This post from 1/23/08 has had so much buzz in the comments below, that I've decided to move it to the top for a couple days. I'll insert my Sunday and Monday posts below this one.
_________________
Some of us IWU religion faculty were in our Monday reading group and were talking about a footnote in James Smith's Who's Afraid of Postmodernism? Here he was mentioning his belief that Reformed theology represents the final working out of Christian orthodoxy.
In this conversation, a "Princetonian" perspective on orthodoxy was mentioned: The New Testament threw the ball to Augustine, who shuffle passed it to Calvin, who shuffle passed it to Barth, who ran it in for a touchdown.
So the question arose--what is the "lineage" of Wesleyan-Arminian theology--who have carried the ball through history. This led us to an important distinction in our minds. Our list is not so much thinkers, but individuals who have deeply experienced God.
Surely, one might make a line through Augustine, Calvin, and Wesley, but it is a somewhat bizarre line. It seems much more appropriate to draw a more affective line through the early ascetics and the medieval mystics line John of Damascus to Madame Guyon and Fenelon to the Moravians and Pietists to Wesley to (for the Wesleyan Church) Phoebe Palmer (whom Thomas Oden called the greatest American theologian of the 1800's) to the revivals at the turn of the twentieth century.
A visitor to our campus yesterday remarked that the danger about schools in the Wesleyan tradition is that they function on Wesley's principle--"If your heart is as my heart, then give me your hand." In this sense, while other traditions stand the danger of a faith without works, Wesleyan schools stand the danger of an experience without faith.
As the most distinguished theologian of the Wesleyan Church has remarked (I won't give the name, although ironically he's not Wesleyan :-), the Wesleyan tradition thus is in the awkward position of being one step away from liberalism.
In any case, it is no surprise that about 10 years ago when a Reformed consultant came to IWU under President Barnes, he warned Barnes of a religion professor (not me ;-) who he should watch out for. That was the most distinguished theologian of the Wesleyan Church at that time he was talking about :-)
Sorry Charlie. You don't understand our tradition. Go back to Reformed land and check off your cognitive list over a nice cold brewskie.
Any thoughts?
You captured our conversation well Ken. Indeed I'd love to get you and Bounds et. al. in one room where we made that list of "Wesleyan dots" to connect through history and then put together a one-paragraph bio of each... I agree they would be people who were "godly" in life more than people who had checked off 23 items on somebody's list.
ReplyDeleteIndeed, even in our embarrassing times of quasi-legalism we never paid much attention to a checkoff list of beliefs, but checked up on behavior most of all. THis is still how IWU hires professors and administrators... we are far mo9re interested if they attend Sunday school (better yet, teach it) than if they agree with belief # 32 on some list. IN a tie-breaker between beliefs and behavior we always make behavior trump belief systems... we interview people's hearts more than heads.
Question: How do you determine "proper behavior", unless you have some understanding of the "culture" that supports it...Reformed understanding is based on a "transcendent God" who undertook "to speak to humans" via his son. Humans are a means to grace, thus our "need" for the "body of believers"...But, what distinguishes "the body of believers" from any other social institution that is humanatarian in its mission? ,,,,the Christian "doctrines" of the Church! which is based on "tradition". Tradition is humans grappling to understand the mystery of God. So, tradition is fallable. Tradition itself is understood in Scripture, that is what being a Jew was all about ....So, it seems to me from what is being said that cognitive-behavior "therapy" is the eptiome of "truth" in the (Wesleyan) Chruch....It is "training" by habit building...just as you pointed out that experience without faith is the Wesleyan "sin"...but anything without faith is sin...so we must have faith before we "do it"...We must believe that God exists and that he rewards those who seek him...but this does not mean that we presume upon God or others in "walking out our faith".... faith is a personal race, as well as communal...if we only understand faith as communal, then we impose upon others our form, instead of allowing the uniquness of the individual to flourish and we may inhibit or bring damage by that presumption...I don't believe "God ordains", so we shouldn't "ordain" for others what their life should "be"...It is only the individual within community can "know" what it is that is necessary to attain to "holiness"...and it is only love and inclusion that brings the individual to a desire to be a "part" and want to pursue holiness...for what is holiness without love? John Wesley thought that holiness WAS love!
ReplyDeleteThese are all poles of identity--belief, behavior, interrelationships both human and divine. I think we would all admit that all are elements of identity and that any social group that tries to eliminate any of the poles is unbalanced. So belief is an essential element of Wesleyan-Arminianism, but not as significant as divine encounter and relationship. Similarly, for the Wesleyan Church tradition, behavior in the past was nearly and unfortunately even more important than divine relationship. That is not where TWC is today, of course.
