Enthusiasm from end to end

John Wesley's journal, November 24, 1739.  "We accepted an invitation to Exeter from one who came thence to comfort my sister in her affliction. And on Sunday the 25th (Mr. D. having desired the pulpit, which was readily granted both for the morning and afternoon), I preached at St. Mary’s, on ‘The kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.’ 

"Dr. W-- told me after sermon, ‘Sir, you must not preach in the afternoon.’ ‘Not,’ said he, ‘that you preach any false doctrine. I allow all that you have said is true. And it is the doctrine of the Church of England. But it is not guarded. It is dangerous. It may lead people into enthusiasm or despair.’ 

"I did not readily see where the stress of this objection (so frequently started) lay. But upon a little reflection, I saw it plain. The real state of the case is this: religion is commonly thought to consist of three things - harmlessness, using the means of grace, and doing good, as it is called; that is, helping our neighbours, chiefly by giving alms. Accordingly, by a religious man is commonly meant one that is honest, just, and fair in his dealings; that is constantly at church and sacrament; and that gives much alms, or (as it is usually termed) does much good. 

"Now, in explaining those words of the Apostle, ‘The kingdom of God’ (or true religion, the consequence of God’s dwelling and reigning in the soul) ‘is not meat and drink,’ I was necessarily led to show that religion does not properly consist in any or all of these three things; but that a man might both be harmless, use the means of grace, and do much good, and yet have no true religion at all. And sure it is, had God then impressed this great truth on any who before was ignorant of it, that impression would have occasioned such heaviness in his soul as the world always terms despair. 

"Again, in explaining those words, ‘The kingdom of God’ (or true religion) ‘is righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost,’ I insisted that every follower of Christ ought to expect and pray for that ‘peace of God which passeth all understanding,’ that ‘rejoicing in hope of the glory of God,’ which is even now ‘unspeakable and full of glory’; and above all (as being the very life and soul of religion, without which it is all dead show), ‘the love of God shed abroad in’ his ‘heart by the Holy Ghost given unto him.’ 

"But all this is ‘enthusiasm from end to end’ to those who have the form of godliness but not the power. I know, indeed, there is a way of explaining these texts so that they shall mean just nothing; so that they shall express far less of inward religion than the writings of Plato or Heraclitus. and whoever ‘guards’ them thus (but God forbid I should do it) will undoubtedly avoid all danger of either driving people into this despair or leading them into this enthusiasm." ~ John Wesley

John Wesley, The Journal of the Rev. John Wesley, ed. Nehemiah Curnock, vol. 2 (London: Robert Culley; Charles H. Kelly, 1909–1916), 321–322.

Most glorious day

January 25, 1736. “At seven I went to the Germans. I had long before observed the great seriousness of their behaviour. Of their humility they had given a continual proof, by performing those servile offices for the other passengers, which none of the English would undertake; for which they desired, and would receive no pay, saying, “it was good for their proud hearts,” and “their loving Saviour had done more for them.” And every day had given them occasion of showing a meekness which no injury could move. If they were pushed, struck, or thrown down, they rose again and went away; but no complaint was found in their mouth. 

“There was now an opportunity of trying whether they were delivered from the spirit of fear, as well as from that of pride, anger, and revenge. In the midst of the psalm wherewith their service began, the sea broke over, split the main-sail in pieces, covered the ship, and poured in between the decks, as if the great deep had already swallowed us up. A terrible screaming began among the English. The Germans calmly sung on. I asked one of them afterwards, “Was you not afraid?” He answered, “I thank God, no.” I asked, “But were not your women and children afraid?” He replied, mildly, “No; our women and children are not afraid to die.”

“From them I went to their crying, trembling neighbours, and pointed out to them the difference in the hour of trial, between him that feareth God, and him that feareth him not. At twelve the wind fell. This was the most glorious day which I have hitherto seen.” ~ John Wesley

Fundamental Early Methodist Doctrines

 1) The “new birth” is an unmistakable supernatural transformation that is associated with the “faith of assurance”.

2) It is possible for people that have not yet received the “faith of assurance” to nevertheless possess the “faith of a servant” and be “servants of God”.

3) Romans 7 describes what life is like for “servants of God”.  This is a key doctrine that cannot be abandoned without risking fatal spiritual confusion.  

4) It is possible for people to have “saving faith” as a “servant of God” and not yet be born again as a “son of God”. 

Definitive proof for the above assertions can be found in other posts on this blog.

Dominion over sin and constant peace

The following passage from John Wesley’s journal is quite instructive.  Note his exceptional spiritual and intellectual honesty. 

“In my return to England, January 1738, being in imminent danger of death, and very uneasy on that account, I was strongly convinced that the cause of that uneasiness was unbelief; and that the gaining a true, living faith was the ‘one thing needful’ for me. But still I fixed not this faith on its right object: I meant only faith in God, not faith in or through Christ. Again, I knew not that I was wholly void of this faith; but only thought I had not enough of it. 

