Haven't we been here before? Church of England gives up on evangelism

 

Winston Churchill once famously said, "I did not become His Majesty's First Minister so that I might oversee the liquidation of the British Empire!" Justin Welby, conversely, appears to be resigned to be the Archbishop who oversees the liquidation of Christianity in the British Isles. Underneath yet another unflattering portrait of His Grace in his oversized "dolphin" mitre is written the following lede by Ruth Gledhill:

The Church of England has admitted that the country has become a nation that knows almost nothing about Christianity and that there is no point any more attempting to convert anyone.

To read the entire article, you have to subscribe to The Times, which is a bit difficult if you don't have access to British currency. Ms. Gledhill was kind enough to e-mail me a copy of the whole piece but I will not reprint it here since that would be violating a trust. Suffice it to say it doesn't get any better as the article unfolds. Apparently, the Mother Church, or at least its beleaguered leadership, is chafing under the withering attacks of atheism and secular humanism.

It is hardly earthshaking news that the Church of England in its current state is not the most vibrant expression of the Christian faith in the twenty first century, but such a state of spiritual dullness is hardly unique to its history. There was nothing particularly vibrant about eighteenth century Anglicanism, either. It was in danger, so it seemed, of being eclipsed by deism and rationalism until a peculiar band of field preachers led by John Wesley, his brother Charles, and George Whitefield arrived on the scene. All they did was start proclaiming again a simple truth which much of England knew almost nothing about at the time: the message of salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ. The result was a spiritual awakening which not only spared England a fate similar to the disastrous French Revolution, but also crossed the Atlantic and ignited the fires of faith on the shores of America.

The Mother Church today is not likely to produce another Wesley or Whitefield. Such a person is more likely to emerge from the global Anglican diaspora. The awakening will come, however, in God's time and on God's terms. Whether it begins in a small parsonage in Epworth or a remote village in Kenya, you can rest assured it will find its way back to Canterbury, and the half-hearted elites who were so willing to accommodate a godless culture will be shamed either into repentance or obscurity.

Athanasius contra mundum: What Justin Welby can learn from William Wilberforce

A video of Archbishop Justin Welby's remarks to the Evangelical Alliance yesterday has been posted. The speech itself is far more innocuous than the remarks he made at a Q&A session afterward. However, the overarching theme of the Archbishop's remarks, that the church ought to be known more for what it is for rather than what it is against, is quite shortsighted.



While it is certainly true that the Gospel of Jesus Christ offers the world a resounding "YES!" to many things (forgiveness, redemption, salvation, life), it also confronts the world with an equally resounding "NO!" to those things contrary to God's purpose for creation. Archbishop Welby wishes to tone down the "NO!" and turn up the "YES!" because, well, it is just not fashionable for the church to be "against" so many things these days.

Perhaps this excerpt from John Wesley's final letter, to anti-slavery activist William Wilberforce, will provide a helpful historical illustration.

Unless the divine power has raised you up to be as “Athanasius contra mundum,” I see not how you can go through your glorious enterprise in opposing that execrable villainy, which is the scandal of religion, of England, and of human nature. Unless God has raised you up for this very thing, you will be worn out by the opposition of men and devils. But if God be for you, who can be against you? Are all of them stronger than God? O be not weary of well doing! Go on, in the name of God in the power of His might, till even American slavery (the vilest that ever saw the sun) shall vanish away before it.

It is never fashionable to be contra mundum, that is, against the world, but taking up the cross and following Christ is never about being fashionable. Wilberforce will never be remembered for anything except that he was against the wicked exploitation of other human beings through the slave trade. In his day, he was ridiculed, persecuted, and marginalized. But he persevered tirelessly and, in the end, prevailed because God had indeed raised him up to be as "Athanasius contra mundum."

It is a quite similar concern over the exploitation of other human beings, the scarring of the image of God in which they were created, that motivates so many "traditionalists" in the church today to oppose vigorously the legitimization of homosexual conduct and its domestication through the redefinition of marriage. It is at this very point that the world is right now opposing the Gospel. It is the responsibility of the Archbishop of Canterbury, of all people, to be "as Athanasius contra mundum" in the face of such opposition, shunning the ridicule and taking as sufficient encouragement the sure and certain knowledge that "if God be for you, who can be against you?".

Editing hell out of Wesley

Earlier this week, I critiqued John Piper's call to amend the Apostles Creed. Piper finds no Scriptural basis for the clause, "He descended into hell." I begged to differ. Piper's rejection of that particular clause, however, is by no means unique. Many, perhaps most, Protestant worship books and hymnals over the years have either deleted it or placed it in [brackets]. Sacred Tradition notwithstanding, the thought of our Lord spending time in hell, whether to preach to the souls imprisoned therein or what have you, is simply taboo in many churches.

Later in the week, as I was compiling a few hymns for a service at a local nursing home, I was reminded yet again of how ingrained is the disdain for the thought of Christ descending into hell. With it being Easter Week, I wanted to focus, naturally, on the theme of the resurrection. One of the most stirring hymns on that subject is Charles Wesley's "Christ the Lord is Risen Today." Growing up a Methodist, this was the one "must sing" hymn every Easter Sunday. From childhood, I remember singing the second stanza thusly:

Love’s redeeming work is done, Alleluia!
Fought the fight, the battle won, Alleluia!
Death in vain forbids His rise, Alleluia!
Christ hath opened paradise, Alleluia!

That is not, however, the way Wesley originally wrote the hymn. Aside from the fact that the Alleluia's were added along with the music, this stanza is actually a merger of portions of two stanzas. Here are Wesley's original words, with the deleted phrases italicized:

Love’s redeeming work is done, Alleluia!
Fought the fight, the battle won, Alleluia!
Lo! the Sun’s eclipse is over, Alleluia!
Lo! He sets in blood no more, Alleluia!

Vain the stone, the watch, the seal, Alleluia!
Christ hath burst the gates of hell, Alleluia!
Death in vain forbids His rise, Alleluia!
Christ hath opened paradise, Alleluia!

Note the strong affirmation, "Christ hath burst the gates of hell." How many hymnals omit this line? My guess is, most of them. The truncated version makes good enough sense, but the uncut version makes perfect sense. The opening of paradise is coupled with bursting the gates of hell. The affirmation of Christ's victory is made all the more complete.

Perhaps at some point long ago, a well-meaning hymnal editor was looking for a way to fit a long hymn into a short space. More likely, however, the now standardized edited version of Wesley's hymn of the resurrection reflects a long-standing aversion to the touchy subject of Christ descending into hell.

Hymns of the Passion (2): O Love Divine, What Hast Thou Done

No series on hymns of the Passion would be complete, of course, without Charles Wesley's moving, and richly theological, lyric set to the SELENA tune by Isaac B. Woodbury.

O Love divine, what hast thou done!
The immortal God hath died for me!
The Father’s co-eternal Son
Bore all my sins upon the tree.
Th’immortal God for me hath died:
My Lord, my Love, is crucified!

Is crucified for me and you,
To bring us rebels back to God.
Believe, believe the record true,
Ye all are bought with Jesus’ blood.
Pardon for all flows from His side:
My Lord, my Love, is crucified!

Behold and love, ye that pass by,
The bleeding Prince of life and peace!
Come, sinners, see your Savior die,
And say, “Was ever grief like His?”
Come, feel with me His blood applied:
My Lord, my Love, is crucified!

