What do you think?
Rate this book
Armchair Theologians
Wesley for Armchair Theologians
Wesley for Armchair Theologians engagingly presents the life and theology of John Wesley, the founder of Methodism. Written by prominent Wesley scholar William Abraham, who aimed to "make Wesley come alive for those who would truly love to become armchair theologians," the book is an excellent, entertaining, and expert guide to the work of this important Christian figure.
Written by experts but designed for the novice, the Armchair series provides accurate, concise, and witty overviews of some of the most profound moments and theologians in Christian history. These books are essential supplements for first-time encounters with primary texts, lucid refreshers for scholars and clergy, and enjoyable reads for the theologically curious.
Written by experts but designed for the novice, the Armchair series provides accurate, concise, and witty overviews of some of the most profound moments and theologians in Christian history. These books are essential supplements for first-time encounters with primary texts, lucid refreshers for scholars and clergy, and enjoyable reads for the theologically curious.
155 pages, Kindle Edition
First published September 30, 2005
16 people are currently reading
79 people want to read
About the author
William J. Abraham
54 books15 followersWilliam J. Abraham is the Albert Cook Outler Professor of Wesley Studies and Altshuler Distinguished Teaching Professor at Perkins School of Theology, working as a philosophical and systematic theologian.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews
March 16, 2012
The author, a distinguished Professor of Wesley Studies at Perkins School of Theology (SMU) says in the preface, “Wesley clearly has a distinctive theology.” It is Abraham’s thesis that this theology is an “intellectual oasis lodged within the traditional faith of the church enshrined in the creeds.” I must admit that I was hooked right there because I enjoy rational inquiry into things not necessarily rational, remembering Wesley’s famous dictum, "In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; and in all things, charity," as guide.
His life: John Wesley (1703-1791) was heavily influenced by his mother Susanna, and steeped in the Anglican Church. “While he led a renewal movement…he never wavered in his own sense of loyalty.” At Oxford, he joined his brother Charles in a small-group ministry that became the “nucleus of his Methodist Societies.” Until he sailed for the New World in 1735 at age 32, he had spent most of his life in “Anglican educational institutions” thus inheriting “a rich theological tradition.” The author notes that, “He learned well how to articulate and defend his ideas even when they were daft and irregular” having developed “an abundance of skills and self-assurance.” In other words, he was a good rhetorician and might have made a good 21st century politician.
His commitment, diligence and spiritual discipline as a missionary in the New World was remarkable—a man obsessed perhaps, “on a quest for real Christianity.” But he was never truly settled spiritually at this stage and failed as a missionary—a matter of being too rigorous with a mixed bag of immigrants and a failure in his love life. (He had to sneak out of the country for “misconduct” having to do with retributive actions on miss Sophia Hopkey, who much to his chagrin married a rival.) And he failed “in his own search for a truly inward relation to God.” He had been in Georgia for all of twenty-two months.
Back in England, German Moravian Peter Bohler “introduced Wesley to a vision of the Christian life that put enormous emphasis on personal, inward certainty about forgiveness and victory over sin here and now…that is was possible to experience the love and power of God as something tangible….” This was not easy for Wesley but on May 24, 1738 he had his Aldersgate experience—he had met God for himself and he came to a clear understanding of justification by grace. “The Aldersgate encounter with God was more than some sugary, pious experience; it was a profound spiritual and intellectual reorientation.” He had found assurance in God’s love, acceptance, and wanted to share what he had discovered but recognized the need for “effective forms of new ministry.” (Perhaps his failure as a missionary in Georgia had an influence on his attempts to find effective means for religious awakening, i.e. evangelism.)
When the opportunity arrived, beginning in 1739, Wesley launched into a new phase of his life as preacher, spiritual leader, organizer, administrator, and clear-thinking theologian. He traveled England, Ireland, and Scotland for five decades preaching the gospel and developing institutional resources. The term “Methodist” suggests a “readiness to be methodical in all things spiritual.” One method was “the gathering of seekers into societies, bands… and recovery units that were truly effective in providing informal spiritual direction among friends.” Although he had the leadership style of “a benign dictator” and had an “arrogant cheek,” he learned over time to listen to good advice from others, although he went to war publicly with George Whitefield over their differences about predestination.
The author says that the 1740’s and 50s, was “a period of organization, of mob persecution, of theological conflict, of intellectual self-defense, and of fundamental theological consolidation” and he saw “the world as his parish.” He created new services of worship with singing, trained lay preachers, and gathered a “crucial group of coworkers.” By the 1750’s, he had “established an evangelical order within the Church of England.” He published a Christian library—fifty volumes between 1749 and 1755—that was rarely used by others. He married a 41 year-old widow, Molly Vazeille, but the marriage was a disaster since Wesley’s first priority required travel and taking care of business, that is, managing all things churchy. Much of the business involved factions—those wanting to separate from the Anglican Church, which he rejected; and those who were so self-assured in their perfection, having a corner on truth, that they got into the prediction business. Wesley “sent them packing.” He also had differences with Calvinist colleagues and his use of a woman “exhorter” (a preacher by another name) did not advance his attempts at unity for renewal and reform. The split with Calvinism over the issue of predestination became final and unalterable in the 1770’s.