ReplyDeleteThis is a great post and place for thinking - it's a question I have really pondered a lot while doing my Ph.D. at Loyola with the Catholic emphasis on tradition.
ReplyDeleteIn my own personal opinion, everybody becomes welcome. Because we are affective theologians, we tend to draw on anyone who pursues love of God and love of neighbor, even if their beliefs on that love may be different. It was always interesting at Asbury that we would have classes on Luther or Calvin or Barth or Kant or Hegel. We saw all of these as great thinkers who could help us think through our Christian life and theology. But, at Calvin (or at Princeton), we don't see classes offered exclusively on Wesley or E. Stanley Jones or the Holiness Movement, etc.
On another quick note, I find the footnote by Smith very interesting. Jurgen Moltmann, a "Reformed" theologian does not see it that way, but rather sees in postmodernity the dissolution of Reformed theology and the triumph of Wesleyan theology. I think it depends on how much you fall with a postliberal/Yale school/Radical Orthodoxy approach (like I think Smith takes) or a more revisionist/fundamental/engaging approach (as I would argue the early Church did, with Augustine).
It's obvious but worth stating that what we truly believe necessarily manifests itself in actions, not just for Arminians, but for everyone. We emphasize orthopraxy because of what we believe, not in spite of it, and Calvinists de-emphasize orthopraxy because their beliefs require them to. We show our faith by what we do, and vice versa.
ReplyDeleteTradition via the Jewish tradition and the admonition of that tradition to "train children" (which all traditions do).The training of children is not with abstract concepts of "doctrine", but a life lived before them in love (memory building and image bearing). Later, as the teen years approach, we "train" them in "belief systems"..which gives rationale to faith . But, as an adult, we commit to communities not because we need an image bearer, or a cognitive reason, but because we believe it is the place we belong, are loved, known and can serve others in...
ReplyDeleteIn regards to faith, the reasons we come to faith and hold onto faith are indeed indentifying factors. But, isn't a call to develop more fully into God's image one where faith is internalized where "no man can judge you"...because the individual has internalized the commitments and convictions he holds and walks in integrity...recognizing that others have different commitments and convictions, but are just as "faithful"...that person is "free indeed", because he lives to the "music of one"...it is integration of the whole personality.
I speak as an English teacher...for readability's sake, can you please stop using quotation marks every few seconds along the way???
ReplyDeleteI wish I was able to eavesdrop on this conversation, but alas I miss it again ... Do you have any recommendations for alternative literature around this such topic (Wesleyan tradition ... the Wesleyan way), besides the typical Church history text. If there's no such book, get together with Drury and Bounds and put a text together. I'll be on the waiting list. Also, if you could add some Schenck-isms as well, that'd be great!
ReplyDeleteAndy
ps. miss the liturgical church a whole lot! I've moved out to Portland, OR two weeks ago on a whim due to lack of substantial employment. If you're out this way, let me know!
I've never been to Portland, but will look you up my first time :-)
ReplyDeleteI don't know of a good book on who the Wesleyan Church is specifically, if that's what you meant, although I have tried to finagle my own vision:
What is a Wesleyan
Could either Dr. Schenck or Dr. Drury elaborate on where they see this in the current students they teach and interact with? It seems that the trend towards the majority of Wesleyans valuing "holy living" over "holy thinking" (is that an appropriate dichotomy for this conversation?) may be shifting. Not that it's disappearing by any means, but could the influx of Wesleyan-Holiness students going on to Seminary and in some cases, PhD's have an impact on this? What have you seen? Do they come out with their MDiv's and PhD's with a different look in their eye than the "average wesleyan" on this topic?
ReplyDeleteInterestingly enough, Wesley's 'If your heart is as my heart..." line is much more complex than it sounds like the visitor on campus realizes. Wesley's sermon "Catholic Spirit" makes clear Wesley's own stand against latitudinarianism, thereby dispelling any notion that one may have an indifference to doctrine. This, as Wesley says, is the "spawn of hell, not the offspring of heaven." Rather, a person to whom we shall extend our hand is "fixed as the sun in his judgment concerning the main branches of Christian doctrine."
ReplyDeleteThis brings us to the point where we might see that it is not that Wesleyans do not care about doctrine, rather, it is that we are not so arrogant to think that we have everything figured out so as to disavow the magnificent resources the saints have bequeathed to us regardless of whether or not we agree with them on every point of doctrine.
