Featured Resources

Wesley Scholar provides over 1200 resources on the Wesleys and early Methodists. To make these resources more accessible, specific works are highlighted weekly around a topic for the general public. The latest topic is listed at the top. To access earlier topics, scroll down the page. You may find many of the previous topics of interest. Previous topics have included the Holy Spirit, Calvinism, Moravianism, Catholicism, Oxford Methodists, Adam Clarke, Christology, the ordo salutis, justification, degrees of faith, salvation and works, Plain Account of Christian Perfection, and more.

John Wesley on the Resurrection of the Dead

Introduction

During his early ministry as an Oxford Methodist Wesley preached several sermons written by other Anglican ministers. One of those sermons was by Benjamin Calamy, vicar of St. Lawrence, Jewry, London. It is titled The Resurrection of the Dead. Calamy published the sermon in 1687 and again in 1704 as part of a larger collection of sermons. Wesley’s diary records transcribing the sermon on June 7, 1732, and preaching it at the Castle prison that year and again 1734. Wesley’s extract is about one half the length of the original sermon. The sermons appears in the Jackson edition of Wesley’s Works 7:474-485.

Here is Wesley’s sermon – Resurrection of the Dead 1732.

Even though Wesley was not the original author of the sermon, it accurately reflects his views on the future resurrection of the body. The sermons has three parts. Part 1 argues that the future glorified body will be the exact same physical body that perished. Part 2 examines how scripture distinguishes between the mortal and glorified body. Part 3 draws some inferences and lessons.

Synopsis

Part 1: Wesley argues that scripture teaches that the “self-same body that died should rise again.” Wesley examines Paul’s statements in 1 Cor. 15 that this mortal body shall put on incorruption. He also draws on the point that the graves will be opened, suggesting the same body that perished will rise again. He argues God is able to preserve and reunite the very dust of each person’s body. In fact, God will not only raise the exact same body but he will also “enliven” it with the exact same soul of the person. In addition, Wesley believed that at the end of the age the entire cosmos will be dissolved down to its basic atomic level and refashioned to make a new creation freed from the effects of Adam’s curse. Just as God will build the new creation out of the ashes of the present cosmos, the future resurrected body will be built from the same atoms of our present bodies. In this way, personal identity between the present person and the future glorified person is maintained in the strongest terms.

Part 2: Wesley teaches that the future resurrected body will be immortal and incorruptible. That is, no longer subject to decay and the effects of the Adamic curse. He further argues that in the future our bodies will spiritualized. He draws on Paul’s statement in 1 Cor. 15 that the body will be raised a “spiritual” body. By this Wesley understood that just as the human spirit now serves the mortal body, so in the resurrection the glorified body shall fully serve our spiritual being. It will be a body suited for the kingdom of God and life among the angels.

Part 3: Wesley closes with exhortations about the need to persevere in the faith, and that rewards will vary at the end. His last exhortation is to not fear death. Christ has won the victory and the hope for believers is bright and strong.

The sermon is short and worth reading – Resurrection of the Dead 1732.

In closing, even though Wesley did not author this sermon, he did edit and preach it, so it does reflect his viewpoint on the subject.

To learn more about Wesley’s eschatology, check out the article: From Heaven Above to New Creation Below.

Resource for further study:
Mark Olson, A John Wesley Reader on Eschatology (2011).

The Wesleys’ Use of Shorthand & Cipher

Both John and Charles began using shorthand and other cipher during their Oxford period (1725-1735). Initially they used a system of shorthand developed by James Weston, which John taught to others. But Weston’s system was more complicated and at the suggestion of Charles, John began to use another system developed by John Byrom while he was in Georgia. Richard Heitzenrater notes that Charles became proficient in Byrom’s method by February 1736 and may have began to use it as early as 1733.

The Wesleys employed various cipher in their diaries. Heitzenrater explains that scholars struggled to figure out what all the symbols meant in John’s diaries. In 1969 Heitzenrater found a key in Benjamin Ingham’s diary, a fellow Oxford Methodist.

An example of abbreviations they used with the Book of Common Prayer is ‘recappshsl12c1234xscptb’, which Heitzenrater explains (note the italics): ‘read ejaculations [i.e. scripture sentences], prayer of confession, absolution, Lord’s Prayer, Psalm, scripture (First Lesson), hymn (Te Deum, etc.), scripture (Second Lesson), litanies (numbered), collects for the day (numbered), expounded, sang, collect (or creed), Lord’s Prayer, thanksgiving, blessing’ (Works, Bicentennial Ed., 18:305).

Shorthand allowed the Wesleys to save space and time when recording their daily activities and religious progress. By 1734 they were using a form of diary known as the “exacter diary,” which used several columns to track in detail their spiritual progress throughout the day. This system of diary was used by other Oxford Methodists as well and reflects their seriousness and methodical approach toward their religious practice.

Here are resources to learn more about the use of shorthand:

Matthias Levy’s short introduction to the history of English shorthand covers from the time of Queen Elizabeth to the 19th century. He presents a good overview and is worth reading. Weston and Byrom are discussed beginning on page 11.
Shorthand Its History & Prospects 1885

James Weston c. 1688-1748
Weston was Scottish and invented a system of shorthand that he taught in London and Manchester. He also served as a stenographer for trials in London. Weston published his system in 1727 and was reissued many times thereafter. In 1730 he published an edition of the Book of Common Prayer in shorthand.
Stenography Compleated 1727
Stenography Compleated 1738
Book of Common Prayer in Shorthand 1730

John Byrom 1692-1763
Besides an inventor of a system of shorthand, Byrom was an English poet and a writer of hymns, notably the Anglican hymn Christians awake! Salute the happy morn. Educated at Trinity College, Cambridge, Byrom was religiously a high churchman and a follower of William Law, with Jacobite sympathies. He developed his system of shorthand while at college and taught it at Oxford and Cambridge. He also studied medicine and was elected to the Royal Society in 1724. In 1742 King George II granted Byrom sole right to publish his method of shorthand. It was adopted by the clerk of the House of Lords and continued to be used until further developments in shorthand in the 19th century. Byrom’s system was finally published posthumously in 1767 as The Universal English Shorthand.
The Universal English Shorthand 1767

What is an Arminian?

Historical Background

John Wesley came by his Arminianism quite naturally. Yet, he did not derive it directly from Jacob Arminius, the Dutch Theologian. Instead, Wesley developed his Arminian view of salvation and theology from the Anglican high church tradition. The roots of the high church tradition go back to Archbishop William Laud in the 1620s. Arminianism might have begun with Jacob Arminius in the Netherlands, yet it found fertile soil among the English who already were inclined in that direction. The groundwork was laid in the English Reformation. Article 31 of the Anglican Articles of Religion clearly teaches a general view of the atonement, while Article 17 favored a Reformed view of predestination. In the 17th century both Calvinists and Arminians in the Church of England found ways to interpret the Articles of Religion according their own theological convictions. High church Arminians interpreted Art. 17 in a way that was compatible with their Arminianism. They could point to Article 31 in support of their position.

After the Restoration in 1660, most Calvinists were forced into Dissent and the Church of England evolved into a denomination dominated by Arminian high churchmanship. Both of Wesley’s parents, Samuel (d. 1734) and Susanna (d. 1742), were raised in Dissent and conformed as young adults (Susanna was only a teenager) to the Established Church in the 1680s. They became fervent high churchmen in their convictions with Arminian beliefs. They therefore raised John and his siblings to have high church beliefs, and this included an Arminian outlook in theology. Wesley was educated at the Charterhouse in London and then at Oxford. Both institutions grounded him even more in the Arminian high church tradition. Wesley’s earliest letters confirm his Arminian convictions from which he never strayed. Like the earlier Arminians in the English Church, Wesley interpreted the Articles of Religion according to an Arminian reading.

Wesley’s Arminian Beliefs

So, what did Wesley specifically believe? In most points his belief were consistent with Jacob Arminius, the founder of the Arminian tradition (see below). However, on some points they differed. It is therefore important to look at Wesley’s writings to discern what he believed. Here is a brief summary:

Conditional election – JW believed in eternal election but understood it to be based on God’s foreknowledge. “Those whom God foreknew he also predestinated…” (Rom. 8:29).
Total Depravity – In agreement with Calvinism JW held that Adam’s sin corrupted every part human nature. This meant that everyone is a sinner and in need of new birth in Christ.
Prevenient grace – Here, JW departed from Calvinism by affirming that God unconditionally gives grace to every human being. This universal grace restores a degree of freedom for sinners to respond to God’s truth and invitations. In JW’s soteriology, God always acts first and people respond or resist.
General redemption – JW took literal the scriptures that teach Christ died for every person. The provision was made for all people, but is salvifically applied in those who respond in faith.
Justification by faith – JW proclaimed the Reformation message of salvation by faith in Christ alone. No one can be saved by works or personal goodness.
Salvation assurance – He also taught that the Holy Spirit witnesses in our hearts to our new birth and acceptance by God.
Resistibility of grace – JW parted paths with Calvinists over this issue. He consistently taught that salvation can be lost due to disobedience. This belief leads to the next point.
Perseverance in holy living – It is necessary for believers to live a devoted life to Christ for final salvation. In the end, salvation requires faithfulness to Jesus.
Final Justification – At Last Judgment Christ will publicly declare who are eternally saved (Matt. 25:31-46). In agreement with his Anglican tradition, JW affirmed that justification in this life remains provisional since it can be lost. Only at the final judgment will our justification be publicly finalized. This final justification will grant legal access into the eternal kingdom.

Only in later life did Wesley begin to use the Arminian label (see picture above). One of his first writings to do so was the tract What is an Arminian? He later began a periodical in 1778 to counter Calvinism, titled The Arminian Magazine (see John Wesley page). Wesley’s Arminianism is most pronounced in his anti-Calvinist writings from 1739 to the 1780s.

Wesley’s Arminian Writings

Here is a sample of Wesley’s writings that express his Arminianism:
Sermon: Free Grace 1739
Dialogue Between Predestinarian & Friend 1741
Predestination Calmly Considered 1752
Sermon: The Lord Our Righteousness 1765
Question ‘What is an Arminian?’ Answered 1770
Thoughts on Necessity (Free Will) 1774
Thoughts on God’s Sovereignty 1777
Thoughts Concerning Gospel Ministers 1784

The Father of Arminianism

Jacob Arminius 1560-1609
Arminius is the Latinized name of Jakob Hermanszoon, who was the Dutch theologian that birthed a movement within the broader Reformed tradition known as Arminianism. He served from 1603 as professor in theology at the University of Leiden. He opposed the high Calvinism of Theodore Beza that the famous acronym TULIP represents (Total depravity, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, Irresistible grace, Perseverance of the saints). Arminius died in 1609, but his movement continued with the Remonstrants. The famous Synod of Dort (1619) was a victory for the Calvinists, but it failed to stop the Arminian movement. Arminianism spread to England by the second quarter of the 17th century and became part of mainstream Anglican theology in opposition to the Calvinism of the Puritans. Arminianism reshaped Reformed theology to include the ideas of conditional election, free will and general atonement. The Wesleys learned their Arminianism from their Anglican tradition passed down to them from their parents and education. Later in life John Wesley embraced the label of an Arminian with the publication of the Arminian Magazine in 1778. Arminius’ works have been collected into three large volumes. Included below is a bio of Arminius by John Guthrie:
Arminius Life Guthrie 1854
Arminius Works vol 1 1853
Arminius Works vol 2 1853
Arminius Works vol 3 1853

John Wesley on the Holy Spirit

John Wesley had a dynamic understanding of the Holy Spirit’s presence and work in our world and in believers. This post includes materials on several areas of his pneumatology. For a summary of Wesley’s perspective see the following article. The article discusses Wesley’s doctrine of the Spirit in relation to the Trinity, salvation, and the future kingdom:
John Wesley’s Doctrine of the Holy Spirit

The Spirit and Salvation
The doctrine of assurance as a gift directly received from the Holy Spirit was central to Wesley’s understanding of conversion and salvation by faith in Christ. He therefore wrote three sermons on the subject – The Witness of the Spirit I (1746), The Witness of the Spirit II (1767), and The Witness of Our own Spirit (1746). Together these three sermons bring out the richness of his understanding of assurance and the Spirit’s role in our salvation. In the 1750s Wesley entered into a dialog with Richard Tompson about his views on salvation assurance. These letters summarize Wesley’s mature thoughts on the subject:
Three Sermons on The Witness of the Spirit
Letters Between JW & R Tompson on Assurance 1760

The Spirit-Filled Life
In 1744 JW preached for the last time at the University of Oxford. He made a scathing critique of the university and city. The text for this sermon is Acts 4:31 – “And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit.” Wesley explains the inward work of the Spirit in the individual believer and in our world at large. He also shares what he considers is the Spirit-filled life. Wesley had a dynamic understanding of the Spirit’s fullness, connected to his views on Christian holiness.
Scriptural Christianity 1st ed 1744

The Perceptible Inspiration of the Spirit
From 1745 to 1748 John Wesley engaged an Anglican church leader (under the pseudonym John Smith) in an exchange of 12 letters (6 each) about the work of the Spirit in the human heart. Smith argued the standard Anglican position that the Spirit works only imperceptibly, below a person’s consciousness. Wesley countered that the Spirit’s working is felt and perceived by a person – that is, it is perceptible to a person. Here are Wesley’s six letters:
Letter I 9/28/45
Letter II 12/30/45
Letter III 6/25/46
Letter IV 3/25/47
Letter V 7/10/47
Letter VI 3/22/48

The Gifts and Ministry of the Spirit
In late 1762 JW responded in a lengthy apologetic letter to William Warburton, the Anglican Bishop of Gloucester, on the subject of the office and operations of the Holy Spirit in his ministry and among the Methodists. It offers many insights into JW’s understanding of person and work of the Spirit within church history. JW saw the importance of his response to the Bishop and soon after published the letter for everyone to read:
Letter to the Bishop of Gloucester on Holy Spirit 1763

Commentary on the Book of Acts
In 1755 Wesley published his Explanatory Notes on the New Testament. Wesley’s comments throughout the Book of Acts, especially in key passages like chs 2, 8, 10-11, 19 reveals his understanding of the baptism in the Holy Spirit and the use of spiritual gifts within the apostolic generation to carry out the Great Commission. Wesley basically understood Spirit baptism to be regeneration and the fillings of the Spirit to be repeatable. Here is the 5th edition of 1788.
Explanatory Notes on NT 5th Edition 1788 Acts

Hymns to the Trinity
Wesley affirmed the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, that teaches the Holy Spirit is fully divine and a person, worthy of our worship and adoration. This hymnal contains many references to the Holy Spirit and a member of the Godhead and brings out more fully JW’s theology of the Spirit.
Hymns to the Trinity 5th ed 1771

Recent studies on JW’s doctrine of the Spirit:
Joseph Cunningham, John Wesley’s Pneumatology: Perceptible Inspiration (2014)
Lawrence Wood, Pentecost & Sanctification in the Writings of John & Charles Wesley (2018)
Daniel Jennings, The Supernatural Occurrences of John Wesley (2012)
Elmer Colyer, The Trinitarian Dimension of John Wesley’s Theology (2019)
Mark Olson, Wesley & Aldersgate: Interpreting Conversion Narratives (2019)
Thomas Oden, John Wesley’s Teachings: Christ & Salvation (2012)
Kenneth Collins, John Wesley’s Theology (2007)

John Fletcher:
Methodism’s First Theologian

John William Fletcher was born on September 12, 1729, with his Swiss name as Jean Guillaume de la Fléchère. He was of French Huguenot stock and emigrated to England in 1750. Fletcher was widely respected for his Christlike demeanor and character. Educated at the University of Geneva and ordained in the Church of England, Fletcher served as vicar of Madeley and was a fervent supporter of the Evangelical Revival and Methodism. He became a major supporter of John Wesley and died from ill health in 1785.

Fletcher rose as the prominent Methodist apologist and theologian during the Minutes Controversy with Calvinists in the 1770s (see Minutes Controversy page). His Checks to Antinomianism stand out as a major theological work on Arminian soteriology and continued to serve as a primary response to Calvinism into the 19th century. In these works Fletcher explains in detail the role of works in the believer’s justification and salvation that avoids any notion of merit or salvation by works. He also presents an Arminian version of covenant theology built around the Trinity and salvation history and offers an evangelical view of the spiritual journey that includes distinct spiritual states. He taught on Christian holiness and espoused the Methodist doctrine of Christian perfection. Contrary to Wesley’s perspective, Fletcher was one of the first Methodists to link Christian perfection to the baptism with the Holy Spirit. Before his death, Fletcher began a major work on the Trinity and Christology in response to the views of Unitarians and other non-trinitarians.

Fletcher would have a marked influence on John Wesley’s mature views on degrees of justification. Wesley so highly valued Fletcher as a colleague, saint, and friend that he desired Fletcher to succeed him as the leader of Methodism upon his death. However, since Fletcher preceded him in death, Wesley published a biography to honor him. Besides his Checks and other miscellaneous writings, Fletcher stepped into politics when he came to the defense of John Wesley and his Calm Address to the American Colonies in 1775 (see John Wesley page).

Here is the standard edition of Fletcher’s works:
Works of J Fletcher Vol 1 1833
Works of J Fletcher vol 2 1833
Works of J Fletcher Vol 3 1833
Works of J Fletcher Vol 4 1833

John Wesley on the World’s End & Final Judgment

How do you visualize the world will end and final judgment happen? What events will lead up to it? Where does it take place? What events follow?

John Wesley visualized these subjects in quite graphic terms.

Introduction

In 1758 Wesley was invited to preach a sermon before Sir Edward Clive, the puisne justice of the common pleas at Bedford, England. He titled the sermon The Great Assize. According to Oxford Dictionary an assize was a court which sat at intervals in each county of England and Wales to administer civil and criminal law. Wesley used this opportunity to teach on the end of the world and the Last Judgment, which Christ will administer at his second coming. Jesus taught on final judgment often. For example, see Matthew 25.

Read the sermon The Great Assize 1758

As were many Christians in his day, Wesley was a postmillennialist who believed the current revival that was breaking out in the world — referred to today as The Great Evangelical Revival — would usher in the millennium in which the world would be evangelized and converted to the faith. After this period of Christian dominance there would be a period of great spiritual deception and apostasy among the nations described by the Apostle John in Revelation 20:7-10. This would lead to the great conflagration that would engulf the entire world, which John mentions in Rev. 20:9 and Peter elaborates on in 2 Peter 3:10. The second coming would take place at this time and the Great Assize would immediately follow.

The Great Assize

The sermon is divided into four sections.

Section I deals with the events that immediately lead up to the Great Assize. Wesley used graphic and terrifying language to describe the events that would immediately precede the final judgment. In every part of the habitable world earthquakes will rock the planet. This will lead to violent tsunamis in which “every island shall flee away and the mountains will not be found” (Rev. 16:20). Drawing on Joel 2:30, the skies around the earth will be filled with violent thunder and lightning storms from the north to the south poles. From Luke 21:25-26 and Joel 3:15 Wesley describes how the heavenly bodies will be thrown into chaos and out of their orbits. Then the end comes with the voice of the archangel and the general resurrection.

Can we visualize such events? We have witnessed in recent decades many destructive events. But what if the entire world was engulfed in them at the same time?

Section II describes the final judgment itself. Christ descends and Wesley surmises the Great Court will take place above the earth since scripture states Christ will come in the clouds. Every person who ever lived will be present and will be judged according to their works, which includes everything about a person’s character. Even the hidden things will be revealed, exposing the character of the heart. Wesley appealed to Matthew 12:36-37 that every idle word will come into judgment.

Section III covers the circumstances that will follow the Last Judgment. The present cosmos will shrivel up “as a parchment scroll.” Regarding the remnants of human civilization, Wesley states, “All, all will die, perish, vanish away, like a dream when one awaketh!” Such is the transitory nature of human culture and civilization. Wesley then chastises the scoffers and skeptics of his day. Sentence will be pronounced on the unrighteous who then go to Hell, who will be punished with “everlasting destruction from the present of the Lord.”

Section IV includes applications to his audience, and this includes you and I today. He begins by applauding those who bring the good news of salvation to lost people. He then calls upon his audience — you and I today — to take heed to what scripture teaches about the final judgment.

What do you think? Are you prepared for that final day?

Wesley says much more than what is included in my brief description. I encourage you to read the sermon: The Great Assize 1758

Adam Clarke on Christ’s Eternal Sonship

Adam Clarke (1762-1832) was a Methodist theologian and a well-known biblical scholar. He served as president of the Methodist Conference in 1806-07. His critical and exegetical commentaries on the Bible need no introduction, for they remain popular even to this day. Clarke took 40 years to produce them, and they reflect evangelical biblical scholarship in the early 19th century. He faithfully taught Methodist doctrine and believed the Bible to be a complete revelation of God’s will and nature.

Clarke’s Position

However, Clarke endorsed controversial views on Christ’s eternal sonship. They brought a sharp reaction from fellow Methodists and those outside of the Wesleyan tradition. Clarke believed in the Trinity and that Christ is fully divine and the second person of the divine Godhead, but he denied that the title “Son of God” applied to the divine person. Instead, the eternal Logos (Word) became the Son at the incarnation. That is, the title “Son of God” applies to the incarnation and not to Jesus’ pre-existence.

Clarke’s views are clearly stated in his commentary on Luke 1:35:

“Therefore also that holy thing (or person) shall be called the Son of God. We may plainly perceive here, that the angel does not give the appellation of Son of God to the Divine nature of Christ; but to that holy person or thing, which was to be born of the virgin, by the energy of the Holy Spirit. The Divine nature could not be born of the virgin; the human nature was born of her. The Divine nature had no beginning; it was God manifested in the flesh, 1Timothy 3:16; it was that Word which being in the beginning (from eternity) with God, John 1:2, was afterwards made flesh, (became manifest in human nature,) and tabernacled among us, John 1:14.”

Clarke gave five reasons why he rejected the eternal Sonship of Christ:

“1st. I have not been able to find any express declaration in the Scriptures concerning it.
2dly. If Christ be the Son of God as to his Divine nature, then he cannot be eternal; for son implies a father; and father implies, in reference to son, precedency in time, if not in nature too. Father and son imply the idea of generation; and generation implies a time in which it was effected, and time also antecedent to such generation.
3dly. If Christ be the Son of God, as to his Divine nature, then the Father is of necessity prior, consequently superior to him.
4thly. Again, if this Divine nature were begotten of the Father, then it must be in time; i.e. there was a period in which it did not exist, and a period when it began to exist. This destroys the eternity of our blessed Lord, and robs him at once of his Godhead.
5thly. To say that he was begotten from all eternity, is, in my opinion, absurd; and the phrase eternal Son is a positive self-contradiction. Eternity is that which has had no beginning, nor stands in any reference to time. Son supposes time, generation, and father; and time also antecedent to such generation. Therefore the conjunction of these two terms, Son and eternity is absolutely impossible, as they imply essentially different and opposite ideas.”

So, it appears Clarke rejected the idea of eternal Sonship primarily because for him the terms “father” and “son” are necessarily linked to time. A father necessarily precedes a son in time. Since Christ is fully divine and always existed, at no time was he ever generated by the Father as standard Trinitarian theology holds (called the doctrine of eternal generation).

Opposition to Clarke’s Views
Clarke’s views did not receive a wide following and there was push-back immediately. Fellow Methodist Richard Watson published against Clarke’s views, as did others. Clarke did receive support from Thomas Exley, who wrote a vindication and a response to Watson. Like others who opposed Clarke, Watson argued that Christ’s eternal Sonship is vital to maintain because as a divine person he is of the same nature and essence as the Father, but distinct in person. The key term here is homoousios that played a key role in the debates with Arianism in the 4th century. The church fathers stressed Christ’s eternal generation as a way to express that he is fully divine as the Father is divine. Passages like Hebrews 1:3 “He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature” (ESV) clearly teach that the Son (see vv. 2, 8) shares the same nature and essence as the Father, though distinct in his person.

