); 78-110; Randy L. Maddox and Laurence W. Wood, "Point/Counterpoint: "Baptism of the Spirit" Language," Wesleyan Theological Journal 36, no. 1 (2001): 56-58; Laurence W. Wood, "Thoughts Upon the Wesleyan Doctrine of Entire Sanctification with Special Reference to the Roman Catholic Doctrine of Confirmation," Wesleyan Theological Journal 15, no. 1 (1980): 88-99; Laurence W. Wood, "Pentecostal Sanctification in Wesley and Early Methodism," Pneuma 21, no. 2 (1999): 251-287.Laurence W. Wood, "Historiographical Criticisms of Randy Maddox's Response," Wesleyan Theological Journal 34, no. 2 (1999): 111-135; Laurence W. Wood, "An Appreciative Reply to Donald W. Dayton's "Review Essay"," Pneuma 27, no. 1 (2005): 163-172; Laurence W. Wood, "The Biblical Sources of John Fletcher's Pentecostal Theology," Wesleyan Theological Journal 42, no. 2 (2007): 98-113. 154 For more thorough studies of John Fletcher see esp. Joseph Benson, The Life of the Rev. John W. De La Flechere: Compiled from the Narrative of the Rev. Mr. Wesley; the Biographical Notes of the Rev. Mr. Gilpin; from His Own Letters; and Other Authentic Documents (New York: Carlton and Phillips, 1854). See also Wood, The Meaning of Pentecost, 10 and 15n64 for a brief history of Fletcher scholarship. For more recent studies see Barbara Coulton, "Tutor to the Hills : The Early Career of John Fletcher," Proceedings of the Wesley Historical Society 47, no. 3 (1989): Peter S. Forsaith, "Portraits of John Fletcher of Madeley and Their Artists," Proceedings of the Wesley Historical Society 47 (1990): 187-201; John A. Knight, "John Fletcher's Influence on the Develpment of Wesleyan Theology in America," Wesleyan Theological Journal 13 (1978): 13-33; Robert A. Mattke, "John Fletcher's Methodology in the Antinomian Controversy of 1770-76," Wesleyan Theological Journal 3, no. 1 (1968): 38-47; Timothy L. Smith, "How John Fletcher Became the Theologian of Wesleyan Perfectionism 1770-1776," Wesleyan Theological Journal 15, no. 1 (1980): 68-87; Stephen Allen Flick, "John William Fletcher, Vicar of Madeley: A Pastoral Theology (Fletcher, John William, England)" (PhD diss., Drew University, 1994); Waldo Emerson Knickerbocker, "The Doctrine of Authority in the Theology of John Fletcher" (PhD diss., Emory University, 1972); John Allan Knight, "John William Fletcher and the Early Methodist Tradition" (Phd diss., Vanderbilt University, 1966); Blake J. Neff, "John Wesley and John Fletcher on 55 in Fletcher, and seemingly arguably by Wesley, an important step in theological orientation of
Methodism, making the idea of perfection explicitly pneumatological, and in this finding a renewed connection with Macarius, and indeed also the earliest writings of Quakerism, that most radical expression of seventeenth century Puritanism.