Then let us sit beneath His cross,
And gladly catch the healing stream:
All things for Him account but loss,
And give up all our hearts to Him:
Of nothing think or speak beside,
My Lord, my Love, is crucified!

This being Maundy Thursday, it is also appropriate to include Wesley's most famous eucharistic hymn, "Come, Sinners, to the Gospel Feast."

Come, sinners, to the Gospel feast;
Let every soul be Jesus’ guest.
Ye need not one be left behind,
For God hath bid all humankind.

Sent by my Lord, on you I call;
The invitation is to all.
Come, all the world! Come, sinner, thou!
All things in Christ are ready now.

Come, all ye souls by sin oppressed,
Ye restless wanderers after rest;
Ye poor, and maimed, and sick, and blind,
In Christ a hearty welcome find.

Come, and partake the Gospel feast;
Be saved from sin; in Jesus rest;
O taste the goodness of your God,
And eat His flesh, and drink His blood!

You vagrant souls, on you I call;
(O that my voice could reach you all!)
You all may now be justified,
You all may live, for Christ hath died.

My message as from God receive;
Ye all may come to Christ and live.
O let His love your hearts constrain,
Nor permit Him to die in vain.

His love is mighty to compel;
His conquering love consent to feel,
Yield to His love’s resistless power,
And fight against your God no more.

See Him set forth before your eyes,
That precious, bleeding Sacrifice!
His offered benefits embrace,
And freely now be saved by grace.

This is the time, no more delay!
This is the Lord’s accepted day.
Come thou, this moment, at His call,
And live for Him Who died for all.

+Wright praises ++Rowan, but is praying for a more visionary and energetic successor

N.T. Wright offers his (obligatory?) tribute to the retiring Archbishop of Canterbury, concluding that his successor needs to be a man of more vision and energy.

‘Here to introduce Bach’s St Matthew Passion,’ said the radio announcer, ‘is the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams.’ My companion and I listened eagerly to a lucid account of St Matthew’s theology, and of how Bach’s music involves every hearer in the events of Jesus’ death. But at one moment the speaker paused, as though searching for a word. Didn’t he have a script? Next time I saw the Archbishop, I asked him. The BBC, he explained, sat him in a studio and asked him to talk about his favourite music. How many Archbishops could have done that, I wondered – at the same time as writing a book on Dostoevsky, debating with Philip Pullman, and plotting a visit to Robert Mugabe? Not to mention the thousand shocks that episcopal flesh is heir to.

Shocks there have been. Nobody in 2002 saw what was coming. That’s why many of us, courteously disagreeing on some issues, have remained convinced that Rowan was the right man for the job. Shallow, polarizing analyses remain irresistible for commentators; many in the church go along for the ride. But Dr Williams is a thinker’s thinker. He burrows down into an issue, reads it up, mulls it over, prays it through, and then speaks his mind. We have needed that. He is a classic Anglican theologian: not one for big, clunky systems, but solid, deep and rich in his study of the Bible and the Fathers. To hear Rowan expounding St John or St Augustine is to encounter Anglican theology at its best. Watch him translate that theology into pastoral mode: with children, say, or praying quietly with someone in the wings of a conference. Like all loveable people, he can be infuriating. But loveable none the less.

His mind has been, above all, for unity, always central to a bishop’s vocation. Not a shoulder-shrugging, lowest-common-denominator unity, but the hard-won, costly unity that makes demands on charity and patience rather than on conscience. He has worked hard for that unity within his own Anglican Communion and across denominational lines. He is one of a tiny handful of Anglican theologians to be a household name in Roman and Eastern Orthodox circles; and he has won friends in the free churches, too. When he was an official observer at an international Methodist conference twenty years ago, he complained in his closing remarks that they hadn’t sung his favourite Wesley hymn, ‘And Can it Be’, with its solid gospel affirmation, ‘No condemnation now I dread; Jesus, and all in him, is mine!’ They obediently stood up and sang it.

A measure of how much the struggle for unity has cost was Rowan’s moving sermon on the 450th anniversary of Thomas Cranmer’s death. Cranmer struggled with conflicting personal, political and theological loyalties. The careful balance of his prose reflects an anguished attempt to hold together a church and nation in crisis. Rowan clearly identified with his predecessor.

Whoever had been Archbishop these last ten years, in fact, would have had it tough. Anyone who tried to pull harder on the line would have seen it snap. But the Anglican Communion is still in a dangerous position. The 2008 Lambeth Conference showed that three of the ‘instruments’ that are supposed to unite the Communion (the Anglican Consultative Council, the Primates’ Meeting, and the Lambeth Conference itself) aren’t working well. Only the fourth one, the Archbishop himself, held things together, giving powerful addresses and inspiring personal loyalty. It may not be possible, and it certainly isn’t desirable, for a successor to rely on doing the same. Many Anglicans worldwide, facing poverty, persecution or both, rely on the Communion as a lifeline. We need a firm, broad base, such as is now proposed in the Anglican Covenant which Rowan has backed to the hilt.

Rowan’s style has been private and unstrategic. Once, questioned about strategy, he responded crossly ‘I believe in the Holy Spirit!’, seemingly oblivious to the possibility that the Spirit might work through long-term planning. Maybe that’s what we needed then. Certainly nobody doubts that he leads by example in his life of prayer and self-discipline. But we now need consultation, collaboration, and, yes, strategy. Despite routine pessimism, the Church of England isn’t finished. In a sense, it’s just getting going. We need someone with vision and energy to pick up from where Rowan’s charismatic style has led us and to develop and deepen things from there.

A new Archbishop must be allowed to lead. Yes, there are deep divisions. Part of the next Archbishop’s task will be to discern and clarify the difference between the things that really do divide and the things that people believe will do so but which need not. But, at the same time, there are problems of structure and organization that slow things down and soak up energy, problems that can and should be fixed so that the church and its leaders can be released for their mission, and to tackle properly the problems we face.

Who, after all, is running the Church of England? We have Lambeth Palace, the House of Bishops, General Synod, the Archbishops’ Council, the Anglican Communion Office, and (don’t get me started) the Church Commissioners. How does it all work? In an episcopal church, the bishops should be the leaders. Rowan hasn’t bothered much about structures, but with six hands grabbing at the steering wheel someone now needs to take charge. I wouldn’t bet on the Crown Nominations Commission proposing someone with the right combination of spirituality, wisdom and strategic thinking, plus boundless, multi-tasking energy. But that’s what I shall be praying for.

Well, just let me say that I may have a little more respect for ++Rowan, knowing that his favorite hymn is Charles Wesley' stirring "And Can It Be."

John Wesley: On Schism

John Wesley never left the Church of England despite the fact that Methodists in America, following the end of the Revolution, formally organized as a separate entity (something of a political necessity at the time) and their British counterparts did the same shortly after their founder's death. To the end, Wesley maintained his belief, first expressed early in his ministry, that the Anglican Church came "nearer the scriptural and primitive plan than any other national church upon earth." Besides several letters and a treatise in which he firmly opposed separation, Wesley preached a sermon, "On Schism," in which he not only deplored the evil of schism but also defined it within the narrow biblical parameters which, then as well as now, were often ignored. I have previously posted an excerpt from this sermon but, in light of the current unpleasantness, I think it appropriate to post the the full text at this time.

