What do you think?
Rate this book
The Wesleyan Quadrilateral: An Introduction
The Wesleyan quadrilateral is a shorthand way that followers of John Wesley use to summarize his understanding of religious authority, The idea of the Wesleyan quadrilateral continues to be crucial to how Christians today understand and live out the gospel of Jesus Christ. Wesley's fourfold understanding of religious authority included Scripture, tradition, reason, and experience. He considered Scripture to be unique, inspired, trustworthy, and the primary religious authority for Christian beliefs, values, and practices. In addition, Wesley appealed to tradition, reason, and experience as genuine, albeit secondary, religious authorities that helped Christians contextualize their understanding and application of biblical Christianity. It was important for John Wesley to investigate the full context of religious data as he inductively and deductively studied Scripture as well as church tradition and relevant experience--including experience that is spiritual and physical, individual and collective. This book is an incisive, concise, and clear introduction to the Wesleyan quadrilateral.
118 pages, Paperback
First published March 15, 2005
1 person is currently reading
62 people want to read
About the author
Don Thorsen
35 books7 followersDon Thorsen (PhD, Drew University) is professor of theology, chair of the department of theology and ethics, and chair of advanced studies in the Haggard Graduate School of Theology at Azusa Pacific University in Azusa, California. His previous books include The Wesleyan Quadrilateral and An Exploration of Christian Theology.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
July 20, 2009
The substance of this book was interesting, but it had quite a few technical errors. I felt like the book repeated itself far too much and it was positively littered with grammatical and punctuation mistakes.
February 13, 2016
Good content. A bit repetitive.
January 1, 2020
In Don Thorsen's book, ‘The Wesleyan Quadrilateral: An Introduction’, we get a concise examination of John Wesley’s method of theologizing – or at least, an examination of the way scholars have understood Wesley’s method of theologizing.
It’s important to recognize that, even though we call it the ‘Wesleyan Quadrilateral’, Wesley's views were not wholly unique. Many before him drew from reason and tradition as they sought to understand Scripture. In fact, this was a very Anglican way (as well as one that accords with Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy) of reading and understanding the Bible. However, Wesley placed a greater emphasis on the role of experience in the way we come to theological conclusions. This isn’t to say that he saw theology as an ‘anything goes’ endeavor. Wesley drew clear boundaries around what he considered orthodox. However, he read Scripture in such a way that the text would always be borne out in the life of the believer. This can be seen in his views on sanctification, holiness, and the Holy Spirit.
This book begins with four chapters that set the stage for understanding what the Wesleyan Quadrilateral is. In the first chapter, he defines it. He describes Wesley as a person and theologian while recognizing that "Wesley did not articulate an explicit theological method. He was concerned more about the practical relevance and applicability of theology than for its theory" (pg 2). This is one thing about Wesley that comes out often in his writings. Unlike Calvin or Luther, Wesley didn’t write much in the way of strict theology. He never wrote a systematic theology or anything like it. If you want to understand Wesley’s thought, you’ll want to read his sermons. Wesley was a pastor and evangelist first, a theologian second. He saw theology as something to be experienced and lived as much (or perhaps more) as it was to be reflected and meditated on. Thorsen lays out some basic principles of a Wesleyan understanding and he recognizes that when Wesley spoke of "Sola Scriptura", he was thinking of Scripture first, not exclusively.
In chapters two and three, Thorsen dives into Wesley's theological method by giving a 30,000 foot view of Wesley’s view of theology and how he approached it. One of the things that is key for understanding Wesleyan theology is its emphasis on holy, divine love. For Wesley, love truly is the fulfillment of the law. This focus on love and its transforming power led him to focus on religion as a social experience. Christianity was not something that you could experience in a vacuum, but rather, was something to be experienced in community. As Thorsen looks at Wesley’s theological method, he recognizes that Wesley was part of the Protestant Reformation, but also acknowledges that he drew more from Anglicanism than from the continental Reformation. This is an important point to note because for many people the Reformation is synonymous with John Calvin and Martin Luther. But the English Reformation was less severe than that which took place in Germany and Geneva. The Anglicans sought a via media (middle way) between Protestantism and Catholicism. They desired to draw from the wisdom of both groups (as well as Orthodoxy). This was something Wesley strongly believed in and practiced.
In chapter four, Thorson looks at Wesley’s doctrine of original sin as a way to see how Wesley did theology. He recognizes that Wesley first observed Scripture and the experience of mankind. Then, he used the scriptural and experiential data - as well as his own reasoning - to argue that the best explanation for all evidence was the doctrine of original sin. Finally, he examined the practical application of these thoughts. Thorsen looks at Wesley's "The Doctrine of Original Sin" (one of the few theological treatises that Wesley ever wrote) to see Wesley’s method in action.