Conclusion
As my goal was to look at Wesley as part of a stream of the Spirit’s work through the course of history, I primarily focused on those influences which fed into and flowed out of his significant contributions. Although not within the scope of this present effort, the political, social, and religious contexts of his era were also vitally important and understanding these more fully is essential to understanding not only what Wesley thought but also how he applied and expressed his underlying priorities.155 Wesley was, to be sure, an intellectual man whose eclectic reading and education shaped him significantly more than most of his era, yet a person can never be independent from their social surroundings. Indeed, Wesley’s immensely practical interests make his social and intellectual climate even more important for study. Seeing the work of the Spirit in an ecological rather than reductionistic fashion means that to most fully understand a context we have to look before and after, into the specific details of the people and settings, while keeping in mind the general patterns the Spirit seems to exhibit in every era. In this work, my goal was not to offer a
Entire Sanctification: A Metaphoric Cluster Analysis" (PhD diss., Bowling Green State University, 1982); David Clark Shipley, "Methodist Arminianism in the Theology of John Fletcher" (PhD diss., Yale University, 1942). 155 Very helpful texts for understanding the context of Wesley, Methodism, and nonconformity in general are the earlier works of J. Wesley Bready, England, before and after Wesley : The Evangelical Revival and Social Reform (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1938) and Maldwyn Lloyd Edwards, After Wesley: A Study of the Social and Political Influence of Methodism in the Middle Period (1791-1849) (London: Epworth Press, 1935). For more contemporary studies see David Hempton, Methodism and Politics in British Society, 1750-1850 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1984); David Hempton, The Religion of the People : Methodism and Popular Religion C. 1750-1900 (New York: Routledge, 1996); David Hempton, Methodism Empire of the Spirit (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2005); James E. Bradley, Religion, Revolution, and English Radicalism: Nonconformity in Eighteenth-Century Politics and Society ( New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990); Mark A. Noll, The Rise of Evangelicalism: The Age of Edwards, Whitefield, and the Wesleys, A History of Evangelicalism ; V. 1 (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2003); Patrick Karl O'Brien and Roland E. Quinault, eds., The Industrial Revolution and British Society (New York: Cambridge University Press,1993). 56 comprehensive view of Wesley or Methodism, but rather to narrow my focus on particular influences which seemed to have led Wesley to explore certain paths, and shaped how he led others down these paths. To be sure, there were even significantly more religious and literary influences which affected Wesley, each of which deserves fuller study, though I selected those which I felt were the most influential, with other influences often either honing or expanding what the initial influences prompted in Wesley’s continuing quest for a holistic faith.
This quest for a holistic, more purely expressed faith was not new to Wesley. Indeed, this is the expression of the work of the Spirit in the life of the church since the day of Pentecost. The
Spirit has called and enabled the people of God to more fully participate with God in this world.
This participation calls people to turn away from their own attempts to bring definition to their life, which only lead to an incomplete identity in a struggle against the contrasting forces faced in this world. The attempts to bring hope or definition or peace are, ultimately, unsuccessful. For death entered into this world, and death calls all people into its grasp. Death came into this world through the first man, Adam, but death was overcome by the new Adam, Jesus of Nazareth, who died on the cross but did not remain dead. After three days, he was resurrected, in the power of the Spirit, the firstborn of all creation becomes the first of the resurrection, and offers this hope to all who seek him, letting themselves find their identity in his identity. In doing this, such people do not lose their self. By letting go of attempts at self-definition, by letting go of the ego’s attempt to form a false, defensive identity, the power of the Spirit reaches in and provides renewal, refreshing, and resurrection, even in this present life. In the life of Christ, we are given life. In the power of the
Spirit, we are reborn to new identities, able to take hold of the fullness of God’s reality, participating increasingly in his fellowship, and in this, participating in the fellowship of all his people.
57
This fellowship of God’s people in this present era is called the Church. It is a reflection of
God’s Kingdom, formed in unity and diversity to be a people who hope, who help, who love. Yet, the Church, like present humanity, is not always, or even often, fully reflecting this call in the world. In every age there are errors and heresies, mistakes caused by zealousness or distortions enabled by gross perversions allowed in sometimes even the highest leadership. The Spirit who calls the people, who empowers the people, does not abandon the people. In every age there is a constant work of the Spirit of God, calling people back to wholeness and truth, empowering those who truly seek Christ to be light in their contexts, teaching and prophesying, for the sake of the whole of God’s people. This work of the Spirit often enlightens the people to a more fully realized truth, building on the insights of the past to help each generation see more and more clearly the fullness of the truth that God is calling all humanity to live. This stream of the Spirit refreshes and enlivens; it sometimes breaks down but it also helps build up, bringing fresh life wherever it goes, even in the face of deep struggle.
Martin Luther participated in this stream, seeing the perversions of the Church of his era and fighting against them, and when they would not listen he helped lead the Church to new forms of gathering, forms in which the people could, once again, find more freedom in their worship and learning. Yet, there was not an end to corruption or distortion. The Spirit continued to work, however, leading men and women to find renewal as they explored the fresh paths of the Spirit.
Often this involved looking back to those who had walked with God in previous generations. They followed the call to “Stand at the crossroads, and look, and ask for the ancient paths, where the good way lies; and walk in it, and find rest for your souls.”156 In England, a people arose who were known as Puritans, for they sought a refreshed purity in the Church of England. However, even as many sought with a Spirit-enlightened spark, the church still had not found the full way of light.