“Methodism grew like a weed, not the least in the New World,” but the War of Independence sent “shock waves throughout the whole church scene.” (Wesley was not sympathetic “for the rebel cause.”) In 1784, he set up organizational structures and ordained bishops (Coke and Asbury) for North America separate from England— “he had crossed the line and invented a new Christian denomination.” He was an “incurable workaholic,” his marriage failed in the 1760’s, and his brother Charles died in 1788. John Wesley died on March 2, 1791. “From the age of thirty-six he had traveled 225,000 miles and preached more than 40,000 sermons, some to more than 20,000 people.
Development of a Theology: He was a small fry—a folk theologian— compared to those who provided a “systematic ordering of Christian teaching.” The author wants to give him his due, however, and discusses the Enlightenment, the road to modernity, and standard perceptions of Wesley in relation to those events. He then offers a different perspective:
“Wesley lived in a world where there was a confessional state…to be a political somebody or to get anywhere in…English society…one had to believe in the Trinity and…be part of the Anglican establishment.”
There was a sign-on fee for making it in the church… “Accepting the official practices and beliefs of the Church of England.”
“Wesley was the product of a university system that was shamelessly confessional in orientation.”
“Wesley’s day was profoundly Christian in its intellectual orientation,” not overtaken by Enlightenment thinking.
Five watersheds in Wesley’s intellectual journey:
He developed a passion for holiness, influenced by reading Jeremy Taylor and William Law… “Holiness of heart and life is the heartbeat of Christianity…inescapably inward and spiritual…the gospel changes people from the inside out and turns the world right side up.” His entire life was “a restless quest for authentic spirituality.”
Aldersgate in 1738—the rediscovery of the doctrine of justification by grace accompanied by the experiential encounter with God.
Wesley’s publication of “official doctrines” in 1764 were “the essentials of true religion as he saw them.”
The publication of Conference Minutes in 1770 whereby he addresses predestination and the idea that personal “moral transformation made an emphasis on works inevitable.”
The launching of a new church in North America in 1784. His primary commitment was “to the spiritual welfare of his people.”
Wesley’s strengths and insights were in the “theological materials he puts in place for his work as an evangelist and spiritual director” with nothing particularly “new’ to say on several Christian traditional concepts. He was more a medieval theologian than a modern one, a traditionalist. To Wesley, the “Reformation was not a fresh start but a course correction.” He was “committed to the ancient doctrines…and unashamedly supernaturalistic.” And “he challenged the nominalism and complacency that are the sins of all establishments not with liberal revisionism but by a radical retrieval of lost ideas and practices.” He is important for our day because he stressed a “combination of ancient commitment and present passion.” He showed us that “doing theology is both exhilarating and risky.” It is a “quest for a clarity that is never complete.”
Examining Sin and Grace: The author covers the nature of God and man noting “we were created for love” but that “we suffer from the effects of original and ongoing sin in our lives…egocentric to the core…In reality we are blind to the truth about God, the world and ourselves.” A “grim picture of the world is pivotal in Wesley’s theology as a whole….Wesley is convinced that it is only by recognizing the depth of human sin that we can fully grasp how deep God’s love and grace are.”
“Prevenient grace is the initial help God gives to everyone to see how grim things are and to form the first intention to get help.” But there is a theological problem when examining “freedom and grace.” The author explains it well, considers the options, and shows how Wesley juggles four distinct and conflicting convictions; but Abraham also finds Wesley’s solution to the problem as “less than compelling” and rethinks it. The author then comes back to Wesley’s theme but ducks drawing a conclusion.
Justification and Regeneration: Abraham faults Wesley for his occasional inconsistency, partly tied to his work as a preacher—“ sermonic hyperbole gets in the way of systematic clarity.” On the subject at hand though, Wesley is committed “to a vision that embraces both forgiveness and radical personal transformation….In justifying us God pardons and forgives us our sins….In regeneration, or rebirth, we get to make a fresh start in life,” i.e. sanctification. “God gives us power to live a life of love toward God and neighbor.” Wesley was certain we needed both elements—pardon/forgiveness/justification and rebirth/regeneration/sanctification.
“Wesley insisted that we need to use all the means of grace at our disposal rather than just sitting around waiting for God to zap us.” Wesley stressed the importance of good preaching as one of the means and he had no patience for weakness in this area. It is faith in God, “not some wishy-washy, sentimental thoughts about forgiveness and mercy that bring relief… Our conversion is inescapably personal.” But unlike Catholics, with a mediator, “the individual is left at the mercy of subjective feeling and discernment.” (That is, there is a problem of assurance and uncertainty.)
