Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
| PentecostalTheology.com
Pentecostal Theology, Volume 24, No. 1, Spring 2002
S SP
Dialogue
Love and Freedom “ by Grace Alone” in Wesley’ s Soteriology: A Proposal for Evangelicals
Henry H. Knight III
Introduction: Wesley’ s Arminian Soteriology
The quarrel between Reformed and Arminian Evangelicals is often seen by the former as a con ict over whether or not salvation is by grace alone. While not discounting salvation by grace alone, Wesleyan Arminians see the disagreement as primarily over how grace works, which tends from the start to accent the transformative and relational nature of this work. This focus is particularly noteworthy in the soteriology of John Wesley, who is generally considered to be one of the most signiŽ cant among Arminian theologians. “ Arminian” is a term he willingly applied to himself. When faced with intense theological criticism from Calvinist friend or foe alike, Wesley founded The Arminian Magazine as a vehicle to clarify what he was and was not teaching about God, grace, and sal- vation. I have found his insights as compelling today as many did then. My goal, therefore, is to reveal the inner logic of Wesley’ s variety of Arminianism, and in the process to suggest how it provides signiŽ cant resources for negotiating tensions facing Evangelical soteriology, espe- cially in response to postmodern concerns.
Brie y put: what is so striking about Wesley’ s theology is his belief in the transforming power of God’ s grace. He sees the problem of sin as every bit as debilitating as did Luther and Calvin. But Wesley insists that it is God’ s desire not only to forgive sin but also to restore humanity in this life to its condition prior to the fall. It is this emphasis on sanctiŽ cation and Christian perfection that orients his entire soteriology. In developing his theology, Wesley proclaims a promise of new life and a conŽ dence in God’ s power that goes beyond the claims of the Protestant Reformers, while clearly retaining their insistence that salvation is by grace alone. It
© 2002 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden
pp. 57-67
1
Pentecostal Theology, Volume 24, No. 1, Spring 2002
is to a description of this fundamentally transformative soteriology that we now turn.
Restoring the Imago Dei: The Heart of Wesley’ s Soteriology
To claim a Protestant doctrine of original sin while at the same time describing the goal of salvation as a kind of theosis may seem theologi- cally incoherent to some. Wesley is able to do this because he links grace not only to what God has done in Christ but to the power of the Holy Spirit, which enables humanity to have in their own hearts and lives the love that was in Christ. Wesley’ s soteriology shows how God accom- plishes this transformation toward Christ’ s love in human lives through both gradual and instantaneous transformation. To understand this trans- formation more clearly we need to examine Wesley’ s understanding of the imago dei, original sin, and prevenient grace.
Wesley believed we were created in God’ s image, and the very heart of that image is love. Commenting on 1 John 4:8, he described love as God’ s “ reigning attribute, the attribute that sheds an amiable glory on all his other perfections.”1 Charles Wesley continually used “ love divine” as a synonym for God in his hymns. Because love is God’ s reigning attribute, love for God and our neighbor is meant to be the reigning attribute of humanity as well.
Wesley identiŽ ed three aspects of our creation in God’ s image: the natural image, which includes understanding, the affections, and freedom; the political image, which is our capacity to govern creation; and the moral image, which is love governing the heart and life.
2
With the fall into sin the moral image is totally corrupted, and the self replaces God as the object of our love. The affections are disordered and corrupted and the understanding clouded. We now misgovern the creation, utilizing it for selŽ sh and destructive ends. And we no longer possess the freedom to return to God— because our heart is corrupted, we no longer have the ability to know or love God.
The fundamental problem for Wesley is that we no longer have a rela- tionship with God. It was this relationship that gave us the moral image of love; without it we are helpless to return to God on our own volition.
1
John Wesley , Explanatory Notes on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book 2 House, 1981 reprint), 1 John 4:8.
John Wesley, “ The New Birth” XLV, in Sermons II, Wesley’ s Works (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1979 reprint), VI:65ff.
58
2
Soteriology: A Proposal for Evangelicals
Wesley’ s use of the language of affections or tempers makes this depen- dence on love clear. Affections are dispositions of the heart, and tempers are affections that are abiding and habitual.
3
The objects of these affections determine the kind of person we are, what Wesley would call our heart and life. For example, love of self as an abiding affection would indicate a radically different heart and life than would love for God and neighbor.
We cannot have, much less grow, in a holy affection outside of a rela- tionship with God in which we know and love God. But if our affections are directed to an object other than God, then we have no disposition to enter into that relationship. In fact, we are unable to do so; our world is so constructed that we cannot even know God. Sin is a condition that holds us totally in its power; it is a terminal disease we cannot cure.