While I agree with you, Ken, that the Wesleyan lineage would be more affective than a Calvinist one, it need not be completely divorced from the thinking types. Your comments could be read to suggest that a dichotomy exists between those who think and those who experience God. Wesley, thanks to his Oxford education, was deeply influenced by the writers of the Eastern Church, some of whom are the brightest theologians the church has ever birthed.
To be sure, one of the reasons that I have remained a Wesleyan is that I am attracted to a tradition that is willing to allow for deep theological reflection as if the heart mattered. These two components, mind and heart, cannot be extricated from each other nor emphasized over the other. After all, John Wesley will distance himself from the Moravians when their doctrine becomes a bit too experience based for his taste.
Certainly, the Methodist movement began with a flurry of experience and scholarship. Enthusiastic Methodist preachers had Wesley's writings, Fletcher's writings, Clarke's commentary, Benson's commentary, Coke's commentary, the Christian Library, Watson's Theology, etc. Yes, this was a movement that wedded heart & mind (as Kevin suggests).
ReplyDeleteYet, I can't help but feel that this synthesis broke down somewhere in the late 19th Century and has yet to recover. I love the old Holiness books of the 19th Century — and some of them have been formative in my own spiritual life — but there are (generally speaking) weak on scholarship and accurate Biblical interpretation.
Yet, I found that they have pointed me to a faith experience to which the larger Christian tradition (especially the Eastern church and the mystics) also witness, though not in the Holiness tradition's idiosyncratic language.
The Christian heart has been defined in the holiness/purity tradition (I think) as love for God apart from love of man...Wesley said that there was no holiness apart from social holiness...The social (or "real world") is what the Christian is called to love. Christians still will disagree as to best love their fellow-man...that is why we have "fights" amongst ourselves about politics/political issues....for politics is the "realm of power" where Christians can be empowered to "show love their way"....
ReplyDeleteAs far as the mind goes...it is developing one's conviction and commitment to the issues that concern others...and then seek in what way you can help...it is all about politics anyway...
ReplyDeleteThis is great--good wide discussion. We must have hit a good topic.
ReplyDeleteI hope anyone who knows me knows that thinking is very important to me. But I'm proud to think that on the hierarchy of values, our tradition puts heart higher up than head--not against head, but more important than head. I firmly believe those are the Bible's values too.
I love Wesley, but if we are talking about him as a thinker and reformer, he just doesn't stack up against Calvin or Luther (even though I think his theology is far more correct). It is more as an evangelist and preacher of deep Christian experience rooted in sound theology that he distinguished himself.
I get a little uncomfortable when we lift up Centers of Wesley studies a little too high and I'm not impressed by the floodwaters of those who've done dissertations on Wesley (not another Wesley dissertation--is there really anything left to say?) He just doesn't stand out as a thinker compared to so many greaters. But as a changer of people's lives based on a great theology--that's the ticket laddie!
I understand the attraction he has to many of us who have come out of a grass roots Wesleyanism that has almost no serious theological thought going on at all. But I see the enamoring with Wesley as a bit of a phase most Wesleyans go through if they go to an orthodox Methodist seminary like Asbury or Duke. Ultimately, I'm glad that Wesley was not the founder of the Wesleyan Church. That gives me more freedom to own his foibles and critique his thought (like his problems with women and the variations in his teaching on entire sanctification due in part to his melancholic temperament).
I think the "problem" (maybe I'm "seeing thing"), but, the head's understanding of "justice" is what our democracy is all about...it is freedom of the individual to "become" and be committed to what he deems to be "just"...This is an objective stance...liberty and justice FOR ALL!!
ReplyDeleteWhile this may hold true for the "head", the "heart"'s understanding of "mercy" is the personal realm of relationship...that is where "love" can flourish and nuture growth in the individual...So, I don't see where we can emphasize one...but I would say, that without an environment of "justice", or a government of "freedom" then the "heart" is not "free" to develop and "become"...and I wonder in what way it hinders the social structures that nuture that development...
The O.T. emphasis on justice and the N.T. emphasis on love (mercy) is what the gospel is all about!!
So by reading into your thoughts, Ken, is it appropriate for me to assume that although Wesleyan-minded folks are traveling off to schools that are not necessarily "Wesleyan" in their approach to theology like Duke (somewhat Wesleyan), Princeton (reformed) , Chicago (??), etc...that you see it having little effect on the current "mood" of the Wesleyan-Holiness branch of church? Perhaps time will tell.