156 Jeremiah 6:16. 58
Errors were made. People were lost.
The Spirit, however, continued to work, both in those who remained in the Church of
England, and in those who Dissented from it. Susanna Wesley, a daughter of Dissent, returned to the Church of England when she was a young teenager, following a call on her life that led her to a deeper spirituality, and an intimate relationship with a man who also sought God in his return to the
Anglican communion. They had many children, and Susanna saw it as her life mission to help these children learn how to participate with Christ, to truly walk with the Spirit in life and light. The testimony to Susanna’s faithfulness in Spirit and Truth is seen in her children, the most famous of whom is John Wesley, a man who helped transform people not only in England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland, but also throughout North America. It was in England, however, that Wesley’s continued leadership through preaching, teaching, and writing found some of his most treasured growth. A young Swiss man named John Fletcher was drawn into the Methodist fold, and was soon drawn into John Wesley’s own inner circle, becoming a helper and a friend, and one of the most important interpreters of Wesley’s theology, helping the many tributaries which poured into and out of John Wesley to find even greater cohesion. They sought perfection, but not perfection as performance. Rather, they sought a perfection that was itself a gift and testimony of the Holy Spirit, a true holiness which was reflected in inner purity and outward actions, a purity that was at its very depths one filled will divine love.
This stream did not stop in the age of Wesley and Fletcher. Their contributions helped to steer others, men and women, towards an even better understanding of the call of God in this world.
Though there were also still temptations and distortions and many mistakes leading particular churches down wrong roads and out of the stream of the call of Christ, there was always a testimony of God’s Spirit in this world, calling and leading, enlightening and empowering. John Fletcher
59 called this great work of the Spirit in a person the baptism of the Spirit, seeing it as a continual
Pentecost that can be experienced in each person, in each generation. Those in the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries understood this to be a true call to the signs of the earliest church, and sought a renewed Pentecost in holiness and healings, tongues and prophesying. The renewal the
Puritans sought in England found new insight in Susanna Wesley, who passed her wisdom to her son John, who was a mentor to John Fletcher, who gave new insights and understanding to men and women of, at first, two continents, and then many. This is a church that is constantly emerging, finding both renewal and fresh insight in every generation.
This stream of the Spirit continues to pour out even to our day. Often, as in the beginning, this work of the Spirit is warming hearts in unexpected places and among unexpected people and in unexpected ways.
Supreme eternal being! Fountain of life and happiness! Vouchsafe to be ever present to the inward sense of my mind. I offer you my heart—take possession by the Holy Spirit for the sake of Jesus Christ. Amen. Amen.157
157 From the journal of Susanna Wesley, in Wallace, Susanna Wesley, 333. 60
Bibliography
Annesley, Samuel, ed. Puritan Sermons, 1659-1689: Being the Morning Exercises at Cripplegate, St. Giles in the Fields, and in Southwark. 6 vols. Wheaton, Ill.: R.O. Roberts, 1981.
Arnett, William M. "The Role of the Holy Spirit in Entire Sanctification in the Writings of John Wesley." Wesleyan Theological Journal 14, no. 2 (1979): 15-30.
Baker, Frank. "Susanna Wesley : Puritan, Parent, Pastor, Protagonist, Pattern." In Women in New Worlds, 112-131. Nashville, Tenn: Abingdon, 1982.
Barclay, Robert. An Apology for the True Christian Divinity. 6th ed. London: T. S. Raylton and L. Hinde, 1736. Reprint, Google Books PDF.
Benson, Joseph. The Life of the Rev. John W. De La Flechere: Compiled from the Narrative of the Rev. Mr. Wesley; the Biographical Notes of the Rev. Mr. Gilpin; from His Own Letters; and Other Authentic Documents. New York: Carlton and Phillips, 1854.
Bevins, Winfield H. "Pneumatology in John Wesley's Theological Method." Asbury Theological Journal 58, no. 2 (2003): 101-113.
Boshears, Onva K., Jr. "The Books in John Wesley's Life." Wesleyan Theological Journal 3, no. 1 (1968): 48-56.