After laying the foundation, Thorsen goes on to examine the four pieces of the quadrilateral. First, he looks at the way Wesley viewed Scripture in chapters five and six. He acknowledges that Wesley had a very high view of Scripture, though his understanding of Sola Scriptura was less strict than some of the other reformers. In addition, Thorsen looks at the way Wesley interpreted Scripture. Wesley was not necessarily a strict literalist, though he did believe that the literal sense of the text should be emphasized first. With this said, he didn’t totally deny the possibility that certain verses could be read in multiple ways, much like the early church fathers did. I sometimes find that certain Christians want Wesley to be more ‘progressive’ than he was when it came to the Bible. I got this feeling a few times in Thorsen's book. I understand this desire. And I can even appreciate it up to a point. However, we must remember that Wesley was a man of his time. Had he lived today, he very well may have approached certain passages differently than he did back then. But we don't have a twenty-first century Wesley to work with. We must take him as he was and, in my opinion, he was more focused on the literal interpretation of Scripture than what some of his descendants would like.
In chapter seven, Thorsen looks at Wesley's understanding of tradition and how tradition helps us do theology well. I love this about Wesley. Since Wesley was a student of church history, he understood that Christendom was bigger than the Methodist movement or the Anglican church. He had an ecumenical spirit and was willing to have fellowship with people who weren’t exactly like him. In fact, Thorsen quotes him as saying, "now, this is utterly a new thing, unheard of in any other Christian community. In what church or congregation, beside, throughout the Christian world, can members be admitted upon these terms without condition?" The terms that he gave were simple: "fear God and work righteousness." I so appreciate Wesley's willingness to mine Christian tradition for truth. But one may wonder how we are to judge which Christian traditions are best? For Wesley, this was done with this simple principle: "the more the doctrine of any church agrees with the Scripture, the more readily ought it to be received. And, on the other hand, the more the doctrine of any church differs from Scripture, the greater cause we have to doubt it." Now, this might seem a bit circular. After all, we're seeking to understand what Scripture says. So, if we say that we understand Scripture by tradition, but then we interpret the tradition by how well it accords with Scripture, where does that leave us? I tend to appreciate St. Vincent of Lerin’s idea that we should hold to what Christians have believed in all places and at all times.
In chapter eight, Thorsen looks at the way Wesley viewed reason and its place in theological reflection. For Wesley, reason was an important tool for gleaning theological truth. He didn't believe that any truth would be contradictory to any other truth. After all, he was a child of the Enlightenment. He was preaching during a time when reason was being viewed with ever greater grandeur. However, he never fell into the drying empiricism of his peers. For Wesley experience was always an adequate balance to parched reason. Wesley recognized that reason had limits (limits that many people don't want to recognize). Here's how Wesley described reason’s limitations: "Let reason to all, that reason can; employ it as far as it will go. But, at the same time, acknowledge it is utterly incapable of giving either faith, or hope, or love." This would be wise advice for all of us to remember. Reason is valuable, but the best kind of reason understands that reason is not all there is.
In chapters nine and ten, Thorsen looks at Wesley's view of experience and how experience helps give greater theological understanding. In these chapters, he looks at both inward and outward experience, conversion, assurance of salvation, etc. As I mentioned earlier, Wesley believed that those who truly had experienced God would have an experience that aligned with what Scripture taught. This is why he was able to value experience in the way he did. With this said, Wesley had certain hesitations about experience. He warned people about putting too much stock into dreams and visions. In fact, he distanced himself later in life from many of the mystics that he had appreciated in his earlier years (like William Law). Again, I think Wesley saw Scripture as an overriding principle, and he recognized the dangers that would come with placing experience above Scripture or reason above Scripture or tradition above Scripture. This is why he often moves from position to position in his writings. It’s one of the reasons that he is, at times, hard to pin down. He was seeking a balance between these things, always with Scripture at the pinnacle and as a guiding force.