So that when Peter Böhler, whom God prepared for me as soon as I came to London, affirmed of true faith in Christ (which is but one) that it had those two fruits inseparably attending it, ‘dominion over sin and constant peace from a sense of forgiveness,’ I was quite amazed, and looked upon it as a new gospel. If this was so, it was clear I had not faith. 

But I was not willing to be convinced of this. Therefore I disputed with all my might, and laboured to prove that faith might be where these were not: for all the scriptures relating to this I had been long since taught to construe away; and to call all Presbyterians who spoke otherwise. Besides, I well saw no one could, in the nature of things, have such a sense of forgiveness, and not feel it. But I felt it not. If, then, there was no faith without this, all my pretensions to faith dropped at once.”

Wesley, John. 1909–1916. The Journal of the Rev. John Wesley. Edited by Nehemiah Curnock. Vol. 1. London: Robert Culley; Charles H. Kelly.

Is justifying faith a sense of pardon? No.

July 31, 1747

Dear Brother (Charles Wesley),

Yesterday I was thinking on a desideratum among us, a genesis problematica on justifying faith. A skeleton of it, (which you may fill up, or any one that has leisure,) I have roughly set down:

Is justifying faith a sense of pardon? Negatur (it is denied)

1. Every one is deeply concerned to understand this question well: But Preachers most of all; lest they either make them sad whom God hath not made sad, or encourage them to say, Peace, where there is no peace.

Some years ago we heard nothing of justifying faith, or a sense of pardon; so that when we did hear of them, the theme was quite new to us; and we might easily, especially in the heat and hurry of controversy, lean too much either to the one hand or to the other.

2. By “justifying faith,” I mean that faith which whosoever hath not is under the wrath and the curse of God. By “a sense of pardon,” I mean a distinct, explicit assurance that my sins are forgiven.

I allow, (1.) That there is such an explicit assurance. (2.) That it is the common privilege of real Christians. (3.) That it is the proper Christian faith, which “purifieth the heart,” and “overcometh the world.”

But I cannot allow, that justifying faith is such an assurance, or necessarily connected therewith.

3. Because, if justifying faith necessarily implies such an explicit assurance of pardon, then every one who has it not, and every one so long as he has it not, is under the wrath and under the curse of God. But this is a supposition contrary to Scripture, as well as to experience.

Contrary to Scripture; to Isaiah 50:10: “Who is among you that feareth the Lord, that obeyeth the voice of his servant, that walketh in darkness, and hath no light? Let him trust in the name of the Lord, and stay upon his God.”

Contrary to Acts 10:34, 35: “Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons; but in every nation he that feareth God, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.”

Contrary to experience; for J. R., &c., &c., had peace with God, no fear, no doubt, before they had that sense of pardon. And so have I frequently had.

Again: The assertion, “that justifying faith is a sense of pardon,” is contrary to reason: It is flatly absurd. For how can a sense of our having received pardon be the condition of our receiving it?

4. If you object, (1.) “J. T., St. Paul, &c., had this sense:” I grant they had: But they were justified, or rather had justifying faith, before they had it. (2.) “We know fifteen hundred persons who have this assurance.” Perhaps so: But this does not prove, they had not justifying faith till they received it. (3.) “We have been exceedingly blessed in preaching this doctrine.” We have been blessed in preaching the great truths of the Gospel; although we tacked to them, in the simplicity of our hearts, a proposition which was not true. (4.) “But does not our Church give this account of justifying faith?” I am sure she does of saving or Christian faith: I think she does of justifying faith too. But to the law and to the testimony. All men may err. But the word of the Lord shall stand for ever.

~ John Wesley

A cruel and unscriptural doctrine

John Fletcher: “Judicious Richard Baxter, by a variety of strong arguments, shows, that to represent assurance, or the kingdom of God in the Holy Ghost, as essential to all true faith, and promiscuously to shut up, in a state of damnation, all those to whom that “kingdom is not yet come with power,” is both cruel and unscriptural. (See the arguments in his Confession of Faith, from p. 189 to 214.)”

Turning from the truth

“See that sculler upon yonder river. The unwearied diligence and watchful skill with which he plies his two oars point out to us the work and wisdom of an experienced divine. What an even, gentle spring does the mutual effort of his oars give to his boat! Observe him: his right hand never rests but when the stream carries him too much to the left; he slacks not his left hand unless he is gone too much to the right; nor has he sooner recovered a just medium than he uses both oars again with mutual harmony. Suppose that for a constancy he employed but one, no matter which, what would be the consequence? He would only move in a circle; and if neither wind nor tide carried him along, after a hard day’s work he would find himself in the very spot where he began his idle toil.”

“This illustration needs very little explaining: I shall just observe that the Antinomian is like a sculler, who uses only his right hand oar; and the Pharisee, like him who plies only the oar in his left hand. One makes an endless bustle about grace and faith, the other about charity and works; but both, after all, find themselves exactly in the same case, with this single difference, that one has turned from truth to the right, and the other to the left.“

 ~ John Fletcher