ReplyDeleteThe wave of Wesleyan students who have gone to Princeton and Duke for MDivs haven't really taken up their place yet in Wesleyan circles yet. John Drury and Kevin Wright are really at the front of that wave and their impact on the church is not yet known.
ReplyDeleteIn the past, it seems like a significant number of the thinkers who went to Asbury ended up leaving the church. At least those days are now gone with regard to Asburians, which shows in my mind that the theological level of the Wesleyan Church has significantly improved.
A sign of this trend is the fact that IWU will have an MDiv in Fall 09 and, fingers crossed, it seems likely it will be housed in a Wesleyan seminary here. With that, the era of "the brightest Wesleyans go off to Asbury" will soon shift I think to "Most of the pastors in the Wesleyan church get an MDiv at the Wesleyan seminary, and the extremely bright theoretically minded ones go off to places like Duke and Princeton."
We'll see if I'm a prophet. If I'm wrong, Deuteronomy allows you to stone me. I say wait about 100 years before you make that decision!
Yes... who is to guess the 100-year effect of IWU's launching of an MDiv and probably also a full blown seminary. Princeton Seminary has a 196 head start, Asbury started 88 years ago, and Duke 85 years ago... it takes 50 years for a seminary to mature so the Schenck question about 100 years from now is interesting..and I suspect worthy of consideration, for institutions like seminaries usually persevere.
ReplyDeleteOne difference... if IWU launches a full blown seminary I predict it will "grow up" faster. I suspect it will "rank" near the top in practical education from day one (often a strength of new institutions) and be among the largest half of all seminaries by the second year. Academic standing will take longer (as always) but will come within 25 years.
What excited me the most is the potential to develop a totally new approach to ministerial education. A new seminary can do that easier for there is no "discipline turf" to protect yet.
This move by IWU to daughter a fresh approach to ministerial education is the single most exciting thing in my 40 years of ordained church service! It has not happened yet...but the mother is very pregnant!
I am thrilled with IWU's decision to pursue starting a Wesleyan seminary (can we call it the Indiana Wesleyan Divinity School just so it sounds more prestigious, though?). Drury has told countless classes of students that seminary will add 15 years to your ministry and that not a single person who has gone to seminary has written him back regarding a faith melt down. Obviously this data is subjective but it at least leads us to begin to think that how well we form our ministers has a direct impact on their longevity, health, and fervor.
ReplyDeleteIWU will provide a cost effective option for people to pursue the calling that God has placed on their lives. Wesleyan ministers will never make oodles of money like the mainliners do, so having a denominational seminary that can offer an M Div at a good cost makes great sense. This is, of course, providing that the intellectual rigor of the program is worth its salt. A program obsessed with the practical is no less dangerous than a program overly fixated upon the theoretical. I have come across ministers who are overly theoretical or overly practical and in both cases, there have been terrible consequences for the congregations unfortunate enough to be led by those ministers. Teaching our ministers to be fine theologians need not come at the expense of ignoring the practical, and similarly, embracing the practical does not preclude cultivating the intellectual.
Overall, I am hopeful that IWU's new MDiv program will provide the Wesleyan Church (and others) with well trained and well formed ministers who are equipped to lead local congregations in modeling faith, hope, and love.
Kevin, the thing about a name that has IWU in it is that it might tend to provincialize the seminary. It's taken this long for the Wesleyan Church to come this close to having its own seminary. It seems unlikely that any other Wesleyan college will do anything like this for a very, very long time.
ReplyDeleteSo if a Wesleyan seminary is to be built, we want to build a "house for all the nations" :-) In other words, could we build a pan-Wesleyan-Arminian seminary that is not just for IWU, indeed not just for the Wesleyan Church, but for all the pan-Wesleyan groups of our stripe. Indeed, can we build a "head" to put on so many "heart" groups without a seminary home (CCCU, Salvation Army, emergents...).
We have a dream...
uh oh - guess I missed the boat by going off to Asbury - haha. You try carting a family off to NC after Indiana and Georgia... other concerns do enter in to decision-,making processes, folks.
ReplyDeleteanyway
For me, I felt that the climate at Asbury was more conducive to what I wished to struggle with in seminary, as opposed to say Duke or Princeton. That is what played a bigger role in my choice.
The Wesleyan Church has a strong uphill climb to make in regards to Asbury, as it is difficult to keep the connection alive here. The church has little, I mean little presence in KY. And the connection it does have is so far removed from Marion, that it holds little interest. All that to say that in my experience, the void between the Wesleyan, its scholars and the church still has massively practical applications and concerns. That may seem less than intellectually tied, but it is true.