It is God who graciously does for us what we cannot do for ourselves. God’ s saving power is exercised in a way consistent with God’ s goal. God seeks to restore the divine image in us so that we once again can love as God loves. God’ s love is given freely, graciously. Therefore our love for God and neighbor must be given freely as well. In order for this divine goal to be obtained, God must act to save us in a way that both restores and maintains our freedom; otherwise our love will not be real and we will not be truly in God’ s image.
This point about the centrality of love to the Spirit’ s transformation of the self is critical to understanding Wesley’ s Arminianism. If salvation were simply a matter of eternal destiny, of heaven or hell, then irresistible grace would at least be plausible. Then the issue would be whether God loves and saves all humanity in this way, or mercifully and mysteriously chooses to save some from the judgment that all deserve. But if salva- tion is fundamentally the restoring of the image of God in us, and the governing attribute of that image is God’ s loving freedom, then grace must necessarily act to restore freedom as well as love in order for our love to truly image that of God.
So how does God accomplish salvation in a way that provides for the restoration of the image of God in humanity such that we can love as God loves? Through the atonement of Jesus Christ, God has made a way for persons to be forgiven and reconciled and to enter into a sanctifying
3
Wesley’ s use of the language of affections has been examined by Gregory S. Clapper , John Wesley on Religious Affections (Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press, 1989); Richard B. Steele, “ Gracious Affections” and “ True Virtue” According to Jonathan Edwards and John Wesley (Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press, 1994); and Kenneth J. Collins, “ John Wesley’ s Topography of the Heart: Dispositions, Tempers, and Affections,” Methodist History 36:3 (April 1998).
59
3
Pentecostal Theology, Volume 24, No. 1, Spring 2002
relationship with God. Because it is God’ s desire to save all people, the offer of a new life in Christ is made to everyone. But given the total cor- ruption of original sin, humans are unable to hear this good news and unwilling to respond.
To solve the problem of human inability, God counteracts the effects of original sin through prevenient grace, which restores a small measure of freedom to humans, enabling them to respond to God and inviting them to do so. This prevenient grace creates the condition wherein every per- son can both hear and respond to the gospel.
We see in the above discussion Wesley’ s twofold understanding of grace. In addition to a forensic understanding of grace as unmerited favor, Wesley also understands grace as a transforming power, a work of the Holy Spirit. This transforming power is evident in prevenient grace and is found throughout Wesley’ s soteriology.
Prevenient grace is Wesley’ s way of afŽ rming salvation by grace alone while denying double predestination and irresistible grace. Of course, as Kenneth Collins has correctly pointed out,
4
prevenient grace is itself irre- sistible in one sense: you cannot not have it. It is a universal gift of grace, unmerited, unearned, and at work apart from any desire or willingness on the part of humans. Yet, since its effect is to restore a measure of free- dom, we can use that freedom to push against God’ s invitation and con- tinue to love sin. “ No man sins because he has not grace,” says Wesley, “ but because he does not use the grace which he hath.”5
If prevenient grace distinguishes Wesley from those non-Arminians who link total depravity and irresistible grace, he is likewise to be dis- tinguished from Arminians who advocate a natural free will. Wesley, speaking for himself and John Fletcher, is clear: “ We both steadily assert that the will of man is by nature free only to evil. Yet we both believe that every man has a measure of free-will restored to him by grace.”6 Wesley does not believe in natural free will but in universal free grace.
Wesley’ s contribution to Evangelical theology is considerable at this point. He offers a theology of grace that afŽ rms the total corruption of the image of God and denies natural free will, while afŽ rming the uni-
4
Kenneth J. Collins, The Scripture Way of Salvation (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1997), 5 43-44.
John Wesley, “ On Working Out Our Own Salvation,” LXXXV, in Sermons II, Wesley’ s Works6 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1979 reprint), VI:512.
John Wesley, “ Remarks on Mr. Hill’ s ‘ Review of All the Doctrines Taught by Mr. John Wesley,’ ” Wesley’ s Works (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1979 reprint) , 10:392.
60
4
Soteriology: A Proposal for Evangelicals
versal love of God for humanity and the offer of salvation for all. He does this through an understanding of grace that enables and invites human beings into a transformative relationship with God. Yet, salvation is by grace alone, dependent on the initiative of God. Thus Wesley is clearly no Pelagian, not even of the “ semi” variety. In other words, Wesley respects the sovereignty and sufŽ ciency of grace while still respecting the promises of salvation as applicable to all. It is to this issue that we now turn.