Wesley “is totally opposed to any vision of justification that will open a door to the denial or neglect of the moral law.” Here is where he combines the necessity of faith and works, love of neighbor, love of God. “Faith that fails to express itself in inward disposition and outward behavior is mere assent, mere dead orthodoxy….” In other words, “faith and works are inseparable.” To believe that grace is dominant is mistaken. Wesley does not see grace as some “syrupy, schmaltzy license to give up on the quest for virtue.” Transformation and action are required. “True freedom is not freedom from law [moral law]; it is freedom to be and become all that moral law requires of us in the good purposes of God.” It is, for Wesley, a “quest for integrity.” (A digression about integrity, not in the book: The Golden Rule—“Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”—does not mean that because I want others to honor my demands, I should honor theirs. The “want,” in Christian terms, infers wanting others to minister to our saintly needs, not to our foolish, retributive, or corrupt desires; and our obligation is to treat others in the same way—as children of God—a matter of uprightness, being aligned with God’s plan.) We have misunderstood the meaning of freedom (with its tendencies toward nihilism) and see discipline to the moral law as a hindrance to liberation. But for Wesley, “integrity can be born again.”
With God all things are Possible (as opposed to “with American ingenuity, all things are possible,” or “by Presidential or legislative decree, all things are possible,” or “any country that can put a man on the moon can…you name it.” I’m editorializing here about man’s hubris, looking to other gods): “Wesley believed that it was possible to achieve spiritual perfection and genuine certainty about God in this life,” a matter that doesn’t wash with modernity. But Wesley was in search of the idea of “purity of intention,” recognizing a lack of knowledge, confusion and other constraints that do not allow for “absolute perfection.” The author delves into the details, the issue of “assurance,” our spiritual presumptions, our capability (or lack thereof) to discern. Wesley had to work out this witness of the Holy Spirit in his own life (as I presume most of us do.)
Abraham calls Wesley “something of a theological oddball” because he picks up pieces of many Christian denominations but also says he had an admirable and “unique vision of the Christian life.” (A syncretist but within the tradition?) Abraham then offers some interesting thoughts on the “complexity and simplicity of the Christian life.” (See pages 103-106)
The Church: Wesley had complaints about the stagnant church; he saw it as a “means to an end [rather] than as intrinsically significant…what mattered first was that people find God….He never really reconciled this with his high-church background and sensibilities.” (The Bible has other ideas; and I wonder of Abraham is correct here.) Abraham does comment on Wesley’s sound views on the universal church. (One of Wesley’s best sermons: “Catholic Spirit.”)
Wesley articulates his views on the “means of grace” but also includes works of mercy as good for the soul—a focus away from self and our religious activities. The means of grace do not provide “any ground for merit. We approach them in a spirit of trust….What God has promised is grace upon grace.” Wesley insisted, “God was not limited in his use of means. God is above all means.”
Making Moral Sense: The quest for holiness was at the heart of his theology but Abraham suggests that Wesley was more interested in the “production of morality” than any questions of the “meaning of morality.” It is a focus on transformation with Jesus as the “moral center of gravity.”
A dilemma worth examination: Wesley said, “Is a thing… right because God wills it? Or does he will it because it is right? I fear this celebrated question is more curious than useful….Tis hardly decent for man to call the supreme God to give an account to him.” Abraham’s interpretation of his answer (condensed): “The will of God is God himself.” And “we cannot know the difference between right and wrong independent of God.” It is “a robust theory of conscience as the foundation of moral judgment.” “Love is the prior virtue to justice, mercy and truth.” Wesley’s vision of ethics was “Love is the end, the sole end, of every dispensation of God….”
Politically, Wesley was a “High Tory” committed to traditional arrangements in England. But…at no time did “Wesley allow his ideas about politics to be cut loose from his fundamental convictions about sin, repentance, justification, sanctification, and the like. The root of all evil goes back to alienation from God, hence any solution to problems of human behavior and society will have to take into account conversion and growth in grace.”
Different People Sin Differently: Much of his theology “is devoted to addressing this dilemma.” Abraham examines some of the false trails: (1) spiritual fanaticism, (2) bigotry, (3) sectarianism, (4) spiritual depression, and (5) money, all worthy of scrutiny.
Providence and Predestination: (Closing with the easy stuff?) The author asks, “Is God’s action confined to the soul? Is God not at work in creation and history?” Wesley was cautious “of the place of human reason in theology” leaning toward divine revelation as the basis—we should stick to what has been revealed, stay close to the text of Scripture. He was also cautious about what we can truly understand about God. (God is other than we are.) For Wesley, “God was intimately at work in every event that occurred in space and time.” (Omnipresence.) But “the manner of God’s presence is incomprehensible.” And he does not deprive humans of freedom, the ability to make choices.
