sign in sign up
<<
Home , Adam Clarke, Catechism, John Miley, William Burt Pope

28 Campbell 11/8/05 9:36 am Page 405

THE LEGACY OF METHODIST 405

John Wesley and the legacy of Methodist theology

TED A. CAMPBELL

One of the many legacies of is a particular tradition of Christian thought, documented by Dale Dunlap, John Deschner, Thomas Langford and others.1 This theological and spiritual tradition has been expressed in a variety of genres. In the nineteenth century, it was expressed most frequently in the genre of systematic officially sponsored and printed by Methodist publishing houses, including Richard Watson’s Institutes of (1825), ’s Compendium of Christian theology (1875–76), Miner Raymond’s (1877) and ’s Systematic theology (1892). A somewhat later expression of this genre, representing the views of Holiness churches, was H. Orton Wiley’s Christian theology (1962–63). The Wesleyan theological tradition also found expression in biblical commentaries that became quasi-official theological statements on the part of Methodist churches. These included not only John Wesley’s own Explanatory notes on the Old and New Testaments, but pre-eminently ’s Commentary (1825), a Methodist standard for almost a century, replaced in the twentieth century by Peake’s commentary (1920) in the U.K. and the Abingdon commentary (1929) in the U.S. Less well known but equally important in their own day as genres that expressed were tracts, pamphlets and popular catechisms used for training in Methodist churches. A catechetical series began with John Wesley’s Instructions for children (1745) and included the 1793 Catechism of the Methodist Episcopal Church, the 1817 A[merican]M[ethodist]E[piscopal] Church Catechism of (based on John Wesley’s ‘Shorter minutes’), the 1817 Catechism for the use of children of the Wesleyan Methodist Church, and a host of further catechetical documents.

1 Thomas Langford, Practical : theology in the Wesleyan tradition (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1983), passim. 405 28 Campbell 11/8/05 9:36 am Page 406

406 BULLETIN JOHN RYLANDS LIBRARY

Although the predecessors of the United Methodist Church (USA) largely gave up the enterprise of preparing catechisms early in the twentieth century, the AME Church used a catechism by Henry McNeal Turner well into the twentieth century, and the British Methodist Church has continued the tradition with a 1953 Senior Catechism and then most recently the 1989 Catechism for the use of the people called Methodists. In the late twentieth century, the genre most favoured in North America for the expression of the Wesleyan theological tradition has been the single-volume work on John Wesley’s theology, considering its relevance to contemporary theological trends and issues. Here I have in mind Colin Williams’s John Wesley’s theology today (1960; acknowledging that Williams was Australian, but worked in the North American Methodist context), Albert C. Outler’s brief but influential study of Theology in the Wesleyan spirit (1975), Randy Maddox’s Responsible grace (1994), John B. Cobb’s Grace and responsibility (1995) and Ted Runyon’s The new creation (1998). I want to ask if there is any consistent shape or content to this Wesleyan tradition of Christian thought and spirituality. At the conclusion of his study of Practical divinity: theology in the Wesleyan tradition, Thomas Langford offered what he considered to be consistent themes of the Wesleyan theological tradition.The centre of the tradition, he argued, is the grace of in Christ.2 This central focus works itself out to the ‘circumference’ of the tradition in four particular ways: a concern with the biblical witness to Christ, concern with the vital experience of God, concern for the ethical expression of the Gospel and an understanding of the church as mission.3 I would note that in some ways Langford defined ‘the Wesleyan theological tradition’ in a broader way than I am inclined to do: for Langford, the Wesleyan theological tradition consisted of all those theologians who happened to be Methodists or Wesleyans. In another respect, though, he defined it more narrowly, because he focused on theologians and their writings. I would want to define the Wesleyan tradition as reflected by those individual or corporate theological works that make an explicit connection to Wesleyan sources. Thus, Langford includes (and I would exclude) Borden Parker Bowne, a Methodist theologian who did not claim an explicit connection to the Wesleyan movement. I include (and Langford does not include) such works as , hymnals, tracts and catechetical materials as indicative of the Wesleyan theological and spiritual tradition.

2 Langford, Practical divinity, 263. 3 Ibid., 264–9.