Thorsen closes his book by asking the question, "What then should we do?" In this chapter he reflects on how Wesley's theological methods might help us do theology in a more effective and faithful manner. In this chapter, there are number of valuable insights and pieces of advice that we would be wise to follow. For example, Christians today ought to seek wisdom in the broader Christian tradition, including the Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox traditions. This is becoming a more and more important endeavor. In addition, we ought to be open to allowing experience to speak into our theology. For too many people, theology is a purely theoretical exercise that never touches the ground. This is why the charismatic movement has grown and become so popular over the past 100 years. Right or wrong, it's a theology that speaks to the human experience in a powerful way. If we are going to develop theologies that are down to earth and touch us where we are, we need to allow our experience to interact with what Scripture says while never allowing it to override Scripture. Basically, we need to do what Wesley did: "Wesley can be seen as both preserving historic, biblical Christianity, and yet also progressing in ways needed to promote the vital spirituality of Christianity." Thorsen's book is a great introduction to the topic of the Wesleyan Quadrilateral and, at only 100 pages or so, it’s easy enough to read in a weekend.
And with discussion questions at the end of each chapter, it's the kind of book that you could use in a small group to help people think through some of these big theological ideas. If you're unfamiliar with Wesleyan theology or just need a refresher, ‘The Wesleyan Quadrilateral’ will meet your needs.
It’s important to recognize that, even though we call it the ‘Wesleyan Quadrilateral’, Wesley's views were not wholly unique. Many before him drew from reason and tradition as they sought to understand Scripture. In fact, this was a very Anglican way (as well as one that accords with Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy) of reading and understanding the Bible. However, Wesley placed a greater emphasis on the role of experience in the way we come to theological conclusions. This isn’t to say that he saw theology as an ‘anything goes’ endeavor. Wesley drew clear boundaries around what he considered orthodox. However, he read Scripture in such a way that the text would always be borne out in the life of the believer. This can be seen in his views on sanctification, holiness, and the Holy Spirit.
This book begins with four chapters that set the stage for understanding what the Wesleyan Quadrilateral is. In the first chapter, he defines it. He describes Wesley as a person and theologian while recognizing that "Wesley did not articulate an explicit theological method. He was concerned more about the practical relevance and applicability of theology than for its theory" (pg 2). This is one thing about Wesley that comes out often in his writings. Unlike Calvin or Luther, Wesley didn’t write much in the way of strict theology. He never wrote a systematic theology or anything like it. If you want to understand Wesley’s thought, you’ll want to read his sermons. Wesley was a pastor and evangelist first, a theologian second. He saw theology as something to be experienced and lived as much (or perhaps more) as it was to be reflected and meditated on. Thorsen lays out some basic principles of a Wesleyan understanding and he recognizes that when Wesley spoke of "Sola Scriptura", he was thinking of Scripture first, not exclusively.
In chapters two and three, Thorsen dives into Wesley's theological method by giving a 30,000 foot view of Wesley’s view of theology and how he approached it. One of the things that is key for understanding Wesleyan theology is its emphasis on holy, divine love. For Wesley, love truly is the fulfillment of the law. This focus on love and its transforming power led him to focus on religion as a social experience. Christianity was not something that you could experience in a vacuum, but rather, was something to be experienced in community. As Thorsen looks at Wesley’s theological method, he recognizes that Wesley was part of the Protestant Reformation, but also acknowledges that he drew more from Anglicanism than from the continental Reformation. This is an important point to note because for many people the Reformation is synonymous with John Calvin and Martin Luther. But the English Reformation was less severe than that which took place in Germany and Geneva. The Anglicans sought a via media (middle way) between Protestantism and Catholicism. They desired to draw from the wisdom of both groups (as well as Orthodoxy). This was something Wesley strongly believed in and practiced.
In chapter four, Thorson looks at Wesley’s doctrine of original sin as a way to see how Wesley did theology. He recognizes that Wesley first observed Scripture and the experience of mankind. Then, he used the scriptural and experiential data - as well as his own reasoning - to argue that the best explanation for all evidence was the doctrine of original sin. Finally, he examined the practical application of these thoughts. Thorsen looks at Wesley's "The Doctrine of Original Sin" (one of the few theological treatises that Wesley ever wrote) to see Wesley’s method in action.
After laying the foundation, Thorsen goes on to examine the four pieces of the quadrilateral. First, he looks at the way Wesley viewed Scripture in chapters five and six. He acknowledges that Wesley had a very high view of Scripture, though his understanding of Sola Scriptura was less strict than some of the other reformers. In addition, Thorsen looks at the way Wesley interpreted Scripture. Wesley was not necessarily a strict literalist, though he did believe that the literal sense of the text should be emphasized first. With this said, he didn’t totally deny the possibility that certain verses could be read in multiple ways, much like the early church fathers did. I sometimes find that certain Christians want Wesley to be more ‘progressive’ than he was when it came to the Bible. I got this feeling a few times in Thorsen's book. I understand this desire. And I can even appreciate it up to a point. However, we must remember that Wesley was a man of his time. Had he lived today, he very well may have approached certain passages differently than he did back then. But we don't have a twenty-first century Wesley to work with. We must take him as he was and, in my opinion, he was more focused on the literal interpretation of Scripture than what some of his descendants would like.