Wesley was not the great foe of predestination (determinism) as typically characterized, according to Abraham. He had a view of “double predestination!” Abraham says, “This God is no wimp…making up the rules as he goes along.” He knows from the outset what is going to happen; He is running the universe, not humanity. And God is totally committed to healing a fallen world. Two elements: “God has decreed that one group will be saved and another will not.” Because of free will—to accept or reject the “mercy of God in Christ”—the predestination involved is “conditional.”
Concluding Remarks: Abraham says, “All human beings are designed to be intoxicated with the love of God and neighbor, so we should stop fooling around and get with the program.” It sounds like something Wesley would say.
His life: John Wesley (1703-1791) was heavily influenced by his mother Susanna, and steeped in the Anglican Church. “While he led a renewal movement…he never wavered in his own sense of loyalty.” At Oxford, he joined his brother Charles in a small-group ministry that became the “nucleus of his Methodist Societies.” Until he sailed for the New World in 1735 at age 32, he had spent most of his life in “Anglican educational institutions” thus inheriting “a rich theological tradition.” The author notes that, “He learned well how to articulate and defend his ideas even when they were daft and irregular” having developed “an abundance of skills and self-assurance.” In other words, he was a good rhetorician and might have made a good 21st century politician.
His commitment, diligence and spiritual discipline as a missionary in the New World was remarkable—a man obsessed perhaps, “on a quest for real Christianity.” But he was never truly settled spiritually at this stage and failed as a missionary—a matter of being too rigorous with a mixed bag of immigrants and a failure in his love life. (He had to sneak out of the country for “misconduct” having to do with retributive actions on miss Sophia Hopkey, who much to his chagrin married a rival.) And he failed “in his own search for a truly inward relation to God.” He had been in Georgia for all of twenty-two months.
Back in England, German Moravian Peter Bohler “introduced Wesley to a vision of the Christian life that put enormous emphasis on personal, inward certainty about forgiveness and victory over sin here and now…that is was possible to experience the love and power of God as something tangible….” This was not easy for Wesley but on May 24, 1738 he had his Aldersgate experience—he had met God for himself and he came to a clear understanding of justification by grace. “The Aldersgate encounter with God was more than some sugary, pious experience; it was a profound spiritual and intellectual reorientation.” He had found assurance in God’s love, acceptance, and wanted to share what he had discovered but recognized the need for “effective forms of new ministry.” (Perhaps his failure as a missionary in Georgia had an influence on his attempts to find effective means for religious awakening, i.e. evangelism.)
When the opportunity arrived, beginning in 1739, Wesley launched into a new phase of his life as preacher, spiritual leader, organizer, administrator, and clear-thinking theologian. He traveled England, Ireland, and Scotland for five decades preaching the gospel and developing institutional resources. The term “Methodist” suggests a “readiness to be methodical in all things spiritual.” One method was “the gathering of seekers into societies, bands… and recovery units that were truly effective in providing informal spiritual direction among friends.” Although he had the leadership style of “a benign dictator” and had an “arrogant cheek,” he learned over time to listen to good advice from others, although he went to war publicly with George Whitefield over their differences about predestination.
The author says that the 1740’s and 50s, was “a period of organization, of mob persecution, of theological conflict, of intellectual self-defense, and of fundamental theological consolidation” and he saw “the world as his parish.” He created new services of worship with singing, trained lay preachers, and gathered a “crucial group of coworkers.” By the 1750’s, he had “established an evangelical order within the Church of England.” He published a Christian library—fifty volumes between 1749 and 1755—that was rarely used by others. He married a 41 year-old widow, Molly Vazeille, but the marriage was a disaster since Wesley’s first priority required travel and taking care of business, that is, managing all things churchy. Much of the business involved factions—those wanting to separate from the Anglican Church, which he rejected; and those who were so self-assured in their perfection, having a corner on truth, that they got into the prediction business. Wesley “sent them packing.” He also had differences with Calvinist colleagues and his use of a woman “exhorter” (a preacher by another name) did not advance his attempts at unity for renewal and reform. The split with Calvinism over the issue of predestination became final and unalterable in the 1770’s.
“Methodism grew like a weed, not the least in the New World,” but the War of Independence sent “shock waves throughout the whole church scene.” (Wesley was not sympathetic “for the rebel cause.”) In 1784, he set up organizational structures and ordained bishops (Coke and Asbury) for North America separate from England— “he had crossed the line and invented a new Christian denomination.” He was an “incurable workaholic,” his marriage failed in the 1760’s, and his brother Charles died in 1788. John Wesley died on March 2, 1791. “From the age of thirty-six he had traveled 225,000 miles and preached more than 40,000 sermons, some to more than 20,000 people.
Development of a Theology: He was a small fry—a folk theologian— compared to those who provided a “systematic ordering of Christian teaching.” The author wants to give him his due, however, and discusses the Enlightenment, the road to modernity, and standard perceptions of Wesley in relation to those events. He then offers a different perspective:
“Wesley lived in a world where there was a confessional state…to be a political somebody or to get anywhere in…English society…one had to believe in the Trinity and…be part of the Anglican establishment.”