To learn more check out the following sources:

Adam Clarke’s Commentaries
To learn more about Clarke’s views, it is best to check out his notes on appropriate gospel texts, like Matt. 1:21-24, Lk. 1:35, Jn. 1:1-14. These texts are in the following three volumes:
Commentary NT Gospels-Acts Part I 1832
Commentary NT Gospels-Acts Part II 1832
Commentary NT Gospels-Acts Part III 1832

Clark’s Bio and History of the Sonship Controversy
For the history of the controversy, check out the following sources:
Etheridge Life of Adam Clarke 1858
Life of Adam Clarke & Sonship Controversy 1834

Thomas Exley’s support for Clarke:
Exley Vindication of Adam Clarke 1817
Exley Reply to Mr Watson’s Remarks 1818

Opposition to Clarke’s views:
R Watson Remarks on Eternal Sonship 1818
Martin Doctrine of Christ’s Eternal Sonship 1821
Scott Dissertation on Christ’s Eternal Sonship 1828
Letter to Clarke on Christ’s Sonship 1830
Beauchamp Letters on Christ’s Eternal Sonship 1849

Resources:
Vickers & Van Kuiken, eds. Methodist Christology, 2020.
Link to Gene Long, Clarke’s Views on Eternal Sonship

John Wesley & Jonathan Edwards

Two Giants of the Faith

Introduction

Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758) and John Wesley (1703-1791) are two giants of the Evangelical faith. Both lived during the same period and were instrumental in advancing the new Evangelical Movement of the 18th century. Both are now seen as major theologians in their respective theological traditions even though their approach to the task of theology was quite different.

Edwards was an American Congregationalist while Wesley was a British Anglican. Edwards mostly had a settled ministry at Northampton whereas Wesley was an itinerant minister with a network of societies. Both men wrote extensively, and their works fill many volumes.

Edwards was a Reformed theologian who had a strong bent toward philosophy in his theology. His influential The Freedom of the Will has become a classic work in philosophy. He also wrote masterpieces on the Revival, including his Faithful Narrative of the Surprising Work of God and Treatise Concerning Religious Affections.

Wesley was an Arminian by conviction and penned many works on predestination (scroll down this page). As a practical theologian Wesley is recognized today for his contributions to understanding the process of salvation found in sermons like The Scripture Way of Salvation and On Working Out Our Own Salvation. Along with his brother Charles, Wesley published thousands of hymns. And his Plain Account of Christian Perfection is a classic on the subject of Christian holiness.

Wesley began to read Edwards’ works in the fall of 1738 with the Faithful Narrative of the Surprising Work of God. The work made an impression on Wesley who was just beginning at the time to promote the Evangelical Revival in Great Britain. He would go on to read several of Edwards’ writings over the years.

Similarities

Both Edwards and Wesley were evangelical Christians and effective preachers of the gospel. Both stressed the total sinfulness of the human heart and salvation by grace alone. They both preached the Reformation message of justification by faith in Christ and the necessity of the new birth for gospel salvation. Even though their language varied on the subject of sanctification, both men taught the importance of holy living and encouraged a deeper experience of the Spirit in the lives of believers.

Their psychologies were also quite similar in that both men held a dispositional view of human behavior. That is, both affirmed that people live according to the ruling dispositions of the heart and that salvation involves a transformation of the dispositional nature. As for eschatology, both Edwards and Wesley were postmillennialists and believed the current revival would help usher in the millennial reign of Christ through world evangelism.

Differences

Their primary differences were due to their basic theological orientation: Edwards was Calvinist and Wesley was Arminian. They therefore drew sharp differences on matters like unconditional vs conditional election/predestination, irresistible vs resistible grace, and perseverance of the saints vs the possibility of apostasy.

These differences led to different ways of thinking about other subjects, like God’s sovereignty and human freedom, though both men asserted both as true. It has been stated that Edwards’ theology is centered on the glory of God while Wesley’s is the love of God. There is truth to this summation though it should not be overly stressed.

Wesley’s Extracts of Edwards Writings

Wesley published numerous extracts of other people’s writings (his total publications is over 400). This included several of Edwards works. From this we know he valued Edwards’ contributions, though he did take the liberty to edit out materials he found contrary to his Arminian convictions (this was a pattern with his editing of any work as he would reduce the size of the originals). Here is a couple extracts Wesley published of Edwards’ works:
Distinguishing Marks of a Work of Spirit 3rd ed 1795
Life of David Brainerd 1815

For Edwards’ writings, see Reformed/Puritan Sources page.

On the matter of the human will Edwards and Wesley came to the subject from different perspectives. They both advocated a compatibilist viewpoint, meaning that human free will is compatible with God’s sovereignty. Edwards explored the issue from a Calvinist point of view and based his arguments on a distinction between moral and physical necessity. His arguments about God’s immutable nature played a role in shaping his views of moral freedom as well. By contrast, Wesley’s Anglicanism stressed the universal gift of prevenient grace that enables each person to freely respond to divine truth and the gospel. As a result, Wesley opposed Edwards’ view of determinism. Here is Edwards’ work and Wesley’s two responses.

Early editions of Edwards’ work:
On Freedom of the Will 1762
On Freedom of the Will 1790

Wesley’s Response is found in two tracts:
Thoughts on Necessity 1774
A Thought on Necessity 1780

In the end, both Edwards and Wesley are two giants of the Evangelical faith and we should value what both men have contributed to our understanding of God, salvation, and related truths.

Secondary Resource
Richard Steele, “Gracious Affection” and “True Virtue” According to Jonathan Edwards and John Wesley, 1994.

What is a Miracle?

In late 1762, John Wesley responded to William Warburton, the Anglican Bishop of Gloucester, regarding the office and operations of the Holy Spirit in his ministry and among the Methodists.

William Warburton 1698-1779

Warburton became bishop in 1759 and was famous as a literary critic. He was a theologian by trade and stood in the Latitudinarian and rationalist tradition. Some considered him somewhat Pelagian in his convictions. Albert Outler states that Warburton was the “most perverse and abusive of all Wesley’s opponents.” The Bishop considered himself the chief arbiter of literary taste and yet he would not pause to savagely attack his opponents.

In 1762 Warburton published a two-volume work The Doctrine of Grace: or, the Office and Operations of the Holy Spirit vindicated from the insults of infidelity and the abuse of fanaticism. In Part II of this work Warburton turned his critical eye on Wesley as a religious fanatic. His basic argument was that times had changed since the founding of the primitive church and the gifts of the apostolic generation was no longer needed – like supernatural struggles with evil spirits, signs and wonders, claims of a supernatural new birth, etc. Methodism was nothing more than wild fanaticism according to Warburton.

Wesley’s Response

Given Warburton’s esteem as an author and critic, Wesley felt compelled to respond. In an open letter he penned a lengthy tract on the office and operations of the Holy Spirit. Wesley’s response is in three parts. Our interest is with Part II, which deals with his views on miracles, so I will only briefly mention Parts I & III first.

JW’s entire letter: Letter to Bishop of Gloucester

Part I. Wesley responds to charges levelled against himself. He answers Warburton’s specific criticisms against himself and his ministry. Wesley discusses many accounts of spiritual or supernatural encounters under his ministry and argues he is acting in good faith and on sound rational principles.

Part III. In the last section Wesley deals with religion as a “reasonable service.” He quotes a long section from a previous letter he wrote to Conyers Middleton defending the evangelical faith of the Methodists and other evangelicals. For Wesley genuine Christian faith is demonstrated in a person’s affections and dispositional life, producing good works and a life of devotion. Authentic faith is saving because it experiences God as present and working in one’s life.

Part II. Wesley addresses the operations of the Holy Spirit and argues that miracles still happen today. He discusses the Spirit as a guide to spiritual truth, as a comforter of peace and joy, and as an agent of miracles, which includes the new birth. He challenges Warburton’s notion that miracles have ceased since the early ages of the church. He then quotes a section of his Principles of a Methodist Farther Explained to explain and defend his position.

Wesley sees miracles as divine activity in our world, not necessarily setting aside natural law. The spiritual and human realms interact with each other. His premise is that God and spiritual beings (angels, demons) are active in this world. So, for Wesley, even the new birth is a miracle because it is the effect of divine power – the Holy Spirit breathing new life in the soul.

Wesley considered the new birth a work of omnipotence. He wrote in the Earnest Appeal, “It requires no less power thus to quicken a dead soul than to raise a body that lies in the grave. It is a new creation; and none can create a soul anew but he who at first created the heavens and the earth.”

Given his biblical worldview, Wesley considered miracles to be events visible to the eyes of faith that recognizes God’s supernatural activity in our world. This viewpoint was in opposition to Warburton’s who appears to have understood miracles to be the setting aside of natural law (which for many in the 18^th century was denied given Newtonian physics).

Here is Wesley’s letter: Letter to Bishop of Gloucester

Question – What Constitutes a Miracle?

Many consider miracles to require a setting aside or violation of natural laws. Wesley had a biblical understanding that miracles involve divine activity in our world, whether it takes place through natural law or outside of it.

For example, scholars have shown that the plagues on Egypt in the Book of Exodus were not a violation of natural laws, but in fact were the working out of natural causes as one plague led to the next plague. What made them miraculous was the divine word (prophecy) spoken by Moses that connected these plagues to Yahweh’s power and authority.

Therefore, a miracle is whenever God acts in our world or in our lives, whether it is done through or in keeping with the natural order (which God put in place as Creator) or apart from the natural laws that govern the world.

John Wesley & God’s Moral Law

In Romans 2:14-16 the Apostle Paul declares that God has written his Moral Law on every human heart, so that every person has a knowledge of right from wrong and will be held accountable for this moral knowledge at the judgment seat of Christ. As a subject, the Moral Law is pertinent today as the church in the west struggles to maintain its witness in an increasing non-Christian, secular world. We can gain much wisdom from what John Wesley wrote on the subject.

Historical Context

John Wesley expounded on God’s moral law in three sermons, published in 1750. Wesley scholar Albert Outler introduces these three sermons by saying, “The most patent danger in Wesley’s delicate balance of faith alone and holy living was its possible tilt toward moralism or legalism (which Outler adds occurred later in Methodism). But the opposite extreme, antinomianism (Latin, anti-law or obedience), was already a clear and present danger among the Methodists.” The tendency toward legalism or license is always present in the church and has been since the time of the apostles. The key is to maintain balance so that God is honored with faithful obedience and the errors of legalism and license are avoided.

Outler proceeds to spell out that several versions of antinomianism were developing among evangelicals in Wesley’s day as a consequence of their interpretation of salvation by faith alone – i.e. salvation did not require holy living from God’s people. A famous example was the debate between Wesley and Count Zinzendorf of the Moravians in 1741. Zinzendorf argued that Christians are positionally holy in Christ but never holy in their own lives. Wesley countered this was blatantly wrong since the New Testament repeatedly calls believers to live holy, devoted lives to Christ (e.g. Eph. 4:17-5:21). Like Zinzendorf, hyper-Calvinists at the time also so magnified justification by imputed righteousness that believers were considered eternally justified and released from any requirement to live holy, obedient lives.

Wesley on the Moral Law

Wesley clarified to his Methodist followers about the origin, nature, properties, and three uses of the Moral Law and what the Apostle Paul meant when he stated that this Law is established through faith (Rom. 3:31). The first sermon explains that the Moral Law existed before the Mosaic Covenant and its origins go back to God himself. In fact, the Moral Law written on our hearts is a “copy of the eternal mind, a transcript of the divine nature.” The Moral Law reflects God’s holy nature. It is his revealed will to us. The Moral Law is that inborn moral sense that came from the Creator and was planted in the angels and human race at the beginning. It was therefore coeval with human nature at the beginning. It is often called original righteousness. Adam was consequently created inherently righteous and holy, and remained so until the day he sinned. One aspect of redemption, Wesley explains, is to re-inscribe the Moral Law on the heart. This is part of the sanctifying work of the Spirit in our lives.

As to the Law’s properties, Wesley drew on the Puritan reading of Romans 7:12 – holy, just, and good – that these three properties define and characterize the Moral Law. When we live holy, just, and good, we fulfill the Moral Law revealed in our hearts. As for its uses, like the Reformers, Wesley taught there are three: (1) to convict of sin, (2) to lead sinners to Christ, and (3) to guide believers in the path of sanctified living. Hence, the Moral Law is never dispensed with or done away in the new covenant. Since it is an expression of God’s moral character and the eternal law of right and wrong, the Moral Law is forever binding. For without it there would be no sin, since sin by definition is a transgression of the Moral Law (1 John 3:5).

In the the last two sermons Wesley addresses how Christians can make the Law void by either not preaching it or by excusing themselves from obeying it. One way this is done is to teach an antinomian view of salvation by faith alone. Wesley proceeds to show that the Moral Law must have a place in our theology and that salvation by faith must be proclaimed in such a manner that it leads to holy living — thereby establishing the Moral Law in our hearts and lives.

Closing Thoughts

These three sermons are well worth the effort to read. They are thought-provoking and reflective. This subject is relevant to our times as the church struggles to maintain its witness and not compromise the faith. The three sermons are valuable at explaining how to have theology of holiness and not fall into the trap of legalism or license. They furthermore give us a solid foundation on which to build a positive understanding of what God desires to work in our lives by his sanctifying grace.

Here are the three sermons:
Sermon 1: Origin Nature Property Use of Moral Law
Sermon 2: Law Established Through Faith I
Sermon 3: Law Established Through Faith II

John Wesley & the Ordo Salutis

Introduction

The ordo salutis is Latin for the “order of salvation.” It is a term used for the logical sequence or steps of salvation in the Christian life. The primary text for the ordo salutis is Romans 8:29-30, because Paul spells out in logical sequence the steps of salvation:

“For those whom he [God] foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn within a large family. And those who he predestined he also called; and those whom he called he also justified; and those whom he justified he also glorified” (NRSV).

In this text we see five specific aspects of salvation listed in order: divine foreknowledge, predestination, calling, justification, and glorification. Other aspects of salvation are often incorporated into the ordo from other passages of scripture. This is done to fill out the ordo into a much fuller system.

The ordo is important to understand God’s saving work in our lives, from beginning to end. The ordo salutis is discussed often in theology, especially within Reformed tradition. An early Calvinist William Perkins (d. 1602) elaborated on the order of salvation in his classic work, A Golden Chain (1590), in which he described the ordo beginning with God’s unconditional election to its completion in the believer’s glorification and God’s eternal glory.

Calvinists and Arminians have disagreed over the ordo because of their different views concerning divine election and the role of human response in salvation.

Wesleyon the Ordo Salutis

In 1773 at the height of his controversy with the Calvinists (See Minutes Controversy), Wesley wrote the sermon On Predestination outlining his Arminian perspective of the ordo salutis as presented in Romans 8:29-30. Over the years Wesley had published several works related to the subject, but these efforts focused more on refuting Calvinist arguments than spelling out in positive terms his own Arminian viewpoint for his Methodist followers.

So, in this sermon what was Wesley’s explanation of the ordo salutis?

Here is a brief synopsis:

Wesley believes the Apostle is not describing a “chain of causes and effects” as much as showing the “order” or “steps” by which God accomplishes the different “branches of salvation” (§4). He begins by affirming God’s foreknowledge of everyone in human history who will believe unto salvation (§5). While we are creatures of time, God dwells in “one eternal now” (§15). He “sees at once whatever was, is, or will be to the end of time.” Thus, Wesley considers foreknowledge to be an anthropomorphism. It expresses from a finite human perspective God’s exhaustive knowledge of the past, present, and future – his omniscience. But he added that God’s infinite knowledge does not cause things to be. Instead, “he knows them because they are.” People are free to believe or to not believe, for such freedom is a gift of preventing grace (§6).

With God’s exhaustive knowledge of who will be finally saved, his decree (predestination) to conform believers into the likeness of the crucified and risen Christ logically follows (§7). In typical Arminian fashion, Wesley argues that God’s eternal decree is conditional and inclusive. Drawing on Mark 16:16, he asserts that the “unchangeable, irreversible, irresistible decree of God” is “‘He that believeth shall be saved; he that believeth not shall be damned.’” So, God’s eternal decree is fixed and cannot change, but what is decreed is the plan of salvation that is available to “everyone who believes,” for God’s love encompasses the entire human race (Jn. 3:16). Wesley’s point is that predestination pertains not so much to initial faith – who will believe – but to the future destiny of God’s people who will be conformed fully to the image of Christ in the future resurrection. After expounding on God’s redemptive work that spans from eternity past to eternity future, he then addresses how this plan is accomplished in the next three “steps.”

Under the labels calling and justification Wesley presents his doctrine of double justification. On calling, he interprets Paul to mean “‘effectual calling’” (§8). That is, the call to salvation begins “outwardly” with the “word of grace” proclaimed, then works “inwardly” by the “application of [God’s] word to the heart,” enabling a person to freely trust in Christ for present justification and salvation, with the Spirit bearing witness to their adoption (§12). Those who are effectually called, are then justified in a broader sense of being “made just or righteous,” or as he adds, “sanctified” by the Spirit (§9). The last “step” is glorification (§10). Having been made “meet” or fit for the “‘inheritance of the saints of light’” in sanctification, the Lord will give his people the “‘kingdom which was prepared for them before the world began’” (Col. 1:12, Matt. 25:34).

Here is a diagram the illustrates Wesley’s understanding of the ordo salutis. It begins with divine foreknowledge and moves to prevenient grace, convicting grace (repentance) and justifying and regenerating grace. After this comes sanctifying grace by which a believer grows toward maturity and full devotion. But our salvation is never complete until glorification, when believers will be fully conformed to the likeness of the risen Christ.

Ordo or Via

Wesleyan scholars and teachers often use the term via salutis (way or path of salvation) instead of ordo salutis. In several sermons Wesley gives holistic descriptions of the path of salvation beginning with prevenient grace (for example, The Scripture Way of Salvation). So, it is proper to speak of the via salutis when describing Wesley’s understanding of the Christian’s spiritual journey. Nevertheless, Wesley was a doctrinal theologian and he often describe in logical sequence the steps of salvation. This brings specificity to his theology and message of salvation. It spells out how he connected the different aspects of salvation in the believers experience of saving grace. So, both terms and the concepts they represent are valid ways to explore and understand Wesley’s doctrine of salvation.

Wesley’s Sermon on the Ordo Salutis

The above synopsis spells out the main points, but I encourage that you read Wesley’s sermon to get the full picture. The sermon was first published in 1776 (three years after it was written) and reissued another five times during his lifetime. It was given the title “On Predestination” in 1788 when it was included in a collection of sermons by Wesley.

Sermon: On Predestination 1773

The Wesleys & The Moravians

A Tale of Two Traditions

Both John and Charles Wesley had a checkered history with the Unitas Fratum, better known as the Moravians. The relationship began well during the Wesleys time in Georgia (1735-1737). At one point John even asked to join the Moravian ranks. And it was the Moravian Peter Böhler who mentored the Wesley brothers in their evangelical conversions in May 1738. In fact, John’s conversion testimony on May 24th is patterned after Böhler’s teaching on the new birth and its immediate fruits: assurance of forgiveness and freedom from sin.

Yet, following their conversions the relationship soon soured due to fundamental differences about what constitutes saving faith and the role of the means of grace in conversion and the Christian life. This became known as the Stillness Controversy, with Philipp Molther, a 25-year-old Moravian missionary, convincing many at the Fetter Lane Society in London to stop using the means of grace until they received the gift of saving faith. Some background is helpful. The Moravians were pietistic Lutherans and took a negative view of the English habit of practicing their faith through a diligent use of devotional practices (means of grace), fearing they trusted in these practices to save them. The Wesleys were high church Anglicans who recently embraced the evangelical faith. The Wesleys were strong exponents of the diligent, even methodical practice of the means of grace to advance one’s spiritual life.

In the end, the Controversy boiled down to irreconcilable differences between two Protestant traditions – Anglican and Lutheran. Both sides never reached a working agreement by which they could work together in advancing God’s kingdom. The Wesleys formally separated from the Moravians and the Fetter Lane Society on July 20, 1740. From that point forward, John Wesley felt a love for the Moravians, and at times desired to rejoin them, but upon reflection he knew he couldn’t and consistently pointed out their differences.

To learn more about the relationship between the Wesleys and the Moravians, see these articles:
John Wesley and the Moravians: 1735-1741
Pietist Credentials of John Wesley
The Stillness Controversy of 1740: Tradition Shaping Scripture Reading

Three Phases
Chronicling Wesleys’ history with the Moravians through John’s writings is a challenge since much of the material is found in his journal. It is grouped into three periods. Excerpts from his journal are therefore included, along with his published writings, so the reader can track the development of their relationship and John’s opinion of the Moravians over time. Material about the Stillness Controversy from the Moravian perspective is included below. It is fascinating to read both perspectives to gain a fuller understanding of what transpired and why both sides separated. Please note the journal excerpts include the entire page. The reader should focus on the date listed in the link heading.

Georgia & Conversion 1735-1738
These excerpts from John Wesley’s journal chronicle from his initial exposure to Moravian piety during their voyage to America to his conversion and its aftermath in 1738. The excerpt for May 24, 1738 records JW’s conversion, which is patterned after the Moravian’s view of the gospel of free grace. This period represents John’s positive view of the Moravians, with the high water mark being his evangelical conversion in May 1738. Yet toward the end of this period we begin to see seeds of doubt in his assessment of their theology and practices, expressed most strongly in his letter to Count Zinzendorf and the Herrnhut leadership.
JW Journal Jan 25-Feb 9 1736
JW Journal Feb 24 1736
JW Journal Mar 4-10 1738
JW Journal Apr 22 -May 13 1738
JW Journal May 24 1738
JW Journal June 6-7 1738
JW Journal July 9-12 1738
JW Journal Aug 10 1738 CD Sermons
JW Letters to Count & Herrnhut 1738

Stillness Controversy 1739-1740
According to John’s journal the Stillness Controversy began in November 1739 when he saw that new converts were being taught they were not yet converted and not to stop practicing the means of grace until they receive the gift of saving faith. John had a lengthy conversation with Molther in December that clarified both positions. By June it was becoming evident that a separation was needed. John spent several days in June 1740 teaching at the Fetter Lane Society on the errors of the Moravians. This cemented the positions of both sides. The following excepts from John’s journal chronicle the controversy from his perspective.
JW Journal Nov 1-9 1739
JW Journal Dec 31 1739
JW Journal Apr 23-30 1740
JW Journal June 22-July 23 1740

Moravian Reaction & Viewpoint. The Moravians, of course, saw things very differently than did the Wesleys. They saw the root issues to be power and control. The Wesleys were known for their forceful personalities. They were also ordained clergy in the Established Church. this gave them social standing that others did not have. However, in the revival spiritual experience was often valued over official positions. Also the differences between the two Christian traditions served as a backdrop to the issues, like who should partake of communion and whether doubts over one’s salvation is compatible with authentic saving faith.
James Hutton Mar 14 1740
Letter of Moravian Church to Wesley 1740
Ingham Letter to JW 1740
Molther’s Recollection of Fetter Lane in 1739-1740

To check out more Moravian writings, follow this link: Pietist Sources.

