What’s Right with the Church

What’s Right with the Church

What’s Right with the Church                                        

By Mike Powers

One of the best-known testimonies in Scripture is also a timely illustration of what is right about the Church as criticism of everything that is wrong with the Church continues. Consider Saul the antagonist of Christianity who became Paul the protagonist of the Church and apostle of Jesus Christ.

The zeal of the Pharisee Saul of Tarsus and his hatred of the Church were evident in his callous assent to the stoning of Stephen (Acts 8:1) and his malicious intent to apprehend the disciples of the Way in Damascus (Acts 9:1-2). However, a personal, divine encounter with Jesus Christ radically transformed Saul from one of the most dangerous enemies of the early Church into Paul, the person who, apart from Jesus, arguably has been the greatest influence on the nature and witness of the Body of Christ throughout the centuries. Reflecting on the change in his life, Paul wrote, “I once thought all these things were so very important, but now I consider them worthless because of what Christ has done. Yes, everything is worthless when compared with the priceless gain of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord” (Philippians 3:7-8).

Fast forward a few years from his conversion to the day Paul wrote a letter to the believers in Rome. Having not visited them in person, note his pastoral concern in chapter 1, verse 11: “I long to see you so I may impart to you some spiritual gift to make you strong.”  That sounds right and proper and good that he was ready to provide what was lacking in their faith, and yet, as soon as he wrote those words, something checked his spirit as he paused and then wrote, “that is, that we may be mutually encouraged by each other’s faith” (1:12).  Those two words “…that is…” reveal a 180-degree reversal of thought. Rather than simply making plans to come to address the spiritual needs of the church at Rome, something clicked in his mind, and Paul humbly admitted that he also needed what they could do for him.    

What caused that 180-degree shift in this thinking?  No doubt the apostle had reflected many times over the years how wrong he had been about the Church before Jesus confronted him on the road to Damascus. Obviously, he also had contemplated deeply, preached passionately and written specifically about the ministry and mission of the church. Perhaps during those formative years of his faith and understanding Paul’s early experiences with “those who belonged to the Way” as recorded in the book of Acts became a reference point that occasionally reminded him what was right with the Church. Consider these three moments from the beginning of his spiritual journey as a follower of Jesus.

 

The Community of Faith

After the light from heaven flashed, blinded, and caused him to fall to the ground, Jesus spoke, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?” He commanded the helpless Saul to get up and go into the city where he would be told what to do. There Saul fasted and prayed and waited for third days.

This “dark night of the soul” was the setting where Saul would learn his first lesson as to what is right about the church. The Lord appeared in a vision to a prophet named Ananias and directed him to go to Saul and minister to him. “Go! This man is my chosen instrument to carry my name to the Gentiles and the people of Israel” (Acts 9:11). A reluctant, but obedient Ananias went to Saul, and as he laid his hands on him, Saul received his sight and was filled with the Holy Spirit.

Saul’s association with those belonging to the Way and publicly proclaiming Jesus as the Son of God surprised and upset the local leaders. Guards were set at the gates of Damascus, ready to seize and arrest him if he tried to leave. It was in this remarkable series of events that Saul, a young believer, learned something that is right about the Church. In the middle of the night, to help him escape from the harm others intended for him, devoted and faithful friends placed him in a basket and lowered him to safety outside the city walls. Ananias might have been one of those rope holders. Regardless, had it not been for the faithful obedience of Ananias and the strong arms of his brothers (and maybe a sister or two), Saul would not have survived. That loving, supportive, caring community of faith made the first impression of the Church upon this young convert uniquely chosen by God for a divine purpose. Without a doubt that first experience with the fellowship of Christ was a powerful memory Paul recollected as he considered what was good and right about the Church.

 

A Covenant Relationship

A second unforgettable experience for the new convert Paul followed shortly after his escape from Damascus. Heading toward Jerusalem, he surely was anticipating the opportunity to participate in the fellowship and share his story with the original disciples of Jesus as well as other believers. However, upon arriving in Jerusalem (Acts 9:26), Paul tried to join the disciples, but they were afraid of him, not believing he really was a disciple. They doubted the authenticity of his conversion and suspected that he was being deceitful, still intent on subversively destroying the church.