There was a sign-on fee for making it in the church… “Accepting the official practices and beliefs of the Church of England.”
“Wesley was the product of a university system that was shamelessly confessional in orientation.”
“Wesley’s day was profoundly Christian in its intellectual orientation,” not overtaken by Enlightenment thinking.
Five watersheds in Wesley’s intellectual journey:
He developed a passion for holiness, influenced by reading Jeremy Taylor and William Law… “Holiness of heart and life is the heartbeat of Christianity…inescapably inward and spiritual…the gospel changes people from the inside out and turns the world right side up.” His entire life was “a restless quest for authentic spirituality.”
Aldersgate in 1738—the rediscovery of the doctrine of justification by grace accompanied by the experiential encounter with God.
Wesley’s publication of “official doctrines” in 1764 were “the essentials of true religion as he saw them.”
The publication of Conference Minutes in 1770 whereby he addresses predestination and the idea that personal “moral transformation made an emphasis on works inevitable.”
The launching of a new church in North America in 1784. His primary commitment was “to the spiritual welfare of his people.”
Wesley’s strengths and insights were in the “theological materials he puts in place for his work as an evangelist and spiritual director” with nothing particularly “new’ to say on several Christian traditional concepts. He was more a medieval theologian than a modern one, a traditionalist. To Wesley, the “Reformation was not a fresh start but a course correction.” He was “committed to the ancient doctrines…and unashamedly supernaturalistic.” And “he challenged the nominalism and complacency that are the sins of all establishments not with liberal revisionism but by a radical retrieval of lost ideas and practices.” He is important for our day because he stressed a “combination of ancient commitment and present passion.” He showed us that “doing theology is both exhilarating and risky.” It is a “quest for a clarity that is never complete.”
Examining Sin and Grace: The author covers the nature of God and man noting “we were created for love” but that “we suffer from the effects of original and ongoing sin in our lives…egocentric to the core…In reality we are blind to the truth about God, the world and ourselves.” A “grim picture of the world is pivotal in Wesley’s theology as a whole….Wesley is convinced that it is only by recognizing the depth of human sin that we can fully grasp how deep God’s love and grace are.”
“Prevenient grace is the initial help God gives to everyone to see how grim things are and to form the first intention to get help.” But there is a theological problem when examining “freedom and grace.” The author explains it well, considers the options, and shows how Wesley juggles four distinct and conflicting convictions; but Abraham also finds Wesley’s solution to the problem as “less than compelling” and rethinks it. The author then comes back to Wesley’s theme but ducks drawing a conclusion.
Justification and Regeneration: Abraham faults Wesley for his occasional inconsistency, partly tied to his work as a preacher—“ sermonic hyperbole gets in the way of systematic clarity.” On the subject at hand though, Wesley is committed “to a vision that embraces both forgiveness and radical personal transformation….In justifying us God pardons and forgives us our sins….In regeneration, or rebirth, we get to make a fresh start in life,” i.e. sanctification. “God gives us power to live a life of love toward God and neighbor.” Wesley was certain we needed both elements—pardon/forgiveness/justification and rebirth/regeneration/sanctification.
“Wesley insisted that we need to use all the means of grace at our disposal rather than just sitting around waiting for God to zap us.” Wesley stressed the importance of good preaching as one of the means and he had no patience for weakness in this area. It is faith in God, “not some wishy-washy, sentimental thoughts about forgiveness and mercy that bring relief… Our conversion is inescapably personal.” But unlike Catholics, with a mediator, “the individual is left at the mercy of subjective feeling and discernment.” (That is, there is a problem of assurance and uncertainty.)
Wesley “is totally opposed to any vision of justification that will open a door to the denial or neglect of the moral law.” Here is where he combines the necessity of faith and works, love of neighbor, love of God. “Faith that fails to express itself in inward disposition and outward behavior is mere assent, mere dead orthodoxy….” In other words, “faith and works are inseparable.” To believe that grace is dominant is mistaken. Wesley does not see grace as some “syrupy, schmaltzy license to give up on the quest for virtue.” Transformation and action are required. “True freedom is not freedom from law [moral law]; it is freedom to be and become all that moral law requires of us in the good purposes of God.” It is, for Wesley, a “quest for integrity.” (A digression about integrity, not in the book: The Golden Rule—“Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”—does not mean that because I want others to honor my demands, I should honor theirs. The “want,” in Christian terms, infers wanting others to minister to our saintly needs, not to our foolish, retributive, or corrupt desires; and our obligation is to treat others in the same way—as children of God—a matter of uprightness, being aligned with God’s plan.) We have misunderstood the meaning of freedom (with its tendencies toward nihilism) and see discipline to the moral law as a hindrance to liberation. But for Wesley, “integrity can be born again.”