Bowden, Martha F. "Susanna Wesley's Educational Method." Journal of the Canadian Church Historical Society 44, no. 1 (2002): 51-62.
Bradley, James E. Religion, Revolution, and English Radicalism: Nonconformity in Eighteenth- Century Politics and Society. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
Brantley, Richard E. Locke, Wesley, and the Method of English Romanticism. Gainesville: University Presses of Florida, 1984.
Bready, J. Wesley. England, before and after Wesley : The Evangelical Revival and Social Reform. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1938.
Butler, David. ""Look for the Mother to Find the Son" : The Influence of Susanna Wesley on Her Son John." Epworth Review 25, no. 4 (1998): 90-100.
Campbell, Ted. John Wesley and Christian Antiquity: Religious Vision and Cultural Change. Nashville: Kingswood Books, 1991.
Collins, Kenneth J. A Real Christian: The Life of John Wesley. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1999 ———. "The State of Wesley Studies in North America: A Theological Journey." Wesleyan Theological Journal 44, no. 2 (2009): 7-38. ———. The Theology of John Wesley: Holy Love and the Shape of Grace. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2007.
Comblin, José. The Holy Spirit and Liberation. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 1989 Coulton, Barbara. "Tutor to the Hills : The Early Career of John Fletcher." Proceedings of the Wesley Historical Society 47, no. 3 (1989): 94-103.
Dayton, Donald W. "John Fletcher as John Wesley's Vindicator and Designated Successor? A Response to Laurence W. Wood." Pneuma 26, no. 2 (2004): 355-361.
Devlin, Christina Marie. "Piety Promoted: Female First-Person Narratives in Eighteenth-Century Quakerism and Methodism." PhD diss., University of Chicago, 2001.
Dieter, Melvin E. "The Meaning of Pentecost in Early Methodism: Rediscovering John Fletcher as John Wesley's Vindicator and Designated Successor." Wesleyan Theological Journal 38, no. 1 (2003): 242-246.
Dreyer, Frederick. "Faith and Experience in the Thought of John Wesley." American Historical Review 88, no. 1 (1983): 12-30.
Edwards, Maldwyn Lloyd. After Wesley: A Study of the Social and Political Influence of Methodism in the Middle Period (1791-1849). London: Epworth Press, 1935.
Edwards, Thomas. The First and Second Part of Gangraena: Or a Catalogue and Discovery of Many of the Errours, Heresies, Blasphemies and Pernicious Practices of the Sectaries of This Time. London: Printed for Ralph Smith, 1646. Reprint, Kessinger Publishing.
Fletcher, John. The Works of the Reverend John Fletcher, Late Vicar of Madeley. 4 vols. Salem, Ohio: Schmul Publishers, 1974.
Flick, Stephen Allen. "John William Fletcher, Vicar of Madeley: A Pastoral Theology (Fletcher, John William, England)." PhD diss., Drew University, 1994.
Forsaith, Peter S. "Portraits of John Fletcher of Madeley and Their Artists." Proceedings of the Wesley Historical Society 47, (1990): 187-201. ———, ed. "Unexampled Labours": Letters of the Revd John Fletcher to Leaders in the Evangelical Revival. Peterborough: Epworth, 2008.
Gunter, W. Stephen. The Limits of 'Love Divine': John Wesley's Response to Antinomianism and Enthusiasm. Nashville: Kingswood Books, 1989.
Headley, Anthony J. Family Crucible: The Influence of Family Dynamics in the Life and Ministry of John Wesley. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2010. Hempton, David. Methodism and Politics in British Society, 1750-1850. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1984. ———. Methodism Empire of the Spirit. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2005. ———. The Religion of the People : Methodism and Popular Religion C. 1750-1900. New York: Routledge, 1996.
Jackson, Thomas, ed. The Works of John Wesley. 3rd ed. 14 vols. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2002.
Kärkkäinen, Veli-Matti. Pneumatology : The Holy Spirit in Ecumenical, International, and Contextual Perspective. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2002.
Keefer, Luke L. Jr. "John Wesley: Disciple of Early Christianity." PhD diss., Temple University, 1982.
