Poverty, Sanctification and the Progress of English
Democracy
Larry JamesUnited Methodist History HX 7365, Fall 2013
Professor Tamara E. Lewis
From the earliest
days religious societies in one expression or another provided the backbone for
the Wesleyan movement to reform the Church of England and to renew the entire
nation. Regular, weekly attention to
religious devotion, personal discipleship and meaningful engagement with the
poor and downcast, both in and outside society membership, provided stability
and purpose to these groups, as well as growth for individual members and to
the expanding movement.
For
all the argument over issues related to assurance, predestination, perseverance
of the saints and other matters emerging from John Wesley’s ongoing dialogue
and struggle with Calvinism and Quietism, it is my contention that service to
and concern for the poor became increasingly important to Wesley and to his understanding of the
meaning and purpose of his work. So
important was this aspect of his understanding that the notion of “works of
mercy” became as important a “means of grace” as were “works of piety.” It
appears that as Wesley’s lifelong struggle with issues related to the assurance
of salvation matured, so did his commitment to the poor deepen. By the end of his life, Wesley had developed
a profound understanding of the poor, their struggles and the forces that
continued to oppress them. While his
life ended in expressed disappointment regarding the overall Methodist response
to the problems associated with poverty and an adequate Christian reaction,[1] it is my
contention that his work set the stage for dramatic advancements in democracy,
social concern and organized labor.
As
M. Douglas Meeks notes, it is
Wesley’s unequivocal insistence that the poor are at the
heart of the evangel and that life with the poor is constitutive of Christian
discipleship. There is widespread
agreement that, according to the practice of Wesley, ‘the poor in Jesus Christ’
has to do with the nature of the church and with salvation. Wesley’s ministry with the poor included
feeding, clothing, housing the poor; preparing the unemployed for work and
finding them employment; visiting the poor, sick and prisoners; devising new
forms of health care education and delivery for the indigent; distributing
books to the needy; and raising structural questions about an economy that
produced poverty.[2]
Wesley considered concern for the
poor by Christian disciples as a determinative factor in the process of salvation.[3]
Clearly,
the outdoor or field-preaching that ushered in and/or accompanied revival among
the people of the nation brought with it an egalitarian dimension that some
found offensive. Rev. Dr. Edmond Gibson,
Bishop of London, wrote a pamphlet against both the Methodists and their
“boldness to preach in the fields and other open space and inviting the rabble
to be their hearers.”[4] Wesley responded by reminding the Bishop that
the reason these people stand in need of salvation is that they never came to
the churches, the implication being that they were not invited or welcomed
there.[5] The Duchess of Buckingham expresses an even
stronger reaction in her letter to the countess of Huntingdon, referring to the
doctrines of the Methodist preachers as “most repulsive, and strongly tinctured
with impertinence and disrespect towards their superiors, in perpetually
endeavoring to level all ranks, and do away with all distinctions. . .. and I
cannot but wonder that your ladyship should relish any sentiment so much at
variance with high rank and good breeding.”[6]
The
egalitarian nature of the methods (even if unknowing) of Wesley and others who
reached out so effectively to the common people of the nation would result in
many unintended consequences vital to the emergence of a thoroughly democratic
society. Wesley’s account of his
experience preaching on the streets and later from a hilltop at Newcastle is
moving and indicative of the hunger of listeners for hope and for inclusion in
the social/religious life of the community and nation.[7]
In
my view, the fact that Wesley places increasing emphasis on ministry among the
poor grows out of his economic vision for the followers of Christ. His well-known dictum—“Earn all you can.” “Save all you can.” “Give all you can.”--became more and more
important to him as he and his movement aged.
Wesley considered a person claiming to follow Christ and, at the same
time, choosing to hold onto wealth while others suffered in need, antithetical
to the call of Christian self-denial and was in fact a “mortal sin.”[8]
Wesley’s
well-known claim that there is “no holiness but social holiness” indicates the
importance of works of compassion and justice to the essential process of
sanctification. In “The Scripture Way of
Salvation” (1765), Wesley declares, “Why that both repentance, rightly
understood, and the practice of all good works, works of piety, as well as
works of mercy (now properly so called, since they spring from faith) are in
some sense necessary to sanctification.”[9] He goes on,
"But
what good works are those, the practice of which you affirm to be necessary to
sanctification?" First, all works of piety; such as public prayer, family
prayer, and praying in our closet; receiving the supper of the Lord; searching
the Scriptures, by hearing, reading, meditating; and using such a measure of
fasting or abstinence as our bodily health allows.
Secondly,
all works of mercy; whether they relate to the bodies or souls of men; such as
feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, entertaining the stranger, visiting
those that are in prison, or sick, or variously afflicted; such as the
endeavouring to instruct the ignorant, to awaken the stupid sinner, to quicken
the lukewarm, to confirm the wavering, to comfort the feeble-minded, to succour
the tempted, or contribute in any manner to the saving of souls from death. This
is the repentance, and these the "fruits meet for repentance," which
are necessary to full sanctification. This is the way wherein God hath
appointed His children to wait for complete salvation.[10]
From the beginning
of his work in and with religious societies, and building on the history of the
varieties of such organizations, Wesley included work among the poor as a vital
part of his response to his experience of justification. How seriously he took these concerns can be
seen in how hard he and his followers worked to build institutional or
organizational “structures”(to borrow a term from Randy L. Maddox) to ensure that the poor were served by the
sanctifying activities of the believers.[11] It is equally clear that over time Wesley’s
efforts among the poor moved beyond simple acts of charity to include
empowerment strategies such as schools for poor children, employment programs,
loan funds and even parish-based wellness efforts stemming from his rather
innovative pharmacy work.