With God all things are Possible (as opposed to “with American ingenuity, all things are possible,” or “by Presidential or legislative decree, all things are possible,” or “any country that can put a man on the moon can…you name it.” I’m editorializing here about man’s hubris, looking to other gods): “Wesley believed that it was possible to achieve spiritual perfection and genuine certainty about God in this life,” a matter that doesn’t wash with modernity. But Wesley was in search of the idea of “purity of intention,” recognizing a lack of knowledge, confusion and other constraints that do not allow for “absolute perfection.” The author delves into the details, the issue of “assurance,” our spiritual presumptions, our capability (or lack thereof) to discern. Wesley had to work out this witness of the Holy Spirit in his own life (as I presume most of us do.)
Abraham calls Wesley “something of a theological oddball” because he picks up pieces of many Christian denominations but also says he had an admirable and “unique vision of the Christian life.” (A syncretist but within the tradition?) Abraham then offers some interesting thoughts on the “complexity and simplicity of the Christian life.” (See pages 103-106)
The Church: Wesley had complaints about the stagnant church; he saw it as a “means to an end [rather] than as intrinsically significant…what mattered first was that people find God….He never really reconciled this with his high-church background and sensibilities.” (The Bible has other ideas; and I wonder of Abraham is correct here.) Abraham does comment on Wesley’s sound views on the universal church. (One of Wesley’s best sermons: “Catholic Spirit.”)
Wesley articulates his views on the “means of grace” but also includes works of mercy as good for the soul—a focus away from self and our religious activities. The means of grace do not provide “any ground for merit. We approach them in a spirit of trust….What God has promised is grace upon grace.” Wesley insisted, “God was not limited in his use of means. God is above all means.”
Making Moral Sense: The quest for holiness was at the heart of his theology but Abraham suggests that Wesley was more interested in the “production of morality” than any questions of the “meaning of morality.” It is a focus on transformation with Jesus as the “moral center of gravity.”
A dilemma worth examination: Wesley said, “Is a thing… right because God wills it? Or does he will it because it is right? I fear this celebrated question is more curious than useful….Tis hardly decent for man to call the supreme God to give an account to him.” Abraham’s interpretation of his answer (condensed): “The will of God is God himself.” And “we cannot know the difference between right and wrong independent of God.” It is “a robust theory of conscience as the foundation of moral judgment.” “Love is the prior virtue to justice, mercy and truth.” Wesley’s vision of ethics was “Love is the end, the sole end, of every dispensation of God….”
Politically, Wesley was a “High Tory” committed to traditional arrangements in England. But…at no time did “Wesley allow his ideas about politics to be cut loose from his fundamental convictions about sin, repentance, justification, sanctification, and the like. The root of all evil goes back to alienation from God, hence any solution to problems of human behavior and society will have to take into account conversion and growth in grace.”
Different People Sin Differently: Much of his theology “is devoted to addressing this dilemma.” Abraham examines some of the false trails: (1) spiritual fanaticism, (2) bigotry, (3) sectarianism, (4) spiritual depression, and (5) money, all worthy of scrutiny.
Providence and Predestination: (Closing with the easy stuff?) The author asks, “Is God’s action confined to the soul? Is God not at work in creation and history?” Wesley was cautious “of the place of human reason in theology” leaning toward divine revelation as the basis—we should stick to what has been revealed, stay close to the text of Scripture. He was also cautious about what we can truly understand about God. (God is other than we are.) For Wesley, “God was intimately at work in every event that occurred in space and time.” (Omnipresence.) But “the manner of God’s presence is incomprehensible.” And he does not deprive humans of freedom, the ability to make choices.
Wesley was not the great foe of predestination (determinism) as typically characterized, according to Abraham. He had a view of “double predestination!” Abraham says, “This God is no wimp…making up the rules as he goes along.” He knows from the outset what is going to happen; He is running the universe, not humanity. And God is totally committed to healing a fallen world. Two elements: “God has decreed that one group will be saved and another will not.” Because of free will—to accept or reject the “mercy of God in Christ”—the predestination involved is “conditional.”
Concluding Remarks: Abraham says, “All human beings are designed to be intoxicated with the love of God and neighbor, so we should stop fooling around and get with the program.” It sounds like something Wesley would say.
August 31, 2021
Disclaimer: This review is low (two stars = "It was okay") for very subjective reasons--a perspectival mis. It was a very well written book, thoughtful, etc. I just fall I little too far away from the author's implied audience.
