s1g’s fluisinn nf ffig hnrhr £aftdilsm by Herbert McGonigle, Lecturer in New Testament Greek, British Isles Nazarene College. n 1642 the English Parliament convened the West it I never subscribed but I think it is in the main a I minster Assembly for the purpose of rebuilding very excellent composition which I shall therefore the constitution and theology of the Church of En endeavor to defend, so far as I conceive it is gland. grounded on clear scripture.”3 And this Wesley One hundred fifty-one theologians attended, in does through the next 12 pages, defending, in gen cluding the most learned and erudite divines in eral terms, the larger Catechism’s doctrine of origi England and Scotland—but the Episcopalian schol nal sin against its denial by the Unitarian Taylor. ars, unhappy with the Presbyterian dominance, It was to the “Shorter Catechism” that John Wes refused to participate. The Assembly met between ley gave most attention. Hidden away at the end of July, 1643, and March, 1652, and three important volume 14 of his 30 volumes, “A Christian Library,” theological documents were formulated. The first is his revision of this Catechism.4 He made no addi was “The Westminster Confession,” the most com tions to it, but he did make some important changes. prehensive statement of 17th-century Calvinism When the original text of the Catechism is compared published in English and based on the supralap with Wesley’s “Revision,” the theological signifi sarian Irish Articles of Faith drawn up by Archbishop cance of the alterations is apparent. The Assembly document Ussher in 1615. second Wesley began by removing altogether Questions a directory for the was “The Larger Catechism,” 7 and 8: “What are the decrees of God?” and “How teachers, while the third document was “The use of doth God execute His decrees?” Likewise the re a brief handbook of indoctrina Shorter Catechism,” spective answers: “The decrees of God are His tio n. eternal purpose, according to the counsel of His was familiar The writings of John Wesley show he will, whereby, for His own glory, He hath foreor his “Predestination with all three documents. In dained whatsoever comes to pass”; and, “God times from Calmly Considered,” he quotes three executeth His decrees in the works of creation and one refer “The Larger Catechism”1 and he makes providence.”5 ence to it in his “Thoughts upon Necessity.”2 Wesley was far from being in full agreement with There are no textual notes in Wesley’s “Revision,” the expressly Calvinistic points of this Catechism, but in other writings he expresses his understand but in reply to Dr. Taylor of Norwich, he wrote: “To (Continued on page 62) 59 given as a rule to the reasonable creature.” This 1i1ig’s iñsinn addition makes sin both willful and conscious—the (Continued from page 59) point Wesley argues for. Wesley, no less than the Reformers, is insistent on man’s natural sinfulness. ing of the decrees of election and predestination. “I He uses the Larger Catechism to defend the doc believe election commonly means one of two things. trine of original sin and his accord with Reformed First, it means a divine appointment of some partic theologians at this point is seen in the fact that he ular men to do some particular work in the world transcribed, without change, many pages of Bos and this election I believe not only to be personal ton’s “Fourfold State.” He seems to imply the impu but . absolute and unconditional. Secondly, it tation of Adam’s guilt, for he makes no changes in means a divine appointment of some men to eternal the Shorter Catechism’s reply to the question: happiness. But I believe this election to be condi “Wherein consists the sinfulness of the estate tional, as well as the reprobation opposite thereto. whereinto man fell?” “The sinfulness of that estate I believe the eternal decree concerning both is ex consists in the guilt of Adam’s first sin.”2 pressed in those words: He that believeth shall be As we would expect, Wesley is opposed to the saved; he that believeth not shall be damned.’ And Calvinistic understanding of the calling of the elect, this decree God will not change and men cannot and he makes changes in Questions 30-32.’ Ques resist. According to this, all true believers are in tion 30 asks: “How doth the Spirit apply to us the scripture termed elect, as all who continue in un redemption purchased by Christ?” and answers: belief are so long properly reprobates.”6 “By working faith in us and thereby uniting us to Christ in our effectual calling.” Wesley removes the phrase “in our effectual calling” and all of Question The most surprising change 31 and its answer: “What is effectual calling?” “Ef Wesley makes in the Shorter fectual calling is the work of God’s Spirit, whereby, Catechism convincing us of our sin and misery, enlightening is his complete re our minds in the knowledge of Christ and renewing moval of the article on adoption. our wills, He doth persuade us and enable us to embrace Jesus Christ In Question 32, Wesley substitutes for the phrase, “they that are effectually Wesley was unhappy with the Calvinistic use of called” the phrase “they that truly believe.”4 the term “God’s elect,” and in Question 18 and its The most surprising change Wesley makes in the answer he substituted the word “mankind.” “Who is Shorter Catechism is his complete removal of the the Redeemer of mankind?” “The only Redeemer of article on adoption. He expunged Question 34: mankind is the Lord Jesus Christ.”7 He also re “What is adoption?” and its answer: “Adoption is moved Question 20: “Did God leave all mankind to an act of God’s free grace, whereby we are received perish in the estate of sin and misery?” and its an into the number and have a right to all the privi swer, that speaks of a covenant of grace given to leges of the sons of God.” those who are “elected to everlasting life.” There is nothing in this answer to which Wesley Question 14 in the Shorter Catechism asks: “What might have objected, as his own teaching on adop is sin?” and answers: “Sin is any want of conformity tion shows, i.e. his sermon, “The Spirit of Bondage unto, or transgression of, the law of God.” The and Adoption” and his “Notes” on Rom. 8:15; Gal. Westminster divines based their answer on 1 John 4:5. Why, then, did he expunge it? We cannot be 3:4: He hamartia estin he anomia, interpreting certain, but a possible reason, admittedly a weak “anomia” as both “want of conformity to” and one, is that he wanted to set in bolder relief the “transgression of” the law of God. preceding question, “What is Justification?” and Wesley significantly struck out the first clause and the succeeding one, “What is Sanctification?”° made the answer: “Sin is a transgression of the law The latter question was of great importance to of God.”8 He would not generally use the West Wesley. The Shorter Catechism answered: “Sancti minster formula though he would occasionally em fication is the work of God’s free grace, whereby ploy it with an explanation. “Every anomia, discon we are renewed in the whole man after the image of formity to, or deviation from, this law [the law of God and are enabled more and more to die unto love in 1 Corinthians 131 is sin.”9 John does not sin and live unto righteousness.” Wesley struck out speak of “any” want of conformity to God’s law but the words “more and more” to emphasize death to rather: “Sin is lawlessness.” Wesley argues that sin as realizable in this life and quoted Rom. 6:4 John does not say: “All transgression of the law is and 6 as proof texts.’7 Wesley’s interpretation of sin. This I deny. Let him prove it that can.” entire sanctification would not harmonize with the In relation to the unbeliever this distinction is Calvinistic teaching on holiness attainable in the unimportant, but for the believer there are discon article of death—so plainly stated in the answer to formities to the law of God not imputed as sin. Question 37. “What benefits do believers receive “Nothing is sin,” Wesley argues, “strictly speaking, from Christ at death?” “The souls of believers are but a voluntary transgression of a known law of at their death made perfect in holiness and do God.” In any analysis of Wesley’s doctrine of sin, immediately pass into glory Wesley strongly the additional explanatory clause given in the Larger denied that scripture taught anywhere a holiness Catechism should be considered. “Any law of God achieved in or at death, and his revised answer 62 reads: “The souls of believers at their death pass was Calvinistic (G. Croft Cell’s abortive attempt 18 into glory showed the fallacy of such a contention),2° it does Wesley’s insistence on a life of holiness made show how large was his area of agreement with possible by the indwelling Spirit led him to expunge Reformed theology. The changes Wesley made are Question 82: “Is any man able perfectly to keep the those expected. In dealing with the divine decrees, commandments of God?” and its answer: “No man he removed the scholastic accretions that went be since the fall is able in this life perfectly to keep yond the teaching of scripture. Relative to sanctifi the commandments of God but doth daily break cation and holy living, Wesley emphasized the Paul them in thought, word, and deed.” The Scottish ine doctrine that “love is the fulfilling of the law”— “Confession of Faith” adopted in 1560 avowed in an emphasis that Patrick Hamilton and John Knox Article 15: “The law of God we confess most just, would have approved.