His second impression of the people who belonged to the Way obviously was disappointing. Undoubtedly, Paul was surprised, hurt, and discouraged by such a response to his new-found faith. Yet, his uneasiness prepared him for his next indelible lesson about the Church. A layman named Joseph stepped forward and defended him before the other disciples. Joseph, nicknamed Barnabas, literally ‘Son of Encouragement,’ put his reputation on the line as he dared to identify with this young, unproven Christian when no one else dared. In that moment, Paul observed another thing that is right about the Church: it is a covenant relationship where one is welcomed, supported, loved, prayed for, and belongs.

The Church is the unfolding story of believers learning to live in covenant with God and live out that covenant with others in Christ to bring others into a relationship with God and others in the covenant community of faith. Barnabas was one of the earliest witnesses of such “radical togetherness” to Saul. His bold embrace was a statement before the dubious congregation that Saul was welcome and belonged to the ‘new covenant.’ That surely was another image Paul would have treasured as to what was right about the Church.

 

A High Calling

At the end of Matthew’s Gospel, in a resurrection appearance, Jesus gave the Great Commission to his disciples: Go into all nations, making disciples, baptizing them in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded (Matthew 28:19-20). In Acts 1:8, before his ascension, Jesus told the disciples again, “Be my witnesses in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, across the world.” (i.e., “Go. Do not stay. Go!”)

Yet, it is not until Acts 11, when the believers in Jerusalem were persecuted by the Romans, that they scattered far and wide, sharing the Gospel, but only with Jews. Several disciples from Cyprus and Cyrene went to Antioch and began telling the Greeks (non-Jews) about Jesus, and many people believed and became followers. When the church at Jerusalem heard about this, they sent Barnabas to Antioch. God greatly blessed his ministry there, so he went to Tarsus to get Saul and brought him back to Antioch where large numbers came to Christ. It was there that the disciples were first called “Christians.” Through the generosity of the Antioch Church, Saul and Barnabas provided famine relief help for believers in Judah. On their return, as the Antioch Church leaders were praying, and the Holy Spirit confirmed the prophecy spoken to Ananias: “This man is my chosen instrument to carry my name to the Gentiles and the people of Israel” (Acts 9:11). Saul and Barnabas were to be set apart, commissioned and sent as the first missionaries to the Gentiles. It was at the church in Antioch that Saul learned firsthand many lessons as to what was right about the Church, but particularly, he received the confirmation of his high calling to be an apostle to of Jesus Christ to all nations.

Did one or more of these experience pop into Paul’s head as he was writing the Roman church years later: “I long to see you so I may impart to you some spiritual gift to make you strong – that is, that you and I may be mutually encourage by each other’s faith.” Maybe or maybe not, but undoubtedly, Saul the antagonist of the Church became Paul the protagonist of the Church. His ecclesiology was shaped from the beginning of his spiritual journey on the Way as he learned what was right about the Church from by a reluctant, but obedient prophet and a caring community of loving friends and faithful servants of Jesus at Damascus. He felt what was right about the Church from a disciple named Joseph, nicknamed Barnabas, who dared to reach out in a spirit of radical togetherness and bond himself with a novice disciple. And, he engaged firsthand in a Spirit-filled, Spirit-led church in Antioch which confirmed and partnered with him in the high calling of God to proclaim the Gospel and make disciples of Jesus Christ throughout the world.

What’s right about the Church? It is a community of faith where anyone, even a Saul of Tarsus, can begin, belong, and become what God has created them to be.

Mike Powers is a retired Elder in and the former President Pro Tempore and Conference Superintendent of the Mid-South Conference of the Global Methodist Church.
A Mind Strangely Warmed

A Mind Strangely Warmed

A Mind Strangely Warmed

By Stephen Rankin

I love John Wesley’s journal entry of May 24, 1738 on his famous Aldersgate experience, which many of us recently commemorated. It just so happens, for us in the West, the event coincided with Pentecost this year. The convergence of these two events makes for a good opportunity for considering the Holy Spirit’s work in our lives.

