Holiness and the Wider Ecumenical Perspective
John Wesley envisioned the purpose of the Methodist people as the spread of scriptural
holiness throughout the land. Methodism was to have been a holiness project. This
visionary project was about the reform of the nation and the practice of just economics. It
was the growing affluence of the Methodists that led him at the end of his life to judge the
Methodist project a failure.1
This socio-economic and political emphasis has rescued Wesley from the criticism that he
was purely individualistic in his theological method and content. The criticism has some
validity but though there are serious gaps in Wesley's theology his description of holiness
as perfect love is essentially a relational and social vision. Wesley's scriptural holiness
may not always have been developed into the great social and political ethic it had the
potential to become, yet the latter two decades of the 20th century have produced positive
developments in this direction.2
Wesley often described holiness as 'renewal of the whole image of God' and scriptural
holiness was about 'the transformation of the economic and political order, the
establishment of Pentecostal commun(al)ism and the abolition of war'.3 It is true that these
concepts are latent in Wesley's theology yet when he spoke of human beings made in the
'political image of God', he considered this to be the essence of human nature. 'Human
beings were constituted as such to image God politically - in the benevolent and
productive care of the creation'.4
All of this suggests that if John Wesley had been around for the 1910 Edinburgh
Missionary Conference, birthing the modern ecumenical movement, and for the
subsequent development of the Life and Work Movement, he would have been a key
contributor! Latent or explicit, Wesley's scriptural holiness was about personal and sociopolitical transformation. His theology of holiness, despite serious difficulties with his
narrow definition of sin and the lack of clarity around his perfection vocabulary, has a
significant contribution to make to ecumenical hermeneutics and dialogue. Those who
have developed his often latent theo-ethics, have with other contemporary Wesleyan
theologians rethinking different aspects of Wesley's theology, done so because of the
challenges of ecumenical dialogue and within the ecumenical context.
Kenneth Collins, writing from the perspective of an ecumenical soteriology, points to the
stream of tradition which enabled Wesley to shape his soteriological formulations.
This broad array of resources, which drew from Roman Catholicism, Eastern
Orthodoxy, Pietism, Moravianism and Anglicanism, often made Wesley a puzzle to
his theological detractors …..5
Collins describes Wesley's soteriological position as a 'sophisticated theological synthesis'.
He believes that we need:
….. to rejoice in the breadth of Wesley's theological perspective and in the nuances
of his carefully crafted theology. In doing so, not only will we be able to see, perhaps,
a larger Wesley than we have previously imagined, not only will we be equipped with
the theological wherewithal for rich dialogue with a diversity of theological traditions,
but we will also be free, most important of all, to bear witness to the hope and
promise of a distinctively WESLEYAN VIA SALUTIS.6
1
This larger Wesley is important for ecumenical encounter and dialogue. Theology in the
Wesleyan tradition is committed to ecumenism because its theological spirit and
substance have been shaped by diverse traditions. Wesley practiced a catholicity which
went far beyond the religious zeal that led to bigotry and strife. His sermons on The
Catholic Spirit and A Caution Against Bigotry reveal someone who had moved beyond
'opinions' to the 'language of love'. In all of this Wesley combined 'openness and
conviction'. Indeed 'Conviction and tolerance can be held together because the source of
both is love!' 7
Something of the theological synthesis can be seen in Wesley's approach to the renewal
of our true humanity.
Thus Wesley places the encounter with divine grace and love in Christ, testified to in
the Lutheran doctrine of justification, within the context of the Eastern understanding
of the transforming power of the Spirit both within us and through us, making us
participants in God's redeeming of all creation. And Wesley would seem to
demonstrate that the richness of the Christian gospel cannot be exhausted by any
one denominational tradition, but we appropriate this variegated richness as we share
in the resources ecumenism makes available to us.8
The Wesleyan understanding of salvation, therefore, owes much to Lutheranism and
Eastern Orthodoxy, not to forget the many other streams of tradition. Scriptural holiness is
itself an ecumenical theology committing contemporary Methodists to the 'language of
love' and the language of dialogue with Christians of all traditions.
THE ECUMENICAL DIALOGUE OF TRUTH AND LOVE
The Wesleyan spirit and substance should have no difficulty engaging with contemporary
ecumenism in its tri-unity of emphases. The tripartite framework of ecumenism is:

inter-church

inter-faith

social ethics.
These three are inter-related, indivisible and inter-dependent. The first has to do with faith
and order issues. The second engages in dialogue with neighbour religions and the third
is often summarised as justice, peace and the integrity of creation. Wesley's vision of
holiness as the renewal of the image of God and the transformation of the economic and
political order, including the abolition of war, connects with all three inter-related
ecumenical dimensions.
1
Inter-Church Ecumenism
'To speak the truth in love' would be a Pauline and a Wesleyan motto for
dialogue. Both elements are important: to speak the truth IN LOVE, and to
speak THE TRUTH in love. Wesley's sermon on 'Catholic Spirit' not only
breathes a generous spirit but also affirms catholic substance.9
2
Methodists are involved in bilateral conversations with Roman Catholics, Lutherans,
Reformed and Orthodox. There is also involvement in key multi-lateral dialogues.
One of the Wesleyan qualities brought to Methodist participation in ecumenical
dialogue is 'a missionary participation'. This 'soteriological interest' for Wainwright
has 'the purpose of removing those divisions among Christians that are a countertestimony to the gospel of reconciliation'.10 To the ecumenical dialogue, therefore,
Methodists bring their already ecumenically shaped vision of holiness. Soteriology
involves missiology and ecclesiology. In the section dealing with The Church as
Communion in Love and Truth, the Joint Catholic-Methodist Commission for Dialogue
deals with The Church as Mission and follows with a paragraph on The Ecumenical
Imperative. It begins:
The ultimate aim of mission is to serve God's saving purpose for all of
humankind. Just as the Church longs for the oneness of its members in love
and prays for it in the liturgy, so it waits in hope for spiritual gifts that will lead it
to a higher level of holiness, a more evident fullness of catholicity, and a greater
fidelity in apostolicity. This striving after perfection in the God-given marks of the
Church implies an ecumenical imperative.11
Holiness is one of the marks of the church and in ecumenical dialogue Methodists will
want to emphasise the role of the Spirit as transforming love, renewing the image of
God in the communion of love for the sake of the wider socio-political transformation
of society. The holiness of the faith community is intimately related to its catholicity
and apostolicity, all of which characteristics reach beyond ecclesial life and churchly
matters to the life of the world and the totality of the world's relationships.
Wainwright lists six principle features of Wesley's vision, programme, and praxis
which relate to the classic ecumenical movement. Two of these are Wesley's
expectation that sanctification would 'show itself in the moral earnestness and loving
deeds of the believers'. The other was his encouragement of 'a social concern that
was directed towards the neediest of neighbours'.12 In the wider ecumenical
perspective, Methodists will not divorce faith and order issues from social ethics.
2
Inter-Faith Ecumenism
The Wesleyan emphasis on holiness as relational, transformative and social connects
with the contemporary and unprecedented encounter and dialogue with neighbour
religions. The OIKOUMENE has to do with the whole inhabited earth, the whole
human community and indeed the entire ecological community. Global perspective,
which increasingly is the local standpoint, locates Christianity as a minority religion.
For Asian Christians this has always been the perspective and role, a reality they do
not see as disadvantageous. For European Christians, minority status may be more
difficult to accept. The demise of a Eurocentric, Christendom model of faith creates,
for some at least, a crisis of identity. Yet a pluralistic Europe, including neighbour
religions and secular humanism is the context for any contemporary Methodist
holiness emphasis as well as the setting for inter-faith ecumenism.
Contemporary global experience is worlds apart from the time and place of John
Wesley. Even though he did claim the world as his parish, his world was very much
smaller than the shared planet of the 21st century. Dialogue with neighbour religions
3
was not on the agenda. Is there anything, therefore, in the Wesleyan tradition that
would enable contemporary Methodists to engage with inter-faith ecumenism?
Though living in a different world Wesley was not unaware of other religions. The
challenges of dialogue and pluralism were not on his horizon, yet his theological
perspective was remarkably open.
Wesley's attitude to other religions was not an outright rejection but a nonjudgemental critical reflection. This was rather unique considering the prevailing
attitude of British Christians towards other religions.
British Christian attitudes to other religions (pagan and savage tribes) during the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries reflected a strong, confident, aggressive,
and often ill-informed type of Christianity.13
It is in Wesley's sermons that his remarkable insights are found. Anti-Semitism was
part of the world in which he lived yet he refused to condemn the Jews and was, if
anything, more gentle in his attitude towards them than people of other faiths.14
He forbade the damnation of Muslims, praised the sincerity of their response to what
he called 'limited revelation' and acknowledged their openness and sensitivity to
God's inward voice.
I have no authority from the Word of God to judge those that are without. Nor do
I conceive that any man living has a right to sentence all the heathen and
Mohometan world to damnation. It is far better to leave them that made them,
and who is the Father of the spirits of all flesh, who is the God of the heathens
as well as the Christians, and also hateth nothing that he has made.15
Wesley's perception of Hinduism is even more remarkable.
He adored the search for holiness in Hinduism.
Would Wesley have
distinguished between the authentic experience of the holy in Hinduism and the
authentic experience of the holy in Christianity? The answer may vary.
However, Wesley gave equal level of standing between those who experience
the holy regardless of their relgion.16
Wesley's attitude to other religions was shaped by his theological standpoint.
Something of his 'generous orthodoxy' comes into play here. Wesley did not accept
the Reformation dichotomy between nature and grace and he believed in the reality
of prevenient grace always and everywhere, in all and for all. The 'light that lightens
everyone' had come into the world. The universally available knowledge of God was
rooted in God's creation. Holiness of life and the experience of the holy were not
confined to Christians. He was prepared to see more justice, mercy and truth in the
inhabitants of China or India than in many of the reformed Christians of Europe! 17
Wesley placed more emphasis on faith lived than faith believed.
I believe the merciful God regards the lives and tempers of men more than their
ideas. I believe He respects the goodness of the heart rather than the clearness
of the head.18
4
He was at one with Paul in Romans 2 v 12-16. God would judge on the basis of light
received and conscience. 'He that believeth not shall be damned, is spoken to them
to whom the gospel is preached'. In the same sermon Wesley again affirmed that God
is 'not the God of the Christians only, but the God of the heathen also'.19
Thompson believes that this sermon ' ….. suggests that the exclusive passages in the
New Testament were addressed to Christians only and cannot be applied to people of
other faiths'.20
On the basis of Wesley's critical reflections on other religions Thompson reaches the
following conclusions:

he did not reject world religions as unacceptable;

he was willing to learn other faiths and appreciate the religiosity of the people of
other faiths;

he was willing to adopt the best teachings of other faiths;

he saw Christianity and other faiths as equal as far as the pursuit of holiness was
concerned;

he was open to acknowledge the moral integrity of people of other faiths and place
them even on a higher ground than Christians;

he did not see religions as rivals;

he would have approved dialogue between religions as far as moral and religious
issues were concerned, and especially the issue of holiness would have been a
common agenda.21
There is enough in the Wesleyan tradition to impel contemporary Methodists to
engage with inter-faith ecumenism and the religious dialogue at the heart of it. If
holiness is a common agenda then the dialogue of spirituality (or Wainwrights's
'spiritual engagement') is a place for contemporary Methodists to positively engage.
Wesley's pneumatology may also help as a pneumatalogical starting point for
revisioning theology, Christology and missiology. If the Spirit blows where she wills
and is at the heart of God's 'undistinguishing regard', then Christians can affirm that
the Spirit is active where Christ is not named.
3
Social Ethics Ecumenism
The Wesleyan emphases on holiness as the renewal of the image of God and the
transformation of society connects with this third area of ecumenism. The interrelatedness of the tripartite approach to ecumenism is also clear given the reality of
shared global space and the search for a shared global ethic. Perhaps the major
question of the 21st century is 'how can we build a more truly human world?' No one
religious tradition can do this alone. If there is no peace for the world without peace
between the world's religions, then inter-faith dialogue is an imperative as is a shared
peace ethic.
5
From the Christian ecumenical perspective the approach to social ethics is focused on
justice, peace and the integrity of creation. These are inter-related and interdependent and embrace the whole human community, economics, politics,
militarisation and the environment.
Again the Wesleyan emphasis on holiness has a contribution to make to inter-church
and inter-faith dialogue. Runyon draws attention to the 'peculiar affinity between
Wesley's doctrine of sanctification and movements for social change'.22 Such a vision
or goal creates a holy dissatisfaction with the way things are and becomes a future
hope that the present can become something better. Such vision is necessary if the
process of personal and social transformation is to keep moving. In relation to society,
holy dissatisfaction ' ….. provides a persistent motivation for reform in the light of a
'more perfect way' that goes beyond any status quo'. 23
It is this holy dissatisfaction at the heart of Wesleyan holiness that provides a
Wesleyan social ethic. Scriptural holiness is a social ethic. Runyon affirms that
Wesley;
….. understood God's goal as the transformation of this present age, restoring
health and holiness to God's creation. God therefore enters into the life of the
world to renew the creature after the divine image and the creation after the
divine will.24
Holy dissatisfaction means confronting the injustices of the present age, taking
seriously the structural and systemic evils of our time and actively committing to an
alternative vision of a healthy and holy world and society. Wesley himself has
provided a social ethics agenda, some aspects more developed in his thought and
practice then others. Yet the grounding is there for a radical praxis. Runyon has
highlighted four key areas which are also key to the ecumenical social ethics agenda;