Separation & Evaluation 1741-1763
Following their separation from the Moravians in 1740, the Wesleys had several important interactions with the Moravians throughout 1741. The journal excerpt in June 1741 records John’s critical evaluation of Martin Luther as the fountainhead of Moravian errors (as he perceived them). On September 3, 1741, John met with Zinzendorf to address their differences over Christian holiness and other matters. The transcript below is from Henry Moore’s biography of JW, and includes a translation of the conversation recorded by John. Most people are aware that John included a record of the meeting in his published journal to support his position. But few are aware that Zinzendorf also published in 1745 John’s transcription of their conversation for his supporters. Both sides believed the transcription showed that they were the ones standing for the truth of the gospel and exposing the errors of the other person.
JW Journal Apr 21-May 2 1741
JW Journal May 16 1741
JW Journal June 15-16 1741
JW Journal Aug 1 1741
Moore JW & CZ Sept 3 1741
JW Letter to Herrnhut 1741

Beginning in 1744 John began to publish tracts and sermons in which he evaluated the differences between his views and the Moravians. John published two tracts to refute Moravian teachings – Dialogues between an Antinomian and a Friend. Wesley also explained his views in his Answer to Rev Church. His 1746 sermon On the Means of Grace was another response to the Moravian viewpoint. Then there is a series of letters that offer further context. Finally, John’s sermon On Sin in Believers again addresses what he perceived was a cardinal error in Moravian doctrine. It is questionable whether Wesley accurately represented the Moravian position in all these specifics. What we can say for certain is that both sides represented traditions that differed in their viewpoints about gospel salvation and the Christian life.
Short View of Difference Between Moravians & Wesley 1744
JW Answer to Rev Church 1745
Dialogue Between Antinomian & Friend 1745
Second Dialogue Between Antinomian & Friend 1745
Sermon On the Means of Grace 1746
JW Letter to Stonehouse 1750
JW Letter to Hutton 1755
Queries Proposed to Zinzendorf 1755
JW Letter to Furly 1763
Sermon On Sin in Believers 1763

What is the “Almost” Christian?

Introduction

The word nominal comes from Latin for “name.” The nominal Christian is one who claims to be a follower of Christ but isn’t one in a real sense. They profess genuine faith but are not real or authentic. They have the form of religion but deny its power in their lives (2 Tim. 3:5). They are a Christian in name only.

The title “Almost” Christian comes from Acts 26:28 where King Agrippa says to Paul, “Do you think that in such a short time you can persuade me to be a Christian?”

The theme of “almost” Christian was central to the Great Evangelical Revival in the day of Whitefield and the Wesleys. Historians estimate about 90% of the population was baptized into the Church of England in the 18th century, but few were actually living the Christian life. They could claim to be Christian, having been baptized, but they lacked the reality of Christ living in them. The central aim of the Evangelical Revival was to convert these almost Christians into altogether or real believers.

So, what is an Almost Christian? How do we tell if someone is lacking saving faith though they claim to have faith?

Both George Whitefield and John Wesley preached on the almost Christian and answer the question – how close can someone be to the faith and still fall short? But first some context.

Anglican Theme
Sincere ministers of the gospel in the Anglican Church preached often on the theme of the almost Christian in the 17th and 18th centuries. Albert Outler states the the distinction between an almost and altogether Christian was commonplace by the 18th century. He lists a number of examples in a footnote (Works of John Wesley, Bicentennial Edition, 1:131). Good ministers recognized that many people had only a nominal faith, having grown up in a professing Christian nation that has a national church. So, Acts 26:28 was a popular text on this theme.

Two 17th century Anglican ministers who preached on the almost Christian was Matthew Mead (who wrote an entire book on the subject), and Bishop Ezekiel Hopkins. Here are their writings on the subject. Check out how these Anglican ministers understood the almost Christian in relation to an evangelical perspective.
Mead The Almost Christian (1661) 1819
Hopkins The Almost Christian 1693

George Whitefield
Whitefield was the greatest evangelist of the 18th century. In 1738 Whitefield published his sermon on the almost Christian. He defines this person as one who wavers in their commitment between Christ and the world. They are moral and upright in their relations to other people and have an inclination toward religion or faith in Christ. But it doesn’t govern their lives. They can attend Church, perform the rituals of religion, but something is lacking in their faith. They often judge their religion by the common culture at the time. They follow the crowd, which is on the broad path that misses the way to eternal life (Matt. 7:13). In simple terms, they lack the new birth. Read Whitefield on the almost Christian:
Whitefield The Almost Christian 1738

John Wesley
Wesley preached his famous sermon on the almost Christian before the University at Oxford in 1741. He appeals to the university to move beyond a nominal faith, which was rampant at Oxford. He published the sermon soon afterwards as one of his most important evangelistic messages. In this sermon Wesley acknowledges that before his evangelical conversion he was an almost Christian, even though he was a minister of the gospel. Wesley defines the almost Christian as someone who has a general belief in God, is moral in their outward life, practices a form of religion, and can even be sincere as far as outward religion goes. Like Whitefield, Wesley says the almost Christian lacks the new birth – they do not have a genuine love for God that purifies the heart. They do not overcome the world, as the apostle John calls us to do (1 Jn. 5:4). They have not yet experienced the saving “power of God.” Read Wesley on the almost Christian:
Wesley The Almost Christian 1741

Rediscovering the Theme Today
The almost Christian was an important theme in the 18th century Evangelical Revival. It was an essential part of the gospel message that Whitefield and Wesley proclaimed to the nation and to church members. I submit it needs to be recovered today in the modern church. So, the question for us is how close can someone be to the faith and still fall short? What are the marks of an almost Christian is our setting?

Susanna Wesley on Salvation

Background

Susanna was born on January 20, 1669 in London, England. She is widely known as the “mother of Methodism.” Her parents were Samuel and Mary Annesley, and she was the youngest of 25 children. Her father was a prominent minister who had recently dissented from the Church of England and joined the ranks of nonconformity. Susanna was a person of deep conviction, and at the age of 12 she stopped attending her father’s church and joined the Church of England. She married Samuel Wesley (1662-1735) on November 11, 1688 (age 19), and from their union came 19 children, with 10 surviving early childhood. Death rates for young children were very high back then. John was born in 1703 and Charles in 1707.

Samuel and Susanna’s marriage was like many marriages with good and bad times. Samuel was jailed twice because of financial debts and the couple separated for a short season because of political and religious differences. Susanna had a keen theological mind, and this is seen in her writings that comprise of letters, journals, and a variety of educational, catechetical, and controversial documents. Her works were published 25 years ago by Charles Wallace Jr. (Susanna Wesley: The Complete Writings. Oxford University Press, 1997).

Soteriology

Susanna’s views on salvation are scattered throughout her writings, with the fullest account found in her exposition of the Apostles’ Creed. Written as a letter to her daughter of the same first name, Susanna explained in detail her beliefs about the gospel and salvation. Just as the Apostles’ Creed is organized around the Trinity, Susanna’s exposition incorporates an economic Trinitarian perspective of salvation. God initiated a covenant of works with Adam, the “first general head of mankind,” which he transgressed and brought guilt and punishment to his posterity. In its place a covenant of grace was instituted that promised salvation through the “seed of the woman” (Gen. 3:15). The conditions of this new covenant were no longer “perfect obedience,” but “faith in Christ Jesus and sincere though imperfect obedience to the laws of God.”

As the “second general head” of the human race, Jesus Christ fulfills the three offices of prophet, priest, and king. Susanna’s grasp of Christ’s office as priest reveals her theological acuity:

“Now I would fain know which way his justice could be satisfied, since ’tis impossible for a finite being as man is to do it . . . unless some other were substituted in our stead that would undergo the punishment we have deserved and thereby satisfy divine justice and purchase pardon and favour from God, the merit of whose perfect obedience should atone for the imperfection of ours, and so obtain for us title to those glorious rewards, to that eternal happiness.”

In this compressed statement, Susanna expressed her understanding of justification and salvation. She subscribed to a penal substitution theory of the atonement and inferred the imputation of Christ’s active and passive righteousness as the basis for pardon, restoration to God’s favor, and title to the eternal kingdom. Digressing into a fairly long description of Christ’s passion in her letter, Susanna affirmed Christ’s death as an “actual, real, separation of his soul and body” and that he did “actually descend into hell” and there proclaim his victory over the principalities and powers. Drawing on the Apostle Paul’s statement in Romans 4:25, Susanna held that Christ was raised from the dead for our justification and now reigns in heaven with absolute “power and dominion.” From there he will return to publicly judge every person “according to what they have done on earth.”

For the third article of the Apostles’ Creed, Susanna drew on the Nicene Creed and Anglican John Pearson to stress that the Holy Spirit is the “author of all holiness in us by sanctifying our natures, illuminating our minds, rectifying our wills and affections,” and by “conveying grace into the soul” through the “word and sacraments.” Besides these benefits, the Holy Spirit “assures us of our adoption.” Baptism is the “first remission” of sin and repentance serves to maintain “constant forgiveness” in the Christian life. Her views on the Lord’s Supper mirror her husband Samuel’s (scroll down this page). The sacrament conveys pardon and grace to worthy communicants.

Influence

From the surviving correspondence between John, Charles, and their mother, we know Susanna left a definite mark on her sons’ faith and theology. Both John and Charles were committed high church Anglicans their entire lives, even after they became evangelicals in 1738. Their views on baptism and communion continued to reflect the imprint of their parents. And their basic understanding of the order of salvation remained high church Anglican in character:

Salvation begins with baptism, normally administered to infants
Continues through life with sanctification and growth
Finalized at the Last Judgment with a public declaration of justification (Matt. 25:31-46)
Consummated with glorification in the eternal kingdom

As evangelicals, John and Charles adjusted this order by adopting the views of William Law that a baptized person loses their salvation when they turn to worldly living. This became the basis for their evangelical message that Anglicans need to be born again by faith in Christ.

Susanna’s Death

Before Susanna passed away on July 23, 1742, at the age of 73, she did receive the evangelical experience of assurance while partaking of communion. She therefore died as a high church evangelical Anglican as were her two famous sons.

What are Sins of Surprise?

John Wesley’s doctrine of sin is more complex than often found in other traditions. He used terms like voluntary & involuntary, outward & inward, guilt-power-being, and sins of surprise. So, what did he mean by this category of sins of surprise and from where did he derive it?

To begin with, the category “sins of surprise” is found in his 1746 sermon The First Fruits of the Spirit, based on Romans 8:1. In this sermon Wesley explains what it means to be “in Christ” and how believers are no longer under condemnation. As is found in many of his sermons, Wesley understood present salvation to involve various degrees of deliverance from sin: justification delivers from sin’s guilt, regeneration liberates from sin’s power (or rule) – also called outward sin – and Christian perfection overcomes inward sin or the being of sin.

Here is the sermon: First Fruits of the Spirit

Sins of Surprise Explained
So, Wesley discusses in First Fruits a Christian’s standing of “no condemnation” in relation to present (outward) sin, inward sin, remaining sin in their lives, sins of infirmity, and sins of surprise. While believers are free from sins guilt and power, they continue to receive grace as they wrestle with and gain victory over inward sin and those sins due to human weakness and imperfection (i.e. sins of infirmity). Lastly, he discusses sins of surprise, which he acknowledges to be more difficult to ascertain. We will let Wesley explain his meaning:

“It is more difficult to determine concerning those which are usually styled sins of surprise; as when one who commonly in patience possesses his soul, on a sudden and violent temptation, speaks or acts in a manner not consistent with the royal law, ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.’ Perhaps it is not easy to fix a general rule concerning transgressions of this nature. We cannot say, either that men are, or that they are not, condemned for sins of surprise in general: But it seems, whenever a believer is by surprise overtaken in a fault, there is more or less condemnation, as there is more or less concurrence of his will” (II.11).

Although Wesley is writing in 18th century English, we can get the basic idea: sins of surprise involve those moments when we are caught off guard and do not respond in a Christ-like manner. Wesley also explains that some sins of surprise involve more guilt due to willful negligence or something similar. Behind this category is the idea that we are responsible before God for our unplanned, impulsive reactions to events that we could not foresee or plan a response.

Lesson: Wesley did have a broader definition of sin than a “voluntary transgression of a known law of God,” which many Wesleyans love to quote. He saw sin in some sense to pertain to all our actions and reactions. Of course, he placed more weight on those sins that are deliberate or voluntary, just as we all do in our interactions and relationships.

Richard Kidder 1633-1703
Kidder was the Anglican Bishop of Bath and Wells from 1691 to 1703. His most famous work is A Demonstration of the Messias, in three parts (1684, 1699, 1700), which influenced the words of the Messiah by Handel. He also wrote a commentary on the Pentateuch.

To learn about Kidder and the other bishops of Bath and Wells, check out this resource: Lives of Bishops of Bath & Wells 1829

Sins of surprise are discussed in Kidder’s booklet, A Discourse Concerning Sins of Infirmity, and Wilful Sins, with Another of Restitution. This work was originally published shortly after his death in late November 1703 and went through several editions.

This work is made up of three separate tracts. The first is a discourse on sins of infirmity. Infirmity is an old English word for human weakness, and it includes a discussion on sins of surprise. Kidder basically sees these sins as impulsive and emotional reactions in a sudden moment, when a person does not have the time to think and prepare for a response.

Here is Kidder’s booklet:
Discourse Concerning Sin 1732
Discourse Concerning Sin 3rd ed 1760

Wesley first read Kidder in 1733. While Wesley did refer to voluntary sin a couple of years before, Kidder’s influence on Wesley and the development of his doctrine of sin is evident, for the same concepts and language are used by both authors. It is therefore worth your time to read Kidder’s short work to gain a better understanding of how Wesley developed his theology of sin during his Oxford era.

Samuel Wesley’s Theology Part 1

Arminian Beliefs & Influence

Background
Samuel Sr. was born in 1662, two years after the restoration of the monarchy, and was raised in a Puritan home. He later was educated at Oxford and there conformed to the Anglican Church in the early 1680s. This was a period of spiritual renewal in the Established Church and of high churchmanship. Samuel participated in this spiritual renewal and was a staunch high churchman. After ordination Samuel accepted the pastorate at Epworth in 1797, along with his wife Susanna, and would remain there till his death in April 1735. They would have 19 children with 10 reaching adulthood.

For a short intro to Samuel’s life and context, see the following video Samuel Wesley: Father of the Fathers of Methodism (umc.org)

Samuel’s Arminian Beliefs
As the father of John and Charles Wesley, Samuel left an indelible mark on their theology and religious life. When Samuel conformed to the Established Church, he also embraced the Arminian perspective, which was prevalent at the time in the Church.

From 1691 to 1697 Samuel published his views on theology and other matters in the Athenian Gazette, later republished in 4 volumes as The Athenian Oracle. In these volumes Samuel’s theology is sufficiently spelled out. Here is the 3rd edition released in 1728 and a sermon:
Athenian Oracle I 3rd ed 1728
Athenian Oracle II 3rd ed 1728
Athenian Oracle III 3rd ed 1728
Athenian Oracle IV 3rd ed 1728
Sermon: Reformation of Manners 1698

The major tenets of Samuel’s Arminian theology:

Conditional election
“We cannot be satisfied by any of those Scriptures which are brought for that purpose, that there is any such election of a determinate number as either puts a force on their natures, and irresistibly save them or absolutely excludes all the rest of mankind from salvation. We think there is no one place in the Holy Scriptures which proves that so many men, and no more, were irresistibly determined to everlasting salvation.”

Predestination by divine foreknowledge
“God predestinated those to salvation whom he foresaw would make good use of his grace, resolving to damn only such as he foresaw would continue impenitent.”

Theodicy
“God necessitates no evil action yet foresees all. If God tempts no man to evil, much less does he necessitate. Indeed, were he to do this, the nature of man would be destroyed, the proposal of rewards and punishments would be ironical, preaching would be vain, and faith also vain.”

God wills everyone’s salvation
“God really wills the salvation of all men, as far as it is consistent with the liberty of man and his own purity and justice.”

Reliance on grace for salvation
“Arminians… absolutely deny any such thing (as salvation apart from grace), and protest they depend upon God’s grace in all their good actions, tho man’s will must be taken in as a subordinate agent, and we are to work out our own salvation (Phil. 2:12), without which we shall never obtain it.”

Freedom of the will
“God made man upright, and a free agent, but doth not over-rule it, by saving man whether he will or no, or by damning him undeservedly.”

General atonement
Jesus Christ “atoned so far for the sins of all mankind as to make them in a saveable condition.”

Samuel’s Influence
From this brief survey of Samuel’s Arminian theology, it should become obvious that he left a mark on John and Charles. For in all these areas we see that the two sons shared their father’s Arminian perspective.

Speaking of John, Allan Coppedge concluded, “The resemblance of Samuel Wesley’s to the theology of his son makes it reasonable to suppose that John Wesley was heavily influenced by his father.”

In the same way Wesley’s biographer Luke Tyerman noted that apart from differences in phraseology and emphasis, the theologies of father and son were essentially the same. The same could be said of Susanna’s influence on her sons.

Lesson: any study in the roots of the Wesley brothers’ beliefs should include the theology of their parents.

Resources
Arthor A. Torpy, The Prevenient Piety of Samuel Wesley, Sr. Scarecrow Press, 2009.

Samuel Wesley’s Theology Part 2

Soteriology & Sacramentalism

Like other clergyman in the Anglican Church of the time, Samuel was an ardent high churchman in his soteriology and sacramentalism. In both areas he left a deep mark on his John and Charles, who held very similar views to their father’s apart from their evangelicalism.

Covenant Theology

A basic outline of Samuel’s high church views on salvation are found in his manual to his parishioners The Pious Communicant Rightly Prepar’d, published in 1700. Samuel’s soteriology was grounded on the Puritan concept of two covenants, but he did not conflate the covenant of works with the Mosaic Law. God’s covenant with Adam as our federal head was based on works, but Adam broke that covenant and along with his descendants came under the sentence of death, both temporal and eternal. Therefore, God instituted a covenant of grace, which was foreshadowed in the protoevangelium of Genesis 3:15 and revealed through Abraham and the Mosaic Law. However, its “full and complete discovery” awaited the “times of the Gospel.” As Samuel explained, the new covenant in Christ contains the “most perfect revelation of the divine will, the promises of God, and those conditions on which he accepts and forgives us.”

Here is Samuel’s tract: Pious Communicant Rightly Prepar’d 1700

Sacramentalism

At this point Samuel’s high churchmanship comes to the forefront with his sacramentalism. The new covenant in Christ is initiated in baptism – nearly always to infants – wherein the baptizand is regenerated and forgiven for the “damning guilt” of original sin. The baptized child then assumes responsibility for their baptismal covenant (i.e., salvation) at confirmation. The sacrament of communion involves a renewing of a person’s baptismal vows of faith and obedience to God. So central was the Lord’s Supper in Samuel’s soteriology that he considered it the “substance of all other Christian duties.” Besides expressing one’s vows to God, the sacrament confers covenant benefits. Quoting the Anglican Homilies, Samuel stated that communicants receive “‘not only the outward sacrament, but the spiritual thing also, not the figure, but the truth, not the shadow only, but the body.’” In this way worthy communicants partake of Christ’s body and blood after a spiritual manner and receive grace for forgiveness and sanctification.

Sacramental Soteriology

The importance of the sacrament to the Christian life is seen in Samuel’s emphasis on “faithful receivers.” He claimed the Apostles, primitive Church, and Church of England agree that only worthy communicants receive the sacrament’s saving benefits. Communicants must examine themselves before partaking, using the Ten Commandments as a guide. Samuel realized that such stern warnings might cause parishioners to stay away from the Table. So, he devoted an entire chapter to the “perpetual obligation” of communicating “frequently.” In Samuel’s soteriology, both baptism and the Lord’s Supper offer grace and an assurance of salvation. He called them the “seals of God’s covenant with us.” Regarding the assurance of justification and sanctification in the sacraments, Samuel wrote:

The Holy Symbols, when duly received, do exhibit and convey unto us divine virtue and assistance, and all the inestimable benefits which were purchas’d for us, and reached out unto us by the death of a Redeemer; as justification or actual pardon of our sins, the reinstating us in God’s favour, and assuring us that he is reconciled to us, and that we are accounted righteous before him; as well as sanctification, or actual strength and grace to conquer our Sins and to obey his commands.

Influence on John & Charles

From Samuel’s sacramental soteriology we gain important insights into his sons’ theology:

Both John & Charles were high church Anglicans their entire lives. They both believed in frequent or constant communion. And they both held the same view of covenant theology as their father’s.
Both John & Charles had a sacramental view of the Christian life: salvation begins in baptism with regenerating/justifying grace, progresses through life with sanctification, and culminates at the Last Judgment with final justification.
Both John and Charles had a high church sacramental doctrine of justification before 1738. It was the same as their father’s viewpoint explained above.
But John & Charles became evangelical Christians in 1738 and adjusted their Anglican sacramental soteriology to affirm that nearly everyone loses their baptismal washing received in infancy and need to be re-born again as adults. This became their message in their evangelical sermons & writings.
Still both John & Charles maintained a high church Anglican view of communion their entire lives. As evangelicals, however, they believed the sacrament conveys preventing, justifying, and sanctifying grace.

Resource:

Mark K. Olson, John Wesley’s Doctrine of Justification. Abingdon Press, 2023.

Writings of Early Methodist Women

Historians of Methodism have long recognized the important role that women played in early Methodism. Paul Chilcote reminds us that “there is no question that women helped make the Wesleyan revival one of the most dynamic Christian movements in the history of Protestantism.” He adds, “The vitality and continuing significance of Methodism is due, in large measure, to their presence and influence and to the depth of their spirituality.” Women were among Wesley’s first converts in 1738 and early on contributed to the spiritual life of the societies (see Early Methodist Conversion Accounts on the Early Methodist page).

A full list of the women who left an indelible mark on early Methodism cannot be made here, but include the likes of Susanna Wesley (d. 1742), Mary Fletcher (Bosanquet) (d. 1815), Elizabeth Ritchie (d. 1836), Sarah Crosby (d. 1794), Sarah Ryan (d. 1768), Hester Ann Rogers (d. 1794), Hannah Ball (d. 1792), and Jane Cooper (d. 1762). But there were many others. The list includes white and black (an example of a black woman is Phillis Wheatley, who had connections with Calvinistic Methodism. Wesley published her poems in the Arminian Magazine). Women served as lay preachers, prayer warriors, small group leaders, and in various other compacities.

The records left by early Methodist women are significant and many. They include autobiographies, dynamic spiritual accounts, hymns and poems, letters and spiritual instructions, tracts, novels, and letters. Their writings offer a different perspective on early Methodism. Below is a sample:

Experience & Letters of Hester Rogers 1841
Conversion Account of Hannah Richardson 1748
Extract Journal of Elizabeth Harper 1796
Letters by Jane Cooper 3rd ed 1778
Letters of Agnes Bulmer 1842
Letters of Mrs Lefevre 1792

Life of Barbara Heck 1895
Memoirs of Jane Pallister 1834
Memoirs of Elizabeth Mortimer (Ritchie) 1836
Memoirs of Hannah Ball 1796
Memoirs of Mary Tatham 1838

Phillis Wheatley Poems 1909
Bosanquet Jesus Altogether Lovely 1st ed 1766
Bosanquet Jesus Altogether Lovely 2nd ed 1766
Brunton ‘Discipline’ A Novel 1837

Histories on Early Methodist Women
Today, there are many studies on early Methodist women. But interest in the subject began in the 19th century. Below is a sample of histories that focus on the lives and contributions of women in early Methodism.
Buoy Representative Women of Methodism 1893
Keeling Eminent Methodist Women 1889
Stevens Women of Methodism 1866
Winthrow Worthies of Early Methodism 1878

Contemporary resource on early Methodist women writings:
Paul Chilcote, Early Methodist Spirituality: Selected Women’s Writings (Kingswood, 2007)

John Wesley on Degrees of Faith

When John Wesley embraced the evangelical faith in 1738, matters of faith and salvation were black and white. The Moravians taught him that a person either had faith and was saved or they did not have saving faith. Before his Aldersgate conversion on May 24th, he confessed that he did not have saving faith. He claimed he was a “child of wrath, an heir of hell.” When others told John that they believed he had Christian faith, he responded, “So have the devils — a sort of faith.” What he wanted was a faith that he could feel within as peace from God, victory over the world, freedom from sin, and the fruits of love and joy. He wanted a faith which “none can have without knowing they have it.” He wanted a perceptible assurance of faith.

However, he soon came to a different point of view. Through his own struggles in the fall of 1738 and ministering to people in various spiritual levels, Wesley came to see that faith is not always black and white. People come to faith by degrees. Christians grow in the faith by degrees. People experience Christ and his salvation in various degrees. There is not one uniform experience of Jesus for everyone. Simply stated, Wesley came to see there are degrees of faith. This position played a huge role in his separation from the Moravians in 1740 and continued to define his theology down through the years.