Hear again (or maybe for the first time) Wesley’s memorable words from Aldersgate: “I felt my heart strangely warmed. I felt I did trust in Christ, Christ alone, for my salvation, and an assurance was given me that he had taken away my sins, even mine, and saved me from the law of sin and death.”

Christians, especially of the Wesleyan/Methodist sort, love to talk about the heart. I certainly do. Wesley famously talked about “heart religion” in sharp contrast to the doctrinal and moral formalism of his day. For example, within his long testimony, recorded as part of the entry for May 24, 1738, he writes, “When I was about twenty-two my father pressed me to enter into holy orders. At the same time, the providence of God directing me to Kempis’s Christian Pattern [also known as The Imitation of Christ], I began to see that true religion was seated in the heart, and that God’s law extended to all our thoughts as well as words and actions.”

One prevailing problem in contemporary Christianity is that too many people want to talk about the heart in virtual opposition to the head, as if the two operate in separate domains. Just think of how often people say, “My head says one thing, but my heart says another.” Or, more disturbingly, the advice to “do what your heart says.” Our culture has been permeated by something sociologists like Robert Bellah and, more recently, Christian Smith, call “expressive individualism.” It goes with the value of authenticity. To be authentic, you must express what you feel, which, in the dominant way of thinking, is to go with your heart.

In a number of ways, this sentiment of expressive individualism, with its ironically shriveled understanding of the heart, has infected the church and causes people to misunderstand the larger significance of Wesley’s Aldersgate experience. This is why, in my recent essay, I tried to explain why the renewal of our minds is so central to how we feel about life, or, to use Wesley’s words, to experience true heart religion. When we understand the work of the Spirit in salvation, we begin to see that to renew the mind is to renew the heart.

To see my point, let’s go back a couple of months before Wesley’s May 24 heartwarming and look at conversations he had with the Moravian, Peter Boehler. This larger historical context is crucial to what occured at Aldersgate. Wesley had recently returned to England from his disastrous experience in Georgia. He had come to realize that the Moravians he met knew something in their relationship with God that he did not know and did not see in his own life. Their witness got him thinking, and, in subsequent conversations with Boehler, a theological question came into focus: what is the nature of true saving faith?

Let’s pause here for a moment and look at the basic and close linkage between thought and emotion. On the feeling side, Wesley is suffering real discouragement. That feeling is intimately connecting to his thoughts in the form of his judgments about his failures: “I came to America to save the Indians,” he wrote in his journal, “but who will save me?” The disappointments of Georgia and his feeling of failure led to his recognizing the inadequacy of his understanding of true faith. Enter Peter Boehler. He challenges John and his brother Charles to recognize their lack of understanding that was blocking the experience of their hearts.

Notice the inevitably intellectual dimension of this background to Aldersgate. Early in the discussions, John, we would say, is “dug in” with his entrenched views about faith as a kind of rational assent, a simple agreement with what the church teaches. It took a while for Boehler’s argument to click, but Wesley eventually realized that the saving faith that transforms is more than mere rational assent. We see, then, a kind of intellectual and theological conversion that the lays the ground for Aldersgate. Wesley records the outcome in his Journal of March 4 and 5, 1738:

“I found my brother at Oxford, recovering from his pleurisy; and with him Peter Boehler. By whom (in the hand of the great God( I was on Sunday the 5th clearly convinced of unbelief, of the want of ‘that saving faith whereby alone we are saved,’ with the full Christian salvation.”

This change of mind opened Wesley to what occured on May 24. He experienced a change mind that opens the heart.

Reflecting on this concept, we must ask ourselves what might this view of Wesley’s Aldersgate experience do to help us with our own faith? Some of us lead with thoughtful reflection that eventuates into deepened feeling, to enriched experience of love for God. Others lead with feelings and then do the work of thinking to make sense of their powerful experiences. The sequence doesn’t matter. What does matter is that we see the essential value of careful thinking for rich, vibrant heartfelt faith.

Let me risk stating what may seem obvious: to think is to experience. Thinking is not some “head trip” detached from life. Yes, we all have sat through boring sermons or teachings that seemed too “heady” and detached from practical life. But notice: the very sense that something is boring or irrelevant is a judgment  based on prior understanding. The feeling of being bored cannot be separated from the intellectual (I use this word purposefully) conclusion, even if the ground for that conclusion remains outside one’s conscious thoughts in the moment. The work of understanding – of coming to a belief, a conclusion – is buried under the feeling of boredom, but a belief is there, operating.

I think it is worthwhile, therefore, to understand Wesley’s Aldersgate experience in light of what happened a couple of months earlier, when – dare I say it? – his mind was strangely warmed. The crying need of our age is to practice thinking carefully about the contents of the faith. Yes, it is slow, time-consuming work, but imagine what God might do in our hearts if we did so.

Stephen Rankin is the Contributing Editor for Good News Magazine.
Learning to Lament

Learning to Lament

Learning to Lament

By Jonathan A. Powers

In the months following the death of his wife, Joy Davidman, C.S. Lewis began keeping a journal. He did not set out to write a book but wrote to survive the loss that overwhelmed him. The entries were raw, unguarded, and painfully honest. Eventually those reflections were published as the now-famous book A Grief Observed. Near the end of the journal, Lewis reflects on something he discovered about grief during this time of written processing:

“I thought I could describe a state, make a map of sorrow. Sorrow, however, turns out to be not a state but a process. It needs not a map but a history.”

Lewis’s insight is one of the truest things ever written about grief. It can be tempting to seek a map for our suffering. We want clear directions. We want someone to tell us how long this will last, what the stages are, and how we know when we are finally “better.” We want grief to behave like a problem that can be solved if we simply follow the right steps. But grief does not work that way.

Grief is not a straight road. It does not move neatly from one stage to the next. It comes in waves. Some days it feels manageable; other days it returns with surprising force. It interrupts ordinary moments. A smell, a song, a memory, or a date on the calendar can suddenly bring sorrow rushing back into the room.

Lewis discovered what many of us eventually learn: grief is not something we merely “get through,” but is something we live through.

Nearly all of us know something about grief. Sometimes grief comes through death. Other times it comes through disappointment, betrayal, illness, broken relationships, loneliness, financial collapse, estrangement, or dreams that never came to fruition. We grieve jobs we lost, relationships that dissolved, communities that changed, and seasons of life that can never be recovered. Even the changes taking place in our culture and churches can produce a kind of sorrow. We look around and feel that something precious has been lost.

When we stop to think about it, to grieve is simply part of what it means to love. The deeper the love for someone or something, the deeper the grief when a hard change occurs. That is why grief is so confusing. It affects every part of us emotionally, physically, spiritually, and even socially. It can leave us exhausted and numb. Sometimes it makes us angry. Sometimes it makes us withdrawn. Sometimes it makes us laugh at strange moments and cry unexpectedly in grocery store parking lots. Grief often feels irrational because love itself is not something neat and clinical. Yet, despite how painful grief is, Scripture never tells us to avoid it. In fact, the Bible is filled with an approach to grief called lament.

We see grief and lament all through the Scriptures. The Psalms are full of cries of sorrow, confusion, and even protest. Job mourns openly before God. Jeremiah is called the “weeping prophet.” Jesus Himself weeps at the tomb of Lazarus.

One of the clearest biblical pictures of grief appears in 2 Samuel 1, when David learns that King Saul and Jonathan have died in battle. The scene is striking because, humanly speaking, David had every reason to celebrate Saul’s death. For years Saul had hunted David like an animal. He threw spears at him. He drove him into exile. He forced David to live in caves and wildernesses, constantly fleeing for his life. Saul’s jealousy and abuse of power had turned David’s life upside down.

Yet when David hears that Saul and Jonathan are dead, he does not rejoice. He laments.

“How the mighty have fallen!” David cries. He tears his clothes. He weeps. He mourns not only for Jonathan, his dear friend, but also for Saul, the king who had tried repeatedly to destroy him. Why?

David understood something we often forget: grief is not only about the character of the person we lost, but it is also about the love we carried for them, the hopes attached to them, and the story we shared with them.

David’s lament is remarkable because it reveals his character. He refuses to reduce Saul to the worst things Saul had done. He refuses to delight in the downfall of another human being, even one who had wounded him deeply. David grieves because Saul was still the Lord’s anointed king, because Jonathan was his beloved friend, and because Israel itself had suffered a devastating loss. In other words, David gives his sorrow a history. He names what happened. He remembers. He laments publicly. He refuses to hide pain behind triumphalism or revenge. That is something the modern church desperately needs to recover.

Many Christians have quietly absorbed the idea that faithful believers should move quickly past sorrow. We can too easily rush grieving people toward resolution, offering quick explanations, neat theological answers, or inspirational clichés. What we need to understand, however, is that lament is not unbelief. Sometimes lament is one of the deepest expressions of faith because lament refuses to let go of God even in the depths of confusion and pain. The person who laments is still speaking to God.

The Psalms teach us this repeatedly. “How long, O Lord?” is not a failure of faith but the cry of someone who still believes God is listening. Too often we try to sanitize grief. We want Easter Sunday without Good Friday. We want resurrection without the cross. Yet the Christian story insists that redemption often moves directly through suffering rather than around it.

That does not mean suffering is good in itself. Death is still an enemy. Grief still hurts. Loss still wounds us deeply. Christianity never calls death natural or beautiful. Jesus Himself stood at Lazarus’s tomb and wept even though He knew resurrection was moments away. The tears mattered, however. The loss mattered. Love made grief unavoidable, because, again, at the center of grief is love. We do not grieve deeply over things that mean nothing to us. Grief reveals attachment, affection, devotion, and relationship. Sorrow hurts precisely because love matters. This is why Christians can lament honestly without despairing completely.

Christianity does not pretend suffering is unreal. Rather, it is built upon the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ that gives hope amid grief. Jesus’ resurrection does not erase pain and hardship from this world, but it does transform the horizon of grief. Christians mourn differently not because our losses hurt less, but because death is not the final word. The resurrection means that sorrow will not reign forever.

Still, we live in the tension of the “already” and the “not yet.” Christ is risen, but the world is still broken. We still bury loved ones. We still endure injustice. We still watch people misuse power, harm others, and fracture communities. And in moments like these, lament becomes an act of faithfulness.

Turning back to David’s lament over Saul, his grief is not only deep, personal sorrow but also a grief over the misuse of power and the suffering it caused Israel. Saul failed as king. His fear, jealousy, and pride wounded the nation. David mourned not only the deaths of the people he loved but also what could have been.

There is something deeply relevant about that today. We live in a world marked by tremendous misuse of power. We see it in governments, institutions, workplaces, families, and even churches. Leaders fail. People are wounded. Trust is broken. Entire communities carry scars from betrayal and injustice. As Christians, we are called not to respond to such realities with indifference. We should lament. Lament allows us to tell the truth about evil while still placing our hope in God. It prevents us from becoming cynical, hardened, or numb. It reminds us that the kingdom of God has not yet fully come, therefore, the brokenness of this world should still grieve us.

In fact, one of the dangers of modern life is that we often try to escape grief rather than process it. We distract ourselves constantly. We entertain ourselves endlessly. We medicate pain, scroll through it, joke about it, or suppress it. But buried grief rarely disappears. It often resurfaces later in bitterness, anger, anxiety, or despair.

Lewis understood that sorrow needs a history. It needs to be spoken. It needs to be remembered. It needs room to breathe. That does not mean we remain trapped in grief forever. But it does mean healing often comes not by avoiding sorrow but by walking honestly through it with God and with others.

The church should be one of the few places left in society where people are allowed to grieve honestly. We should be communities where tears are welcomed, not rushed away. Communities where people do not feel pressured to pretend they are fine. Communities where lament and hope can coexist. After all, the Christian faith has always held both together.

If for no other reason, we should recognize that at the cross we see the deepest sorrow imaginable alongside the greatest hope the world has ever known. Jesus Christ entered fully into human suffering. He was betrayed, abandoned, mocked, beaten, and crucified. Isaiah says He was “a man of sorrows, acquainted with grief.” He did not remain distant from human pain. He stepped directly into it. And because He entered into suffering, Christians can trust that God is not absent in our grief either. Even when He feels silent. Even when we do not understand. Even when healing comes slowly.

Lewis once admitted that grief felt like fear, exhaustion, and disorientation all at once. Many of his readers resonate with his words because they recognize themselves in them. There is comfort in realizing we are not alone in our sorrow. Perhaps that is part of why lament matters so much. Lament reminds us that suffering does not isolate us from the people of God. We join a long history of grieving saints who cried out to God before us. We stand alongside David, Job, Jeremiah, Lewis, and countless others who discovered that faithfulness sometimes looks less like triumph and more like honest endurance.

Perhaps that is what it means to give sorrow a history. We do not seek to solve grief or explain away pain, but to carry it truthfully before God while refusing to let suffering have the final word. For Christians, the final word belongs to resurrection. One day Christ will wipe away every tear. One day death itself will die. One day all things will be made new. Until then, we celebrate, we hope, and we grieve. And as the Body of Christ, we never do it alone.

Jonathan Powers is the Associate Professor of Worship Studies at Asbury Theological Seminary in Wilmore, KY and the Editor-in-Chief for Good News magazine.
Let This Methodist Preacher Lead You to Revival

Let This Methodist Preacher Lead You to Revival

Let this Methodist Preacher Lead You to Revival

By Jeff Patterson

I will be forever grateful that I read Preacher and Prayer by Edward McKendree Bounds (1835-1913) early in my ministry. Though named after a prominent American Methodist Bishop, he is known to history as E.M. Bounds. He was a Methodist preacher, born in Missouri, served as the associate editor of the Nashville Christian Advocate, and died in Georgia. He was a chaplain during the Civil War. Preacher and Prayer was a short book published by the Publishing House of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, in 1907. I try to re-read this short book regularly.  I can never read it too often. It has often been my antidote to burn-out.  I am glad that early in my ministry I encountered these words, “The sermon cannot rise in its life-giving forces above the man. Dead men give out dead sermons, and dead sermons kill…The preaching man is to be the praying man…The real sermon is made in the closet. The man – God’s man – is made in the closet…A prepared heart is much better than a prepared sermon. A prepared heart will make a prepared sermon” (Preacher and Prayer). A sermon is God’s truth coming through human personality. God must fashion the personality of the preacher. This is holiness of heart and life for the preacher. Working for God is never a substitute for spending time with God. The preacher must have a prayer closet, know how to enter the secret place underneath the wings of the Almighty, spend time alone with God.

If you are interested in seeking the enduring power and manifest presence of the Holy Spirit in your life, Preacher and Prayer might be exactly what you need. It is still in print. E.M. Bounds will make sure that the preacher spends time before the Throne of Grace before the preacher spends time in the pulpit. If you want to experience spiritual awakening, revival, and the filling of the Holy Spirit, run to the life-giving fountain provided by E.M. Bounds. Run, do not walk.

I am grateful that E.M. Bounds’s thoughts on prayer were also packaged for a broader audience in his book Power Through Prayer.  He knew that a praying preacher would produce praying pews and Spirit-filled Christians would crave a more prayerful life. For many people, quotations from Power Through Prayer continue to awaken and inspire:

“God’s acquaintance is not made hurriedly.”

“The men who have done the most for God in this world have been early on their knees.”

“The first and last stages of holy living are crowned with praying.”

“The Church is looking for better methods; God is looking for better men. The Holy Ghost does not flow through methods, but through men. He does not come on machinery, but on men. He does not anoint plans, but men…men of prayer.”

“A holy life does not live in the closet, but it cannot live without the closet.”

“God shapes the world by prayer.”

“Prayer breaks all bars, dissolves all chains, opens all prisons, and widens all straits by which God’s saints have been held.”

When I read the work of this great Methodist, I suspect that he was aware that John Wesley wrote that “God does nothing but in answer to prayer.” These two men believed in the power of prayer to do the work of God in this world.

Do not be hindered by the language of another era. Do not reject his work because he made the mistake of living before we became sensitive about using inclusive language for the genders. Do not let the powerful, flowery rhetoric of this old-fashioned preacher keep you from living with the text. I am sure that he had the commanding voice that often adorned the preachers of past eras. Do not let modern bias prevent you from drinking from this fountain of spiritual life.  Be gracious in judging E.M. Bounds because he served as a Confederate Chaplain during the Civil War. (I cannot imagine how hard it would have been for him to have fought against his family and friends by joining the Union’s cause.) Like all of us, he was captivated to some degree by the age in which he lived. He was an imperfect vessel who sought to carry the “God-touched, God-enabled, and God-made” life to his generation (Preacher and Prayer). He was a Methodist preacher who wanted to be obedient to the Holy Spirit by leading others into a prayer-saturated, holy life.

Whether we pray using liturgical, set forms of prayer with substantial period of listening to God or spontaneous, extemporaneous prayer with substantial periods of listening to God, our lives must include copious amounts of seeking the presence of God through prayer. Prayer brings heaven to earth and sets the earth ablaze with the power of the Holy Spirit. E.M. Bounds will draw you into this type of life. It is time for us to return to the “old paths” (Jeremiah 6:16). Let this Methodist preacher lead you to revival.

The Rev. Dr. Jeff Patterson is the lead pastor of Wesley Memorial Methodist Church in High Point, NC.
Interview with Dr. Ryan Danker on Dynamic Grace: The Story of Early Methodism

Interview with Dr. Ryan Danker on Dynamic Grace: The Story of Early Methodism

 

Interview with Dr. Ryan Danker on Dynamic Grace: The Story of Early Methodism

 

The Good News editorial team recently sat down with Dr. Ryan Danker, Director of the John Wesley Institute, to discuss his new book, Dynamic Grace: The Story of Early Methodism. In the following conversation, Dr. Danker reflects on the life and ministry of John Wesley, the rise of early Methodism, and why Wesley’s vision of grace, holiness, and encounter with God continues to speak powerfully to the Church today.

 

Good News: For those who may be new to John Wesley, can you please briefly introduce who he was and why he still matters today?

Ryan Danker: John Wesley was a fascinating man, an eighteenth-century Anglican priest, theologian, and strong-willed leader of the early Methodist movement. He was a driven man, educated at Oxford, and committed to the restoration of vital Christianity. He wrote an enormous number of books, tracts, and sermons, and we know more about his day-to-day activities than any other figure in all of church history because he kept meticulous notes of each day. He wanted every moment to count for God. What drove him was a passion to see lives changed by a dynamic encounter with the living God, and this passion was contagious! As a person, he would probably drive many of us crazy today, but as a faithful worker in God’s vineyard, he was a powerhouse.

GN: What inspired you to write this book, and what gap did you hope to fill for readers, especially those without a formal theological background?

RD: I was initially asked to write a shorter history of Methodism for another work and that project simply grew and grew. What inspired me to continue writing were the many people that I’ve met over the years who are interested in the Wesley brothers and early Methodism but are unlikely to have the time to read a full academic biography of these figures or an academic history of early Methodism. They’re interested in Wesley, and particularly interested in the passion and growth of early Methodism, and so I wanted to write an accessible book that anyone can pick up and enjoy. This is a book that can be read in 30 minutes. But it also includes a bibliography for anyone who wants to dive in and explore the topic further.

GN: Can you give us an overview of the book and how it helps readers understand both the historical context of Wesley’s life and the development of his theology?

RD: The book is focused on the life of John Wesley and the rise of Methodism, but I start by looking at the context. England was in a time of renewal when Wesley was born. The nation had been through a great amount of turmoil in the previous century, and they were still climbing their way out it. But this effort to climb out of the mess of past turmoil, civil wars, and social strife gave birth to a fresh vision of restoration. So I place both the life of the Wesley brothers and the rise of Methodism within that vision. I highlight major influences and turning points, including the “three rises of Methodism” that were key to Wesley’s theological development. What I want to do is try to help the reader grasp the power of the Evangelical Revival, an international revival that swept up figures like the Wesleys and so many others from Central Europe to the American colonies. The book describes the early organizational structures of Methodism, structures designed for spiritual growth. And one chapter is dedicated entirely to holiness, the driving message behind Wesley’s ministry. The book closes with a description of Wesley’s last years—including some of the controversies—and explores the lasting impact of the early Wesleyan movement. It really is focused on the 18th c. even if I try to point out contemporary movements inspired by that early work.

GN: Wesley’s theology can sometimes feel complex. What are a few key themes or “takeaways” you hope readers will walk away with after finishing the book?

RD: This was a key part of the book. I not only wanted to tell the story in an accessible (but also accurate) way, but it’s so important to get Wesley’s theology right. His theology is simple in some regards and complex in others. What most people fail to grasp is what he took for granted: his Anglican heritage. He worked within that worldview, was formed by it, embraced it, and lived it to his dying breath. But for many reasons, that worldview isn’t easily understood by many outside of Anglicanism. Some have tried to make Wesley into an English version of Martin Luther, an Eastern Orthodox theologian, or even a Billy Graham on horseback, but he was none of these things. He was an evangelical Anglican who loved the Book of Common Prayer and wanted to restore the vision of early Christianity. This can be seen clearly in his understanding of grace, a term so often used in the Wesleyan world and so often misunderstood. For Wesley, grace wasn’t simply “unmerited favor” (a Reformed approach), but the very power of the Holy Spirit! Grace is dynamic, relational, and transforming. Grace empowers the Christian life, a life of service and holy love. This is at the heart of his vision, and it enables us to see why he taught that Christian perfection (wholeness in Christ) is possible in this life. I wrote the book so that the reader might understand grace and holiness as Wesley taught them, which I think is vital to Wesleyan teaching and living today.

GN: How do you hope this book will be used in the life of the Church, whether by pastors, small groups, or individual readers?

RD: I remember hearing about Wesley as a teenager and wanting to know more about him. That curiosity led me to my career as a Wesley scholar, but on a personal level what I found was a man and a movement focused on Christ. We only point to Wesley because he points to Christ. This book can be read by pastors and laity alike and I hope that the story of early Methodism inspires their faith. It can easily serve as an introduction to Methodism for new church members or be used in a small group setting meant to ignite an interest in the Wesleyan heritage, and what it means to be a part of the Wesleyan movement. If it lights a fire in someone’s heart to go deeper or to experience the transformation that Wesley preached, that would be wonderful.

GN: In your view, what is one aspect of Wesley’s life or teaching that the Church today most needs to recover or pay closer attention to?

RD: There are many things that I think the church today should recover from Wesley, but as you’ve only given me one, I will say his firm belief that an encounter with God will actually change us. His ministry was a ministry of encounter. He taught that we encounter God in prayer, and he prayed fervently. If you visit the room where he prayed just off of his bedroom in London, you can still see the marks in the floor where he knelt for hour after hour. He taught that we encounter God in Scripture! When we approach Scripture prayerfully, it’s not just a depository of knowledge, but a means to encounter the One who inspired its writing. He taught that in the sacraments, particularly Holy Communion, that it’s much more than a ritual or a remembrance, but an actual encounter with God. He craved God’s presence. He believed in encounter, and he saw the fruit of it. If we can recapture that vision of the Christian life, it will change us dramatically.

Dynamic Grace: The Story of Early Methodism is now available for purchase.