Kellett, Norman Lawrence. "John Wesley and the Restoration of the Doctrine of the Holy Spirit to the Church of England in the Eighteenth-Century." PhD diss., Brandeis University, 1975.
Kimbrough, S. T. Orthodox and Wesleyan Spirituality. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 2002.
Kisker, Scott. "John Wesley's Puritan and Pietist Heritage Reexamined " Wesleyan Theological Journal 99, no. 2 (1999): 266-280.
Knickerbocker, Waldo Emerson. "The Doctrine of Authority in the Theology of John Fletcher." PhD diss., Emory University, 1972.
Knight, John A. "John Fletcher's Influence on the Develpment of Wesleyan Theology in America." Wesleyan Theological Journal 13, (1978): 13-33.
Knight, John Allan. "John William Fletcher and the Early Methodist Tradition." Phd diss., Vanderbilt University, 1966.
Lucas, Richard. An Enquiry after Happiness. 3 vols. Vol. 3. London: W. Innys and R. Manby, 1735. Reprint, Nabu Press.
Luther, Martin. "The Freedom of a Christian." In Three Treatises. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1970.
Maddox, Randy L. Responsible Grace: John Wesley's Practical Theology. Nashville: Kingswood Books, 1994. ———. "Wesley's Understanding of Christian Perfection: In What Sense Pentecostal?" Wesleyan Theological Journal 99, no. 2 (1999): 78-110.
Maddox, Randy L., and Laurence W. Wood. "Point/Counterpoint: "Baptism of the Spirit" Language." Wesleyan Theological Journal 36, no. 1 (2001): 256-258.
Maloney, George A., ed. Pseudo-Macarius: The Fifty Spiritual Homilies and the Great Letter. New York: Paulist Press, 1992.
Mattke, Robert A. "John Fletcher's Methodology in the Antinomian Controversy of 1770-76." Wesleyan Theological Journal 3, no. 1 (1968): 38-47.
Moltmann, Jürgen. The Spirit of Life. Translated by Margaret Kohl. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992.
Monk, Robert C. John Wesley: His Puritan Heritage. 2nd ed. Lanham, Md.: Scarecrow Press, 1999.
Moore, Henry, ed. The Life of Mrs. Mary Fletcher, Consort and Relict of the Rev. John Fletcher, Vicar of Madeley, Salop, Compiled from Her Journal and Other Authentic Documents. New York: Published by T. Mason and G. Lane, for the Methodist Episcopal Church, 1840. Reprint, Nabu Press.
Neff, Blake J. "John Wesley and John Fletcher on Entire Sanctification: A Metaphoric Cluster Analysis." PhD diss., Bowling Green State University, 1982.
Newton, John A. "Samuel Annesley (1620-1696)." Proceedings of the Wesley Historical Society 45, (1985): 29-45. ———. Susanna Wesley and the Puritan Tradition in Methodism. 2nd ed. London: Epworth Press, 2002.
Noll, Mark A. The Rise of Evangelicalism: The Age of Edwards, Whitefield, and the Wesleys, A History of Evangelicalism ; V. 1. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2003.
Nuttall, Geoffrey F. The Holy Spirit in Puritan Faith and Experience. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992.
O'Brien, Patrick Karl, and Roland E. Quinault, eds. The Industrial Revolution and British Society. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
O'Malley, J. Steven. "The Meaning of Pentecost in Early Methodism: Rediscovering John Fletcher as John Wesley's Vindicator and Designated Successor." Methodist History 42, no. 3 (2004): 185-186.
Oden, Thomas C., and Leicester R. Longden, eds. The Wesleyan Theological Heritage: Essays of Albert C. Outler. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1991.
Outler, Albert C., ed. John Wesley. New York: Oxford University Press, 1980. ———, ed. The Works of John Wesley, Vols. 1-4, Sermons. Nashville: Abington, 1984-1987. Park, Chang Hoon. "The Theology of John Wesley as "Checks to Antinomianism"." PhD diss., Drew University, 2002.
The Philokalia: The Complete Text. Translated by G. E. H. Palmer, Philip Sherrard and Kallistos Ware. 4 vols. Vol. 3. London: Faber and Faber, 1984.
Rack, Henry D. Reasonable Enthusiast: John Wesley and the Rise of Methodism. 3rd ed. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2002.
