Geoffrey Wainwright on Wesley and Calvin

by Geoffrey Wainwright

Paperback. Gently scuffed wrappers. Else very good.

70 pages, Unknown Binding

Published January 1, 1987

Reviews

[Dan Gobble · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wainwright gives a concise overview of the main points between John Wesley's theology versus John Calvin's theology. This book represents the lectures Wainwright gave at the time of a merger of several different denominations in Australia, which included some Reformed and Wesleyan strands of theology. Wainwright sets out to show these folks who have entered into this union where there will be tension in their theological dialogue and praxis as well as where they already have common areas of theology and praxis on which to build a future life together, based on the theology of Calvin and Wesley. Calvin seems to start his theology at the sovereignty of God while Wesley begins at the love of God. Calvin can be exhaustively thorough in thinking through the nature and being of God, i.e., his massive systematic theological tome "The Institutes". Wesley, while not as widely recognized as a theologian, is very apt in theological debate but carried out his work in a more practical manner, i.e., his massive collection of sermons, personal papers, and letters. While Calvin's systematic approach presses for clarity and detail, Wesley's approach was more nuanced and emphasized the mystery of God (there is something unknowable and unsearchable about God else we've underestimated and reduced God to our comfortable forms and formulas). In their preaching, Calvin tended to be more methodical and exegetical in covering books of the Bible, one after the other, as he preached regularly to the same congregation year after year, for an extended period of time. Wesley, however, tended to be more topical and pastoral in his approach, sizing up each particular congregation on his circuit and addressing them as per their individual spiritual needs. One of the key differences between these two theologians is, of course, Calvin's emphasis on election and Wesley's emphasis on free will. Wainwright carries the discussion far beyond this popular area for theological wrangling, however. This is a good summary and luanching pad for those interested in digging deeper into the theological nuances which make up the debate between Calvinist and Wesleyan thinkers.