Rating this book as "ok" is as much a remark on me as a reader as it is on the book. The book is fine. Well written, engaging, insightful. However, the author is as far away from Welsey on one side as I am on the other. He is a mainline Methodist, and thus an actual heir of the theological and denominational tradition stemming from Wesley, however far downstream. I am not. I am a Baptist of Fundamentalist upbringing. I am, however, an "conservative" evangelical and classical Arminian, and thus I share a great many of the theological convictions and perspectives which Wesley held, but the present author does not. The author (writing from within his own perspectives) gives frank and frequent judgments of Wesley's ideas, but to me the criticisms were more instructive of the author's beliefs than of Wesleys. It is of course entirely proper for the author to have written the book as he has, but I am too far off center from his intended audience--an audience likely more mainline in orientation and sympathetic to his judgments. I never felt attacked by his judgments, nor that any attempt was being made to persuade me of them--just that I was being missed altogether.
I would probably look elsewhere for an introduction either to Wesley's life or his thought. For the latter, Thomas Oden might be a good starting point. I'm not sure where I would begin the former. For the conservative evangelical reader interested in Wesley, I would likely recommend this work four or five books in just to get an "outside" perspective.
Rating this book as "ok" is as much a remark on me as a reader as it is on the book. The book is fine. Well written, engaging, insightful. However, the author is as far away from Welsey on one side as I am on the other. He is a mainline Methodist, and thus an actual heir of the theological and denominational tradition stemming from Wesley, however far downstream. I am not. I am a Baptist of Fundamentalist upbringing. I am, however, an "conservative" evangelical and classical Arminian, and thus I share a great many of the theological convictions and perspectives which Wesley held, but the present author does not. The author (writing from within his own perspectives) gives frank and frequent judgments of Wesley's ideas, but to me the criticisms were more instructive of the author's beliefs than of Wesleys. It is of course entirely proper for the author to have written the book as he has, but I am too far off center from his intended audience--an audience likely more mainline in orientation and sympathetic to his judgments. I never felt attacked by his judgments, nor that any attempt was being made to persuade me of them--just that I was being missed altogether.
I would probably look elsewhere for an introduction either to Wesley's life or his thought. For the latter, Thomas Oden might be a good starting point. I'm not sure where I would begin the former. For the conservative evangelical reader interested in Wesley, I would likely recommend this work four or five books in just to get an "outside" perspective.
Read
April 3, 2013Suffice as an introduction to Wesley and his theology. The first chapter went over his biography before exploring various aspect of his theology. The author himself comes from a Wesleyan background. Which should come to no surprises that he lets Wesley off the hook easily for his rejection of Calvinism. I did not know how high church Wesley was until this book. Two critical comments about the book: the author excuses Wesley for not being as clear and systematic in his theology at times because Wesley was first and foremost pastoral in his concern and he was a preacher. While I don't want to take away from the importance of pastoring, nevertheless when one consider Wesley's "greatness" with that of other great leaders of spiritual and theological impact such as the other biographies in this series, many were pastors and preachers as well and were great in organizing and thinking through their theology (Augustine, Luther and Calvin, etc). I also thought it was strange the author describe Wesley's exposition on "You must be born again" and justification by faith is as "Vulgar, popular Protestantism." Vulgar?
June 19, 2018
A fine overview and introduction to John Wesley's life and thought. Written in an easy to understand way by someone who clearly respects (and in large part agrees with) Wesley but also isn't afraid to boldly disagree with Wesley as well. The cartoons peppered throughout the book were also entertaining and helpful! I hope to read more books in this armchair theologians series!
May 22, 2018
Abraham gives a comprehensive, plain-language overview of John Wesley's life and theology -- doctrinal and practical. What emerges is a picture of an effective, tenacious leader and a compassionate pastor who successfully started a reform movement in the Anglican Church. He lifted up the poor by almsgiving and by preaching the Gospel with an emphasis on personal holiness, freeing many from drunkenness and other vices that kept them from self-sufficiency. He preached 40,000 sermons, in fact! And he developed a unique theology that answered some problems and created others. Abraham does a good job highlighting the tensions in Wesley's thought but gives a weak presentation of Calvinist alternatives to it. (In particular, Abraham misses the meaning of unconditional election, especially how it magnifies God's grace in choosing to save some sinners. A discussion of the order of God's decrees would help here.) But this is not a book about Calvinism.
By the end of the book, I wanted to read Wesley's sermons. I also wondered: would Wesley recognize the Methodist Church today, especially the theologically liberal side of it? Wesley was very evangelical. Maybe Thomas Oden can tell me.
By the end of the book, I wanted to read Wesley's sermons. I also wondered: would Wesley recognize the Methodist Church today, especially the theologically liberal side of it? Wesley was very evangelical. Maybe Thomas Oden can tell me.
March 3, 2024
A good introduction to the Theology of John Wesley from an Irish theologian.
Abraham is not uncritical in his admiration for this great Christian figure and does a good job navigating murky waters around God's sovereignty, predestination, perfection in the Christian life, and more.
The Catholic nature of Wesley came across, alongside the evangelical side. I think that's important and welcome.
It has made me want to read more from and about Wesley so has served it's purpose well as an accessible introductory text.
