Religion and Violence in Early American Methodism: Taking the Kingdom by Force by Jeffrey Williams (review)

BOOK REVIEW 82 OHIO VALLEY HISTORY Jeffrey Williams’s Religion and Violence in Early American Methodism adds a new dimension to our understanding of the nature and significance of early American Methodism: recognizing and making sense of the violent, martial language so frequent in the contemporary accounts of early Methodism. This compelling book tells two stories. The first traces and analyzes the violent language Methodists used to describe their conversions and spiritual life, and how it changed from the time of John Wesley, the eighteenth century British founder of Methodism, through the Civil War. The second traces how Methodism regarded social and physical violence in the same era. For Wesley and early Methodists, Christians faced continual spiritual warfare against “sin, the world, and Satan” (14). As Wesley noted, “I found more and more undeniable proofs that the Christian state is a continual warfare” (13). Warfare went on prior to, during, and after conversion, although its intensity lowered considerably once a believer achieved sanctification. For early Methodists, the violence existed in the convert ’s mind and soul but also had bodily manifestations . Wesley provided several examples, including a woman who “experienced bodily afflictions, including suddenly falling to the ground, choking as if someone was strangling her, beating herself” (31), and he attributed such phenomena to warfare with Satan. Williams describes the terrifying conversion experiences of preachers such as Jesse Lee, James Finley, and Jacob Young to show that intense, violent conversion experiences were also typical of late eighteenth and early nineteenth century American Methodism. Over the course of the antebellum era, however, Methodist conversions became less frightening and bodily manifestations all but disappeared . The Holiness leader Phoebe Palmer epitomized the more mild experience of religion in these later years. Though she used some martial language and spoke of Satan’s assaults upon her mind and body, she found her conversion relatively easy, requiring only “the initiative of the person to place himself or herself on the altar” (150). Although Jeffrey Williams. Religion and Violence in Early American Methodism:Taking the Kingdom by Force. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2010. 248 pp. ISBN: 9780253354440 (cloth) $34.95. Religion and Violence in Early American Methodism: Taking the Kingdom by Force Jeffrey Williams BOOK REVIEW WINTER 2010 83 sometimes trying, conversion and sanctification no longer required the spiritual warfare and agonizing experiences typical of earlier generations. Williams provides an interesting and informative discussion of the changing nature of Methodist conversions. His second story examines Methodist relationships and interactions with the rest of society, focusing on politics and war. According to Williams, the Methodist struggle with the world followed the opposite trajectory of its internal struggle with Satan. Wesley urged his followers to “steer clear of preaching politics” (43). He followed a conservative political path and told his supporters to obey the legal authorities, who ruled by divine right. However, this position put him at odds with the quietistic path he expected of his followers. During the American Revolution, Wesley argued that the British fought a just war to crush the rebels, who rebelled against God’s duly selected authorities on earth. Most of his American adherents followed his advice but not his actions and took a neutral stand during the Revolution. Francis Asbury, the British-born leader of American Methodism, opposed violence on all sides and even criticized Wesley’s support for the British. Most American Methodists shared Asbury’s stance, saving their energy for internal and spiritual battles rather than taking sides in the Revolutionary War. During the early national and antebellum eras, Methodists transformed their stance, rejecting pietistic withdrawal for active support and participation in America’s wars. Methodists backed war against Britain in 1812, against Native Americans throughout the antebellum era, and during the bloody Civil War church members from both sections whole heartedly supported their respective governments. Williams raises an intriguing question when he asks, “Is there more than irony” (160) in the opposite trends of less intense inner warfare and more intense outer warfare? While Williams wrestles with this paradox in the last chapter, he never identifies it as anything more than irony. More thought on this topic would have improved his analysis. In addition, increased comparison and context would...