Rogal, Samuel J. "The Epworth Women : Susanna Wesley and Her Daughters." Wesleyan Theological Journal 18, no. 2 (1983): 80-89.
Rogers, Hester Ann. A Short Account of the Experience of Mrs. Hester Ann Rogers. New York: Published by Daniel Hitt, for the Methodist connection in the United States. Paul & Thomas, printers, 1811.
Shipley, David Clark. "Methodist Arminianism in the Theology of John Fletcher." PhD diss., Yale University, 1942.
Smith, Timothy L. "How John Fletcher Became the Theologian of Wesleyan Perfectionism 1770-1776." Wesleyan Theological Journal 15, no. 1 (1980): 68-87.
Spencer, Carol Dale. Holiness: The Soul of Quakerism. Colorado Springs: Paternaster, 2007.
Starkey, Lycurgus Monroe, Jr. "The Work of the Holy Spirit in the Theology of John Wesley." Ph.D diss., Columbia University, 1953.
Streiff, Patrick. Reluctant Saint?: A Theological Biography of Fletcher of Madeley. Translated by G.W.S. Knowles. Peterborough: Epworth, 2001.
Thomas, Hilah F., and Rosemary Skinner Keller, eds. Women in New Worlds: Historical Perspectives on the Wesleyan Tradition. 2 vols. Nashville: Abingdon, 1981.
Wallace, Charles, Jr. ""Some Stated Employment of Your Mind" : Reading, Writing, and Religion in the Life of Susanna Wesley." Church History 58, no. 3 (1989): 354-366. ———. "Susanna Wesley's Spirituality: The Freedom of a Christian Woman." Methodist History 22, no. 3 (1984): 158-173. ———, ed. Susanna Wesley: The Complete Writings. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.
Waterland, Daniel. The Works of the Rev. Daniel Waterland, D.D. 10 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1823.
Watts, Michael R. The Dissenters. 2 vols. Vol. 1. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978.
Welker, Michael. God the Spirit. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994 Wesley, John. Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament. 2 vols. Kansas City, Mo.: Beacon Hill Press, 1983 ———. Explanatory Notes Upon the Old Testament. 2 vols. Salem, Ohio: Schmul Publishers, 1975 ———. John Wesley's Sunday Service of the Methodists in North America. Edited by James F. White. Nashville: United Methodist Publishing House, 1984.
Wolfteich, Claire E. "A Difficult Love : Mother as Spiritual Guide in the Writing of Susanna Wesley." Methodist History 38, no. 1 (1999): 53-62.
Wood, Laurence W. "An Appreciative Reply to Donald W. Dayton's "Review Essay"." Pneuma 27, no. 1 (2005): 163-172. ———. "The Biblical Sources of John Fletcher's Pentecostal Theology." Wesleyan Theological Journal 42, no. 2 (2007): 98-113. ———. "Historiographical Criticisms of Randy Maddox's Response." Wesleyan Theological Journal 34, no. 2 (1999): 111-135. ———. "[John Fletcher, Containing Unpublished Works of J Fletcher, Wesley's "Coadjutor"]." Asbury Theological Journal 53, no. 1 (1998): 5-96. ———. The Meaning of Pentecost in Early Methodism : Rediscovering John Fletcher as Wesley's Vindicator and Designated Successor. Lanham, Md.: Scarecrow Press, 2002 ———. "The Need for a Contextual Interpretation of John Wesley's Sermons." Wesleyan Theological Journal 45, no. 1 (2010): 259-267. ———. "The Origin, Development, and Consistency of John Wesley's Theology of Holiness." Wesleyan Theological Journal 2, no. 43 (1998): 33-55. ———. Pentecostal Grace. Wilmore, Ky.: Francis Asbury Publishing, 1980 ———. "Pentecostal Sanctification in Wesley and Early Methodism." Pneuma 21, no. 2 (1999): 251-287. ———. "Thoughts Upon the Wesleyan Doctrine of Entire Sanctification with Special Reference to the Roman Catholic Doctrine of Confirmation." Wesleyan Theological Journal 15, no. 1 (1980): 88-99.
Young, Betty I. . "Sources for the Annesley Family." Proceedings of the Wesley Historical Society 45, (1985): 46-57.