human rights

poverty and the rights of the poor

the rights of women

environmental stewardship.
Few will fail to recognise these issues as a 21st century agenda challenging not only
Christianity but neighbour religions as well. Missing from Runyon's list but also
another key Wesley concern, as it is on an even greater scale for the 21st century, is
war and peacemaking. War, violence and conflict have serious implications for human
rights, the poor, women and the environment. A more ecological, holistic approach to
life in the world will see the interconnectedness of all of these social-ethical issues.
Wesley's position on war was complex.
John Wesley loved peace and hated war. He urged peaceful ways and attitudes
upon his followers, and saw himself as a peacemaker - above all in the
American war. Wesley was also an English patriot - one who believed the
British government should defend the empire against foreign enemies and
6
internal dissolution, and discharge its international as well as domestic
responsibilities with force of arms, if necessary.25
He also believed that 'the end of war should be a return to peace - a peace of
reconciliation, not of domination'.26 Wesley's ethic was the just war ethic though
without a thorough grounding in moral theology, or at least without evidence from his
writings. Wesley appears to have been a peacemaker but not a pacifist.
In the 21st century and after the horrific experiences of the 20th century, (which marks
out our world as totally different from Wesley's) many ethicists have concluded that the
just war ethic is no longer possible. Methodists, as participants in the inclusive
ecumenical dialogue, which must also include dialogue with the secular world, are
inevitably engaged with the ethical debate on militarisation. The latter includes all
forms of warfare and weaponry, nuclear and conventional, the arms trade, responses
to terrorists, including state terrorism and the economic and environmental fall-out as
well as the abuse of human rights by terrorists and states and the scale of human
suffering affecting the poor, women and children especially. Nothing less than a
global ethical response is required calling for the ethical resources of all neighbour
religions. Furthermore, if conflicts are to be resolved and transformed and the peace
of reconciliation rather than domination is to be realised, what role does religion have?
Can religion succeed where politics is often failing? Much conflict transformation
practice has no place for the spiritual dimension, yet there may just be the beginnings
of a realisation that conflict cannot be transformed without religious vision and values.
The Wesleyan vision of holiness has its contribution to make to the ecumenical
commitment to the renewal of the universe. The strength of that contribution to
ecumenical social ethics may well be in the recovery and development of Wesley's
own concept of the political image of God. For Wesley, human beings image God in
three ways: the natural, moral and political image. The natural image consists of
reason, volition and freedom, capacities which humanity possesses. The moral image
has to do with the human relationship to God which is continuously received from
God. It is gift and consists of love, justice, mercy and truth, which are to be lived in
and through relationships within the world. The political image consists of God-given
facilities of leadership and management. Much of this Wesley defines in Sermon 60.
The human role is to be 'vice-regent upon earth, the prince and governor of this lower
world'. The political image was the gift of 'special responsibility of being the channel of
conveyance between the Creator and the rest of creation'.27 It is a stewardship role,
not just in relation to political governance but as caretaker of creation. Wesley in this
same sermon has much to say about the relationship between humans and animals,
the latter also being in the natural image of God.
Wesley's political language of humanity as vice-regent, prince and governor does
need to be changed. His vocabulary has easily translated into domination which
historically has been destructive of human and ecological relationships, community
and environment. Weber is correct to describe the political image concept as latent in
Wesley, even though Wesley considered this to be the essence of human nature.
Wesley used the whole image of God concept as 'the focus of his evangelism and its
supporting theology'.28 He did not develop the concept nor draw out its radical
implications for political life.
His neglect of the political image blocked the integration of his politics and his
understanding of the way of salvation. It hindered the formulation of a Wesleyan
7
social ethic by focusing on an individualistic concept of Christian love largely
incapable of dealing with questions of institution and power. It encouraged
controversies over the meaning of Christian perfection and entire sanctification
that often were sterile because their moral image concerns had no inherent or
integral social and relational dimensions.29
In the 21st century social ethics must address issues of institution and power. A
theology and ethics of power and power relations are key, not just to internal,
denominational and ecumenical ecclesial life, but to all institutions and structures,
cultural, economic and political. The use and abuse of power is the key issue for the
present and future of the world. Can scriptural holiness be translated into an ethics of
power? The challenge for Wesleyan Christians is to:
….. discern with biblical and theological integrity the meanings of political reality
and responsibility; and to confront in the light of these meanings the great and
perennial issues of political authority and obligation, the nature and purpose of
state and government, the grounds and definitions of rights and liberties, the
mandates of justice, and the moral imperatives of peace and war.30
The political image of God implies the political work of God. To be renewed in the
political image of God and to engage with integrity the meanings of political reality and
responsibility is to participate in the purpose and action of the political God, whose
arena is human history and the life of all creation, and whose goal is the renewal of
the universe. The political image and holiness are inextricably linked. The political
image and the wholeness of salvation belong together. Scriptural holiness is social
ethics. The recovery and development of the political image of God draws politics into
the order of salvation since 'human politics takes place in the context of God's political
care for and ordering of the world, not apart from it'.31
Wesleyan holiness relates to the tripartite ecumenical framework. It has the capacity
to contribute to and receive from the wider ecumenical perspective. The tradition is
theologically open to dialogue between churches, neighbour religions, secular
humanists and all who work for a more just and peaceful world and for more ethically
based systems and structures of power.
Dr Johnston McMaster
June 2002
8
References
1
See the paper Wesley on Social Holiness, Dublin, January 2002 by Johnston
McMaster
2
There are at least five notable contributions towards the expression of a Wesleyan
social and political ethic.
M Douglas Meeks, in God the Economist: The Doctrine of God and Political
Economy, (Fortress Press, 1989
Theodore W Jennings in Good News to the Poor: John Wesley's Evangelical
Economics, (Abingdon Press, 1990)
Manfred Marquardt in John Wesley's Social Ethics, (Abingdon Press, 1992)
Theodore Runyn in The New Creation: John Wesley's Theology Today, (Abingdon
Press, 1998)
Theodore R Weber in Politics in the Order of Salvation: Transforming Wesleyan
Political Ethics, (Kingswood Books, 2001)
3
Jennings, op cit, p 153
4
Weber, op cit, p 36
5
Collins, Kenneth J, The Scripture Way of Salvation: The Heart of John Wesley's
Theology, (Abingdon Press, 1991) p 205
6
Ibid, p 207
7
Runyon, op cit, p 220
8
Ibid, p 214
9
Wainwright, Geoffrey, Methodists in Dialog, (Kingswood Books, 1995) p 33
10
Ibid, pp 33-34, Wainwright lists three other Wesleyan qualities for ecumenical
dialogue. These are:

doctrinal responsibility

spiritual engagement

the glorification of the Triune God
11
Report of the Joint Commission for Dialogue Between the Roman Catholic Church
and the World Methodist Council, 1997-2001, Speaking the Truth in Love: Teaching
Authority Among Catholics and Methodists, (World Methodist Council, 2000) p 15
12
Wainwright, op cit, pp 283-284. The other four features are:
9

the scriptures as the primary and abiding testimony to the redemptive work of God
in Christ

Wesley's utter commitment to the ministry of evangelism

He valued a generous orthodoxy

He found in the Lord's Supper a sacramental sign of fellowship graciously
bestowed by the Triune God
13
Helm, Mark S (ed), Grounds for Understanding: Ecumenical Resources for
Responses to Religious Pluralism, (Eerdmans, 1998) p 98. The chapter The Search
for a Methodist Theology of Religious Pluralism is by Nehemiah Thompson of the
General Commission on Christian Unity and Inter-Religious Concerns of the United
Methodist Church
14
Wesley, Sermon 106
15
Wesley, Sermon 130
16
Thompson in Helm, op cit, p 99
17
Wesley, Sermon 61
18
Wesley, Sermon 130
19
Wesley, Sermon 91
20
Thompson in Helm, op cit, p 101
21
Ibid, p 100
22
Runyon, op cit, p 168
23
Ibid, p 168
24
Ibid, p 169
25
Weber, op cit, p 353
26
Ibid, p 353
27
Wesley, Sermon 60
28
Weber, op cit, p 36
29
Ibid, pp 36-37
30
Ibid, p 37
31
Ibid, p 417
10