My other great, great concern for the future of the seminary and the M.Div program is one of need. Why should a Wesleyan pastor put themselves through a rigorous program that is not mandated by the denomination? For instance, in order to be a fully ordained elder in the UM Church, you must have an M.Div. The degree then is not only a means to an end, but it carries weight upon completion.
Take the same degree and same scenario in the Wesleyan Church. The degree guarantees nothing and holds much less sway in the eyes of churches. That's at least a practical consideration.
My biggest suggestion to IWU is to make sure that the denomination gets on board. Either raise the educational reqs of the denomination - which would only benefit all or at least encourage the pursuit. This is not to dismiss the calling to get education, as the Holy Spirit does still do such things. I am concerned, as one who participated in the MML program at IWU. It was a valuable experience for me, but at this stage, it was a concern from class to class that we would even have 5-7 students. That was a travesty from my point of view. I know there are more factors involved in the equation than denominational support, but I still believe that it is an indispensable part of the equation.
I would love to see a seminary, an M.Div and eventually a Ph.d. that holds some stroke in the Wesleyan Church AND in academic circles. Alas, that may not come in my lifetime, but as Ken puts it so eloquently, we have a dream...
Thanks Jeff...
ReplyDeleteThe question of where Asbury will fit on the Wesleyan seminary map of the future is a good one. I think a number of Wesleyans will continue to go to Asbury for many years in the future, especially those that want a more traditional seminary emphasis on things like Greek and Hebrew but for whatever reason don't go to schools like Duke and Princeton.
At the same time, it's hard to imagine that the Wesleyan Church would continue to have its Seminary Foundation at a non-Wesleyan institution if there were a Wesleyan institution with a vibrant seminary of its own.
A group of us go off on retreat next weekend to team write the basic curriculum for the first IWU MDiv 6 hour block course (Global Christian Mission)! It will be an intercultural prof, two CE and two Biblehead profs to cover evangelism, church multiplication, and traditional missions. Maybe I'll post the major outcomes before the week is out...
I plan to attend Huntington U. this fall as a freshman, and plan on graduation in 2012. Depending on what I want to pursue, will this new seminary be open for students in 2012? :-)
ReplyDeleteThe MDiv will launch Fall 09 one way or another online with an onsite component sufficient to apply for Association of Theological Schools accreditation.
ReplyDeleteHowever, it is looking good (not definitely but more likely than unlikely) that a full blown seminary with a residential option will be launched concurrently. We're talking buildings, student housing, faculty hires, the whole nine yards.
Drury's not kidding when he says that by 2011 it might very well be one of the largest seminaries in America.
hey - IF it is possible to build cross-denominational and interdenominational support for such a seminary, what a wonderful thing that would be!I'm sure HQ would have to get behind it in some fashion, too. I tell you, for whatever reason, it seems like the geographic Midwest has less than its fair share of seminaries. Nothing against the south and the east, but it's about time we had options closer to home!
ReplyDeleteKen, I know you said you might post some of the details of the your curriculum meeting coming up, but I'm curious if you can give us some ideas of what kind of seminary this will be. It seems you are describing a "non-traditional seminary." What might that look like as opposed to a "traditional school" like Asbury, Duke, or Princeton?
ReplyDeleteMark A. Schnell
Associate member of the QMLCA: Quotation Mark Lovers Club of America
Mark, you inspired me to post the proposed distinctives in a new post.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, I need to back up about saying we will at least have an MDiv at IWU. We are in the most basic accreditation process with the Higher Learning Commission, which we hope will be secured before this summer even beings. But we will not have any MDiv at all if they do not approve our program, which would be the first professional degree at IWU.
Wow! This seems totally off subject by now, but I have a critical edition of THE PRACTICE OF THE PRESENCE OF GOD printed by the Institute of Carmelite Studies. In its general introduction the editors obviously point out John of the Cross's and Teresa of Jesus' impact on Lawrence, but then go on to discuss Lawrence's dissemination through none other than Gerhard Tersteegen, German pietist who would become important an important influence for Moravians, and so Wesley. Wesley actually included Lawrence in his recommended library.
ReplyDeleteThe discussion of experience is then quite appropriate. I don't think we can argue for an experiential rather than thinking faith, but it is a tradition steeped in the experience of union with God. Given the financial aid comes I hope to be able to study John of the Cross and explore his spiritual theology, which really is a theology of holy love.
Let me get back to you on this one. I promise I will.
ReplyDelete