Covenant Theology

Wesley held a standard high church Anglican view of covenant theology. He first learned his covenant theology from his parents — Samuel and Susanna — and from his Anglican education at the Charterhouse and Oxford.

Wesley believed that the covenant of works was made with Adam in his innocence. Adam was sinless and fully capable of perfect obedience to God. Therefore, he was able to merit God’s favor and blessings through his works. But we all know the story that he sinned and lost God’s favor and blessing. Separated from God, Adam came under the rule of sin and death, passing on a sinful nature to his posterity. As sinners, no person can now merit God’s favor or salvation. To remedy this situation, God made a covenant of grace with fallen Adam and his posterity. The first promise of this covenant is stated in Gen. 3:15 (called the protoevangelium) wherein the seed (Christ) will crush the head of the serpent.

As a means of salvation, the covenant of works was set aside and the covenant of grace replaced it. Wesley did not conflate the covenant of works with the Mosaic Law, instead he held the various dispensations from Genesis 3 to the new covenant in the NT are under the covenant of grace. In the covenant of grace, people are saved by divine grace, not by their works. This principle applies to everyone, including fallen Adam and his posterity. As an Arminian, Wesley believed God loves every person (Jn. 3:16) and generously gives grace to draw all people to a saving knowledge of God. This includes people who have never heard of Christ.

See the article on Wesley’s inclusivism.

Like others who held covenant theology, Wesley identified various periods of history to dispensations within the covenant of grace (e.g. patriarchal, Jewish, John the Baptist, and Christian). Wesley focus mostly on the Jewish and Christian, also called the legal (under the law) and evangelical (under the gospel).

Wesley discusses the covenants of works and grace in the sermon The Righteousness of Faith 1740 reprint

The key point is that the various dispensations were not just historical periods, but represent stages in the spiritual journey of faith. This was how Wesley understood degrees of faith.

On Faith, Hebrews 11:6

This sermon was written towards the end of Wesley’s life (1788). In it Wesley spells out the four dispensations in the covenant of grace (from his colleague John Fletcher). These four dispensations are heathenism (patriarchal), Jewish, John the Baptist, and Christian.

Wesley then walks through the “several sorts of faith” by which he means degrees of faith. He begins with the materialist (atheist), then proceeds to discuss the deist, heathen, Moslem, Jewish and so on. He then discusses the Catholic and Protestant degrees of faith before expounding on the two degrees of faith that bring eternal salvation. Here he introduces two levels of Christian faith, which he called the servant and the child of God. The faith of a servant involves a reverential fear or respect of God that motivates holy living. This degree of Christian faith is accepted by God and saves from his wrath, meaning eternal punishment (i.e. Hell). Wesley believed that many professing Christians have this degree of faith. The faith of a child is evangelical faith. The born-again believer enjoys the Spirit of adoption and has a perceptible (felt) assurance of salvation. They know by experience the indwelling presence of Christ (Gal. 2:20).

Understanding the degrees of faith is helpful in a number of ways. It helps us to understand our own spiritual journey and the progress we are making. It also is helpful in our witness to non-believers, to understand where they are at in their spiritual journey and to give them counsel according to their spiritual needs. Wesley’s sermon is worth reading and expanding upon for our context today. For we live in a world with many degrees of faith. It is important to give seekers guidance that pertains to their spiritual state.

To learn more about Wesley’s degrees of faith: On Faith, Hebrews 11.6 1788

Two months after Wesley wrote the above sermon he penned a follow-up, called On the Discoveries of Faith. In this sermon he discusses how faith serves as a spiritual sense (like our five senses) to know the things of God and to understand the spiritual realm. Wesley explains what faith reveals to us about God, ourselves, and salvation. He then discusses the degrees of Christian faith — servant, child of God, growing believers, and mature Christians.

Here is the sermon: On the Discoveries of Faith 1788

Further Reading
Stanley Rodes, From Faith to Faith: John Wesley’s Covenant Theology and the Way of Salvation (2013).
Mark Olson, Wesley and Aldersgate: Interpreting Conversion Narratives (2019).
Thomas Oden, John Wesley’s Teachings: Christ and Salvation (2012).

Early Methodist Christology

Within the general church, Early Methodism is often not noted for its interest or concern with doctrinal theology. It was largely seen as an offshoot of Pietism and a movement that stressed the experiences of the new birth and entire sanctification. But this caricature is certainly incorrect, for as you will learn below the early Methodist’s were deeply committed to Nicene orthodoxy on the Trinity and Christology.

Historical Context

In late 1782, Unitarian minister and famous scientist Joseph Priestley (1733-1804) – discoverer of oxygen and other gases – published a broadside against the Christian doctrines of the Trinity and Christ’s deity. The work was titled History of the Corruptions of Christianity and it immediately gained widespread attention. In it Priestley argued that Christianity was originally a Jewish-Unitarian movement and the doctrine of Christ’s deity was a later innovation by the 2nd century Apologists. Priestley championed the idea that Jesus Christ was a “mere man.” His work was critically assessed by Anglican Bishop Samuel Horsley in the summer of 1783. The debate between the two men went on for several years and after their deaths supporters claimed victory for both sides. Priestley’s Unitarian Christology was accused of reviving the heresy known as Socinianism, which in the 16th century denied the doctrine of the Trinity. John Wesley considered Priestley one of the most dangerous heretics in the nation at the time. For more on Priestley and his other writings, see the philosophy/political page.

Methodist Response

In 1783 John Fletcher (1729-1785) decided to write a full response to Priestley, with the encouragement of John Wesley. Fletcher, however, unexpectedly died in August, 1785, before the work was finished. With the support of John Wesley, the papers were turned over by Mrs. Fletcher to Joseph Benson (1749-1821) to prepare for publication. This shows the importance that Wesley believed in a scholarly response to Priestley’s arguments.

The finished work was in two parts, with Benson and Fletcher authoring different chapters in each work. The first was A Rational Vindication of the Catholic Faith (pub. 1788, 1790) and was followed with Socinianism Unscriptural (pub. 1791). These two volumes represent the first full exposition on Christology and the doctrine of the Trinity by Methodist theologians. The first volume is a rational apologetic for the orthodox doctrine of Christ’s two natures – divine and human – in one person; the second a vindication of that doctrine by the biblical witness. Fletcher’s discussion on the Trinity is informative in the opening chapters and demonstrates his theological depth.

The Rational Vindication was an apologetic writing done by early Methodist theologians in a more systematic format. Socinianism Unscriptural supports the prior work by focusing on the biblical text. That John Wesley endorsed these works shows that he was not against apologetics or systematic treatments of doctrine, even though he was not a systematic theologian by profession. These works would help set a precedence for later Methodist theologians to write systematic works.

For further study, see the article Early Methodist Christology.

Rational Vindication of the Catholic Faith 1788, 1790
John Fletcher wrote the first four chapters and Joseph Benson added another seven. Included here is a table of contents, the 1790 edition, and volume 3 of Fletcher’s Works that includes the Rational Vindication and Socinianism Unscriptural in updated typesetting (makes it easier for us to read):
Rational Vindication of Catholic Faith – Table of Contents
Rational Vindication of Catholic Faith 1790
Works of John Fletcher Vol 3 1833 pp. 379-619

Socinianism Unscriptural 1791
This work is in two parts. Fletcher wrote the first series of letters addressed to Dr. Priestley. These letters address the subject of Christology from scripture in the OT and NT. The second part is a series of letters addressed to John Wesley by Joseph Benson that finishes what Fletcher began in the first part. Besides a work of apologetics and theology, this work reveals the hermeneutics of early Methodists. Included here is the first edition and a table of contents. The work is also available in an updated typesetting in vol. 3 of Fletcher’s Works (see above).
Socinianism Unscriptural – Table of Contents
Socinianism Unscriptural 1791

Priestley & Horsley’s Writings:
Included here is Priestley’s two-volume work that sparked the controversy and the exchange of writings between himself and Horsley.
Priestley History of Corruptions of Christianity vol 1 1782
Priestley History of Corruptions of Christianity vol 2 2nd ed 1783
Priestley Letters Controversy with Horsley 1815
Horsley Response to Priestley 1786
Horsley Tracts Against Priestley 1821

Studies on Methodist Christology:
Vickers & Van Kuiken, Methodist Christology: From the Wesleys to the Twenty-First Century, 2020.
Colyer, The Trinitarian Dimension of John Wesley’s Theology, 2019.

The Novel
‘The History of Henry, Earl of Moreland’
Edited by John Wesley

It is well-known that the Wesley brothers published over 400 works during their lifetimes on almost every conceivable subject and genre. These include sermons, hymns, poetry, histories, tracts, journals, etc. However, few people know that JW published works of fiction as an editor. In 1780 or shortly before JW read a novel written by the Irish writer Henry Brooke (1703-1783). Even though he felt its length and digressions were too much for the average reader, the quality of the prose and its moral lessons on “inspiring and increasing every right affection” and “instilling gratitude to God, and benevolence to man” made the story worth reading.

Henry Brooke 1703-1783

On Wikipedia we learn that Brooke was an Irish novelist and play-writer. He was born and raised at Rantavan House near Mullagh, a village in the far south County Cavan in Ireland. He later studied law at Trinity College, Dublin, but later took up literature as a career.

Brooke’s father was William Brooke, the Church of Ireland Rector of Killinkere and Mullagh, within the Diocese of Kilmore. We learn that Brooke first began his career as a poet. His now forgotten Universal Beauty was published in 1735, of which Alexander Pope considered fine poetry. Brooke then turned dramatist by adapting extant plays, such as The Earl of Essex. He wrote from the Tory perspective and became one of the most important figures in Augustan drama.

From 1765-1770 Brooke released a five-volume novel titled The Fool of Quality; or, The History of Henry, Earl of Moreland. We learn on Wikipedia that this “sentimental” work is the “only one of his works which has enjoyed any great reputation.” It is described as a “somewhat shapeless plot” about an “account of the doings of young Harry Clinton, who, rejected by his decadent and aristocratic father, is educated on enlightened principles by his philanthropic uncle.” He is thus “equipped to fight the evils of the world [as an] innocent yet wise hero [and] does his best to better the lot of the unfortunate Hammel Clement and his family, and other deserving cases.” A feature of the novel is the “intervals between the author’s frequent philosophical digressions and commentaries” on the action in the story.

The Fool of Quality was privately published in 5 volumes and a revised edition was released by Edward Johnston in 1776. Reviews of the novel were at first unfavorable, but critics quickly came to appreciate the novel’s promotion of virtues.

Here is Brook’s five-volume novel:
Brooke Fool of Quality vol 1 1766
Brooke Fool of Quality vol 2 1767
Brooke Fool of Quality vol 3 1768
Brooke Fool of Quality vol 4 1769
Brooke Fool of Quality vol 5 1770

Wesley’s Edition

In 1781 JW published a two-volume version of the novel under the title The History of Henry, Earl of Moreland. The preface is dated March 4, 1780. JW explains that at first he was not attracted to the book because of its “whimsical title,” but after reading a few pages he was drawn to its story and moral lessons. In his edition JW removed all the long digressions and dialogues between the author and a friend. He also removed the “mystical divinity” which is more philosophical in nature than scriptural. He valued the lessons on virtue and believed his readers would benefit from it.

By 1816 the two volumes were incorporated into a single volume and was released as a “new edition.” Here is JW’s edition in two-volume and single format:
History of Henry Earl vol 1
History of Henry Earl vol 2
History of Henry Earl 1816

Salvation & Good Works

Introduction

In the 16th century Protestants broke with the Roman Catholic Church over several subjects, one of which was Rome’s teachings on justification by inherent righteousness. They considered this to be salvation by works, even though Rome stressed that the infusion of righteousness is by grace. Because of their sensitivity over the issue of works in relation to salvation, Protestants continued to debate the role of good works in our salvation. The spectrum of views include those on one hand who claim that works play no role whatsoever to those on the other hand that believe we are saved by faith and good works.

So, we might ask? What did John Wesley believe? Some might be surprised by his answers.

Salvation by Faith 1738

Wesley experienced evangelical conversion in May 1738 (his famous Aldersgate experience) and began to proclaim that we are saved by faith alone. In his evangelical manifesto Salvation by Faith (1738), Wesley taught that we are saved by God’s free grace. Salvation springs from God’s mercy and comes to us as sheer gift. The sermon has three parts. In Part 1 Wesley defines saving faith by contrasting it to three inferior faiths. Saving faith is not a general belief in God (faith of a heathen), nor is it a mere intellectual belief in Christian doctrine (faith of a devil). Wesley adds that the proper Christian faith is not the same as the pre-Pentecost disciples had, even though they were sincere followers of Jesus. What is saving faith? Wesley answers it is trust and reliance on Christ’s death and resurrection.

In Part 2 Wesley explains that salvation by faith pertains to this present life. It is salvation here and now, as Paul teaches in his Letters. Specifically, Wesley declared we are saved from sin’s guilt and its reign/power over our lives (II. 3, 5). That is, we are justified and given new life in Christ (new birth).

Does this mean that good works has no part in our salvation? Wesley addresses this question in Part 3. He begins by clarifying that justifying, saving faith is “productive of all good works and all holiness” (III.1). He clarifies this to say that good works can not merit salvation. Instead, they serve as evidence for saving faith. In other words, where true faith lives in the heart, good works will follow.

Read Wesley’s sermon Salvation by Faith 1738

Annual Doctrinal Minutes 1770

Wesley had much more to say about the role of good works in our salvation. Wesley’s views on holy living are well known and need no introduction here. He was Arminian in theology and believed salvation could be lost. So persevering in holiness and good works is necessary for final salvation. His strongest statement on the issue was made in the 1770 Annual Conference Minutes. They are quite short, little more than a page long.

Read Wesley’s 1770 Doctrinal Conference Minutes.

These doctrinal minutes was Wesley’s response to the claim by some Calvinists that all a person must do to be finally saved is to believe. No holiness or obedience is necessary. This viewpoint is called antinomianism (against the law). Wesley rejected this view because it undercut the importance of holy living in the Christian life. A key scripture for Wesley is Hebrews 12:14, “…without holiness no one will see the Lord.” Therefore, Wesley believed that good works are in some sense necessary for final salvation.

To proceed, the doctrinal minutes are in two parts. Part 1 includes three propositions that rebut major points of the antinomian position. Bottom line, Wesley believed we cannot be idle in the faith. For God’s grace to be saving, we must be responsive by doing good works. Part 2 includes eight short theses that review the subject. Thesis 4 is the key that unlocks Wesley perspective on good works. He makes a distinction between condition and merit.

Condition vs Merit

Anglicans in Wesley’s day made a distinction between works as a condition for salvation and works meriting salvation. When Wesley spoke of works as necessary for salvation, he was not referring to them meriting or earning salvation. Salvation is by grace, not works, as the Apostle Paul taught. We can never earn salvation. But works are still a condition, just as faith is a condition. What he meant is that God will not bestow salvation to anyone unless they trust in Christ, nor will he grant future salvation unless a believer sincerely serves Christ with good works. Wesley refers to several scripture texts in the minutes to support his point, like Lk. 16:11, Jn. 6:67. Jesus taught the final judgment will determine one’s eternal destiny and it will be according to works (Matt. 25:31-46). Once again, Wesley understood these passages to mean that good works are a condition of final salvation and do not in any way merit salvation.

On the Wedding Garment 1790

Wesley’s final work on the subject of good works and salvation is the sermon On the Wedding Garment, taken from Jesus’ parable in Matt. 22:1-14. This sermon is worth reading to understand how Wesley balanced justification by faith alone with the necessity of good works for final salvation.

Read Wesley’s sermon On the Wedding Garment 1790

In this sermon Wesley explains that which entitles us to heaven from that which qualifies us for heaven. He writes, “Without the righteousness of Christ (imputed) we could have no claim to glory; without holiness we could have no fitness for it.” The distinction between claim and fitness now summarize the purpose of justification and sanctification in our salvation. Justification gives us a legal standing as righteous before God. This entitles us to the eternal kingdom through the righteousness of Christ. Sanctification (good works) qualifies us by making us righteous and fit to live in the eternal kingdom. Wesley held that what qualifies us is Christ’s righteousness implanted in us so that we take on his character and holiness. This fits us to live in God’s eternal presence.

In conclusion, Wesley considered good works to be necessary for salvation in the following senses:

Good works serve as evidence for saving faith.
Good works are a condition of final salvation, but they do not merit it.
Good works, as part of our sanctification, prepare us to live in God’s eternal presence.

In the end, Wesley saw the purpose of salvation by faith is to deliver us from sin’s guilt and reign (justification & new birth) and salvation by works to transform us into the likeness of Christ (sanctification). Both our faith and good works are gifts of God’s free grace. In the end, he receives all the glory!

John Wesley on Animal Redemption

Will animals take part in the new creation promised in Revelation 21-22? Throughout most of Christian history the popular assumption has been they will not. The bible does not say they will (since they are not made in the divine image). A fascinating aspect of John Wesley’s eschatology is that he came to believe in animal redemption. To understand Wesley’s perspective we first need to look at his natural philosophy.

Great Chain of Being

A dominant idea in natural philosophy in Wesley’s day was a concept of cosmology that arranged everything in vertical order like a chain. It has been called the Great Chain of Being, and was derived from Greek philosophy. The basic idea is that everything which exists from God down to the minerals of the earth are linked together like a chain, with those beings on top having the most essence or pure being, and those lowest with the least amount of pure being. The basic structure can be outlined from left to right as follows:

God – Angels – Humanity – Animals – Minerals

The idea that all reality is linked together was also used to structure society (King & nobles on the top, slaves at the bottom). In this scheme perfect harmony and order required each link to remain in its position so the entire Chain can remain stable and connected, bringing blessing and happiness to the whole.

In the Great Chain the human race serves as the connection point between the spiritual and material realms. At creation, Adam ruled over the animals and earth (Gen. 1:26-28). As he was blessed, so were they. As he enjoyed life, so did they. So, when Adam sinned, the animal world also fell under the curse of death due to human sin. Therefore, it was reasoned that our redemption from the curse will also include the lower creation. This viewpoint looked to Apostle Paul’s brief remarks in Romans 8:19-22 that the entire creation is longing for deliverance from the curse.

Wesley learned about the Great Chain of Being while at Oxford, but in the 1770s he read several works that convinced him that animals have souls and will be redeemed along with the people of God in the new creation. He spelled out his views on animal redemption in the sermon The General Deliverance.

The General Deliverance

This sermon has three parts. The text is Romans 8:19-22 (KJV). Here is the link: Sermon General Deliverance

The first section extrapolates from Adam’s perfection in the beginning to draw conclusions about the perfection that animals enjoyed in the Garden of Eden. Just as Adam was perfect in all ways and blessed by God, so animals were perfect according to their compacity and were blessed by God – through Adam’s federal headship. There was perfect harmony in the animal kingdom with no animals being devoured by other animals.

In the second section Wesley describes the impact of the Fall on the animal kingdom. The animals were now made “subject to vanity,” so that their understanding became more clouded and they experienced a loss of vigor and swiftness. Animal passions became distorted and began to eat and devour each other. Wesley goes into detail about the savagery by which animals attack and devour each other. Wesley concludes that by Adam’s one sin, death not only passed to every human being, but also to the animal kingdom.

Part Three offers hope to the animal kingdom that they too will be granted deliverance from the corruption that enslaves all living things in the present age. Just as the future state for humanity will be much higher than what Adam enjoyed at the beginning, so the animal kingdom will be lifted to a higher plane than was experienced in the Garden of Eden. Their level of intelligence will probably match what we as humans enjoy right now (and ours will be higher like the angels). Their compacity for God will therefore increase dramatically, compared to their present state.

In the resurrected state, the entire Chain of Being will give glory to the Creator who has loved and redeemed them.

For more information, read the article on Wesley’s eschatology: From Heaven Above to New Creation Below

Wesley’s Standard Sermons with Annotations

Edward Sugden (1854-1935) is remembered best for his classic two-volume set on Wesley’s standard sermons. First published in 1921, the set includes a general introduction on the sermon collection, plus introductions and footnotes to the individual sermons. His annotations offer many judicious insights the reader will find valuable. Sugden’s work served as the primary authoritative resource on Wesley’s standard sermons until the Bicentennial Edition came out in the 1980s.

Sugden Wesley’s Standard Sermons vol 1
Sugden Wesley’s Standard Sermons vol 2

Short Bio
Sugden was born in Ecclesfield in England and was the eldest son of the Rev. James Sugden. He took his degree in classics at the University of London (graduated 1883) and in 1887 became the first master of Queen’s College in Australia, which is now the University of Melbourne. He also had an interest in music became a member of the Leed’s Festival Chorus. Besides the work on Wesley’s sermons, Sugden produced the historical work John Wesley’s London. Besides his interest in Wesley and Methodism, his studies included experimental work in psychology. Over his career Sugden wrote on a number of topics. In 1918 he received the degree of Litt.D. and in 1923 served as president-general of the Methodist Church of Australia.

John Wesley’s Perspective on…

Voting, Sunday Observance, Preaching Politics, Culture, Protestantism, Religious Profession

Students of Wesley focus mostly on Wesley’s writings of theology and salvation. These would include his sermons, journals, commentaries, hymns, and major doctrinal works and correspondence. In these works we find Wesley’s theology spelled out in sufficient detail. However, interesting insights into Wesley’s thoughts on a variety of subjects is found in his more obscure writings. Below is a sample.

Please note, it is important to read Wesley’s thoughts in light of his 18th century British context. The writings below are situational and address specific issues of the day. It is therefore important to look for principles and lessons that are applicable to today.

Wesley’s Thoughts on Voting
Wesley lived before the rise of modern democracies with the exception of the American Revolution (However, the Constitution was not ratified till the end of his life). As an Englishman, Wesley was loyal to his king and country during the colonies break with the mother country. So, he did not support the American version of democracy. However, his thoughts on voting can be discerned from a tract he wrote to a freeholder that deals with the subject in his English context. Below is the 1748 tract and the same tract taken from the Jackson edition of Wesley’s Works.
Word to a Freeholder 1748
Word to Freeholder (Jackson Edition)

Wesley’s Thoughts on Sunday Observance
Today in the USA and in many other nations there is a casual attitude toward Sunday observance. Many believers observe Sunday as just another day in the week. In the following tract Wesley shares his thoughts in which he explain why it is important to treat Sunday as a special (holy) day.
Word to a Sabbath-Breaker

Wesley’s Thoughts on Preaching Politics
The concept of separation of church and state is ingrained in American political culture. Yet, many ministers use the pulpit to promote their political views. Should there be any boundaries or limits to this practice? Wesley’s tract on the subject is very short but offers some analysis on the topic. What do you think of his perspective?
How Far Should Ministers Preach Politics 1782

Wesley’s Thoughts on Protestantism
The Protestant Reformation in the 16th century reverberated down to Wesley’s day in the 18th century. The differences were as much political as religious. Most Englishman in Wesley’s day had a deep distrust of Catholicism, especially since the heirs of pro-Catholic King James II tried twice to overthrow the current Protestant monarchy in Wesley’s lifetime (1715 and 1745). Yet, Wesley found that many people who considered themselves Protestant had no idea of what the term meant. In the following tract Wesley explains the differences between the two forms of Christian faith and then challenges the reader to practice a real Protestant faith.
Word to Protestant 8th ed 1745
Word to a Protestant (Works, Jackson, vol. 11)

Wesley’s Evaluation of Culture
It is probably safe to assume that nearly everyone critiques the society in which they live. In the following tract Wesley shares his concerns about the current moral climate in British society. England was one of the most prosperous nations, yet Wesley looked behind the material wealth to express concerns over deeper issues. How much of his evaluation is pertinent to today?
Advice to an Englishman 1745
Advice to an Englishman (Works, Jackson, vol. 11)

Wesley’s Thoughts on Religious Profession
In Wesley’s day about 90% of the population were baptized members of the Church of England and the other 10% members of other denominations. The general culture was much more religious than what we see today. This led people to make religious professions yet show little evidence of authentic faith. While our context is different today, especially in the west, the same issue is remains relevant. How did Wesley deal with this issue. The following two tracts offer insight into how Wesley approached people whose profession of faith lacked authenticity.
Advice to Saints & Sinners 4th ed 1748
Word to an Unhappy Woman (Works, Jackson,vol.11)

John Wesley’s Interactions with Africans

Since there were only about 20,000 black people in England, John Wesley did not have much interaction with Africans. Even though his contact was minimal, he does record some interesting exchanges with Africans during his ministry in America and in other settings. Wesley opposed the institution of slavery his entire life which was universally practiced around the world in pre-democratic, industrialized nations. Abolitionism began to gain momentum toward the end of the 18th century and slavery was gradually abolished in Great Briton in the early decades of the 19th century – after Wesley’s death in 1791. In the 1770s Wesley began to publish a series of political tracts, and one of them was on slavery.