In chapter seven, Thorsen looks at Wesley's understanding of tradition and how tradition helps us do theology well. I love this about Wesley. Since Wesley was a student of church history, he understood that Christendom was bigger than the Methodist movement or the Anglican church. He had an ecumenical spirit and was willing to have fellowship with people who weren’t exactly like him. In fact, Thorsen quotes him as saying, "now, this is utterly a new thing, unheard of in any other Christian community. In what church or congregation, beside, throughout the Christian world, can members be admitted upon these terms without condition?" The terms that he gave were simple: "fear God and work righteousness." I so appreciate Wesley's willingness to mine Christian tradition for truth. But one may wonder how we are to judge which Christian traditions are best? For Wesley, this was done with this simple principle: "the more the doctrine of any church agrees with the Scripture, the more readily ought it to be received. And, on the other hand, the more the doctrine of any church differs from Scripture, the greater cause we have to doubt it." Now, this might seem a bit circular. After all, we're seeking to understand what Scripture says. So, if we say that we understand Scripture by tradition, but then we interpret the tradition by how well it accords with Scripture, where does that leave us? I tend to appreciate St. Vincent of Lerin’s idea that we should hold to what Christians have believed in all places and at all times.
In chapter eight, Thorsen looks at the way Wesley viewed reason and its place in theological reflection. For Wesley, reason was an important tool for gleaning theological truth. He didn't believe that any truth would be contradictory to any other truth. After all, he was a child of the Enlightenment. He was preaching during a time when reason was being viewed with ever greater grandeur. However, he never fell into the drying empiricism of his peers. For Wesley experience was always an adequate balance to parched reason. Wesley recognized that reason had limits (limits that many people don't want to recognize). Here's how Wesley described reason’s limitations: "Let reason to all, that reason can; employ it as far as it will go. But, at the same time, acknowledge it is utterly incapable of giving either faith, or hope, or love." This would be wise advice for all of us to remember. Reason is valuable, but the best kind of reason understands that reason is not all there is.
In chapters nine and ten, Thorsen looks at Wesley's view of experience and how experience helps give greater theological understanding. In these chapters, he looks at both inward and outward experience, conversion, assurance of salvation, etc. As I mentioned earlier, Wesley believed that those who truly had experienced God would have an experience that aligned with what Scripture taught. This is why he was able to value experience in the way he did. With this said, Wesley had certain hesitations about experience. He warned people about putting too much stock into dreams and visions. In fact, he distanced himself later in life from many of the mystics that he had appreciated in his earlier years (like William Law). Again, I think Wesley saw Scripture as an overriding principle, and he recognized the dangers that would come with placing experience above Scripture or reason above Scripture or tradition above Scripture. This is why he often moves from position to position in his writings. It’s one of the reasons that he is, at times, hard to pin down. He was seeking a balance between these things, always with Scripture at the pinnacle and as a guiding force.
Thorsen closes his book by asking the question, "What then should we do?" In this chapter he reflects on how Wesley's theological methods might help us do theology in a more effective and faithful manner. In this chapter, there are number of valuable insights and pieces of advice that we would be wise to follow. For example, Christians today ought to seek wisdom in the broader Christian tradition, including the Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox traditions. This is becoming a more and more important endeavor. In addition, we ought to be open to allowing experience to speak into our theology. For too many people, theology is a purely theoretical exercise that never touches the ground. This is why the charismatic movement has grown and become so popular over the past 100 years. Right or wrong, it's a theology that speaks to the human experience in a powerful way. If we are going to develop theologies that are down to earth and touch us where we are, we need to allow our experience to interact with what Scripture says while never allowing it to override Scripture. Basically, we need to do what Wesley did: "Wesley can be seen as both preserving historic, biblical Christianity, and yet also progressing in ways needed to promote the vital spirituality of Christianity." Thorsen's book is a great introduction to the topic of the Wesleyan Quadrilateral and, at only 100 pages or so, it’s easy enough to read in a weekend.
And with discussion questions at the end of each chapter, it's the kind of book that you could use in a small group to help people think through some of these big theological ideas. If you're unfamiliar with Wesleyan theology or just need a refresher, ‘The Wesleyan Quadrilateral’ will meet your needs.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews