logo

Wesley and predestination
By Les Longden

For over 50 years, John Wesley engaged in a lively dispute with Calvinists over the question of predestination. Many folks have come to the conclusion that this debate is now a dusty relic of our past. I haven’t heard much contention about it in the congregations I’ve served, or even in the Presbyterian seminary where I now teach.

Yet, some of the old arguments are returning, particularly on college campuses. The cover story of the March 23 issue of Time is “10 Ideas Changing the World Right Now.” Number 3 on that list is “The New Calvinism.” In 2006, Christianity Today carried a cover story entitled, “Young, Restless, and Reformed: Calvinism is making a comeback—and shaking up the church.” So, perhaps it’s time for us to refresh our memories of Father John’s argument with the Calvinists.

In a letter to John Newton, the converted slave-trader and author of the hymn “Amazing Grace,” Wesley wrote: “We think it our duty to oppose predestination with our whole strength, not as an opinion, but as a dangerous mistake which appears to be subversive of the very foundations of Christian experience and which has, in fact, given occasion to the most grievous offences.”

Elsewhere, Wesley spoke of predestination as a “blasphemy,” so there is no doubting the seriousness with which he took the Calvinist interpretation of this doctrine. But why call it blasphemy?

According to Professor William J. Abraham of Perkins School of Theology, Wesley thought “that predestination, unless properly understood, was blasphemy because it cast a terrible shadow over the love of God for the whole world.” That’s the first thing to grasp about the doctrine of predestination: what does it say about the character of God?

This emphasis upon the integrity of God’s love for the world, a love which leaves out no one, was expressed in Charles Wesley’s hymn (United Methodist Hymnal, 339):

“Come, sinners, to the gospelfeast / let every soul be Jesus’ guest / Ye need not one be left behind / for God hath bid all humankind.”

The number of times Charles repeats “all” in that hymn (seven, by my count) shows how repeatedly the Wesleyans shouted “all are called” against the Calvinists who insisted that “only some (the predestined) are called.”

Having read some of my initial thoughts on Calvinism, one of my United Methodist colleagues here at Dubuque Seminary referred me to Wesley’s famous essay, “Predestination Calmly Considered” (PCC), thinking I had oversimplified Wesley’s argument with Calvinists by focusing solely upon the love of God. Indeed, Wesley does not appeal simply to the love of God, as if God’s character could be reduced to love alone. Wesley would not allow one of God’s attributes to be played off against another: “All [God’s] attributes are inseparably joined; they cannot be divided; no, not for a moment” (PCC, sec. 23).

Most Protestants in Wesley’s day interpreted predestination to mean that the salvation of every human being depended solely on God’s previous choice (the biblical word is “election”). The Calvinists were particularly rigorous in this; they believed God’s “choice” meant that God had already “elected the saved” and all the rest (already known to God) were damned. This was called “double predestination.”

The debate over predestination often tends to pit God’s “sovereignty” (a la the Calvinists) against God’s “love” (a la the Methodists); whereas Wesley himself refuses to separate God’s love, mercy, justice, or sovereignty. It is very tempting for some United Methodists to fall into the trap of conceiving of God according to some vague or sentimental notion of a “loving God” by neglecting the far more robust biblical portrait of God’s character.

In the same way, Calvinists had fallen into the trap of so emphasizing one attribute of God, namely “sovereignty,” that the biblical vision of God’s character was reduced to a form of deterministic logic. As Calvin wrote in his Institutes on Christian Religion, “Some are fore-ordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation…elected (i.e., predestinated to life) or reprobated (i.e., predestinated to damnation).” This concentration on God’s sovereign decision before all time logically required Calvinists to believe in unconditional election and unconditional reprobation.

Wesley, however, believed that God’s grace was universally for all. Yes, some would refuse God’s grace, but that was not because the God of grace had decided beforehand to damn them; it was based on the “condition” of their not receiving the grace offered.

In “Predestination Calmly Considered,” Wesley argues that reprobation is utterly irreconcilable to the whole scope and tenor both of Old and New Testament. In other words, the overall fabric of the Bible cannot be reduced to a deterministic and logical system. The character of God and the salvation he offers is a rich tapestry of intimate dialogue between God and humanity in which the realities of grace and freedom, divine choice and human responsiveness, are intricately intertwined.

Further against the abstract notion of divine decision, Wesley piled up the scripture texts that assert that Christ died for all (2 Corinthians 5:15), that God wants all to come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9), that Christ came to save the whole world (1 John 4:14), and many more. All the texts that show God’s mercy, patience, will to save, justice, and forbearance are weighed against a view of God confined to a logical divine decision.

Closely related to this debate was the argument over “good works.” In broad strokes, the Calvinists appeared to see no place for “good works” in salvation. Since salvation was by God’s “grace alone” and God’s predestination of the “elect,” there appeared to be no role for human beings to play in salvation.

Although Calvin himself stressed sanctification and held to a much more nuanced theological position than is often understood, this is where Wesley raised his voice not only for the character of God as eternal love but also for the place of human freedom and responsibility. For Wesley, “good works” were not an attempt to “earn” salvation; they were the actual fruit of God’s grace in a transformed life. He criticized the Calvinists for turning the God of universal grace into a dreadful tyrant. He believed their interpretation of “good works” had become an excuse for lazy and immoral Christians who said it was “all up to God anyway” so why worry about “works.”

The arguments around predestination are complicated, but here is the bottom line for Wesley. God is eternal love; therefore, to argue that God’s grace does not extend to the “damned” is to blaspheme God.

The Bible is an abundant storehouse of narratives, poetry, prayers, parables, proverbs, prophetic visions, commands, and promises. It is not a theological system. The encounter between God and human creatures is a love story, but the love is no mere principle of inclusiveness or sentimental feeling. It has all the richness of longing and loss, seeking and sorrow, betrayal and reconciliation. There are deep notes of truth and justice and judgment.

As Henry Knight, Professor of Wesley Studies at St. Paul School of Theology, has pointed out, if salvation is about restoring human beings to the image of God, then “grace had to work in a way that enhanced human ability to love as freely as God loves.” 

Les Longden is Associate Professor of Evangelism and Discipleship at the University of Dubuque Theological Seminary in Dubuque, Iowa. Dr. Longden is a clergy member of the West Michigan Conference of the United Methodist Church. This article was adapted and reprinted by permission of the Michigan Christian Advocate (www.mcadvocate.org).



Click here to send your response plus the title of this article to us at Good News.

Good News | 308 East Main St. | P.O. Box 150 | Wilmore, KY 40390 | 859-858-4661 | 1-800-487-7784
info@goodnewsmag.org | About Us | ©2007 Good News magazine