Wesley’s
attitude toward the poor included an unique sensitivity as to how Christian
acts of compassion, charity and justice would affect those served.[12] Wesley evidences a social understanding well
beyond his times when he defends the poor against the charge that their poverty
is the result of their unwillingness to work.
The following journal entry in February 1753 reflects Wesley’s heart and
understanding:
Thursday,
8 . . . In the afternoon I visited many of the sick; but such scenes, who could
see unmoved? There are none such to be
found in a pagan country. If any of the Indians in Georgia were sick (which
indeed exceeding rarely happened till they learned gluttony and drunkenness
from
the Christians), those that were near him gave him whatever he wanted. Oh, who
willconvert the English into honest heathens!
While
Wesley’s vision of a reformed church and a renewed nation through the work of
the Methodists did not materialize, I contend that the movement he helped
create and led resulted in the planting of important, revolutionary seeds that
bloomed in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Ironically, his social teaching did not
result in what he had hoped for during his day.
However, Methodist social doctrine informed the creation of a new,
robust form of social democracy that took seriously the needs of its people in
ways the church could not imagine.
Further, while not thoroughly radical, Wesley’s work, and especially the
organizational strategies of the societies, served very well the rise of labor in
response to the Industrial Revolution in England.
With this in mind, I’ll conclude with a description
of the work of the “Sheffield Society,” one of the many more radical labor
groups that began appearing on the English social, economic, political
landscape toward the end of the 18th century.
Reported by noted, Marxist historian, E. P. Thompson, who regarded
Methodism as an overall hindrance to social resistance; notwithstanding, I find the passage clearly
connected to the influence and form of the Wesley societies:
The
Sheffield Society originated . . . from a gathering of “five or six mechanics.
. . conversing about the enormous high price of provisions.” It grew so rapidly that by January 1792, it
comprised eight societies “which meet each at their different houses, all on
the same evening.” “None are admitted
without a ticket . . . and perfect regular good order kept up.” The societies met fortnightly, the General
Meeting, “at which some hundreds attend,” monthly. There were 1,400 subscribers to a pamphlet
edition . . .of the First Part of Rights of Man, which was read with avidity in
many of the workshops of Sheffield.” In
Mach 1792, after four months in existence, the society claimed nearly 2,000
members. In May a new method of
organization was adopted: dividing them
into small bodies or meetings of ten persons each, and then ten to appoint a
delegate: Ten of these delegates form
another meeting, and so on . . . till at last are reduced to a proper number
for constituting the Committee or Grand Council.[14]
[1] John Wesley, “Causes of the
Inefficacy of Christianity,” in John Wesley’s Sermons: An Anthology. Edited by Albert C. Outler
nad Richard P. Heitzenrater, Nashville:
Abingdon Press, 1991, pp. 550-557.
[2] M. Douglas Meeks, “On Reading
Wesley with the Poor, The Portion of
the Poor, pp. 9-10.
[3] Meeks, p. 11.
[4] “Chapter IX, Society and Class,”
John Wesley the Methodist, The Wesley Center Online, p. 3.
[5] “Chapter IX, Society and Class,”
p. 3.
[6]
Donald W. Dayton, “Liberation Theology in the Wesleyan and Holiness Tradition.”
On Public Theology website (http://www.pubtheo.com/page.asp?pid=111),
p. 5.
[7] “Chapter IX, Society and Class,”
p. 4.
[8] Randy L. Maddox, “’Visit the
Poor’ John Wesley, the Poor, and the Sanctification of Believers,” in The
Wesleys and the Poor: The Legacy and
Development of Methodist Attitudes to Poverty, 1729-1999. Edited by Richard Heitzenrater, Nashville,
TN: Kingswood Books, 2002, p. 62
[9] John Wesley, “The Scripture Way
of Salvation,” in John Wesley’s Sermons: An Anthology. Edited by Albert C. Outler and Richard P.
Heitzenrater, Nashville: Abingdon Press,
1991, p. 377; and Randy L. Maddox,
“’Visit the Poor’ John Wesley, the Poor, and the Sanctification of Believers,”
p. 65.
[10] John Wesley, “The Scripture Way
of Salvation,” p. 378.
[11]Randy L. Maddox, “’Visit the
Poor’ John Wesley, the Poor, and the Sanctification of Believers,” p. 66.
[12] Randy L. Maddox, “’Visit the
Poor’ John Wesley, the Poor, and the Sanctification of Believers,” p. 75.
[13]The Journal of John Wesley, edited by Percy
Livingstone Parker, Chicago: Moody
Press, 1951, pp. 205-206, Randy L.
Maddox, “’Visit the Poor’ John Wesley, the Poor, and the Sanctification of
Believers,” p. 75.
[14] E. P. Thompson, The making of
the English working class, New York:
Vintage Books, 1963, pp. 149-150.
No comments:
Post a Comment