Pastor John Wright

« The Witness of the Congregation | Main | March 8, 2006 »

March 7, 2006

John Wesley got into some trouble for preaching his sermon "Scriptural Christianity." It was preached at St. Mary's Oxford on August 24, 1744 -- and the Vice-Chancelor of Oxford University asked for his notes afterwards, and dismissed Wesley from the speaking in the university ever again.

What got Wesley in trouble? Implying that England was not a Christian nation! Suggesting that the members of the Oxford administration needed to repent! Suggesting that the laxness of devotion of the Oxford students suggested that they were not really Christian! The sermon reveals Wesley's zeal for genuine Christianity, how amidst the "already" and "not yet" of the kingdom, Wesley called believers to live the "already!" He gives an account of Christianity had begun and continued for awhile, and that, Wesley argued, should be lived today.

What I'd like to share is Wesley's vision of the kingdom come in its fullness -- what a Christian world will look like. Note the role of peace and the relationship of this vision to the Our Father -- Your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven. It is this peaceable kingdom that Wesley called for believers to live now. It is interesting that such a call can still get one banned from pulpits!

III. 3. Suppose now the fullness of time to be come, and the prophecies to be accomplished. What a prospect is this! All is peace, 'quietness and assurance for ever.' Here is no din of arms, no 'confused noise,' no 'garments rolled in blood.' 'Destructions are come to a perpetual end': wars are ceased from the earth. Neither are there any intestine jars remaining; no brother rising up against brother; no country or city divided against itself, and tearing out its own bowels. Civil discord is at an end for evermore, and none is left either to destroy or hurt his neighbour. Here is no oppression to 'make' even 'the wise man mad'; no extortion to 'grind the face of the poor'; no robbery or wrong; no rapine or injustice; for all are 'content with such things as they possess.' Thus 'righeousness and peace have kissed each other'; they have 'taken root and filled the land'; 'righteousness flourishing out of the earth'; and 'peace looking down from heaven.

4. And with righteousness or justice, mercy is also found. The earth is no longer full of cruel inhabitations. The Lord hath destroyed both the blood-thirsty and malacious, the envious and revengeful human. Were there any provocatio, there is none that now knows to return evil for evil; but indeed there in none that does evil, no, not one; for all are harmless as doves. And being filled with peace and joy in believing, and united in one body, by one Spirit, they all love as brethren, they are all of one heart and of one soul. 'Neither says any of them, that aught of the things which he possesses is his own.' There is none among them that lack; for every person loves his neighbor as himself. And all walk by one rule: 'Whatever you would that men should do unto you, even so do them.'

Posted by johnwright at March 7, 2006 4:00 AM

Comments

John,
I wonder if you might comment on Hans Boersma's Violence, Hospitality, and the Cross in light of this sermon by Wesley. I find Boersma's account of non-violence as an over-realized eschatology to be intriguing.

I have enjoyed the Wesley quotes!

Peace,
Scott

Posted by: Scott Savage at March 7, 2006 12:07 PM

Scott:

I haven't read Boersma's book. I'd obviously be careful, though, because Christians live in the end time now, in the time between the times. In this time, while God can use the non-Christian authorities to check evil by violence, it seems in reading the NT that Christians are called into a life of non-retaliation in light of the resurrection of Jesus. That is the difference -- liberal non-violence could be 'over-realized' eschatology because it tends to see it as a type of political strategy for a certain ends in the world; Christians practice non-violence so that the world might no that God has raised Jesus from the dead, thus defeating death.

It seems to me that to argue non-violence as an over-realized eschatology is to demean the witness of the martyrs as well. This is why Wesley's quote here is so interesting -- in the sermon he calls for Christians to live as an end time now. Thus, there is no such thing as a nation that is Christian because it is immersed in violence. This is a profound critique of the modern nation-state in Wesley, a critique that he did not sustain throughout his life. Instead when the British troops began protecting his Methodist rallies, he came to be a big supporter of "liberty" enforced by state coercion.

Thanks!

John

Posted by: John Wright at March 7, 2006 10:52 PM

John,

Thanks for replying. I agree. When I read Boersma what intrigued me was the light he shed on how ingrained our lives our in the violence of the world in ways that we cannot even see. He talks about how it is impossible, save withdrawal into a sectarian society, to not succomb in some way, shape, or form to violence. He brings to light the reality of tension between the times. I would aruge against Boersma's "over-realized eschatology" that he perhaps has an under-realized christology and ecclesiology. I read Yoder with much more appreciation now and with great respect in his approach to Christian social ethics. It seems that a church that cannot imagine the possibility of a pre-parousia life to be rid of violence hasn't much to hope for nor say to powers. It really does matter how we talk about Jesus, huh?!

Peace,
Scott

P.S. Missed you at the WTS!

Posted by: Scott Savage at March 8, 2006 1:22 PM

The second to last paragraph alludes to the dangers of discontent. The call is to find contentness with one's own posessions, which I believe is essential, as desire is the problem maker responsible for personal and global imperialisms. However, I'm curious to know how this relates to relationships. Although in a healthy relationship one does not seek to posess the other, there is still an element of ownership over the relationship itself. This gets especially complicated when considering romantic relationships. I would say that it's impossible to be romantically drawn to another person without a certain discontent with oneself, especially oneself as a single person. Though, there is a kind of paradox as a marriage is perhaps the most effective venue for expressing the sacrifice of one's own desire for the sake of the other, who does the same in return.

Peace of Christ to you,
Adam

Posted by: Adam Pike at March 15, 2006 9:00 AM