Wesley was intrinsically a pastoral theologian, and his concern for practical divinity means that his most salient insights regard the life of faith rather than abstract theological premises. In particular, the most key Wesleyan distinctives have to do with his construal of the ordo salutis and the Christian’s experience of justification and sanctification. In particular, I believe his understanding of Christian perfection, the reality of sin in believers, and the means of grace are the most significant aspects of his thought for contemporary theological issues.
Perhaps the most controversial aspect of Wesley’s theology is his unwavering affirmation of Christian perfection as the telos of Christian living within this life. Often misunderstood, Wesley’s understanding of perfection does not entail the overcoming of created, material limitations of corruption. Thus, the individual Christian will still be subject to sickness in the body and to error in the mind. Thus a perfected Christian may in fact do wrong. The perfection of the Christian in this life is a perfection in love whereby the human heart is brought into complete conformity with the will of God. Thus, though a perfected Christian may do wrong from mental error, such wrong will always flow from a loving heart seeking the good of the neighbor in light of God’s love.
This Wesleyan emphasis takes a strong stand against antinomianism by affirming that the Christian is not only reckoned righteous but is in fact made righteous through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. This is a significant theological affirmation that I fear is often lost in UM preaching when we succumb to a generic “Protestant” identity. In many ways, Wesley’s understanding of salvation is closer to Tridentine Catholicism than to prototypical Lutheran or Calvinist Protestantism. Wesley’s concept of grace is more robust than mere imputation; grace is something that effects a change within the heart of the believer to the point of perfection in love.
This notion of perfection also has significant implications for Christian ethics. If we take seriously the juxtaposition of a perfected heart with a still enfeebled mind, then any sort of ethics that is ultimately teleological or deontological is proscribed. A deontological ethic does not meet the demands of love and presumes a transcendent awareness of universal laws that the created mind simply cannot grasp. A teleological ethic, though appealing because it seems to adapt the demands of love to the particular circumstance of a given situation, ultimately fails because of the impossibility of perfect knowledge of any given situation and of probable outcomes. Only an aretic ethic, focused on the virtue of the agent, can guide human moral actions. Certainly teleological concerns must be considered, but the standard for Christian moral actions has to rest in the love that motivates any given action. Only by admitting the limitations of our knowledge and agreeing on a shared virtue of love can we have legitimate conversation about how that love might be enacted in the world, both at the corporate and individual levels.
Of course for Wesley this belief in perfection is balanced by a serious appreciation of the reality of sin in believers. The place this crisis has in Wesley’s own biography is well documented, and in many ways the language of “backsliding” and constant repentance has become well ingrained in modern Protestant theology. Yet the implications of this for contemporary religious dialogue have not always been appreciated. The Christian life is, in many ways, a juxtaposition of humility and confidence. The reality of sin within the believing life is the reality that, no matter how far we progress toward perfection, no matter how assured we are of God’s love of us, we are still finite and fallible beings who are liable to turn again from the heart of God. It is with this balance of humility and confidence that we ought to enter into both ecumenical and inter-religious dialogue.
Within our communities of faith, however, this juxtaposition must lead us to a passionate embrace of the means of grace. In particular, Wesley’s strong advocacy of constant communion arises from these two poles of sin and perfection between which the converted Christian finds herself. The life of faith is not stagnant but a constant celebration of the grace of God, grace that is particularly accessible through the sacraments, prayer, and good works. The Spirit that is given to us works within us through our cooperation. The development of habits of virtue and love necessitate our active engagement of the sources of grace that Jesus ordained for us.
An appreciation of the role of the Means of Grace in transforming the heart allows us to engage in fruitful theological dialogue. In Wesleyan theology we see an anticipation of the cultural-linguistic model of doctrine espoused by post-liberals as well as the liturgical renewal trends that accompany emergent Church and Radical Orthodox movements. In recent theological work there is great interest in the way in which liturgy and practice shapes a community’s self-understanding and identity. Wesleyan communities have particularly rich theological tools for engaging this discussion since grace-infusing practices have been central to our identity from the beginning.
1 comment:
Adam,
In the second paragraph, what do you mean when, paraphrasing Wesley, that the perfected Christian can still do wrong mentally, but will do so out of genuine love of the neighbor? Are you saying that the perfected Christian can do something that is not the will of God?
Thank you for this post, by the way.
Kurt
Post a Comment