The subject of race relations is a sensitive subject today. The purpose for publishing these materials is to make available the writings of John Wesley on his interactions with black people. There is no stated or implied aim to either vindicate or accuse him of racism and racial attitudes. Wesley lived in the 18th century and viewed race relations from the perspective of his era and context. The abolition of slavery is historically a complex issue and happened in most places around the world in the 19th century.

The following excerpts are representative and do not include every appearance of black people in Wesley’s writings. From these excerpts we can gain insights into his person and character and of Wesley’s theological convictions on the matter.

America 1736-1737
Richard Heitzenrater informs us that slavery was outlawed in Georgia when JW arrived in early 1736 (Wesley & People Called Methodists, 66). The following two excerpts from JW’s journal include his interactions with African slaves in the neighboring colony in which slavery was legal. His discussions reflect his disgust at slaveholders for not teaching the faith to their slaves and his genuine concern for their spiritual welfare.
Journal July 31 1736
Journal April 23 & 27 1737

Baptisms
Wesley records baptizing black people on only two occasions in his journal, on November 28, 1758 and March 10, 1786. On both occasions he noted their sincere piety, but in the first one he remarked that the woman was the “first African Christian” he had known. This confirms his limited interactions with black people.
Journal November 29 1758

Letter
Wesley had a deep concern for the salvation of all people, including black people. This is evident by the inclusion of a letter in his 1755 journal that warmed his heart. He wanted to share it with his readers. The letter was from Samuel Davies, who served as the president of Princeton from 1759 to his death in 1761. The letter shares about Davies’ interest to reach black slaves with the gospel. He notes their piety and unusual musical talent.
Journal July 27 1755

Holiness & Piety
On one occasion Wesley noted the deep piety of a black women in a society.
Journal May 7 1780

Thoughts Upon Slavery
In 1774 Wesley published a tract calling for the abolition of slavery. The tract is drawn from Anthony Benezet’s Some Historical Account of Guinea (p. 1771). Due to Wesley’s influence many early Methodists took a clear stand against slavery. Examples include Samuel Bradburn and Thomas Coke. The following edition is taken from Thomas Jackson’s edition of Wesley’s Works (vol.11).The 1774 edition is available on the John Wesley page.
Thoughts Upon Slavery 1774

Resources
The following three resources include sections dealing with early & later Methodism, Black Methodism, racism, and slavery. They detail the development of Black Methodism in America beginning in the 18th century.
Wesley and Methodist Studies, vol. 3 (2011)
The Oxford Handbook of Methodist Studies (2009)
The Cambridge Companion to American Methodism (2013)

‘A Brand Plucked from the Burning’

Part of early Methodist legend was when John Wesley nearly died at age six, when the parsonage burned down. The entire family had escaped except for John who was trapped upstairs in his bedroom with fire surrounding him. John climbed up to the window and neighbors formed a human ladder to pull the boy to safety just as the roof collapsed.

Wesley always felt he was providentially spared to fulfill his ministerial calling and took the phrase — “a brand plucked from the burning” — to remember the event. The phrase is taken from Zechariah 3:2. Early Methodists took the phrase and began to use it as a metaphor for evangelical conversion.

Although many people are aware of the story, few know its details. Fortunately, we have a vivid first-hand account from John’s mother Susanna, written on February 14, 1709, only five days after the fire.

Susanna wrote to his elder son Samuel, Jr. about the fire and how they all escaped. Samuel was away attending school at Westminster. For some background, John was called “Jacky” by his family. After some introduction in her letter, Susanna informs her eldest son of the details of the fire:

“I suppose you already heard of the firing of our house by what accident we cannot imagine, but the fire broke out about eleven or twelve o’ clock at night, we being all in bed; nor did we perceive it till the roof of the corn chamber was burnt through and the fire fell upon your sister Hetty’s bed, which stood in the little room joining upon it. She waked and immediately run to call your father, who lay in the red chamber, for I being ill, he was forced to lie from me. He says he heard some crying fire in the street before, but did not apprehend where ‘twas till he opened his door. He called at our chamber and bid us all shift for life, for the roof was falling fast and nothing but thin wall kept the fire from the staircase.”

“We had no time to take our clothes, but ran all naked. I called Betty to bring the children out of the nursery. She took Patty and left Jacky to follow her. But he, going to the door and seeing all on fire, ran back again. We got the street door open, but the wind drove the flame with such violence that none could stand against it. I tried thrice to break through, but was driven back. I made another attempt and waded through the fire, which did me no other hurt than scorch my legs and face.”

“When I was in the yard, I looked about for your father and the children, but seeing none, concluded ’em all lost. But I thank God, I was mistaken! Your father carried sister Emly, Suky and Patty into the garden; then missing Jacky, he ran back by the flame; then he thought him lost and commended his soul to God and went to look after the rest. The child (Jacky) climbed up to a window and called out to them in the yard; they got up the casement and pulled him out just as the roof fell into the chamber. Harry broke the glass of the parlour window and through out your sister Molly and Hetty, and so by God’s great grace we all escaped. Don’t be discouraged. God will provide for you.”

Susanna Wesley

Source: Charles Wallace, Jr. Susanna Wesley: The Complete Writings (Oxford, 1997), 65-66.

——————————————–

Early Methodists on the New Birth

George Whitefield, John Wesley, & John Fletcher

The Evangelical Revival broke out in the 1730s with the central message, “You must be born again” (Jn 3:7). The two most famous evangelists of the new movement was George Whitefield (1714-1770) and John Wesley (1703-1791). They both had dramatic experiences of the new birth. Whitefield experienced the new birth in May 1735 when he was reflecting on Christ’s last words on the cross and he cried out, “I thirst! I thirst!” Likewise, John Wesley was born again in May 1738 — his now famous Aldersgate experience — in which he felt his heart strangely warmed. Another early Methodist leader was John Fletcher (1729-1785). Fletcher is often regarded as the first Methodist theologian with his Five Checks to Antinomianism. Having been born in Switzerland, Fletcher experienced the new birth when he came to England around 1750. As were Whitefield and Wesley, Fletcher was an Anglican minister and proclaimed the evangelical message of the new birth.

What did these early Methodist leaders proclaim about the new birth? Like, what is the new birth? How does one become born again? Is the new birth necessary for eternal salvation? Also, did they differ in their views, since Whitefield was a moderate Calvinist and Wesley and Fletcher were Arminian? Below are key writings by all three men on the new birth.

There are some common characteristics between their views: new life in the Spirit, inward change from sin to holiness, through faith in Christ alone. Though as Anglican ministers all three connected the sacrament of baptism to regeneration, they likewise saw that baptism alone is not the new birth.

George Whitefield’s most famous sermon is On the Necessity and Nature of our New Birth in Christ Jesus, in order to Salvation. It sparked his rise to national fame in 1737 as the churches could not contain all the people who gathered to listen to his preach. In this sermon Whitefield defines the new birth as a fundamental change in a person’s dispositional nature, a change in the orientation of one’s heart and life. This same viewpoint is found in the second sermon on The Marks of the New Birth. The marks of regeneration that he describes are a spirit of prayer, does not willfully or continue in sin, overcomes the world, love for fellow Christians, and last, love for one’s enemies. Are these the marks that you would list for the new birth? Read Whitefield for yourself in these early editions of the two sermons:
Whitefield – On the New Birth 1737
Whitefield – Marks of New Birth 1741

John Wesley wrote his famous sermon On the New Birth in 1759. Like Whitefield, Wesley grounded the need for regeneration in original sin. Since we are born sinners in Adam, we need new life in Christ. The new birth is life from the dead. Wesley used the analogy of the physical senses to illustrate what the new birth entails. We are are born of the Spirit our spiritual senses come alive to God — we see the light of God’s truth in Christ, we hear the message of salvation and feel the love, joy, and peace of God in our hearts. Wesley describes the new birth as a “great change which God works in the soul when he brings it into life.” How would you define the new birth? Read Wesley to learn more:
Wesley – The New Birth reprint 1810

John Fletcher saw the new birth as being born of the Spirit. In his Discourse on the New Birth Fletcher goes into detail explaining the meaning of Jesus’ teachings in John 3. He describes regeneration as the transition from being in a “state of nature to a state of grace.” It is a “new creation, a resurrection from the dead.” Using Wesley’s analogy of the awakened senses, Fletcher likewise describes the new birth in terms of seeing, hearing, feeling, and breathing in of God’s life and presence. In the discourse the religion of a Pharisee is contrasted to the regeneration of a Christion to refute any notion of the new birth as some kind of moralism or legalistic faith. But Fletcher in the last section introduces the idea of degrees of regeneration, in which the renewal is carried forth by the grace of sanctification in the Spirit. How would you connect the new birth to sanctification? Read Fletcher to see how he connects the two:
Fletcher – The New Birth 3rd Ed 1805

Resources for Further Study:
Mark K. Olson, “Whitefield’s Conversion & Early Theological Formation” in George Whitefield: Life, Context, and Legacy. eds. Geordan Hammond & Davide Ceri Jones.
Mark K. Olson, Wesley and Aldersgate: Interpreting Conversion Narratives.
J. Russell Frazier, True Christianity: Doctrine of Dispensations in the Thought of John Fletcher.

The Wesleys’ Sacramental Theology

It is fairly common knowledge that the Wesley brothers held high church views on the sacraments, inherited from their parents and nurtured by their Anglican education. Geordan Hammond correctly noted that the Wesleys led a revival that was both evangelical and sacramental. But many people today still do not know what the Wesleys specifically believed about the Lord’s Supper.

In the 1740s the Wesley’s published two works that spelled out their views.

In 1742 John published A Companion for the Altar to help early Methodists to prepare as communicants. The Companion was an extract of Thomas à Kempis’ Book IV in his classic The Imitation of Christ. Wesley had published an edition of Thomas’ work in 1735 and reissued an extract in 1741 that was reissued many times during his lifetime. By publishing an extract of just Book IV it showed the importance that the Wesleys placed on the sacrament.

Here is the tract A Companion for the Altar 3rd ed 1744

In 1745 the Wesleys published Hymns on the Lord’s Supper that included a preface that spelled out further their theology of the Eucharist. It was an extract of David Brevint’s The Christian Sacrifice and Sacrament. The Wesleys studied Brevint’s work at Oxford and endorsed its perspective on the Eucharist.

Here is the preface Preface to Hymns on Lord’s Supper 1st ed 1745

From the following two works, we quickly learn some basics of their sacramentalism:

Altar & Sacrifice. As the titles of both works suggest, the Wesleys understood the Lord’s Table to be an altar on which a spiritual sacrifice is offered. Images of the OT sacrificial system come to mind, except the Christian altar is bloodless since the sacrifice of Christ was made once to put away sin (Heb. 9:28). The sacrifice is therefore a spiritual one with the elements representing Christ broken body and shed blood.
Real Presence. As was common in Anglican and some Reformed circles, the Wesleys held that Christ is personally present in a spiritual manner at the sacrament. Rejecting both transubstantiation and consubstantiation explanations of real presence, the Wesleys held that Christ is present through his divine nature to minister grace to worthy recipients. This same viewpoint was held by their parents.
Memorial, Means, and Pledge. Following Brevint, the Wesleys held that the Table serves as a means to remember Christ’s passion (memorial), a channel through which God gives grace to his people (means of grace), and a promise and hope of our future salvation in Christ (pledge). The sacrament conveys fresh pardon for sin and strength to live holy unto God. God actually meets with his people through the sacrament as the benefits of the atonement are applied to people’s lives.
Means of Grace. Since Christ is present and active, the Lord’s Supper conveys to communicants preventing, justifying, and sanctifying grace. Many early Methodists experienced evangelical conversion (Spirit’s witness of assurance) while partaking. The Wesleys considered the sacrament as one of the chief means to confer actual grace to communicants. Therefore, they encouraged believers to partake constantly, even daily if possible (Acts 2:42).
An Offering of Oneself. Besides commemorating Christ’s sufferings and death for our sin, the concept of sacrifice included the notion of sacrament as a means for the communicant to offer themselves afresh to God (Romans 12:1).

There is much more to learn about the Wesleys sacramentalism. Check out the above two works in their 1st and 3rd editions:

A Companion for the Altar 3rd ed 1744

Preface to Hymns on Lord’s Supper 1st ed 1745

To check out more of the Wesley’s writings on the sacraments, see the John Wesley and Charles Wesley pages.

Studies on the Wesleys sacramentalism:
Ole Borgen, John Wesley on the Sacraments. Zondervan, 1972.
John Bowmer, The Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper in Early Methodism. Dacre Press, 1951.
Geordan Hammond, John Wesley in America. Oxford, 2014.

___________________________

John Wesley on Calvinism

It is widely known that John Wesley opposed Calvinism, but many don’t know how he came to adopt the Arminian view and why he opposed Calvinism. To begin with, Wesley learned his Arminianism from his parents, Samuel and Susanna Wesley, who were high church Anglicans. High churchmanship in the 17th and 18th centuries leaned heavily toward Arminianism in theology. So Wesley developed his opposition to Calvinism quite naturally. His education at Oxford was Arminian in flavor as the university supported high church Anglicanism.

When Wesley became an evangelical in 1738 his opposition toward Calvinism did not lessen. Instead, by 1739 he was publicly calling out what he felt were their errors regarding unconditional election, absolute predestination, limited atonement, irresistible grace (denial of free will), and eternal security (perseverance of the saints). His central concern was that such teachings espoused antinomianism which undercut the necessity of holy living in the Christian life.

Wesley’s Arminian Theology

It must be understood that Wesley did not deny eternal election and predestination. Instead, what he opposed was absolute, unconditional election and predestination. He believed in conditional election based on divine foreknowledge. His reading of Romans 8:29-30 was that God foreknew who would freely believe in Christ and that predestination in this text speaks of believers conformity to Christ as the end-goal of their faith.

On free will, Wesley denied what he called natural free will. Since we all are sinners due to Adam’s transgression, no one can seek and find God on their own. God must graciously reach out to sinner’s for them to be saved. Wesley was convinced that God in his love reaches out to every person and gives grace to every person to respond to his truth. He called this prevenient or preventing grace – the grace that comes before salvation. A fruit of preventing grace is the gift of free response to God’s revealed truth (free will on salvation).

Regarding justification, Wesley affirmed imputed righteousness, but denied that Christ’s human obedience is imputed to believers so that they do not need to obey Christ themselves. Wesley opposed any concept of the atonement or justification that undermined the scriptural teaching on the necessity of holy living for final salvation.

Like other Arminians Wesley believed a Christian can lose their salvation if they turn away from Christ in unbelief and a sinful lifestyle. This life remains a state of probation and testing and final salvation requires a life of perseverance in obedience and holy living.

Wesley’s Controversies with Calvinists

Wesley had three major controversies with the Calvinists: (1) the Free Grace Controversy with George Whitefield over predestination (1739-1745), (2) the Imputed Righteousness Controversy with James Hervey (1756-1766), (3) the infamous Minutes Controversy with Calvinists over the role of good works in our salvation (1770-1777). See the Minutes Controversy page for more information.

Locating all of Wesley’s writings on Calvinism is a difficult task. There are a few that are no longer available, but even the ones that are can be a challenge to locate. Below is one of the most comprehensive listings of Wesley’s writings on Calvinism in their chronological order, and organized according to the controversy they belong. The importance of having them listed chronologically is that it enables a reader to discern development in Wesley’s thought on the subject.

Free Grace Controversy:
Sermon: Free Grace 1739
Serious Considerations Concerning Election & Reprobation 1740
Dialogue Between Predestinarian & Friend 1741
Scripture Doctrine of Election and Predestination 1741
Hymns on God’s Everlasting Love 1741
Calvinistic Controversy 1743
Extract of Baxter’s Aphorisms on Justification 1745

Miscellaneous Works:
Serious Thoughts on Perseverance of Saints 1751
Predestination Calmly Considered 1752
Extract of Westminster Shorter Catechism 1753

The Imputed Righteousness Controversy:
Letter to James Hervey 1756
Sufficient Answer to ‘Letters to Author Theron & Aspasio’ 1757
Letter to a Gentleman at Bristol 1758
Thoughts Imputed Righteousness 1762
Extract of Goodwin’s Treatise on Justification 1765
Sermon: The Lord Our Righteousness 1765
Remarks on Defense of Preface to Edinburgh Edition 1766

The Minutes Controversy:
Question ‘What is an Arminian?’ Answered 1770
Doctrine of Absolute Predestination Stated 1770
The Consequence Proved 1771
Some Remarks on Mr Hill’s Review 1772
Some Remarks on Mr Hill’s Farrago Double Distilled 1773
Sermon: On Predestination 1773
Thoughts on Necessity (Free Will) 1774
Thoughts on God’s Sovereignty 1777
Answer to Rowland Hill 1777

The Arminian Magazine
The Minutes Controversy finally compelled Wesley to begin a regular publication that would highlight an Arminian view of the evangelical faith. Publication began in 1778 and continued beyond Wesley’s lifetime. To access copies of the Arminian Magazine, see the John Wesley page.

Final Thoughts:
Thoughts on Salvation by Faith 1779
A Thought on Necessity 1780
Thoughts Concerning Gospel Ministers 1784

______________________________

Salvation by Faith

Albert Outler referred to this sermon as Wesley’s “evangelical manifesto.” Wesley always included it first in his publications of his sermons, and for good reason. Salvation by Faith enunciates in the clearest terms Wesley “new gospel” of salvation by faith alone.

Here is the sermon: Salvation by Faith

Background

The story of Wesley’s pilgrimage to find assurance of salvation is well-known and does not need to be repeated here (see Wesley’s first journal). He returned from Georgia in early 1738 questioning whether he had ever truly been converted as a Christian. In early February he met the Moravian Peter Bohler who would mentor both John and Charles in the evangelical experience of the new birth. At first, Wesley questioned the scriptural basis for Bohler’s gospel of instantaneous conversion by faith in Christ alone that brings both an assurance of pardon (justification) and freedom from the enslaving power of sin (new birth). But by late April Wesley was fully convinced after hearing the testimonies of several people. He then sought after the gift of faith and received it on May 24, 1738, at a religious meeting in Aldersgate, London.

By then Wesley had been preaching his new view of salvation at numerous Anglican churches. When his turn came up to preach once more at Oxford before the University on June 11th, Wesley took the opportunity to proclaim his new evangelical gospel of faith alone.

Contents

Kenneth Collins and Jason Vickers described Salvation by Faith as “remarkable in many respects, due to its strong Reformation themes.” The sermon is organized into three sections that address what constitutes saving faith, what is the nature of salvation that this faith brings, and then closes by answer objections. Before we briefly look at the three sections, the introduction begins the subject by declaring that all of God’s blessings is by free grace. And, if any sinner is to find favor with God it is only by the freeness of divine grace.

Wesley defines saving faith by contrasting it to other faiths. The most generic form of faith is that of a heathen, who believes in the being of God, including his goodness and justice. The next level of faith is that of a demon. The demons know Jesus is the Son of God and that he is the Savior, but do not commit to him from the heart. It is a mere intellectual faith. The third level of faith is that which the pre-Calvary disciples had. They followed Christ and even worked miracles, but their faith knew nothing of his death and resurrection. And this becomes the essence of saving faith – it is a “full reliance” and “trust” in Christ’s life, death, and resurrection as “given for us” and “living in us.”

After defining what saving faith is, Wesley proceeds to explain what kind of salvation this faith brings. First, he stresses that it is a present salvation and involves (1) deliverance from the guilt of all past sin, (2) freedom from all servile fear stemming from a sense of divine wrath, and (3) deliverance from the enslaving power or rule of sin experienced in the new birth.

In answering objections, Wesley explains that this gospel of faith alone produces all holiness of heart and life by the inward working of the Spirit. He also countered that faith alone does not excuse continued sinful living. Instead, our new birth in Christ regenerates the moral heart to love God and neighbor.

Publication

Salvation by Faith was published numerous times as a single tract and in collections over the course of Wesley’s lifetime. It was first released in London by the fall of 1738.

Here are early editions:
Salvation by Faith 1st ed 1738
Salvation by Faith 6th ed 1743
Salvation by Faith 8th ed 1747

John Wesley & the Natural Sciences

Many people are not aware of Wesley’s interest in the natural realm and that he published a multi-volume work on the subject. Titled, A Survey of the Wisdom of God in Creation; or, A Compendium of Natural Philosophy, the work was first published as a two-volume work in 1763, expanded to three volumes in 1770, then expanded to five volumes in 1777. By 1781 Wesley was publishing excerpts in the Arminian Magazine for his Methodist followers.

Background
Science in the 18th century was just beginning to become what we know it to be today – the empirical study of the physical world with attention given to causation. For example, Newton’s theory of gravity, which we take as an established fact, was still a debated point in the 18th century. Natural philosophy was a common term back then that meant to examine the physical order more as a work of God’s creation and a display of his attributes. Nearly all the practitioners of science were believers in one form or another in Wesley’s day.

Randy Maddox informs us that Wesley acquired his information for his Survey from several contemporary works published by the Royal Society for the Improvement of Natural Knowledge and other journals. Wesley served more as an editor than an author in the Survey by collecting and preparing the material for a general audience. In the Cambridge Companion to John Wesley Maddox goes into detail explaining the history of science leading up to the 18th century. Here is the link: https://dukespace.lib.duke.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/10161/9529/Wesley’s_Engagement_with_Science.pdf;jsessionid=7A8FB9C0D6DA506CCCA30AD518917CC2?sequence=1

Central Purpose
The intended audience for the Survey was a general lay readership. Many early Methodists would not have had the means to access the latest writings on the subject. In the preface Wesley states that his central aim is descriptive, “I endeavor throughout, not to account for things, but only to describe them . . . to set down what appears in nature; not the cause of those appearances.” His purpose is to offer a “short, full, plain account of the visible creation directed to its right end . . . to display the invisible things of God, his power, wisdom, and goodness.” Contrary to what some expect, Wesley does not seek to refute atheism or other issues that today we are sensitive to. The reader will not sense any conflict between science and religion, but instead see how the “heavens declare the glory of God” (Ps. 19:1). J.W. Haas points out that in the Survey Wesley roughly follows the order of creation spelled out in Genesis. In so doing, Wesley offers a panoramic picture of the creation at the service of God.

Wesley’s interest in the descriptive role of Natural Philosophy stems from a philosophic concept known as the Great Chain of Being. This concept was derived from Greek philosophy (especially Platonic thought) that correlated everything in vertical order with God at the top, followed by angels – humans – animals – plants – minerals. Things are arranged according to their anatomy and similarity to other things. For example, in the Great Chain apes were placed just below humans because of recognized similarities. In the attempt to order everything to fill in the Great Chain, early practitioners of science used description as a method to identify similarities and differences between things. The Great Chain as a unifying principle gave way to modern views of science at the turn of the 19th century – after Wesley’s passing. While it proved insufficient to explain new findings of science, it did serve a valuable role in the advance of science by showing the connections of various living/material things to each other.

What we learn is that Wesley did not see any fundamental conflict between science and religion. He was skeptical of the new use of mathematics to explain natural things but this is understandable given the intellectual context he lived. This shows he employed critical thought in weighing the evidence. Wesley is an example of a Christian using the best of current scientific understanding to see the handiwork of the Creator. He clearly believed in two books of revelation – Holy Scripture revealing all things related to salvation and Nature revealing the power and goodness of the Creator.

