An Independent Study focusing on Wesley's Sermons

This blog is a collaborative effort by a group of students at Princeton Theological Seminary as part of an Independent Study on John Wesley. The students (Deidre Porter, Logan Hoffman, and Clint Ussher) are being guided by Prof. Ross Wagner.

Wednesday, February 16, 2011

A wrestling match with Wesley...

I wrestled most this week with Wesley’s sermon ‘Justification by Faith.’ I think the sermon very clearly outlines his views of justification, so in that sense, I appreciate it. However, I was struck by a few notions which kept creeping into my thoughts after I read them. Even after reading all of the other sermons, I found myself unable to engage them as well because I so wanted to dig into this sermon alone.

After explaining the general ground of the doctrine of justification, Wesley begins to explain who it is that is justified. Up to this point, I have been with him all the way. I agree that Christ came to save the lost, or as Wesley would call us, the ungodly. But as he moves into his understanding of good works in light of justification, I started to do some questioning. Wesley believes that all truly good works follow after justification. Everything that is good and acceptable to God and Christ is so because it springs from a true faith. All works done before justification, even if they are good, are not truly good works because they do not come out of a faith in Jesus Christ. No works are good unless they have been willed and commanded by God. As he moves through his thought process on this, he ends on the belief that no works done before justification are good.

There are a few things within this that I can’t let pass by without some discussion. Perhaps you all can enlighten me as to what I may be missing or misunderstanding. That there can be good works that are not good in the sight of God, because they come from an unjustified person, is difficult for me. I certainly want people who are not Christians to be engaged in good works, and find myself deeply hoping that God loves the world, even the unjustified, and therefore could love their attempts at good works as much as God can love my meager attempts at good works as well. Would a loving God be able to not love good works, especially in light of all people as God’s children? This seems to limit the scope of God’s love, if God only sees the good in the good works of the justified. I also feel like this would set up a strange relationship between Christians and non-Christians, if I assume that my works are good because they flow out of faith, but see others’ good works as useless in the eyes of God because they are not justified. What reason is there for non-Christians to do good things? Is it a complete waste of time?

Additionally, to say that no works done before justification are done as God has willed or commanded is troubling to me. Does this limit the power of God, to assume that God could not or would not surprise us in this way? I wish Wesley had further developed this point, because I need further explanation of his thinking. If we hold onto Wesley’s doctrine of God and believe that he saw God as all-powerful, then how could we entirely eliminate the possibility that God might use an unjustified sinner for God’s glory or purposes? God’s power is far greater than our ability to know God, so how can Wesley claim to know that God would never will an unjustified person to good works? Does this speak to Wesley’s understanding of free will, so I should be able to understand this more fully if I dig there?

Maybe I am just spinning my wheels here. Maybe there is some semantic difference I am missing or some grounding to this view of justification that I have looked over which would enlighten me. I don’t disagree with many of Wesley’s understandings of justification. I think the significant part of justification for Wesley is the centrality of faith and the trust that falls out of faith that God has indeed justified us. I am completely on board with this, and can jump into Wesley’s views of justification as he starts them and as he ends them, however this middle piece of his understanding of justification troubles me. If we allow ourselves to limit God or to place ourselves on a pedestal above non-Christians, this causes me to pause and fear how this doctrine could be misused. I don’t want to have grounds for thinking my works are better than any others. And I certainly don’t want to limit the magnitude of what the almighty God can do. Is this what is happening here, or am I reading too much into this?

No comments:

Post a Comment