God’ s Sovereignty and Promises
A second issue for which Wesley may prove helpful has to do with the tension between God’ s sovereignty and God’ s promises. Reformed Evangelicalism has long emphasized the sovereign freedom of God, and understood “ by grace alone” to mean that God is the active agent and humans are the passive recipients of salvation. Human action is subse- quent to and a result of salvation, but does not contribute to it. This is the line of thinking that has led some to afŽ rm double predestination.
A more Arminian strand of Evangelicalism has understood salvation as a promise offered to all, to be received by faith. The spotlight shifts from God’ s action to human agency: the call is to make a decision for Christ or accept Jesus as Savior. Some have even described this process in terms of spiritual laws with a cause-and-effect character: if you meet the conditions of salvation, then God will automatically grant it to you. God’ s promise then becomes a kind of formula. And while God may still be seen as seeking to elicit a decision through Word and Spirit, the over- all impression is of God passively awaiting a human decision.
Wesley offers a way to conceive of a sovereign, loving God and a grace-enabled humanity both as active agents, interacting with one another in a dynamic relationship. In so doing, Wesley does not diminish God’ s power but emphasizes it by describing salvation as both instantaneous and gradual.
A brief sketch of Wesley’ s description of the way of salvation will show this integration of divine and human agencies. As we have seen, prevenient grace enables and invites the human response to God. Upon hearing the gospel and the claims of God’ s law, persons become awak- ened to their condition, convicted of their sin, and seek to amend their ways. In Wesley’ s mature theology, these have what he calls the faith of a servant, seeking to obey God out of fear and obligation. According to Wesley, people Ž nd that, while they can change their actions to a degree, they neither absolve their guilt nor break the grip sin has on their lives.
61
5
Pentecostal Theology, Volume 24, No. 1, Spring 2002
What they are seeking is for God to enable them to know that their sins are forgiven (which is justiŽ cation) and to break the power of sin in their lives (which is regeneration, or new birth).
For Wesley, these preveniently “ awakened” sinners searching for sal- vation ideally enroll in a weekly class meeting and commit themselves to follow a spiritual discipline. They began a pattern of daily prayer, searching the scriptures, weekly worship (preferably including the Lord’ s Supper), and acts of mercy toward their neighbors. Enabled by grace, they enter a relationship with God in and through these means of grace.
7
As they do, the Holy Spirit works in their lives toward growth in both self- knowledge as sinners in need of grace and in their desire for justiŽ cation and new birth.
What they need but do not have is to express what Wesley called the faith of a child of God, in which they both trust in Christ for their sal- vation and are able to know that their sins are forgiven. This faith is what then enables subsequent growth in knowledge and love of God. Wesley underscores the epistemological function of this faith by calling it a “ spir- itual sense,” which is the means by which we know God and the things of God. Wesley is quite clear that only God can give us this faith:
No man is able to work it in himself. . . . It requires no less power thus to quicken a dead soul, than to raise a body that lies in the grave. It is a new creation; and none can create a soul anew, but he who at Ž rst created the heavens and the earth.
8
Wesley is likewise clear that the timing of this gift of faith is God’ s. He says:
Undoubtedly faith is the work of God , and yet it is the duty of man to believe if he will, though not when he will. If he seek faith in the appointed ways, sooner or later the power of the Lord will be present, whereby (1) God works, and by His power (2) man believes.
9
7
On the role of means of grace in Wesley’ s soteriology see Henry H. Knight III, The Presence of God in the Christian Life (Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press, 1992); Randy L. Maddox, Responsible Grace: John Wesley’ s Practical Theology (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1994), chap. 8; and Theodore Runyon, The New Creation: John Wesley’ s Theology Today 8 (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1998), chap. 4.
John Wesley, “ An Earnest Appeal to Men of Reason and Religion,” 9, in ed., Gerald R. Cragg, The Appeals to Men of Reason and Religion (New York: Oxford University Press, 9 1975), 48.
“ Letter to Isaac Andrews” (Jan. 4, 1784) in The Letters of the Rev. John Wesley, A.M., ed., John Telford (London: The Epworth Press, 1931), 7:202.
62
6
Soteriology: A Proposal for Evangelicals
Note how Wesley upholds both God’ s faithfulness and God’ s freedom in this understanding of the gift of faith. God promises to give us the power to believe if we remain in a grace-enabled relationship with God and are open to receive. God is faithful to this promise but sovereign as to the timing— it occurs at God’ s initiative, not ours.
This understanding of divine agency is distinct from forms of Evan- gelicalism that undervalue grace-enabled human agency— we are to actively seek faith in the appointed ways. Yet, Wesleyan Arminianism is likewise distinct from one form of later revivalism that assumes people already have the capacity to believe if they only will. It certainly avoids the for- mulaic, cause-and-effect approach that can be so presumptive of God. What we have instead is a God-human relationship in which the focus remains unwaveringly Ž xed on God.
