Calvinist Methodists

I grew up in the Methodist Church in Sri Lanka. Methodism comes from John and Charles Wesley, and George Whitfield. They were Anglican ministers who preached powerfully, and were serious about living a Godly life. They were “methodical” in their approach to their personal life – hence, “Methodists”.
I like to combine the intense personal devotion and powerful preaching of Methodism with the doctrinal precision of Calvinism. If you have just one without the other, you have trouble. Mere doctrinal precision without personal devotion turns into a cold legalism. That seems to be the classic Presbyterian problem – theologically correct, but not very loving or evangelistic. On the other hand, personal devotion without doctrinal precision could lead to… well, anything…! It’s great to be devoted – but to what? I’ve seen people deeply devoted to their careers! The health & wealth gospel, and other problems of the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements, can be seen as Methodist piety and preaching without doctrinal precision.
That’s why I’m drawn to people like Jonathan Edwards and Martin Lloyd-Jones. They also combined doctrinal precision with personal devotion and powerful preaching. It’s not head OR heart, it’s head AND heart. It’s not doctrine OR passion, it’s doctrine AND passion.
So maybe in becoming a Presbyterian, I’ve become a Calvinist Methodist.
David Jones - my supervisor here in Hobart - comes from the Welsh Presbyterian church. Their roots lie in the revivalist preaching of people like Howell Harris and Daniel Rowland, who were themselves associated with the Wesleys and Whitfield. They combined Calvinist doctrine with powerful preaching and serious godliness. In fact, the Welsh Presbyterians used to go by another name.
Calvinist Methodists.

Comments

The different distractions of secularity and spirituality

There has been a lot of discussion about the recent 'vibe shift' away from radical atheism back towards an openness to the supernatural. I don't think this new spirituality is necessarily an openness to the unique claims of Christ. It will more probably replace one set of commonly-accepted misunderstandings about Jesus with another. Under radical atheism, people dismissed the Biblical claims about Jesus' resurrection because they 'knew' that it was impossible. Jesus hadn't really died. He just passed out (after being beaten and whipped and crucified) and then woke up in the tomb (and rolled away the stone himself and overcame several guards). Or the disciples hallucinated that they saw him (even though Jewish beliefs of the time didn't expect one person to rise possessing eternal life himself; they expected a general resurrection at the end of time - see John 11:24 ). Or something else. The so-called 'explanations' of Jesus' non-resurrectio...

A better understanding of nonbelief

The Nones Project is an ongoing study into the belief systems of people who call themselves non-religious. A few weeks ago one of the project leaders, Ryan Burge of Washington University, posted some really interesting preliminary results on his Substack. 1. We've probably heard of people who are spiritual but not religious (SBNRs). SBNRs were "the largest group of nones" in the sample. They believe in the supernatural realm but not necessarily in "a God." They are "deeply skeptical of religion but highly interested in spirituality," therefore individualistic and anti-institutional. 2. But this study differentiated SBNRs from people they called Nones In Name Only, NiNos. They different to SBNRs by being religious about their spiritual. They believe not just in the supernatural but in "God." And they tend to engage in traditional communal religious practices while SBNRs practice individualised eclectic bespoke spiritual practices. The s...

Wax and Wright on the definition of "mission"

Trevin Wax has written a clear, simple, and charitable introduction to a debate about the nature and boundaries of the kinds of Christian activities that validly should be called "mission." In brief: Should we use a broad definition, where "mission" encompasses all the various purposes which God calls Christians and the church in general to perform, e.g. being ethical at work; general acts of care and charity; standing against systematic oppression and working towards justice instead? If so, "evangelism" is only one part of the church's mission - a central, necessary, and irreplaceable part, but only one part nonetheless. The latter kinds of activities don't save anyone for eternity, but they do genuine good in this world which please God. And that kind of good makes a real difference in many parts of the world which have not benefited from the kind of Christian moral transformation which the West benefited from - the kind of moral transformation...

Multicultural Ministry Matters

Search This Blog