Abraham is not uncritical in his admiration for this great Christian figure and does a good job navigating murky waters around God's sovereignty, predestination, perfection in the Christian life, and more.
The Catholic nature of Wesley came across, alongside the evangelical side. I think that's important and welcome.
It has made me want to read more from and about Wesley so has served it's purpose well as an accessible introductory text.
April 19, 2024
I found this an accessible and engaging treatment of Wesley's theology, drawing predominately from his canonical sermons. Abraham does a good job of explaining how Wesley was always concerned about the practical application of theology to lives of believers and how certain topics were examined more closely each time his experience demanded better answers and explanations.
September 27, 2025
While I think the book was great for explaining the basic theology of John Wesley and the foundations of the United Methodist church, I did not appreciate the author including his opinions and thought. I did not pick up the book to read about Ron Hill’s theology and how his theology differs from Wesley’s, I picked up the book to get a better understanding of Wesley’s theology.
March 30, 2019
An easy to read introduction to Wesley's like and theology
May 17, 2020
This is a cool idea. I would like to read the one on Aquinas and Augustine as well.
August 19, 2024
I have my quibbles with this book but I have received such a blessing in reading it that I find it hard to give it any less then 5 stars.
March 15, 2011
Belonging to a Methodist Church, I thought I should find out about the guy who founded Methodism. This book is a little bit biography and a lot of analysis of Wesley's thinking.
If you're interested in that, it's a good book - brief, informative, and interesting. Abraham is not the kind of writer that I'd read just for the sake of his writing, but he's competent.
So, what gets addressed? Wesley wrestled a lot with many seemingly conflicting tenets of various Christian sects - if God controls everything, how can there be free will? If God is all-knowing, how in predestination not an inescapable conclusion? If grace alone saves someone, why do good? If good works alone are sufficient, what does one do with all the New Testament passages that say nobody can be saved except through Jesus Christ?
Frankly, those things don't worry me much, but it was interesting to read how Wesley could see his way clear through all of them. And now I know I'm not accidentally supporting some cult that was founded by a guy who wanted to eat babies or anything.
If you're interested in that, it's a good book - brief, informative, and interesting. Abraham is not the kind of writer that I'd read just for the sake of his writing, but he's competent.
So, what gets addressed? Wesley wrestled a lot with many seemingly conflicting tenets of various Christian sects - if God controls everything, how can there be free will? If God is all-knowing, how in predestination not an inescapable conclusion? If grace alone saves someone, why do good? If good works alone are sufficient, what does one do with all the New Testament passages that say nobody can be saved except through Jesus Christ?
Frankly, those things don't worry me much, but it was interesting to read how Wesley could see his way clear through all of them. And now I know I'm not accidentally supporting some cult that was founded by a guy who wanted to eat babies or anything.
July 27, 2012
The average person unfamiliar with Wesley will find this audio book overwhelming. But for the person who has at least some familiarity with Wesley, Abraham helps unpack Wesley in a new light. Being one of the later, I found some of Abraham's critiques of Wesley particularly helpful. I have been reading and studying (and in many ways following) Wesley for about fifteen years now. There are some growing edges where I'm finding Wesley unhelpful. Abraham helped flesh those out for me. I'd like to describe those a bit more, but given that this was an audio book, I'm left with only an impression, and I can't go back and look up specific passages to remind myself what I liked about Abraham's ideas (I also listened to this about three months ago and my memories are fading. Note to self: write these reviews closer to the time of listening!)
July 24, 2017
Wesley was never a systematic theologian, but Abraham has provided some winsome order to the thought of this workaholic saint. To those eager to dismiss Wesley as a theological lightweight Abraham provides excellent context for understanding his views, appropriate criticism, and a focus on Wesley's passion for encouraging people to enter into and abide in the Christian life. Abraham has his own interests in mind certainly, but Wesley's are similar - evangelism, holiness, and the mission of the church. The book whets the appetite with quotations and while it could have used Wesley more obviously as a direct challenge to the modern church, it is challenging enough.
July 2, 2012
This was an excellent introduction to Wesley. I have never read much about his work or theology. So, this was a very interesting and informative place to begin. The author did a great job of placing him in his historical context and giving explanations for how his thoughts/work fit into time and place. He was also willing to share Wesley's flaws along with his strengths.
I love this series. It is the theological version of the For Dummies series. I look forward to reading more of them in the future.
I love this series. It is the theological version of the For Dummies series. I look forward to reading more of them in the future.
March 2, 2009
If you are a Methodist or interested in how churches spun off form The Church of England, this is an interesting read.
September 15, 2011
Good introduction to John Wesley and his theology that birthed the Methodist church.
May 10, 2012
Great bokk fro coming to understand Wesley and his passion for preaching.
January 4, 2013
I'm trying to read it, but it's just over my head.
February 12, 2015
Easy to read, covers the basics of John Wesley's theology.
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews