-
Introduction
- Baylor University Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
1 @ Methodists and Catholics in Dialogue Introduction Methodists and Catholics have been engaged in joint bilateral dialogues for over forty years.1 From the beginning of these conversations, the participants were pleased to discover an eminent degree of spiritual kinship. the universal call to holiness announced by Lumen Gentium2 echoed Wesley’s insistence that all Christians, not just the clergy, are to “go on to perfection ” (Heb 6:1). in the words of one of the earliest Methodist-Catholic reports: “Catholics and Methodists have always had one very important thing in common, though they have not fully realized it . . . the conviction of John Wesley that each man has a duty to seek holiness and ‘Christian perfection.’”3 Forty years of dialogue have confirmed the centrality of perfection in Methodist and Catholic ecclesiologies and affirmed the significance of sanctity for ecumenicity. “For Methodists and Catholics, the call to holiness and the call to be the Church belong together.”4 in spite of strong joint statements on holiness, the doctrine of Christian perfection or “perfect love,” as Wesley preferred to call it, has not been the subject of sustained ecumenical scrutiny.5 individual theologians have examined the doctrine of Christian perfection in an ecumenical context. these studies have frequently looked eastward for engaging in conversation .6 today, the working thesis among many Methodist theologians is that Catholicism teaches a static notion of perfection whereas orthodoxy teaches a dynamic one, and that Wesley’s is more like the latter than the former.7 the originator of this thesis, or at the very least the one most credited with this theological approach, is Albert outler. in an introduction to an anthology of Wesley sermons outler states, 2 Wesley, Aquinas, and Christian Perfection [Wesley] was particularly interested in “Macarius the egyptian” and ephraem syrus. What fascinated him in these men was their description of “perfection” (τελείωσις) as the goal (σκόπος) of the Christian in this life. their concept of perfection as a process rather than a state gave Wesley a spiritual vision quite different from the static perfectionism envisaged in roman spiritual theology of the period and the equally static quietism of those Protestants and Catholics whom he deplored as “the mystic writers.” the “Christian Gnostic” of Clement of Alexandria became Wesley’s model of the ideal Christian. thus it was that the ancient and eastern tradition of holiness as disciplined love became fused in Wesley’s mind with his own Anglican tradition of holiness as aspiring love, and thereafter was developed in what he regarded to the end as his own most distinctive doctrinal contribution.8 taking their cue from this statement by Albert outler, recent evaluations of Wesley’s doctrine of salvation have looked for affinities between Wesley ’s doctrine of Christian perfection and the patristic doctrine of theosis. A number of studies have been written that pair Wesley with eastern Fathers like John Chrysostom.9 valuable as these comparisons are for ecumenical rapprochement with the orthodox, there are limitations to this approach, particularly when it is grounded in reconstructions of the historical sources of John Wesley’s theology. recent scholarship has seriously challenged the genetic dependence of Wesley’s doctrine of perfection on eastern orthodox sources.10 For instance, the avowal of a connection between Wesley’s teaching of perfection and Macarius’ understanding of theosis fails to give sufficient weight to the fact that Wesley appreciated what the syrian monk had to say on the doctrine of sin, but was far less happy with his doctrine of divinization. in fact, in preparing the edition of Macarius’ sermons for inclusion in the Christian library, Wesley replaced all references to the term theosis with “sanctification,” a change that arguably underlies not just a difference of vocabulary but of actual theological understandings.11 Did Wesley appreciate and learn from the teachings of the Greek Fathers? Absolutely, but Wesley did not read origen or Clement of Alexandria as eastern orthodox theologians but as Christian theologians belonging to the whole church; whenever he spoke of orthodoxy at all, which was rare, it was in a largely negative light.12 in questioning the orthodox provenance of Wesley’s doctrine of perfection , i am not denying the possibility or fruitfulness of a Methodistorthodox dialogue on this or any other doctrine. if anything, such encounters between Wesley and the eastern Fathers should be pursued more deeply and extensively. What i am questioning is the categorical [44.223.39.199] Project MUSE (2024-03-29 12:15 GMT) Introduction 3 validity of opposing...