Once received, faith enables us to trust in Christ for our justiŽ cation, or forgiveness, and that in turn removes the barrier of guilt that stands in the way of our loving God. While faith, justiŽ cation, and regeneration have a logical sequence, chronologically they occur together as one instan- taneous work of God. This moment is preceded by a gradual work in which, largely through means of grace, persons grow in a relationship with God. It is followed by the gradual work of sanctiŽ cation, in which newborn Christians, again primarily through means of grace, grow in the knowledge and love of God. The goal of sanctiŽ cation is Christian per- fection, or perfect love, in which the image of God is restored and love fully governs the heart and life. Should believers receive this second instantaneous work of God before the time of death, they would then con- tinue gradually to grow in perfection.
Grace then works both gradually and instantaneously. Each transforms human lives, but in different ways. The gradual work is intrinsically rela- tional, involving both divine and human agency. It is oriented teleologi- cally toward a promised goal, which for the awakened sinner is justiŽ cation and new birth, and for the believer who is growing in sanctiŽ cation is Christian perfection. Lives are transformed as they grow toward these goals through continuing in a relationship with God by way of means of grace such as praying, searching the scriptures, participating in the Lord’ s Supper, and performing acts of mercy to their neighbor.
The goals being sought are themselves instantaneous works of God. These are divine acts that create new potentialities in the lives of the recip- ients, potentialities that did not previously exist and are not the result of preexisting factors. In one sense they are not resistible— at one point, even Wesley uses the word “ irresistibly” to describe the instantaneous work of
63
7
Pentecostal Theology, Volume 24, No. 1, Spring 2002
conversion.
10
Yet, they are only given to those who seek them, and require active faith in response for their effects to be retained. The gradual work of salvation both seeks and builds upon the instantaneous.
What Wesley gives us is a carefully conceived depiction of the inter- relation of divine and human agency. It maintains the sovereign freedom and transforming power of God while insisting on a grace-enabled human freedom. It shows how salvation is by grace alone and yet can result in humans loving in freedom as God has loved them. How this Wesleyan focus on a free and loving response to God avoids the dual dangers of antinomianism and legalism is our next concern.
Antinomianism and Legalism
A third issue, one that from time to time has been prevalent in popu- lar Evangelicalism, is the tension between antinomianism and legalism. There is always the tendency to assume that if Christ has done everything for our salvation then we need do nothing; if righteousness is alien then our righteousness does not matter. On the other hand, there has also been the assumption that if one is truly among the elect or has been truly sanctiŽ ed, there would be some sign of this in one’ s behavior. This has sometimes led to a rigid set of rules and expectations governing human behavior.
Wesley’ s contribution to avoiding these dangers is found in both his christology and his soteriology. Christologically he distinguished between the sense in which Christ’ s work for our salvation is fulŽ lled and is still ongoing. Wesley believed as strongly as anyone in the Ž nality of Christ’ s death and resurrection. What has been accomplished in the atonement can be neither repealed nor overcome; it stands for all eternity. Yet, he believed it a Ž ction to act as if sin has been totally overcome when it so obviously continues its destructive existence. Sin is being overcome in the hearts of persons and in the world at large as God’ s love is made manifest through the power of the Spirit. Sin and death will be Ž nally eliminated when the risen Christ returns in glory. Wesley roots salvation in the past work of Christ, but does not see salvation completed until God’ s love Ž lls the cre- ation. So there is a sense in which Christ has done all, and a sense in which Christ has not yet completed the work of salvation.
Corresponding to this issue, Wesley understands the righteousness of
10
John Wesley, “ Thoughts on God’ s Sovereignty,” Wesley’ s Works (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, reprint 1979), 10:362.
64
8
Soteriology: A Proposal for Evangelicals
Christians to be not alien but actual. While Wesley says the “ righteous- ness of Christ is the whole and foundation of all our hope,” he argues that it “ is by faith that the Holy Ghost enables us to build upon this foun- dation.”11 God forgives us for Christ’ s sake, but it is simply not the case that God sees Christ’ s righteousness instead of our sin. Salvation is not a divine plan to act as if we have no sin, but to replace the sin we actu- ally have with love.
Hence Wesley insists that “ God implants righteousness in every one to whom he has imputed it.” Persons “ to whom the righteousness of Christ is imputed are made righteous by the Spirit of Christ, are renewed in the image of God. . . .”12 Put differently, justiŽ cation is the logical precondi- tion and necessary entrance into sanctiŽ cation, and God begins to sanc- tify through regeneration (or the new birth) those whom God has justiŽ ed. It is sanctiŽ cation and not justiŽ cation that is essentially what is meant by salvation.