That there might be no schism in the body. 1 Corinthians 12:25

1. If there be any word in the English tongue as ambiguous and indeterminate in its meaning as the word Church, it is one that is nearly allied to it, -- the word Schism. it has been the subject of innumerable disputes for several hundred years; and almost innumerable books have been written concerning it in every part of the Christian world. A very large share of these have been published in our country; particularly during the last century, and the beginning of the present: And persons of the strongest understanding, and the most consummate learning, have exhausted all their strength upon the question, both in conversation and writing. This has appeared to be more necessary than ever, since the grand separation of the Reformed from the Romish Church. This is a charge which the members of that Church never fail to bring against all that separate from her; and which, consequently, has employed the thought and pens of the most able disputants on both sides. And Those of each side have generally, when they entered into the field, been secured of victory; supposing the strength of their arguments was so great, that it was impossible for reasonable men to resist them.

2. But it is observable, that exceeding little good has been done by all these controversies. Very few of the warmest and ablest disputants have been able to convince their opponents. After all that could be said, the Papists are Papists, and the Protestants are Protestants still. And the same success has attended those who have so vehemently disputed about separation from the Church of England. Those who separated from her were eagerly charged with schism; they as eagerly denied the charge; and scarce any were able to convince their opponents either on one side or the other.

3. One great reason why this controversy has been so unprofitable, why so few of either side have been convinced, is this: They seldom agreed as to the meaning of the word concerning which they disputed: and if they did not fix the meaning of this, if they did not define the term before they began disputing about it, they might continue the dispute to their lives' end, without getting one step forward; without coming a jot nearer to each other than when they first set out.

4. Yet it must be a point of considerable importance, or St. Paul would not have spoken so seriously of it. It is, therefore, highly needful that we should consider,

I. The nature, and ,

II. The evil of it.

I.

1. It is the more needful to do this, because among the numberless books that have been written upon the subject, both by the Romanists and Protestants, it is difficult to find any that define it in a scriptural manner. The whole body of Roman Catholics define schism, a separation from the Church of Rome; and almost all our own writers define it, a separation from the Church of England. Thus both the one and the other set out wrong, and stumble at the very threshold. This will easily appear to any that calmly consider the several texts wherein the word "schism" occurs: from the whole tenor of which it is manifest, that it is not a separation from any Church, (whether general or particular, whether the Catholic, or any national Church) but a separation in a Church.

2. Let us begin with the first verse, wherein St. Paul makes use of the word. It is the tenth verse of the first chapter of his First Epistle to the Corinthians. The Words are, "I beseech you, brethren, by the name of the Lord Jesus, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no schisms" ( the original word is schismata) "among you." Can anything be more plain than that the schisms here spoken of, were not separations from, but divisions in, the Church of Corinth? Accordingly, it follows, "But that ye be perfectly united together, in the same mind and in the same judgment." You see here, that an union in mind and judgment was the direct opposite to the Corinthian schism. This, consequently, was not a separation from the Church or Christian society at Corinth but a separation in the Church; a disunion in mind and judgment, (perhaps also affection) among those who, notwithstanding this, continued outwardly united as before.

3. Of what nature this schism at Corinth was, is still more clearly determined (if anything can be more clear) by the words that immediately follow: "Now this I say," -- this is the schism of which I speak; you are divided into separate parties; some of you speaking in favor of one, some of another preacher, -- "Every one of you saith," (verse 12) "I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas," or Peter. Who then does not see that the schism for which the Apostle here reproves the Corinthians is neither more nor less than the splitting into several parties, as they gave the preference to one or another preacher? And this species of schism there will be occasion to guard against in every religious community.

4. The second place where the Apostle uses this word is in the eighteenth verse of the eleventh chapter of this Epistle: "When ye come together in the Church," the Christian congregation, " I hear that there are division" ( the original word here also is schismata, schisms) "among you." But what were these schisms? The Apostle immediately tells you: (Verse 20) "When you come together," professing you design is "to eat of the Lord's Supper, every one of you taketh before another his own supper," as if it were a common meal. What then was the schism? It seems, in doing this, they divided into little parties, which cherished anger and resentment one against another, even at the solemn season.

5. May it not be observed, (to make a little digression here, for the sake of those who are troubled with needless scruples on this head) that the sin which the Apostle charges on the communicants at Corinth in this chapter is usually quite misunderstood? It was precisely this, and nothing else, "the taking one before another his own supper;'" and in such a shocking manner, that while "one was hungry, another was drunken." By doing this, he says, "ye eat and drink" (not "damnation:" a vile mistranslating of the word, but) judgment, temporal judgment, "to yourselves:" Which sometimes shortened their lives. "For this cause" -- for sinning in this vile manner -- "many are sick and weak among you." Observe here two things: First, What was the sin of the Corinthians? Mark this well, and remember it. It was taking one before another his own supper; so that while one was hungry, another was drunken. Secondly, What was the punishment? It was bodily weakness and sickness; which, without repentance, might end in death. But what is this to you? Your cannot commit their sin: Therefore, you cannot incur their punishment.

6. But to return. It deserves to be seriously remarked, that in this chapter the Apostle uses the word "heresies" as exactly equivalent with the word "schisms." "I hear," says he, (verse 18) "that there are schisms among you, and I partly believe it:" He then adds, (verse 19) "for there must be heresies" (another word for the same thing) "among you, that they which are approved among you may be made manifest." As if he had said, "The wisdom of God permits it so to be, for this end, -- for the clear manifestation of those whose heart is right with him." This word, therefore, (heresy) which has been so strangely distorted for many centuries, as if it meant erroneous opinions, opinions contrary to the faith delivered to the saints, -- which has been made a pretense for destroying cities, depopulation of countries, and shedding seas of innocent blood, -- has not the least reference to opinions, whether right or wrong. It simply means, wherever it occurs in Scripture, divisions, or parties, in a religious community.

7. The third and the only remaining place in this Epistle, wherein the Apostle uses this word, is the twenty fifth verse of the twelfth chapter; where, speaking of the Church, he seems to mean the Church universal, the whole body of Christ) he observes, "God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked, that there might be no schism in the body:" (Verse 24, 25) He immediately fixes the meaning of his own words: "But that the members might have the same care one for another: And Whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with is or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it.": We may easily observe that the word Schism here, means the want of this tender care for each other. It undoubtedly means an alienation of affection in any of them toward their brethren; a division of heart, and parties springing therefrom, though they were still outwardly united together; though they still continued members of the same external society.

8. But there seems to be one considerable objection against the supposing heresy and schism to mean the same thing. It is said, St. Peter, in the second chapter of his Second Epistle, takes the word Heresies in a quite different sense. His words are, (verse 1) "There shall be among you false teachers, who will bring in damnable," or destructive, "heresies, denying the Lord that bought them." It does by no means appear that St. Peter here takes the word Heresies in any other sense that St. Paul does. Even in this passage it does not appear to have any reference to opinions, good or bad. Rather it means, They will "bring in" or occasion, destructive parties or sects, (so it is rendered in the common French translation) who "deny the Lord that bought them:" Such sects now swarm throughout the Christian world.

9. I shall be thankful to any one who will point to me any other place in the inspired writings, where this word "Schism" is to be found. I remember only these three. And it is apparent to every impartial reader, that it does not, in any of these, mean a separation from any Church or body of Christians, whether with or without cause. So that the immense pains which have been taken both by Papists and Protestants, in writing whole volumes against Schism, as a separation, whether from the Church of Rome, or from the Church of England, exerting all their strength, and bringing all their learning, have been employed to mighty little purpose. They have been fighting with shadows of their own raising; violently combating a sin which had no existence but in their own imagination; which is to once forbidden, no, nor once mentioned, either in the Old or New Testament.

10. "But is there no sin resembling what so many learned and pious writers have termed Schism, and against which all the members of religious communities have need to be carefully guarded? I do not doubt but there is; and I cannot tell, whether this too may not, in a remote sense, be called Schism: I mean, "A causeless separation from a body of living Christians". There is no absurdity in taking the word in this sense, though it be not strictly scriptural. And it is certain all the members of Christian communities should be carefully guarded against it. For how little a thing soever it may seem, and how innocent soever it may be accounted, schism, even in this sense, is both evil in itself, and productive of evil consequences.

II.

1. It is evil in itself. To separate ourselves from a body of living Christian, with whom we were before united, is a grievous breach of the law of love. It is the nature of love to unite us together; and the greater the love, the stricter the union. And while this continues in its strength, nothing can divide those whom love has united. It is only when our love grows cold, that we can think of separating from our brethren. And this is certainly the case with any who willingly separate from their Christian brethren. The pretences for separation may be innumerable, but want of love is always the real cause; otherwise they would still hold the unity of he Spirit in the bound of peace. It is therefore contrary to all those commands of God, wherein brotherly love is enjoined: To that of St. Paul, "Let brotherly love continue:" -- that of St. John, "My beloved children, love one another;" -- and especially to that of our blessed Master, "This is my commandment, That ye love on another, as I have loved you" Yea, "By this," saith he, "shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye love one another."

2. And as such a separation is evil in itself, being a breach of brotherly love, so it brings forth evil fruit; it is naturally productive of the most mischievous consequences. It opens a door to all unkind tempers, both in ourselves and others. It leads directly to a whole train of evil surmising, to severe and uncharitable judging of each other. It gives occasion to offense, to anger and resentment, perhaps in ourselves as well as in our brethren; which, if not presently stopped, may issue in bitterness, malice, and settled hatred; creating a present hell wherever they are found, as a prelude to hell eternal.

3. But the ill consequences of even this species of schism do not terminate in the heart. Evil tempers cannot long remain within, before they are productive of outward fruit. Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. As he whose heart is full of love openeth his mouth with wisdom, and in his lips there is the law of kindness; so he whose heart is full of prejudice, anger, suspicion, or any unkind temper, will surely open his mouth in a manner corresponding with the disposition of his mind. And hence will arise, if not lying and slandering, (which yet will hardly be avoided) bitter words, tale-bearing, backbiting, and evil-speaking of every kind.

4. From evil words, from tale-bearing, backbiting and evil-speaking, how many evil works will naturally flow! Anger, jealousy, envy, wrong tempers of every kind, do not vent themselves merely in words, but push men continually to all kind of ungodly and unrighteous actions. A plentiful harvest of all the works of darkness may be expected to spring from this source; whereby, in the end, thousands of souls, and not a few of those who once walked in the light of God's countenance, may be turned from the way of peace, and finally drowned in everlasting perdition.

5. Well might our blessed Lord say, "Woe unto the world because of offenses:" Yet, "it must needs be, that offenses will come:" Yea, abundance of them will of necessity arise when a breach of this sort is made in any religious community; while they that leave it endeavour to justify themselves, by censuring those they separate from; and these on the other hand retort the charge, and strive to lay the blame on them. But how mightily does all this altercation grieve the Holy Spirit of God! How does it hinder his mild and gentle operations in the souls both of one and the other! Heresies and schisms (in the scriptural sense of those words) will, sooner or later, be the consequence; parties will be formed, on one and the other side, whereby the love of many will wax cold. The hunger and thirst after righteousness, after either the favor or the full image of God, together with the longing desires wherewith so many were filled of promoting the work of God in the souls of their brethren, will grow languid, and as offenses increase will gradually die away. And as the "fruit of the Spirit" withers away, "the works of the flesh" will again prevail, to the utter destruction, first of the power, and then of the very form, of religion. These consequences are not imaginary, are not built on mere conjectures, but on plain matter of fact. This has been the case again and again within these last thirty or forty year: These have been the fruits which we have seen, over and over, to be consequent on such a separation.

6. And what grievous stumbling-block must these things be to those who are without, to those who are strangers to religion, who have neither the form nor the power of godliness! How will they triumph over these once eminent Christians! How boldly ask, "What are they better than us?" How will they harden their hearts more and more against the truth, and bless themselves in their wickedness? From which, possibly, the example of the Christians might have reclaimed them, had they continued unblamable in their behavior. Such is the complicated mischief which persons separating from a Christian Church or society do, not only to themselves, but to that whole society, and the whole world in general.

7. But perhaps such persons will say, "We did not do this willingly; we were constrained to separate from that society, because we could not continue therein with a clear conscience; we could not continue without sin. I was not allowed to continue therein with breaking a commandment of God." If this was the case, you could not be blamed for separating from that society. Suppose, for instance, you were a member of the Church of Rome, and you could not remain therein without committing idolatry; without worshipping of idols, whether images, or saints and angels; then it would be your bounded duty to leave that community, totally to separate from it. Suppose you could not remain in the Church of England without doing something which the word of God forbids, or omitting something which the word of God positively commands; if this were the case, (but blessed be God it is not) you ought to separate from the Church of England. I will make the case my own: I am now, and have been from my youth, a member and a Minister of the Church of England: And I have no desire, no design to separate from it, till my soul separates from my body. Yet if I was not permitted to remain therein without omitting what God requires me to do, it would then become meet and right, and my bounden duty, to separate from it without delay. To be more particular: I know God has committed to me a dispensation of the gospel; yea, and my own salvation depends upon preaching it: "Woe is me if I preach not the gospel." If then I could not remain in the Church without omitting this, without desisting from preaching the gospel I should be under a necessity of separating from it, or losing my own soul. In like manner, if I could not continue united to any smaller society, Church, or body of Christians, without committing sin, without lying and hypocrisy, without preaching to others doctrines which I did not myself believe, I should be under an absolute necessity of separating from that society. And in all these cases the sin of separation, with all the evils consequent upon it, would not lie upon it, would not lie upon me, but upon those who constrained me to make that separation, by requiring of me such terms of communion as I could not in conscience comply with. But, setting aside this case, suppose the Church or society to which I am now united does not require me to do anything which the Scripture forbids, or to omit anything which the Scripture enjoins, it is then my indispensable duty to continue therein. And if I separate from it without any such necessity, I am just chargeable (whether I foresaw them or not) with all the evils consequent upon that separation.

8. I have spoke the more explicitly upon this head, because it is so little understood; because so may of those who profess much religion, nay, and really enjoy a measure of it, have not the least conception of this matter, neither imagine such a separation to be any sin at all. They leave a Christian society with as much unconcern as they go out of one room into another. They give occasion to all this complicated mischief and wipe their mouth, and say they have done no evil! Whereas they are justly chargeable, before God and man, both with an action that is evil in itself, and with all the evil consequences which may be expected to follow, to themselves, to their brethren, and to the world.

9. I entreat you, therefore, my brethren, all that fear God, and have a desire to please them, all that wish to have a conscience void of offense toward God and toward man, think not so slightly of this matter, but consider it calmly. Do not rashly tear asunder the sacred ties which unite you to any Christian society. This indeed is not of so much consequence to you who are only a nominal Christian. For you are not now vitally united to any of the members of Christ. Though you are called a Christian, you are not really a member of any Christian Church. But if you are a living member, if you live the life that is hid with Christ in God, then take care how you tend the body of Christ by separating from your brethren. It is a thing evil in itself. It is a sore evil in its consequences. O have pity upon yourself! Have pity on your brethren. Have pity even upon the world of the ungodly! Do not lay more stumbling-blocks in the way of these for whom Christ died.

10. But if you are afraid, and that not without reason, of schism, improperly so called, how much more afraid will you be, if your conscience is tender, of schism in the proper scriptural sense! O beware, I will not say of forming, but of countenancing or abetting any parties in a Christian society! Never encourage, much less cause, either by word or action, any division therein. In the nature of things, "there must be heresies," divisions, "among you;" but keep thyself pure. Leave off contention before it be meddled with: Shun the very beginning of strife. Meddle not with them that are given to dispute, with them that love contention. I never knew that remark to fail: "He that loves to dispute, does not love God." Follow peace with all men, without which you cannot effectually follow holiness. Not only "seek peace," but "ensue it:" If it seem to flee from you, pursue it nevertheless. "Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good."

11. Happy is he that attains the character of a peace-maker in the Church of God. Why should not you labor after this? Be not content, not to stir up strife; but do all that in you lies, to prevent or quench the very first spark of it. Indeed it is far easier to prevent the flame from breaking out, than to quench it afterwards. However, be not afraid to attempt even this: The God of peace is on your side. He will give you acceptable words, and will send them to the heart of the hearers. Noli diffidere: Noli discedere, says a pious man: Fac quod in te est; et Deus aderit bonce tuce voluntuti: "Do not distrust Him that has all power, that has the hearts of all men in his hand. Do what in thee lies, and Good will be present, and bring thy good desires to good effect." Never be weary of well-doing. In due time thou shalt reap if thou faint not.

Hark! The backmasked angels song

In most traditional and contemporary hymnals, the beloved Christmas carol, "Hark! The Herald Angels Sing" includes the following third stanza:

Hail the heaven-born Prince of Peace!
Hail the Sun of Righteousness!
Light and life to all He brings,
Ris’n with healing in His wings.
Mild He lays His glory by,
Born that man no more may die.
Born to raise the sons of earth,
Born to give them second birth.

In some Anglican hymnals, however, you will find this convoluted, upside down, back-masked rendering:

Mild He lays His glory by,
Born that man no more may die.
Born to raise the sons of earth,
Born to give them second birth.
Ris'n with healing in His wings,
Light and life to all He brings.
Hail the Sun of Righteousness!
Hail the heaven-born Prince of Peace!

At first glance, one who was raised on the traditional arrangement of the words might view such tinkering as near blasphemous. But the history behind the hymn suggests such tinkering is very much the rule, not the exception. Although credited to the great Methodist hymn writer Charles Wesley, the most popular version of the song is altered considerably from Wesley's original work and the finished product is something of a collaboration of four composers spanning a considerable theological spectrum. In fact, Wesley's original poem would be hardly recognizable to the several generations of carolers who have learned the standard version by heart:

Hark, how all the welkin rings,
Glory to the King of kings;
Peace on earth, and mercy mild,
God and sinners reconciled!

Joyful, all ye nations, rise,
Join the triumph of the skies;
Universal nature say,
Christ the Lord is born to-day!

Christ, by highest Heaven ador’d,
Christ, the everlasting Lord:
Late in time behold him come,
Offspring of a Virgin’s womb!

Veiled in flesh, the Godhead see,
Hail the incarnate deity!
Pleased as man with men to appear,
Jesus! Our Immanuel here!

Hail, the heavenly Prince of Peace!
Hail, the Sun of Righteousness!
Light and life to all he brings,
Risen with healing in his wings.

Mild He lays his glory by,
Born that man no more may die;
Born to raise the sons of earth;
Born to give them second birth.

Come, Desire of nations, come,
Fix in us thy humble home;
Rise, the woman’s conquering seed,
Bruise in us the serpent’s head.

Now display thy saving power,
Ruined nature now restore;
Now in mystic union join
Thine to ours, and ours to thine.

Adam’s likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp Thy image in its place.
Second Adam from above,
Reinstate us in thy love.

Let us Thee, though lost, regain,
Thee, the life, the inner Man:
O! to all thyself impart,
Formed in each believing heart.

It was George Whitfield, Wesley's Calvinist colleague, who changed "how all the wellkin rings" to "the herald angels sing" and "King of kings" to "newborn King." This was done over Wesley's strenuous objections and imposed some subtle theological and historical inaccuracies which most casual worshipers probably miss.

George Whitfield, who had been a student with Wesley, changed this to "Glory to the newborn King" in 1753. His fairly revolutionary Calvinist position was not compatible with Wesley's gentler reforming approach, which eventually bore fruit in the Methodist movement that he and his brother John inspired, Whitfield maintained the four-line verses of Wesley's original, but changed the angels' emphasis: "Glory to the newborn King" means something slightly but significantly different from "Glory to the King of kings." In the Gospel account, the angels praise God, whereas in "Hark! the herald angels sing," they are inaccurately described as praising Jesus. Furthermore, Luke does not say that the angels "sing," and so it may well be that this reinterpretation by Whitfield has emphasized the popular but unscriptural picture of angels singing the Gloria. ("While shepherds watched" also implies that they sang.)

Also among Whitfield's alterations was the deletion of the final four stanzas, robbing the hymn of some of its deepest theological insights.

There is some real theological insight in these neglected verses. First of all we notice the Advent antiphon "Come, desire of nations, come," followed by a reference to the Fall, with the serpent bruising the heel of humanity and Adam bruising its head (Genesis 3:15). Wesley cleverly alters the meaning, asking that the serpent in us (sin) should be bruised (defeated) by Christ, the second Adam, who reinstates us as beloved sons and daughters of God. In the restoration of sinful humanity to a state of grace through the incarnation of Christ, the joining of divine and human nature is also achieved. Consequently, that which was lost (salvation) is gained and a new life is granted to all believers.

All things considered, I will always prefer the standard version, complete with "born that man no more may die" and "born to raise the sons of earth." Count me among those who have "coolly received" those "attempts to 'inclusivize' the language."

The communion of saints (Susannah Wesley)

From Commentary on the Apostles' Creed, some moving thoughts on the communion of saints from Susanna Wesley (1670-1742):

Accordingly we believe that all saints, as well those on earth as those in heaven, have communion with God, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; with the blessed angels, who not only join in devotion with the Church triumphant above, but are likewise sent forth to minister to those who are the heirs of salvation while they remain in this world. And perhaps we do not consider as we ought to do, how much good we receive by the ministration of the holy angels; nor are we sufficiently grateful to those guardian spirits that so often put by ill accidents, watch over us when we sleep, defending us from the assaults of evil men and evil angels. And if they are so mindful of our preservation in this world, we may suppose them much more concerned for our eternal happiness: "There is joy among the angels in heaven over one sinner that repenteth:"--they are present in our public assemblies, where we in a more especial manner hold communion with them; and it is there we join with all the company of the heavenly host in praising and admiring the supreme Being whom we jointly adore. What knowledge the saints in heaven have of things or persons in this world we cannot determine, nor after what manner we hold communion with them is not at present easy to conceive.

That we are all members of the same mystical body of Christ we are very sure; and do all partake of the same vital influence from the same head, and so we are united together; and though we are not actually possessed of the same happiness which they enjoy, yet we have the same Holy Spirit given unto us as an earnest of our eternal felicity with them hereafter. And though their faith is consummated by vision, and their hope by present possession, yet the bond of Christian charity still remains; and as we have great joy and complacency in their felicity, so no doubt they desire and pray for us.

With the saints on earth we hold communion by the word and sacraments, by praying with and for each other; and in all acts of public or private worship we act upon the same principles and the same motives, having the same promises and hopes of [the forgiveness of sins].

Similar thoughts are expressed poetically by Susanna's son Charles in the hymn, "Come, Let Us Join Our Friends Above."

Come, let us join our friends above, who have obtained the prize,
And on the eagle wings of love to joys celestial rise.
Let saints on earth unite to sing with those to glory gone,
For all the servants of our King in earth and Heaven are one.

One family we dwell in Him, one church above, beneath,
Though now divided by the stream, the narrow stream of death;
One army of the living God, to His command we bow;
Part of His host have crossed the flood, and part are crossing now.

Ten thousand to their endless home this solemn moment fly,
And we are to the margin come, and we expect to die.
His militant embodied host, with wishful looks we stand,
And long to see that happy coast, and reach the heavenly land.

Our old companions in distress we haste again to see,
And eager long for our release, and full felicity:
Even now by faith we join our hands with those that went before;
And greet the blood besprinkled bands on the eternal shore.

Our spirits too shall quickly join, like theirs with glory crowned,
And shout to see our Captain’s sign, to hear His trumpet sound.
O that we now might grasp our Guide! O that the word were given!
Come, Lord of Hosts, the waves divide, and land us all in Heaven.

Living Responsibly Under Grace

Grace is a two-edged sword. On the one hand, it frees us from the burden of righteousness under the law but, on the other hand, it eliminates all our excuses for not living righteous lives. That we are justified freely by grace means that we have placed upon us the responsibility to live the kind of life that bears witness to our justification. As forgiven sinners, we are responsible to "go and sin no more" (John 8:11).

But how are we to live responsibly under grace? John Wesley emphasized the need for spiritual disciplines, what he often referred to as "the means of grace." These included worship, the sacraments (particularly the eucharist), prayer, Bible study, and Christian conferencing. By practicing such disciplines, we continue to grow in grace and cultivate a life of holiness. Salvation is not a one-time event, but a continual journey by faith under grace unto sanctification.

Wesley himself said he came within a "hair's breadth" of Calvin. Yet, the Wesleyan view of salvation is much more holistic than the Calvinist view. Calvinism sees salvation as little more than a forensic matter, a legal transaction whereby the righteousness of Christ crucified is transferred or imputed to us. Wesleyanism sees salvation as far more than this. Not only is Christ's righteousness imputed to us, but through faith in him, his righteousness is also imparted to us so that we are not merely accounted righteous, but actually made righteous in order to stand in the presence of God. For without holiness, no one will see the Lord (Hebrews 12:14).

The Wesleyan perspective provides an excellent paradigm for responsible Christian ethics. Ironically, it is this perspective, more than any other, which has proven highly susceptible to being hijacked by revisionists. Evangelicals in the Wesleyan tradition have often proven the most timid when it comes to confronting the cultural accommodationalists who constantly invoke Wesley's name. If the message of Scriptural holiness, the very heart of Wesley's theology, is to live up to its potential for igniting again the fires of genuine revival in our day, contemporary Wesleyans need to overcome their penchant for what our founder would have referred to as "hellish harmlessness."

With grace comes responsibility and, under grace, we are called to live responsible, holy lives. That, above all else, ought to be the message of the Wesleyan movement in the 21st century.

It's Still True

Ben Witherington has some timeless advice for celebrity preacher Joel Osteen, courtesy of John Welsey.

"I fear, wherever riches have increased, the essence of religion has decreased in the same proportion. Therefore, I do not see how it is possible, in the nature of things, for any revival of religion to continue long. For religion must necessarily produce both industry and frugality, and these cannot but produce riches. But as riches increase, so will pride, anger, and love of the world in all its branches."

--- John Wesley (1703-1791).

Yes, it's still true, even in the age of rock star mega-preachers.

More Wesley Favorites, In Season and Out

My initial list of favorite Charles Wesley hymns did not include any of his "seasonal" hymns, that is, hymns that are usually sung only at particular times of the year. Such hymns deserve, I believe, a "favorites" category of their own.

No true Wesleyan can get through the Advent and Christmas seasons without "Hark! The Herald Angels Sing." No doubt, it is also the favorite carol of many in the wider Christian community, as well. In its most familiar form, its three stanzas celebrate the birth of the Christ child in perhaps the most magnificent fashion this side of heaven itself.

Hark! The herald angels sing,
“Glory to the newborn King;
Peace on earth, and mercy mild,
God and sinners reconciled!”
Joyful, all ye nations rise,
Join the triumph of the skies;
With th’angelic host proclaim,
“Christ is born in Bethlehem!”

Refrain

Hark! the herald angels sing,
“Glory to the newborn King!”

Christ, by highest Heav’n adored;
Christ the everlasting Lord;
Late in time, behold Him come,
Offspring of a virgin’s womb.
Veiled in flesh the Godhead see;
Hail th’incarnate Deity,
Pleased with us in flesh to dwell,
Jesus our Emmanuel.

Refrain

Hail the heav’nly Prince of Peace!
Hail the Sun of Righteousness!
Light and life to all He brings,
Ris’n with healing in His wings.
Mild He lays His glory by,
Born that man no more may die.
Born to raise the sons of earth,
Born to give them second birth.

Refrain

Long forgotten (though included in older hymnals) are two additional stanzas which, in addition to emphasizing themes more associated with Advent than with Christmas, express so rich a theology of the Incarnation that it is easy to understand how this hymn has often been called the "Theologian's Carol."

Come, Desire of nations, come,
Fix in us Thy humble home;
Rise, the woman’s conqu’ring Seed,
Bruise in us the serpent’s head.
Now display Thy saving power,
Ruined nature now restore;
Now in mystic union join
Thine to ours, and ours to Thine.

Refrain

Adam’s likeness, Lord, efface,
Stamp Thine image in its place:
Second Adam from above,
Reinstate us in Thy love.
Let us Thee, though lost, regain,
Thee, the Life, the inner man:
O, to all Thyself impart,
Formed in each believing heart.

Refrain

Interestingly, Wesley's original lyrics included no reference whatsoever to angels or Bethlehem, making it a more general, and less seasonal, hymn to the glory and majesty of Christ.

Hark, how all the welkin rings,
“Glory to the King of kings;
Peace on earth, and mercy mild,
God and sinners reconciled!”

Joyful, all ye nations, rise,
Join the triumph of the skies;
Universal nature say,
“Christ the Lord is born to-day!”

Christ, by highest Heaven ador’d,
Christ, the everlasting Lord:
Late in time behold him come,
Offspring of a Virgin’s womb!

Veiled in flesh, the Godhead see,
Hail the incarnate deity!
Pleased as man with men to appear,
Jesus! Our Immanuel here!

Hail, the heavenly Prince of Peace!
Hail, the Sun of Righteousness!
Light and life to all he brings,
Risen with healing in his wings.

Mild He lays his glory by,
Born that man no more may die;
Born to raise the sons of earth;
Born to give them second birth.

Come, Desire of nations, come,
Fix in us thy humble home;
Rise, the woman’s conquering seed,
Bruise in us the serpent’s head.

Now display thy saving power,
Ruined nature now restore;
Now in mystic union join
Thine to ours, and ours to thine.

Adam’s likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp Thy image in its place.
Second Adam from above,
Reinstate us in thy love.

Let us Thee, though lost, regain,
Thee, the life, the inner Man:
O! to all thyself impart,
Form’d in each believing heart.

It was George Whitefield, the Wesley brothers' co-laborer in the Methodist revival, who apparently altered the lyrics to something similar to what we sing today. Perhaps he took Charles aside one day and said, "Hey, Chuck. You've got a great hymn here, but you might want to consider changing the welkin ringing to angels singing."

For the penitent season of Lent, the Wesley hymn, "O Love Divine, What Hast Thou Done" takes us straight to the foot of the cross.

O Love divine, what hast thou done!
The immortal God hath died for me!
The Father’s co-eternal Son
Bore all my sins upon the tree.
Th’immortal God for me hath died:
My Lord, my Love, is crucified!

Is crucified for me and you,
To bring us rebels back to God.
Believe, believe the record true,
Ye all are bought with Jesus’ blood.
Pardon for all flows from His side:
My Lord, my Love, is crucified!

Behold and love, ye that pass by,
The bleeding Prince of life and peace!
Come, sinners, see your Savior die,
And say, “Was ever grief like His?”
Come, feel with me His blood applied:
My Lord, my Love, is crucified!

Then let us sit beneath His cross,
And gladly catch the healing stream:
All things for Him account but loss,
And give up all our hearts to Him:
Of nothing think or speak beside,
My Lord, my Love, is crucified!

As Lent gives way to Easter, earth and heaven together declare the triumph of the resurrection in the words of Wesley's "Christ the Lord is Risen Today."

Christ, the Lord, is risen today, Alleluia!
Sons of men and angels say, Alleluia!
Raise your joys and triumphs high, Alleluia!
Sing, ye heavens, and earth, reply, Alleluia!

Love’s redeeming work is done, Alleluia!
Fought the fight, the battle won, Alleluia!
Lo! the Sun’s eclipse is over, Alleluia!
Lo! He sets in blood no more, Alleluia!

Vain the stone, the watch, the seal, Alleluia!
Christ hath burst the gates of hell, Alleluia!
Death in vain forbids His rise, Alleluia!
Christ hath opened paradise, Alleluia!

Lives again our glorious King, Alleluia!
Where, O death, is now thy sting? Alleluia!
Once He died our souls to save, Alleluia!
Where thy victory, O grave? Alleluia!

Soar we now where Christ hath led, Alleluia!
Following our exalted Head, Alleluia!
Made like Him, like Him we rise, Alleluia!
Ours the cross, the grave, the skies, Alleluia!

Most hymnals (the 1988 United Methodist Hymnal notwithstanding) conclude the song on the triumphant note of the fifth stanza (usually omitting the third stanza, making it a four stanza selection). However, Wesley still had much to say about the highest, holiest day of the Christian year.

Hail, the Lord of earth and Heaven, Alleluia!
Praise to Thee by both be given, Alleluia!
Thee we greet triumphant now, Alleluia!
Hail, the resurrection, thou, Alleluia!

King of glory, Soul of bliss, Alleluia!
Everlasting life is this, Alleluia!
Thee to know, Thy power to prove, Alleluia!
Thus to sing and thus to love, Alleluia!

Hymns of praise then let us sing, Alleluia!
Unto Christ, our heavenly King, Alleluia!
Who endured the cross and grave, Alleluia!
Sinners to redeem and save. Alleluia!

But the pains that He endured, Alleluia!
Our salvation have procured, Alleluia!
Now above the sky He’s King, Alleluia!
Where the angels ever sing. Alleluia!

Jesus Christ is risen today, Alleluia!
Our triumphant holy day, Alleluia!
Who did once upon the cross, Alleluia!
Suffer to redeem our loss. Alleluia!

Wesley Top 5

Celebrating the 300th anniversary of the birth of Charles Wesley, Leslie Griffiths, pastor of Wesley's Chapel in London, picked his five favorite Wesley hymns during a recent visit to Cape Cod. His list is as follows:

1. And Can It Be That I Should Gain
2. Christ, Whose Glory Fills the Skies
3. O Thou Who Camest From Above
4. O For a Thousand Tongues to Sing
5. My God, I Know, I Feel Thee Mine

Griffiths' first choice is a no-brainer. There is perhaps no more brilliant a poetic confession of the Christian faith than Wesley's "And Can It Be That I Should Gain." Unfortunately, in the United States, unless you are a graduate (or a parishioner of a graduate) of Asbury Theological Seminary, there is a good chance you have never heard this hymn, much less pondered its stirring stanzas.

And can it be that I should gain
An interest in the Savior’s blood?
Died He for me, who caused His pain—
For me, who Him to death pursued?
Amazing love! How can it be,
That Thou, my God, shouldst die for me?
Amazing love! How can it be,
That Thou, my God, shouldst die for me?

’Tis mystery all: th’Immortal dies:
Who can explore His strange design?
In vain the firstborn seraph tries
To sound the depths of love divine.
’Tis mercy all! Let earth adore,
Let angel minds inquire no more.
’Tis mercy all! Let earth adore;
Let angel minds inquire no more.

He left His Father’s throne above
So free, so infinite His grace—
Emptied Himself of all but love,
And bled for Adam’s helpless race:
’Tis mercy all, immense and free,
For O my God, it found out me!
’Tis mercy all, immense and free,
For O my God, it found out me!

Long my imprisoned spirit lay,
Fast bound in sin and nature’s night;
Thine eye diffused a quickening ray—
I woke, the dungeon flamed with light;
My chains fell off, my heart was free,
I rose, went forth, and followed Thee.
My chains fell off, my heart was free,
I rose, went forth, and followed Thee.

Still the small inward voice I hear,
That whispers all my sins forgiven;
Still the atoning blood is near,
That quenched the wrath of hostile Heaven.
I feel the life His wounds impart;
I feel the Savior in my heart.
I feel the life His wounds impart;
I feel the Savior in my heart.

No condemnation now I dread;
Jesus, and all in Him, is mine;
Alive in Him, my living Head,
And clothed in righteousness divine,
Bold I approach th’eternal throne,
And claim the crown, through Christ my own.
Bold I approach th’eternal throne,
And claim the crown, through Christ my own.

Also in concurrence with Griffiths, I would include "O For a Thousand Tongues to Sing" on my list of favorites. This is almost obligatory, as it is the unofficial/official anthem of the Methodist movement, written by Charles Wesley on the first anniversary of his conversion experience. Usually trimmed down to six or seven stanzas in most hymnals, the uncut version expresses, in a deeply personal way, the hymnwriter's deep convictions about the atoning work of Christ in his life.

O for a thousand tongues to sing
My great Redeemer’s praise,
The glories of my God and King,
The triumphs of His grace!

My gracious Master and my God,
Assist me to proclaim,
To spread through all the earth abroad
The honors of Thy name.

Jesus! the name that charms our fears,
That bids our sorrows cease;
’Tis music in the sinner’s ears,
’Tis life, and health, and peace.

He breaks the power of canceled sin,
He sets the prisoner free;
His blood can make the foulest clean,
His blood availed for me.

He speaks, and, listening to His voice,
New life the dead receive,
The mournful, broken hearts rejoice,
The humble poor believe.

Hear Him, ye deaf; His praise, ye dumb,
Your loosened tongues employ;
Ye blind, behold your Savior come,
And leap, ye lame, for joy.

In Christ your Head, you then shall know,
Shall feel your sins forgiven;
Anticipate your heaven below,
And own that love is heaven.

Glory to God, and praise and love
Be ever, ever given,
By saints below and saints above,
The church in earth and heaven.

On this glad day the glorious Sun
Of Righteousness arose;
On my benighted soul He shone
And filled it with repose.

Sudden expired the legal strife,
’Twas then I ceased to grieve;
My second, real, living life
I then began to live.

Then with my heart I first believed,
Believed with faith divine,
Power with the Holy Ghost received
To call the Savior mine.

I felt my Lord’s atoning blood
Close to my soul applied;
Me, me He loved, the Son of God,
For me, for me He died!

I found and owned His promise true,
Ascertained of my part,
My pardon passed in heaven I knew
When written on my heart.

Look unto Him, ye nations, own
Your God, ye fallen race;
Look, and be saved through faith alone,
Be justified by grace.

See all your sins on Jesus laid:
The Lamb of God was slain,
His soul was once an offering made
For every soul of man.

Awake from guilty nature’s sleep,
And Christ shall give you light,
Cast all your sins into the deep,
And wash the Æthiop white.

Harlots and publicans and thieves
In holy triumph join!
Saved is the sinner that believes
From crimes as great as mine.

Murderers and all ye hellish crew
In holy triumph join!
Believe the Savior died for you;
For me the Savior died.

With me, your chief, ye then shall know,
Shall feel your sins forgiven;
Anticipate your heaven below,
And own that love is heaven.

Griffiths' three other selections are more typical of Methodists across the pond than here in America. To round out my top five, I would choose, first, "O For a Heart to Praise My God," a prayerful expression of a soul's passion for holiness.

O for a heart to praise my God,
A heart from sin set free,
A heart that always feels Thy blood
So freely shed for me.

A heart resigned, submissive, meek,
My great Redeemer’s throne,
Where only Christ is heard to speak,
Where Jesus reigns alone.

A humble, lowly, contrite, heart,
Believing, true and clean,
Which neither life nor death can part
From Christ who dwells within.

A heart in every thought renewed
And full of love divine,
Perfect and right and pure and good,
A copy, Lord, of Thine.

Thy tender heart is still the same,
And melts at human woe:
Jesus, for thee distressed I am,
I want Thy love to know.

My heart, Thou know’st, can never rest
Till Thou create my peace;
Till of mine Eden repossest,
From self, and sin, I cease.

Fruit of Thy gracious lips, on me
Bestow that peace unknown,
The hidden manna, and the tree
Of life, and the white stone.

Thy nature, gracious Lord, impart;
Come quickly from above;
Write Thy new name upon my heart,
Thy new, best name of Love.

Next, I would have to include the hauntingly moving "Jesus, Lover of My Soul" (haunting, perhaps, because of the tune most often associated with it, which was not written by Wesley, but a perfect fit for his lyrics).

Jesus, lover of my soul, let me to Thy bosom fly,
While the nearer waters roll, while the tempest still is high.
Hide me, O my Savior, hide, till the storm of life is past;
Safe into the haven guide; O receive my soul at last.

Other refuge have I none, hangs my helpless soul on Thee;
Leave, ah! leave me not alone, still support and comfort me.
All my trust on Thee is stayed, all my help from Thee I bring;
Cover my defenseless head with the shadow of Thy wing.

Wilt Thou not regard my call? Wilt Thou not accept my prayer?
Lo! I sink, I faint, I fall—Lo! on Thee I cast my care;
Reach me out Thy gracious hand! While I of Thy strength receive,
Hoping against hope I stand, dying, and behold, I live.

Thou, O Christ, art all I want, more than all in Thee I find;
Raise the fallen, cheer the faint, heal the sick, and lead the blind.
Just and holy is Thy Name, I am all unrighteousness;
False and full of sin I am; Thou art full of truth and grace.

Plenteous grace with Thee is found, grace to cover all my sin;
Let the healing streams abound; make and keep me pure within.
Thou of life the fountain art, freely let me take of Thee;
Spring Thou up within my heart; rise to all eternity.

But no list of Wesley favorites would be complete, IMNSHO, without "Love Divine, All Loves Excelling," a masterpiece on perfect love.

Love divine, all loves excelling,
Joy of heaven to earth come down;
Fix in us thy humble dwelling;
All thy faithful mercies crown!
Jesus, Thou art all compassion,
Pure unbounded love Thou art;
Visit us with Thy salvation;
Enter every trembling heart.

Breathe, O breathe Thy loving Spirit,
Into every troubled breast!
Let us all in Thee inherit;
Let us find that second rest.
Take away our bent to sinning;
Alpha and Omega be;
End of faith, as its Beginning,
Set our hearts at liberty.

Come, Almighty to deliver,
Let us all Thy life receive;
Suddenly return and never,
Never more Thy temples leave.
Thee we would be always blessing,
Serve Thee as Thy hosts above,
Pray and praise Thee without ceasing,
Glory in Thy perfect love.

Finish, then, Thy new creation;
Pure and spotless let us be.
Let us see Thy great salvation
Perfectly restored in Thee;
Changed from glory into glory,
Till in heaven we take our place,
Till we cast our crowns before Thee,
Lost in wonder, love, and praise.

To the wider Christian world, Charles Wesley is probably best known for the seasonal hymns, "Hark! The Herald Angels Sing" and "Christ the Lord is Risen Today." Wesley himself, however, would probably not consider these hymns useful only for certain times of year. In particular, "Hark! The Herald Angels Sing" was not written originally as a Christmas hymn. It is so deeply theological that it has been called the "Theologian's Carol." But that is a story for another day (maybe tomorrow).

Abraham: The Death of Wesleyan Theology

Wesleyan theology is dead. That is the declaration of William J. Abraham, professor of Wesley Studies and Altshuler distinguished professor at Perkins School of Theology. But true disciples of the movement founded by John Wesley should not mourn its passing.

Abraham said he sees the death of Wesleyan theology as a chance to celebrate a life well lived and find the real historical Wesley. We need to rethink the "background music" of studying Wesley.

By changing the way Wesley is studied, you see the man had a "deep, robust vision of God," Abraham said. By looking at Wesley's doctrine of perfection, we see there is more to salvation than God forgiving us.

Abraham said he thinks that we need to look at Wesley, as a saint, father and great evangelist. He said Wesley enabled people to find God for themselves and come to their own understanding of God.

"We have used Wesley to our own ends and projected into Wesley what we have loved in life," Abraham said.

There is, perhaps, nothing more detrimental to the legacy of a man than the development of a theological system around him. The real, historical Wesley was hardly a radical individualist. He certainly emphasized the personal nature of salvation. But he also emphasized the corporate nature of the Christian faith. Indeed, he insisted that there was no holiness but social holiness, that is, holiness cultivated and nurtured in community.

Abraham's argument is somewhat circular. On the one hand, he encourages a study of Wesley as a man who "enabled people to find God for themselves and come to their own understanding of God." But, on the other hand, he laments that "We have used Wesley for our own ends and projected into Wesley what we have loved in life." If the former were true, the latter would be inevitable; and neither would be preferable from an objective, orthodox point of view.