John Wesley and Catholic Spirit

There's the Pope, Luther, and Calvin duking it out.  Is there another alternative?

As should be obvious to those following this blog, I find myself unable to adhere to the traditions of those great magisterial reformers of the 16th and 17th century--though I agree with much of what they say (and have enormous respect for their theological prowess--every Christian ought to read Calvin's Institutes).

Although I've seemed quite RC-friendly in this blog, much of it is not due to my immediate avowal of RC--rather, it probably comes from my adherence to John Wesley and the Methodist tradition that I have been a part of for quite some time now.  Wesley is well known for offering an "olive branch" to both his Calvinist rivals as well as to RC.  His "middle of the road" approach is to be expected coming from one loyal to the Church of England, a "hybrid" of catholicism and protestantism (so to speak, though I take it to be a form of protestantism through and through).

Wesley, along with many other Christians (including myself), was concerned with the unity of the church.  Wesley found disunity and the lack of love amongst Christ's disciples as intolerable.

In one of his sermons, he speaks of the "catholic spirit".  The Scriptural text he bases his position on is 2 Kings 10:15:

   "And when Jehu was departed thence, he lighted on Jehonadab the son of Rechab coming to meet him, and he saluted him, and said to him, "Is thine heart right, as my heart is with thy heart?"  And Jehonadab answered, "It is." "If it be, give me thine hand"."

Wesley uses this case as an example of how Christians ought to regard other Christians.  Regardless of certain doctrinal differences (more to be said anon) and differences in praxis and modes of worship, if another Christian has a "right heart, as my heart is with thy heart", then we can be hand in hand in fellowship.  In this, "all the children of God may unite, notwithstanding these smaller differences" (Catholic Spirit).

Wesley accepts the reality and perhaps inevitability of doctrinal differences due to his very reasonable view that most (if not all) of us will be wrong at least about some matters.  He says, 

    "although every man necessarily believes that every particular opinion which he holds is true (for to believe an opinion is not true is the same thing as not to hold it), yet can no man be assured that all his own opinions, taken together, are true.  nay, every thinking man is assured they are not, seeing humanum est errare et nescire...although in what particulars he mistakes he does not, perhaps he cannot,  know" (Catholic Spirit).

Now Wesley asserts that one must belong to some church (one cannot be a Christian independent of other human beings), but that one must follow his or her own conscience as to which congregation he or she should join.

Wesley does not think just anyone can be a part of the "catholic spirit"; there are indeed some "essentials"--one must answer the affirmative to the following questions:

   "Dost thou believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, God over all, blessed forever?...Dost though know Jesus Christ and him crucified, and does he dwell in thee and though in him?...Having absolutely disclaimed all they own works, thy own righteousness, hast thou submitted thyself unto the righteousness of God, which is by faith in Christ Jesus?...Art thou, through him, fighting the good fight of faith, and laying hold of eternal life?...Doest thou love God with all thy heart, mind, soul, strength? Does though seek all thy happiness in him alone?...Is God the centre of thy soul, the sum of all thy desires?  Art thou accordingly laying up thy treasures in heaven and counting all things else dung and dross?...Art thou more afraid of displeasing God than either of death or hell?...dost thou hate all evil ways, every transgression of his holy and perfect law and herein exercise thyself to have a conscience void of offence toward God, and toward man?...Is they heart right toward they neighbor?...Do you show your love by your works?...may every Christian say, "Yea!" (Catholic Spirit).

So if one can say yes to these questions (and more that I left out), then one is part of the catholic spirit.  Still, answering the affirmative to these questions leaves open the possibility of one being part of the catholic spirit and yet being on the fringe or residing in the vague boundaries of being a Christian.  I take it that various oneness pentacostals and others who deny the orthodox conception of the Trinity (viz. one ousia in three hypostases) can easily say yes to all these questions (and perhaps, even seventh-day adventists, and perhaps even extreme liberal theologians depending on how some of these claims are to be interpreted).  Of course, it is not obvious (to me at any rate) why those particular questions (and the others I left out) must be answered in the affirmative--that is, it is not clear why those questions are essential and why other questions are not.  It would serve well to have further explanation as to why these doctrinal points are the ones that must be adhered to and why other points need not be (and Wesley himself, in other places, has suggested that Christians must accept the traditional doctrine of the Trinity; as I take Wesley, he wasn't always consistent, and much having to do with his lack of a systematic framework).

Nevertheless, once it is acknowledged as to who has their "heart right" with one another (that is, those who answer the series of questions in the affirmative), then there should be a deep love and affection for one another ("give me thine hand"), correcting one another and praying for each other.

Although not fully satisfied with every aspect, I sit somewhat comfortably within the halls of Methodism and being Wesleyan.  But again, there are nagging questions left unanswered.

Benedict XVI and Justification

Many Protestants are surprised by the following statement from Benedict XVI in his teachings on Paul the apostle:

"Being just [i.e., justified] means being with Christ and in Christ... Luther's phrase 'faith alone' is true, if it is not opposed to faith in charity, in love.  Faith is looking at Christ, entrusting oneself to Christ, being united to Christ, conformed to Christ, to his life.  And the form, the life of Christ, is love; hence to believe is to conform to Christ and to enter into his love" (St. Paul).

The Pope, in characteristic academic form, is careful to make an implicit distinction regarding the locution 'faith alone'.  For in catholic ears, it typically signifies a certain attitude or capacity that is primarily cognitive and, as such, does not include the virtues of hope and love.  Lutherans and some other Protestants typically use 'faith' to mean something more robust, and Benedict is careful to note that he is happy to agree with the doctrine of sola fides as long as it incorporates a robust conception that does incorporate love (both are permissible uses since there is no single use of the term in the Bible, and the term is used to connote different ideas depending on the context--and this is where exegesis and systematic theology come in to provide us a working category that will fit with one's overall theological framework).


For my own part, I would be happy to dismiss the locution altogether since it is not genuinely Biblical (but was an addition probably by Luther's followers in some manuscripts), at least not explicitly (and I would argue not implicitly, given James and other passages, e.g. Galatians 5).  But more dialogue must take place regarding our understanding of the doctrine of justification.  Catholics and Protestants both agree that we are justified by faith, but that is where agreement putatively ends.

Benedict XVI is one of the most Christocentric and Bibliocentric popes the Catholic Church has ever seen, and so now is a good time for dialogue between Rome and Protestants.

Kicked out of Geneva

If Geneva were around, I'd definitely get kicked out.  And not just me, but a whole host of contemporary evangelicals too.

Even disregarding the nasty ordeal with Servetus, if you disagreed with Calvin's theology, you were history.  In many ways then, Calvin seems to have taken on papal power over a small Swiss town.  And "decent Christian folk" such as (some of) you and me would be "ex-communicated".

I say this as one who has enormous and deep respect for Calvin.  Re-reading the Institutes, I am overwhelmed by his rhetorical and theological power.  And happily, I agree with almost everything he writes--especially when he focuses on the unity with Christ.