Editions of The Survey of the Wisdom of God in Creation
Wesley Scholar offers all three editions of the Survey for the reader to explore and study:

Compendium of Natural Philosophy vol 1 1763
Compendium of Natural Philosophy vol 2 1763

Compendium of Natural Philosophy vol 1 1770
Compendium of Natural Philosophy vol 2 1770
Compendium of Natural Philosophy vol 3 1770

Compendium of Natural Philosophy vol 1 1777
Compendium of Natural Philosophy vol 2 1777
Compendium of Natural Philosophy vol 3 1777
Compendium of Natural Philosophy vol 4 1777
Compendium of Natural Philosophy vol 5 1777

Additional Resources
For more background on the Survey, Laura Felleman addresses several of the common misconceptions that people have with the Survey and J.W. Haas Jr., has an article dealing with “John Wesley’s Vision of Science in the Service of God.” Here are the links to both articles:

Haas, https://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/1995/PSCF12-95Haas.html

Felleman, https://archives.gcah.org/bitstream/handle/10516/6659/MH-2006-April-Felleman.pdf?sequence=1

John Wesley’s Death Mask

When John Wesley passed away on March 2, 1791, a death mask was made of his face. Death masks were prevalent before the age of photography. The masks were usually made of wax or plaster and were used for portraits by artists and sculptors. In some cultures death masks served as a funeral mask. So, the practice goes back to ancient times.

On Wikipedia it explains, “Death masks were increasingly used by scientists from the late 18th century onwards to record variations in human physiognomy. The life mask was also increasingly common at this time, taken from living persons. Anthropologists used such masks to study physiognomic features in famous people and notorious criminal . . . The main purpose of the death mask from the Middle Ages until the 19th century was to serve as a model for sculptors in creating statues and busts of the deceased person. Not until the 1800s did such masks become valued for themselves.” (Death mask – Wikipedia)

The United Methodist Church has a website on John Wesley’s death mask. Here is the link: https://www.umc.org/en/content/secrets-of-john-wesleys-death-mask

Here is part of the transcript of pathologist Dale Patterson from the website,

“This was made 5 hours after Wesley died and he died of a stroke and as a teenager he needed braces.”

He continues, “If you look around the face, you can see the characteristic droop of a stroke.” He said, “That’s how we know he had a stroke. If you look at his eyelids, you will see that there are small dimples in the eyelids. And that happens about 5 hours after death.”

“If you look at the upper right lip you’ll see a bump. That’s more than likely caused by a misaligned tooth. Today, when he was a teenager, we would have put braces on him.”

Patterson comments on the use of death masks, “Everyone from the king of England down to the local butcher, baker would have probably had a death mask made. And it would have been on display at the funeral. There were no photographs. Other than painting someone there was really no way to do a presentation of that person.”

For the youtube video of Paterson’s comments, see https://www.youtube.com›watch?v=6E_i9DKAn0g

Another site: https://www.wesleysheritage.org.uk/object/cast-of-john-wesleys-death-mask/

John Wesley on Life after Death

What happens after physical death and before the future resurrection — often called the intermediate state? Assuming conscious existence after death (the standard view throughout church history), where do the departed go? And, what do they do during this period of time? What occupies their attention? Are they active and/or passive in existence?

The NT offers some clues depending on how we interpret the texts. Jesus told a parabolic story of Lazarus and a rich man in hades (Lk. 16:19-31) and Paul spoke of being with Christ (Php. 1:25-27). In the highly symbolic Revelation, martyred souls cry out from underneath the altar (ch. 6) and in 1 Peter we learn that following his death Jesus descended into the underworld and proclaimed his victory (1 Pet. 4:6). But these texts are quite vague and open to a variety of interpretations.

Wesley’s Sermon: On Faith, Hebrews 11:1

Sermon Link: On Faith

John Wesley reflected on the intermediate state and wrote down his thoughts less than two months prior to his passing on March 2, 1791. In some ways Wesley’s worldview in this sermon is in sharp contrast to what most of us believe today as Christians.

Wesley begins by asking a series of questions about life after death. With no physical body, how will he see, hear, and think (with no mortal brain)? How will the material universe appear to him? He then draws on several scripture texts to launch into his reflection on his life after death.

Wesley envisioned his soon departure as a release from the limitations of the human body, and expects a great increase in knowledge, holiness, and other natural capacities, like the ability to travel at the speed of thought.

As a Protestant by faith, Wesley rejected any notion of purgatory, which Catholicism teaches.

His most interesting comments are about how the departed serve alongside angels or demons, depending on their character and destiny. The righteous serve the heirs of salvation in this present life, while the unrighteous are the cause of all kinds of evils, including storms, earthquakes, meteor showers, diseases, mental illness, and various temptations to sin. In other words, the departed remain very engaged in the affairs of this world and in the eschatological battle between good and evil.

Influence of Science

As you read Wesley’s sermon you will notice an obvious difference between his 18th century scientific understanding of the world/cosmos and our perspective today in the 21st century. Many examples could be given, but one will illustrate the difference. In Wesley’s day comets were seen as fiery balls whose tails would devastate the earth if they happened to cross paths. Today, we know they are icy balls that offer no threat to our planet unless there is a direct impact.

Whether we want to admit it or not, scientific knowledge profoundly influences how we interpret the bible and our Christian faith — far beyond what we consciously realize. We naturally assume this knowledge in our everyday perceptions and how we construct our faith on many matters.

Looking back over two centuries, we can see how current science influenced Wesley’s perspective of the world, its creation, and his beliefs on the intermediate state.

An important lesson from his example is that we should remain humble and realize that we too are influenced by our current scientific knowledge in the construction of our beliefs and faith.

John Wesley’s Aldersgate Conversion

Background & Analysis

This May 24th will be the 284th anniversary of John Wesley’s evangelical conversion. Wesley’s heart-warming experience is one of the most famous narratives of Christian conversion and one of the best documented. Wesley was an Anglican minister and missionary to America who realized there was something missing in his faith. He felt a lack of assurance over his salvation. You can read about this in his first journal. We now want to take a closer look at his Aldersgate testimony.

Background

Wesley published his testimony two years after the event in his second journal extract. The diary for May 1738 is lost and so his journal account remains the primary record of what transpired. We do have a brief remark from Charles’ journal substantiating John’s account of his conversion that evening. We also have corroborating testimony from a family friend who wrote about it several days later. Wesley would publish his testimony five times during his lifetime (1740, 1742

From internal clues we know John jotted down the basic details of his conversion that evening. And, from a journal notation one year later we know he finished the the full account of 18 paragraphs within two weeks of the event, for he shared his written account with his mother shortly thereafter (June 1738). Wesley likely polished the document before he published it as part of 18 paragraphs in his 1740 journal. The entire document is known today as the Aldersgate Memorandum. While we will focus on paragraph 14 (quoted below), the entire narrative begins at his early childhood and tells the story of his spiritual awakening in 1725 and realization he lacked assurance and how he attained an assurance of salvation at Aldersgate.

The narrative in the Aldersgate Memorandum is patterned after the concept of three spiritual states: natural, legal, and evangelical. This was a common way early evangelicals described their journey to saving faith in Christ. Wesley explains three spiritual states in his sermon The Spirit of Bondage and of Adoption (sermon posted after this paragraph). In the Aldersgate Memorandum paragraphs 1-3 describe himself in the natural state; paragraphs 4-13 in the legal state; paragraphs 14-18 in the evangelical state.

Here is the sermon The Spirit of Bondage and of Adoption 1747.

Wesley’s Core Testimony

Let’s take a closer look at Wesley’s testimony on the evening of May 24th:

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

Narrative structure. Wesley’s Aldersgate core testimony can be divided into three parts – setting, event, interpretation – with each one sentence in length:

Setting: In the evening I went very unwillingly to a society in Aldersgate Street, where one was reading Luther’s Preface to the Epistle to the Romans.

Event: About a quarter before nine, while he was describing the change which God works in the heart through faith in Christ, I felt my heart strangely warmed.

Interpretation: 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.

As for the setting, the meeting was a Moravian small group and the subject that evening was Christian conversion. We know this because by the 18th century Luther’s Preface had become the classic text on Christian conversion. So, the reading of the Preface that evening suggests the focus of the groups discussion. The Moravians were a Lutheran Pietist group that originated in Moravia and were under the leadership of Count Zinzendorf (d. 1760).

Interpretation

Wesley’s interpretation of what he felt and experienced that evening is found in the third sentence. He felt three things: 1. He trusted in Christ alone for salvation. 2. He felt an assurance that his sins were taken away. 3. He felt an assurance he was no longer under the law of sin and death. Let’s look briefly at each one.

Wesley trusted in Christ alone for salvation: This is the substance of evangelical conversion – a person puts their faith in Christ alone for salvation. From his other writings we learn that Wesley understood saving trust to be a “full reliance on the blood of Christ” (Salvation by Faith). So, Wesley received an assurance that evening he did rely on the cross of Jesus alone for salvation.

Wesley felt assured his sins were taken away: This phrase comes from John 1:29 and was used repeatedly in early evangelical conversion testimonies to express that a person knew their sins had been forgiven and they were justified by faith alone. So, Wesley now felt peace with God kowing his sins were forgiven.

Wesley felt assured he was liberated from the “law of sin and death”: The phrase come from Romans 8:2. As an Arminian Wesley believed Romans 7 described a sinner’s plight under the law, Romans 8:1 described conversion/new birth; and Romans 8:2ff. described the Christian life. This was standard Arminian interpretation and his audience knew it. By quoting verse 2, Wesley was stating he now believed he was born again and sin no longer ruled his life.

Conclusion

Wesley’s testimony employed standard conversion terms and language of that day. His audience understood that he was sharing his conversion to evangelical faith in Christ. Another feature of Wesley’s testimony was that he structured it after what the Moravians had taught him about conversion. He had been taught that when a person believes in Christ, they receive an assurance of forgiveness and a deliverance from sin’s reign (see his journal for January-May 1738). So, this was what Wesley included in his testimony. Once again, by structuring his testimony after this pattern he communicated with clarity that Aldersgate was his evangelical conversion.

Even though Wesley later added some corrective comments to clarify that in his mature years he no longer believed he was going to hell prior to his conversion at Aldersgate, he never adjusted, changed, and altered his testimony of what happened on May 24, 1738. He let it stand as he published it in 1740.

Here is Wesley’s second journal that includes his full Aldersgate testimony: Journal 2 1740

Resource

Mark K. Olson, Wesley and Aldersgate, 2019.

The Joy of Conversion

New life in Christ is exciting and fulfilling. Below, there is a link to early testimonies of conversion gathered by Charles Wesley in the early 1740s. They are fascinating to read. Yet, how many know what conversion is? To answer this question, here is some background.

New Testament
The word ‘evangelical’ comes from a transliteration of the Greek noun euangelion, and in the New Testament refers to the ‘good news of God’s saving act in Jesus Christ’. For evangelicals the focal point of this saving act is the cross of Christ and its benefits. They take seriously the biblical truths of human sinfulness and final judgment, and the biblical injunctions to repent and believe in Christ for an assurance of forgiveness and salvation. Central to evangelical conversion was faith in the cross of Christ as the atonement for sin, both original and actual.

Reformation
During the sixteenth century the term ‘evangelical’ became associated with the Protestant Reformation. Martin Luther proclaimed an ‘evangelical doctrine’ of justification by faith alone. Justification by faith became a core tenet of the Reformation and was considered by many Protestants as the articulus stantis et cadentis ecclesiae—the article on which the church stands or falls.

English Puritans
Building on the Reformed order of salvation, William Perkins described the order of conversion in The Golden Chain. Like links in a chain, the stages of conversion begin with spiritual awakening from God’s law revealing one’s sins and sinfulness. This awakening produces fear of divine retribution and despair over one’s salvation. The good news of forgiveness and new life in Christ kindles in the heart sparks of saving faith. Now justified, the new convert’s faith is further tested with doubts producing repentance and obedience in the Christian until a firm assurance of final salvation is attained.

Pietists
August Hermann Francke left an indelible mark on what constitutes evangelical conversion. Drawing upon his own conversion, Francke taught the necessity of a penitential struggle followed by a sudden breakthrough to an assurance of faith and new birth. An important difference between Francke and the Puritans was the timing of assurance. Whereas in Puritan theology assurance normally took years to attain, Francke considered assurance as central to the crisis experience of conversion.

Evangelicals
From the above sketch a basic definition of evangelical conversion can be given. For starters, conversion does not mean becoming religious or being baptized. Instead, conversion signifies the new birth, received by faith in Christ as an atonement for sin, bringing a new sense of peace and joy from having one’s sins forgiven. Early evangelicals understood conversion to be preceded by a season of deep conviction over one’s salvation, culminating in a breakthrough to an assurance of saving faith, followed by a new life of devotion and obedience.

In short, evangelical conversion follows a pattern of confliction—crisis—comfort. Confliction over sin leads to a crisis of surrender and trust followed by the comfort of peace, joy, and new life in Christ.

Early Methodist Conversion Testimonies
In 1739 Charles Wesley began to collect testimonies of those converted under his ministry. These narratives are part of a larger collection known as the Early Methodist Volume, which is housed at John Rylands Library in Manchester, UK. In total there are 64 conversion testimonies with most of them dating from 1738 through the 1740s. The stories recorded in this collection are fascinating to read. They reveal so much about the religious climate of the 18th century and the spiritual hunger these people felt and what conversion meant to them personally. The collection of testimonies attached here was transcribed by Tom Albin.

These testimonies were written first-hand and include the pattern of confliction—crisis—comfort. Here is the link: Early Methodist Conversion Accounts

Resources
D. Bruce Hindmarsh, The Evangelical Conversion Narative (2005).
Sean McGever, Born Again: Conversion Theologies of Wesley & Whitefield (2020).

John Wesley & The Imitation of Christ

Background

The Imitation of Christ is one of the most influential writings on Christian devotion ever written. Both Catholics and Protestants have turned to the Imitation over the centuries for spiritual counsel and direction. Apart from the Bible, the Imitation has been translated into more languages than any other Christian work.

Composed around c. 1420 and commonly attributed to Thomas à Kempis (c. 1380-1471), by 1471 there were about 750 manuscripts. The book quickly spread among the monasteries of Europe. By the end of the 15th century the book had been printed more than 100 times and translated into several different languages. Thomas à Kempis’s 1441 autograph manuscript remains today in a Brussels Museum. For more info on Kempis, see Christian Devotion page.

The Imitation consists of four books of an uneven number of chapters. Book 1 has 25 chapters and focuses on a variety of lessons and encouragements for the spiritual life. Book 2 is the shortest with 12 chapters and centers on virtues of the interior life, like humility, peace, joy, love for Christ, and reliance on divine grace. Book 3 addresses internal consolations and is the longest with 59 chapters. The final chapter consists of devotions to help prepare for Holy Communion.

For a contemporary version of the Imitation, I recommend the following: Thomas à Kempis, The Imitation of Christ. New York: Cosimo Classics, 2007.

Here is an older edition: Kempis Imitation of Christ 4 Books 1869

John Wesley’s Impressions

The Imitation of Christ played a significant part in Wesley’s spiritual awakening of 1725. In January at the age of 22 Wesley decided to follow in his father’s footsteps and become an Anglican minister. Samuel counseled his son to prepare theologically for a career in the Church of England, while his mother Susanna encouraged him to take stock of his spiritual character and to ascertain whether he had a clear assurance of salvation.

Wesley began reading the Imitation that spring along with Jeremy Taylor’s Holy Living and Holy Dying. John’s initial response was a bit critical since he understood Kempis to be overly strict and against seeking any form of personal happiness, or as we would say – having fun. Like other young people of his day, Wesley enjoyed a number of the entertainments of his age. But by late summer Wesley’s mind had changed and he would be known around Oxford for his disciplined and methodical approach to the Christian life.

Wesley’s deep appreciation for the Imitation would be expressed in his journal entries on May 24, 1738, the day of his evangelical conversion. Wesley attributed his spiritual awakening to his reading of the Imitation. He now realized that true religion is seated in the heart, not in formalities or externals. Wesley believed his evangelical conversion was the right path to living out what Kempis taught in the Imitation.

Thirty later in his Plain Account of Christian Perfection (1766), Wesley looked back and recognized that the Imitation was one of the three primary sources from which he had developed his doctrine of Christian perfection. Wesley attributed to the Imitation his understanding of holiness as purity of intention and as the necessity of giving God all of one’s heart. Simply stated, God does not want half-hearted followers.

Then, in 1784 Wesley reminisced once more about Kempis and the influence that the Imitation had on his life. Wesley now credited the Imitation for his commitment to be a real, altogether Christian, not an almost Christian. The first of these terms was standard in Anglican circles to denote authentic Christian faith, while the latter denoted nominal faith.

From Wesley repeated comments we cannot overestimate the significance that the Imitation of Christ had on Wesley’s spiritual formation and his doctrine of holiness.

John Wesley’s Publications

One of the first works Wesley ever published was the Imitation of Christ in 1735. He would re-issue it several more times (1741, 1748, 1780s). He retained the title, The Christian’s Pattern, from the English edition he had first read of the Imitation. He found the Imitation to be a rich devotional source for his Methodist followers.

Here is Wesley’s 1735 edition: JWs Extract Christian’s Pattern 1735

In 1741 he published an extract of book four to aide his people to prepare for Holy Communion. Called Companion for the Altar, the work would be published several more times. The work reflects Wesley’s high church perspective of the Lord’s Supper as a means of grace. It has been estimated that Wesley partook of communion on average every five days, and he encouraged the same practice for his followers. The Anglican Church held a Reformed view of real presence with Christ spiritually present in the sacrament. This was in contrast to Rome’s teaching on transubstantiation.

Here is Wesley’s edition: JWs Companion for the Altar 3rd ed 1744

John Wesley’s Introduction

As was his practice, Wesley shortened his edition of the Imitation by not including all of the chapters. The exception was book 2 which included all 12 chapters. He also wrote a lengthy introduction that included a sketch of Kempis’ life, a summary of its main themes, and guidance on how to read the book. He finished with remarks on his edition of the work.

The introduction is important reading for those who want to learn about Wesley’s early views on holiness and the spiritual journey. Wesley states that the Imitation contains everything one needs to know about Christian perfection and living close to God. He emphasizes the need to replace sinful desires and attitudes with holy one by the consistent practice of Christian virtues and the means of grace. His early views on holiness included overcoming habitual, willful sin and turning the heart fully toward God.

Here is Wesley’s 1735 edition: JWs Extract Christian’s Pattern 1735

Luther & Wesley on The Theologia Germanica

The Christian mystics were devotional writers of the Reformation and post-Reformation eras. They stressed union with God through inner purification and illumination. Many of them were Roman Catholic. Their influence was enormous among Catholics and Protestants alike. Therefore, it should not surprise us that Martin Luther and John Wesley read the mystic authors.

Theologia Germanica

In 1516 and 1518, the same period he had his breakthrough on justification by faith alone, Luther published the Theologia Germanica. a devotional work from the 14th century that Luther believed had been authored by the German Mystic John Tauler (1300-1361). Today, the author is considered unknown. Luther valued its teachings on living the Christian life in union with God. So popular was the work that 17 editions were produced during Luther’s lifetime.

The English translator of this work from Luther’s German edition was Susanna Winkworth in the 19th century. She explains the work was produced by the “Friends of God,” a circle of mystics that John Tauler was a part of. She goes into detail about the book’s development in the historical introduction.

Luther’s praise for the Theologia Germanica played a major role in its popularity. He acknowledged in his preface that the quality of the German was not the best, but he considered this “noble book” to contain much “knowledge and divine wisdom.” In fact, Luther valued this little book next to the Bible and St. Augustine as the best source for learning about a deep walk with God.

The popular image of Luther is as a Reformer who re-discovered justification by faith alone, the central tenet of the Protestant faith. He is remembered for his emphasis on “alien righteousness” as the believer’s legal or positional standing before God. But Luther was also deeply interested in the interior life of the Christian. Like other believers, he desired a deep bond with God. This was what led him to publish the Theologia Germanica.

English Edition: Theologia Germanica 1874

John Wesley

John Wesley was introduced to the Theologia Germanica by William Law, when the two met for the first time in the summer of 1732. Like Luther, Wesley read the authors of the mystic tradition and read this work over the next several years. What drew Wesley to the mystics was their emphasis on holiness as union with God. Their teachings on inner purgation and spiritual illumination resonated with him. The mystic approach of inner change fit quite well with his pursuit to attain heart holiness.

By 1736 the Theologia Germanica and other mystical works began to fall out of favor with Wesley. He wrote to his older brother Samuel in November of that year, “I think the rock on which I had the nearest made shipwreck of the faith was in the writings of the mystics, under which term I comprehend all, and only those, who slight any of the means of grace.”

In Wesley’s perspective, the mystics devalued the devotional practices which the Anglican Church placed a lot of emphasis on for living the Christian faith. The mystics basically felt whatever means produced union with God should be treasured and the rest could be discarded. As a devout Anglican this was too much for Wesley, who practiced a methodical approach to living the Christian life.

Wesley’s criticism may sound harsh, but he had a point. Mysticism was and is quite individualistic. He mentioned such means of grace as corporate prayer. Should we discard praying together just because someone doesn’t feel it unites them to God? Other examples could be given.

Link to Christian Mysticism Sources.

Conclusion

Luther and Wesley did not support the mystic path in regard to justification. Both firmly believed that in Christ we have a standing as righteousness before God. It is a gift of grace. But they did see value in the mystics when it came to drawing closer to God and experiencing union with God – a bond of love and unity of heart.

Secondary Resources:

Robert Tuttle, Mysticism in the Wesleyan Tradition (1989)

William Law and John Wesley

Wlliam Law exerted an enormous influence on John Wesley during his Oxford period, to the point that Wesley sought his spiritual counsel and patterned his preaching and ministry after his mentor’s teachings. To better understand Wesley’s spiritual development and his early theology, it is important to know who Law was and what he contributed to Wesley’s spiritual and theological growth as a young Oxford don. Below is a brief summary that highlights some key points.

William Law 1686-1761

Law was an Anglican priest who wrote several influential works in the first half of the 18th century. He is recognized as part of the holy living tradition within the Church of England. He lost his position at Emmanuel College, Cambridge, when he would not swear allegiance to the new Hanoverian King George I. Later in life, Law became a mystic having been drawn to the views of Jacob Bohme. His works fill nine volumes. Law is remembered most for his works on practical divinity. His two most influential writings were A Practical Treatise on Christian Perfection (1726) and A Serious Call to a Devout & Holy Life (1728).

Law taught a gospel of full devotion that stressed self-denial and a renunciation of the world as evidence of an authentic faith. The Church of England practiced paedo baptism, believing the infant was then justified from the guilt of original sin and regenerated by the Spirit of God. As an Anglican, Law believed this too. But he held that when a baptized person turns to worldly living they forfeit their salvation and must be re-regenerated by fully devoting themselves to God and thereby renewing their baptismal covenant. This rededication he saw as the new birth and a conversion of the heart to God. The renewed Christian was then to live a devout life of strict obedience and faithfulness to the gospel covenant.

Law’s Influence on Wesley

John Wesley says he began to read Law around 1727/28, though the historical record suggests it was a couple years later in1730. Wesley first read Law’s Serious Call and it made an immediate impression on him. The book was passed around to the different members of the Holy Club, as the Oxford Methodists were often called. In the summer of 1732, Wesley paid a visit to Law at his residence. Law gave Wesley a copy of his prior work, Christian Perfection, which Wesley read that fall. While Wesley and the Oxford Methodists were reading many authors of the Holy Living Tradition, Law stood out because his style of writing was engaging and his arguments were forcefully made. Law’s influence is evident in Wesley’s famous sermon, The Circumcision of the Heart, which he preached at St. Mary’s Cathedral on January 1, 1733.

To briefly summarize Law’s influence on Wesley:

Wesley became convinced he had lost his baptismal washing/regeneration and had been re-converted during his spiritual awakening in 1725. This would be his view until 1738 when WEsley experienced evangelical conversion at Aldersgate.
Wesley began to teach the necessity of adult conversion for authentic, saving faith. Law’s idea of adult conversion prepared Wesley to later embrace the concept of evangelical conversion by faith in Christ, which he learned from the Moravians.
Wesley patterned his early ministry after Law’s principles. He would hold these views until 1738 when he adopted the Reformation message of salvation by faith alone. Wesley then wrote Law and challenged his views. These letters are fascinating to read for what they tell us about Wesley’s new understanding of gospel salvation.

The issue that caused Wesley to begin rethinking what he believed about gospel salvation was a lack of salvation assurance. This happened during his voyage to America in late 1735 when he experienced fear of immanent death during a series of violent storms. When Wesley returned to England in 1738 he came to a new understanding of the gospel salvation from Peter Bohler, a Moravian missionary on route to America. He then moved away from Law’s teachings regarding saving faith and conversion in Christ. He continued to appreciate Law’s writings on holy living (sanctification), but never again followed Law regarding initiation into the faith — i.e. justification and regeneration.

William Law’s Works

Law’s basic position on justification represented a mainstream view within the Anglican Church of the 18th century (present justification in this life and final justification at the Last Judgment). Towards the end of his life he penned a tract expressing his current view on justification. On regeneration, over the years Law shifted toward a mystic perspective. He mature viewed differed sharply with Wesley and the Methodists.
The Ground of Regeneration 1739
The Grounds and Reasons Regeneration 1762
On Justification 1761

Here is the complete set of his published works:
Works of W Law vol 1
Works of W Law vol 2
Works of W Law vol 3
Works of W Law vol 4
Works of W Law vol 5
Works of W Law vol 6
Works of W Law vol 7
Works of W Law vol 8
Works of W Law vol 9

Martin Luther’s Gospel

Martin Luther (1483 -1546) sparked the Protestant Reformation in the 16th century and remains one of the most influential persons in the history of the Christian religion. Luther protested against the Roman Catholic practice of indulgences with his Ninety-Five Theses in October 1517. This is recognized by many historians as the official start of the Reformation. Luther came to a revolutionary new belief about how people are made right with God. The doctrine was called justification by faith alone and it became for most Protestants their central tenet in opposition to Rome.

Luther’s gospel of justification by faith is found in his Preface to the Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans. Luther begins with an explanation of key terms and concepts in the Book of Romans by which he focused more on imparted rather than imputed righteousness. Beginning with God’s law, Luther argued that the sinner attempts to fulfil God’s law by works, either through fear of punishment or hope of reward, but fails because their heart is not in it. The sinner does not freely love God or his law since they are sinful at heart. For God’s law is spiritual and can be fulfilled only by the Holy Spirit imparting a genuine love for God and his truth. But the Spirit is received through faith in Christ and in the merits of his death. So, for Luther the root issue was unbelief and its remedy a living faith in Christ:

“Faith, however, is a divine work in us which changes us and makes us to be born anew of God, John 1:12-13. It kills the old Adam and makes altogether different men, in heart and spirit and mind and powers; and it brings with it the Holy Spirit . . . Faith doesn’t ask whether good works are to be done, but, before it is asked, it has done them. It is always active . . . Faith is a living, unshakeable confidence in God’s grace; it is so certain, that someone would die a thousand times for it. This kind of trust in and knowledge of God’s grace makes a person joyful, confident, and happy with regard to God and all creatures. This is what the Holy Spirit does by faith. Through faith, a person will do good to everyone without coercion, willingly and happily; he will serve everyone, suffer everything for the love and praise of God, who has shown him such grace. It is as impossible to separate works from faith as burning and shining from fire.”

In other writings Luther used the analogy of marriage to explain justification. Just as a bride assumes the name, honor, and privileges of the groom, so in Christ our sins are assumed by him and we receive his righteousness before God. His righteous standing becomes ours in virtue of our faith-union with Christ. He called it “alien righteousness” because it is a righteousness outside of the person and is received as sheer gift. We cannot earn or merit it. It is God’s declaration that we are accepted in Christ.

This brief overview of Luther’s gospel is described more fully in the Preface. In the first half he discusses key topics in the letter — law, sin, grace, faith, righteousness & flesh/Spirit — before giving a chapter-by-chapter survey. It is worth the reading.

Here is Luther’s Preface in a newer translation: Martin Luther’s Preface to Romans

Luther’s Impact on John Wesley

It is well-known that Luther’s Preface was instrumental to Wesley’s evangelical conversion in May 1738. Wesley recorded n his Journal:

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

This was not the first time that Wesley had read portions of Luther’s Preface. Over a month prior he had read Luther’s description of saving faith from the Preface in another book, called Pia Desideria by Philip Spener. Spener’s book played a key role in the birth of the Pietist Movement in the late 17th century. The esteemed historian W. R. Ward states that by the 18th century Luther’s Preface had become the classic text on evangelical conversion. For the Pietists, justification by faith alone was part of the conversion experience of new birth in Christ. When Wesley states that he received an assurance of his sins being taken away — a reference to John 1:29 — he was referring to the gift of justification as the forgiveness of sin. He alluded to receiving the new birth by the last phrase — “saved me from the law of sin and death.” This phrase comes from Romans 8:1-2, which again speaks of no condemnation for the believer in Christ.

Luther would leave a permanent mark on Wesley’s evangelical gospel. From this point forward he would proclaim to everyone who would listen that we can be forgiven and accepted by God through faith in Christ alone. Justification is a gift of free grace. And, he continually gave credit to Luther for the re-discovery of this fundamental truth of the gospel. Wesley did become more critical of Luther after his fallout with the Moravians in 1740, but he continued to affirm Luther’s gospel of justification by faith alone.

In the 1786 sermon On God’s Vineyard, the elderly Wesley stated that no one had written more ably on justification by faith alone than Luther. Where Wesley parted paths with Luther was over sanctification. Yet, scholars today argue that Luther’s full doctrine of justification by faith incorporated the inward work of renewal. This is evident in his description of saving faith in the Preface to Romans.

For other writings by Luther, see the Reformation Sources page.

Secondary Resources

T. Wengert, gen. ed. Dictionary of Luther and the Lutheran Traditions (2017).
M. Olson, “Martin Luther’s Contribution to John Wesley’s Doctrine of Justification,” in Wesley and Methodist Studies 13:2 (2021).
M. Olson, Wesley and Aldersgate (2019).
R. Olson, The Story of Christian Theology (1999).

John Wesley on Assurance of Salvation

Assurance of salvation is a vital topic for anyone who desires to be with Christ in eternity. A young man once asked Jesus, “What good thing must I do to get eternal life?” (Matt. 19:16). No matter what people might think today, Jesus taught there was an eternal future for everyone in either heaven or hell (e.g., Matt. 25:46). While scripture clearly teaches that salvation requires a person to repent and believe in Christ for salvation (Mk. 1:15, Jn. 3:16), the question of assurance still remains – how can I know that I am saved?

We cannot just base it on a profession, our church attendance, our good deeds, or some other aspect of ourselves. For we are sinners and can be deceived by our own hearts (Jeremiah 17:9).

So, how does one know they are saved?

John Wesley on Assurance

The Evangelical Revival of the 18th century was sparked by the desire to have a confident assurance of salvation. This was what John Wesley received at his now famous Aldersgate conversion on May 24, 1738:

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

What Wesley experienced that evening he proclaimed to the masses — that God bears witness to a person’s salvation when they trust in Christ alone. He called it the “witness of the Spirit,” wherein the Holy Spirit testifies directly & indirectly to a person in their heart of God’s forgiveness and new birth in Christ.

In the 1746 sermon, The Witness of the Spirit, Wesley explained in detail how these two witnesses function. He based both of these witnesses on Romans 8:16, “The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God.” Wesley understood the preposition “with” to mean there are actually two witnesses, the Holy Spirit and our own spirit.

The testimony of the Holy Spirit he defined as an “inward impression on the soul, whereby the Spirit of God directly ‘witnesses to my spirit that I am a child of God’; that Jesus Christ hath loved me, and given himself for me; that all my sins are blotted out, and I, even I, am reconciled to God” (I.7). This is what Wesley experienced at his Aldersgate conversion when his heart was “strangely warmed.” This witness can be felt immediately upon believing in Christ. There is no need to wait, for the Spirit testifies directly to the person’s heart.

The testimony of our own spirit was defined as the immediate awareness a person has of the change which God has work in their life. They begin to feel the love of God in their heart. They sense they are now alive to God and have a relationship with him. They see the work of God in their lives, called the fruit of the Spirit. They see the marks of a Christian in the bible and can testify that these are real in their life. Wesley describes this aspect of assurance in sections I:2-6 of the sermon. Wesley considered this testimony an indirect witness of the Spirit, because the assurance comes through the fruits of the Spirit’s work (whereas the direct witness is immediate to the heart).

In the sermon Wesley further taught that a clear assurance of salvation in Christ is vital to the Christian life. It is essential to having confidence to wage spiritual warfare, to grow in the faith, to overcome sin, and to persevere in obedience and holy living.

Wesley’s Sermons on Assurance

Wesley published three sermons on assurance over his career, though the topic is discussed in other places as well. Two sermons – The Witness of the Spirit I and The Witness of Our Own Spirit – were published in 1746, as part of his first collection of sermons. This collection focused on themes found in his evangelistic preaching over the prior 8 years. Then, 21 years later Wesley published a second sermon, titled The Witness of the Spirit II (1767). By comparing the first sermon on the Spirit’s witness to this second sermon we see that over the period of two decades Wesley’s views did not materially change, but how he expressed it did. In the second sermon he quote from the first one to define the Spirit’s direct witness, yet there is more of an emphasis on the love of God in the second sermon. Altogether, these three sermons contain Wesley’s full thoughts on the subject.

Here are Wesley’s three sermons:

The Witness of the Spirit I
The Witness of the Spirit II
The Witness of Our Own Spirit

Studies on Wesley’s Theology of Assurance
If you are interested in further study, check out the following,

Joseph Cunningham, John Wesley’s Pneumatology (2014).
Mark Olson, Wesley and Aldersgate (2019).
Ken Collins, The Theology of John Wesley (2007).

Charles Wesley as a Preacher

Charles (1707-1788) is mostly remembered for his hymns and poetry. It is estimated he composed around 6500 hymns and poems over the course of his lifetime. Less known is that Charles was an effective and gifted preacher. He began preacher during his ministry in America in 1736-1737. After his evangelical conversion on May 21, 1738, Charles became a Methodist itinerant and preached before large crowds for many years. Like the other revival preachers, He preached in the open-air (outside of the churches), which was a novelty for Anglican preachers.

Stats
The website poetpreacher.com estimates from Charles’ journal and other records that between 1738 and 1749 he preached 1585 times (possibly more). Charles recorded the crowd size on 88 occasions with a total audience of nearly 268,000. This averages out to over 3,000 per preaching event. Though at times the audience was more close to 20,000. We need to remembe4r there were no sound equipment or amplification, just the strength of the preacher’s voice to reach a large gathering. He described the gathers as “vast congregation,” “thousands,” “many sinners,” “crowded church,” and “thronged audience.”

On these 88 occasions poetpreacher.com states that Charles recorded 373 people coming to faith. Charles is remembered as a fiery and pointed preacher, calling sinners to repentance and faith in Christ. His most famous sermon was the evangelistic sermon “Awake, Thou that Sleepest,” preached at St. Mary’s in Oxford in 1742. Altogether scholars have located 23 of Charles’ sermons that were written down. All 23 sermons can be found in The Sermons of Charles Wesley: A Critical Edition by Kenneth Newport (Oxford, 2001).

Manuscript Sermons
There are 23 manuscript sermons from Charles Wesley. Two were published by Charles during his lifetime (Eph. 5:14, Ps.46:8). The rest include 6 shorthand sermons, 12 in an 1816 edition, and 3 other sermons. For a fuller description of these manuscript sermons, see poetpreacher.com.

Awake Thou that Sleepest
This sermon represents Charles’ abilities as an evangelist. The sermon aims to awaken those who feel secure in their sinful lifestyle. The text is Ephesians 5:14, “Wake up, sleeper, rise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you” (NIV). Below are several editions of this sermon. Charles calls on people to recognize their true spiritual condition apart from Christ and to cry out in faith for salvation. Wesleyan scholar Kevin Watson offers a full description of the sermon follow this link.
Awake Thou that Sleepest 1742
Awake Thou that Sleepest 5th ed 1743
Awake Thou that Sleepest 1832 edition

1816 Collection
This collection includes twelve of Charles’ manuscript sermons and one of his brother John’s sermons. Several of Charles’ sermons in this collection were originally written by John and Charles adapted them for his own purposes. Nearly all of them come from Charles’ pre-conversion period. See especially sermons 11 and 12 for an excellent summary of Charles’ view of salvation during his time in America. However, Charles continued to preach some of these sermons after his evangelical conversion because of their emphasis on holy living.
Thirteen Sermons 1816

Tract on Earthquakes
Even though this is not a sermon, this tract does represent Charles’ ability as an evangelist. In the spring 1750 London was struck with a powerful earthquake. Aftershocks continued for days and weeks. At the time earthquakes were seen as acts of God. CW wrote this evangelistic tract to call people to repentance. The tract was later reissued after the Great Lisbon earthquake on November 1, 1755. The tract is informative on the Wesleys’ evangelistic methods:
Cause and Cure of Earthquakes 1750

Check out the Charles Wesley page for more his works.

John Wesley & The Plain Account of Christian Perfection

Historical Context & Background Information

Today, the Plain Account (PA) is a classic of Christian devotional writings and is arguably John Wesley’s (1703-1791) most famous work. Yet, few today know anything about the historical context or why Wesley published the tract. There were six editions of the Plain Account published during Wesley’s lifetime, with each successive edition updating the subtitle to include the latest year of publication (with 1777 being the last year the subtitle was changed even though two more editions were released -1785, 1789). Even though today the Plain Account belongs to the genre of devotional literature, Wesley originally wrote it for apologetic reasons – to defend and explain his doctrine of holiness to critics both inside and outside of Methodism.

Historical Context

In 1758, fresh winds of revival were beginning to be felt, and a new interest in attaining perfection was included in this outpouring of the Spirit. Then in 1759 Wesley records that “perceiving some danger that a diversity of sentiments should insensibly steal in among us, we again largely considered this doctrine” at the annual conference (PA, 19). “Diversity of sentiments” did steal in among them. Within three years Wesley found himself in the middle of a schism over the subject of perfection. While Wesley wrote three tracts and two sermons to bring correction and balance, it was to no avail. Two Methodist preachers, Thomas Maxfield and George Bell, had come to embrace what Wesley called “angelic” perfection. Both men claimed they had attained a state in which it was impossible for them to sin, or to be tempted. They further claimed they would not physically die (PA, 20). George Bell believed he had the gift of healing. It was claimed he healed a person of blindness, and that he attempted to raise another person from the dead. Their meetings were full of emotion and created quite a stir among the Methodists and abroad.

Many, including his brother Charles, wanted John to act more swiftly and decisively. But Wesley moved with caution and this is evident in his Journal for 1762. He continued to point out the positives, as well as the negatives, in Bell and Maxfield’s ministries. In December 1762, George Bell finally went too far. He prophesied the world would end on February 28, 1763 (PA, 22). Wesley finally took a public stand and renounced the prophecy. By the spring things had come to a head with both Maxfield, Bell, and their followers separating from Wesley.

The effects of the perfectionist controversy were long lasting. Two years later, in May, 1764, John wrote to his brother Charles, “The frightful stories wrote from London had made all our Preachers in the north afraid even to mutter about perfection… It is what I foresaw from the beginning; that the devil would strive by Thomas Maxfield and company to drive perfection out of the kingdom.” Over the years the perfection revival with its excesses and schism caused many to question the teaching of Christian perfection. Charles moved more toward a progressive view of perfection and even thirty years later people still remembered the schism and were turned off to any experience of perfection in this life (Gunter, Limits of Love Divine, 226).

The revival, with its critics, schism and continuing controversy, was the setting which finally compelled Wesley to publish a definitive statement on what he believed concerning Christian perfection. Since Wesley was always concerned to communicate in plain words, he chose a style he felt would serve him best: simply to tell his story on how he came to embrace Christian perfection and to state clearly what his views were at specific periods of his ministerial career. To accomplish this task he thought it best to quote writings from different periods of his career.

When Wesley Wrote the Plain Account

In PA, 26 Wesley states that in 1764 he took the time to review the “whole subject.” While this comment points to the gathering of his thoughts and ideas in an organized way, it also could indicate he was considering the idea of writing a book on the subject. In PA, 27 he mentions the year 1765, so we know he had not began writing anything of substance before that year. Also, the first published edition of the Plain Account included the subtitle, “from the year 1725, to the year 1765.” This is a straightforward statement that he wrote the Plain Account in 1765. This is what we can learn from the book itself. There is general agreement Wesley published the Plain Account in around February 1766, since he mentions printing the tract in that month.

From other sources we learn he probably began to write the Plain Account in the spring of 1765. On May 14th he wrote a letter to John Newton and this letter contains much of the same information as we find in the early sections of the Plain Account. This suggests Wesley had begun to structure the early sections of the book but had not yet formally written them, since some details in the letter to Newton are different than what is found in the Plain Account. We also know he read sections of the book to the annual conference in August. The book was completed by the beginning of 1766 and soon after published.

Why Wesley Titled It – “Plain Account”

Once, when I commented to a ministerial colleague that I was writing a book on Wesley’s A Plain Account of Christian Perfection, his reply was, “You mean the not-so-plain account.” Obviously, for many, the Plain Account is anything but “plain.” What did Wesley mean by giving this title?

Wesley was fond of “accounts.” This is probably why he wrote so many of them. To understand Wesley’s meaning of a “plain account,” we must look at how he uses the word “plain” in other writings. In an early sermon he concludes a point with, “This is God’s short and plain account of true religion and virtue.” In A Plain Account of the People Called Methodists he writes, “This is the plainest and clearest account I can give of the people commonly called Methodists. It remains only to give you a short account of those who serve their brethren in love.” Another example is found in his journal entry on February 8, 1738, when Wesley speaks of giving the Board of Trustees (who sponsored his trip to America) a “short but plain account of the state of the colony.” In a letter late in his life (1789) he contrasts a “plain account” to a “false” one. Others could be given.

From these examples we learn that Wesley’s aim was to give a straightforward chronicle of his perfection views, from 1725 to 1765 that would be accurate, transparent, and concise. He shares the relevant facts of his spiritual pilgrimage, and those writings he thought best represented his views throughout his ministerial career. He does not try to integrate or harmonize what he says at different times, and he does not present a systematic statement of his doctrine. Instead, he records in a concise manner what he taught, when he taught it, and then offers in the end a brief summary statement of his current views (PA, 26).

Wesley primary wrote to defend and explain his doctrine of Christian perfection to two camps. The first included spiritual elitists like Bell and Maxfield, who so emphasized the attainability of an eschatological perfection, they came to believe they could not even be tempted to sin. They attacked Wesley for not truly believing in perfection at all. the second camp were self-defined spiritual realists, who so emphasized the evils and frailties of this life, they believed no one could ever be so changed and transformed by God’s grace. Wesley attempted, as he saw it, to walk down the middle. He had to define according to scripture, reason, and experience what was the true nature of this experience, how to recognize it, and how to attain it. He had to present his doctrine in as simple a format as possible so that everyone, from the regular Methodist attendee to the highly educated Anglican bishop, would be able to understand what he believed, how he came to believe it, and why he believed it.

Wesley’s Understanding of Christian Perfection

John Wesley believed Christian perfection to be God’s purpose for every believer in Christ. The doctrine summarizes in two words what God’s goal, through the cross, is for every believer. We could even say that, for John Wesley, Christian perfection is Christianity and perfection is the theme of the God’s Word. The ideal of perfection captured his imagination as a young man and became the spring from which his entire life and ministry flowed. This is why his spiritual awakening to perfection in 1725 is so significant (PA, 2).

The essence of Christian perfection is this: God can so transform the believer’s dispositional nature that his love, even his perfect love, can become the natural and habitual characteristic in their life. But most significantly, God can do this work of grace in this life, which is characterized by ignorance, mistake, temptation, and trial—all the human frailties that are inescapable in this life. Wesley therefore did not see it as sinless perfection, but as wholehearted love to God and neighbor – “humble, gentle, patient love” was how he often summarized it.

This became the great challenge. How does one reconcile the ideal of perfect love with the realities of this world? How does one live in this fallen world with God’s love reigning in their thoughts, words, and actions? What would such a life look like? How would we recognize it? What are the essential qualities of such a life? How does one attain it? This was the real task Wesley sets out to accomplish in the Plain Account.

Although Wesley wrote the tract initially for apologetic reasons, he later realized it teaching value and began to encourage seekers of heart holiness tread it as a devotional guide. This was how the tract became a devotional classic over the past 250 years.

Editions of the Plain Account

Below are some of the early editions:

Plain Account Christian Perfection 1st ed 1766
Plain Account Christian Perfection 3rd ed 1770
Plain Account Christian Perfection 5th ed 1785
Plain Account Christian Perfection 8th ed 1797

The following two tracts were written at the height of the perfection revival and schism and were later incorporated into the Plain Account:
Cautions and Directions 1762
Farther Thoughts upon Christian Perfection 1763

One of the testimonies to Christian perfection Wesley included was by Jane Cooper (PA, 24). Here is a collection of her letters that express her devotion and faith:
Letters by Jane Cooper 1764

John Wesley the Philosopher

Even though Wesley was an Anglican clergyman and an evangelical revivalist, he engaged a number of the philosophical issues of the 18th century. Here are a few of his philosophical principles.

Empiricism
Wesley acknowledged his empiricist bent on numerous occasions, with a strong leaning toward the Aristotelian tradition on logic and epistemology. He studied Aristotelian logic while at Oxford, which used Henry Aldrich’s Artis Logicæ Compendium as a textbook.
Wesley held that human reason had three functions: apprehension, judgment, and discourse. Apprehension is the mind forming ideas from data gathered by the five senses. Judgment is the mind comparing one apprehension to another. And discourse is the mind stringing judgments together to form an argument. As Timothy Crutcher explains, “Reason is valued for its ability to process information, but its completely dependent upon experience for its raw material” (The Crucible of Life, 27).

Spiritual Senses
As an empiricist JW believed there is nothing in the understanding which is not first in the senses. However, he differed from John Locke by asserting the capacity of human knowledge of God through restored spiritual senses as a gift of grace. Wesley often spoke of faith serving as a spiritual sense by which we can know God and his truth.

Limitation of Human Reason
JW opposed the Enlightenment assumption on the sufficiency of unaided human reason and instead stressed reliance on divine revelation. This meant he was a firm believer in the limits of human reason, yet he was charged by his critics with enthusiasm (religious fanaticism) for his idea of direct knowledge of God through the Spirit’s inspiration of faith, love, and assurance.

Freedom of the Will
Freedom of the will was a hot philosophical topic in the 18th century. As an Arminian, Wesley was a staunch supporter of freedom of the will. Yet he saw this freedom as a gift of grace given to every person (called “preventing” grace from the Latin prevenio which means that which comes before – in this case before conversion). He therefore rejected the idea of a natural, inherent free will. This was largely due to his belief in original sin as a corruption of every faculty of human nature. Regarding God’s knowledge of human choices and events, Wesley believed in the concept of eternal now – there is properly speaking no past, present, or future with God. He sees the beginning to the end as an eternal present, since he foreknows all things. But he affirmed that God’s foreknowledge does not cause what he knows. Instead, God knows them because they are. Therefore, he choices are genuinely free and not caused by God. God simply knows what humans freely choose ahead of time.

Ethics
He refused to accept any concept that denied human dependence on the Creator for ethics and moral goodness. Enlightenment ethics began stressing moral goodness apart from God. Wesley rejected such a notion outright. He affirmed the theological virtues of the historic Christian tradition (faith, hope, love) and emphasized the ethic of love. Regarding wealth, he is famously remembered for teaching that we should make all we can, save all we can, and give all we can. Wesley was a firm believer in God’s sovereignty and his role as supreme governor over human affairs and the created order. Yet, with his views on human freedom he adopted a view of synergism in his teachings on salvation and relationship with God.

In the 1770s and 1780s Wesley wrote several works in which he expressed his philosophical views. Here is a sample of them:
Thoughts on Necessity 1774
Thoughts on Gods Sovereignty 1777
Gradual Improvement of Natural Philosophy 1777
A Thought on Necessity 1780
Remarks on Locke’s Essay on Human Understanding 1781
Thoughts on Montesquieu’s Spirit of Laws 1781
Remarks on Buffon’s Natural History 1782
The Imperfection of Human Knowledge 1788
The Case of Reason Impartially Considered 1788

Resources on Wesley’s philosophy:
Timothy Crutcher, The Crucible of Life.
Manfred Marquardt, John Wesley’s Social Ethics.
Ronald Stone, John Wesley’s Life & Ethics.
D. Stephen Long, John Wesley’s Moral Theology.

Also check out this standard resource on 18th century thought:
L Stephen History of English Thought 18th Century vol 1
L Stephen History of English Thought 18th Century vol 2

Wesley vs Whitefield

The Free Grace Controversy

John Wesley and George Whitefield were both used mightily by God to proclaim the evangelical gospel of salvation by faith in Christ alone. They were both personal friends and active in Oxford Methodism. Wesley was one of the founding leaders beginning in late 1729 and Whitefield joined in 1733. When the Evangelical Revival broke out in England in the late 1730s both men were leaders, though Whitefield was seen by the public as the undisputed leader of the new movement since he was already nationally famous as a revival preacher.

Wesley was a lifelong Arminian, having been raised in the Anglican high church tradition that was predominantly Arminian in theology. Whitefield, by contrast, to Anglican but began to read Calvinist works following his conversion in May 1735. Over the next 3-4 years his belief in the Calvinist perspective grew and by 1739 he was openly a Calvinist by profession. This set the stage for a controversy between the two men that was only partially healed during their lifetimes and is felt day to our day.

Historical Context
When Whitefield went to Bristol in early 1739 the response was so great he invited Wesley to come and assume leadership and organize societies for the new converts. Wesley began to be pressured to take a stand on the issue of predestination, a cherished doctrine of the Calvinists. At first he was hesitant, but eventually decided to preach his famous sermon on the subject on Sunday, April 29th, to about 4,000 people, after taking a lot (on lots as a means of divine guidance, see Acts 1:26). He soon after published his sermon called Free Grace.

Whitefield was away and was shocked when the news reached him. He wrote to Wesley expressing his concern that the new movement would now be divided. In hindsight, the division that followed was inevitable given the religious fervor and the depth of conviction regarding this issue on both sides. Both men and their supporters – Arminian & Calvinist – believed that their understanding of election, predestination, grace, and related issues were the correct and faithful interpretation of the gospel of Christ.

The breach between Wesley and Whitefield has become known as the Free Grace Controversy. The two leaders exchanged letters of the next several months as Whitefield was in America and Wesley was in England. Because no common ground could be found, Methodism split into two factions in 1741 – Wesleyan Methodism and Calvinistic Methodism, each with their own organization. Over time Calvinistic Methodism transitioned into Dissent as Whitefield proved to be gifted as an evangelist but not so much as an organizer. Wesley’s leadership skill are widely recognized and the organization he formed – the United Societies – eventually assumed the title of Methodism in church history.

Over time the breach was healed on a personal level between Whitefield and Wesley. They remained friends but continued to differ sharply in their theological views. As Whitefield’s request, Wesley preached the official funeral sermon when Whitefield passed away in 1770.

Brief Summary of Views
Wesley assumed a single view of Calvinism and its doctrine of predestination. Joel Houston explains, “Wesley’s polemic was against the supralapsarian scheme, believing it made God the author of sin. Whitefield, operating in a largely infralapsarian paradigm, argued that preterition did not cause God to be the author of sin, as election emerged from the consideration of a (logically speaking) already fallen humanity” (Wesley, Whitefield & Free Grace Controversy).

Below are the writings of both men that ignited the controversy that ripples to our day. You can examine their arguments for yourself.

John Wesley’s Sermon “Free Grace” 1739
In this sermon Wesley asserts the Arminian perspective on God’s grace is given to every person. While God foreknows who will be saved, Christ died for every person and grace is universally given for people to freely respond to God’s offer of salvation. As Wesley stated, “Grace is free in all and for all.” The idea of an “eternal, unchangeable, irresistible degree of God” whereby “one part of mankind are infallibly saved, and the rest infallibly damned” is totally inconsistent with God’s love for the world (Jn. 3:16). He then critiques the Calvinist position in many areas. Examine his arguments for yourself.
Sermon Free Grace 2nd ed 1740

George Whitefield’s Open Letter 1740
In his public letter to Wesley (dated 12/24/1740), Whitefield defends the Reformed positions election, predestination, and other related doctrines. He appealed to Christian experience – including Wesley’s – to support his moderate Calvinist position. Whitefield defends the idea of reprobation as well as election to life. He appealed to a large number of authorities to support his position as faithful to the Anglican Articles of Religion – and suggesting that Wesley’s Arminianism was not (compare Art. 17 & 31).
Letter to JW Free Grace Sermon 1741

Link to George Whitefield’s Writings

Link to John Wesley’s Writings

John Wesley’s Doctrine of Justification

The doctrine of justification is probably the most complex aspect of Wesley’s theology. The primary reason is that Wesley was raised and educated as a high church Anglican and in 1738 became an evangelical who adopted the Protestant message of justification by faith alone. This means that two theological traditions informed his doctrine of justification: high church Anglicanism and Protestant evangelicalism.

(1) High church Anglicanism emphasized a sacramental view of the Christian life and the doctrine of double justification (two moments of justification). Both of these traits were inherited from the Catholic tradition reaching back to the church fathers. To explain, initial justification (and regeneration) were given in the sacrament of baptism. The Anglican church in Wesley’s day universally practiced infant baptism. So Wesley believed that baptized infants are regenerated and justified, and as part of the body of Christ in spiritual union with Christ. High church Anglicans were also Arminian in theology. They expected the baptized child to grow in the faith (sanctification) or they would lose their salvation through flagrant sin. Finally, high church Anglicanism taught that final justification took place at the Last Judgment. That is when a believer receives their public declaration of approval by Christ and their justification is complete. Since scripture teaches that the final judgment is according to works (Matt. 25:31-46, 2 Cor. 5:10), Anglicans stressed both faith and works as conditions for full justification before God. By this they meant that both faith and works are conditions for future salvation but do not accrue merit to earn salvation. Christ’s atonement was the only meritorious cause of salvation. Wesley believed in the high Anglican views on baptism, double justification, and the distinction between condition and merit his entire life.

(2) Evangelical faith. The evangelic gospel stressed justification as a present gift in adult conversion. This can be called present or evangelical justification to distinguish it from final justification (at final judgment). Wesley believed that most people lose their baptismal washing before adulthood and need to be born again by faith in Christ alone. One of the blessings of conversion was a felt assurance of justification, called the witness of the Spirit. Justification here means forgiveness of sin, acceptance by God, and a return to divine favor. This was Wesley’s standard meaning for justification in his writings.

(3) Faith of a Servant. The Evangelical message of salvation focused on having a conscious assurance of salvation. This defined one’s evangelical experience and faith. But some sincere believers in Christ struggled to experience this assurance of salvation. By 1747 Wesley realized he could not say these people are going to hell simply because they don’t feel an assurance of salvation. In a letter to his brother Charles, John distinguished between “justifying faith” and “the proper Christian faith.” Justifying faith delivers from God’s future wrath and curse but lacks an assurance of salvation. “The proper Christian faith” – evangelical faith – enjoys a present assurance of salvation. JW later called this lower level of justifying faith as the faith of a servant.

(4) Responsive Unregenerate. As Wesley grew older he came to the view that people who have never heard the gospel can be finally saved if they truly believe in the One Supreme God and pursue righteous living as best they understand. These people are the responsive unregenerate. An example is Cornelius in Acts 10. Wesley believed before Cornelius was converted by Peter, he was already accepted by God in some measure (“measure of acceptance” Acts 10:35.) Wesley even considered that some Jews and Moslems might be finally saved. If any of these people are saved in the end, then Wesley assumed they must be justified in some degree. He called this a “measure of acceptance” (Acts 10:35).

So, if we list the different degrees of justification according to Wesley along a trajectory of the spiritual journey, it looks like this:

(1) measure of acceptance for responsive unregenerate

(2) baptismal justification for infants (vast majority lose it later)

(3) justifying faith for those who lack assurance (i.e. faith of a servant)

(4) present or evangelical justification for born again Christians who have assurance

(5) final justification by faith and works at Last Judgment.

There are more details to Wesley’s full theology of justification but the above five categories or degrees spell out the main aspects of his doctrine.

Wesley’s Writings on Justification

Measure of Acceptance – responsive unregenerate
Paragraph 4 above. In Wesley’s commentary on Acts 10, Wesley explains that Cornelius was devout (notes v. 4) and already had a measure of acceptance by God (notes v. 35) before he was converted under Peter’s preaching (vv. 44-47). See Acts 11:14-17 and Wesley’s notes. He believed Cornelius received Christian new birth at that time. Pay close attention to Wesley’s comments on Acts 10:4, 35; 11:14.
Commentary on Acts 10-11

Baptismal Justification – infants
Paragraph 1 above. In 1755 Wesley published an extract of his father Samuel’s tract on baptism (1700). In it Wesley explains how baptized infants are washed from the guilt of original sin (section II.1), born again in Christ, and made a member of the Body of Christ. He also explains how baptized children must later repent and believe in Christ, or else they can lose their baptismal washing/salvation through sinful living (sections II.4-5). For Wesley’s views on adult baptism, see his sermon, The New Birth IV.1-2. Wesley held adults must have saving faith for baptism to serve as a sacrament (i.e. to impart grace).
Treatise on Baptism

Justifying Faith – faith of a servant / lack assurance
Paragraph 3 above. Below are two documents. In the 1747 letter to Charles the distinction between justifying faith (salvation from God’s future wrath) and the proper Christian faith (present assurance of salvation) is made. He later identified the first level of faith with the faith of a servant, the second with evangelical faith or the faith of a son – in the Sermon On Faith, Heb. 11:6 (see sections I.10-12).
Letter to Brother Charles 1747
Sermon On Faith, Heb. 11:6

Present Justification – evangelical faith
Paragraph 2 above. In Wesley’s 1746 sermon he explains in detail what evangelical justification entails. It is basically pardon and acceptance, given to believers the moment they trust in Christ for salvation. The Holy Spirit gives an assurance of this justification in the believer’s heart. He briefly mentions final justification in the sermon, though this is not the focus of the message. Wesley’s commentary notes on Romans 3:21-4:25 offer a clear biblical exposition of his views on present justification.
Sermon Justification by Faith
Commentary on Romans 3:21-4:25

Final Justification – Last Judgment
Paragraph 1 above. Wesley did not write a sermon or tract in which he spelled out his full views on final justification. It would have been helpful if he did. But the idea was so common in Anglicanism that he probably assumed everyone was aware of it. However, many evangelicals (mostly Calvinists) rejected the notion as a part of Catholicism, since Catholics taught the doctrine of double justification. Include below are three documents that express his views on the subject. First, the 1770 Conference Minutes stress the importance of works in our salvation, which pertains to the final judgment. Wesley states we work for eternal life and well as from spiritual life (given in the new birth). Second, is his commentary on Matthew 25:31-46 which deals with the last judgment – where Christ declares who are righteous and is is not. Note the Last Judgment involves a public declaration of who is righteous. This is in contrast to present justification which is a private declaration to the believer’s heart. Last, is Wesley’s commentary on Matthew 12:36-37. His comments succinctly express his views on final justification.
1770 Conference Minutes
Commentary on Matthew 12:36-37
Commentary on Matthew 25:31-4

John Wesley, Biblical Commentator

and His Sources

One of John Wesley’s more enduring projects is his Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament. The project might never had happened unless Wesley fell so ill in November 1753 that he had to stop all his travels and seek relief in the countryside. He even traveled to the hot springs near Bristol to seek its medicinal nutrients. Since he could not travel but still had the strength to read and write he began to write this foundational work for his Methodist followers. Five editions of Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament were issued during Wesley’s lifetime, beginning in 1755. The intended audience was not the educated classes, but “plain, unlettered men [and women]” who knew only the English language, yet reverenced God’s word and desired to “save their souls” (Preface).

Scott Jones explains that Wesley considered God’s word to be the sole authority for Christian faith and practice. As Wesley stated in the preface, Holy Scripture is the “word of the living God” and comprise the “most solid and precious system of divine truth.” There is “no defect, no excess” in its pages; instead, they provide a “fountain of heavenly wisdom” able to save one’s soul. While Wesley leaned toward a literal reading of scripture, his real interest was soteriological. This is seen in his emphasis on the wholeness of scripture and the analogy of faith. The central message of the entire Bible is to teach the “grand scheme of doctrine” pertaining to salvation, specifically “original sin, justification by faith, and present, inward salvation” (Preface).

Here is the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 5th editions, plus a 19th century edition with modern English spelling. By offering the different editions, a reader can examine how Wesley developed the text from the 1st edition up through the 5th. The major changes happened with the 3rd edition when John and Charles edited and enlarged the text:

Explanatory Notes on NT 1st Edition 1755 Matt-Rom
Explanatory Notes on NT 1st Edition 1755 1 Cor-Rev

Explanatory Notes on NT 2nd Edition 1757 Matt-Acts
Explanatory Notes on NT 2nd Edition 1757 Rom-Rev

Explanatory Notes on NT 3rd Edition 1760 Matt-Acts
Explanatory Notes on NT 3rd Edition 1761 Rom-Eph
Explanatory Notes on NT 3rd Edition 1762 Phil-Rev

Explanatory Notes on NT 5th Edition 1788 Matt-Luke
Explanatory Notes on NT 5th Edition 1788 John
Explanatory Notes on NT 5th Edition 1788 Acts
Explanatory Notes on NT 5th Edition 1788 Rom-Jude
Explanatory Notes on NT 5th Edition 1788 Rev-Index

Explanatory Notes on NT Matt-Acts 1831
Explanatory Notes on NT Rom-Rev 1831

Wesley’s Sources
From the preface we learn that Wesley sought the insights of four contemporary commentators: the Anglican John Heylyn (d. 1759) and his first volume of Theological Lectures at Westminster Abbey, the Dissenting Calvinists Philip Doddridge (d. 1751) and John Guyse (d. 1761) and their multi-volume paraphrastic expositions, and the Lutheran pietist scholar Johannes Bengel (d. 1752) and his Gnomon Novi Testamenti, widely respected in the eighteenth century for its critical study of the biblical text. The four resources show that Wesley looked beyond his own religious tradition for guidance and that he used a broad range of materials, from scholarly analysis to popular paraphrases. This reflects Wesley’s desire to remain faithful to the text while communicating its message in a way his intended audience could understand. Consequently, the Notes do not include a scholarly description of the biblical doctrine of justification, but a faithful rendering of its message in a style that average Methodist could grasp and apply to their lives.

Johann Albrecht Bengel 1687-1752
Bengel, or better known as Bengelius, was a Lutheran clergyman, pietist, and one of the most respected Greek-language scholars in the 18th century. His edition of the Greek New Testament and commentaries on the New Testament were highly regarded and served as primary source material for John Wesley’s Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament (1755). Wesley relied heavily on Bengal for his commentary on the Book of Revelation. Wesley presentation of two future millenniums came from Bengel.
Gnomon of NT Matt-Acts 1862
Gnomon of NT Rom-Rev 1860
Introduction to Revelation 1757

Philip Doddridge 1702-1751
Doddridge was a Nonconformist (Congregational) minister, educator, author, and hymnwriter. He was the pastor of an independent congregation in Northampton and wrote many widely-read works including his multi-volume paraphrase and commentary on the New Testament, The Family Expositor. John Wesley used the Expositor as a source for his Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament (1755). Probably, Dodridge’s most influential work was The Rise and Progress of Religion in the Soul (1745). It was instrumental in the conversion of William Wilberforce:
Doddridge Family Expositor vol 1 4th ed 1763
Doddridge Family Expositor vol 2 2nd ed 1745
Doddridge Family Expositor vol 3 1748
Doddridge Family Expositor vol 4 1753
Doddridge Family Expositor vol 6 1756

John Guyse 1680-1761
Guyse was a Nonconformist minister who received his D.D. degree from Aberdeen in 1733. He was a member of the King’s Head Society that served to assist young men to obtain their academical training for the ministry. His popular three-volume An Exposition of the New Testament in the Form of a Paraphrase was published from 1739 to 1752. It served as one of the sources for John Wesley’s Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament (p. 1755). Here is the six volume edition of Guyse’s commentary:
Practical Expositor vol 1 1797
Practical Expositor vol 2 1797
Practical Expositor vol 3 1797
Practical Expositor vol 4 1797
Practical Expositor vol 5 1797
Practical Expositor vol 6 1797

John Heylin 1685-1759
Heylin was an Anglican priest and a popular preacher. Because of his interest in mysticism, he was known as the “mystical doctor.” John Wesley listened to Heylin preach several times in the late 1730s and used Heylin’s Theological Lectures as a source for his Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament (1755):
Theological Lectures on Gospels 1744

Resources
Scott J. Jones, John Wesley’s Conception and Use of Scripture. Kingswood Books, 1995.
Mark L. Weeter, John Wesley’s View and Use of Scripture. Wipf and Stock, 2007.

John Wesley’s Attitude Toward Catholics
and the Church of Rome

The Protestant Reformation in the 16th century led to a sharp political divide between Catholics and Protestants that involved war and persecution. Religious and political tensions between both sides was present in England up into the 19th century, which includes the period of Wesley’s life (1703-1791). Space here does not allow an extended discussion of this history, but it is important to note that in the 1700s there were two military attempts by pro-Catholic claimants to the British throne (Stewart line) to overthrow the pro-Protestant Hanoverians (1715 and 1745). English Protestants therefore had a deep-seated fear of “popery” (institution of the pope) and a distrust toward Roman Catholics in general.

Wesley’s principal writings dealing with Catholicism and Roman Catholics reflects this political context. He held a common English bias against Catholicism, especially the institution of the pope, yet his belief and desire for everyone to know the gospel led him to stress the fundamentals of the faith over denominational labels. JW’s was often accused of being a closet Catholic by critics because of his commitment to primitive Christianity and his high churchmanship that stressed the sacraments.

Listed here are Wesley’s principal writings dealing with Roman Catholics and the Church of Rome in their chronological order:

Letter to a Roman Catholic
In this letter JW seeks to find common ground with a Irish Catholic. His tone is irenic as he spells out the essentials of the faith upon which believers of different churches can accept each other and fellowship together.
Letter to Roman Catholic 1749

Short Method of Converting All Catholics
JW always considered the primary hurdle to converting sinners the lack of holy living and the failure to preach apostolic doctrine. In this tract to Irish clergy he offers his advice on how to convert all Catholics in the land.
Short Method Converting Catholics 1752

Advantage of Church of England Membership
JW firmly believed that the Church of England was the best national church in Europe regarding doctrine and liturgy. In this tract JW addresses in detail the teachings of Trent and where the Church of Rome has errored.
Advantage Members of English Church over Rome 1756

A Roman Catechism and Response
This is a reprint of Bishop John William’s tract of the same title. It is not a Catholic catechism but a copulation of Catholic teachings concerning the rule of faith, repentance & obedience, genuine worship, and the sacraments.
Roman Catechism with Reply 1756

Catholic Relief Act & Gordon Riots 1778-1780
The pro-Catholic Act of 1778 set off a fire storm that led to the famous anti-Catholic Gordon riots in 1780 that paralyzed London for several days. JW responded with three writings in which he expressed a strong distrust of any Catholic holding public office for fear their loyalty would be to the pope and yet did not support the persecution of Catholics at the same time.
Popery Calmly Considered 1779
Letters Concerning Late Act Favoring Popery 1780
Disavowal of Persecuting Papists 1782

Writings of the Oxford Methodists

Oxford Methodism began in 1729 as Charles Wesley began to meet with Robert Kirkham and William Morgan. Soon John Wesley joined the group and assumed the leadership role of mentoring the group in a lifestyle of religious piety and observance. This lifestyle of “living by rule and method” became their distinctive approach (Heitzenrater, Mirror & Memory, 69). It involved study, prayer, religious conversation, self-denial, fasting, early rising, the disciplined use of time by keeping a diary, regular partaking of the Sacrament, setting firm resolutions, and participation in a variety of charitable ministries. They studied the Greek New Testament, the classics, the church fathers, and primitive Christian worship. As high churchmen of the Anglican Church, they drank deep into the holy living tradition and its authors.

In 1730 the group began to gain some notoriety around Oxford. Soon others began to join, including John Boyce, William Hayward, John Gambold, Westley Hall, Matthew Salmon, Benjamin Ingham, James Hervey, and John Clayton. Over time the various members scattered and became involved in different strands of evangelicalism and of the Anglican Church. Their writings offer a window into the religious landscape of early Methodism and the religious culture of the 18th century.

The Oxford Methodists
While Oxford Methodism never became a numerically large group, it did raise up several influential leaders. Everyone knows of the Wesleys and Whitefield, but fewer people know much about the other Oxford Methodists who became influential and effective ministers of the Gospel, like Clayton, Ingham, Gambold, Hervey, and Broughton. In 1873 the premiere biographer of early Methodism at the time, Luke Tyerman, published a bio of these five men for the public to gain a fuller understanding of these men and their contribution to the church at large.
Tyerman The Oxford Methodists 1873

John Gambold 1711-1771
Gambold entered Christ Church, Oxford, in 1730 and became friends with Charles Wesley who introduced him to John. He was ordained in 1733 and became vicar of Stanton Harcourt in 1735. The following year he wrote an account of his time as an Oxford Methodist. This account is found in Tyerman’s The Oxford Methodists and is located below. In 1738 John Wesley introduced Gambold to Peter Bohler and the Moravians. Gambold eventually joined the Moravian Church in 1742 and was ordained bishop in their church.
The Oxford Methodists 1736
Christianity Tidings of Joy 1741
Reasonableness & Extent Religious Reverence 1756
Martyrdom of Ignatius, A Tragedy 1773
Works of John Gambold 1789
Works of John Gambold 2nd ed 1823

Benjamin Ingham 1712-1772
Ingham was a member of the Oxford Methodists and served alongside the Wesleys in Georgia in the mid-1730s. He also traveled with John Wesley to Herrnhut in the summer of 1738. Having experienced evangelical conversion in 1737, Ingham became an effective evangelist and established more societies than he could manage. So, in 1742 he turned them over to the Moravian Brethren and joined the movement, though he retained an affinity toward Methodist principles. Later in life he was drawn toward Sandemanianism. In 1763 he published a work explaining his understanding of the gospel and where he differed from the Wesleys and Moravians.
Discourse on Faith & Hope of Gospel 1763

James Hervey 1714-1758
Hervey was tutored by John Wesley at Oxford in the 1730s and a member of the Oxford Methodists. Though he was Anglican, he thoroughly embraced the Calvinist creed and sought to promote that viewpoint in his writings. He became a popular and respected author, with his works filling six volumes. In 1755 he published Theron and Aspasio which espoused a Calvinist viewpoint on imputed righteousness. He had Wesley review it and received several criticisms that apparently hurt Hervey’s feelings. The fallout led to Hervey responding in a series of letters, which were publish posthumously.
Hervey Whole Works vol 1
Hervey Whole Works vol 2
Hervey Whole Works vol 3
Hervey Whole Works vol 4
Hervey Whole Works vol 5
Hervey Whole Works vol 6

John Wesley’s replies:
Letter to James Hervey 1756
Sufficient Answer to ‘Letters to Author Theron & Aspasio’ 1757