By making sanctiŽ cation, or holiness of heart and life, the central con- tent of salvation, Wesley undercuts both antinomianism and legalism. He shows how a salvation merely concerned with qualifying one for heaven has totally missed God’ s intention to transform us so that we could love in freedom in this life. Thus, the antinomian picture of a grace that takes us to heaven while leaving us unchanged is no salvation at all; and the legalistic concern to show through external behavior that one has received it likewise misses the point.
Wesley’ s Methodists did have their rules of discipline, of course, but these were not signs of having received salvation but a means of seeking salvation. Today we would call them spiritual disciplines. Their purpose was to aid people to continue in a relationship with God and to serve as concrete, daily reminders of our ongoing need for grace.
If sanctiŽ cation is the point of salvation, then it is well to recall that Wesley conceives of sanctiŽ cation in terms of holy affections or tempers, the chief of which are love for God and our neighbor. Such affections and tempers are at one and the same time dispositional and relational. As dis- positions they are essentially who we are, the result of a real transfor- mation of heart and life. The righteousness is actual, not alien; implanted as well as imputed. As relational the affections can only exist as we con- tinue in a relationship with God; that is, we have these affections by grace
11
John Wesley, “ The Lord Our Righteousness,” XX, in Sermons I, Wesley’ s Works (Grand 12 Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, reprint 1979), 1:241-244.
Ibid.
65
9
Pentecostal Theology, Volume 24, No. 1, Spring 2002
alone. There can simply be no holiness of heart and life, no restoration of the image of God, no loving in freedom apart from a continual depen- dence on God’ s grace through faith.
Engaging Postmodernism
If Wesley’ s theology of grace is at all pervasive, then it has the added bonus of providing some avenues for Evangelicalism to constructively engage postmodern culture. Let me brie y suggest two.
First, it is clear that Wesley does not simply accept the autonomous individualism presupposed by modernity. For Wesley it is autonomy that is at the root of our problem: autonomy from God is the cause of origi- nal sin, and autonomy from our neighbor is the destructive result. Wesley’ s theology is fundamentally relational and communal; it is only as we are enabled by grace to enter into a relationship with God that we can become the people we were created to be. That relationship is lived out through the practices of the Christian community, which serve as means of grace. Moreover, Wesley insists that we only grow in grace when we are in soci- ety with one another, which means that community is essential to the Christian life.
Postmodernism recognizes the communal and relational nature of human existence. However, some forms of postmodernism have so emphasized the formative power of social context as to make us virtual prisoners of our own culture, and see religion as one product of that culture. To this view Wesley would argue that the gospel is not the product of any cul- ture but of the revelation of God. While he did not have the multicultural sensitivity that we have today, he was deeply aware of how the gospel had become captive to various European cultures, most especially his own. Over against this dead, formal religion he proposed a religion of God’ s love in Christ, which proclaims a God who both judges and renews any and every culture as well as human lives. While the gospel can Ž nd a home in any culture, it has its own narrative and practices that serve to counteract cultural accommodation. Hence, Wesley was an ardent oppo- nent of slavery, and he utilized in leadership persons who would have been denied such opportunities elsewhere in society because of their gen- der or class.
A second feature of postmodernism is the move away from founda- tionalism. Wesley showed little interest in trying to demonstrate the truth of the gospel through an appeal to universal reason. While he did insist there was nothing in the gospel contrary to reason, Wesley believed that
66
10
Soteriology: A Proposal for Evangelicals
apart from faith as a spiritual sense, given to us by the Holy Spirit, rea- son is limited by its lack of access to spiritual reality. He would not at all be surprised by modernity’ s reductionist approach to religion, in which it continually seeks a natural explanation for spiritual phenomena, and he would attribute this to the absence of faith, or perhaps to the presence of another, very different underlying belief.
Yet, Wesley would strongly reject those elements of postmodernism that imply truth is relative. For Wesley, the essential truth of the gospel is universal, and provides an account of the meaning and purpose of human life, history, and creation itself. Those who have faith know this to be so.
The evidence for this claim cannot be conclusive according to the stan- dards of modernity, but the proclamation of the gospel may prove per- suasive to lonely, alienated postmoderns who long for something or someone they can trust. Wesley knew that the best evidence for the truth of this gospel is not in the plausibility of our arguments but in the integrity of our lives and communities. Wherever are found people who name the name of Jesus and who actively love God and their neighbor, great cred- ibility will be given to the gracious power and love of God.
67
11
