The Asbury Journal by First Fruits Press

EDITOR

Robert Danielson

EDITORIAL BOARD

Kenneth J. Collins

Professor of Historical Theology and Wesley Studies

J. Steven O’Malley

Professor of Methodist Holiness History

EDITORIAL ADVISORY PANEL

David Bundy, New York Theological Seminary

Ted Campbell, Perkins School of Theology

Hyungkeun Choi, Seoul Theological University

Richard Heitzenrater, Duke University Divinity School

Scott Kisker, Wesley Theological Seminary

Sarah Lancaster, Methodist Theological School of Ohio

Gareth Lloyd, University of Manchester

Randy Maddox, Duke University Divinity School

Nantachai Medjuhon, Muang Thai Church, Bangkok, Thailand

Stanley Nwoji, Pastor, Lagos, Nigeria

Paul Numrich, Theological Consortium of Greater Columbus

Dana Robert, Boston University

Howard Snyder, Manchester Wesley Research Centre

Leonard Sweet, Drew University School of Theology

Amos Yong, Regent University

Hwa Yung, United Methodist Church, Kuala Lampur, Malaysia

All inquiries regarding subscriptions, back issues, permissions to reprint, manuscripts for submission, and books for review should be addressed to:

The Asbury Journal

Asbury Theological Seminary

204 N. Lexington Avenue, Wilmore, KY 40390

FAX: 859-858-2375

http://place.asburyseminary.edu/asburyjournal/

The Asbury Journal

From the Editor

Robert A. Danielson

11 New Additions to the Archives and Special Collections: John Wesley Letter and Possible Samuel Wesley Letter

Robert A. Danielson

21 Knowing What to Eat and When to Eat: Reading the Food Offering Text (1 Corinthians 8:1-11:1) from a Myanmar Christian Perspective

Hram Hu Lian

86 Freemasonry and the Methodist Episcopal Church in the Nineteenth Century

Nicholas M. Railton

139 Theory and Practice in John Wesley’s Critique of Calvinism: A Philosophical Examination

Walter Stepanenko

162 Defying Death: Abraham and Moses in Jewish Antiquity

David Zucker

179 Irene Blyden Taylor: God’s Apostle to Nevis

Robert A. Danielson

215 Charles Wesley and the Jews

Nicholas M. Railton

Features

254 From the Archives: The Robert A. Danielson Collection of Christian Tracts and Pamphlets- “Little Preachers” of the Gospel Message

270 Special Book Essay: Thomas Oord on “The Death of Omnipotence”: “Not Born of Scripture”: Dwight D. Swanson

285 Book Reviews

291 Books Received

David

Gyertson

Interim President and Publisher

John Ragsdale Interim Provost

The Asbury Journal is a continuation of the Asbury Seminarian (1945-1985, vol. 1-40) and The Asbury Theological Journal (19862005, vol. 41-60). Articles in The Asbury Journal are indexed in The Christian Periodical Index and Religion Index One: Periodicals (RIO); book reviews are indexed in Index to Book Reviews in Religion (IBRR). Both RIO and IBRR are published by the American Theological Library Association, 5600 South Woodlawn Avenue, Chicago, IL 60637, and are available online through BRS Information Technologies and DIALOG Information Services. Articles starting with volume 43 are abstracted in Religious and Theological Abstracts and New Testament Abstracts. Volumes in microform of the Asbury Seminarian (vols. 1-40) and the Asbury Theological Journal (vols. 41-60) are available from University Microflms International, 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106.

The Asbury Journal publishes scholarly essays and book reviews written from a Wesleyan perspective. The Journal’s authors and audience refect the global reality of the Christian church, the holistic nature of Wesleyan thought, and the importance of both theory and practice in addressing the current issues of the day. Authors include Wesleyan scholars, scholars of Wesleyanism/Methodism, and scholars writing on issues of theological and theological education importance.

ISSN 1090-5642

Published in April and October

Articles and reviews may be copied for personal or classroom use. Permission to otherwise reprint essays and reviews must be granted permission by the editor and the author.

The Asbury Journal 80/1: 6-10

DOI: 10.7252/Journal.01.2025S.01

From the Editor

This issue of The Asbury Journal is dedicated to the memory of Hram Hu Lian (May 22, 1982 – June 2, 2024). Hu Lian was a Ph.D. student at Asbury Theological Seminary in the area of Biblical Studies with a concentration in the New Testament. He was from the country of Myanmar and also worked in the Archives and Special Collections of the B.L. Fisher Library. I knew Hu Lian from his work in the archives, but also as a student. When he was almost fnished with his coursework, he needed one more class during the summer, and so he arranged to do an independent study with me on the Anthropology of Food and Buddhism in Myanmar. He was hoping to make this a key part of his Ph.D. dissertation. Part of his work for that study was to produce a publishable article. I told him at the time that I would like to publish it in The Asbury Journal, but it needed a little editing work. Sadly, he never had time to do that work, and so I have done some basic editing and his paper is in this issue of The Journal, both in English and translated into Burmese, the principal language of Myanmar, by a friend and classmate, David Lian. (Special thanks to David for this work in honor of Hu Lian.) I feel this article can help perpetuate some of what Hu Lian was trying to accomplish with his Ph.D. work, and I pray that his work will continue to strengthen the work of the Church in Myanmar.

Perhaps more than this paper though, I remember our weekly meetings when Hu Lian was so worried about the state of his country, Myanmar, which was involved in civil unrest, and the safety of his wife and children. He was working hard to get them out of the country, and so we often prayed for their well-being in those meetings. I remember the joy in his face when I saw him in the parking lot after the class and he introduced me to his wife and children, after they had arrived safely. It was a wonderful answer to our prayers.

I also remember Hu Lian’s work in the archives, where he had become the person who knew how to do everything. He was the expert when you needed something. Often, many of the images you see in the “From the Archives” essay for the past few years, were scanned by Hu Lian.

When he became unexpectedly ill and was hospitalized, the entire archives had to fgure out how to do many things which had always fallen to Hu Lian. We still grieve his loss as a co-worker and as a friend. Our prayers and thoughts continue to go out to his family, and especially his children who he deeply loved and cared about.

In Memory of Hram Hu Lian (May 22, 1982 – June 2, 2024)

It is somehow suitable, given Hu Lian’s work in the archives, that we start this issue of The Journal announcing some important new gifts to the Archives and Special Collections, including a signed letter of John Wesley’s and a possible letter of Samuel Wesley, along with other Wesleyana. This is followed by Hram Hu Lian’s paper in English, followed by the same paper translated into Burmese. In this paper, he is seeking to relate Paul’s advice on eating meat offered to idols with the real practical theology of Christians in Myanmar who often interact with their Buddhist neighbors, and these interactions often involve issues of eating together at

social events, many of which have religious connotations. Hram Hu Lian is aiming to fnd biblical support to encourage increased interactions between Christians and Buddhists, while also remaining true to scripture.

Nicholas Railton presents the next article which examines the history of Freemasonry within Methodist circles in the 18th century. While some groups, like the Free Methodists rejected ties to secret societies, the Methodist Episcopal Church appears to have embraced these connections. Railton raises the types of concerns these connections caused, and in a well-documented article seeks to increase research interest in this topic.

Walter Stephanenko uses the debates between Wesley and Calvinist opponents to examine how Wesley’s view of theory and practice worked together in terms of his theology. He is less concerned with the traditional theological arguments and more interested in the process which Wesley used to both address theological and practical concerns among the Methodists.

Rabbi David Zucker joins The Asbury Journal again in this issue with a fascinating examination of Jewish rabbinic sources regarding the death of Abraham and Moses. While only briefy touched on in scripture, understanding the Jewish sources on this topic better helps us understand Jewish views about death in historic times. These rabbinic stories have many similarities as Abraham and Moses both seek to avoid death, and even refuse to go with God’s angels who are sent to bring them to heaven. This look into the topic can help Christians seeking to understand possible early Jewish infuences on Christian views of death as well.

The story of Irene Blyden Taylor is told by Robert A. Danielson in the next article. This little-known story of an early African-American Holiness missionary to the Caribbean is insightful in understanding key missiological principles. Irene worked on the island of Nevis, and due to her work no foreign missionary was ever needed to live on the island. Her work demonstrates the complexity of early Holiness missions in the English-speaking Caribbean, but also shows how God laid the foundation for the Wesleyan Church in the islands through the work of ordinary people who did extraordinary things.

Nicholas M. Railton presents a second article on the views of Charles Wesley of the Jewish people of his day. In particular, he analyzes the anti-Jewish protests of 1753 (triggered by a law to allow citizenship for Jews in England), and a political cartoon from the time which seems to suggest Charles Wesley’s agreement with these sentiments. However, as

Railton points out, the infuence of Samuel Wesley and Charles’ own work suggests that their theology toward the Jewish people was not against the Jews, but rather saw the restoration of the Jewish people to the Holy Land as part of the eschatological views of scripture, and therefore Railton suggests that while some Methodists clearly held anti-Semitic views, it is unlikely that these views were held by Charles or Samuel Wesley. Railton is also encouraging modern Methodists, in Britain especially, to be more refective on their modern views toward Israel in light of the historical theology of the Wesleys.

In the From the Archives essay for this issue, I examine the development and use of tracts and their importance for understanding lay theology, especially from the 1920s through the 1970s. This in an area rich for potential research which provides insight into the concerns of ordinary Christians and their spiritual needs. Finally, Dwight D. Swanson presents a special book essay focused on dealing with issues raised in Thomas Oord’s book, The Death of Omnipotence and Birth of Amipotence. Swanson presents strong evidence countering some of the principle themes taken by Oord, particularly in regard to confusing etymology with meaning and translation with interpretation. The use of El Shaddai in Genesis and Job is especially important in Oord’s view for understanding concepts on the omnipotence of God. Swanson argues that Oord’s conclusions lack appropriate scholarly support.

In many ways, this issue of The Asbury Journal is about speaking from the margins. Whether it be from the Church in distant Myanmar and the island of Nevis in the Caribbean, to Methodists opposed to Freemasonry, to Jewish views of scripture and Methodist views of Jews, it is always important to hear points of view from the margins and not just the centers of the Christian world. Even the article on Calvinism is speaking from the academic margins of the philosophy of religion instead of the theological center. The issue of tracts also forces us to examine issues of concern to ordinary Christians, which are often sidelined in academic circles. The margins are an important place in scripture and in the Jewish and Christian traditions. The Jewish people themselves were on the margins of the empires of the ancient world. God chose a people who were slaves in Egypt, defnitely a marginalized people, to form a new nation. The prophets frequently supported the people on the margins. Jesus cared for those on the margins in his day, whether they be despised tax collectors, or lepers,

or sinners rejected by the local religious elite. In his description of the fnal judgement in Matthew 25, Jesus points out that actions done for “the least of these,” those who were hungry or thirsty, strangers, naked, sick, or in prison, would be actions done to Christ himself. Being true Christians means being able to hear and respond to the voices of the poor, the immigrant, the excluded or rejected of society, and bring them the Good News that God loves and cares for them, just as much as for the people at the center. Christian theology and practice must always include the people on the margins. As Jesus quoted from Isaiah in announcing his message in Luke 4:18-19 (ISV),

“The spirit of the Lord is upon me; He has anointed me to tell the good news to the poor. He has sent me to announce release to the prisoners and recovery of sight to the blind, to set oppressed people free, and to announce the year of the Lord’s favor.”

This continues to be our message, even as academics and theologians. We must never become so captured by the center of power that we forget we are sent to the margins, and I pray our academic work as well as our practical ministry will never fail to remember this essential truth.

Robert Danielson Ph.D

The Asbury Journal 80/1: 11-20

Robert A. Danielson

New Additions to the Archives and Special Collections: John Wesley Letter and Possible Samuel Wesley Letter

In a generous gift to Asbury Theological Seminary this past winter, Rev. George S. Rigby, Jr. donated a collection of Wesleyana and rare books which he had collected over a lifetime. Of particular signifcance, this collection contained an original letter from Rev. John Wesley, the founder of Methodism. This particular letter is well documented and was purchased in 1971 from Charles Sessler, Inc., a noted dealer in rare books and manuscripts. Rev. Rigby shared the letter with Dr. Frank Baker in 1981, when he was the editor-in-chief of The Oxford Edition of Wesley’s Works. In Baker’s correspondence with Rigby, he indicates that Thomas Warrick came as an assistant to Burslem in Staffordshire in August of 1785. Two other young men (one a Samuel Edwards and the other possibly John Robotham) had also turned up as preachers. The two younger men were arguing about who should remain, and one of them, who was married, wanted a house for his wife. Baker noted, “Like Asbury, however, who learned it from him, Wesley didn’t really favour married preachers, and although he did support them from Conference funds, that support was mainly limited to the ‘regulars.’” This letter was also printed in John Telford’s The Letters of the Rev. John Wesley, A.M. (Epworth Press, London 1931, reprinted 1960) volume eight, page 168; however in that publication the year is wrong, listed as 1789. The transcript of the letter records,

Bath Sept 10 1785

My Dear Sister

I know not what to do, or what to say; this untoward man so perplexes me! It is not my business to fnd Houses for Preacher’s wives; I do not take it upon me. I did not order him to come to Burslem: I only permitted what I could not help. I must leave our Brethren to compromise these matters among themselves: they are too hard for me. A Preacher is wanting in Gloucester Circuit. One of them may go thither. I am, with Love to bro. Warrick

My Dear Sister, Your Affectionate Brother

J Wesley

Image of the John Wesley Letter Donated to Asbury Seminary (Used with the permission of the Asbury Theological Seminary Archives and Special Collections)

Addressed: To Mrs Warrick At the Preaching House In Burslem, near Fr Glo’ster Newcastle under Lain (possibly Newcastleunder-Lyme)

Image of the Cover of the John Wesley Letter (Used with the permission of the Asbury Theological Seminary Archives and Special Collections)

The other letter with possible historical signifcance is a letter reportedly from Samuel Wesley, although it has not been authenticated. It appears to have come from the collection of autograph letters and historical documents of Alfred Morrison, who was a well-known collector of such materials in the 19th century. It is the documentation from Morrison that attributes the letter to Samuel Wesley. The letter is sent to “Capt. Early Ship is called The Wm & Mary- Paul Beckford Mastr.”

Image of the Back Page of the Possible Samuel Wesley Letter (Used with the permission of the Asbury Theological Seminary Archives and Special Collections)

Epworth May 17, [1]710

Sir

The 10th instant I recd yrs at Gainsbro’, (tho’ without any date) with that of Mrs. Sparling enclosd. I have sent an acct of it to council, with a copy of our Ltr of Atturney, to know if it gives us suffcient pow-ers to sell our 3d pt, or whether that be all yr Mr. Ana-sley has a Title to? If they resolv[e] both in the affrma-tive, I shall consent to the sale; for 240 £ is better then nothing. If you would likewise be so kind to take yr Kinsman’s advice about it, who it’s likely may by this time have digested it, it may be very proper. I’ll send the Result to you the next post af-ter I hear from my council, & beg you would do as same to me, directed for me [at Epworth, to be left at Gainsbro’, Lincolnshire.] I am

Honrd Sir!

Yrs most obligd

& most humble servt

S Wesley

Image of the Main Page of the Possible Samuel Wesley Letter (Used with the permission of the Asbury Theological Seminary Archives and Special Collections)

(2025)

Some internal evidence that might support a letter from Samuel Wesley can be seen in the date of 1710, since Samuel became the rector at Epworth in Lincolnshire in 1695. By 1700, Samuel was in serious debt, and this was followed by a number of catastrophes, including the rectory burning in 1702, a crop of fax burning in 1704, being imprisoned for debt in 1705, and the rectory burning again in 1709 with its contents and almost with his son, John. So, a concern about funds makes sense as well. Also of interest, his wife Susanna was the daughter of Samuel Annesley, and the name “Anasley” in the letter could refer to that family and the possibility of selling some type of property for an inherited part.

(Used with the permission of the Asbury Theological Seminary Archives and Special Collections)

Enoch Wood Bust of John Wesley (circa 1800)Gift from Rev. George Rigby

Rev. Rigby’s gift also included around 100 books (with about half of these being older rare texts), several prints, and at least nine older porcelain Staffordshire fgures of Wesley and other collectable items of Methodist ephemera. Of particular note is the Staffordshire bust of John Wesley done by Enoch Woods. The Woods family of Staffordshire potters were followers of John Wesley, and Wesley sat for Enoch Woods in Burslem in 1781 for this image. It was frst released for sale in Leeds at the Methodist Conference in 1781. Wesley considered this likeness by Woods to be one of the best done of Wesley. The bust gifted to the Seminary is inscribed, noting Wesley’s death in 1791. A second issue was made at the time of Wesley’s death, so this bust is from this period or slightly later.

(Used with the permission of the Asbury Theological Seminary Archives and Special Collections)

Black Wedgewood Bust of John Wesley (circa 1904)Gift from Rev. George Rigby

Some Other Staffordshire Figures of Wesley Given by Rev. George Rigby (Used with the permission of the Asbury Theological Seminary Archives and Special Collections)

The Archives and Special Collections, along with the B.L. Fisher Library and Asbury Theological Seminary in general, are grateful for Rev. Rigby’s collection and hope it will continue to encourage scholars studying the Wesleyan Movement in the future.

The Asbury Journal 80/1: 21-40

DOI: 10.7252/Journal.01.2025S.03

Hram Hu Lian

Knowing What to Eat and When to Eat: Reading the Food Offering Text (1 Corinthians 8:1–11:1) from a Myanmar Christian Perspective

Abstract:

Food offerings play a vital role in the socio-religious life of the people of Myanmar. This is mainly because food is served as a part of worship in religious settings (Nat worship, Ahlu pwe, and religious festivals), as well as a part of regular interactions in a social setting (workrelated dinner parties, dinner parties at a Buddhist neighbor’s house, and non-religious social gatherings). In this context, knowing what to eat, and when to eat, becomes crucially important for Myanmar Christians as often times a person encounters various questions in regard to food offerings such as; Should a Christian participate in Buddhist religious festivals? Can he/she partake of food offered the Nats? Can he/she participate in the neighbor’s dāna offering ceremony to witness and share the joy on their meritorious occasions? In the case of a religiously mixed family, should Christian family members share or refrain from both the food and meritorious acts of other Buddhist family members? With these questions in mind, this article is an attempt to read the food offering text of 1 Corinthians 8:1–11:1 from a Myanmar Christian perspective.

This article is divided into three parts. The frst part discusses the socio-religious context of food offerings in Myanmar, highlighting the food offering practices in Nat Worship, popular Buddhism, and religious festivals. The second part discusses the rationale behind the food offering practices in Nat worship (propitiation) and Buddhist religious offerings (merit producing dāna). In the fnal part, the text of 1 Cor. 8:1–11:1 will be examined from a Myanmar Christian perspective, highlighting what types of foods are prohibited, and what types of foods are permitted in various occasions, both in Corinth and Myanmar.

Key Words: Myanmar, food offerings, Buddhism, Nat worship, contextualization

Hram Hu Lian (May 22, 1982 – June 2, 2024) was a Ph.D student at Asbury Theological Seminary from Myanmar in the area of Biblical Studies with a New Testament concentration. This paper was one of his last papers, written for an independent study and focused on the topic he hoped to develop into his Ph.D. dissertation. His unexpected death impacted those who knew him and those he worked with in the Archives and Special Collections of the B.L. Fisher Library. His kind nature, devotion to his family, and his love of God remain a constant memory for those who interacted with him as fellow students, staff, and professors. He will be missed. This article is published in his memory.

Introduction

The Socio-Religious Context of Food Offerings in Myanmar

Nat Worship

Nat worship is one of the primal religions of Myanmar1 which still dictates much of the religious thought and behavior of the people. The failure of a powerful king, like Anawrahta, who tried to wipe out the religious practices of Nat worship and replace it with Theravada Buddhism in the eleventh century C.E, indicates how deeply Nat worship is rooted in the minds of the people of Myanmar.2 According to Khin Maung Nyunt, Nat worship is broadly defned as the worship of spiritual beings because “‘Nat’ is a derivative from a Pali word ‘Natha’ which means ‘a resplendent being

(2025)

worthy of veneration.’ Nat generally applies to all spiritual beings- devas, gods, goddesses, deities or spirits who deserve worship by human beings for their favor.”3

Traditionally, there are believed to be thirty-seven Nats who intervene with the welfare of human beings. However, various scholars have pointed out that the number can be much higher as the term “Nat” can apply to all spiritual beings.4 In fact, one Burmese scholar placed the number of earthbound-Nats alone around 3705 and there are various kinds of Nats in the Burmese pantheon. Moe Moe Nyunt has classifed them under four categories, namely:

(1) Tasay-Taye or evil spirits who haunt, bring curses, hardships, dangers, and cause mischief in people lives,

(2) Deva-Nats who save and protect good people from danger and other calamities,

(3) Nature Nats who reside in trees, waterfalls, hills, paddy felds, etc.,

(4) Earthbound Nats who are the lords, kings, governors, and rulers of individuals or groups of people, or a set of objects, or certain places.6

The Nat worshippers in Myanmar pay homage, bring offerings/ sacrifces, or sing songs to the Nats in order to appease them. Shrines in the form of spirit houses are erected in various places depending upon the location of the Nats’ habitation (e.g, under trees, on the hills/mountains, etc.).7 There is also a Nat shrine on the family altar (alongside the Buddha image) for the household Nats who oversee the personal and domestic events of the inhabitants such as: health, wealth, marriages, and births, etc. Every Nat shrine is provided with offerings.8 There are also special Nat festivals where the thirty-seven Nats are worshipped.9 Nat-kadaws (spirit mediums)10 are the main practitioners, who are spiritually married to the Nats11 and according to Melford E. Spiro they play various roles in regard to Nat worship; namely they (a) arrange the public Nat ceremonies, (b) present the offering to the Nats, (c) take good care of the Nat shrine (mostly the village Nat shrine at the gate of the village), (d) dance as a service to the Nat, (e) perform private rites on behalf of the clients, and (f) serve as a medium. Thus, he calls them “an oracle, a medium, a diviner and a cult offciant.”12

The Nat devotees present food offerings at every Nat worship or festivals. The devotees offer food and drink at the family Nat shrine or village Nats shrine as a daily ritual. They would also participate in annual regional Nat festivals where devotees from the nearby town/village gather together to present offerings and participate in the propitiation of the regional Nats Most importantly, the devotees would also participate in the annual national Nats festivals such as Taung-pyone pwe, Popa Medaw festival, and Mingun Nat festival (also known as Shwe Kyun Pin Nat pwe).13

Popular Buddhism

Although Myanmar is known as a country which adheres to Theravada Buddhism, it is the scholarly consensus that the majority of the population practices folk or popular Buddhism.14 Popular Buddhism by defnition is a syncretistic religion which incorporate animistic elements with Buddhist beliefs and practices.15 In the case of Myanmar, Nat worship, which is mentioned above, serves as the central element of Myanmar popular Buddhism. Spiro asserts that Buddhism and Nat worship coexist in Myanmar while complementing each other and also conficting with each other.16 In the case of the former, Buddhism and Nat worship co-exist because they provide for two different psychological needs of the people, i.e, Buddhism provides the means to achieve otherworldly goals, Nat worship offers solutions to the day-to-day mundane matters, which are irrelevant to Buddhism.17 Despite the complementary nature, the two traditions are clearly distinguishable, as both operate on different doctrines and ethos.18 Hence, he describes the relation between the two religious’ practices in terms of an Apollonius-Dionysius dichotomy.19

Apart from Nat worship, the popular Buddhists also practice astrology (Badin-Yadayar), Bodaw, or Weikza and other superstitious rituals. According to Maung Htin Aung, “Astrology to the Burmese meant not only the methods of tracing the courses of the planets and their infuence on mortals, but also the ritual by which the planets were appeased and made to withdraw their baneful infuence. In other words, it involved a worship of the planets.”20 The astrologers are believed to be able to tell one’s fortune, prevent misfortune, bring good luck, and solve various kinds of problems.21 Bodaw or Weikza is another person who is believed to possess supernatural spiritual power, have control over aulan saya22 and is able to help the poor and the oppressed. Last but not least, the popular Buddhist also believes in superstitious practices such as an obsession with getting good luck, or luck

associated objects (e.g, a lucky charm bracelet, special necklace, etc,), and the number nine.23

When it comes to food offerings, the popular Buddhist offers food to (1) the Nats in order to appease the Nats in Nat shrines, (2) the family altar in front of the statue of Buddha, (3) the monks in the morning as a daily ritual, (4) the monks on special occasions, and (5) as a communal feast. In the case of food offerings on the family altar, the Buddhist always sets aside the frst portions of rice and vegetables they have cooked for the family altar, where the statue of Buddha is placed. The early morning or dawn food offering is usually performed in light of a deep reverence for the Buddha, as well as the frst act of a good deed, which earns merit. Food offerings to the monks on special occasions and ahlu24 are done to gain merit and ensure better prospects in his/her next life. Zon Paan Pwint records U Nay Main Da from Nanda Gone Yi Monastery in Yangon, who said that, “after offering the food in the early morning, Buddhists feel they have done a good deed for the day.”25 He further states that a “Buddhist believes the person who eats the food which is offered to the Buddha is free from danger and will possess good health.”26 Buddhists also expect their food offering to be reciprocated, as they are believed to received back abundant and delicious foods in their life in exchange.27

Religious Festivals

The Myanmar lunar calendar is flled with festivals as there are festivals which are celebrated throughout the year. These festivals play a signifcant role in the lives of the people of Myanmar, because they not only provide the occasion to earn merit (dāna), but also serve as the time to celebrate communal ceremonial feasts.28 Among the most popular festivals are: the harvest festival (February), Thingyan water festival (early April), the full moon days of the months of Kason (April/May), Waso (June/July), the Nat festival (August/September), and Thidingyut (September-October).

Commemoration of the above festivals take various forms. For instance, the Burmese cook htamane, a special sticky rice made with sesame seeds, peanuts, and ginger to commemorate the Harvest festival. The Thingyan water festival is held in early April to mark the Burmese New Year. The sprinkling of water symbolizes cleansing of past sins and bad luck. During this festival, people go to the pagodas to offer food for alms, and the housewives at home prepare food and gifts to presents to their neighbors.29

The Kason festival is celebrated to announce the auspicious birth of Buddha, and for the celebration of this occasion people pour water on the sacred Bodhi tree and scented water in the pagoda. The Burmese also celebrate the full moon day of Waso which marks the beginning of Buddhist Lent and the anniversary of Buddha’s frst sermon on the Four Noble Truths. People donate robes to the monks on this occasion and shinbyu ceremonies are held as well.30 The Burmese celebrate the Taungpyone Nat Festival, where they offer three bunches of bananas, coconuts, rice, eggs, vegetables, fruits, sweets, and drinks (mineral water or alcohol) to the Nats.31At the end of the ceremonies, on the full moon day, the Burmese celebrate the festival of light (Thidingyut), where they pay respect to the elders and light candles.

The Rationale of Food Offerings in Myanmar

Propitiation

This concept of appeasing the deity with food offerings is prominently seen in Nat worship and there are at least two reasons for performing a food offering to the Nats. First, the Burmese perform food offerings mainly out of fear. This is mainly because Burmese believe that if Nats are not properly propitiated they will not only fail to protect them, but can also bring illnesses and curses. Hence, fear is the motivational factor for performing that duty. Second, people also offer food to the Nats because they want to receive assistance, blessings, and good luck. This is particularly true in regard to Deva Nats and Earthbound-Nats.

There are various levels of propitiation.32 First, at a personal or private level, the devotees offer food and drink at the family Nats shrine every morning seeking protection, guidance, and good luck. When the supplication is answered, the devotee will invite nat-kadaw/s to celebrate a thanksgiving ceremony called nat-kana pwe with food, orchestra music, and dances.33

Second, devotees participate in a local Nat pwe which are mostly seen in the rural areas, because every Burmese village has a Nat shrine for its village Nat. Spiro states that three times a year, in the months of Waso (June/July), Thadingyut (September-October), and Tagu (April), the village Nat is propitiated with a ritual offering of food to the Nat at sunset. In addition to the food, candles are lit, and a prayer is chanted by the local Nat expert, while the village orchestra plays music to sooth the Nats. 34 He further describes the treatment of the food after the service as follows:

This offering, like all offerings of food to the nats, is later distributed among, and eaten by, the participants. The nats, it is believed, consume the spiritual essence of the food by smelling it. Thus the saying, nathma angwei, luhma atwei, ‘a smell (on the part) of a nat (is like) a touch (on the part) of humans.’35

Third, there is also an annual regional Nat Pwe where devotees from the nearby town/village gather to present offerings and participate in the propitiation of the regional Nats. Spiro mentioned of the annual festival of Sedaw Nat Pwe where the Sedaw Thakinma and her brothers are propitiated as an example.36 In this regional Nat Pwe, devotees offer bananas, the images of the Nat shrine are ritually bathed in the river and returned to the Nat shrine. Throughout the ceremonies the orchestra plays a repertoire of Nat music where the Nat dakaws and other spirit-possessed devotees dance before the Nats. 37

Lastly, the devotees would also participate in an annual Nats festivals such as Taung-pyone pwe, Popa Medaw festival, and Mingun Nat festival (also known as Shwe Kyun Pin Nat pwe). Taung-pyone pwe is the most famous Nat festival in Myanmar which last for a full week and the festival honors the Nat brothers Shwepyingyi and Shwepyinge (popularly known as the Taungpyone Min Nyinaung or Taungpyone Brothers). The festival draws tens of thousands each year and, while many come to propitiate these Nats because of hereditary obligations, others are participatory observers of the Nats pwe who still made their offerings to the Nats 38 The festival is presided over by Nat-Ouk with four principle female Nats kadaws and four principal male Nats kadaws. The role of these eight principal Nats kadaws is to lead the processions, performing Nats dances.39 The core propitiation mainly falls under two forms: dancing and other ritual activities performed by Nats kadaws, and offerings which consist of coconuts, bananas, cloth, money, liquor, and bouquets of fowers and ferns made by the devotees.40 Additionally, one can seek the service of Nats kadaws with a fee to solve a problem which is within the competence of the Nats such as business, illness, marriage, divorce, and so on.41 Popa Medaw Nat festival is another popular Nat festival which is held a week after the Taungpyone Nat festival to honor Popa Medaw (the Mother of Popa), who was the mother of the Taungpyone Min Nyinaung. Mingun Nat festival, which last six days, is held in Mingun village in central Myanmar to pay homage to the brother and sister of Shwe Kyun pin, “who became nat spirits when the tree under which they were hiding from their uncle fell on them, killing them.”42

Religious Offering or Dāna

Dāna, according to Hiroko Kawanami, is “the religious practice of generous offering [given] to members of the monastic community.”43 Dāna offering is regarded as an essential meritorious deed in both Mahayana and Theravada Buddhist traditions. In Myanmar, the Buddhists offer dāna for two reasons. First, dāna is offered to the monks in order to receive religious merit. According to Spiro, this merit-producing dāna is mainly done in two ways; (1) by offering special meals to the monks, and (2) by purchasing domestic animals in order to save them from slaughter.44 It is normative for Buddhist monks (and nuns) to express their gratitude and to publicly recognize gifts offered to them by reciting blessing chants or by public proclamation of the donor’s meritorious acts in gratitude.45 Second, Myanmar Buddhists offer dāna to the monastic community when they encounter life crises: terminal illnesses, accidents, business losses, family problems, or any event they consider inauspicious, to offset bad karma by conducting a meritorious deed.46

When it comes to food offerings as merit-producing dāna, Buddhist monks in Myanmar are not vegetarians so they eat whatever is offered.47 As Spiro states, “the more elaborate the meal and the greater the number fed, the greater the merit.”48 Thus, people offer them the most prestigious item of food, which is meat and usually chicken or pork.49 Attached to this offering is the practice of sharing ahlu which is commensality in the form of communal feasts. Here the wider community witnessed and shared the joy of the individual or family’s meritorious occasion. After the communal feasts, the community would join the second part of the ceremony which consists of two main parts.50 The frst part consists of the recitation of awkatha51 by the congregation, the response and confrmation by the offciating monk, and the taking of the Five or Eight precepts. The second part consists of a sermon by the chief monk, a collective recitation of paritta, 52 the confrmation of the meritorious value of the donors by the principal monk, the pouring of water or water libation ritual (yezet-cha), the collective recitation of ahmyá we53 (three times), and the congratulatory proclamation of sadhu (three times).54

Reading 1 Corinthians 8:1–11:1 from a Myanmar Christian Perspective

Given the socio-religious signifcance of food offerings in Myanmar, the text of 1 Corinthians 8:1–11:1 is very relevant for the

(2025)

Myanmar Christian community. Often times, one encounter various questions in regard to food offerings such as; Should a Christian participate in Buddhist religious festivals? Can he/she partake food offered the Nats? Can he/she participate in the neighbor’s dāna offering ceremony to witness and share the joy of their meritorious occasion? In the case of a religious mixed family, should the family member/s share or refrain from both the food and meritorious deeds of other family members? Having these questions in mind, we will be reading the text of 1 Cor. 8:1–11:1 from a Myanmar Christian Perspective. Since Paul mainly deals with the issue of food offerings in the sacred places (temple precinct and at the table of pagan gods) and social location (marketplace meals and meals at home), we will discuss our text under these headings.55

Partaking in A Sacred/Cult Meal (8:1–13; 10:1–22)

In the frst reported issue in relation to food offerings in 1 Corinthians is the idea that some of the church members, who belong to the higher strata of the community, are actively participating in a sacred meal and partaking εἰδωλόθυτα at a pagan temple in the name of possessing gnosis (πάντες γνῶσιν ἔχομεν) and authority (ἐξουσία).56 In addition to their participation, the strong group also pressures the weak to follow suit, so that they will “build up” (οἰκοδομεω) the conscience of “the weak” (ἡ συνείδησις αὐτῶν ἀσθενὴς) in the church. The weak, on the other hand, perceive the action of the strong as idolatry because of their weak conscience and this in turn causes them to fall in their faith.

The issue at stake in the text of 1 Cor. 8:1–13 and 10:1–22 is idolatry, and scholars like Derek Newton and Richard Liong-Seng Phua have demonstrated that the question of what constitutes idolatry (in regard to food offerings) can be a tricky one, since idolatry can take various forms in both the Greco-Roman as well the Diaspora Jewish context.57 In the case of the former, Newton points out that the ancients perceived sacrifce in various levels; some were considered meaningless, some customary, and some recognized the presence of the god/s who could either help or harm the worshipper. They also attended and participated in communal meals for various reasons; some attended to demonstrate their socio-economic status, some to build friendships, and for some, to fulfll their sociopolitical obligations. Thus, meals in temple contexts were multidimensional and multi-functional.58 In a similar vein Phua’s study show that idolatry can take various forms in the Diaspora Jewish context, such as; actual

idolatrous behavior in visiting pagan temples and invoking pagan gods; cognitive error in terms of confusing the true God with nature or other gods; misrepresenting Yahweh with an object; and open abandonment of the Jewish ancestral tradition.59

Despite the existence of a range of perspectives and viewpoints on idolatry in regard to food offerings, what is clear from the text is that Paul is concerned with two things, Corinthians Christian participation of cultic meals in the temple precincts which was a partnership with demons (8:10; 10:20–21) that can cause harm to the brothers/sisters’ conscience (8:9, 12). These two issues are important for Myanmar Christians, because when it comes to food the main concern lay in the issue of the power behind the food. Our study on the socio-religious context of food offerings in Myanmar has demonstrated that devotees of the Nats and popular Buddhists believed in the transformative power of the food after it is offered to the deity. It is one of the reasons that both traditions promote partaking of food which is offered to the Nats and Buddha for the purpose of protection, healing, and bringing good luck to the business and the family. Additionally, partaking in food offerings would also bring harm to the conscience of other believers because they are accustomed to fear the Nats and partaking of the food would indicate the believer’s sharing a partnership or allegiance with the Nats or the Buddha.

Since Paul has consistently opposed Christians attending, eating, and getting involved in sacrifcial offerings of temple festivals, Myanmar Christians, likewise, should refrain from attending Nats pwe and partaking fo food offered to the Nats. In addition, they should also avoid attending and partaking in some of the Buddhist merit-producing dāna offerings, because they are highly religious in nature. In the case of harming the brothers/ sisters’ conscience, Paul’s advice according to Newton, is that “knowledge must be superseded by love and individual self-interest must be set aside for the sake of others and of the whole body of Christ.”60 Christians in Myanmar, likewise, should set aside their self-interest and practice love for God and for the brothers/sisters in Christ, so that they will not become a stumbling block.

Partaking in A Social Meal (10:23–11:1)

When it comes to a social meal, Paul discusses two types of food; (1) food (meat) purchased in the market (1 Cor. 10: 25) and a homecooked meal for dinner (1 Cor. 10:27). Various scholars have established that all of

the meat products sold in the market for public consumption came from the temple, as the surplus meat from temple sacrifces were sold to the merchants in the meat market.61 Since all the meat passed through the sacrifcial ritual of the temples, all meat purchased from the market and the homecooked meat for any dinner were technically “the meat offered to the idol” (ἱερόθυτόν). This situation is closely paralleled to the food offerings in Myanmar, where the Buddhists will offer a portion of every food, whether it be food sold in the market or food cooked for a meal, on the family altar or to the monks. Hence, all foods eaten by Buddhists are technically a food offering to the deity.

It is a puzzle for many Christians in Myanmar when they read about Paul’s permission for Christians to partake in food offered to idols without raising questions on the origin of the meat (10:25; 27). Therefore, it is important to ask the question, what prompts Paul to permit the Corinthians to partake of meat offered to idols in the social setting, but not in the cultic setting? Based on the different terms used for idol-meat in 1 Cor. 8–10 (εἰδωλόθυτον [8:1, 4, 7, 10] and ἱερόθυτόν [10:28]) Ben Witherington argues that εἰδωλόθυτον is a polemical Christian term denoting “something sacrifced to an idol or idols” whereas the term ἱερόθυτόν refers to meat sacrifced in a temple, but not eaten in the temple.

John Fotopoulos, who did a socio-rhetorical study on 1 Cor. 8:1–11:1, further points out that there are at least three reasons for Paul to allow Christians to partake in the social meal.63 First, Paul allows the purchase of meat sold from the macellum because there does not seem to have been any clear way to make a distinction between sacrifcial and non-sacrifcial food.64 Second, Paul’s allowance of food sold at the macellum also served his rhetorical strategy as an accommodation to the strong, one of who may have been Erastus, who as aedile (city treasurer), would have had oversight of the macellum.65 Third, Paul also allows the strong to accept invitations to meals extended by pagans on social grounds. He instructs them to eat whatever was put before them, without raising questions on the grounds of moral consciousness. Paul’s instructions allowed the consumption of all food being served, as long as the Corinthians were not aware that sacrifcial food was being served, an approach which allowed continued social relations with pagans.66

Based on the close parallel of socio-religious signifcance of food offerings in Corinth and Myanmar, one can conclude that Christians in Myanmar can partake of food that they purchased in the market and

participate in a social meal, such as a business-related dinner party, a dinner party at a Buddhist neighbor’s house, and even to participate in the communal feast of ahlu pwe without raising the origin of the food. While participating in ahlu pwe, a Christian should avoid attending the second part of the ceremony, which is very religious in nature. However, if someone brings up the religious nature of the food, or in the case that one is aware that this action would harms the conscience of other Christian neighbors or church members, then the concerned Christian should avoid participation in social meals for the sake of the conscience of Christian brothers/sisters, as well as that of the host.

Conclusion

As we have observed in our study above, Paul was mainly concerned with Christians’ participation of food offerings to the deities in the cultic setting, and not their participation in social settings. In the case of the former, he has consistently opposed Christians attending, eating, and getting involved in sacrifcial offerings in the temple, or in the temple precincts. Whereas in the case of the latter, he allowed Christians to purchase food from the market and partake in social meals with caution. Since many of the food offering issues in Corinth have close parallels with the socio-religious context of food offerings in Myanmar, this paper proposes that Myanmar Christians refrain from attending Nats pwe and partaking of food offered to the Nats. In addition, they should also avoid attending and partaking in some of the Buddhist merit-producing dāna offerings because they are highly religious in nature. In the case of purchasing food and participating in a social meal, Christians in Myanmar can freely partake of food that they purchased in the market, and participate in a social meal, such as a business-related dinner party or a dinner party at a Buddhist neighbor’s house.

In order to maintain good social relations with Buddhist friends, Christians may also participate in the communal feast of ahlu pwe without raising the origin of the food. While participating in ahlu pwe, a Christian should avoid attending the second part of the ceremony due to its very religious nature. However, if one brought up the religious nature of the food, or in the case that one is aware that this action would harm the conscience of other Christian neighbors or church members, then the concerned Christian should avoid participation in the social meal for the

sake of the conscience of other Christian brothers/sisters, as well as for the sake of the host.

End Notes

1 According to Maung Htin Aung, other important and popular primal religions of Myanmar include Astrology and Alchemy. While the practice of Astrology is still relevant to modern Myanmar Buddhist, the practice of Burmese alchemy seems to die out as the Burmese alchemist aiming to attain an eternally youthful body through alchemy seems to be impractical for the Popular Buddhist who are more concerned with their day to day socio- economic and spiritual hardship. See, Maung Htin Aung, Folk Elements in Burmese Buddhism (Rangoon: The Religious Affairs Department Press, 1979), 1; Moe Moe Nyunt, A Pneumatological Response to the Burmese Nat- Worship (Yangon: Myanmar Institute of Theology, 2010), 48.

2 Pau Khan En, “Nat Worship: A Paradigm for Doing Contextual Theology for Myanmar” (Ph.D diss., University of Birmingham, 1995), 7.

3 Khin Maung Nyunt, “Traditional Nat Festivals of the month Nattaw (December),” Myanmar Digital News, December 29, 2020, https:// www.myanmardigitalnewspaper.com/en/traditional-nat-festivals-monthnattaw-december (accessed March 23, 2022).

4 See, En, “Nat Worship,” 73; Melford E. Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism: With A New Introduction by the Author (London/New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 1966, exp. ed.1996), 52; Khin Maung Than (Seik-Pyin- Nya), A-Yu-The-Hmu, Nat-Koe-Kwe-Hmu hnint SeikPyin-Nyar Shu-Daunt (The Superstitions in Nat Worship: A Psychological Perspective) (Yangon: Pin-war-yone, 2006), 143 (In Burmese).

5 Than, A-Yu-The-Hmu, 143.

6 Nyunt, A Pneumatological Response, 27–33.

7 En, “Nat Worship,” 73; Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism, 48–49.

8 Robert L. Winzeler, Popular Religion in Southeast Asia (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefeld, 2016), 92.

9 One of the most famous annual Nat festivals is Taung-pyone festival which was held on the full moon day of December at Taungbyone village in central Myanmar.

10 For want of a better term, Spiro refers to nat-kadaw as shamans. See, Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism, 205–229.

11 Nat-kadaw literally means nat-wife or one who married a nat in Burmese. While many of them are female, Spiro mentioned that 3 to 4 percent are male. Cf. Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism, 205.

12 Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism, 206.

13 Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism, 108–125; Nyunt, A Pneumatological Response, 44–45.

14 See, John Brohm, “Buddhism and Animism in a Burmese Village,” The Journal of Asian Studies 22 (1963): 155–167; Winston L. King, A Thousand Lives Away: Buddhism in Contemporary Burma (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1964), Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism, 247–263; Aung, Folk Elements, 1–6; Nyunt, A Pneumatological Response, 22–46; Donald K. Swearer, The Buddhist World of Southeast Asia (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2010), 1–3; Winzeler, Popular Religion, 91–115.

15 Winzeler, Popular Religion, 90–91.

16 Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism, 266–280.

17 Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism, 266.

18 For the detail discussion in confict, see Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism, 253–263.

19 Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism, 297; cf., Winzeler, Popular Religion, 93.

20 Aung, Folk Elements, 1.

21 Nyunt, A Pneumatological Response, 49.

22 Aulan saya is the person who is believed to have powers to control evil spirits and power to use the evil power to achieve malevolent end. See Nyunt, A Pneumatological Response, 51.

23 The Burmese associated the number 9 with success and in order to get success in life, the popular Buddhist will offer 9 kinds of tendrils or fruits, or fowers, or candles. See Nyunt, A Pneumatological Response, 53.

24 Ahlu basically mean religious offering and the term is always associated with commensality in the form of communal feasts. See Hiroko Kawanami, The Culture of Giving in Myanmar: Buddhist Offerings, Reciprocity and Interdependence (London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2020), 40.

25 Zon Pann Pwint, “Making Merit: On the Business of Buddhist Offerings,” Myanmar Times, July 8, 2013, https://www.mmtimes.com/ special-features/168-food-and-beverage/7442-food-for-buddhist-thought. html (accessed March 31, 2022).

26 Pwint, “Making Merit.”

27 Pwint, “Making Merit.”

36 The Asbury Journal 80/1 (2025)

28 Kawanami, The Culture of Giving, 123–124.

29 C. Duh Kam, “Christian Mission to Buddhists in Myanmar: A Study of Past, Present, and Future Approaches by Baptists” (D.Miss diss., United Theological Seminary, 1997), 242.

30 The Shinbyu is the ceremonies celebrate for the entrance of the Burmese boy into the novitiate of the Buddhist monkhood. See, Brohm, “Buddhism and Animism,” 161.

31 Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism, 44; King, A Thousand Lives Away, 51.

32 While both Spiro and Ngunt classifed the propitiation as three level, I think the four-level classifcation fts better because a personal or private level propitiation at the family Nat sin is different from participating in a local Nat pwe.

33 Nyunt, A Pneumatological Response, 44.

34 Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism, 110.

35 Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism, 110.

36 Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism, 110–112.

37 Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism, 112.

38 Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism, 116.

39 Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism, 117.

40 Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism, 119.

41 The Nat-dances are performed while dancing to the music at the state of Nat-possession. During this trance, the Nat-kadaw obtains relevant information for the clients and delivered it to them. See, Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism, 118, 207.

42 Than Naing Soe, “Shwe Kyun Pin Nat Festival Draws Annual Believers,” Myanmar Times, September 3, 2015, https://www.mmtimes. com/lifestyle/16302-shwe-kyun-pin-nat-festival-draws-annual-believers.html (accessed April 1, 2022).

43 Kawanami, The Culture of Giving, 6.

44 Melford E. Spiro, Buddhism and Society: A Great Tradition and its Burmese Vicissitudes (New York: Harper and Row, 1971), 271.

45 Kawanami, The Culture of Giving, 9.

46 Kawanami, The Culture of Giving, 158, n. 32

47 Kawanami, The Culture of Giving, 159, n. 8.

48 Spiro, Buddhism and Society, 271.

49 Although eating beef is not forbidden in Myanmar, most monks do not eat beef, probably due to the close association villagers have with cattle in their daily life. See Kawanami, The Culture of Giving, 159, n. 8.

50 Kawanami, The Culture of Giving, 40–43.

51 awkatha is a devotional chant recited at Buddhist ritual in Myanmar.

52 Paritta is a protection prayer which is believed to have benefcial functions such as curing illnesses and injuries, inviting good fortune, pacifying restless spirits, soliciting protection from devas and deities to achieve a peaceful balance. See, Kawanami, The Culture of Giving, 41.

53 ahmyá we basically mean the sharing meritorious deeds and it is a recitation to send out loving kindness to everyone in the planet.

54 sadhu mean well done.

55 Since 1 Corinthians 9 deals mainly with Paul’s apostolic authority, we will not discuss the text in this study.

56 For the elites of Corinthians, see David W. J. Gill, “In Search of the Social Elite in the Corinthian Church,” TynBul (1993):323-37).

57 See, Derek Newton, Deity and Diet: The Dilemma of Sacrifcial Food at Corinth, JSNTSup 169 (Sheffeld: Sheffeld Academic Press, 1998); and Richard Liong-Seng Phua, Idolatry and Authority: A Study of 1 Corinthians 8.1-11.1 in the Light of the Jewish Diaspora. LNTS 299 (London/ New York: T&T Clark, 2005).

58 Newton, Deity and Diet, 175–242.

59 Phua, Idolatry and Authority, 35–124.

60 Newton, Deity and Diet, 22.

61 See, Gerd Theissen, “The Strong and the Weak in Corinth: A Sociological Analysis of a Theological Quarrel,” The Social Setting of Pauline Christianity: Essays on Corinth, ed. and trans. by John H. Schütz (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1982), 121–143. Wendell Lee Willis, Idol meat in Corinth: The Pauline Argument in 1 Corinthians 8 and 10, SBLDS 68 (Chico, CA: Scholar Press, 1985), 230; Ben Witherington, Confict & Community in Corinth: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 189–190; Jerome Murphy O’Connor, St. Paul’s

(2025)

Corinth: Texts and Archaeology, 3rd rev. and expanded edn. (Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 2002), 186.

62 Ben Witherington, “Not So Idle Thoughts about Eidolothuton,” TynBul 44 (1993): 238–242.

63 John Fotopoulos, Food Offered to Idols in Roman Corinth, WUNT 151 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003), 239–250.

64 Fotopoulos, Food Offered to Idols, 240.

65 Fotopoulos, Food Offered to Idols, 240.

66 Fotopoulos, Food Offered to Idols, 243–247.

Works Cited

Aung, Maung Htin

1979 Folk Elements in Burmese Buddhism. Rangoon, Myanmar: The Religious Affairs Department Press.

Brohm, John

1963

En, Pau Khan

“Buddhism and Animism in a Burmese Village.” The Journal of Asian Studies 22 (1963): 155–167.

1995 “Nat Worship: A Paradigm for Doing Contextual Theology for Myanmar.” Ph.D Dissertation, University of Birmingham.

Gill, David W. J.

1993 “In Search of the Social Elite in the Corinthian Church.” TynBul (1993): 323– 37.

Kam, C. Duh

1997 “Christian Mission to Buddhists in Myanmar: A Study of Past, Present, and Future Approaches by Baptists.” D.Miss Dissertation., United Theological Seminary.

Kawanami, Hiroko

2020 The Culture of Giving in Myanmar: Buddhist Offerings, Reciprocity and Interdependence. London: Bloomsbury Academic.

King, Winston L.

1964 A Thousand Lives Away: Buddhism in Contemporary Burma. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Murphy O’Connor, Jerome

2002

Newton, Derek

1998

St. Paul’s Corinth: Texts and Archaeology. 3rd rev. and expanded edition. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press.

Deity and Diet: The Dilemma of Sacrifcial Food at Corinth, JSNTSup 169.Sheffeld, England: Sheffeld Academic Press.

Nyunt, Khin Maung

2020

Nyunt, Moe Moe

“Traditional Nat Festivals of the month Nattaw (December),” Myanmar Digital News, December 29, 2020, https://www.myanmardigitalnewspaper.com/en/ traditional-nat-festivals-month-nattawdecember (accessed March 23, 2022).

2010 A Pneumatological Response to the Burmese NatWorship. Yangon, Myanmar: Myanmar Institute of Theology.

Phua, Richard Liong-Seng

2005

Pwint, Zon Pann

2013

Soe, Than Naing

2015

Spiro, Melford E.

1971

Idolatry and Authority: A Study of 1 Corinthians 8.1-11.1 in the Light of the Jewish Diaspora. LNTS 299. London/ New York: T&T Clark.

“Making Merit: On the Business of Buddhist Offerings,” Myanmar Times, July 8, 2013, https://www.mmtimes. com/special-features/168-food-and-beverage/7442food-for-buddhist-thought.html (accessed March 31, 2022).

“Shwe Kyun Pin Nat Festival Draws Annual Believers,” Myanmar Times, September 3, 2015, https://www. mmtimes.com/lifestyle/16302-shwe-kyun-pin-natfestival-draws-annual-believers.html (accessed April 1, 2022).

Buddhism and Society: A Great Tradition and its Burmese Vicissitudes. New York, NY: Harper and Row.

1996 Burmese Supernaturalism: With A New Introduction by the Author. London/New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, (1966), expanded edition.

Swearer, Donald K.

2010

The Buddhist World of Southeast Asia. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Than, Khin Maung (Seik-Pyin-Nya)

2006 A-Yu-The-Hmu, Nat-Koe-Kwe-Hmu hnint Seik-Pyin-Nyar Shu-Daunt (The Superstitions in Nat Worship: A Psychological Perspective). Yangon, Myanmar: Pin-waryone. (In Burmese.)

Theissen, Gerd

1982 “The Strong and the Weak in Corinth: A Sociological Analysis of a Theological Quarrel.” Pages 121–143 in The Social Setting of Pauline Christianity: Essays on Corinth. Edited and translated by John H. Schütz. Philadelphia, PA: Fortress.

Willis, Wendell Lee

1985 Idol meat in Corinth: The Pauline Argument in 1 Corinthians 8 and 10, SBLDS 68. Chico, CA: Scholar Press.

Winzeler, Robert L.

2016 Popular Religion in Southeast Asia. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefeld.

Witherington, Ben

1993 “Not So Idle Thoughts about Eidolothuton,” TynBul 44 (1993): 238–242.

1995 Confict & Community in Corinth: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.

The Asbury Journal 80/1: 41-85

DOI: 10.7252/Journal.01.2025S.04

Hram Hu Lian

ကက�င်းမက�သလခပ�သည

ပါ၀ငဆငနသင်ပါသလ�း။

hram hu lian

မည်သညအစ�းအစ�မို�းကု� ခွင််ခပ�ရမည်ဟူကသ�

ကနွးသွ�းမည်ခဖစကပသည်။

Hram Hu Lian

B.L. Fisher

(Archives and Special Collections)

အခမ်းအန�းမိ�းတွင

ဤကဆ�င်းပါးကု�

စ�းပွမိ�းမိ�းနှင်

hram hu lian

ကက�င်းမက�သလခပ�သည

ပါ၀ငဆငနွသင််ပါသလ�း။

အသင်းကတ�် နှင်

မို�းကု�

မည်သညအစ�းအစ�မို�းကု�

ကနွးသွ�းမည်ခဖစကပသည်။

အစ�းအစ�ပက��်ခခင်းနှင်သက်ဆင်သည

hram hu lian :

ကခ်ဆု�ကပသည်။

hram hu lian

၊ ပ�ပ�းမယကတ�် ပွနှင် မင်းကန်းနတပွ (ကရှကွန်းပင်နတပွဟူ၍ လည်းကခ်ဆု�ကပသည်)13 က်သု

ကသ� နှစစဉကိင်းပသည

လကခးကိင််သး�ကက�က�င်း

ကကု�က်နစ်သကကသ�

ဗ�ဒဘ�သ�၀ငမိ�း၏

မုဆငရ�

သကဘ�တရ�းမိ�းကု�ပါ

သကဘ�တရ�းမိ�းအ�း

hram hu lian : မည်သညအစ�းအစ�ကု�

စ (Apollonius-Dionysius)

သကဘ�တရ�းအခဖစ

နကတကဗဒင

ကု� ကဆ�င�ကဉ်းကပးနင်ခခင်းတု�ကု� ခပ�နင်သည်သ�မက အမို�းမို�းကသ�

ခပဿန�မိ�းကု�လည်း

Bodow) သု�မဟ�တ

hram hu lian

(ဧပပးလအကစ�ပု�င်း)၊ လမိ�းတွင

hram hu lian :

အကလးအခမတ��းကသ�

မက ကစတးပ��ုးမိ�း၌လည်း ကမွးကကု�ငကသ�

ခမနမ�လူမို�းတု�သည်

Taungpyone

hram hu lian

သည နတကန�းပွ (nat-kanapwe)

အစ�းအစ�တုပါ၀င

hram hu lian

(Shwepyingyi

(Shwepyinge)

(Taungpyone Min Nyinaung)

Taungpyone Brothers

ကငွက�ကး၊

ခပ�န်းမင်းညးကန�င (Taungpyone Min Nyinaung)တု�၏

မင်းကန်း (Mingun) နတပကတ�်မှ�

ကွန်းပင (Shwe Kyun pin)၏ အစ်မကတ�်

ကရ

hram hu lian

Hiroko Kawanami

ရန ကက�င်းမခပ�လ�ပ်ခခင်းခဖင်

အ၀င်းသု

မမက�က�းခခင်းတု

ရတ်ဆု��ကခခင်း၊

hram hu lian :

Derek Newton

Richard Liong-Seng Phua

hram hu lian

ဘ�သ�ကရးဆု�ငရ�

အကခခအကနမို�းတွင

hram hu lian

Ben Witherington

hram hu lian :

Erastus

အက�က�င်းတရ�းမှ�

ဝုည�ဉကရးရ�အ�းကကးကသ�

ကသ�

ကု� အနရ�ယခဖစကစသည

hram hu lian

သည ဗ�ဒဘ�သ�ဝငတ�အတကမ

See, Maung

Htin Aung, Folk Elements in Burmese Buddhism (Rangoon: The Religious Affairs Department Press, 1979): 1; Moe Moe Nyunt, A Pneumatological

Response to the Burmese Nat- Worship (Yangon: Myanmar Institute of Theology, 2010): 48.

hram hu lian : မည်သညအစ�းအစ�ကု�

2 Pau Khan En, “Nat Worship: A Paradigm for Doing Contextual

Theology for Myanmar” (Ph.D diss., University of Birmingham, 1995): 7.

3 Khin Maung Nyunt, “Traditional Nat Festivals of the month Nattaw (December),” Myanmar Digital News, December 29, 2020, https://www. myanmardigitalnewspaper.com/en/traditional-nat-festivals-month-nattawdecember (accessed March 23, 2022).

4 See, En, “Nat Worship,” 73; Melford E. Spiro, Burmese

Supernaturalism: With A New Introduction by the Author (London/New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 1966, exp. ed.1996): 52; Khin Maung Than (Seik-Pyin- Nya), A-Yu-The-Hmu, Nat-Koe-Kwe-Hmu hnint Seik-Pyin-Nyar

Shu-Daunt (The Superstitions in Nat Worship: A Psychological Perspective) (Yangon: Pin-war-yone, 2006): 143 (In Burmese).

5 Than, A-Yu-The-Hmu: 143

6 Nyunt, A Pneumatological Response: 27–33.

7 En, “Nat Worship,”: 73; Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism: 48–49.

8 Robert L. Winzeler, Popular Religion in Southeast Asia (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefeld, 2016): 92.

Supernaturalism: 205–229

Spiro, Burmese

Supernaturalism: 205.

12 Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism: 206.

13 Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism, 108–125; Nyunt, A Pneumatological Response: 44–45.

14 See, John Brohm, “Buddhism and Animism in a Burmese Village,”

The Journal of Asian Studies 22 (1963): 155–167; Winston L. King, A Thousand

Lives Away: Buddhism in Contemporary Burma (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1964), Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism: 247–263; Aung, Folk

Elements: 1–6; Nyunt, A Pneumatological Response: 22–46; Donald K. Swearer, The Buddhist World of Southeast Asia (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2010): 1–3; Winzeler, Popular Religion: 91–115.

15 Winzeler, Popular Religion: 90–91.

16 Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism: 266–280.

hram hu lian : မည်သညအစ�းအစ�ကု�

17 Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism: 266.

See, Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism: 253–263.

19 Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism: 297; cf., Winzeler, Popular Religion: 93.

20 Aung, Folk Elements: 1.

21 Nyunt, A Pneumatological Response: 49.

Pneumatological Response:

Pneumatological Response: 53.

See Hiroko Kawanami, The Culture of Giving in Myanmar: Buddhist

(2025)

Offerings, Reciprocity and Interdependence (London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2020): 40.

25 Zon Pann Pwint, “Making Merit: On the Business of Buddhist Offerings,” Myanmar Times, July 8, 2013, https://www.mmtimes.com/specialfeatures/168-food-and-beverage/7442-food-for-buddhist-thought.html (accessed March 31, 2022).

26 Pwint, “Making Merit.”

27 Pwint, “Making Merit.”

28 Kawanami, The Culture of Giving: 123–124. 17

29 C. Duh Kam, “Christian Mission to Buddhists in Myanmar: A Study of Past, Present, and Future Approaches by Baptists” (D.Miss diss., United Theological Seminary, 1997): 242.

(Shinbyu)

Brohm, “Buddhism and Animism,”: 161.

31 Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism, 44; King, A Thousand Lives Away: 51.

32 Spiro and Ngunt

33 Nyunt, A Pneumatological Response: 44.

34 Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism: 110.

35 Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism: 110.

36 Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism: 110–112.

37 Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism: 112.

38 Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism: 116.

39 Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism: 117.

40 Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism: 119. 41 နတ်အက(Nat-dances)

(Natkadaw)က အ�ကးအဉ�ဏကတ�င်းခးသ�းမ သင််ခမတကလိ�်ကနမုရှုကသ� သတင်းအခိက်အလကမိ�းကု�

See, Spiro, Burmese Supernaturalism: 118, 207.

43 Kawanami, The Culture of Giving: 6.

44 Melford E. Spiro, Buddhism and Society: A Great Tradition and its Burmese Vicissitudes (New York: Harper and Row, 1971): 271.

45 Kawanami, The Culture of Giving: 9.

46 Kawanami, The Culture of Giving: 158, n. 32 18

47 Kawanami, The Culture of Giving: 159, n. 8.

48 Spiro, Buddhism and Society: 271.

See, Kawanami, The Culture of Giving: 159, n. 8.

50 Kawanami, The Culture of Giving: 40–43. 51 �သက�သ(awkatha)

Giving: 41.

56 For the elites of Corinthians, see David W. J. Gill, “In Search of the Social Elite in the Corinthian Church,” TynBul (1993):323-37).

57 See, Derek Newton, Deity and Diet: The Dilemma of Sacrifcial Food at Corinth, JSNTSup 169 (Sheffeld: Sheffeld Academic Press, 1998); and Richard Liong-Seng Phua, Idolatry and Authority: A Study of 1 Corinthians 8.111.1 in the Light of the Jewish Diaspora, LNTS 299 (London/New York: T&T Clark, 2005).

58 Newton, Deity and Diet: 175–242.

59 Phua, Idolatry and Authority: 35–124.

60 Newton, Deity and Diet: 22.

82 The Asbury Journal 80/1 (2025)

Argument in 1 Corinthians 8 and 10, SBLDS 68 (Chico, CA: Scholar Press, 1985):

230; Ben Witherington, Confict & Community in Corinth: A Socio-Rhetorical

Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995): 189–190;

Jerome Murphy O’Connor, St. Paul’s Corinth: Texts and Archaeology, 3rd rev. and expanded edn. (Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 2002): 186. 19

62 Ben Witherington, “Not So Idle Thoughts about Eidolothuton,”

TynBul 44 (1993): 238–242.

63 John Fotopoulos, Food Offered to Idols in Roman Corinth, WUNT

151 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003): 239–250.

64 Fotopoulos, Food Offered to Idols: 240.

65 Fotopoulos, Food Offered to Idols: 240.

66 Fotopoulos, Food Offered to Idols: 240.

Works Cited

Aung, Maung Htin

1979 Folk Elements in Burmese Buddhism. Rangoon, Myanmar: The Religious Affairs Department Press.

Brohm, John

1963 “Buddhism and Animism in a Burmese Village.” The Journal of Asian Studies 22 (1963): 155–167.

En, Pau Khan

1995 “Nat Worship: A Paradigm for Doing Contextual Theology for Myanmar.” Ph.D Dissertation, University of Birmingham.

Gill, David W. J.

1993 “In Search of the Social Elite in the Corinthian Church.” TynBul (1993): 323– 37.

Kam, C. Duh

1997 “Christian Mission to Buddhists in Myanmar: A Study of Past, Present, and Future Approaches by Baptists.” D.Miss Dissertation., United Theological Seminary.

Kawanami, Hiroko

2020 The Culture of Giving in Myanmar: Buddhist Offerings, Reciprocity and Interdependence. London: Bloomsbury Academic.

King, Winston L.

1964 A Thousand Lives Away: Buddhism in Contemporary Burma. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Murphy O’Connor, Jerome

2002 St. Paul’s Corinth: Texts and Archaeology. 3rd rev. and expanded edition. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press.

Newton, Derek

1998 Deity and Diet: The Dilemma of Sacrifcial Food at Corinth,JSNTSup 169. Sheffeld, England: Sheffeld Academic Press.

Nyunt, Khin Maung

2020 “Traditional Nat Festivals of the month Nattaw (December),” Myanmar Digital News, December 29, 2020,https://www.myanmardigitalnewspaper.com/en/ traditional-nat-festivals-month-nattawdecember (accessed March 23, 2022).

(2025)

Nyunt, Moe Moe

2010 A Pneumatological Response to the Burmese NatWorship. Yangon, Myanmar: Myanmar Institute of Theology.

Phua, Richard Liong-Seng

2005

Idolatry and Authority: A Study of 1 Corinthians 8.1-11.1 in the Light of the Jewish Diaspora. LNTS 299. London/ New York:T&T Clark.

Pwint, Zon Pann

2013 “Making Merit: On the Business of Buddhist Offerings,” Myanmar Times, July 8, 2013,https://www.mmtimes. com/special-features/168-food-and-beverage/7442food-for-buddhist-thought.html (accessed March 31, 2022).

Soe, Than Naing

2015 “Shwe Kyun Pin Nat Festival Draws Annual Believers,” Myanmar Times, September 3, 2015,https://www. mmtimes.com/lifestyle/16302-shwe-kyun-pin-natfestival-draws-annual-believers.html (accessed April 1, 2022).

Spiro, Melford E.

1971 Buddhism and Society: A Great Tradition and its Burmese Vicissitudes. New York, NY: Harper and Row.

1996 Burmese Supernaturalism: With A New Introduction by the Author. London/New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, (1966), expanded edition.

Swearer, Donald K.

2010 The Buddhist World of Southeast Asia. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Than, Khin Maung (Seik-Pyin-Nya)

2006 A-Yu-The-Hmu, Nat-Koe-Kwe-Hmu hnint Seik-PyinNyar Shu-Daunt (The Superstitions in Nat Worship: A Psychological Perspective). Yangon, Myanmar: Pin-waryone. (In Burmese.)

Theissen, Gerd

Willis, Wendell Lee

1985 Idol meat in Corinth: The Pauline Argument in 1 Corinthians 8 and 10, SBLDS 68. Chico, CA: Scholar Press.

Winzeler, Robert L.

2016 Popular Religion in Southeast Asia. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefeld.

Witherington, Ben

1993 “Not So Idle Thoughts about Eidolothuton,” TynBul 44 (1993): 238–242.

1995 Confict & Community in Corinth: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.

The Asbury Journal 80/1: 86-138

DOI: 10.7252/Journal.01.2025S.05

Nicholas M. Railton

Freemasonry and the Methodist Episcopal Church in the Nineteenth Century

Abstract: Virtually nothing has been written on the presence and impact of Freemasonry within the Methodist Episcopal Church. This article begins to fll this lacuna by shedding some light on the topic. It has been claimed that John Wesley was himself a Freemason. In his journal he briefy discusses a book by an ex-Mason.

In this article some of the similarities and differences between the two systems are highlighted. The Morgan Affair temporarily weakened the position of Freemasonry in the Methodist Episcopal Church and in broader American society. Twelve short biographies of Methodists who joined the lodge show that the infuence remained. Freemasonry played a role in the schism in New York between 1858 and 1860, which led to the formation of the Free Methodist Church. In the second half of the nineteenth century newspapers like The Christian Cynosure, Der Lutheraner and Leaves of Healing highlighted the continuing infuence of Freemasonry on decisionmaking within the MEC.

At the end of the nineteenth century the Freemason William McKinley became the frst Methodist President of the USA. Right up to World War II Freemasonry continued to spread within the MEC. Two hundred years after the Morgan abduction Freemasonry needs to be seriously discussed again. Wesley’s remarks on Freemasonry provide the starting-point for Methodist refection on the subject.

Keywords: Freemasonry, Methodism, William Morgan, Methodist Episcopal Church, lodge

Nicholas M. Railton, M.A., PhD., is a retired university lecturer and school teacher. His email is: nicholasrailton@gmail.com

Introduction

On 30 November 1798 an eighteen-year-old theology student registered for membership in St. Vigean Lodge No. 101 in the small Scottish town of Arbroath.1 Following fve preparation sessions he was formally admitted to Freemasonry on Christmas Eve 1798 and acquired the degree of Master Mason.2 The student’s name was Thomas Chalmers (1780-1847), the founder of the Free Church of Scotland. He had matriculated at St. Andrews University in November 1795 and, from 1843 onwards, worked to establish a union of all Protestants in the United Kingdom. That body, the Evangelical Alliance, was founded in Freemasons’ Hall in London.3

It was a not uncommon occurrence for theology students, candidates for ministry and clergymen to seek membership in a Masonic lodge. Why Thomas Chalmers wanted to join a lodge is unknown. In all likelihood a relative of his will have suggested to him that lodge membership enabled a young man to gain important contacts in bourgeois society. In a letter to his older brother James, dated 1 January 1821, Chalmers claimed he had never attended a lodge since the turn of the century.4 It seems as if the teenager had become a Mason for egotistical and material reasons, inspired by a hope that lodge membership would be useful in obtaining his frst pastorate. His conversion following his reading in 1811 of William Wilberforce’s Practical View of Christianity (“a great revolution in my thinking”, as he described the change in a letter dated 14 February 1820) led to a strictly evangelical understanding of the Bible.5 His Masonic career suddenly came to an end.6

In 1797 the philosopher and Freemason John Robison (17391805) published a book in Edinburgh.7 In the preface to his book the author declared he had become a Master Mason in his youth and had visited many lodges all over Europe, from Belgium to Russia. Robison came to believe that reformers and revolutionaries, men without religious principles, were utilizing lodges for their political purposes. Indeed, the “leaders of the French Revolution” were all Masons. The book sparked interest amongst readers in North America8 and Chalmers probably heard of the book’s success in Edinburgh. He actually got to know Professor Robison at the University of Edinburgh where his philosophical convictions were profoundly shaped by his teacher.9

At the beginning of the nineteenth century Freemasons were not only active in the Church of Scotland, but also in British Methodist churches. Rev. Jacob Stanley was shocked in 1813 when Methodists told

him: “If we cannot be members of both societies, we will continue in the lodges.” Stanley warned them: “What! Prefer darkness to light – Belial to Christ? You cannot serve both.”10 The reason for the double-mindedness, and ultimate preference for the lodge as against the Methodist society, was clear to Stanley. The men longed for the material prosperity membership in the lodges promised to give. Already there were Methodists who were not able to understand, still less accept, such spiritual rebuke.11

Methodism and Freemasonry

There were a number of parallels as well as differences between Methodist class meetings and lodge meetings. While the sanctifcation of the believer was strived for in class meetings, in lodge meetings the rough edges were to be metaphorically hammered off the imperfect characters. In Methodism living stones were to be built into a spiritual house; in Masonry coarse ashlars are crafted into useful stones. Temple imagery is used in both systems. The Holy Spirit reshapes a man into the image of Christ, into a new priesthood, while in Masonry men reshape themselves into men of service. Lodges made good men better. John Wesley believed that God had raised up Methodists for a purpose just as Freemasons believed their craft was ancient in origin and eternal in nature:

Hail masonry! Thou craft divine! Glory of earth, from heav’n reveal’d ! Which dost with jewels precious shine, From all but masons’ eyes conceal’d !

Hail! Masonry divine, Glory of ages shine, Long may’st thou hold; Where’er thy lodge stand.

We’ll banish sullen discontent. We have in our possession An art divine, by Heaven sent, And sacred information.

Hail sacred Masonry! of source divine, Unerring sovereign of th’ unerring line.12

Christians are chosen just as Masons are selected after applying for membership and being inspected. Only those who wished to be saved from their sins and fee from the wrath to come were admitted to Methodist

societies. Blackballing ensured the unworthy were not admitted to lodge membership. In the lodge ritual a man experiences death and resurrection and a new life in the light of Masonry. While believers might hope if being admitted to heaven, all Masons were assured they would fnd a seat in the Grand Lodge above. In both Methodism and Freemasonry fellowship and brotherhood were emphasised for life could never be what the Creator intended it to be without covenant relationships.

The duty of a Mason agrees with Wesley’s concept of commitment to a class meeting. “’A Mason is oblig’d, by his Tenure, to obey the moral Law; and if he rightly understands the Art, he will never be a stupid Atheist, nor a irreligious Libertine.’ The “duly organiz’d Society of Masons is call’d a LODGE, and every Brother ought to belong to one, and to be subject to its By-Laws and the GENERAL REGULATIONS. […] In ancient Times, no Master or Fellow could be absent from it, especially when warn’d to appear at it, without incurring a severe Censure, until it appear’d to the Master and Wardens, that pure Necessity hinder’d him.” The lodge was to be a big tent, where individuals were free to hold whatever theological views they chose and where “Quarrels about Religion, or Nations, or State Policy” were not to take place within lodge doors.13

Theological and political pluralism were to govern the speech and behaviour of Masons; Masonry formed the centre of union and true fellowship amongst people of varying opinions. But lodges were from the start exclusive. The lodge only admitted men who had “no Maim of Defect in his Body” In other words, handicapped people were not admitted. Nor were women, slaves, hermaphrodites, men with the female and male genitalia, or eunuchs. Men with an immoral or scandalous reputation had to be rejected.14 The latter point was true of eighteenth-century Methodism, too.

These criteria for admittance to the lodge do not seem to have been critically received by American Christians. On the contrary, in the course of the nineteenth century tens of thousands of American Methodists accepted these criteria for membership.

The disciplinary measures implemented by Grand Lodges resembled the discipline Wesley enforced in class meetings.15 Attendance at lodge and class meetings was deemed to be essential. Absence from lodge meetings led to a fne in the United States right up to the middle of the nineteenth century.16 Wesley laid down the rule that a person who failed to attend seven class meetings in any quarter should be expelled from

the Methodist society. He would refuse to give anyone a ticket who only attended his or her class every second or third week.17 Similarly, tickets were in use in British Freemasonry and a Mason promised to submit to the charges and regulations and, should he be found guilty of any infraction of the lodge rules, he could expect to be ejected from the brotherhood. A Mason had to obediently submit to the advice of his brethren.18 Such a procedure was fully in line with Wesley’s understanding of authority. In contrast to the social background of most Masons, Methodist preachers tended to come from the lower ranks of society. Most preachers were actually poor. Wesley’s confdence in the leadership qualities of the well-heeled was limited. He was sceptical and critical of the ruling values, customs and opinions in bourgeois society and warned, more than once, against any fnancial dependence on the rich. As soon as the wealthy governed societies and conferences, and determined how preaching houses should be built, he once wrote, then one could say goodbye to Methodist discipline and, in all probability, also to Methodist doctrine.19 Poor people were sure to be the better class leaders he wrote in 1757. One could only employ very few “rich and honourable Methodists” for such a task, he opined.20 Freemasonry recruited members who were well-to-do and honourable members of society. Methodists collected class money (initially a penny a week to discharge the public debt). Masons also collected money in the lodges to fund support for brethren in need.21 Attendance at class and lodge was a requirement that entailed an investment of time and money. Christ was neither required to achieve Masonic perfection nor to encourage charitable giving. Freemasonry was a child of the Enlightenment and incarnated the rise of the wealthy middle-classes.22 A belief in a Supreme Being was considered important, but religious toleration required that all religions and denominations be deemed of equal worth and dignity. In lodges Catholics, Protestants, Methodists, Quakers and adherents of other religions could meet in fraternal harmony at a time when such ecumenical peace was most unusual.23 The editor of an American Masonic journal in the United States expressed opposition to religious walls. Each Mason was encouraged to build his own spiritual trestle board. Universalists, Unitarians, Jews, Spiritualists, and many others, who did not believe that Jesus Christ was the earth’s Creator and Redeemer were involved and so mention of those beliefs should be kept private, as to avoid giving offence. Such a view of Christ was “purely sectarian” and unacceptable to Masons and completely out of place in a Masonic lodge. Were unbelievers in such

a view of Jesus to be removed from the fraternity, there would be precious few men remaining, he argued. What people understood by the Supreme Being, or the Grand Architect of the Universe, was their personal matter, but it should not be imposed on other brethren.24

Wesley and Freemasonry

In the lodge a man would emotionally experience, through the rituals and degrees, bonds of fellowship within a tolerant deistic environment. For this reason, John Wesley rejected freemasonry as a syncretistic systema substitute religion binding men of all faiths together.25 In an entry in his journal he criticised a work on freemasonry by Thomas Wilson, namely Solomon in all his Glory: or, the Master-Mason. Being a True Guide To the Inmost Recesses of Free-Masonry, both Ancient and Modern. 26 Wilson was a soldier who had left the fraternity and had published the secrets he had learned there. Wesley called the work “a strange tract” that claimed to enter “the inner recesses of Freemasonry.” He thought the account was genuine and wondered why the author was “suffered to live.” Clearly, half a century before the William Morgan affair in the United States, there was already a belief that the lodge was quite capable of eliminating traitors. Wilson’s work was thus characterized by Wesley: “[W]hat an amazing banter upon all mankind is Freemasonry! And what a secret is it which so many concur to keep! From what motive? Through fear – or shame to own it?” In spite of such criticism and warning, it has often been declared in print that Wesley himself was a Freemason.27 Nikolaus Count Zinzendorf, who for a while had a great infuence on Wesley, has experienced a similar fate.28 In both cases the conclusion was based on mistaken identity.29

George Washington and the Methodists

It is no secret that George Washington (1732-1799) was a Freemason. On 4 November 1752 he paid a fee of £2 3s and was made a Mason in a lodge in Fredericksburg. After the War of Independence, he was made Master of Alexandria Lodge No. 22 in Virginia.30 Slavery had made him a rich man and amongst his slaves were some who had contact to Methodists.31

Washington was a nominal, latitudinarian Anglican who was certainly no “enthusiast” in religious matters.32 For him “Providence” played a far greater role in history than Jesus Christ. On becoming president, Francis Asbury (1745-1816) and Thomas Coke (1747-1814) headed off to

congratulate him. They offered thanks as “bishops” of a new denomination. The Methodist Episcopal Church had only been established in December 1784 in Baltimore.33 In their address to Washington (19 May 1789) they noted with satisfaction Washington’s faith in “the Great Governor of the universe”34 and expressed not only confdence in Washington’s wisdom and integrity, but also thanks for the blessings transmitted to them by “the providence of God, and the glorious revolution.”35

Washington replied to the two bishops using the same descriptions of God. The spirit of the age, and a good dose of political opportunism, had led to such an exchange, for the writings of John Wesley to the American colonists had surely not been forgotten.36

Freemasons differed in their political and religious views. During the American Revolution, French, German and American Freemasons had taken the side of the colonists. British Masons fought on the opposing side.37 Masonic lodges had for many years been active in the British army. The Freemason Samuel Seabury (1729-1796) served as chaplain to the regiment led by David Fanning (1755-1825). After the war Seabury became frst bishop of the Episcopal Church in the United States, established in 1789. Seabury remained in fraternal contact with Brother George Washington until the day he died.38 It is no wonder that a German historian of Masonry noted correctly that the deep interactions between Freemasonry and politics had found their purest and most noble expression in the history of the American struggle for independence.39 Popular culture has brought this to the attention of millions. At the constitutional assembly, not a few Masons sought to give their humanist ideals a legal structure.40 It was Washington himself who, as honorary master of Lodge No. 22 and dressed in full Masonic regalia, laid the cornerstone of the Capitol building on 18 September 1793. A Masonic ritual was, of course, used in the proceedings.

The Morgan Affair

With so many founding fathers and leading American politicians being members of Masonic lodges it was, perhaps, inevitable that their example shaped the views of the frst generations of Methodists. It has always been the case that American Methodists were attracted in far greater numbers to Freemasonry than was the case in British Methodism. In reaction, from 1816 at the latest, resolutions had been adopted against the involvement of Methodists in the craft.41 Public statements and resolutions did not, however, have the desired effect. In the 1820s many preachers (a

large proportion of the Methodist clergymen) had already become Masons. Many of them are said to have distinguished themselves for their zeal “in giving a moral tone to the conduct of the Lodges.”42 Presumably this is an oblique reference to drink.

Churchmen were not supposed to propagate their religious views within the lodges. Prayers offered in the name of Jesus were theoretically not allowed. The craft was deemed to be more ancient than Christianity and sectarian prayers might offend Jewish and Muslim and freethinking Masons. Only universalist prayers could guarantee harmony.43 The Methodist preacher Rev. Amos Barr Kendig (1830-1909), who held the offce of Grand Orator in the Grand Lodge of Iowa, was publically rebuked for mentioning “the Redeemer Jesus Christ” in a lecture in his lodge. Sectarian phrases were not to be smuggled into lodges under any pretences whatsoever. The editor wondered how Kendig would feel if a “merchant brother” turned up at his church in order to sell his goods. Talking about Jesus in a lodge was “altogether out of place.”44 From the start tensions beneath the friendly surface had been at work.

The origins of the political struggle against freemasonry in the United States and the Anti-Masonic Party (founded in 1828 and, for a second time, in 1872) had a particular Methodist component. The wife of William Morgan (c.1774-c.1826), who was apparently abducted and murdered by Freemasons for betraying their secrets, was Lucinda Pendleton (1803-1856), the daughter of a Methodist preacher called Joseph Pendleton (1781-1839).45 Morgan had himself been a zealous Freemason who had forbidden his wife from attending her Methodist chapel.46

Morgan’s disappearance led to a wave of anti-Masonic feeling in most Christian denominations.47 The Genesee Conference as well as the annual conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church (MEC) in Pittsburgh drew up resolutions against membership in lodges.48 The annual conference of the Methodist Church in Portsmouth (1830) tried to defuse the situation by calling on members to avoid arguments about Freemasonry. The Boston Masonic Mirror praised the “catholicism and affection” shown by that conference.49 Freemasons defended themselves against generalizations.

The Masonic Societies had been the means of protecting the Methodist Preachers from insult and contumely, in various parts of the country, particularly the back settlements and there were many, very many places where the Wesleyan Christianity would never have been known, but for the benign and charitable infuence of Freemasonry. That was the offcial

line taken by the lodge. And it was no doubt true. “The greatest portion of the Methodist preachers of the New England Conference are zealous and good Masons” in contrast to their brethren in Tuscaloosa (Alabama), stated one report. Sadly, the report continued, the Methodist Society generally is affected by the bigoted ignorance of a part. The majority of Methodists were, however, liberal and well-disposed towards Freemasonry and would have nothing to do with an “absurdly intolerant spirit.”50 In the south of the Republic preachers were becoming Masons in droves. Emory College (later, Emory University), founded by the annual conference in Georgia in 1836, had been under strong Masonic infuence from the beginning.51

Free Methodists

William Morgan and his wife lived in Genesee County. From 1850 onwards conficts there had arisen about the purported infuence of Freemasons on decision-making in the conference. Ultimately the disagreements led to the establishment of a new Methodist denomination. The murder of Morgan was the backdrop against which tensions within the church exploded in the years 1857 and 1858.52 In 1860 the Free Methodist Church was established. Members of this new denomination were not permitted to be simultaneously members of a secret society. There were fears that the freedom to preach a biblical message and discern the will of God was being undermined by opposition from Masonic elements within the denomination.53 No Free Methodist was to be bound by oaths to protect and where possible aid a Masonic brother.

The events in the Genesee Conference between 1857-1860 led to widespread criticism of the leadership, especially amongst Methodist women.54 One event in the early history of Free Methodism shaped the narrative over the next decades. During a camp meeting in Bergen a love feast was organized on 30 June 1859. A woman by the name of Mariet Hardy Freeland (1829-1912) gave a prophetic word in which Freemasons were named as the instigators of the ecclesiastical trial of Benjamin Titus Roberts (1823-1893). After the word men stood up and criticized the message. However, one old respected Methodist confrmed Freeland’s prophecy. “Suddenly as if a mighty wind had blown across the vast congregation, beginning near Miss Hardy, an outpouring of the Holy Spirit came, as on the day of Pentecost. She was flled with uncontrollable laughter, others wept, many fell to the ground, some shouted, danced, and leaped for joy. [...] Thus did the Holy Ghost set his seal upon the

truth.”55 Many preachers would have been reminded of the “enthusiasm” demonstrated at some of John Wesley’s gatherings.

Masonic Methodists

The role played by Freemasons during this episode has not been thoroughly researched yet, though a beginning has been made.56 To this day little has been made known about the numerous and varied links between Freemasonry and the MEC. To start to fll this gap the following brief biographical sketches of some Methodists who became Freemasons are provided:

(1) Rev. Joel Winch (1787-1854), whom Bishop Asbury ordained as deacon and Elder in 1807, became a Freemason in 1818 and later served the craft as Grand Chaplain of the Grand Lodge of Vermont.57

(2) Rev. Edward Thompson “Father” Taylor (1793-1871) became a Mason in 1820. He also joined the Odd Fellows and the Knights Templar.58

(3) Rev. Aaron Lummus (1792-1859) became a Methodist preacher in 1811. Later he became editor of the Methodist publications The New England Christian Herald and Zion’s Herald. In 1826 Lummus published Essays on Holiness (Conference Press: Boston). While preaching in New England, he always found time to attend meetings in lodges, chapters and camps of various secret societies. He was a Freemason, Rosicrucian and a Knight Templar 59

(4) Dr Elijah Hedding (1780-1852) was elected bishop in 1824. In 1815 he had become a Freemason and served the Order as a chaplain.60

(5) Bishop Enoch M. Marvin (1823-1877) was a Mason.61

(6) Rev. Benjamin Taylor Kavanaugh (1805-1888), brother of bishop Hubbard Hinde Kavanaugh (1802-1884), was a missionary with the American Colonization Society. In 1828 he was appointed Exhorter. The following year he was ordained preacher and in 1842 became Presiding Elder (Plattville District). Together with his Masonic brother Enoch M. Marvin he served as a missionary among the soldiers of the Confederate Army. Kavanaugh became the frst Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of

Wisconsin in 1844. Later he served as Grand Chaplain of the Grand Lodge of Texas and editor of the Masonic Mirror (Texas).62

(7) Rev. Charles Henry Titus (1819-1878) was ordained a deacon by his Masonic brother Bishop Hedding in 1844. In 1847 he was ordained Elder and, later, Presiding Elder in Providence District. In 1871 he held the offce of ‘Grand Master Gardner to the Offce of Recording Grand Secretary of the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts’ und received the 33° degree in Boston in 1867.63

(8) Bishop John Morgan Walden (1831-1914) became a Freemason in 1852 and served as Grand Chaplain in the Grand Lodge of Ohio. He was also an Odd Fellow, a Knight Templar and a member of Phi Kappa Psi. On 22 February 1892 Bishop Walden was awarded the 33° of the Scottish Rite.64

(9) Bishop Charles Henry Fowler (1837-1908), President of Northwestern University (1872) and editor of the Christian Advocate (1876), was Grand Chaplain of the Grand Lodge of Iowa.65

(10) James Jackson McIlyar (1816-1907) was a revivalist preacher who, in his posthumous autobiography, listed his memberships in secret societies. He became a Freemason in 1852, an Odd Fellow in 1850 and a Knight Templar in 1863. In all these societies he was a very active member. He notes in passing the anti-Masonic activities of his Elder, Rev. Edward H. Taylor (1796-1853), as well as the ‘conversion’ in 1841 to Freemasonry of Rev. James B. Findley (1781-1853), who at the beginning of the nineteenth century had once waged a campaign against Masons in the Ohio Conference.66 McIlyar became Grand Chaplain in the Grand Council of Royal, Super-Excellent and Select Masters of Pennsylvania.67 Between May 1878 and May 1880 he held the title of Generalissimo und Eminent Commander of the Knights Templar in Allegheny City.68 These were no doubt particularly impressive titles for the son of a farmer. Everybody knew of his work for secret societies. He once told an offcial at the church he pastored: “The sooner the people of the church who are opposed to Masonry die the better for all concerned.”69 He encouraged a number of infuential Freemasons to join his church who later held offce there.70 McIlyar established new congregations, and at the same time, as Sir Knight

Rambo pointed out at McIlyar’s funeral, he worked tirelessly as a “Masonic crusader.”71

(11) The Scotsman Hugh Duncan (1824-1887) was a missionary in Montana and established Sunday Schools there. He also founded Masonic lodges in the Rocky Mountains. In 1866 he and eight brethren established the Grand Lodge of Montana. He became Grand Chaplain. In 1883 he had the honour of becoming Grand Master. In spite of all his duties he still found time to become a Knight Templar.72

(12) Rev. Arthur Irwin Leet (1812-1892) was born in Ireland. He owned slaves, as well as land and a mill, in Georgia. Arthur Leet became a preacher in 1833 and an elder of the MEC in 1844. Leet was master of the Crawfsh Springs Lodge No. 300 (Chickamauga, Ga.) and Quitman Lodge (Ringgold, Ga.). A lodge in Kensington, Ga., is named after him (A. I. Leet Lodge No. 266). He became Grand Chaplain of the Grand Lodge of Georgia. At his Masonic funeral over 125 Masonic brethren attended.73

Post-Morgan

The lodges quickly recovered from the turmoil brought about by the publication of their rituals and the disappearance of William Morgan.74 Membership in secret societies soon became the norm within the ranks of Methodism. Lodges, not classes, drew in the emerging bourgeois class.75 Rev. McIlyar was convinced that “the majority of the ministers of the church” in the USA were Masons.76 After decades of attending lodges in various parts of the country this was at least his decided impression.

Rev. Benjamin T. Roberts, the key founder of the Free Methodist Church, had not overestimated the numbers of clergymen who had taken secret oaths. Of the 125 preachers in the Genesee Conference (1869) about 80% were Freemasons and the remaining preachers were well disposed to the craft.77 However, opposition to Freemasonry never totally disappeared. In 1871 two presiding elders and thirty-one preachers signed a resolution attacking Freemasonry’s infuence.78 The removal of Roberts from his post within the MEC had not brought the confict to an end. It is diffcult, of course, to know precisely to what degree the situation in the state of New York was representative of the whole United States. A German periodical (the Evangelische Kirchen-Chronik) quoted the National Christian Association’s publication The Christian Cynosure, which claimed that all the bishops

and most of the clergy of the MEC were Masons.79 One correspondent of the Cynosure calculated that about two-thirds of Methodist preachers were members of the order. This fact went some way in explaining why so many cornerstones of Methodist churches had been laid in Masonic ritual by Freemasons.80 A member of the General Conference of the MEC, J. H. V. Smith of Indianapolis, who was himself an Odd Fellow, testifed that threequarters of the conference that elected a Mason, Rev Thomas Bowman (1817-1914), bishop, were themselves lodgemen.81

German-American Lutherans confrmed this impression of widespread Masonic infuence in the MEC. The church was literally controlled by Masons, one Lutheran publication claimed.82 These are, perhaps, exaggerations made for sectarian and propagandistic reasons.

There was pushback. On 14 September 1870 a church conference took place which appointed a commission to investigate the matter more thoroughly. It was recommended that church members remain aloof from lodges.83 Delegates at other conferences called for similar action. Dr. Wilhelm (William) Nast (1807-1899) petitioned the General Conference in 1872 and called for an investigation into Freemasonry’s infuence. The petition was passed on to a committee. A second petition came before conference, calling on it to demand that all preachers and lay people leave the lodge systems. The reaction to this second petition spoke volumes on the state of affairs. The presentation of the petition was greeted by laughter everywhere. The petition was also banished to a committee. The press organ of the Missouri Synod Lutherans commented: “We should not be surprised by the behavior of the Methodists who claim to be so pious.” Their piety was obviously the self-chosen unspiritual variety (Col. 2,18 is referenced), which is “not rooted in the clear word of God but in emotional excitement.” Methodists preferred to laugh about the religious scruples of their members rather than debate whether Freemasonry was in agreement with the principles of Christianity.84 For conservative Lutherans the MEC had drifted from biblical moorings.

Some years later a German pastor who had just spent twenty years ministering in the USA, wrote a letter to a Methodist in which he claimed that there was simply no Christian denomination as corrupted by secret behind-closed-door machinations as the MEC. The large number of men involved in secret societies had brought a curse upon the organization. Not only the vast majority of members but also many preachers and bishops had become involved. Some served as chaplains in the societies. They held

Masonic funerals for their unbaptized brethren who, they claimed in their sermons, were now in the Grand Lodge above. Such events were now so common among the Methodists that they rarely caused offence.85

Individuals felt led to wage a crusade against fraternal organizations. In Michigan, John Levington (1813-1893) fought for ffteen years against the power of Freemasonry in the region. In an obituary written by two preachers from the Wesleyan Methodist Connection, S. A. Manwell und S. J. Young, the point was underscored. The MEC in the state of Michigan was thoroughly “honeycombed” with Masons.86 As a result, they claimed, Levington had been charged with ecclesiastical subversion on three separate occasions. Ultimately, he resigned and in 1873 left the church.

Particularly in the frontier regions Methodism faced stiff competition from the lodges. In remote regions the lodge gained the affections of many. Class meetings were abandoned. The decision taken by Rev. Moses Franklin Shinn (1809-1885) to give up his job in the MEC in favour of the lodge was of symbolical signifcance. His annual conference had demanded that he give up membership in the lodge and devote more time to his preaching. Shinn left the church.87

Critics claimed that the presence of Masons in the church dampened and even crushed a spirit of evangelism. Freemasonry had destroyed the spirituality of American Methodism, one observer said, and enthroned the “Masonic Mah-ha-bone will be the god of the MasonicEpiscopal Church.” The MEC would have to die so that people could be saved.88

John Alexander Dowie (1847-1907), an ordained pastor of the Congregational Church, was a signifcant critic of the linkage between Masonry and Methodism. In 1896 he established the Pentecostal Christian Catholic Church in Zion, Chicago. In his newspaper Leaves of Healing numerous diatribes referred to the MEC as the Masonic Episcopal Church. Throughout the nineteenth century criticism of Freemasonry focussed on the perceived deism and the drinking culture associated with lodges. Yet the discipline of the MEC never forbade membership in a secret society. Well-known Christian personalities such as the president of Oberlin College, Charles G. Finney (1792-1875) or the president of Wheaton College, Jonathan Blanchard (1811-1892), used their literary and vocal abilities to push back against Masonic infuence. Finney, a revivalist, had been a Mason for ten years prior to his conversion in May 1824. He

described the “inevitable” spiritual consequences of tolerating the “great evil” of Freemasonry. The taking of solemn oaths grieved the Holy Spirit, he said, and seared the conscience and hardened the heart of its initiates.89 A similar judgement was made by the German Lutheran professor Ernst W. Hengstenberg (1802-1869). Membership of a lodge usually checked spiritual growth. A “kind of curse” rested on the Mason and this hindered all spiritual health.90

We have seen that John Wesley had already foreseen that publishing the secrets and rituals of Freemasonry might not be conducive to one’s health. Finney and others reminded their readers of the fate of William Morgan. On 13 September 1882 a colossal granite statue was erected in the cemetery of Batavia to commemorate the murder of Morgan. The inscription reads as follows: “Sacred to the Memory of William Morgan, A native of Virginia, a Captain of the War of 1812, A respectable Citizen of Batavia, and A Martyr to Writing, Printing and Speaking the Truth. He was abducted from near this spot in the year 1826, by Free Masons, And Murdered for Revealing the Secrets of their Order.”91 The obelisk is still standing there as a testimony to an unsolved mystery.

Masonic cornerstones

Freemasonry contributed to shaping sermons, congregational life and the collective spirit of the MEC. Indeed, the spirit of Freemasonry has been engraved on to the very foundations of thousands of church and public buildings in the United States. The White House and the Capitol are just examples of many. Masonic rituals accompanied the laying of the cornerstones.92 There is very little evidence of opposition to these rituals being used to inaugurate church building programmes.93 No evidence could be found suggesting Methodist objections.

In 1851 the newspaper Der Lutheraner attached the “spiritual whoredom” of the MEC on hearing of Masonic preparations and rituals being used to ‘bless’ a Methodist church in Staunton, Virginia.94

It was not only the MEC that was being driven by various winds of doctrine.95 Debates were going on in other Methodist denominations which were picked up by non-Methodist periodicals. Freemasonry was impacting the Evangelical Association founded in 1803 by Jakob Albrecht.96 The Jewish chaplain of a local lodge was allowed to lay the cornerstone of a chapel in a Masonic ritual. The use of anointing oil and other “Masonic hocus-pocus” in such rituals was criticized. Preachers in Masonic regalia processed to

the old church. Only a minority of the lay people protested against such “abominations” and the Methodist press refused to publish their protests. The liberal majority in the church feared that Methodism would lose “all infuence” and relevance should Freemasonry be openly attacked. As a result, the MEC became a “sect being eaten alive by the cancer of the lodge system.”97 One member criticized the silence of the Eastern Pennsylvanian Conference on Masonic matters, interpreting that as an objective defense of Freemasonry. The conference lacked moral courage, he said, and so made itself a laughing-stock in the eyes of tens of thousands of other members.98

A Lutheran commentator went further. Tolerating Masonic rituals at cornerstone-laying ceremonies was, in effect, a sign that the “abomination of desolation” was being installed in the church.99

A Methodist President

The ubiquitous presence of Methodists at the conference where William McKinley (1843-1901) was nominated as a candidate of the Republican Party for the presidency was noted with great concern in Catholic circles. Rev. Charles Casey Starbuck (1827-1909) had argued that the future of the United States belonged to the MEC, not least because there seemed to be an indissoluble alliance between the MEC and Freemasonry.100 In a long letter the Methodist Rev. Dr. John Alfred Faulkner (1857-1931), professor of church history at Duke University, validated Starbuck’s thesis. He reckoned that about a third of all MEC preachers were still Freemasons. In the middle of the century, however, their infuence had been far greater. In an obvious reference to the turmoil in the state of New York, Faulkner spoke of a Masonic clique who had gained control of a whole conference. Their secret activities had led to thousands of God-fearing Methodists leaving the church. In spite of the continuing infuence of Freemasons he did not, however, believe that decisions at annual conferences were being pre-determined by them.101

In 1897 the Methodist lay preacher and Freemason William McKinley was elected 25th president of the USA.102 McKinley had been a Mason since 1 May 1865 (Hiram Lodge No. 21, Winchester, Va.). He was also a Knight Templar (since 1884) and a Knight of Pythias.

The Methodist presidency did not bring many blessings to the world. McKinley abandoned the policy of non-interventionism in the affairs of other states. The Methodist newspaper Northern Christian Advocate announced on 13 April 1898 what the manifest destiny of the United States

(2025)

was going to be. Should war be forced on the USA, then, of course, “our cause” was just. Methodism stood ready to fulfl its patriotic duties and every Methodist preacher would be a part-time recruiting offcer.”103

The United States slowly became a world power. At the dictate McKinley, Guantánamo Bay came under American control in June 1898 and was turned into a military outpost. In the Pacifc region the USA took its frst steps towards “civilising” other nations. When the Philippines were conquered, the Methodist president saw the victory as a “gift from the gods [sic].” On 21 November 1899 he told a group of visiting Methodists that he had prayed long and hard before getting a distinct impression from God that the USA had been given the divine task to educate and Christianise the Filipinos.104 That was, of course, the calling and fate of the United States.105 The exceptionalism and imperialism was given a religious veneer and marketed throughout the country. The Philippine islands were only to function as a springboard towards the huge empire of China. During McKinley’s presidency China came into the sights of American foreign policy. Further divinely appointed successes were not granted to the Methodist president. On 14 September 1901 McKinley, the “president of the money kings and trust magnates” (Emma Goldman), was assassinated by an anarchist.

McKinley was not the frst, nor the last, Freemason to be elected to the highest offce in the United States. Washington had been as devoted to Masonry as McKinley. On 29 June 1795 the Masonic Anglican Bishop Seabury dedicated a sermon to “the Most Worshipful President of the United States of America.” He had preached the message on 24 June 1795 at the offcial opening of a Masonic lodge in Norwich, Connecticut.106 In Masonic lodges to this day Washington’s praises are sung. His faultless and pure life is expressed in song:

And Truth, an attribute of God above, Clustered like dropping vines on Washington. What marvel that admiring Masons strove To catch the light from such a matchless sun, Or claim the mantle, ere the godlike chief was gone.107

Among the Masonic sermons and works in George Washington’s library there is a copy of John Robison’s Proofs of a Conspiracy. A German by the name of G. W. Snyder sent the volume to Washington in 1798.108 Snyder, himself a Freemason, was concerned that many lodges in the USA

had been infected by the virus of the German Illuminati. Washington had indeed heard of the dangerous doctrines taught by the Illuminati but, in a letter to Snyder dated 25 September 1798, he expressed his conviction that American lodges had not been contaminated by godless principles. This was the position held by most clergy in the MEC up to the point of its dissolution in April-May 1939.

The frst half of the twentieth century marked the high watermark of American Freemasonry. The MEC was in 1923 still full of Freemasons, it was claimed.109 William J. Whalen wrote that in the middle of the century perhaps as many as 90% of Methodist preachers in some conferences were Masons.110 Of those men who were elected bishops of the MEC between 1900 and 1939 at least thirty were Freemasons. Six of these had received the 32° and a further eleven the 33° of the Scottish Rite.111

Concluding Remarks

The number of Masonic bishops in 1939 should be reason enough to begin to explore the ties and bonds between Freemasonry and Methodism.

The anti-Masonic struggle conducted by Jonathan Blanchard and the Christian Cynosure supported the work of Methodists like Rev. John Levington who wished to see those ties cut. The latter edited The Methodist Free Press, a newspaper geared to “restor[ing] Methodism to its pristine purity, when the fnery, folly and blasphemy of the lodge could fnd no favour or shelter among a people devoted to gospel simplicity and holiness.”112 Some argued that Levington had continued the fght begun by Rev. B. T. Roberts. “The old fearless apostolic spirit of Wesley has met the spirit and world-worship of the lodge,” an article in the Cynosure claimed.113 To this day the Free Methodists forbid the involvement of members in Freemasonry.

The religious indifferentism and deism of Freemasonry does not seem to have concerned American Methodists. Thousands and tens of thousands of preachers joined a lodge in the nineteenth century. Numerous bishops swore fealty to the craft in spite of John Wesley’s warning.114 How was such a development possible?

Central ideas and doctrines of Methodism which were of supreme importance for the vitality and spiritual growth of individuals and congregations had been jettisoned by theologians in the course of the nineteenth century, according to George Wilson.115 Whether seismic

theological shifts after the middle of the nineteenth century had anything to do with Freemasonry still has to be investigated. A call was made at the start of the twentieth century by Bishop Willard Francis Mallalieu (1828-1911) to rediscover what John Wesley taught and wrote.116 A fresh look at what Wesley and other early Methodists thought about Freemasonry would be an appropriate response.

Many Methodist preachers saw no confict of interest and had no compunction about taking blood-curdling oaths that they could not even discuss with their own wives.117 It became clear in 1858 that, at least in some regions, Masons were meeting in caucus to discuss ecclesiastical affairs prior to annual conferences.118

Nothing of substance has really changed since the middle of the nineteenth century. Given that many Masons fought for independence and helped establish the constitution of the United States, strong patriotic emotions mitigated against any distancing of the MEC from the lodge membership of many of the founding fathers.119

One can speculate upon whether, or how, or to what degree the therapeutic deism and universalism of Freemasonry infuenced the thinking of Methodist theologians. The de-emphasis of Christ’s divinity within Methodism can be perhaps traced to a Masonic source.

Dual loyalties are rarely healthy. Any system which builds invisible walls and encourages secrecy between a man and his wife should be abandoned. Jealousies, suspicions and alienations are likely to ensue. The spiritual arguments against Freemasonry have been spelled out many times since the beginning of the eighteenth century. A number of Christian deliverance ministries have been working with Freemasons (and their spouses, for women are also impacted due to the one-fesh union) for many years. Certainly, the implications of Masonic infuence on the decision-making, evangelism and worship of a church need to be taken very seriously.120 In his novel Elmer Gantry (1927) Sinclair Lewis mentions that his protagonist became a Mason, an Odd Fellow and a Knight of the Maccabees. In the flm version of the book one of the backers of revivalism, George F. Babbitt, openly states he is a 32° Mason. Nearly one hundred years ago Lewis observed something that featured in American evangelicalism.

The 1858-1860 schism within the MEC – or the 1889 schism within the United Brethren Church over the incompatibility clause and the Liberals’ brazen disregard for the Discipline’s prohibition – clearly show that Methodism has indeed been impacted by the secrecy of Masons. It

is hoped this article may encourage more discussion and lead to further research on the issues at stake.

End Notes

1 ‘Freemasonry in Arbroath’, The Freemason’s Chronicle. A Weekly Record of Masonic Intelligence 40: 1026 (September 8, 1894): 99.

2 Bye-Laws of Lodge St. Vigean, No. 101. Holding Charter from the Grand Lodge of Scotland. Brodie and Salmond: Arbroath (1899): 7.

3 J. M. McBain, Arbroath: Past & Present, being Reminiscences chiefy relating to the last half century. Brodie and Salmond: Arbroath (1887): 221. The Evangelical Alliance was established in Freemasons’ Hall, Great Queen Street, London, in 1846. Evangelical Alliance. Report of the Proceedings of the Conference, held at Freemasons’ Hall, London, From August 19th to September 2nd inclusive, 1846. Partridge and Oakey: London (1847): 67, 82, 134, 373, 378. Many churches used the rooms at Freemasons’ Hall for their meetings until well into the twentieth century.

4 William Hanna, Memoirs of Thomas Chalmers, D.D. LL.D. Vol. 1. Constable: Edinburgh (1854): 683.

5 Ibid.: 136-39; ‘The Value of Good Books’, The Methodist New Connexion Magazine, and Evangelical Repository 63 (March 1860): 153.

6 The same decision to relinquish membership in a lodge, for the sake of his Christian witness, was also taken by the revivalist preacher César Malan (1787-1864), who from 1809 to 1814 had been a member of a lodge in Geneva. He left in order to totally dedicate himself to the Christian believers in his country. Charles Schnetzler, ‘Le Mysticisme de L’Union des Cœurs (Loge Maçonnique Genevoise), 1808-1836 et le mouvement du Réveil’, Revue de Théologie et de Philosophie 23: 100 (1936): 285.

7 John Robison, Proofs of a Conspiracy against all the Religions and Governments of Europe, carried on in the Secret Meetings of Free Masons, Illuminati, and Reading Societies. 4th edition. Cadell and Davies: London (1798). The book became a classic many years ago, not least because Robison propagated therein his thesis that irregular, politically radicalized Masons, so-called Illuminati, were undermining society.

8 In New York and Philadelphia editions of Robison’s book appeared in 1798. The struggle of American colonists for their independence is mentioned, and indeed criticised, without, strangely, providing any details on the role of Masons in that struggle. Ibid.: 202, 361-62. A postscript to the American edition Robison concludes with verses of Scripture (Matthew 7:15-20) in which Jesus warns his listeners of false prophets, men in sheep’s clothing.

9 William Hanna, Memoirs of Thomas Chalmers, Vol. 1: 10, 27-28.

10 Jacob Stanley, ‘An Address to the Members of Certain Lodges’, The Methodist Magazine 36 (January 1813): 70-71. Stanley (1776-1850) was Conference President in 1845.

11 The Bible verses (2 Corinthians 6,14-15) used by Stanley in his argument were the same as those used by Algernon J. Pollock (1864-1957) in his later criticism of Freemasonry. Pollock quotes John Wesley in this study and refers to a resolution passed at the annual conference in Bradford in 1927 which called on all Methodist preachers to resign membership in lodges. A. J. Pollock, Reasons why a Christian should not be a Freemason. Pickering and Inglis: London: (c1930): 9, 14-15.

12 ‘The Fellow Craft’s Song’, ‘Song LXXXIV’, ‘Ode. CV.’, in: Masonic Song Book, containing A Large Collection of the Most Approved Masonic Songs, Odes, Anthems, etc. Carey: Philadelphia (1814): 17-18. The “divine” character of Freemasonry is given expression in numerous songs.

13 The Constitutions of the Free-Masons. Containing the History, Charges, Regulations, &. of that most Ancient and Right Worshipful Fraternity. […]. Senex and Hooke: London (1723): 50, 51, 54 [capitals and spelling as in the original]. The Constitutions were drawn up by the Scottish Calvinist James Anderson, D.D. (c.1680-1739) while he was preacher at the Scots Presbyterian Church, Piccadilly, London. Anderson was chaplain to the ninth Earl of Buchan (1672-1745) just as John Wesley was, in 1768, chaplain to Agnes Steuart (1717-1778), “the Right Honourable Countess Dowager of Buchan”, widow of the tenth Earl of Buchan. In 1768 John Fletcher became chaplain to David Steuart (1742-1829), the eleventh Earl Buchan, who, in 1782, became Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Scotland.

14 Ibid.: 51; A. G. Mackey, ‘Of the Qualifcations of Candidates’, The American Freemason 6: 1 (January 1858): 51-59; Albert G. Mackey, ‘Hermaphrodite’, A Lexicon of Freemasonry. 5th edition. Moss, Brother and Co.: Philadelphia (1859): 192. Mackey, one of the great Masonic writers, once wrote that it was a universal doctrine of all ancient religions that the Supreme Being was “bisexual, or hermaphrodite”. Albert G. Mackey, The Symbolism of Freemasonry: Illustrating and Explaining Its Science and Philosophy, its Legends, Myths, and Symbols. Clark and Maynard: New York (1869): 185; ‘The Point Within the Circle’, The Ashlar 1: 7 (March 1856): 292-93.

15 ‘Expulsions and Suspensions’, The Ashlar 1: 7 (March 1856): 306-307.

16 Albert G. Mackey, ‘Excuse’, in: An Encyclopædia of Freemasonry and Its Kindred Sciences. Moss and Company: Philadelphia (1874): 269.

17 John Wesley, ‘Letter to Joseph Benson, 22 February 1776’, in: The Works of the Reverend John Wesley, A.M.. First American Complete and Standard Edition. Ed. John Emory. Vol. 7. Emory and Waugh: New York (1831): 76.

18 The Constitutions of the Free-Masons: 60-61, 66.

19 Question 63 (Is anything farther advisable with regard to building?), Minutes of Several Conversations between the Rev. Mr. Wesley and Others; from the Year 1744, to the Year 1789, in: The Works of the Rev. John Wesley, A.M.. Vol. 8. 3rd edition. Mason: London (1830): 332.

20 Letter from John Wesley to Miss Furly dated 18 May 1757, in: The Works of the Rev. John Wesley. Vol. 12. Wesleyan Conference Offce: London: (1872): 197.

21 The Journal of the Rev. John Wesley, A.M. Sometime Fellow of Lincoln College, Oxford. Edited by Nehemiah Curnock. Standard Edition. Vol. 2. Kelly: London (n.d.): 528 (February 15, 1742); The Constitutions of the Free-Masons: 62.

22 ‘Omitting Christ’, The Christian Cynosure 2: 43 (April 5, 1870): 67.

23 [Johann Christian Friedrich Harleß], Der Geist und das Wirken des ächten Freimaurer-Vereins. Ein Wort der Wahrheit für erleuchtete und menschenfreundliche Fürsten und Regierungen, zur Widerlegung der neuerlichst gegen diese Gesellschaft öffentlich ausgesprochenen Beschuldigungen. Germanien (1815): 30.

24 ‘Grand Lodge of Iowa’, The Mystic Star: A Monthly Magazine devoted to Freemasonry and Its Literature 9: 1 (July 1868): 28.

25 The Journal of the Rev. John Wesley, Vol. 5: 514 (June 18, 1773).

26 Wilson’s book was frst published in Berlin in French (Le Maçon Démasqué ou Le vrai secret des Francs Maçons, 1751). On the title page of the 1766 edition a notice is given, that the book had been publicly burned. The king of Prussia had been persuaded to take this step at the instigation of Freemasons. S. N. Smith, ‘The So-called ‘ “Exposures” of Freemasonry of the Mid-Eighteenth Century’, Ars Quatuor Coronatorum, being the Transactions of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge 56 (January 1, 1943): 4-36. In London Robinson and Roberts published an English-language version in 1766. Wesley was evangelizing in Ballymena, Ireland, at the time he read the book.

27 ‘Wesley, John’, Allgemeines Handbuch der Freimaurerei. Ed. the Verein deutscher Freimaurer. Vol. 2: M – Z. 3rd edition. Hesse: Leipzig (1901): 537; ‘Freimaurerisches’, Allgemeine Evangelisch-lutherische Kirchenzeitung Nr. 12 (March 25, 1892): 297; ‘Freimaurerisches’, Allgemeine Evangelischlutherische Kirchenzeitung Nr. 14 (April 8, 1892): 347; ‘John Wesley as a Free Mason’, The Michigan Freemason 5: 8 (February 1874): 418; ‘John Wesley was the frst Methodist to become a Mason’, Masonic Standard 1: 5 (May 14, 1898): 4. The second son of Charles Wesley, Samuel Wesley (17661837), was made a Mason on 17 December 1788, [Scriba], ‘Biographical Sketches of Eminent (Deceased) Freemasons. 1. Samuel Wesley, P. G. Org.’.

The Freemasons’ Magazine and Masonic Mirror 5: 30 (July 28, 1858): 15161.

28 Conspiracy theorists confuse Nikolaus Ludwig Cont Zinzendorf und Pottendorf (1700-1760) with his nephew Ludwig Friedrich Julius Count Zinzendorf (1721-1780) and the latter’s half-brother Johann Karl Christian Heinrich Count Zinzendorf (1739-1813), who were both Freemasons. Das neueste Gespräch In dem Reiche derer Lebendigen Zwischen dem Herrenhutischen Herrn Grafen von Zinzendorff, Und einem Freymaurer. [s.n.]: Frankfurt and Leipzig (1741); H. Belling, ‘Herrnhuter und Freimaurer’, Freimaurer-Zeitung 22: 26 (June 27, 1868): 201-202; Ludwig Abaf, Geschichte der Freimaurerei in Oesterreich-Ungarn. Vol. 1. Aigner: Budapest (1890): 73; Die Freimaurerei Österreich-Ungarns. Zwölf Vorträge am 30. und 31. März und 1. April 1897 zu Wien gehalten. Vienna (1897): 101; Friedrich Voigts, ‘Die Loge aux trois Canons in Wien’, Freimaurer-Zeitung No. 27 (July 1849): 216. Nikolaus Count Zinzendorf was a member of the Order of the Mustard Seed, which, however, had nothing to do with Freemasonry though its members were often referred to as “spiritual Freemasons”, ‘Senfkornorden’, Oekonomische Encyklopädie, oder allgemeines System der Staats=Stadt=Haus u. Landwirtschaft. Ed. Johann Georg Krünitz. 153rd Part. Paulische Buchhandlung: Berlin (1830): 227; ‘Senfkorn-Orden’, Freimaurer-Lexicon. Ed. Johann Christian Gädicke. Gädicke: Berlin: (1818): 458-59; ‘Geheime Gesellschaften’, Berliner Monatsschrift 15: 6 (June 1790): 546-54; Regeln Des Löblichen Ordens Vom Senff-Korn. Nach dem Englischen Original übersetzt, Nebst Einem kurtzem Vorbericht. Stöhe: Büdingen (1740): 6.

29 W. J. Chetwode Crawley, ‘Notes on Irish Freemasonry, No. VI. The Wesleys and Irish Freemasonry’, Ars Quatuor Coronatorum, being the Transactions of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge 15 (1902): 100-124; Charles H. Crookshank, ‘Was Wesley a Freemason?’. Proceedings of the Wesley Historical Society 7:7 (1910): 163-64.

30 Sidney Hayden, Washington and His Masonic Comperes Masonic Publishing and Manufacturing Company: New York (1866); Julius F. Sachse, Washington’s Masonic Correspondence as Found among the Washington Papers in the Library of Congress. [s.n.]: Philadelphia (1915); Albert Bushnell Hart (ed.), Honor to George Washington and Reading about George Washington. United States George Washington Bicentennial Commission: Washington, D.C. (1932): 159-60, 168-78.

31 Louis-Philippe d’Orléans’ (1773-1850) noted this in his diary in 1797 as he travelled around America, Diary of My Travels in America, ed. Stephen Becker, New York: Delacorte Press 1977. The original title is Journal de mon voyage d’Amérique. Texte établi et présenté par Suzanne d’Huart, Dijon 1976. See the entry ‘Slave Religion’ on The Digital Encyclopedia of George Washington (www.mountvernon.org). Francis Asbury and Thomas Coke tried in vain to persuade Washington to sign a petition to liberate slaves, Extracts of the Journals of the Rev. Dr. Coke’s Three Visits to America. [s.n.]: London (1790): 45 (May 26, 1785).

32 E. C. McGuire, The Religious Opinions and Character of Washington. Harper and Brothers: New York (1836); Merle Vernon, George Washington. The Soldier and the Christian. American Tract Society: Boston (1862).

33 Nathan Bangs, A History of the Methodist Episcopal Church. Vol. 1. Lane and Tippett: New York (1845): 156-66.

34 John Wesley had also used this rather unusual name for God, ‘Sermon LXVII. On Divine Providence’ und ‘Sermon LXXIV. Of the Church’, in: The Works of The Rev. John Wesley, A.M. Sometime Fellow of Lincoln College. Vol. 6. Wesleyan Conference Offce: London (1872): 320, 395.

35 ‘The address of the Bishops of the Methodist-Episcopal Church. To the President of the United States, New York, May 19, 1789’, The Arminian Magazine, For June 1789: 284-86; Paul F. Boller Jr., ‘George Washington and the Methodists’, Historical Magazine of the Protestant Episcopal Church 28: 2 (June 1959): 165-186; Nathan Bangs, A History of the Methodist Episcopal Church. Vol. 1: 279-87.

36 John Wesley, A Calm Address to Our American Colonies. Bonner and Middleton: Bristol (1775); John Fletcher, A Vindication of the Rev. Mr. Wesley’s Calm Address to the American Colonies. In Some Letters To Mr. Caleb Evans. 2nd edition. Hawes: London (1776).

37 Sidney Morse, Freemasonry in the American Revolution. The Masonic Service Association of the United States: Washington, D.C. (1924).

38 Sidney Hayden, Washington and His Masonic Comperes. Masonic Publishing and Manufacturing Company: New York (1866): 36874; ‘Samuel Seabury, D.D. The First Episcopal Bishop in America’, The Masonic Eclectic: Gleanings from the Harvest Field of Masonic Literature 3: 1 (January 1867): 17-20. Amongst the frst Episcopal bishops in the United States the following were Freemasons: William Stevens Perry (Iowa), Dr Edward Bass (Massachusetts), William Odenheimer (New Jersey), Thomas U. Dudley (Kentucky), Alexander Viets Griswold (Eastern Diocese), Philander Chase (Ohio), Gregory Thurston Bedell (Ohio), Isaac Joseph Schereschewsky (Shanghai), George M. Randall (Colorado und Nevada), William Pinckney (Maryland), John F. Spalding (Colorado, Wyoming und New Mexico). Henry W. Rugg, History of Freemasonry in Rhode Island. Memorial Volume. Freeman: Providence (1895): 361-64; J. H. Bird, ‘The Late Bishop Chase’, The Freemasons’ Monthly Magazine 12: 1 (November 1, 1852): 29-30; ‘Bishop Randall’, The Freemasons’ Monthly Magazine 30: 9 (July 1, 1871): 286; Proceedings of the M. W. Grand Lodge of A.F. and A.M. of Colorado, at Its 13th Annual Communication, held at Denver, Sept. 30 and Oct. 1, 1873, A.L. 5873. News Steam Printing House: Denver, Col. (1873): 20-26; ‘Our Tracing Board’, Masonic Review 63: 3 (April 1885): 179.

39 Joseph Gabriel Findel, Die Grundsätze der Freimaurerei im Völkerleben. Ein geschichtsphilosophisches Erbauungsbuch. J. G. Findel: Leipzig (1881): 165.

40 The only Methodist who played a role in the deliberations of 1787 was Richard Bassett (1745-1815). Robert E. Pattison, The Life and Character of Richard Bassett. (Papers of the Historical Society of Delaware XXIX). The Historical Society of Delaware: Wilmington (1909).

41 William Warren Sweet (ed.), Circuit-Rider Days Along the Ohio. Being the Journals of the Ohio Conference from its Organization in 1812 to 1826. The Methodist Book Concern: New York-Cincinnati (1823): 48-50, 143, 158-59, 201; ‘Die Methodisten’, Freimaurer-Zeitung 14: 45 (November 10, 1860): 358; ‘The Methodists and the Freemasons’, The Freemason 2: 37 (November 20, 1869): 222; A. H. Redford, The History of Methodism in Kentucky. Vol. 2. The Southern Methodist Publishing House: Nashville, TN (1869): 470-71; Walter C. Palmer, Life and Letters of Leonidas L. Hamline, D.D., Late One of the Bishops of the Methodist Episcopal Church. Nelson and Phillips: New York (1877): 323-24; Anson West, History of Methodism in Alabama. Publishing House Methodist Episcopal Church: Nashville, TN (1893): 324-26.

42 A. P. Bentley, History of the Abduction of William Morgan, and the Anti-Masonic Excitement of 1826-1830. Van Cise and Throop: Mt. Pleasant, Iowa (1874): 45-46.

43 ‘The Universality of Masonry’, The Ashlar 1: 7 (March 1856): 277-85; Mrs. E. W. Crooks, Life of Rev. A. Crooks, A.M. D. S. Kinney: Syracuse, New York (1875): 170-72; The Masonic Mirror and Keystone (June 29, 1859), quoted in: John Lawrence, The History of the Church of the United Brethren in Christ. Vol.1. Shuey: Dayton, Ohio (1868): 184-85; Cyrus Prindle, Masonry and Odd Fellowship. An Inquiry whether Christians should acquire, or retain membership in these Fraternities. Wesleyan Offce: [Syracuse] (1862): 6-24. Prindle maintains that there were hundreds of thousands of Christians who, as Freemasons, must have been aware of the wording and nature of the prayers being offered. Ibid.: 11.

44 ‘Grand Lodge of Iowa’, The Mystic Star: A Monthly Magazine Devoted to Freemasonry and Its Literature 9: 1 (A.L. 5868 / July 1868): 28; ‘Tolerance’, The Mystic Star: A Monthly Magazine devoted to Freemasonry and Its Literature 9: 2 (August 1868): 62-63; ‘Masonic Testimony’, Evangelical Repository and United Presbyterian Review 47 (May 1871): 783-84; Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of Iowa, of the Most Ancient and Right Honorable Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons, at its Several Grand Annual Communications, June, A.D. 1864-June, A.D. 1868. Vol. 4. [s.n.]: Iowa City (1868): 653. Kendig was the frst pastor of the Iowa Mission (1845). He later became Grand Chaplain of the Grand Lodge of Iowa. Rev. A. B. Kendig, Sparks of My Forge. Russell: Boston (1879).

45 A Narrative of the Facts and Circumstances relating to the Kidnapping and Presumed Murder of William Morgan. 3rd edition. Scranton: Rochester, N.Y. (1828): 6; William L. Stone, Letters on Masonry and AntiMasonry, addressed to the Hon. John Quincy Adams. Halsted: New York (1832): 126. A. P. Bentley, History of the Abduction of William Morgan, and the Anti-Masonic Excitement of 1826-1830. Van Cise and Throop: Mt. Pleasant, Iowa (1874).

46 ‘Life of Captain William Morgan’, National Freemason 8: 16 (April 20, 1867): 241.

47 John Lawrence, The History of the Church of the United Brethren in Christ. Vol. 1. Shuey: Dayton, Ohio (1868): 170-91, 417-20. On Baptist reactions: Ecclesiastical Record. Howe: Boston (1832); John G. Stearns, An Inquiry into the Nature and Tendency of Speculative Freemasonry, with an Appendix. 5th edition. Northway and Porter: Utica, N.Y. (1829); John G. Stearns, Letters on Freemasonry, addressed chiefy to the Fraternity Seward: Utica, N.Y. (1860); J. G. Sterns, A New Chapter on Free Masonry: Addressed to the Baptist Church of Clinton, N.Y. Griffths and Warren: Utica, N.Y. (1868). John Glazier Stearns (1795-1874) was a Freemason before his conversion. ‘Stearns on Masonry’, Freemasons Repository 27: 9 (June 1898): 471-72.

48 Francis W. Conable, History of the Genesee Annual Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church, from its Organization by Bishops Asbury and McKendree in 1810, to the Year 1872. Nelson and Phillips: New York (1876): 141-42, 302; ‘’Methodism and Masonry’, The Religious Monitor, and Evangelical Repository 7: 6 (November 1830): 373-74; ‘Methodist Conference’, Masonic Mirror: Science, Literature and Miscellany, New Series, 1: 4 (July 25, 1829): 30-31; Ephraim Wood, ‘To the Methodists of Portage County, Ohio’, American Masonick [sic] Record and Albany Literary Journal 4: 39 (October 23, 1830): 307.

49 ‘Appeal to the People of Vermont’, Boston Masonic Mirror, New Series, 2: 2 (July 10, 1830): 10.

50 ‘Effects of Ignorance and Bigotry’, The Masonic Mirror: And Mechanics’ Intelligencer 2: 19 (April 22, 1826): 135; ‘Methodism and Freemasonry’, The Masonic Mirror: And Mechanics’ Intelligencer 2: 17 (May 6, 1826): 150.

51 ‘Monument to the Rev. Ignatius A. Few’, The Freemasons’ Monthly Magazine 9: 2 (December 1, 1849): 58-59.

52 Samuel K. J. Chesbrough, Defence of Rev. B. T. Roberts, A.M., before the Genesee Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church, at Perry, N.Y., Oct. 18-21, 1858. Matthews: Buffalo (1858): 3-4, 36.

53 Discipline of the Free Methodist Church adopted August 23, 1860. B. T. Roberts: Buffalo (1860): 33.

54 George R. Crooks, The Life of Bishop Matthew Simpson of the Methodist Episcopal Church. Harper and Brothers: New York (1890): 359.

55 Mariet Hardy Freeland. A Faithful Witness. A Biography by her Daughter Mrs. Emma Freeland Shay. 2nd edition. The Women’s Foreign Missionary Society of the Free Methodist Church: Chicago (1914): 114.

56 Leslie Ray Marston, From Age to Age A Living Witness. A Historical Interpretation of Free Methodism’s First Century. Light and Life

Press: Winona Lake, Indiana (1960): 167-68. William H. Brackney, ‘The Fruits of a Crusade: Wesleyan Opposition to Secret Societies’, Methodist History 17: 4 (July 1979): 242, 249, 252; John W. McNeil, ‘Consequences and Principles: A Reexamination of the 1860 Free Methodist – Methodist Episcopal Schism’, Methodist History 24: 2 (January 1986): 105-106; John R. Wetherwax, ‘The Secularization of the Methodist Church: An Examination of the 1860 Free Methodist – Methodist Episcopal Schism’, Methodist History 20: 3 (April 1982): 156-63.

57 ‘The Fathers! Where are They?’, The Masonic Review 11: 5 (August 1854): 278-79; ‘Rev. Joel Winch’, in: John Gregory, Centennial Proceedings and Historical Incidents of the Early Settlers of Northfeld, VT., with Biographical Sketches of Prominent Business Men. Argus and Patriot Book and Job Printing House: Montpelier, VT. (1878): 94.

58 Gilbert Haven und Thomas Russell, Incidents and Anecdotes of Rev. Edward T. Taylor, for over Forty Years Pastor of the Seaman’s Bethel, Boston. Russell: Boston (1873): 202-203, 310-12; ‘Rev. Edward T. Taylor, Boston’, Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of the Most Ancient and Honorable Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, December 1873. Rockwell and Churchill: Boston (1874): 304-326; ‘Masonic Portraits’, Voice of Masonry and Family Magazine 18: 4 (April 1880): 286-87.

59 ‘A Letter on Speculative Freemasonry, by Charles Pinckney Sumner’, Masonic Mirror: Science, Literature and Miscellany, New Series, 1: 19 (November 7, 1829): 150; Aaron Lummus, VDM, K.R.C, K.T., ‘An Address delivered at Ashburnham A.L. 5825 in commemoration of the Anniversary of St. John the Evangelist’, Masonic Mirror And Mechanics’ Intelligencer 2: 12 (March 18, 1826): 89-90; 2: 13 (March 25, 1826): 97; 2: 14 (April 1, 1826): 105-106; W. P. Strickland, Autobiography of Dan Young. Carlton and Porter: New York (1860): 92-93; James Mudge, History of the New England Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church 1796 – 1910. The Conference: Boston (1910): 362-63; ‘Mr. Lummus’ Effusions’, in: Parsons Cooke, Second Part of Cooke’s Centuries. Being a Defence and Confrmation of the First; showing that Methodism is not a branch of the Church of Christ. Whipple: Boston (1855): 18-20.

60 ‘From the Middlebury American’, Boston Masonic Mirror, New Series, 2: 4 (July 24, 1830): 27; ‘Rev. Elijah Hedding’, The American Freemasons’ Magazine 5: 27 (March 1860): 314; ‘The Anti-Mason and the Bishop’, The Masonic Review 14: 3 (December 1855): 146-47; D. W. Clark, Life and Times of Elijah Hedding, D.D., Late Senior Bishop of the Methodist Episcopal Church. Carlton and Phillips: New York (1856): 372; ‘Bro. Dadmun’s Speech’, The Freemasons’ Monthly Magazine 24: 1 (November 1, 1864): 29.

61 Thomas M. Finney, The Life and Labours of Enoch Mather Marvin, Late Bishop of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South. Chambers: St. Louis, MO. (1880): 333, 605-606.

62 A. H. Redford, Life and Times of H. H. Kavanaugh, D.D., One of the Bishops of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South. [s.n.]: Nashville, Tenn. (1884): 56-61; Minutes of the Annual Conferences of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, for the Year 1888. Publishing House of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South: Nashville, TN (1889): 50; Transactions of the M. W. Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the State of Wisconsin at its 38th Annual Communication June 13, 1882. Burdick and Armitage: Milwaukee (1882): 67; Samuel W. Geiser, ‘Benjamin Taylor Kavanaugh, and the Discovery of East Texas Oil’, Field and Laboratory 12: 2 (June 1944): 52, 54; James R. Case, ‘Benjamin Taylor Kavanaugh’, Knight Templar 22: 1 (January 1977): 7-8.

63 Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of the Most Ancient and Honorable Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Quarterly Communication December, 1873. Rockwell and Churchill: Boston (1874): 378-82; ‘Rev. Charles Henry Titus, 33°’, Proceedings of the Supreme Council of Sovereign Grand Inspectors-General of the Thirty-Third and Last Degree, Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, for the Northern Jurisdiction of the United States of America commencing on the 27th Day of [...] September, 1879. Lawrence: New York (1879): 143-53.

64 David H. Moore, John Morgan Walden. Thirty-Fifth Bishop of the Methodist Episcopal Church. The Methodist Book Concern: New YorkCincinnati (1915): 186-96; ‘Ohio’, The Masonic Review 27: 2 (August 1862): 119; ‘Scottish Rite – Thirty-Third Degree’, The Masonic Review 77: 2 (March 1892): 110; ‘Report on Foreign Correspondence for 1897’, Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the State of New York one Hundred and Sixteenth Annual Communication June 1897. Little: New York (1897): 99; Proceedings of the Supreme Council of Sovereign Grand Inspectors-General of the Thirty-Third and Last Degree Ancient Accepted Scottish Rite, September 1892. [s.n.]: 12.

65 ‘Bishop Charles H. Fowler’, The Christian Cynosure (January 1900): 212; Leaves of Healing. A Weekly Paper for the Extension of the Kingdom of God (March 10, 1900): 623-24; H. C. Bradsby, History of Bureau County, Illinois. World Publishing Company: Chicago (1885): 188.

66 M.D. Lichliter (ed.), James Jackson McIlyar. Preacher –Evangelist – Freemason. An Autobiography. [n.p.] (1912); ‘Tarentum’, The Companion. A Monthly Magazine For Odd Fellows and Their Families 5: 1 (August 1869): 71; ‘Masonry and the Church’, The Freemasons’ Monthly Magazine 29: 4 (February 1, 1870): 112-13; ‘Sir Knight Rev. J. J. McIlyar, D.D.’, Freemasons’ Magazine and Masonic Mirror No. 628 (July 15, 1871): 47-48.

67 Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Annual Session of the M.P. Grand Council of Pennsylvania, held at Williamsport, June 14th, 1870. An. Dep. 2870. Anderson and Sons: Pittsburgh (1870): 28.

68 M.D. Lichliter (ed.), James Jackson McIlyar: 191-92.

69 Ibid.: 287.

70 Ibid.

71 Ibid.: 278. A. M. Rambo was a publicist and editor by profession.

72 ‘American Indians’, in: Fifty-Ninth Annual Report of the Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church for the Year 1877. Printed for the Society: New York: 171; ‘Montana’, in: Sixty-Second Annual Report of the Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church for the Year 1880. Printed for the Society: New York: 219-220; Reid Gardiner, ‘Hugh Duncan, 18th Grand Master’, Montana Freemason 87: 3 (August 2013): 3032; Michael A. Leeson (ed.), History of Montana. 1739-1885. Warner, Beers and Company: Chicago (1885): 375-77; Proceedings of the W.W. Grand Lodge of Ancient, Free and Accepted Masons of Utah. Fifteenth Annual Communication, held January 19th and 20th, 1886. Tribune: Salt Lake City (1886): 121-22; ‘Montana Conference’, Minutes of the Annual Conferences of the Methodist Episcopal Church. Spring Conferences of 1887. Phillips and Hunt: New York (1887): 342.

73 Nathan Bangs, Appendix: ‘List of Preachers’ Names’, in: A History of the Methodist Episcopal Church. Volume IV: From the Year 1829 to the Year 1840. Lane and Sandford: New York (1841): 25; Susie Blaylock McDaniel, Offcial History of Catoosa County, Georgia 1853-1953. 3rd edition. Wolfe Publishing: Fernandina Beach, Fla. (2000): 82-83, 164, 17980, 218; ‘ “Uncle Billy” Prayed and the Rain Fell’, Walker County Messenger (November 5, 1915); ‘Local News’, Walker County Messenger (March 11, 1897); ‘A Notable Funeral’, Walker County Messenger (September 8, 1892); S. Proceedings of the M. W. Grand Lodge of A.F. and A. M. of Colorado, 28th Annual Communication, held at Denver, September 18th and 19th A.D. 1888 A.L. 5888. The Collier and Cleveland Litth. Co.: Denver (1888): 61, 188, 279, 288; Minutes of the Annual Conferences of the Methodist Episcopal Church for the Years 1839-1845. Vol. 3. Mason and Lane: New York (1840): 325, 430, 431; Proceedings of the Most Excellent Grand Holy Royal Arch Chapter of Pennsylvania, For the Year Ending December 27, 1893. MacCalla: Philadelphia (1894): 211; Report on Foreign Correspondence for 1893, in: Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the State of New York, 112th Annual Communication June, 1893. J. J. Little: New York (1893): 25; ‘Letter from Rev. Leet, 26th April 1873’, in: Twentieth Century Song Book. Medicine Co.: Chatanooga, TN (1904): 11; Proceedings of the M. W. Grand Lodge of Ancient and Accepted Masons of Oregon, Forty-third Annual Communication Held at Portland, June 14, A.L. 5893. Haltes: Portland, Oregon (1893): 192. Many thanks to Meghan Herbel (Catoosa County Library, Ringgold, Georgia) and Robert L. Baker (University of North Georgia) for information on Leet.

74 Illustrations of Masonry, by One of The Fraternity, Who has devoted Thirty Years to the Subject. Printed for the Author: Rochester (1827); Rob Morris, William Morgan; or Political Anti-Masonry, Its Rise, Growth and Decadence. Robert Macoy, Masonic Publisher: New York (1884).

75 ‘Methodism and Masonry in Arkansas’, The Freemasons’ Monthly Magazine 31: 7 (May 1872): 210-11; John Levington, Key to

Masonry, and Kindred Secret Combinations. United Brethren Publishing House: Dayton, Ohio (1871).

76 M.D. Lichliter (ed.), James Jackson McIlyar: 296. McIlyar boasted (wrongly) that all but one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were Masons.

77 ‘Error Corrected’, The Masonic Review 37: 1 (January 1870): 6364. The presiding elder of the Buffalo District, D. H. Muller, was a Freemason (Queen City Lodge No. 358). In New York about 18% of all MEC clergy were Masons in 1890 (288 out of 1635), Mark C. Carnes, Secret Ritual and Manhood in Victorian America. Yale University Press: New Haven-London (1989): 189.

78 ‘A Way Mark’, The Christian Cynosure 1: 9 (December 7, 1871): 34.

79 ‘Curiosa aus dem amerikanischen Sectenleben der Gegenwart’, Stimmen aus Maria-Laach. Katholische Monatsschrift 2: 3 (1872): 367-68.

80 ‘The North-western Christian Advocate’, The Christian Cynosure 2: 42 (July 31, 1873): 166; Letter from H. van Order, The Christian Cynosure 3: 61 (December 13, 1870): 34.

81 ‘Notes and Items’, The Christian Cynosure 5: 8 (November 26, 1872): 30. Thomas Bowman is listed as a Master Mason of Temple Lodge N. 47 in Greencastle, Putnam County, where Indiana Asbury University was located. Proceedings of a Grand Communication of the Grand Lodge of Indiana. Elder and Harkness: Indianapolis (1860): 149. The third president of Indiana Asbury, William C. Larrabee, was Grand Chaplain of the Grand Lodge of Indiana in 1851 and 1852. Daniel McDonald, A History of Freemasonry in Indiana from 1806 to 1898. The Grand Lodge: Indianapolis (1898): 431. In 1884 the university was re-named after the Freemason and Odd Fellow, Washington Charles De Pauw. ‘Washington C. De Pauw’, John M. Gresham (ed.), Biographical and Historical Souvenir for the Counties of Clark, Crawford, Harrison, [etc.] Indiana. Chicago Printing Company: Chicago (1889): 87. De Pauw was a member of Salem Lodge No. 21. Proceedings of a Grand Communication of the Grand Lodge of Indiana (1860): 137.

82 ‘Kirchlich-Zeitgeschichtliches’, Lehre und Wehre. Theologisches und kirchlich-zeitgeschichtliches Monatsblatt. Ed. deutsche evangelischlutherische Synode von Missouri, Ohio u. a. Staaten, 26: 1 (January 1880): 24.

83 ‘Curiosa aus dem amerikanischen Sectenleben der Gegenwart’: 367-68.

84 ‘Methodismus und Freimaurerei’, Der Lutheraner 28: 19 (July 1, 1872): 150. The Deutsche Evangelisch-Lutherische Synode von Missouri, Ohio und anderen Staaten produced this publication.

85 ‘Eine Schilderung der Methodisten nach dem Leben’, Kirchliche Mitteilungen aus, über und für Nord-Amerika. Ein Blatt für innere Mission 9: 6 (1878): 42. Rather than ‘heaven’ Masons spoke, he said, of the “celestial lodge above” or the “celestial Grand Lodge.” All Masons would one day fnd themselves in that lodge.

86 John Levington, Key to Masonry, and Kindred Secret Combinations. United Brethren Publishing House: Dayton, Ohio (1871); ‘The Detroit Conference before the Public’, The Christian Cynosure 5: 5 (October 15, 1872): 17; ‘The Work and Labour of the Craft In the Detroit Conference of the M.E. Church’, The Christian Cynosure 5: 6 (October 29, 1872): 23; ‘The Work and Labour of the Craft In the Detroit Conference of the M.E. Church’, The Christian Cynosure 5: 7 (November 12, 1872): 23; ‘The Methodist Free Press’, The Christian Cynosure 5: 12 (January 21, 1873): 46; S.A. Manwell und S. J. Young, ‘Rev. John Levington’, Minutes of the Fifty-First Annual Session of the Michigan Conference of the Wesleyan Methodist Connection of America, held at Allendale, Ottawa Co., Michigan September 5 to 9, 1893. Wesleyan Methodist Publishing Association: Syracuse, N.Y. (1893): 33. Levington wrote four books on secret societies.

87 ‘Appendix. Report on Foreign Correspondence, June, 1876’, in: Annals of the Grand Lodge of Iowa, Volume VI, Part III, 1876. Day, Egbert and Fidlar: Davenport, Iowa (1876): 302-303; D.C. Bloomer, ‘Notes on the History of Pottawattamie County. No. 2’, The Annals of Iowa (October 1871), Griggs, Watson, and Day: Davenport (1871): 681. Shinn was appointed Exhorter in 1830 and preacher in 1838. Two years later he became Elder and, in 1855, Presiding Elder in Nebraska. He established several congregations in Nebraska. When he died it was said he was one of the richest men in Omaha.

88 Leaves of Healing. A Weekly Paper for the Extension of the Kingdom of God (March 10, 1900): 624. John Alexander Dowie was the editor of the newspaper. He published many humorous accounts of the MEC which were accompanied by illustrations. See, for example, Leaves of Healing (October 28, 1899): 17-19; (November 4, 1899): 46; (November 11, 1899): 72; (December 9, 1899): 202, 204; (January 20, 1900): 401; (March 10, 1900): 623-24, 626, 639; (March 31, 1900): 724; (April 7, 1900): 758-59; (April 14, 1900): 790-91, 796.

89 Charles G. Finney, The Character, Claims, and Practical Workings of Freemasonry. Western Tract and Book Society: Cincinnati (1869), preface (unpaginated). In the introduction to this book (v-viii) Finney describes his conversion “from Freemasonry to Christ.”

90 ‘Vorwort’, Evangelische Kirchen-Zeitung No. 3 (January 8, 1853): 24.

91 ‘A Monument to Morgan’, The Freemason’s Chronicle; A Weekly Record of Masonic Intelligence 16: 407 (October 14, 1882): 262; ‘Frontispiece’, The Facts Stated. Hon. Thurlow Weed on the Morgan Abduction. A Document for the People. National Christian Association: Chicago (1882): 16.

railton: Freemasonry and the methodist episcopal church 117

92 ‘Laying a Corner Stone’, Annals of Southern Methodism For 1856. Stevenson and Owen: Nashville, TN (1857): 84-85, 151-53; ‘Corner-Stone laid by the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts’, The New England Freemason 1: 7 (July 1874): 344; Kenton N. Harper, History of the Grand Lodge and of Freemasonry in the District of Columbia with Biographical Appendix. Beresford: Washington, D.C. (1911): 16-22; Alfred Osborn, ‘Corner-Stone Laying of the College of History’, The Epworth Herald 7: Thanksgiving Number (November 21, 1896): 7, 11; ‘Cornerstone rededication at G. W. Masonic Memorial’, Alexandria Times (February 9, 2023): 24; Henry W. Rugg, History of Freemasonry in Rhode Island. Memorial Volume. Freeman: Providence (1895): 137-38; ‘Mississippi’, in: Henry Leonard Stillson (ed.), History of the Ancient and Honorable Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons, and Concordant Orders. The Fraternity Publishing Company: Boston and New York (1893): 334; M.D. Lichliter (ed.), James Jackson McIlyar: 170-73.

93 The High-Church Anglican bishop of Illinois, Henry John Whitehouse (1803-1874), was one exception. He rejected out of principle such rituals, ‘Church Corner-Stone Ceremonies’, The New England Freemason 1: 8 (August 1874): 372-75. On the ritual, in which corn, wine and oil are used, see Albert G. Mackey, The Symbolism of Freemasonry: Illustrating and Explaining Its Science and Philosophy, its Legends, Myths, and Symbols. Clark and Maynard: New York (1869): 159-75; Albert G. Mackey, ‘The Symbolism of the Corner-Stone’, American Quarterly Review of Freemasonry and its Kindred Sciences 2: 1 (July 5858 [sic]): 9-18.

94 ‘Freimaurer’, Der Lutheraner 9: 26 (August 16, 1853): 181. The Masonic ritual is described in the article as “humbug in a holy place.”

95 The United Brethren Church also experienced a formal schism in 1889 related to the issue of secret societies. A. W. Drury, History of the Church of the United Brethren in Christ. Otterbein Press: Dayton, Ohio (1924): 465, 473, 481, 487-89, 496-504; Daniel Berger, History of the Church of the United Brethren in Christ. United Brethren Publishing House: Dayton, Ohio (1897): 283, 330-33; H.A. Thomson, Our Bishops. A Sketch of the Origin and Growth of the Church of the United Brethren in Christ. Elder Publishing: Chicago (1889): 254, 261, 375-77; Lehre und Zucht-Ordnung der Vereinigten Brüder in Christo [1816], in: Disciplines of the United Brethren in Christ. Ed. A. W. Drury. United Brethren Publishing House: Dayton, Ohio (1895): ix, 102; Origin, Doctrine, Constitution and Discipline of the United Brethren in Christ. United Brethren in Christ: Dayton, Ohio (1859): 68; Scott T. Kisker, ‘Unpopular Religion: Bishop Milton Wright and the United Brethren Schism of 1889’, Methodist History 57:1-2 (October 2018 and January 2019): 45-63; Milton Wright, ‘Secret Societies’, The Reform Leafet 1: 1 (October 1881); Daryl Melvin Elliott, Bishop Milton Wright and the Quest for A Christian America. PhD. dissertation, Drew University (1992): 167-252. My thanks to Randy Neuman, Director of the United Brethren Historical Center, for providing me with material on Bishop Milton Wright.

96 The History of Schuylkill County, Pa. Munsell: New York (1881): 334-35.

97 ‘Eine Schilderung der Methodisten nach dem Leben’, Kirchliche Mitteilungen aus, über und für Nord-Amerika. Ein Blatt für innere Mission. 9: 6 (1878): 42; ‘Die Freimaurerei, und die Evangelischen oder Albrechtsleute’, Der Lutheraner 22: 16 (April 15, 1866): 125. Conferences of the United Evangelical Church regularly called on their preachers to stay clear of lodges and secret societies, Ammon Stapleton, Annals of the Evangelical Association of North America and History of the United Evangelical Church. Publishing House of the United Evangelical Church: Harrisburg, Penn. (1900): 279, 283-84, 328, 331, 354-55.

98 ‘Die Freimaurerei, und die Evangelischen oder Albrechtsleute’: 125.

99 ‘Freimaurer-Unfug in den Secten’, Der Lutheraner 22: 1 (September 1, 1865): 7.

100 Charles C. Starbuck, ‘Considerations on Catholicism by a Protestant Theologian’, The Sacred Heart Review 25: 16 (April 20, 1901): 246-47; Charles C. Starbuck, ‘Unintelligent Treatment of Romanism’, Dickinson’s Theological Quarterly, New Series, 1 (July 1882): 399-400. Starbuck was a Congregationalist.

101 J. A. Faulkner, ‘Methodism and Masonry’, The Sacred Heart Review 25: 21 (May 25, 1901): 329.

102 ‘Masonic Honor to McKinley’, The Christian Cynosure (March 1900): 372; Robert P. Porter, Life of William McKinley, Soldier, Lawyer, Statesman. Hamilton: Cleveland, Ohio (1896): 53, 106-7. The candidate of the Democratic Party in the year 1896 was the Presbyterian William Jennings Bryan, who had attended a Methodist Sunday School in his youth. Bryan was converted, like McKinley, at a revival meeting and became, like McKinley, a Freemason (1902) and Knight of Pythias.

103 Quoted by Albert Kolb, USA und die Philippinen. Essener Verlagsanstalt: Essen (1942): 10-12.

104 Quoted by Charles S. Olcott, The Life of William McKinley. Houghton Miffin Company: Boston – New York (1916): 110-111.

105 The concept of “manifest destiny” which drew together elements of this ideology was coined in 1845, ‘Annexation’, The United States Magazine, and Democratic Review 17: 85 (July and August 1845): 5. Providence had planned (Annuit cœptis) for the Anglo-Saxon conquest of the North American continent and the civilising and Christianising of the “wild redskins”. The new world order (Novus ordo seclorum) was not to be limited to North America.

106 Sidney Hayden, Washington and His Masonic Comperes: 373.

107 ‘Tribute to Washington’ und ‘Washington’, in: Rob Morris, The Masonic Odes and Poems. 3rd edition. Rob Morris: La Grange, KY (1868): 69-70, 119-24 (122).

108 Julius F. Sachse, Washington’s Masonic Correspondence: 11739.

109 ‘Condition of Methodism’, The Christian Cynosure (February 1924): 309.

110 William J. Whalen, Christianity and American Freemasonry. 3rd edition. Bruce Publishing: Milwaukee (1959): 153.

111 William R. Denslow, 10,000 Famous Freemasons. 4 vols. Missouri Lodge of Research: Fulton, MO. / Macoy Publishing & Masonic Supply Company: Richmond, Va. 1957.

112 ‘The Methodist Free Press’, The Christian Cynosure 5: 7 (November 12, 1872): 18.

113 ‘Free Methodists – A Fault Amended’, The Christian Cynosure 5: 12 (January 21, 1873): 46.

114 William J. Whalen, Christianity and American Freemasonry: 153.

115 George W. Wilson, Methodist Theology vs. Methodist Theologians. A Review of Several Methodist Writers. With an Introduction by Bishop W. F. Mallalieu, D.D., LL.D. Jennings and Pye: Cincinnati (1904): 5-8.

116 Ibid.: 12.

117 On the oaths see David Bernard, Appendix to Light on Masonry, with Oaths and Penalties. Woodruff Post: Rochester, New York (1871): 4174. Bernard left Freemasonry and became a pastor in the Genesee Baptist Association in the state of New York.

118 Discipline of the Free Methodist Church adopted August 23, 1860. Published by B. T. Roberts: Buffalo (1860): 3-5.

119 M.D. Lichliter (ed.), James Jackson McIlyar: 296.

120 The recent online article by Chance M. Robinson is an excellent start. Chance M. Robinson, Allegiance as Christian Witness: A Testimony of Leaving Freemasonry, Firebrand (May 21, 2024) (accessed on 06/01/2024) at (https://frebrandmag.com/articles/allegiance-as-christian-witness-atestimony-of-leaving-freemasonry).

Works Cited

Anonymous

1723 The Constitutions of the Free-Masons. Containing the History, Charges, Regulations, &. of that most Ancient and Right Worshipful Fraternity […]. Senex and Hooke London.

1740 Regeln Des Löblichen Ordens Vom Senff-Korn. Nach dem Englischen Original übersetzt, Nebst Einem kurtzem Vorbericht. Stöhe: Büdingen

1741 Das neueste Gespräch In dem Reiche derer Lebendigen Zwischen dem Herrenhutischen Herrn Grafen von Zinzendorff, Und einem Freymaurer. [s.n.]: Frankfurt -Leipzig.

1789 ‘The address of the Bishops of the Methodist-Episcopal Church. To the President of the United States, New York, May 19, 1789’, The Arminian Magazine, For June 1789: 284-86.

1790 ‘Geheime Gesellschaften’ Berliner Monatsschrift 15: 6 (June 1790): 546-554.

1814 Masonic Song Book, containing A Large Collection of the Most Approved Masonic Songs, Odes, Anthems, etc. Carey: Philadelphia.

1815 Der Geist und das Wirken des ächten FreimaurerVereins. Ein Wort der Wahrheit für erleuchtete und menschenfreundliche Fürsten und Regierungen, zur Widerlegung der neuerlichst gegen diese Gesellschaft öffentlich ausgesprochenen Beschuldigungen Germanien.

1826 ‘Effects of Ignorance and Bigotry’, The Masonic Mirror: And Mechanics’ Intelligencer 2: 19 (April 22, 1826): 135.

1826 ‘Methodism and Freemasonry’, The Masonic Mirror: And Mechanics’ Intelligencer 2: 17 (May 6, 1826): 150.

1828 A Narrative of the Facts and Circumstances relating to the Kidnapping and Presumed Murder of William Morgan. 3rd edition, Scranton: Rochester, N.Y.

1829 ‘Methodist Conference’, Masonic Mirror: Science, Literature and Miscellany, New Series, 1: 4 (July 25, 1829): 30-31.

1829 ‘A Letter on Speculative Freemasonry, by Charles Pinckney Sumner’, Masonic Mirror: Science, Literature and Miscellany, New Series, 1: 19 (November 7, 1829): 150.

1830 ‘Methodism and Masonry’, The Religious Monitor, and Evangelical Repository 7: 6 (November 1830): 373-74.

1830 ‘Appeal to the People of Vermont’, Boston Masonic Mirror, New Series, 2: 2 (July 10, 1830): 10.

1832 Ecclesiastical Record. Howe: Boston.

1845 ‘Annexation’, The United States Magazine, and Democratic Review 17: 85 (July and August 1845): 5-10.

1847 Evangelical Alliance. Report of the Proceedings of the Conference, held at Freemasons’ Hall, London, From August 19th to September 2nd inclusive, 1846. Partridge and Oakey: London.

1849 ‘Monument to the Rev. Ignatius A. Few’, The Freemasons’ Monthly Magazine 9: 2 (December 1, 1849): 58-59.

1853 ‘Freimaurer’. Der Lutheraner 9: 26 (August 16, 1853): 181.

1854 ‘The Fathers! Where are They?’, The Masonic Review 11: 5 (August 1854): 278-79.

1855 ‘The Anti-Mason and the Bishop’, The Masonic Review 14: 3 (December 1855): 146-48.

1856 ‘The Point Within the Circle’, The Ashlar 1: 7 (March 1856): 292-93.

1856 ‘Expulsions and Suspensions’, The Ashlar 1: 7 (March 1856): 306-307.

1856 ‘The Universality of Masonry’, The Ashlar 1: 7 (March 1856): 277-85.

1857 Annals of Southern Methodism For 1856. Stevenson and Owen: Nashville, Tenn. 1857.

1858 ‘Biographical Sketches of Eminent (Deceased) Freemasons. 1. Samuel Wesley, P. G. Org.’, The Freemasons’ Magazine and Masonic Mirror 5: 30 (July 28, 1858): 151-61.

1860 ‘The Value of Good Books’, The Methodist New Connexion Magazine, and Evangelical Repository 63 (March 1860): 153.

1860 ‘Rev. Elijah Hedding’, The American Freemasons’ Magazine 5: 27 (March 1860): 314.

1860 ‘Die Methodisten’, Freimaurer-Zeitung 14: 45 (November 10, 1860): 358.

1862 ‘Ohio’, The Masonic Review 27: 2 (August 1862): 119.

1864 ‘Bro. Dadmun’s Speech’, The Freemasons’ Monthly Magazine 24: 1 (November 1, 1864): 29.

1865 ‘Freimaurer-Unfug in den Secten’, Der Lutheraner 22: 1 (September 1): 7.

1866 ‘Die Freimaurerei, und die Evangelischen oder Albrechtsleute’, Der Lutheraner 22: 16 (April 15, 1866): 125.

1867 ‘Samuel Seabury, D.D. The First Episcopal Bishop in America’, The Masonic Eclectic: Gleanings from the Harvest Field of Masonic Literature 2: 1 (January 1867): 17-20.

1867 ‘Life of Captain William Morgan’, National Freemason 8: 16 (April 20, 1867): 241.

1868 ‘Grand Lodge of Iowa’, The Mystic Star: A Monthly Magazine Devoted to Freemasonry and Its Literature 9:1 (A.L. 5868 / July 1868): 28.

1868 ‘Tolerance’, The Mystic Star: A Monthly Magazine devoted to Freemasonry and Its Literature 9: 2 (August 1868): 62-63.

1869 ‘Tarentum’, The Companion. A Monthly Magazine For Odd Fellows and Their Families 5: 1 (August 1869): 71.

1869 ‘The Methodists and the Freemasons’, The Freemason 2: 37 (November 20, 1869): 222.

1870 ‘Masonry and the Church’, The Freemasons’ Monthly Magazine 29: 4 (February 1, 1870): 112-13.

1870 ‘Error Corrected’, The Masonic Review 37: 1 (January 1870): 63-64.

1870 ‘Letter from H. van Order’, The Christian Cynosure 3: 61 (December 13, 1870): 34.

1870 ‘Omitting Christ’, The Christian Cynosure 2: 43 (April 5, 1870): 67.

1871 ‘Bishop Randall’, The Freemasons’ Monthly Magazine 30: 9 (July 1, 1871): 286.

1871 ‘Masonic Testimony’, Evangelical Repository and United Presbyterian Review 47 (May 1871): 783-84.

1871 ‘Sir Knight Rev. J. J. McIlyar, D.D.’, Freemasons’ Magazine and Masonic Mirror 24: 628 (July 15, 1871): 47-48.

1871 ‘A Way Mark’, The Christian Cynosure 1: 9 (December 7, 1871): 34.

1872 ‘Methodismus und Freimaurerei’, Der Lutheraner 28: 19 (July 1, 1872): 150.

1872 ‘Methodism and Masonry in Arkansas’, The Freemasons’ Monthly Magazine 31: 7 (May 1872): 210-11.

1872 ‘Curiosa aus dem amerikanischen Sectenleben der Gegenwart’, Stimmen aus Maria-Laach. Katholische Monatsschrift 2: 3 (1872): 367-68.

1872 ‘The Detroit Conference before the Public’, The Christian Cynosure 5: 5 (October 15, 1872): 17.

1872 ‘The Work and Labour of the Craft In the Detroit Conference of the M.E. Church’, The Christian Cynosure 5: 6 (October 29, 1872): 23.

1872 ‘The Work and Labour of the Craft In the Detroit Conference of the M.E. Church’, The Christian Cynosure 5: 7 (November 12, 1872): 23.

1872 ‘Notes and Items’, The Christian Cynosure 5: 8 (November 26, 1872): 30.

1873 ‘The Methodist Free Press’, The Christian Cynosure 5: 12 (January 21, 1873): 46.

1873 ‘Free Methodists – A Fault Amended’, The Christian Cynosure 5: 12 (January 21, 1873): 46.

1873 ‘The North-western Christian Advocate’, The Christian Cynosure [Weekly Edition] 2: 42 (July 31, 1873): 166.

1874 ‘Church Corner-Stone Ceremonies’, The New England Freemason 1: 8 (August 1874): 372-75.

1874 ‘John Wesley as a Free Mason’, The Michigan Freemason 5: 8 (February 1874): 418.

1874 ‘Corner-Stone laid by the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts’, The New England Freemason 1: 7 (July 1874): 344.

1878 ‘Eine Schilderung der Methodisten nach dem Leben’, Kirchliche Mitteilungen aus, über und für Nord-Amerika. Ein Blatt für innere Mission 9: 6 (1878): 42.

1880 ‘Masonic Portraits’, Voice of Masonry and Family Magazine 18: 4 (April 1880): 286-87.

1880 ‘Kirchlich-Zeitgeschichtliches’, Lehre und Wehre. Theologisches und kirchlich-zeitgeschichtliches Monatsblatt, ed. deutsche evangelisch-lutherische Synode von Missouri, Ohio u. a. Staaten, 26: 1 (January 1880): 24.

1882 ‘A Monument to Morgan’, The Freemason’s Chronicle; A Weekly Record of Masonic Intelligence 16: 407 (October 14, 1882): 262.

1882 The Facts Stated. Hon. Thurlow Weed on the Morgan Abduction. A Document for the People. National Christian Association: Chicago 1882.

1885 ‘Our Tracing Board’, Masonic Review 63: 3 (April 1885): 179.

1892 ‘Scottish Rite – Thirty-Third Degree’, The Masonic Review 77: 2 (March 1892): 110.

1892 ‘Freimaurerisches’. Allgemeine Evangelisch-lutherische Kirchenzeitung Nr. 14 (April 8, 1892): 347.

1892 ‘A Notable Funeral’, Walker County Messenger (September 8, 1892).

1892 ‘Freimaurerisches’. Allgemeine Evangelisch-lutherische Kirchenzeitung Nr. 12 (March 25, 1892): 297.

1894 ‘Freemasonry in Arbroath’, The Freeemason’s Chronicle. A Weekly Record of Masonic Intelligence 11: 1026 (September 8, 1894): 118.

1897 ‘Local News’, Walker County Messenger (March 11, 1897).

1897 Die Freimaurerei Österreich-Ungarns. Zwölf Vorträge am 30. und 31. März und 1. April 1897 zu Wien gehalten. [s.n.]: Vienna: 101.

railton: Freemasonry and the methodist episcopal church 125

1898 ‘Stearns on Masonry’, Freemasons Repository 27: 9 (June 1898): 471-72.

1898 ‘John Wesley was the frst Methodist to become a Mason’ Masonic Standard 1: 5 (May 14, 1898): 4.

1899 Bye-Laws of Lodge St. Vigean, No. 101. Holding Charter from the Grand Lodge of Scotland. Brodie and Salmond: Arbroath.

1899-1900 Leaves of Healing. A Weekly Paper for the Extension of the Kingdom of God. Numerous articles in various issues.

1900 ‘Bishop Charles H. Fowler’, The Christian Cynosure (January 1900): 212.

1900 ‘Masonic Honor to McKinley’, The Christian Cynosure (March 1900): 372.

1915 ‘“Uncle Billy” Prayed and the Rain Fell’, Walker County Messenger (November 5, 1915).

1924 ‘Condition of Methodism’, The Christian Cynosure (February 1924): 309.

2023 ‘Cornerstone rededication at G. W. Masonic Memorial’, Alexandria Times (February 9, 2023): 24. (Accessed on 02/09/24) at https://www.alexandriava.gov/sites/default/ fles/2023-02/Masonic-Cornerstone-Attic-2-9-2023.pdf

Abaf, Ludwig

1890 Geschichte der Freimaurerei in Oesterreich-Ungarn. Vol. 1. Aigner: Budapest.

Bangs, Nathan 1845 A History of the Methodist Episcopal Church. Volume I. Lane and Tippett: New York.

Bangs, Nathan 1841 A History of the Methodist Episcopal Church, Volume IV: From the Year 1829 to the Year 1840. Lane and Sandford: New York.

Belling, H. 1868 ‘Herrnhuter und Freimaurer’, Freimaurer-Zeitung 22: 26 (June 27, 1868): 201-202.

Bentley, A. P.

1874

History of the Abduction of William Morgan, and the Anti-Masonic Excitement of 1826-1830. Van Cise and Throop: Mt. Pleasant, Iowa.

(2025)

Berger, Daniel 1897 History of the Church of the United Brethren in Christ United Brethren Publishing House: Dayton, Ohio.

Bernard, David 1871 Appendix to Light on Masonry, with Oaths and Penalties. Rochester, Woodruff Post: New York.

Bird, J. H. 1852 ‘The Late Bishop Chase’, The Freemasons’ Monthly Magazine 12: 1 (November 1, 1852): 29-30.

Bloomer, Dexter C. 1871 ‘Notes on the History of Pottawattamie County. No. 2’, The Annals of Iowa, October 1871, Griggs, Watson, and Day: Davenport: 681.

Boller, Paul F. Jr., 1959 ‘George Washington and the Methodists’, Historical Magazine of the Protestant Episcopal Church 28: 2 (June 1959): 165-186.

Brackney, William H. 1979 ‘The Fruits of a Crusade: Wesleyan Opposition to Secret Societies’, Methodist History 17: 4 (July 1979): 239-252.

Bradsby, H. C. 1885 History of Bureau County, Illinois. World Publishing Company: Chicago.

Carnes, Mark C. 1989 Secret Ritual and Manhood in Victorian America. Yale University Press: New Haven-London.

Case, James R. 1977 ‘Benjamin Taylor Kavanaugh’, Knight Templar 22: 1 (January 1977): 7-8.

Chesbrough, Samuel K. J. 1858 Defence of Rev. B. T. Roberts, A.M., before the Genesee Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church, at Perry, N.Y., Oct. 18-21, 1858. Matthews: Buffalo. (Accessed 03/10/24) at: https://place.asburyseminary.edu/ freemethodistbooks/28/.

Chetwode Crawley, William John 1902 ‘Notes on Irish Freemasonry, No. VI. The Wesleys and Irish Freemasonry’, Ars Quatuor Coronatorum, being the Transactions of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge 15 (1902): 100-124.

Clark, Davis W.

1856

Coke, Thomas 1790

Life and Times of Elijah Hedding, D.D., Late Senior Bishop of the Methodist Episcopal Church. Carlton and Phillips: New York.

Extracts of the Journals of the Rev. Dr. Coke’s Three Visits to America. New Chapel: London 1790.

Conable, Francis W.

1876

Cooke, Parsons

History of the Genesee Annual Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church, from its Organization by Bishops Asbury and McKendree in 1810, to the Year 1872. Nelson and Phillips: New York.

1855 ‘Mr. Lummus’ Effusions’, in: Parsons Cooke, Second Part of Cooke’s Centuries. Being a Defence and Confrmation of the First; showing that Methodism is not a branch of the Church of Christ. Whipple: Boston.

Crooks, Mrs. E. W.

1875

Crooks, George R.

Life of Rev. A. Crooks, A.M., Syracuse. D. S. Kinney: New York.

1890 The Life of Bishop Matthew Simpson of the Methodist Episcopal Church. Harper and Brothers: New York.

Crookshank, Charles H.

1910 ‘Was Wesley a Freemason?’, in: Proceedings of the Wesley Historical Society 7:7 (1910): 163-64.

Denslow, William R.

1957-1961 10,000 Famous Freemasons. 4 vols. [Transactions of the Missouri Lodge of Research] Fulton, MO.

Drury, A. W.

1924

History of the Church of the United Brethren in Christ Otterbein Press: Dayton, Ohio.

Elliott, Daryl Melvin 1992 Bishop Milton Wright and the Quest for A Christian America. PhD. Dissertation. Drew University: 167-252.

Faulkner, J. A.

1901 ‘Methodism and Masonry’, The Sacred Heart Review 25: 21 (May 25, 1901): 329.

Findel, Joseph Gabriel

1881 Die Grundsätze der Freimaurerei im Völkerleben. Ein geschichtsphilosophisches Erbauungsbuch. J. G. Findel: Leipzig.

Finney, Charles G.

1869 The Character, Claims, and Practical Workings of Freemasonry. Western Tract and Book Society: Cincinnati.

Finney, Thomas M.

1880 The Life and Labours of Enoch Mather Marvin, Late Bishop of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South. James H. Chambers: St. Louis, MO.

Fletcher, John

1776 A Vindication of the Rev. Mr. Wesley’s Calm Address to the American Colonies. In Some Letters To Mr. Caleb Evans. 2nd edition. Hawes: London.

Free Methodist Church

1860 The Doctrines and Discipline of the Free Methodist Church adopted August 23, 1860. B. T. Roberts: Buffalo. (Accessed on 12/06/23) at https://place.asburyseminary. edu/freemethodistbooks/18/

Gardiner, Reid

2013

Geiser, Samuel W.

1944

‘Hugh Duncan, 18th Grand Master’, Montana Freemason 87: 3 (August 2013): 30-32.

‘Benjamin Taylor Kavanaugh, and the Discovery of East Texas Oil’, Field and Laboratory 12: 2 (June 1944): 4655.

Grand Lodge of Iowa

1876

Grand Lodge of Wisconsin

Annals of the Grand Lodge of Iowa, Volume VI, Part III, 1876. Day, Egbert and Fidlar: Davenport, Iowa.

1882 Transactions of the M. W. Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the State of Wisconsin at its 38th Annual Communication June 13, 1882. Burdick and Armitage: Milwaukee.

Grand Lodge of Indiana

1860 Proceedings of a Grand Communication of the Grand Lodge of Indiana. Elder and Harkness: Indianapolis. -

Grand Lodge of New York

1893

Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the State of New York, 112th Annual Communication June, 1893. J. J. Little: New York.

Grand Lodge of Massachusetts

1874 ‘Rev. Edward T. Taylor, Boston’, Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of the Most Ancient and Honorable Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, December 1873. Rockwell and Churchill: Boston: 304-326;

Gädicke, Johann Christian (ed.)

1818 Freimaurer-Lexicon. Gädicke: Berlin: 458-59 (‘SenfkornOrden’).

Grand Council of Pennsylvania

1870

Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Annual Session of the M.P. Grand Council of Pennsylvania, held at Williamsport, June 14th, 1870. An. Dep. 2870. Anderson and Sons: Pittsburgh.

Grand Lodge of Iowa

1868

Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of Iowa, of the Most Ancient and Right Honorable Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons, at its Several Grand Annual Communications, June, A.D. 1864-June, A.D. 1868. vol 4. [s.n.]: Iowa City.

Grand Lodge of New York

1897

Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the State of New York one Hundred and Sixteenth Annual Communication June 1897. Little: New York: 99 (Report on Foreign Correspondence for 1897).

Grand Lodge of Utah

1886

Proceedings of the W.W. Grand Lodge of Ancient, Free and Accepted Masons of Utah. Fifteenth Annual Communication, held January 19th and 20th, 1886 Tribune: Salt Lake City.

Grand Lodge of Colorado

1873

Proceedings of the M. W. Grand Lodge of A.F. and A.M. of Colorado, at Its 13th Annual Communication, held at Denver, Sept. 30 and Oct. 1, 1873, A.L. 5873. News Steam Printing House: Denver, Col..

Grand Lodge of Colorado

1888 Proceedings of the M. W. Grand Lodge of A.F. and A. M. of Colorado, 28th Annual Communication, held at Denver, September 18th and 19th A.D. 1888 A.L. 5888. The Collier and Cleveland Litth. Co.: Denver.

Grand Lodge of Massachusetts

1874

Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of the Most Ancient and Honorable Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Quarterly Communication December, 1873. Rockwell and Churchill: Boston.

Grand Lodge of Oregon

1893

Proceedings of the M. W. Grand Lodge of Ancient and Accepted Masons of Oregon, Forty-third Annual Communication Held at Portland, June 14, A.L. 5893 Portland. Haltes: Oregon.

Gregory, John 1878 ‘Rev. Joel Winch’, in: John Gregory, Centennial Proceedings and Historical Incidents of the Early Settlers of Northfeld, VT., with Biographical Sketches of Prominent Business Men. Argus and Patriot Book and Job Printing House: Montpelier, VT.

Hanna, William 1854 Memoirs of Thomas Chalmers, D.D. LL.D. Vol. 1. Constable: Edinburgh.

Harper, Kenton N.

1911 History of the Grand Lodge and of Freemasonry in the District of Columbia with Biographical Appendix. Beresford: Washington, D.C.

Haven, Gilbert und Thomas Russell 1873 Incidents and Anecdotes of Rev. Edward T. Taylor, for over Forty Years Pastor of the Seaman’s Bethel, Boston Russell: Boston.

Hayden, Sidney 1866

Washington and His Masonic Comperes. Masonic Publishing and Manufacturing Company: New York.

Hengstenberg, Ernst W. 1853 ‘Vorwort’. Evangelische Kirchen-Zeitung No. 3 (January 8, 1853): 24.

Kendig, Amos B. 1879 Sparks of My Forge. Russell: Boston.

Kisker, Scott T. 2019 ‘Unpopular Religion: Bishop Milton Wright and the United Brethren Schism of 1889’, Methodist History 57:1-2 (October 2018 and January 2019): 45-63.

Kolb, Albert

1942 USA und die Philippinen. Essener Verlagsanstalt: Essen.

Krünitz, Johann Georg 1830 ‘Senfkornorden’, Oekonomische Encyklopädie, oder allgemeines System der Staats=Stadt=Haus u. Landwirtschaft. 153rd Part. Paulische Buchhandlung: Berlin: 227.

Lawrence, John 1868 The History of the Church of the United Brethren in Christ. Vol. 1. Dayton. Shuey: Ohio.

Leeson, Michael A. (ed.)

1885 History of Montana. 1739-1885. Warner, Beers and Company: Chicago.

Leet, Arthur Irwin

1904 ‘Letter from Rev. Leet, 26. April 1873’, in: Twentieth Century Song Book. Medicine Co.: Chatanooga, TN.: 11.

Levington, John 1871 Key to Masonry, and Kindred Secret Combinations. United Brethren Publishing House: Dayton, Ohio.

Lichliter, M.D. (ed.)

1912 James Jackson McIlyar. Preacher – Evangelist –Freemason. An Autobiography. [n.p.].

Lummus, Aaron 1826 ‘An Address delivered at Ashburnham A.L. 5825 in commemoration of the Anniversary of St. John the Evangelist, by Aaron Lummus, VDM, K.R.C, K.T.’. Masonic Mirror And Mechanics’ Intelligencer 2: 12 (March 18, 1826): 89-90; 2: 13 (March 25, 1826): 97; 2: 14 (April 1, 1826): 105-106.

Mackey, Albert G. 1874 ‘Excuse’, in: An Encyclopædia of Freemasonry and Its Kindred Sciences. Moss and Company: Philadelphia: 269.

Mackey, Albert G. 1858 ‘Of the Qualifcations of Candidates’. The American Freemason 6: 1 (January 1858): 51-59.

Mackey, Albert G. 1859 ‘Hermaphrodite’. A Lexicon of Freemasonry. 5th edition. Moss, Brother and Co.: Philadelphia: 192.

Mackey, Albert G.

1869 The Symbolism of Freemasonry: Illustrating and Explaining Its Science and Philosophy, its Legends, Myths, and Symbols. Clark and Maynard: New York.

Mackey, Albert G.

1859 ‘The Symbolism of the Corner-Stone’. American Quarterly Review of Freemasonry and its Kindred Sciences 2: 1 (July 5858 [sic]): 9-18.

Manwell, S.A. and S. J. Young

1893 ‘Rev. John Levington’, Minutes of the Fifty-First Annual Session of the Michigan Conference of the Wesleyan Methodist Connection of America, held at Allendale, Ottawa Co., Michigan September 5 to 9, 1893. Wesleyan Methodist Publishing Association: Syracuse, N.Y.: 33.

Marston, Leslie Ray

1960 From Age to Age A Living Witness. A Historical Interpretation of Free Methodism’s First Century. Light and Life Press: Winona Lake. Indiana.

McBain, James M.

1887 Arbroath: Past & Present, being Reminiscences chiefy relating to the last half century. Brodie and Salmond: Arbroath.

McDaniel, Susie Blaylock

2000 Offcial History of Catoosa County, Georgia 1853-1953. 3rd edition. Wolfe Publishing: Fernandina Beach, Fla.

McDonald, Daniel 1898 A History of Freemasonry in Indiana From 1806 to 1898. The Grand Lodge: Indianapolis.

McGuire, E. C.

1836 The Religious Opinions and Character of Washington Harper and Brothers: New York.

McNeil, John W.

1986 ‘Consequences and Principles: A Reexamination of the 1860 Free Methodist – Methodist Episcopal Schism’. Methodist History 24: 2 (January 1986): 98-106.

Methodist Episcopal Church

1887

Minutes of the Annual Conferences of the Methodist Episcopal Church. Spring Conferences of 1887. Phillips and Hunt: New York.

1889 Minutes of the Annual Conferences of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, for the Year 1888. Publishing House of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South: Nashville, TN.

1840 Minutes of the Annual Conferences of the Methodist Episcopal Church for the Years 1839-1845. Vol. 3. Mason and Lane: New York.

Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church

1880 ‘Montana’, in: Sixty-Second Annual Report of the Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church for the Year 1880. Printed for the Society: New York: 219-220.

1877

Moore, David H.

Fifty-Ninth Annual Report of the Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church for the Year 1877. Printed for the Society: New York.

1915 John Morgan Walden. Thirty-Fifth Bishop of the Methodist Episcopal Church. The Methodist Book Concern: New York-Cincinnati.

[Morgan, William]

1827 Illustrations of Masonry, by One of The Fraternity, Who has devoted Thirty Years to the Subject. Printed for the Author: Rochester.

Morris, Rob

1868 ‘Tribute to Washington’ und ‘Washington’, in: Rob Morris, The Masonic Odes and Poems. 3rd edition. Rob Morris: La Grange, KY.: 69-70, 119-24.

Morris, Rob

1884

Morse, Sidney

1924

William Morgan; or Political Anti-Masonry, Its Rise, Growth and Decadence. Robert Macoy, Masonic Publisher: New York.

Freemasonry in the American Revolution. The Masonic Service Association of the United States: Washington, D.C.

Most Excellent Grand Holy Royal Arch Chapter of Pennsylvania

1894 Proceedings of the Most Excellent Grand Holy Royal Arch Chapter of Pennsylvania, For the Year Ending December 27, 1893. MacCalla: Philadelphia: 211

Mudge, James

1910

Munsell, W. W.

History of the New England Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church 1796 – 1910. The Conference: Boston.

1881 The History of Schuylkill County, Pa. Munsell: New York.

Olcott, Charles S.

1916 The Life of William McKinley. Houghton Miffin Company: Boston–New York.

Osborn, Alfred

1896 ‘Corner-Stone Laying of the College of History’, The Epworth Herald 7: Thanksgiving Number (November 21, 1896): 7, 11.

Palmer, Walter C.

1877 Life and Letters of Leonidas L. Hamline, D.D., Late One of the Bishops of the Methodist Episcopal Church. Nelson and Phillips: New York.

Pattison, Robert E.

1909 The Life and Character of Richard Bassett. [Papers of the Historical Society of Delaware XXIX]. The Historical Society of Delaware: Wilmington.

Pollock, A. J.

1930

Porter, Robert P.

Reasons why a Christian should not be a Freemason. Pickering and Inglis: London.

1896 Life of William McKinley, Soldier, Lawyer, Statesman. Hamilton: Cleveland, Ohio.

Prindle, Cyrus

1862 Masonry and Odd Fellowship. An Inquiry whether Christians should acquire, or retain membership in these Fraternities. Wesleyan Offce: [Syracuse].

Redford, Albert H.

1869

Redford, Albert H.

1884

The History of Methodism in Kentucky. Vol. 2. The Southern Methodist Publishing House: Nashville, TN.

Life and Times of H. H. Kavanaugh, D.D., One of the Bishops of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South. [s.n.]: Nashville, TN.

Robinson, Chance M.

2024 Allegiance as Christian Witness: A Testimony of Leaving Freemasonry, Firebrand (May 21, 2024). (Accessed on 04/06/24) at (https://frebrandmag.com/articles/ allegiance-as-christian-witness-a-testimony-of-leavingfreemasonry).

Robison, John

1798 Proofs of a Conspiracy against all the Religions and Governments of Europe, carried on in the Secret Meetings of Free Masons, Illuminati, and Reading Societies. 4th edition. Cadell and Davies: London.

Rugg, Henry W.

1895 History of Freemasonry in Rhode Island. Memorial Volume. Freeman: Providence.

Sachse, Julius F.

1915 Washington’s Masonic Correspondence as Found among the Washington Papers in the Library of Congress. [s.n.]: Philadelphia.

Schnetzler, Charles

1936 ‘Le Mysticisme de L’Union des Cœurs (Loge Maçonnique Genevoise), 1808-1836 et le mouvement du Réveil’, Revue de Théologie et de Philosophie 23: 100 (1936): 283-288.

Shay, Emma Freeland

1914 Mariet Hardy Freeland. A Faithful Witness. A Biography by her Daughter Mrs. Emma Freeland Shay. 2nd edition. The Women’s Foreign Missionary Society of the Free Methodist Church: Chicago.

Smith, S. N.

1943 ‘The So-called ‘ “Exposures” of Freemasonry of the MidEighteenth Century’. Ars Quatuor Coronatorum, being the Transactions of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge 56 (January 1, 1943): 4-36.

Stanley, Jacob

1813 ‘An Address to the Members of Certain Lodges’, The Methodist Magazine 36 (January 1813): 66-71.

Stapleton, Ammon

1900 Annals of the Evangelical Association of North America and History of the United Evangelical Church. Publishing House of the United Evangelical Church: Harrisburg, Penn.

Starbuck, Charles C.

1882 ‘Unintelligent Treatment of Romanism’, Dickinson’s Theological Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 1 (July 1882): 399-400.

Starbuck, Charles C.

1901 ‘Considerations on Catholicism by a Protestant Theologian’, The Sacred Heart Review 25: 16 (April 20, 1901): 246-47.

Stearns, John G.

1868 A New Chapter on Free Masonry: Addressed to the Baptist Church of Clinton, N.Y. Griffths and Warren: Utica, N.Y.

Stearns, John G.

1860 Letters on Freemasonry, addressed chiefy to the Fraternity. Seward: Utica, N.Y.

Stearns, John G.

1829 An Inquiry into the Nature and Tendency of Speculative Freemasonry, with an Appendix. 5th edition. Northway and Porter: Utica, N.Y.

Stillson, Henry Leonard

1893 ‘Mississippi’, in: Henry Leonard Stillson (ed.), History of the Ancient and Honorable Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons, and Concordant Orders. The Fraternity Publishing Company: Boston and New York: 334.

Stone, William L.

1832 Letters on Masonry and Anti-Masonry, addressed to the Hon. John Quincy Adams. Halsted: New York.

Strickland, W. P.

1860 Autobiography of Dan Young. Carlton and Porter: New York.

Supreme Council of Sovereign Grand Inspectors-General of the Thirty-Third and Last Degree

1892

Proceedings of the Supreme Council of Sovereign Grand Inspectors-General of the Thirty-Third and Last Degree Ancient Accepted Scottish Rite, September 1892. [n.p.]

Supreme Council of Sovereign Grand Inspectors-General of the Thirty-Third and Last Degree

1879

Proceedings of the Supreme Council of Sovereign Grand Inspectors-General of the Thirty-Third and Last Degree, Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, for the Northern Jurisdiction of the United States of America commencing on the 27th Day of [...] September, 1879. Lawrence: New York.

Sweet, William Warren (ed.)

1823 Circuit-Rider Days Along the Ohio. Being the Journals of the Ohio Conference from its Organization in 1812 to 1826. The Methodist Book Concern: New YorkCincinnati.

Thompson, Henry A.

1889 Our Bishops. A Sketch of the Origin and Growth of the Church of the United Brethren in Christ. Elder Publishing: Chicago.

United Brethren in Christ

1859 Origin, Doctrine, Constitution and Discipline of the United Brethren in Christ. The Printing Establishment of the United Brethren in Christ: Dayton, Ohio.

United Brethren in Christ

1895 Disciplines of the United Brethren in Christ. Ed. A. W. Drury. United Brethren Publishing House: Dayton, Ohio.

Verein deutscher Freimaurer

1901 ‘Wesley, John’, in: Allgemeines Handbuch der Freimaurerei. Ed. the Verein deutscher Freimaurer, Volume II: M – Z. 3rd edition. Hesse: Leipzig: 537.

Vernon, Merle

1862 George Washington. The Soldier and the Christian. American Tract Society: Boston.

Voigts, Friedrich

1849 ‘Die Loge aux trois Canons in Wien’, FreimaurerZeitung No. 27 (July 1849): 216.

Wesley, John

1872 ‘Sermon LXVII. On Divine Providence’ und ‘Sermon LXXIV. Of the Church’, in: The Works of The Rev. John Wesley, A.M. Sometime Fellow of Lincoln College. Vol. 6. Wesleyan Conference Offce: London: 313-325.

1909-1916 The Journal of the Rev. John Wesley, A.M. Sometime Fellow of Lincoln College, Oxford. Edited by Nehemiah Curnock, Standard Edition. Vols. 1-8. Kelly: London.

1830 Minutes of Several Conversations between the Rev. Mr. Wesley and Others; from the Year 1744, to the Year 1789, in: The Works of the Rev. John Wesley, A.M.. Vol. 8. 3rd edition. Mason: London.

1831 ‘Letter to Joseph Benson, 22 February 1776’, in: The Works of the Reverend John Wesley, A.M.. First American Complete and Standard Edition. Ed. John Emory, Volume 7. Emory and Waugh: New York.

1872 Letter from John Wesley to Miss Furly (May 18, 1757), in: The Works of the Rev. John Wesley. Vol. 12. Wesleyan Conference Offce: London.

1775 A Calm Address to Our American Colonies. Bonner and Middleton: Bristol.

West, Anson

1893 History of Methodism in Alabama. Publishing House Methodist Episcopal Church: Nashville, TN.

Wetherwax, John R.

1982 ‘The Secularization of the Methodist Church: An Examination of the 1860 Free Methodist – Methodist Episcopal Schism’. Methodist History 20: 3 (April 1982): 156-63.

Whalen, William J.

1959 Christianity and American Freemasonry. 3rd ed. Bruce Publishing: Milwaukee.

Wilson, George W.

1904 Methodist Theology vs. Methodist Theologians. A Review of Several Methodist Writers. With an Introduction by Bishop W. F. Mallalieu, D.D., LL.D. Jennings and Pye: Cincinnati.

Wood, Ephraim

1830 ‘To the Methodists of Portage County, Ohio’, American Masonick [sic] Record and Albany Literary Journal 4: 39 (October 23, 1830): 307.

Wright, Milton 1881 ‘Secret Societies’. The Reform Leafet 1: 1 (October 1881).

The Asbury Journal 80/1: 139-161

DOI: 10.7252/Journal.01.2025S.06

Walter Stepanenko

Theory and Practice in John Wesley’s Critique of Calvinism: A Philosophical Examination

Abstract:

On more than one occasion, John Wesley found himself engaged in debate with Calvinists in the Methodist revival. This paper philosophically re-examines John Wesley’s concerns with the Calvinism of some members of his evangelical cohort. It is argued that Wesley’s concerns fall into two types: theoretical concerns about the conceptual coherency of a view that makes God the author of sin, and practical concerns about the moral implications of a view that suggests some individuals are elect and others are reprobate. This article then attempts a principled reconstruction of these objections. It is argued that while there is a rational Arminian case to be made here, what is arguably most valuable in this case is the distinctive method of weaving together thought and action in the Christian life, which the connections between Wesley’s theoretical and practical concerns reveal.

Keywords: John Wesley, Calvinism, Arminianism, nature of sin, election

Walter Stepanenko is Assistant Professor of Philosophy at York College of Pennsylvania with interests in the Philosophy of Religion and Religious Epistemology.

Introduction

On February 1, 1741, John Wesley stood before the congregants at his Foundery and tore up a letter George Whitefeld had written him, a letter that had been disseminated to the congregants that day.1 The precise content of the letter is contested. Joel Houston argues that the letter was likely a September 1740 personal correspondence between the two Methodist preachers.2 In any case, John Wesley stood before his congregation, and declared that he would “do just what I believe Mr. Whitefeld would, were he here himself,” and “tore it in pieces.”3 Though the act was an attempt at de-escalation and a public showing of an intention to avoid an open rift with Whitefeld, the effort was insuffcient to stave off the impending schism, and the Methodist revival broke into two camps. Unfortunately for John Wesley, the controversy emerged in the early days of the 1740s would not be the last time he would fnd himself theologically sparring with the ideological allies of George Whitefeld. The theological disagreement between John Wesley and George Whitefeld traced a well-trodden Arminian and Calvinist divide, and the debate would iterate throughout Wesley’s public career, including in the aftermath of the eulogy Wesley would give for Whitefeld upon his death in September 1770, some years after the two friends had managed to repair their personal relations.4 Though it is necessary to have this background in view, my interest in this episode is not historical. Rather my interest in the various ArminianCalvinist controversies that erupted in the Methodist revival throughout the 17th century is philosophical. Of course, the Whitefeld-Wesley debate has been examined before, and along various dimensions.5 Theologians and philosophers have also retread the Arminian-Calvinist debate in general.6 However, my primary interest in examining the debate is not to adjudicate the debate in favor of one party rather than another. While I do believe a philosophical re-examination of the Arminian-Calvinist Methodist controversies can support the construction of something of a plausible Arminian critique, I also believe that the critique is arguably less expansive and less biting than John Wesley appears to have maintained. Instead, my primary aim is to examine John Wesley’s concerns in the various controversies in an effort to elucidate the method within his brand of Methodism. In this paper, I argue that an examination of Wesley’s concerns in the various Arminian-Calvinist controversies reveals a distinctive method of integrating theory and practice. As I will argue, Wesley’s concerns

with Calvinism fall into types: theoretical and practical concerns, and the bidirectionality between the two suggests a model of theory and practice in which both are mediated by a pietistic attitude that ultimately constitutes a transcendental precondition for successful engagement in each, as well as in their patterning.

In what follows, I develop this case in three steps. First, I examine John Wesley’s concern that Calvinism in general makes God the author of sin. I argue that while many scholars have noted Wesley’s concern that Calvinist interpretations runs afoul of the analogy of faith, it is equally valid to interpret Wesley’s concern as a concern for logical consistency in one’s conception of God, and thus as a theoretical concern. I next examine John Wesley’s concern that Calvinism is morally dangerous insofar as it tends toward antinomianism. I introduce several ways of testing the inherent moral danger of a view, and I argue that while there is at least one way of fnding Calvinism to be morally dangerous, the operant principle is perhaps a less sure ground upon which to build a critique than Wesley appears to have believed. In any case, I contend that this second objection implies that Wesley had equal concern for both the theoretical and practical implications of Calvinism. With this claim established, I examine the relationship between these two types of concerns. I argue that Wesley’s concerns run in both directions: that his theoretical concerns have practical implications and that his practical concerns have theoretical implications. I then ask what this bidirectionality means for the shape of Wesley’s thought. I distinguish between two models of theory and practice integration, and I argue that Wesley’s method is better described in holistic terms as the view that right practice and adequate theorizing are linked by a mediating pietistic attitude.

Theoretical Concerns in the Calvinist-Arminian Methodist Controversies

With respect to the volatile controversy between John Wesley and George Whitefeld, scholars and historians can debate the sequence of events and assign precipitating responsibility to whichever party they think frst or most provocative, but there is no doubt that John Wesley’s decision to publish his sermon “Free Grace” played a catalytic role in the schismatic rift that would tear through the Methodist revival in the early 1740s. In that sermon, Wesley takes aim at the Calvinist conception of election. More specifcally, Wesley argues that a modifed form of Calvinism, in which

God has predestined only an elect, but not the reprobate, is logically untenable. Even with such a modifed position, Wesley argues, “[y]ou still believe that in consequence of an unchangeable, irresistible decree of God the greater part of mankind abide in death.”7 For Wesley, to say that God eternally decrees that some are saved logically entails that some are not. Of course, the contemporary philosopher must admit that logic is not exactly on Wesley’s side here. For example, the claim “some Granny Smith apples are green” does not actually imply that some Granny Smith apples are not. However, Wesley’s comments must be understood in a context in which all interested parties shared a commitment to a more restrictive position than salvifc universalism. In “Free Grace,” Wesley was concerned frst with the Calvinist’s doctrine of limited atonement. Against this position, Wesley held a commitment to the view that the doctrine of unlimited atonement had a better scriptural basis.

Nonetheless, Wesley’s concerns with Calvinism stemmed not just from a concern with the doctrine of limited atonement itself, but with its implications. In Predestination Calmly Considered, Wesley returns to the themes of “Free Grace” and with a bit more care. There, Wesley repeats the charge that election logically entails reprobation: “if God hath fxed a decree that these men only shall be saved, in such a decree it is manifestly implied that all other men shall be damned.”8 The chief problem with this implication, Wesley suggests, is that “it fatly contradicts, indeed utterly overthrows, the Scripture account of the justice of God.”9 For some scholars, Wesley’s concern here is for fdelity to the Word of God. For example, Mark Weeter reads Wesley’s primary concern here as a concern for Calvinism’s inconsistency with the analogy of faith, or “the general tenor of Scripture.”10 There is no doubt that is part of Wesley’s concern. However, I would also add that Wesley is equally concerned with the purely speculative, or logical problem he thinks Calvinism creates. In my view, this comes to the fore in Wesley’s treatment of this same issue in Predestination Calmly Considered. After raising the concern that Calvinism contradicts scripture, Wesley actually launches into a conceptual analysis of justice. He asks, “what should those on the left hand be condemned for? For their having done evil? They could not help it.”11 Here, the idea is that God cannot be omnibenevolent if God is unjust, and God is unjust if God punishes individuals for behaviors that are coerced. This is much more conceptual analysis than it is Biblical exegesis.

In Thoughts Upon Necessity, Wesley elaborates on this perspective. He considers the view that “man is not self-determined, that the principle of action is lodged not in himself, but in some other being.”12 Wesley observes that in different systems, the source of action can be found in different things. In some systems, the source of action is found in the brain, in others in nature, and still in others in God. However, Wesley argues that “every one of these schemes implies the universal necessity of human actions. In this they all agree, that man is not a free, but a necessary agent, being absolutely determined in all his actions.”13 For Wesley, then, freedom consists in the capacity to choose between alternative courses of action. Determination is inconsistent with freedom because determination suggests that one course of action is ultimately inevitable. Here again, Wesley is primarily engaging in conceptual analysis. However, for Wesley, this conceptual analysis does have a theological upshot. For Wesley, theological determinism ultimately entails that God is “the author of sin.”14 Wesley is aware of the soft determinist or compatibilist view that human freedom and determinism are compatible because freedom is ultimately the capacity to achieve one’s preferences, but he is unmoved. He notes the opposing view that “their actions are voluntary, the fruit of their own will,” but Wesley argues “that is not enough to make them either good or evil. For their will…is irresistibly impelled.”15 Thus, in John Wesley’s view, Calvinism cannot help but make God the author of sin.

Whether this is a charge that can stick to all forms of Calvinism is debatable. Joel Houston argues that Wesley’s criticisms most directly, and perhaps only, apply to supralapsarian forms of Calvinism.16 To evaluate these claims, it will help to get the various lapsarian forms of Calvinism clearly in view. In my view, the most concise way to formulate the possible variants is as follows:

Supralapsarianism: Election is God’s logically primary decree.

Infralapsarianism: Election is logically consequent on God’s decree to permit the fall.

Sublapsarianism: Election is logically consequent on God’s decision to offer salvation to all.

According to this formulation, the primary distinction between these forms of Calvinism concerns the logical place election occupies in God’s eternal decrees. In supralapsarianism, election is God’s frst decree. In infralapsarianism, election logically follows the decree to permit the fall and in sublapsarianism, election logically follows God’s post-fall decision to offer salvation to everyone. Houston implies that Wesley’s criticism that Calvinism makes God the author of sin only sticks in the case of supralapsarianism.

Wesley would surely respond that the question is not what logical place election occupies in God’s decrees, but whether the cosmic system God creates is deterministic. For Wesley, to say that God is the author of sin is to say that God’s providential design causally necessitates sinful action. Thus, we can formulate Wesley’s initial notion of what it means to be the author of sin (AoS) as follows:

(AoS1): God is the author of sin, if and only if, God causally coerces sinful action.

With this defnition in view, Houston is clearly right to suggest that supralapsarianism makes God the author of sin. According to supralapsarianism, election is God’s primary decree. Assuming that God is infallible, the election of various persons and the reprobation of others is therefore inevitable. As Wesley notes, this view entails determinism. Because AoS1 says that God is the author of sin, if God causally coerces sinful action, which is what determinism involves, supralapsarianism makes God the author of sin.

Houston’s comments suggest that this same line of thinking is inapplicable in the case of infralapsarianism and sublapsarianism. Consider infralapsarianism frst. Infralapsarianism is the view that God frst decrees the creation of humans, then God decrees to permit the Fall, and then and only then does God (logically) decree election. Now, Wesley would not be moved by this emendation. If God’s decrees still necessitate human failure, God is still the author of sin, given AoS1. However, this Wesleyan response seems to miss the point of infralapsarianism. The idea that God decrees to permit the Fall only after God decrees to create human beings is supposed to create an aperture for God’s logically subsequent decrees to be informed by God’s foreknowledge. Unfortunately, the Calvinist cannot be let off this

easily. If God’s foreknowledge is infallible, that may very well be because human power does not involve a capacity do otherwise. If that’s right, infralapsarianism alone does not actually circumvent Wesley’s objection that Calvinism makes God the author of sin, given AoS1.

Nevertheless, there is another commitment the Calvinist could add to infralapsarianism that would render the view immune to this objection. This is a commitment to Molinism. Though the mere idea that God’s foreknowledge informs God’s logically subsequent decrees does not block God from ultimately becoming the author of sin, Molinism’s notion of middle knowledge is more helpful. That’s because it is the very nature of middle knowledge that it consists not of what human beings will do, but what they would do, in the circumstances they will fnd themselves in. If God’s decrees are only informed by middle knowledge, and infralapsarianism is true, it is hard to see how God could be the author of sin, given AoS1. In that case, God would not be causally necessitating human sinful action in adopting His providential design. God’s providential design would be merely shaped in response to what God’s middle knowledge suggests we will do, not what we must do. Of course, Wesley could argue that middle knowledge is incoherent, or that Molinism is an inviable position, and that may be true, but that is not the same thing as arguing that Calvinism makes God the author of sin.17 If that’s right, then there is at least one way for the Calvinist to avoid Wesley’s charge, and because infralapsarianism places election in higher logical priority compared to sublapsarianism, this defense of infralapsarianism applies to sublapsarianism a fortiori, and there is more than one way for the Calvinist to avoid Wesley’s charge.

However, there is also one other way to understand the objection that Calvinism makes God the author of sin. According to this way of approaching the issue, the problem with Calvinism cannot be solved by logically variegating the order of God’s decrees. The problem lies not with the ordering of the decrees, but with the fact that all forms of Calvinism take the decrees to be logically prior to God’s act of creating the universe. Here, the concern is that even though the Calvinist schemes suggest the decree to create the universe is logically prior to God’s other decrees, these decrees must still logically precede God’s actually creating the universe, but then this means that God actually creates the universe with the intention to actualize a scenario in which the decrees are realized. What this means is that the creation of the universe is performed with the intention that human

beings sin. This does not make God the author of sin, given AoS1, but it does suggest an alternative notion of what it means to be the author of sin. Consider:

(AoS2) God is the author of sin, if God’s providential actualization involves an intention that human beings commit sinful actions.

AoS2 implies that the only way to avoid making God the author of sin is to suggest that God’s intention to actualize the universe is logically (and perhaps even temporally) prior to God’s cognizance of actual sin. This is ultimately the Arminian view. As Houston notes, the Arminian view is that the Fall is not decreed.18 Of course, this view might invite its own problems. The Calvinist will wonder how God can be sovereign on this view. The Calvinist can also wonder whether this view entails that God enters time upon the creation of the world. These are concerns the Arminian must ultimately address, but the important point at present is that AoS2 does imply that God is in fact the author of sin in all three of the above forms of Calvinism. The Calvinist can argue that the notion of intention is ambiguous, and that, in the Calvinist view, God does not want human beings to sin, but intention does not require that one want or even prefer the intended outcome. In response, the Calvinist can argue that AoS1 is the better interpretation of the concept “author of sin,” but that is not to deny that AoS2 does give us one way of salvaging Wesley’s objection.

Practical Concerns in the Calvinist-Arminian Methodist Controversies

From the initial “Free Grace” controversy to the 1770 Minutes Controversy and beyond, John Wesley routinely expressed not only the theoretical concerns with Calvinism hinted at above, but concerns about the moral and practical implications of Calvinism he thought would undermine the pietism of the Methodist revival. In “Free Grace,” the frst concern Wesley develops in this direction is a concern for preaching. In Wesley’s view, Calvinism renders “all preaching vain.”19 That’s because the elect are predestined to be saved and those who are “not elected…cannot possibly be saved.”20 In Predestination Calmly Considered, Wesley adds that he opposes Calvinism not only “because it is an error…but because it is an error of so pernicious consequence to the souls of men.”21 Here, Wesley’s chief concern is for the entailment of the doctrine of the perseverance of the

saints from election. If a person is elect, and guaranteed to persevere in that election, Wesley argues one’s pietistic energies will ultimately be zapped. He quotes an imagined recipient of the Calvinist message: “if I am one of the elect I must and shall be saved. Therefore I may safely sin a little longer, for my salvation cannot fail.”22

Now, these are fairly serious charges. In his various writings, Wesley expounds several ways in which Calvinism leads to moral laxity, or what he describes as antinomianism. Because my interest here is in the general type and rationality of the charge, I will sidestep this exposition. What is important for present purposes is that Wesley’s criticisms here are all specifcations of the broader claim that Calvinism is morally dangerous. If even one specifcation of this broad claim can be proven adequate that will suffce to show that Wesley has legitimate practical concerns with Calvinism. The problem is that the development of this case is immediately hampered by the diffculty of specifying exactly when a view counts as objectionable because it is morally dangerous. In what follows, I attempt a specifcation of this concern through an engagement in an exercise philosophers call “Chisholming,” by proposing a principle and reworking that principle in light of counterexamples until a suitable principle is in view.

To start, let us begin by considering an obviously problematic principle. This is the principle that a view is objectionable because it can be misapplied. We can formulate this as follows:

Misapplication (M): A view is morally objectionable if the view can be misapplied.

Clearly M is too strong. The mere possibility of misapplication is not suffcient to justify the claim that a view is morally dangerous. M must be revised. Consider:

Misapplication2 (M2): A view is morally objectionable if the view is misapplied.

Unfortunately, M2 is no improvement over M. In fact, if M2 were true, almost every view ever maintained by rational human agents would be objectionable. M2 also requires revision. Consider then:

Misapplication3 (M3): A view is morally objectionable if the view is misapplied more often than not.

M3 improves on M2 insofar as M3 would not rule out every view ever maintained, but M3 still builds track record considerations into our purview far too strongly. Perhaps the practitioners of the view in question are just shoddy practitioners. M3 cannot account for this. Consider then one last misapplication principle:

Misapplication4 (M4): A view is morally objectionable if the view is more likely to be misapplied than not.

The problem with M4 is that M4 also fails to discern between the possibility of shoddy practitioners and the actual danger of the view. In fact, there is reason to think every misapplication principle will fail in this regard. That’s because a misapplication principle will locate the danger of a view in its propensity for misapplication by defnition, and such an identifcation can never deliver the resources needed to discern misapplication from inherent danger. We cannot just look at the mere fact of misapplication if we are going to identify a morally dangerous view, we have to look a bit deeper.

What we require then is a method for identifying the inherent danger of a view that protects us from making erroneous assessments better attributed to misapplication. It seems to me that the best way to develop such a method is to look to the substance of the view and to connect this substance to the systemic loss of some recognizable good. If we reconsider John Wesley’s concerns articulated above, it seems to me that this is closer to the method Wesley was in fact applying. For example, in the case of Wesley’s criticism of Calvinism, the concern was for piety and the impact of the opponent’s particular view on the development of piety.

The question to ask is what kind of connection we should be looking for between the substance of a view and the recognizable goods we are aiming at. One negative connection surely consists of omission. Consider then:

Omission (O): A view is morally dangerous if it is fails to recognize some important good.

Clearly, an individual levying objection O at a particular view will need to explain what an important good is, but in our present context, the issue is largely moot because there is a shared axiological orientation within the Methodist revival. Presumably, in such a context, O has bite precisely because the interlocutors agree on what goods are important. This would explain some of the vitriol we fnd in the various Arminian-Calvinist controversies.

Unfortunately, in our present context, O is not particularly convincing. That’s because both the Calvinists and the Arminians share a commitment to pietism. To see this, we need to note the difference between Wesley’s criticisms of antinomianism and his criticism of Calvinism. In the former case, Wesley accuses antinomians of blatant disregard for the moral law and the ordinances of God. For example, in “A Blow at the Root,” Wesley considers the view that because Christ’s righteousness is “imputed to us, we need none of our own.”23 Here, the concern is that antinomianism fails to recognize some particularly important good, namely, the good of one’s own righteousness. Thus, this concern is an O-type concern. Wesley’s criticism of Calvinism is not quite this criticism. Wesley knows very well that the Calvinists are preaching to the masses, and he knows very well that they are committed pietists. What Wesley is arguing is that Calvinism’s doctrines undermine these efforts because they introduce theoretical pressure away from these efforts. This suggests an altogether different principle. Consider:

Erosion (E): A view is morally dangerous if the adoption of that view upsets the realization and/or protection of some important good.

E is a much closer specifcation of Wesley’s concerns with Calvinism. Unfortunately, E is too imprecise. To specify Wesley’s objection to Calvinism, we need to say more about what it means to “upset” the realization and/ or protection of some important good. Here is an initial attempt at this specialization:

Erosion1 (E1): A view is morally dangerous if the adoption of that view prevents an individual from rationally realizing and/or protecting some important good as far as possible

E1 is a more specifc principle, but it is itself objectionable. E1 fails to recognize the possibility of supererogatory action. For this reason, E1 requires scaling back. Here is a second specifcation:

Erosion2 (E2): A view is morally dangerous if the adoption of that view prevents an individual from rationally realizing and/or protecting some important good as far as duty demands.

E2 seems to give us the principle we are looking for. While E2 is silent on what specifcally duty demands in any particular case, E2 is specifc enough to be tractable with input from moral theory.

The question then is whether Calvinism is morally dangerous, given the light of E2. Consider again Wesley’s objection that Calvinism makes preaching unnecessary. If Wesley is right about this, Calvinism is objectionable, given E2. That’s because, if Wesley is right, the adoption of Calvinism makes preaching irrational. Assuming preaching and/or evangelizing is a moral duty of a Christian, and certainly this was the view of the Methodist revivalists, then if Wesley is right, Calvinism is morally dangerous. Of course, it is open to the Calvinist to argue that Wesley is wrong. The Calvinist might respond to Wesley by suggesting that God’s means of election involve preaching and that because any particular preacher cannot foresee who is elect, any particular preacher has no reason not to preach to any particular person.

To evaluate this response, it will help to compare this response to a parallel debate in normative theory. Consider one common objection to Act Utilitarianism. Act Utilitarianism is the view that an action is right if and only if and because that action promotes the greatest total net happiness. Act Utilitarianism is often objected to on the grounds that it can license morally odious action, such as murder. In response, many Act Utilitarians adopt an expected outcome version of the view. According to this expected outcome version, an action is right if and only if and because that action promotes the greatest expected total net happiness. Because murder almost never optimizes expected total net happiness, murder is morally unacceptable, and where this is not the case, murder is not wrong (according to the Act Utilitarian).

It seems to me that the Calvinist is suggesting something analogous in response to the Arminian’s E2-type objection that Calvinism undermines grounds for preaching. According to the Calvinist, there is no reason to expect preaching to be ineffective as a means of grace, and so there is no reason to refrain from preaching, even if one accepts Calvinistic predestination. Is such a response convincing? Well, it seems to me that the response depends on the empirical contingencies of the matter. If it is equally likely that a person is elect as not, refraining from preaching seems like a rational response. In fact, preaching is only the exclusively rational response if it is more likely than not that a given person is elect. Now, the Calvinist can argue that we have no clue about the empirical distribution of this matter, but if we truly have no clue how election is empirically distributed, it is hard to see how the Calvinist can argue that refraining from preaching is irrational.

However, it is important to notice that this concern does not actually run afoul of E2. E2 says that a view is morally dangerous if the adoption of the view rationally prevents a person from realizing and/or protecting some important good. Our present concern is not that Calvinism rationally prevents a person from preaching. Our present concern is that Calvinism does not rationally preclude a person from not preaching. This suggests an alternative formulation. Consider the following principle:

Erosion3 (E3): A view is morally dangerous if the adoption of that view does not rationally rule out a course of action that fails to realize and/or protect an important good as far as duty demands.

E3 is a much stronger principle than E2. In essence, E2 says that a view is morally dangerous because one can no longer rationally do the right thing when one adopts the view. E3 says something much stronger. In essence, E3 says that a view is morally dangerous because it rationally permits too much. In this sense, E2 focuses on whether a view rationally precludes the right action whereas E3 focuses on whether a view rationally precludes wrong action. For this reason, I suspect some may doubt the legitimacy of E3. I am not sure how much we should expect an epistemic view to morally settle. Consider any number of now debunked views. Take classical psychology for example. Classical psychology paved the theoretical way for the practice of lobotomy, a practice many of us might fnd, or maybe should fnd, morally repugnant. However, many contemporary

persons not only fnd lobotomy to be a morally repugnant practice, many of us contemporaries want to say that classical psychology did not have an impressive enough track record, or strong enough evidential grounds, to warrant the imposition of the risk lobotomy poses on individuals. Now, while I in fact suspect that a good case in this direction can be made, that case nonetheless rests on various evidential and moral considerations that we might not think it is the business of classical psychology to decide. If that’s right, then perhaps a principle such as E3 is simply too strong.

Of course, the Arminian might argue that we want, and in fact, should expect something more out of theology than we want or should expect out of a science, such as psychology. According to this way of approaching the subject, theology is not just the science of God, theology is the science of God and God’s ways with humanity, which includes God’s expectations for humanity. If a reasonable case can be made in this direction, then perhaps E3 is a suitable principle in at least some contexts, and the Methodist revival is one such context. Perhaps then there is a principle and a case to made on which to rest the Arminian charge that Calvinism is a morally dangerous theology. However, if the Arminian opts to go this route, the Arminian will need to take care lest the Calvinist attempt to turn the tables. In the Minutes controversy in the ensuing years following George Whitefeld’s death, some Calvinist authors attempted this reversion. For example, Richard Hill argued that Wesley’s distinction of sins properly so-called and sins improperly so-called could encourage an individual believer to engage in moral error while claiming perfection.24 In response, the Arminian can argue that Hill’s criticism points only to a potential misapplication of the view, and that this possibility does not fall under the scope of E3. That, after all, was the lesson we learned in the exercise that led us to this principle.

In any case, I leave the resolution of this debate up to the reader as well. The important takeaway for present purposes is that there is at least one rational way of interpreting Wesley’s charge that Calvinism is morally dangerous. While a fuller treatment of this debate should examine some of Wesley’s broader moral concerns, the preceding nonetheless demonstrates the extent to which Wesley had both legitimate theoretical and practical concerns with Calvinism, even if those concerns are perhaps more controversial and less compelling than Wesley himself appears to have maintained and/or recognized. Whatever one should ultimately decide about the rational force of this case, my interests next move me to

a consideration of the way Wesley patterned his theoretical and practical concerns and what these patterns reveal about his broader conception of rationality.

Theory and Practice in the Methodist Revival

In the preceding two sections, I have examined several concerns John Wesley expressed for the forms of Calvinism extant and emerging during the Methodist revival. First, I examined John Wesley’s concern that Calvinism made God the author of sin. Insofar as this was a concern for the logical coherence of Calvinism, I described this concern as a theoretical concern. I then moved to a consideration of John Wesley’s concern that Calvinism leads to antinomianism. Insofar as this was a concern for the moral implications of Calvinism, I described this concern as a practical concern. In this section, I briefy want to consider the relationship between these two types of concern. In my view, these two types of concern are not unrelated, and the connection between the two reveals at least part of the implicit structure of John Wesley’s theology.

The frst connection to make between John Wesley’s theoretical and practical concerns emphasizes the practical upshot of Wesley’s theoretical concern. As we have seen, John Wesley was concerned that Calvinism would make God the author of sin. I have described this as a concern for the conceptual coherence of Calvinism. According to this way of putting the matter, to suggest that God is the author of sin is to suggest God is not omnibenevolent, and that is an incoherent position to adopt. However, this is only one way of putting this concern. In Wesleyan theology, as in almost any genuinely Christian theology, the human being is made in the image of God.25 To suggest that God is not omnibenevolent, or somehow the author of sin, is to generate not only a conceptual problem, but a moral problem insofar as divine authorship of sin implies a defective normative ideal for humanity.

The second connection to make between John Wesley’s theoretical and practical concerns runs in the opposite direction. If God does not demand perfection of us, if God is not aiming at the salvation of all persons, then God is not the God we have been led to believe God is. For Wesley, this practical problem raises a theoretical problem, but it is also raises an epistemological concern. In Wesley’s view, scripture plays a central epistemological role as a source of potential knowledge and a

conceptual corroborator of experience. For this reason, Timothy Crutcher has argued that Wesley posits a hermeneutical circle between scripture and experience.26 However, for Wesley, scripture also has a general tenor, as is exemplifed in Wesley’s rule or analogy of faith.27 This rule of faith suggests that scripture ultimately aims at the therapeutic regeneration of the human being from original sin to a state of holiness, best characterized as a life walking by faith with the mind of Christ. If our practical pursuit of holiness is compromised because it is not demanded of us, this threatens the entire epistemological foundation of the Christian way of life. Thus, our practical concerns can raise theoretical concerns, and vice versa.

What then is the nature of the relationship between theory and practice in Wesley’s revivalism? One possibility is that theory is simply another form of practice. We could call this view theory-to-practice reductionism (TPR). One advantage of TPR is that it explains why a particular view has bidirectionality, or why a view suggests practice can have theoretical upshot and vice versa. According to TPR, bidirectionality is the result of a common feature of prudential life and the true nature of theorizing. To see this, consider the way our prudential lives are governed by practice patterning. For instance, a sick patient might journey to the physician in search of healing so that he can get back to the work of building the home in which he will raise his kids. Our various life plans always involve this kind of practice patterning. If theory is just another practice we engage in, it makes sense that it will be patterned with other practices, and insofar as the outcome of one practice can infuence how one engages with another practice, it makes sense that theory can have practical implications and vice versa.

However, I am not sure that there is any evidence to suggest Wesley is committed to TPR. Consider Wesley’s well-documented comments in the “Preface” to his sermon series, Sermons Upon Several Occasions. 28 There, Wesley declares his intention “to speak, in general, as if I had never read one author.”29 For Wesley, this is necessary to cut out all extraneous understanding and “to know one thing, the way to heaven.”30 Fortunately, Wesley says, “God himself has condescended to teach the way…He hath written down in a book…Here is knowledge enough for me. Let me be homo unius libri. Here then I am, far from the busy ways of men.”31 These are the words of a man in search of a foundation. These are not the words of a man treating theory as if it just another link in a chain of practices. Of course, it is true that Wesley is in search of what he calls “the true,

the scriptural, experimental religion.”32 However, for Wesley, this simply means that this truth has profound practical implications, and this is the feature of Wesley’s thought I have already noted. Wesley’s commitment to experimental religion does not in and of itself indicate a commitment to TPR.

How then shall we understand the relation between theory and practice in Wesley’s practical divinity? One alternative to TPR is what we could call attitudinally suffused theory and practice (ASTP). According to ASTP, theory and practice are ultimately linked or mediated by the attitude of the theorizer and the practitioner. In the case of ASTP, the modulation of both theory and practice by the mediating attitudinal suffusion explains the bidirectionality of theory and practice. As the undertaking and outcome of both theory and practice can affrm or even perturb the theorizer/ practitioner’s suffused attitude, theory can have practical upshot and vice versa. Consider for example the way in which the artist’s state of mind can infuence both the construction and completion of a vision, in the case of, say, painting. If the mood of the completed painting is to exemplify the mood of the painter’s vision, the painter will need to maintain that mood in both the development and execution of the vision. When the execution is perturbed because the artist has lost or altered the mood in which the vision was had, the vision will either be lost, partially expressed, or need to be altered in response to the execution.

In my view, the relations between Wesley’s theoretical and practical concerns reveal an outlook better described as a form of ASTP than TPR. Consider Wesley’s view of prevenient grace and the role it plays even in theoretical knowledge. In “Walking by Faith and Walking by Sight,” Wesley suggests that it is possible to employ reason to infer the existence of God.33 However, Wesley also clearly regards rational capacity as damaged in the Fall and restored by grace. This is best seen in the sermon “The End of Christ’s Coming.”34 There, Wesley says that God created humanity “in his own natural image…endued with understanding” and while this original understanding probably consisted of “truth by intuition,” this only serves to reinforce the contention that, in Wesley’s view, the rational faculty of fallen humanity is a damaged, but partly rehabilitated and slower moving form of this original capacity.35 Nevertheless, the reach of this capacity is signifcantly limited. In “The Case of Reason Impartially Considered,” Wesley suggests that “reason cannot produce faith in the scriptural sense of the word.”36 As Wesley describes in “The Witness of the Spirit I” scriptural

faith ultimately has an experiential ground in the joint testimony of our spirit with the Spirit, but even this experiential ground is embedded in the Christian practice of searching the scriptures and exemplifying the fruits that mark a genuine perception of assurance from the “supposed testimony…in a presumptuous man.”37 In this way, practice completes what theory starts, but in this case this completion ultimately consists in a theoretical insight: God not only exists, the God who is love, the God of the Bible, exists. This is not just bidirectional insight between theory and practice, it is also a conception of both in which proper engagement ultimately depends on the theorizer/practitioner having the right attitude.

This dependency on having the right attitude dovetails with Wesley’s Arminianism. Consider again Wesley’s rejection of the perseverance of the saints. Wesley’s view is that even the sanctifed person can grieve the Spirit, damaging both one’s knowledge of God’s truths and one’s righteousness. As Wesley says in Serious Thoughts upon Perseverance, “[t]hose who are grafted in the good olive-tree, the spiritual, invisible church may nevertheless so fall from God as to perish everlastingly.”38 In “The Wilderness State,” Wesley describes some ways in which a genuine believer can fall. There, Wesley notes how, for example, frequent “sins of omission…gradually and slowly” alienate the Spirit.39 Of course, Wesley does believe recovery is possible. In “A Call to Backsliders,” Wesley says that “several of these, thoroughly sensible of their fall, and deeply ashamed before God, have been again flled with his love.”40 However, this description of the process only reaffrms the importance of attitude in Wesley’s view of the Christian life. With the wrong “heart” one can fall away from any degree of sanctifcation, but one can always recover by recovering the correct “heart” and cooperating with the prevenient work of the Holy Spirit. In every step of the way, the goal is always “to be a real, inward, scriptural Christian.”41

Finally, I would argue that this conception of Wesley’s method also illuminates the sense of Wesley’s commitment to being homo unius libri. As many scholars have noted, Wesley was hardly “a man of one book.”42 If anything, Wesley was one of the most well-read writers in Britain in the 18th century. Wesley had a broad set of interests, not just in theology and philosophy, but in science and politics.43 The conception of Wesley I have outlined in the preceding text dispels some of the tension between Wesley’s statement and his actual habits. According to ASTP, some individuals unify their worldview and their actions by suffusing both with

an underlying attitude. In my opinion, this is what Wesley’s homo unius libri comment is indicating. The idea is not to literally read one book, but to immerse oneself in that book in the sense that one suffuses every single endeavor one undertakes with the insight and attitude that book teaches and recommends. For Wesley, this is the heart of pietism, and pietism just is the heart religion Wesley unswervingly recommended through this preaching career. It is the religion founded on “faith which ‘purifes the heart.’”44

Conclusion

The Arminian-Calvinist ruptures in the 18th century Methodist revival can be proftably viewed from many perspectives. In the preceding, I have focused my attention on John Wesley’s criticisms of Calvinism, and I have argued that there is a rational Arminian critique of Calvinism to be developed from Wesley’s writing, even if that critique is not as epistemically decisive as the vitriol of the original debates might suggest, or as the few extant militant partisans today might hope. In fact, I have argued that what is most valuable in this critique is not any polemical insight, but a distinctive method of relating theory and practice. An examination of this method not only supports the construction of models of theory and practice integration that have hitherto been concealed, but the examination may also generate resources for further philosophical and theological refection on the very nature of what it means to be religious and to lead a religious life. Perhaps these models can inform both descriptive accounts of distinct religious approaches and normative confessional accounts of successful religious indoctrination, but even if the fecundity of these models is limited to the context to which they are applied here, the models nonetheless suggest the preponderance of an impressive method within Wesley’s Methodism.

End Notes

1 Richard P. Heitzenrater, Wesley and the People Called Methodists (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1995): 133.

2 Joel Houston, Wesley, Whitefeld, and the ‘Free Grace’ Controversy’: The Crucible of Methodism (New York: Routledge, 2020): 111.

3 John Wesley, “Sunday, February 1 1741,” in The Works of John Wesley Volume 19: Journal and Diaries II (1738-1743), Bicentennial edition, edited by W. Reginald Ward and Richard P. Heitzenrater (Nashville: Abingdon Pres, 1990): 180.

4 Allan Coppedge, Shaping the Wesleyan Message: John Wesley in Theological Debate (Nappanee: Francis Asbury Press, 2003): 140.

5 See: Joel Houston, Wesley, Whitefeld, and the ‘Free Grace’ Controversy’: The Crucible of Methodism (New York: Routledge, 2020); James L. Schwenk, Catholic Spirit: Wesley, Whitefeld, and the Quest for Evangelical Unnity in Eighteenth-Century British Methodism (Lanham: The Scarecrow Press, 2008); Sean McGever, Born Again: The Evangelical Theology of Conversion in John Wesley and George Whitefeld (Bellingham: Lexham Press, 2020); David McEwan, “’I Am Yet Persuaded You Do Greatly Err’: Whitefeld, Wesley, and Christian Perfection,” in Wesley and Whitefeld? Wesley versus Whitefeld? Edited by Ian J. Maddock (Eugene: Pickwick, 2018): 87-105.

6 See: Roger E. Olson, Arminian Theology: Myths and Realities (Downers Grove: interVarsity Press, 2006); Kenneth G. Talbot and W. Gary Crampton, Calvinism, Hyper-Calvinism, and Arminianism (Arlington Heights: Christian Liberty Press, 1999); Adam Harwood, Christian Theology: Biblical, Historical, and Systematic (Lexham Press, 2022).

7 John Wesley, “Sermon 110: Free Grace,” in The Works of John Wesley Volume 3: Sermons III 71-114, Bicentennial edition, edited by Albert C. Outler (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1986), Sec. 6: 546.

8 John Wesley, Predestination Calmy Considered, in The Works of John Wesley Volume 13: Doctrinal and Controversial Treatises III, Bicentennial edition, edited by Paul Wesley Chilcote and Kenneth J. Collins (Nashville: Abingdon Pres, 2013), Sec. 13: 266.

9 Ibid., Sec. 31: 277.

10 Mark L. Weeter, John Wesley’s View and Use of Scripture (Eugene: Wipf & Stock, 2007): 204.

11 John Wesley, Predestination Calmy Considered, in The Works of John Wesley Volume 13: Doctrinal and Controversial Treatises III, Bicentennial edition, edited by Paul Wesley Chilcote and Kenneth J. Collins (Nashville: Abingdon Pres, 2013), Sec. 31: 278.

12 John Wesley, Thoughts Upon Necessity, in The Works of John Wesley Volume 13: Doctrinal and Controversial Treatises III, Bicentennial edition, edited by Paul Wesley Chilcote and Kenneth J. Collins (Nashville: Abingdon Pres, 2013), Sec. I.1: 528.

13 Ibid., Sec II.1: 533.

14 Ibid., Sec. III.1: 535.

15 Ibid., Sec. III.7: 539.

16 Joel Houston, Wesley, Whitefeld, and the ‘Free Grace’ Controversy’: The Crucible of Methodism (New York: Routledge, 2020): 46.

17 Barry Bryant argues that Wesley himself ultimately adopted something of the Molinist perspective on the problem of free will and divine foreknowledge (Barry Bryant, “John Wesley’s Doctrine of Sin,” PhD diss., King’s College University of London [1992]: 134). While I recognize the evidence Bryant adduces in support of this claim, I ultimately think the adoption of this perspective completely undermines the possibility of a Wesleyan-inspired critique of the more moderate forms of Calvinism, as I have explained here. For this reason, I would advise the contemporary Wesleyan to stick closer to the Boethian conception of the eternal now than Wesley himself does, at least if one wants to salvage something of Wesley’s original critique. For more on the Boethian view, see: Eleonore Stump and Norman Kretzman, “Eternity,” The Journal of Philosophy 78:8 (1981): 42958.

18 Joel Houston, Wesley, Whitefeld, and the ‘Free Grace’ Controversy’: The Crucible of Methodism (New York: Routledge, 2020): 44.

19 John Wesley, “Sermon 110: Free Grace,” in The Works of John Wesley Volume 3: Sermons III 71-114, Bicentennial edition, edited by Albert C. Outler (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1986), Sec. 10: 547.

20 Ibid.

21 John Wesley, Predestination Calmy Considered, in The Works of John Wesley Volume 13: Doctrinal and Controversial Treatises III, Bicentennial edition, edited by Paul Wesley Chilcote and Kenneth J. Collins (Nashville: Abingdon Pres, 2013), Sec. 86: 317.

22 Ibid.

23 John Wesley, “A Blow at the Root; or Christ Stabbed in the House of His Friends,” in The Works of John Wesley Volume 14: Doctrinal and Controversial Treatises III, Bicentennial edition, edited by Sarah Lancaster, Randy L. Maddox, and Kelly Diehl Yates (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2022), Sec. 7: 120.

24 Allan Coppedge, Shaping the Wesleyan Message: John Wesley in Theological Debate (Nappanee: Francis Asbury Press, 2003): 190.

25 Barry E. Bryant, “John Wesley on the origins of evil,” in The History of Evil in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries: 1700-1900CE, edited by Douglas Hedley, Chad Meister, and Charles Taliaferro (New York: Routledge, 2018): 68.

26 Timothy Crutcher, The Crucible of Life: The Role of Experience in John Wesley’s Theological Method (Lexington: Emeth Press, 2010): 142.

27 Scott J. Jones, John Wesley’s Conception and Use of Scripture (Nashville: Kingswood Books, 1995): 45-7.

28 John Wesley, “Preface,” in The Works of John Wesley Volume 1: Sermons I 1-33, Bicentennial edition, edited by Albert C. Outler (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1984).

29 Ibid., Sec. 4: 104.

30 Ibid., Sec. 5: 105.

31 Ibid.

32 Ibid., Sec. 6: 106.

33 John Wesley, “Sermon 119: Walking by Faith and Walking by Sight,” in The Works of John Wesley Volume IV: Sermons IV 115-151, Bicentennial edition, edited by Albert C. Outler (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1986), Sec. 8: 52.

34 John Wesley, “Sermon 62: The End of Christ’s Coming,” in The Works of John Wesley Volume 2: Sermons II 34-70, edited by Albert C. Outler, Bicentennial edition (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1985).

35 Ibid., Sec. 3: 474.

36 John Wesley, “Sermon 70: The Case of Reason Impartially Considered,” in The Works of John Wesley Volume 2: Sermons II 34-70, edited by Albert C. Outler, Bicentennial edition (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1985), Sec II.1: 593.

37 John Wesley, “Sermon 10: The Witness of the Spirit I” in The Works of John Wesley Volume 1: Sermons I 1-33, Bicentennial edition, edited by Albert C. Outler (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1984), Sec. II.6: 279. See also: Walter Scott Stepanenko, “Some Varieties of Christian Pragmatism,” Faith and Philosophy (forthcoming).

38 John Wesley, “Series Thoughts upon Perseverance,” in The Works of John Wesley Volume 13: Doctrinal and Controversial Treatises III, Bicentennial edition, edited by Paul Wesley Chilcote and Kenneth J. Collins (Nashville: Abingdon Pres, 2013), Sec. III.12: 247.

39 John Wesley, “Sermon 46: The Wilderness State,” in The Works of John Wesley Volume 2: Sermons II 34-70, edited by Albert C. Outler, Bicentennial edition (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1985), Sec. II.3: 209.

40 John Wesley, “Sermon 86: A Call to Backsliders,” in The Works of John Wesley Volume 3: Sermons III 71-114, Bicentennial edition, edited by Albert C. Outler (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1986), Sec. II.6: 225.

41 John Wesley, “Sermon 125: On a Single Eye,” in The Works of John Wesley Volume IV: Sermons IV 115-151, Bicentennial edition, edited by Albert C. Outler (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1986), Sec. 3: 121.

42 Randy L. Maddox, “John Wesley—“A Man of One Book,” in Wesley, Wesleyans, and Reading Bible as Scripture, edited by Joel B. Green and David F. Watson (Waco: Baylor University Press, 2012): 3-18.

43 Randy L. Maddox, “The Rule of Christian Faith, Practice and Hope: John Wesley on the Bible,” Methodist Review 3 (2011): 1-35.

44 John Wesley, “Sermon 2: The Almost Christian” in The Works of John Wesley Volume 1: Sermons I 1-33, Bicentennial edition, edited by Albert C. Outler (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1984), Sec. II.6: 139.

The Asbury Journal 80/1: 162-178

David J. Zucker

Defying Death: Abraham and Moses in Jewish Antiquity

Abstract:

Although all who live will die, Abraham, in the pseudepigraphic work the Testament of Abraham; and then Moses in numerous midrashic/ Talmudic sources, seeks to defy and deny the date of his death, at least for a period of time, each one saying in effect, “Yes, but not yet.” These texts are described and compared, refecting on how each face death from within the Jewish tradition.

Keywords: Abraham, Angel of Death/Samael, Midrash, Moses, Testament of Abraham

David J. Zucker is a retired rabbi and independent scholar. He is co-author, along with Moishe Reiss, of The Matriarchs of Genesis: Seven Women, Five Views (Wipf and Stock, 2015). He is also the author of American Rabbis: Facts and Fiction, Second Edition (Wipf and Stock, 2019). His website is DavidJZucker.org and he may be contacted at: DavidJZucker@gmail.com.

Eventually everyone dies. Yet, in certain writings in Jewish antiquity and late antiquity (c. 100 CE - c. 900 CE, and perhaps even later) there are circumstances where Abraham and then Moses, in contrast with what is found in the Hebrew Bible, successfully seek to postpone the time of their death. Each says in effect, “Yes, but not yet.” Following an explanation of how the Bible describes their demise, this article addresses how the Testament of Abraham deals with his death, and then it explains how rabbinic writings discuss the death of Moses.

The Hebrew Bible’s version of the deaths of Abraham and Moses Abraham

Although Abraham’s death is many years in the future, God tells him (then still Abram) “You shall go to your ancestors in peace; you shall be buried at a ripe old age” (Gen 15:15). Many years pass by, but then fnally “Abraham breathed his last, dying at a good ripe age, old and contented; and he was gathered to his kin” (Gen 25:8. Bible translations from The JPS Tanakh: Gender-Sensitive Edition).1

Moses

Late in the book of Numbers, God instructs Moses to ascend the heights of Abarim where he will view the Promised Land, but he is also told that he will not go there, rather he will be “gathered to [his] kin.” Moses asks God to appoint a successor and God says, “Single out Joshua son of Nun” (Num 27:13; 18). The closing chapters of Deuteronomy explain that “Moses the servant of GOD died … at GOD’s command who buried him in the valley in the land of Moab” (Deut 34:5-6). “The narrative about Moses’ death reveals his close relationship to God throughout. The very report that a man has been told by God when he is to die, and at which place, is exceptional, though echoed in [Num 20:22-29] the account about Aaron.”2 Unlike the report about Aaron, Moses’s burial is specifcally mentioned. In Numbers 20 God tells both Moses and Aaron that they will not enter the Promised Land. They do not challenge God’s words, nor does Moses debate that statement at that time. Likewise, Moses does not bargain with God when in Numbers 27 and Deuteronomy 34 he is told to appoint Joshua as his successor. Still, the Torah does explain that Moses at some point had attempted to challenge God’s decree. “I pleaded with GOD at that time, saying, ‘O my Sovereign GOD … Let me, I pray, cross over and see the good land on the other side of the Jordan …But GOD was wrathful with me

on your account and would not listen to me. GOD said to me, ‘Enough! Never speak to Me of this matter again!’” (Deut 3:23-26).

The Testament of Abraham

In the post-biblical world, traditions develop about the last days of both Abraham and Moses. The most complete narrative from that period that deals with the death of Abraham is the pseudepigraphic work, the Testament of Abraham (written 1st to 2nd century CE) It features close parallels with the midrashic3 traditions about the death of Moses; it may have been infuenced by early forms of these traditions, which then were set down later, or may have developed in tandem with them.4 The Abrahamdeath traditions in Testament of Abraham clearly focus on Abraham, but they address a wider audience, answering questions about what happens when people die, and what happens to their soul? There are many rabbinic statements about dying and death, but in the case of the Moses-death traditions featured in rabbinic midrash, the focus is entirely on Moses: there is no sense that statements are being made about humankind in general.

The “Testament [of Abraham] often uses humor to express profound truths”5 (a device which is also found in rabbinic midrashim dealing with Moses’ impending death.) The Testament divides into two parallel and symmetrical parts. At the beginning God sends for the agent of death and it ends with Abraham dying on his bed. Part one which features the archangel Michael is lengthy and rambling; part two which involves the Angel of Death is terser. Although the portrait of Abraham refects some of his traditional virtues such as righteousness and hospitality, “the author has glaringly omitted the most celebrated” virtue, “Abraham’s obedient faith.” The fact is that on seven occasions, Abraham refuses to submit to God’s request (chapters 7, 9, 15, 16, 17, 19 and 20). Actually Abraham chooses not to make a testament, because this would acknowledge that he must die. “What we get is a parody on the genre – a non-testament.”6

The Testament of Abraham (hereafter TestAbr) features details of what happens when someone dies. In chapter twelve Abraham is shown what transpires. “He learns that souls are tried in three ways: by fre, by record, and by balance; and he learns that there are three judgments: by Abel [the son of Adam (TestAbr 13.2)], by the twelve tribes of Israel, and fnally, by God.”7 There a book records what someone has done or failed to do.

A couple of angels are introduced, Dokiel (possibly meaning examining carefully) and Puruel (a hybrid word, pur being the Greek word for fre, or possibly a corruption of Uriel – light of God?) in chapter thirteen (TestAbr 13.10-11). “Souls that are neither wicked nor righteous must wait until the very end of time to be judged.” The Testament describes neither postmortem punishment nor reward; nor “where the souls in the middle are kept.”8 Somewhat similar material is found in the Babylonian Talmud Rosh Hashanah 16b, where it explains that three books are opened on the day of judgment, those of the wicked, those of the righteous, and a third for people whose deeds are in a middle category.

Whereas Genesis records Abraham’s death at age 175, the Testament of Abraham suggests it is close to a millennium, at 995 years. (TestAbr 1.1). Early in the narrative God sends the archangel Michael to speak to Abraham, to let the patriarch know that he needs to set his affairs in order for it is time for him to die (TestAbr 1.4). Michael is greeted warmly by Abraham, whose custom was “to meet and entertain all strangers” (TestAbr 2.2). Michael explains that he has been sent by the great Ruler to see the orderly departure of the Ruler’s good friend. Abraham does not seem to understand that this is an angel of God standing before him. The two fgures take a short walk, and then come to Abraham’s home where they meet up with Isaac and Sarah (contrary to the biblical tradition that she had died and had been buried years earlier – Gen 23:1-20). Isaac immediately recognizes that the visitor “is not a son of the race of those who dwell on the earth” (TestAbr 3.5).

Ever the hospitable host, Abraham washes Michael’s feet, and his eyes begin to tear up, as do the eyes of Isaac. The archangel Michael also weeps. Michael’s tears fall into a vessel of water, turning miraculously into precious stones. Abraham is astonished, and secretly takes the stones, but does not comment on what happened. Abraham asks Isaac to set up an elaborate sleeping chamber for their guest in Abraham’s own bedroom, although he still appears to remain unaware of the true nature of their visitor, or the purpose of this visit. At this point, Michael feels that he needs further clarifcation from God how to proceed. As noted, the Testament as in later midrashim, often has fashes of humor. At one point, Michael steps away and goes outside, suggesting that he needs to urinate. Then he “ascended to heaven in the twinkling of an eye” (TestAbr 4.5) and seeks God’s advice. Michael explains that he fnds Abraham so “merciful, hospitable, righteous, truthful, devout, refraining from every evil deed” that

he cannot bring himself to remind him of his death (TestAbr 4.6). God is sympathetic to this observation and explains that a message will be sent via Isaac in a dream, and that Michael is to interpret it, clarifying that the time has come for Abraham to die.

After dinner they go to sleep. Then Isaac awakes with the dream that Abraham is about to die. He goes to Abraham and shares this information at which point all three of the male characters start to weep, and then Sarah joins them. She realizes that the visitor is an angel, and she tells Abraham. By chapter seven Michael reveals himself, and his mission. The chapter concludes with Abraham replying that he recognizes Michael and his purpose. Nonetheless Abraham says, “I will not go with you, but do you whatever you are commanded!” (TestAbr 7.12. Abraham will say much the same thing again. See TestAbr 15.10; 16.16; 19.4, and 20.4-5).

Michael then vanishes and reports to God, seeking divine guidance. God is not pleased. God gives Michael new instructions for Abraham, ending with the statement that if Abraham does not come voluntarily, God will send Death (TestAbr 8.12). Michael returns to Abraham, who appears to accept God’s verdict. Just one thing, Abraham says, “I ask one request of you [God]… I desire to see all the inhabited earth and all the creations that you established by one word. When I see these, then I shall depart from life” (TestAbr 9.5-6). In chapter ten Michael takes Abraham on a heavenly chariot and shows him various scenes of humankind, positive as well as negative. When Abraham sees such sights as violence, robbery, or immorality, he commands that they be destroyed, and they immediately are wiped out. God then intervenes and tells Michael to turn Abraham away that he may not see all the earth. God says, since Abraham never sinned, he has no pity on sinners. Rather, God says, “I desire not to destroy any one of them, but I delay the death of the sinner, so that he may repent and live” (TestAbr 10.14. Cf. Ezekiel 18:32). In the next few chapters Abraham is shown how people are judged in the afterlife for their earthly actions.9 Then God tells Michael to return Abraham to his home, which he does. In chapter ffteen Michael tells Abraham to set his matters in order, for he is about to die. Abraham however replies, “I will not go with you” (TestAbr 15.10). Michael returns to God and says, Abraham refuses to come, and I will not ask him further. Again, one sees here the conscious humor of the Testament: Michael can stand up to God and say, no I will not continue to ask him.10

Chapter 16 begins when God calls upon Death to bring Abraham’s soul. Here again a sense of fun shines through as God tells Death to go in disguise, and further not to frighten Abraham. The invisible God said to Death: “Come here, you bitter and ferce name in the world. Hide your ferceness, cover your corruption, and cast away your bitterness. Put on your beauty and all your glory, and go down to Abraham my friend. Take him and bring him to me. But I tell you not to terrify him. Bring him with fair speech, for he is my friend” (TestAbr 16.4-5).

In the meantime, Abraham goes outside and sits under some trees at Mamre. Death visits Abraham there. Yet, despite God’s instructions not to terrify Abraham, Death is quite direct, saying “behold, I tell you the truth: I am the bitter cup of death” (TestAbr 16.11). When Death tells Abraham that he has come for Abraham’s soul, Abraham is unfazed. “Then Abraham said: ‘I know what you mean, but I will not go with you’” (TestAbr 16.16). Abraham tells Death to go away, because he wants to go inside his house and lie down on his couch. (In rabbinic literature, Moses also will be dismissive of the Angel of Death. Indeed, Moses reacts violently to Death’s presence). Death accompanies Abraham inside, and sits at his feet. Abraham then enters into an extended dialog with Death, fattering Death, asking about his methods and various guises. He asks Death to show his power and Death ends up killing thousands of Abraham’s servants. Abraham acknowledges Death’s abilities but asks that the servants, who after all were innocent bystanders, be returned to life. Abraham and Death go outside and prostrate themselves in prayer, asking that the dead servants be revived. This happens. By chapter 19 Abraham goes into his chambers and lies down. He tells Death to depart because Abraham says, “I desire to rest, because my spirit is in faintness” (TestAbr 19.2). Abraham plays Death along by asking more questions which Death answers at length. Next, Abraham says, “Depart from me just a little while, so that I may rest on my couch” (TestAbr 20.4).

Time and again, Abraham in effect says to God and God’s decree, “Yes, but not yet.” The matter is fnally resolved, for Death knows how to trick the patriarch. The dénouement arrives when Death says, “‘Come, take my right hand, and may cheerfulness and life and strength come to you’— for Death deceived Abraham. He took his right hand, and right away his soul adhered to the hand of Death! Immediately the archangel Michael came with a multitude of angels and took up his precious soul” (TestAbr 20.8-10).

While there are broad parallels between the Testament of Abraham and the wealth of materials that deal with the death of Moses, the treatment of these two fgures is very different. Abraham’s refusals to die are stated clearly, but rather briefy. “I will not go with you, but do whatever you are commanded” (TestAbr 7.12; 15:10, 12). Abraham, unlike Moses, does not offer long explanations for why his life on earth should not yet end.11

Rabbinic statements concerning the death of Moses

Biblical Ecclesiastes says it well: “A season is set for everything, a time for every experience under heaven: a time for birthing and a time for dying” (Eccl 3:1-2). Perhaps in some imagined future time, God would bring an end to death as Isaiah proclaims: “Death will be destroyed forever … GOD will wipe the tears away from all faces” (Isa 25:8). Yet that time has not come. The book of Daniel certainly posits a future time when “Many of those that sleep in the dust of the earth will awake some to eternal life” (Dan 12:2), but again that is in the unknown time to come. In the meanwhile, death is our common lot. In the rabbinic period, the Mishna (compiled 200 CE) states clearly “Those who are born will die … Without choice you were born … of necessity you will die” (Avot 4.22).

The Angel of Death

A prominent fgure in the rabbinic imagination is the Angel of Death.12 This angel has great power, yet he still is subservient to God and God’s will. He follows God’s decrees. Commonly in midrashic writings, the agent of death is named Samael (or sometimes spelled Sammael).13 Samael is frequently mentioned in rabbinic writings as well as in even earlier collections in the Pseudepigrapha. In some cases, in the pseudepigraphic material such as The Testament of Abraham the Archangel Michael also serves as the agent of death. In Deuteronomy Rabbah 11.10, a subsection of Midrash Rabbah (compiled c. 500-1300 CE) God deputizes frst the angel Gabriel, and then the angel Michael to bring Moses’ soul to heaven. When each is unable or unwilling to do so, God sends Samael.

There is a rabbinic comment on a line in Ecclesiastes, “No one has authority over the lifebreath [or spirit, ruah] … there is no authority over the day of death” (Eccl 8:8). The rabbis explain that “No one has authority over the lifebreath of the Angel of Death, to make him withhold it from him … One cannot say to the Angel of Death, ‘Wait for me until I make up my

accounts, and then I will come…’ Nobody can question his decision, nor can a person say, ‘I appeal against his verdict’” (Ecclesiastes Rabbah 8.8.1). Nor does it help to say, “Wait until I have set my house in order.” Further, when persons are about to die, they cannot say, “I will send my servant in my stead” nor can one make weapons to save oneself from the Angel of Death. While this is the general rule, since rabbinic writings refect the many and varied discussions of the rabbis, exceptions exist.14

“Textually, there are more variant Midrashic traditions on Moses’ death than on any other deathbed narrative in Jewish tradition.” It is suggested that Moses goes through the fve stages of dying—denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance—as articulated by the Swiss-born psychiatrist, Dr. Elisabeth Kübler-Ross.15 Many of these midrashim address Moses’ human side. “Moses may be the man of God (Deut 33:1) who split the sea, stood on Mount Sinai, and shepherded his people through the wilderness for forty years, but in these lines, he sounds like an ordinary man who just wants a little more time.”16

According to the closing chapter of the Torah, “Moses was a hundred and twenty years old when he died; his eyes were undimmed and his vigor unabated” (Deut 34:7). That Moses’ vision and his vigor remain powerful to the end are refected in several midrashim which close out the collection Deuteronomy Rabbah (composed 600-900 CE). These responses demonstrate that while the rabbis revered scripture, they also had a good sense of humor. They portray Moses as stubbornly refusing the will of God. In this collection, there are many scenarios which describe how Moses reacts to God’s decree.17

In one example, God sends the Angel of Death to Moses. Moses then seizes the Angel of Death and casts him down in front of him. The Angel then tells him, “God has sent me to you, for you are to depart this life today.” Moses’ reaction? He says to the Angel: “Go away, for I want to praise God.” Moses then quotes part of a psalm, “I shall not die but live, and proclaim the works of Yah” (Psl 118:17). Not to be outdone, the Angel replies, “Moses, why do you give yourself airs? There are suffcient things in creation to praise God; heaven and earth are praising God at all times.” The Angel then quotes the verse “The heavens declare the glory of God; the sky proclaims God’s handiwork” (Psl 19:1 [19:2 Heb]). In the event, Moses resigns himself to God’s will. Yet Moses’s soul struggles with this decision; it does not want to leave Moses. Moses fnally reassures his soul

that this is God’s will, and his soul departs from this world (Deuteronomy Rabbah 11.5). In Deuteronomy Rabbah 9.5 God promises to personally attend Moses’ funeral.

In an extended midrash, the fnal one in Deuteronomy Rabbah (11.10), following the statement that Moses is not to enter the Promised Land, Moses makes light of this and says that many times Israel sinned, but when Moses prayed for them, God forgave them. He continues, since he has not sinned from his youth, surely God will relent when he prays on his own behalf. God is irritated and swears that Moses will not enter the Land. Moses then draws a small circle and says he will not move from it until God relents. He then dons sackcloth and ashes and prays so fervently that the order of nature is shaken. The absurdity of Moses’ actions is captured in the midrash: God responds by closing all the gates of heaven so that Moses’ prayer will not go there. Moses continues to make his case asking, “Is this the reward for the forty years of labor that [he] went through so that [Israel] would become a holy and faithful people?” When he sees that God will not relent, Moses offers a counter suggestion. He will not enter the Land, but neither does he wish to die. God responds, if Moses does not die now, how can God bring him back to life in the World to Come?

God has enough of Moses’ procrastination and sends the angel Gabriel to go and bring back Moses’ soul. Once again, in a display of rabbinic humor, Gabriel stands up to God and demurs. He says he just cannot do that. God then turns to the angel Michael and orders him to bring back Moses’ soul. Michael replies that he was Moses’ teacher, and Moses was his pupil, and so he could not witness his death. (Note: Michael’s baulking at God’s request to take Moses’ soul is a small part of this midrash. In the Testament of Abraham, Michael’s presence is featured over ffteen chapters.) In response God orders “Samael the wicked” to bring back Moses’ soul. Samael clothes himself with anger, takes his sword, wraps himself in ruthlessness and sets out for Moses. When he fnds Moses, Samael however is so overcome with Moses’ presence that he approaches him gently, similar to the account in the Testament of Abraham. Moses asks, “Who sent you?” Samael replies, God. Moses is adamant. “You shall not take away my soul.” He then claims to have greater strength than anyone who has lived before, listing a variety of examples. Moses seems to be bragging. This contradicts the image of Moses as the mildest and modest of people (see Num 12:3, and Numbers Rabbah 19.23; 22.4 end.). Samael returns to God and explains what happened. God has had enough, and

commands Samael forthwith to bring Moses’ soul. Samael goes to Moses, sword in hand. Moses takes his own staff upon which is written the Ineffable Name and starts to beat Samael who then runs away. He knocks the halo between Samael’s eyes and then blinds him. According to Louis Ginzberg’s The Legends of the Jews, Moses “was not far from killing him, but a voice resounded from heaven and said, ‘Let him live, Moses, for the world needs him,’ so Moses had to content himself with Samael’s” chastisement.18

God’s patience reaches its limit. God says to Moses, “The end, the time of your death has come.” Moses makes a fnal plea not to be handed over to the Angel of Death. God relents to the extent that God then summons three ministering angels, Michael, Gabriel,19 and Zagzagel (the latter who earlier had been identifed as the Master Scribe of the children of heaven), who assist in taking Moses’ soul. “God kissed Moses and took away his soul with a kiss of the mouth, and God, if one might say so, wept” (Deuteronomy Rabbah 11.10).

In another midrash collection the Sifrei to Deuteronomy20 (compiled c. 200 CE), God is directly involved in Moses’ death, but there the reasoning is very different. God begins by asking the Angel of Death to go and fetch Moses’ soul. The angel goes and stands before Moses and asks for his soul. Moses rebukes the angel, saying that he does not even deserve to be in the place where Moses dwells, yet he has the effrontery to ask for Moses’ soul. The Angel of Death is crestfallen; he leaves and goes back to God and reports what happened. God says, go again. “The angel went looking for him at his home but could not fnd him. He went to the sea and asked it, ‘Moses, have you seen him?’ The sea replied, ‘Since the day that he made Israel pass through me, I did not see him.’” The Angel of Death then goes to the mountains and the hills, but they deny knowing Moses’ whereabouts. The angel next goes to Gehenna [i.e., the Jewish hell], with no results. Next the ministering angels are approached and they say, “Go and ask human beings.” The Angel of Death goes to Israel, and asks, “‘Moses, have you seen him?’ They said to him, ‘God has fathomed his way, and has secreted him for the world to come, and no creature knows his whereabouts,’ as it is said, God ‘buried him in the valley.’” (Deut 34:6) (Sifrei to Deuteronomy, Piska 305). In a variation of the Midrash Tanhuma (c. mid-8th century CE) Moses goes to various entities to entreat God on his behalf. Moses goes to the heaven and the earth, but they say that they need to seek mercy for themselves. Moses then approaches the moon, the mountains and the hills, and the sea, with similar results; they all are seeking

mercy for themselves (Midrash Tanhuma, Deuteronomy, Wa’ethannan, section 6).21 Earlier in that same section, God points out that others such as Adam, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob all were God-fearing, yet they died. Moses counters with arguments that each one in some fashion was fawed. At one point, God says, either I destroy Israel, or I destroy you. Moses replies, do not destroy Israel, but still, I want to live. God then replies, every generation has its expositors, its administrators, and its leaders. Up to now, you were that person. Now it is time for Joshua to take on that role. Moses replies, let me become his disciple. Moses then goes to Joshua who initially is reluctant to teach. Then a Bat Qol (a heavenly voice) cries out to Israel, “Learn from Joshua.” Moses quickly realizes that he cannot follow Joshua’s argumentation, because traditions and learning have been developed in a post-Moses world.22 Moses then indicates that he is ready to die, and shortly thereafter his breath left him with a kiss from God.23

Elsewhere in the Sifrei to Deuteronomy, a different and very clever explanation is given. Here Moses attempts a varied set of arguments why he should continue to live. He suggests that as someone alive, he is a more credible exemplar. “Moses said to God, ‘Master of the universe, why must I die? Would it not be better for people to say, “Moses is good” out of personal knowledge rather than as mere rumor? Would it not be better for people to say, “This here is Moses, who brought us out of Egypt, had split the Sea … performed miracles and wonders for us,” rather than to say, “Moses was like that, and did such-and-such.”’” God will have none of this and says, “Enough Moses, such is my decree, which applies equally to all people.” The ministering angels then challenge God and ask, why did Adam die? God responds, because he disobeyed my commands. The angels respond, but Moses follows all of your commands. God repeats what was said previously to Moses, “It is my decree, and applies equally to all people” (Sifrei to Deuteronomy, Piska 339).

In that same collection, Moses pleads with God that there may be another way of dealing with things which would allow him both to live longer and to enter the Promised Land. “If I may not enter it as a ruler, let me enter it as a commoner.” He then somewhat modifes this approach and says, “If I cannot enter it alive, let me enter it dead.” God’s reply is clear: “You shall not go over there” neither as a ruler nor as a commoner neither alive nor dead” (Piska 357).24

In the Tanna Debe Eliyyahu: The Lore of the School of Elijah, (compiled 10th century CE) Moses suggests to God that based on the Torah

law “You must pay out the wages due on the same day” (Deut 24:15) that, having served God faithfully for forty years, Moses wants his wages now. God replies, do you really want your wages now? Since Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob served me faithfully in this world, I granted them life in the World to Come, so I will grant your life in the World to Come (Tanna Debe Eliyyahu Chapter 6, Eliyyahu Zuta, chapter 24, Supplement 44 [page 479]).25

Discussion of the Texts

These two accounts of the fnal days of Abraham and Moses employ different methodologies to convey their messages. The Testament of Abraham is a long narrative which focuses on its unfolding plot. It depends on both descriptive passages and the voices of Abraham and supporting characters to explain to the reader how the storyline is progressing. It weaves in multiple individual human characters, Abraham, Isaac and Sarah. They are presented as very sympathetic fgures. In addition, one meets the archangel Michael and then the angel of death, Samael. God also has a prominent role, gently directing matters by delegating authority, but trying hard not to be too intrusive in the process. Abraham himself is a kind of gentle rogue, seemingly aware of Michael’s role even before it is spelled out for him, but then quite clearly choosing to dispute the heavenly command. Abraham displays a variety of emotions: he sulks, he grumbles, he pleads ignorance, he is argumentative, but in a respectful manner. The angel Michael’s momentary departure from Abraham and family, supposedly to urinate, but actually in the twinkling of an eye he goes to heaven to consult with God, is an amusing device that is interwoven into the story.

Abraham’s interactions with Samael are presented as broad humor. Abraham enjoys his role in teasing Death, he makes diffcult demands –seeing the ways of the world and human behavior – just as he had found meaning in wielding the power of life and death in his heavenly journey with the archangel Michael. Later Abraham asks his heavenly visitor to show him Death’s terrible face. Death does so but this results in the death of thousands of his Abraham’s servants. Abraham regrets his request and asks that they are once again brought back to life, which naturally happens (TestAbr 17.9-18.11).

The rabbinic statements concerning the death of Moses, on the whole, are terser. The Testament of Abraham goes on for many pages, and features different venues including earth and the heavens. With the exception primarily of the midrashic account of Moses’ death in Deuteronomy Rabbah

9, the rabbinic materials tend to be more succinct. Usually they are directly connected to a specifc scriptural verse, and seek to explicate its meaning. Abraham has general questions about reward and punishment, and the afterlife; Moses evinces no such broad curiosity. Where Abraham is not dissimilar from a loveable rogue, sometimes feigning ignorance or perhaps misunderstanding, Moses is much more belligerent and confrontational. Abraham can have a sense of humor, Moses is almost priggish, pompous or pedantic both in his statements to Samael, and then to God. As Death points out, the great leader gives himself airs. Moses stands on his dignity. I deserve to live longer. I have earned a special place in the world. God, he seems to say, you owe me this favor. Moses has a temper. Moses believes that he can successfully bargain with God, even manipulate the natural order of life and death. He suggests that he can happily live with a humbler role. In terms of the Promised Land Moses says, “If I may not enter it as a ruler, let me enter it as a commoner.” Likewise, he posits that he can live with Joshua taking over leadership. When however, Moses fnally realizes that he is unable to follow Joshua’s argumentation he is reconciled with the fact that he has to die.

Although these words refer to Version A of the Testament of Abraham, they can be applied broadly to the midrashim which address the last days of Moses. This work “almost seems to satirize post-biblical approaches to Abraham that elevate the patriarch at the expense of his humanity. In the process, it recovers the poignantly fawed … [fgure] painting a vivid portrait of a great man at the end of his life.” Moses, too, is poignantly fawed and the rabbinic commentaries likewise paint a vivid, but critical portrait of a great man at the end of his life.

The major source in antiquity addressing Abraham’s death is found in the Testament of Abraham, a work composed in the 1st to 2nd century CE. Abraham balks at the notion that the time has come for his demise. In this example, even more than in midrashim dealing with Moses’ death, humor lightens the seriousness of the subject matter. There are clear thematic links between this Testament and its material and the various earliest explanations dealing with Moses. Moses was the great leader, but when it was time for his death, he struggled like an ordinary person who just wants a little more time. Moses debates with God, making case after case why he should both live longer and be able to enter the Promised Land, but to no avail. In these ancient sources Abraham and then Moses do die, but not before attempting to resist death by bargaining with God. They

successfully postpone the time of their demise, in effect saying to God, “Yes, but not yet.” The overarching message of all of these sources is that humans, even the great heroes and leaders of the past, will die. In exceptional cases their death date can be put off, but as the Mishna observes, “Those who are born will die … Without choice you were born … of necessity you will die” (Avot 4.22).

End Notes

1 The JPS Tanakh: Gender-Sensitive Edition. (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 2023).

2 Samuel E. Loewenstamm, “The Death of Moses,” (Ed. George W. E. Nickelsburg, Jr.) Studies on the Testament of Abraham. (Missoula, MT: Scholar’s Press, 1976): 194.

3 Midrash involves a wide variety of genres including tales and allegories, ethical refections, epigrams, and legends. “Midrash is a type of literature, oral or written, which has its starting point in a fxed canonical text, considered the revealed word of God by the midrashist and his audience, and in which this original verse is explicitly cited or clearly alluded to.” Gary G. Porton. “Midrash.” Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary. Ed. D. N. Freedman, (New York: Doubleday, 1992): 4.819. Midrash, however, often moves far from the plain meaning of that text. The rabbis were not interested in what we call ‘the original meaning of the text.’ They were more intent on the meaning for their own time, and they engage in obviously anachronistic readings. They thereby lift the biblical story out of its original context and apply it to another context. In so doing, they keep the Bible alive.” Adele Berlin, “Writing a Commentary for a Jewish Audience.” The Book of Esther in Modern Research. Eds. S. W. Crawford and L. J. Greenspoon, (London: T. & T. Clark, 2003): 15.

4 Annette Yoshiko Reed, “Testament of Abraham,” Outside the Bible: Ancient Jewish Writings Related to Scripture, Vol. 2. Eds. Louis. H. Feldman, James L. Kugel, and Lawrence H. Schiffman. (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 2013): 1673. There are two versions of the Testament of Abraham, A and B. “The style and vocabulary of B are simpler and less verbose than that of A.” E. P. Sanders, “Testament of Abraham,” The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Vol. 1. Ed. James H. Charlesworth. (New York: Doubleday, 1983): 872. References in this article are to Recension A. The URL below takes the reader to the article by Professor Reed. https://www.academia.edu/41260552/Annette_Y_Reed_Testament_ of_Abraham_in_Lawrence_H_Schiffman_James_L_Kugel_and_ Louis_H_Feldman_eds_Outside_the_Bible_Ancient_Jewish_Writings_ Related_to_Scripture_vol_2_Philadelphia_Jewish_Publication_ Society_2013_1671_1696

5 Reed, 1672.

6 George W. E. Nickelsburg, Jr. “Structure and Message in the Testament of Abraham.” (Ed. George W. E. Nickelsburg.) Studies on the Testament of Abraham. (Missoula, MT: Scholar’s Press, 1976): 87-88. See also Meredith J.C. Warren, “Human and Divine Justice in the Testament of Abraham”, The Embroidered Bible: Studies in Biblical Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha in Honour of Michael E. Stone. Studia in Veteris Testamenti Pseudepigrapha, (2017) 26. Eds. L. DiTommaso, M. Henze, and W. Adler. (Brill, Leiden, 2017): 928-940. [See URL below in n. 9].

7 Sanders, “Testament of Abraham,” 871.

8 Reed, 1687, n. 14.2.

9 See Warren, 4-6. https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/117326/1/ WARREN%20LDT%20fnal%20copyedit.pdf

10 In midrashic literature, frst the prominent angel Gabriel and then the archangel Michael, say to God that for certain reasons they are unwilling to deliver the decree of death to Moses (Deuteronomy Rabbah 11.10).

11 For a somewhat different approach to the differences between the Testament of Abraham and the material dealing with Moses’ death see Samuel E. Loewenstamm. “The Testament of Abraham and the Texts Concerning Moses’ Death,” (Ed. George W. E. Nickelsburg.) Studies on the Testament of Abraham. (Missoula, MT: Scholar’s Press, 1976): 219-25.

12 In Midrash on Psalms (compiled 1050-1450 CE, although containing earlier material) there is a discussion about the afterlife, and how the Angel of Death takes one’s soul at death, as well differentiating between the death of the righteous and the wicked. The Midrash on Psalms, Tr. William G. Braude (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1959), Psalm 11.6.

13 “Satan is never called in rabbinic literature the Evil One … or Beelzebul [Beelzebub]—names familiar to us from the pseudepigrapha and the New Testament. Sometimes he is called Samael—a name also given to the Angel of Death … Nowhere in Talmudic sources is Satan depicted as a rebel against God The Satan of the Talmud is essentially the Satan of the Hebrew Bible. He is an agent of God. His role is unpleasant, even unsavory. He is [an] … agent provocateur.” Bernard J. Bamberger, Fallen Angels (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1952): 94 (emphases in original).

14 See Babylonian Talmud (hereafter BT) Moed Qatan 28a (Rav Ashi); Deuteronomy Rabbah 9.1 (Rabbi Simeon ben Halafta); and BT Ketubot 77b (Rabbi Hanina bar Papa).

15 Simcha Paull Raphael, Living and Dying in Ancient Times Death, Burial, and Mourning in Biblical Tradition (Boulder, CO: Albion-Andalus,

2015): 63, 68. https://www.daatinstitute.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/ Moses-Death-in-Torah-Midrash.pdf

16 Raymond P. Scheindlin, “Moses Pleads with God: Why Must I Die?” https://www.thetorah.com/article/moses-pleads-with-god-why-musti-die. Loewenstamm, cited above, also discusses various parallels to the Torah’s description of Moses’ death.

17 For some other sources dealing with Moses’ last days, see Midrash Petirat Moshe (Midrash on the Death of Moses, compiled c. 7th to 11th cent. CE) and James L. Kugel. The Bible as it was. (Cambridge: Belknap/ Harvard University Press, 1997): 536-44.

18 Louis Ginzberg, Legends of the Jews (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1911), Vol. 3: 471. Another example of the Angel of Death being rejected by Moses is found in the Avot de Rabbi Natan, (The Fathers According to Rabbi Nathan). Tr. Judah Goldin. (NY: Schocken, 1955), chapter 12. In that chapter, Moses also is depicted as begging for a death like that of Aaron.

19 In the Aramaic Bible, the Targum Pseudo-JonathanDeuteronomy, God also involves, among others, the angels Michael and Gabriel.

20 Sifrei: A Tannaitic Commentary on the Book of Deuteronomy, Tr. Reuven Hammer (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1986).

21 Midrash Tanhuma, Deuteronomy. Wa’ethannan, section 6, S. Buber Recension. Tr. John T. Townsend (Hoboken, NJ: Ktav, 2003).

22 Moshe Lavee, “The Cycle of Life and Torah: Accepting Our Mortality” https://www.thetorah.com/article/the-cycle-of-life-and-torahaccepting-our-mortality. A variation of the description of Moses realizing that Joshua has carried the tradition/teaching further along is found in Deuteronomy Rabbah 9.9. See also BT Menahot 29b.

23 Six biblical fgures died via a kiss from God: Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Aaron, and Miriam. BT Baba Batra 17a. An even more radical stance suggests that the Angel of Death has no power over Israel, since they accepted the Torah. Exodus Rabbah 51.8 (beginning); Leviticus Rabbah 18.3.

24 Similar material where Moses pleas to enter the land is found in the Mekilta. Mekilta de Rabbi Ishmael, Vol. 2, Amalek 2. Tr. Jacob Z. Lauterbach (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1949), vss. 60-76: 151-53. Compiled c. 2nd-3rd cent. CE). Another midrash collection offers a different view. There Moses does not procrastinate when he is told is going to die. In a dialog with Job, God says do you consider yourself greater than Moses? “I decreed … that he should not enter the Land. Yet he did not raise a cry.” Pesikta Rabbati, Piska 47.3. Pesikta Rabbati: Discourses for Feasts, Fasts, and Special Sabbaths. Tr. William G. Braude. (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1968). Compiled 9th cent. CE).

A similar viewpoint is found in the Midrash on Psalms. Commenting on the verse “GOD is upright, my rock, in whom there is no wrong” (Psl 92:15), Moses is asked, who prevented you from entering the Land? Moses replies, “I prevented it.” When asked, was it not God who prevented you?, Moses replies, even if it appears that God is justifying the wicked, and condemning the righteous, nonetheless, God is “The Rock!— whose deeds are perfect, Yea, all of whose ways are just; A faithful God, never false” (Deut 32:4). The Midrash on Psalms. Psalm 92.14.

25 Tanna Debe Eliyyahu: The Lore of the School of Elijah. Tr. William G. Braude and Israel J. Kapstein (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1981). Compiled 10th cent. CE).

The Asbury Journal 80/1: 179-214

DOI: 10.7252/Journal.01.2025S.08

Robert A. Danielson

Irene Blyden Taylor: God’s Apostle to Nevis

Abstract:

Irene Blyden Taylor was an early Holiness convert from the Island of Saba in the West Indies. Her life intersects a number of key people and places in the history of the Holiness Movement, as she worked with C.O. Moulton, one of the founding Holiness missionaries in the Caribbean, attended school at God’s Bible School and College, and as she worked as an evangelist and church planter on the Islands of St. Kitts, Nevis, and Saba. Through her story, the origins of Holiness mission work in the Englishspeaking Caribbean can be explored as well as key missiological insights. Blyden Taylor’s story also demonstrates one of the few accounts of an African-American woman who was actively involved in mission.

Keywords: St. Kitts and Nevis, Holiness, church planting, missions, Pilgrim Holiness Church

Robert A. Danielson is the Director of Strategic Collections and Scholarly Communications Librarian at Asbury Theological Seminary. He has served as a missionary to the People’s Republic of China and done work in El Salvador and Honduras. He also teaches in the E. Stanley Jones School of Missions and Ministry at Asbury Theological Seminary.

Introduction

Traditionally in the history of Christian missions, scholars focus on the “important” fgures: those who were prolifc writers and missiologists, or those who pioneered work in densely populated locations such as China, Japan, or India. They might also focus on those who faced exceptional challenges, such as many of the missionaries in Africa. And yet, the true history of the missions of the Christian Church are found in those who went to the small and seemingly insignifcant parts of the world. Those who planted and worked among small communities, and who left their life’s work among people who were isolated and often marginalized. The true strength of the Church through history was not that it spread in urban centers, but rather that it sought to go into the farthest corners of the earth. To truly understand the history of Christian missions, it is vital that these stories be told and studied alongside those of more well-known fgures, or mission work in urban centers.

Irene Blyden Taylor was just such a fgure, and the story of her work on the small Caribbean island of Nevis demonstrates the importance of a Christian missiology designed to spread outward regardless of fame or any recognition. Blyden Taylor wrote no books, never achieved fame from the larger world, and yet her life-long commitment to serve the people of Nevis has eternal rewards in the economy of God’s kingdom. The fact that she had to struggle as an African-American woman in the early 20th century adds to the barriers she had to overcome, and yet her life also demonstrates important missiological lessons about how more effective missionaries are who arise from within the local context in comparison to those who simply come in from outside as “foreign” missionaries.

The Early Holiness Mission Work in the West Indies1

In October of 1890, D.A. Ross from St. Kitts and S.H. Bayley from Barbados spoke at a meeting in New York, calling for missionaries to come to the islands with the holiness message.2 They stirred the hearts of two men attending from Massachusetts, Rev. George R. Penney and F.W. Plummer, who were both connected to the faith-healing work of Dr. Charles Cullis of Boston. Rev. Penney especially felt the call, and along with J.H. Hartman, a group was raised to accompany Ross and Bayley back to the islands in December of 1890.3 Penney brought with him a number of people from his congregation in North Attleboro, Massachusetts.4 This included Deacon Jason F. Guild5 and his niece, Miss Nellie Guild6, and also

Fred and Adelia Dunnell7, and Miss Jessie Purdy.8 This group from North Attleboro settled in St. Kitts at D.A. Ross’s urging, while Penney, Hartman, and a Sister I.D. Haines from Maine accompanied Bayley on an evangelistic tour and ultimately settled in Barbados. These missionaries seemed to have fourished, although little is known of their work. Moulton noted,

The work has grown until to-day (1907) there is on the island of Barbadoes (sic) twenty-eight halls or tabernacles, twenty of which are the property of the mission, and not a cent of indebtedness upon them. We also have a printing plant where the “Christian Mission Herald,” with a circulation of nearly 4,000 copies, is published monthly, and thousands of tracts are printed and scattered over the islands. Connected with this is a Book-room, from which thousands of Bibles, Song books and Holiness literature go out every year.

There are also Mission stations on the British Islands of Trinidad, St. Lucia, Dominica, Antigua, St. Vincent, Barbuda, the Dutch Islands of Saba, and the Danish Island of St. Thomas, and the French Island of Martinique. In South America we have six mission stations in British Guiana, one in Dutch Guiana, and one in Venezuela, also one in the Canal Zone, Panama, and one in Freetown, on the West Coast of Africa.

Connected with this work are nine ordained preachers, known as Elders, and six regular workers who have not been ordained, who are giving all their time to the work. Besides this, there are many other workers who spend their evenings in various Mission stations, laboring for the lost…

The work is governed by the Holy Ghost through a Board of Managers consisting of a General Superintendent and Treasurer, who is an American, fve native assistant Superintendents, a Secretary, Auditor, and three Directors who are also natives.9

In January of 1902, Captain Charles A. Potter of Norwich, Connecticut set out for an evangelistic tour of the West Indies. Along with him went C.O. Moulton, who was described as, “a young Providence man, who was converted at Camp Hebron (in North Attleboro, MA), and later at Portsmouth (Rhode Island) camp-meeting was ordained to the mission work.”10 According to Moulton, he was raised a Methodist. After his experience of sanctifcation, Moulton entered ministry, but felt called to missions, especially to the West Indies in the Caribbean. He answered this call at the Portsmouth, Rhode Island Camp Meeting, which had been founded by Seth Rees. The Portsmouth Camp Meeting accepted him and

his family as missionaries and they were sent out on January 15, 1902 for the mission feld. After a few meetings on St. Kitts, Antigua, and Dominica, the group was invited to attend a convention of a Christian mission which had been founded about 1892 in Bridgetown, Barbados (likely the work of Penney, Hartman, Haines, and others). The mission was run by a Brother and Sister Dunnell and Sister Guild (of the original North Attleboro group) and consisted of a chapel on Barbados and two mission stations on St. Kitts.11 Moulton became ill on the trip, and then “felt called to St. Kitts,” while “Brother Potter went on with his evangelistic trip through the islands.”12

C.O. Moulton13 then assisted the Dunnells by founding a mission station on Saba. As Moulton describes Saba, the island had almost no roads and no wheeled transportation. Everything had to be carried by porters up steep paths along the side of the volcanos, with the frst settlement called The Bottom. Moulton and his family had initially intended to stay on Saba for a month, but he indicates that work turned into one year by the time he returned to the United States.14

Irene Blyden: Her Early Life (1884-1905)

According to birth records,15 Irene Blyden was born October 15, 1884 to Albert Blyden and Susanna Smith on the small Caribbean island of Saba, which was, and still remains, part of the Dutch West Indies. The island is the smallest special municipality of the Netherlands with an island of only about fve square miles dominated by a volcano. It is a rocky island with a population of around 2,000-3,000 and no major ports or easy access. At the time Irene was born, it was primarily known for sugar, indigo, rum, and fshing. It’s forbidding geology made it a prime place for smugglers and pirates through much of its history.

Moulton relates some interesting accounts of this initial time on Saba in his 1907 book Exploits in the Tropics, and several accounts deal with a girl named Irene. While Moulton does not give Irene’s family name, she apparently helped his family in their home, and it is quite likely, given the population of the island and the small number of holiness believers, that this is a reference to Irene Blyden. Moulton wrote,

When we organized the Sunday school I gave a class to Irene. Irene is a black girl whom God had wonderfully saved and sanctifed. She lived in our home while we were there, and during all the time she was with us I never saw anything contrary to perfect love.

The frst time I met Irene was in St. Kitts, when she stepped from a little sail boat, and as I shook hands with her I felt I had met a saint of God.

I remarked “That is a little boat,” and she answered, “Yes, a little boat, but a great God.”

After I had given her the class in the Sunday School at St. John’s the members began to get saved, one after another would come to the meetings in The Bottom, and get to God, until half a dozen of them had been saved.16

A later version of this story, told by R.G. Finch indicated that Irene and her father crossed the two miles from St. Kitts to Nevis in a small boat in the middle of a storm, although Irene’s comment remained the same.17 (This might just be embellishment on Moulton’s story and it makes more sense as a trip from Saba to St. Kitts.) In another account, Moulton wrote about the diffculty of getting food on Saba, and he noted,

While on the island of Saba we often found it hard to get food, even when we had the money to purchase it. One Saturday, Irene came to us and said, “I can’t get a piece of meat, nor a chicken, nor anything for dinner tomorrow; what shall I do?” I turned to her and said, “Well, if you cannot, you cannot, so we will praise the Lord and go without, unless he sees ft to send us something.” The next morning early I heard a shout and hearty “Well, praise the Lord.” Upon inquiry I learned that a vessel had just come in from St. Kitts, and the mate of the vessel had brought a tin to us from a business man in St. Kitts. When the cover was taken off we found that it contained a nice piece of beef, well roasted, and with it, the gravy in another tin. We preached that morning on “The peculiar relationship of God the Father to the child of faith.”18

While it is not clear if these references are to Irene Blyden, they would make sense if they were. Irene would have been about 18 or 19 by the time Moulton arrived in 1902, and while Moulton does not describe her conversion and sanctifcation, she clearly exhibited spiritual qualities which encouraged Moulton to put her in charge of a Sunday school class, and it also seems as if she helped in his household, possibly as a cook or someone to care for Moulton’s young daughter. Moulton does not indicate any involvement in Irene’s conversion, but seems to indicate she had experienced her conversion before his arrival on Saba based on his account of their frst meeting. Other accounts seem to credit Moulton as converting

Irene, but this clearly is not the case. This is supported by the following on the history of the mission work in Saba,

Mrs. Irene Blyden Taylor, who is mentioned in connection with the work on Nevis, was born and reared on this rocky eminence. She tells me that in 1900 a Rev. and Mrs. Dunnell and a Miss Guild, of Attleboro, Massachusetts, who had been laboring on St. Kitts for some time, came to Saba to preach the gospel. These hardy missionaries crossed the turbulent channel from St. Kitts to Saba in a rowboat, with the spirit of Indians going over a rapids. When one realizes that that trip on the high seas is frequently really very rough, and is strenuous even in a sloop, and under favorable conditions requires some fve or six hours in such a ship, one cannot but admire the courage those workers must have shown to attempt that stretch of water in a rowboat.19

It is highly likely that Irene was converted around 1900 in this early work of the Dunnells and Miss Guild.20 This would also explain her ability to work with Moulton so quickly in his own ministry on Saba.

Moulton returned to New England in 1903, where he attended camp meetings at Camp Hebron in North Attleboro, Massachusetts.21 At this same camp meeting a decision was made to open a new chain of missions, “Announcement was made at camp Hebron last night that a chain of mission stations will be started in the fall along the coast of South America by the Holiness people. This work will be in charge of Capt. Charles A. Potter of Norwich, Conn. who has for several years conducted mission work in the West Indies. His frst lieutenant will be Rev. Charles O. Moulton of Providence, who for the past year has been located at Basseterre, St. Kitts.”22 The article also noted the pair would leave about October 1, 1903 and take along a mission boat named “Glad Tidings” completed for Captain Potter from funds raised by Holiness supporters. This appears to be a continuation of the earlier work by the North Attleboro missionaries under George Penney. Moulton wrote of this decision,

While holding a meeting in the town of Cranston, R.I., Brother Penney, who was one of the founders of the Christian Mission in the West Indies and South America, came to the meeting. In conversation with us he told us that he felt God had led him to the United States to turn over to a board of men, whom he would name, the mission work of which he was then the director and

superintendent. After talking it over for some time we looked into his face and said, “Brother Penney, you have thought and prayed over this matter a great deal, who do you think ought to go to Barbadoes (sic) and take your place as Superintendent of the work?” He looked into our faces and said, “Brother Moulton, I believe God wants you to go.” This was in August, and in the following January we left New York for Barbadoes (sic) to take up the Superintendency of the Christian Mission.23

At this same time in 1903, Moulton visited God’s Bible School in Cincinnati, Ohio, and a reference from this visited noted, “Every one was much interested as Brother Moulton told of Irene, who had been adopted by Brother Pennington, and is to come to the school as soon as possible.”24 So, in January of 1904, C.O. Moulton returned to the Caribbean to take up his work over all of the Holiness mission work being done in the region. There is no indication that this work would have been part of the International Holiness Union and Prayer League founded by Seth Rees of the Portsmouth camp-meting and Martin Knapp of God’s Bible School in 1897, but it is completely possible. This group had become the International Apostolic Holiness Union in July of 1900 and would become the International Apostolic Holiness Church in 1905, however these formal group names do not appear in any of the records of this Caribbean mission, so any association was likely loosely held, if it even existed.

On May 7, 1905, Rev. C.O. Moulton, his wife, and two children sailed from St. Thomas on the S.S. Pretoria for New York City. They arrived on May 13, 1905. But on the same passenger manifest from the immigration offce, we also see Irene Blyden’s name as a native of Saba with a fnal destination of Providence, Rhode Island. Additional notes indicated she had $50.00 and had paid for her ticket herself. It also noted that she working as a nurse to Mrs. Moulton of Providence.

At God’s Bible School and College (1905-1909)

The next evidence of Irene Blyden to appear is as a student in God’s Bible School and College in Cincinnati, Ohio from 1905-1909. While we do not know exactly how this happened, Moulton appears to have been involved. Moulton had his primary connections with the Portsmouth Camp Meeting in Rhode Island, which was led by Seth Rees, and Rees maintained strong connections with God’s Bible School and College, which had been

founded by Martin Wells Knapp (1853-1901). Smith noted that Moulton’s connection with Seth Rees “brought them support from both the Holiness Union25 and God’s Revivalist,”26 although it is interesting that Moulton does not write about this connection in his book. However, Moulton clearly visited God’s Bible School in 1903. Support might also have come from Arthur Greene, the Holiness pastor at North Attleboro and the organizer of Camp Hebron. Greene was also connected to God’s Revivalist and God’s Bible School.27 It is clear though, that Moulton played a role. In a later account about travels with Irene Blyden, Minnie Knapp, the widow of Martin Wells Knapp wrote, “…Irene was one of our old students, and indeed, as Brother Moulton declared when sending her to us years ago, ‘a saint in ebony,’ we had a great desire that God might not only use her and make the meeting a great blessing to the people present, but make it count for the West Indies and South America as well, and surely He heard and answered.”28

The school was part of the radical branch of the Holiness Movement and had only been founded in 1900, so Irene was a relatively early student there. As a radical Holiness school, the curriculum focused on scripture study and other subjects tied to the practice of ministry. Irene was at God’s Bible School and College at an important point. An image of the school from about May or June of 1907 shows Irene as the lone African-American female face among the women of the school. At the same time, the front row shows Holiness legends Oswald Chambers29 and William Godbey sitting together, along with the leadership of the school, which included Minnie Knapp. Even more interesting, on the edge of the men in the school we see Richard Taylor, Irene’s future husband, standing next to Oscar Logan King30, who would be another future mission leader in the British West Indies for the Pilgrim Holiness Church. Irene Blyden even preached a message at the 1909 Salvation Park Camp Meeting, and in his refections of the event, Oswald Chambers wrote, “Tuesday, June 15th , witnessed another day of these glorious seasons of ‘feasting on the mount.’ In the afternoon, Sister Irene Blyden, of the West Indies, preached from the text, ‘I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth.’ Our colored sister has the voice and presence of a good preacher, and the Lord witnessed to her message.”31

Group of Teachers and Students at God’s Bible School and College (May or June 1907)

(Image from the collection of the author, used with permission)

up of

O.L.

danielson: irene blyden taylor: god’s apostle to nevis 187

Close

Irene Blyden and

King (to the left of Richard Alfred Taylor) and Richard Alfred Taylor

Irene was also involved with the usual mission outreach done by students at God’s Bible School. In one account about the outreach to people in a poor part of Cincinnati called Shantytown, it noted, “Some time ago, Sister Irene Blyden had charge of the Friday evening service. The power of God fell upon the meeting, and a drunkard fell at the altar crying to God for mercy on his soul. Bless God. He heard and answered prayer. The man was wonderfully saved, and now is one of the best workers there.”32

It was while at God’s Bible School and College that Irene would meet Richard Taylor, her future husband. Wingrove Taylor noted that even though the islands of Saba and St. Kitts are only thirty miles apart, Saba is Dutch and St. Kitts was British. He recorded a story that when they were in Cincinnati, they both did student work service, which was part of student life at the time. Irene worked in the kitchen and at one meal was pouring glasses of water. Richard used a slang expression from St. Kitts asking for “three drops” of water, which meant a little bit of water, and Irene attempted to give him literally three drops.33 Richard had left St. Kitts for New York City to fnd work, but he came from a Methodist background and after encountering a copy of Knapp’s paper The Revivalist, felt called to God’s Bible School and College. Richard would graduate after Irene and the two would marry in 1919.

Planting Churches and Mission on Nevis (1910-1914)

When Irene Blyden left God’s Bible School and College in 1909, she did not journey alone. “Among those traveling with Irene Blyden as she returned home from GBS in 1909 were the Rev. and Mrs. James Taylor.34 Taylor was to bring together what remained of the Caribbean work begun by C.O. Moulton, identifying it with the Holiness Union and thus connecting it with GBS and God’s Revivalist. This bond was reinforced by the ministry of the Rev. O.L. King and other GBS alumni working in the islands.”35 An extended quote from a mission study book written about 1959 provides what appears to be Irene Blyden’s story in much of her own words (since Irene died in October of 1958 it is assumed that the interview was early in 1958), so it will be quoted at length:

After I left God’s Bible School, I traveled with a group who had a camp meeting tent which they pitched in a suitable spot to reach the masses. However, I went on to Saba, while the remainder of the group stopped in St. Croix. When they got to St. Kitts, they wrote for me to

join them there. God came down in a mighty way on the souls of men. At this time, the work was connected with God’s Bible School.

During the time that the evangelistic party was in St. Kitts, folks from Nevis asked that we go to Nevis. That was not in the original plan, however. Then Brother James Taylor said, ‘Irene, we’ll send you over.’ I told him I would have to pray about that. They were very much inclined to hold me in the West Indies. But I had begun to make plans to go to Africa, and my mind was that way. After talking to God about it, he assured me that it was all right to go to Nevis. So, Jamison, his wife and son, Brother Ford, and Irene Blyden went to Nevis.

A boat was chartered, and our group went across to Nevis. We had an eventful time, and once even despaired of our lives or of saving the boat. The wind and sea were terrible. But in God’s mercy we reached safety.

We did not know if we would fnd a place to hire (rent) so that we could remain. But as we walked off the wharf, a little old lady came up to me and said, ‘Me, dear, where you come from?’ I told her, ‘We have come over to hold evangelistic meetings.’ Then I asked her if she knew of a house we might rent. She said, ‘Sure, there is a good-size house on the main road, shut up for ever so long. I’ll take you to the woman in charge.’ So we went frst to see the house, and left our things by it with some of the party, while Brother Jamison and I went to bargain for the house. We got it to rent.

There was a good-size hall downstairs and four rooms upstairs. The men went to the store to buy boards to make seats. Sister Jamison and I tried to clean the rooms. Bats had made the attic their home for a long time.

We got all set up for Sunday. In the afternoon we had an open-air service, and in the evening we had meeting in the hall. There was hardly standing room. We carried on for a week.

It was then about time for the evangelistic party to leave St. Kitts and go on south. But the Lord came upon the people with such conviction and saving power that I wrote to Brother Taylor telling him that it would be wisdom for them to move over to Nevis- tent and everybody! They felt God’s leadings and came, remaining for about three weeks.

There was no mission work being done here. There were Anglican and Methodist churches, but the people felt their need of being saved. There had been no plans for anyone to remain; but the people in bulk said that they wanted the mission work to go on. This was in January 1910.

After a conference together, it was decided that Sister Blyden would stay. But here I was with the burning desire to go to Africa! I told them that I would remain until someone could come. Later on, the Lord made it clear, ‘Here is your Africa.’ So I made preparations for gathering the lost in Nevis. There are now seven churches on this island, all the work being carried on by national workers. There were 22 persons baptized on Sunday, May 18, 1958.

When I decided to stay in Nevis, Brother Jamison said that there was a young lady in St. Croix who was anxious to work for the Lord and would be willing to come and help spread the gospel. As soon as arrangements could be made for her to get here, she came.

Miss Alice Coulter was a great asset to the work of Christ. She was completely surrendered for service and sacrifce. We often walked seven miles to where we would have service, get back home at midnight, sleep soundly for the rest of the night, and be up and going early the next morning.

In a village three miles away, where we held openair meetings (Brown Hill), a man got under conviction. He walked into Charlestown for us to pray with him. When he reached town, we had gone to Gingerland, four miles away, for an open-air meeting. So he walked back past his village, reaching us in time for part of the service. When the invitation was given for those who wanted to accept Christ as their Saviour, he was the frst in the ring. He died in the faith of Christ his Saviour only six years ago.

In the village of Brown Hill, many persons got saved. By the help of friends abroad, we were able to build a church there.36 A few Sundays ago I was there for a meeting and was delighted to see the many very fne young people in Sunday school. Praise be to God!37

It is helpful here to note that James M. Taylor sent a copy of Irene Blyden’s letter to him after he left her in charge of the work on Nevis, and it was published in full in God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, the paper of God’s Bible School and College. Irene wrote:

Charleston, Nevis, B.W.I., February 14, 1910

Dear Brother Taylor: God is with us in a marked way. The departure of the party did not affect the interest as might have been expected. The altar has been double lined with seekers nearly every service, and the house packed as usual. I wish you might have been here Tuesday night (converts’ meeting). The very spirit of God flled the place as men and women praised Him for deliverance. Wednesday night God helped us as I spoke

on the “Baptism of the Holy Ghost,” and at least one hundred, with upturned faces, with tears running down their cheeks, prayed defnitely for God to sanctify them, and have been testifying clearly since to two works of grace. Some are being saved in homes as we visit them. The people declare that God will not take all of the good people out of the land, whom he sent here to teach them the other way (referring to the missionaries).

One woman in conversation with another said: “If God had called us for one week before the evangelistic party came we would have gone to Hell thinking we were Christians.”

The offerings since you left have amounted to $2.96. February 25th- We had our frst prayer meeting for your evangelistic campaign on Wednesday morning at 5 A.M. There were over forty out and every one that prayed seemed to get hold of God. They are really growing. We have been having good meetings, right strong, but this week seems to have been special. God met us Sunday night in power. Men and women came reeling to the altar under conviction; others dropped in the seats screaming for mercy, and still others skipped over the seats, making their way to the altar. So great was the crowd on the outside that the offcers had to come and clear the street.

Wednesday night we went to Fig Tree, a village two and one-half miles distant. About ffty knelt seeking the Lord.

February 28- Had good services Sunday. Good prayer-meeting at 5 A.M. A man in great distress of soul came in and prayed through to victory and was present at every service that day. So great was the conviction last night that while I was preaching a woman rose from her seat and came to the altar. When the altar call was given there were a goodly number who sought the Lord. We are going to Brown’s Hill tonight, another nearby village. Our seats have been broken down. What about having seats made? Of course it will take more lumber, but Phil. 4:19. Give my love to the party. God bless you every one. Yours in His name, Irene Blyden.38

Nevis was a bigger mission feld than Saba, but not by much. The island is about 36 square miles in size and is more closely related to St. Kitts by a narrow channel. St. Kitts is much larger and more densely populated. Yet, Irene felt God telling her that this was her Africa. Her dreams of working for God in the mission felds of Africa had been replaced with a smaller, more remote feld, yet she embraced this with the same trust in God she had when she headed off to Cincinnati and God’s Bible School and College. One visitor to the work noted, “Pilgrim Holiness churches on

Nevis are very aggressive and are places of spiritual power and salvation. When we begin to think about the missionary efforts of the Pilgrims here we are made to see the importance of the policy which was maintained by the church, in that the converted and Spirit-flled natives of the country are to be used to carry on the gospel work among their own people. An American missionary has never made his permanent home on Nevis. The work was founded largely through the efforts of sister Irene Blyden Taylor, who was brought to Christ by our missionaries on the rocky island of Saba.”39

In 1914, as the Caribbean missions were moving more under the Apostolic Holiness Church, Irene’s impact began to extend beyond Nevis. Working with Brother R.G. Finch40 and Brother George Biernes,41 she was invited to help with evangelistic revival services. Irene wrote,

Four months ago I left Nevis where the Lord had been with me to help souls for almost fve years. After a pleasant voyage of three days the ship dropped anchor in the harbor of Trinidad, and in just a little while Brother Finch was on board to welcome us. God graciously blessed in the revival service in Trinidad. There were only a few gathered together there, but He poured out His Spirit and gave us victory.

Two weeks ago I came here to Georgetown42, South America, to help Brother Biernes in the battle. He has a splendid lot of Holiness folks; they know how to pray clear through, how to pray conviction on the unsaved, and how to pray until it is easy for the preacher to give God’s messages. At almost every altar call there have been seekers and many have prayed through to victory. Oh, it is a beautiful sight to see men and women weep their way to Calvary!43

While Irene was away on her evangelistic efforts, J. M. Coone took up her work on Nevis. Coone had encountered J.M. Taylor in Calgary, Alberta in 1911 and went with his wife and child in 1912 to Saba. His wife died of Bright’s Disease and she was buried by Irene Blyden on Nevis. Coone then stayed on for a while helping Irene until he was relocated to Antigua.44

A Return to the United States (1915-1916)

In 1915-1916, Irene Blyden made a return trip to God’s Bible School and College in Cincinnati. On June 1, 1915 Irene Blyden left St. Kitts and is listed on the manifest of the S.S. Korona arriving in New York on June 8, 1915. She listed her destination as the Missionary Training School

danielson: irene blyden taylor: god’s apostle to nevis 193

in Cincinnati, Ohio. In June of 1915 she was one of the speakers at the seventeenth annual camp-meeting at God’s Bible School and College. While she was not listed on the April 29, 2015 list of speakers, she does appear in the June 3rd list. The camp meeting itself was held from June 11-20, 1915. Here Irene Blyden would share the platform with important holiness fgures such as W.B. Godbey, George B. Kulp, John Wesley Hughes, and F.M. Messenger. But this camp-meeting was especially known for its missionary presence with Charles and Lettie Cowman from Japan, Mr. and Mrs. John Thomas from Korea, Brother Rodway, Charles Slater, and Fred DeWeerd from Africa, and Sister Pierce from China.45

Group of Missionaries at God’s Bible School and College for the 1915 Camp Meeting (June 17, 1915).

Irene Blyden is in the back-left corner. Charles and Lettie Cowman from the Oriental Missionary Society are the third and fourth from the right in the front row

(Photo from God’s Bible School archives. Used with permission)

At the morning service on Sunday June 13th a massive storm tore the main tent to pieces, while men worked to keep the poles from falling. On Thursday, June 17th the missionary part of the camp-meeting began in

earnest. One writer noted after a sermon and group photo, “Irene Blyden, God’s shining saint and missionary in ebony who was faithful in few things some years ago at the Bible School and who has now an enlarged sphere of usefulness in the West Indies, stirred the hearts of all who listened to her at the morning missionary service. It was a glorious time.”46 Another writer described Blyden’s talk on Friday morning,

The Friday morning service was taken, after singing and prayer by Sister Irene Blyden, of the West Indies, who gave a delightful account of her conversion on the Island of Saba, where she was born, her sanctifcation, the two years spent in Brother Moulton’s home, the four years in God’s Bible School, and the six years of labor for the Master on the Island of Nevis and other islands of the West Indies. She brought greetings from Brother Finch and family, and spoke of how God was blessing him and how they all loved him as superintendent of their work. The Lord is richly blessing the work in the West Indies and South America.47

Irene Blyden remained with her friends at God’s Bible School and College until March of 1916. When the time came to return to Nevis and her ministry there, it was decided that Irene would travel to catch her boat in New York with Minnie Knapp, and that the trip would be a very slow speaking tour. From March 19- April 9, 1916, the two would visit and speak at some 20 different locations. The schedule was posted in the March 16, 1916 edition of God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, with about half of them being Apostolic Holiness Churches tied to the work of God’s Bible School. They would start in Cincinnati, then move through northern Kentucky, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and then New York. God’s Bible School and College would provide a good send off,

On March 19, Sister Irene Blyden, from the West Indies, who has been in America for the past few months, representing the needs of her people, preached her farewell sermon in the Tabernacle, to a large and appreciative audience. Her text was, “He that goeth forth and weepeth, bearing precious seed, shall doubtless come again with rejoicing, bringing his sheaves with him.” God blessed her in giving this message. One interesting little incident she related, was that of a little boy coming to her on shipboard and telling her things he had heard about there being German war boats near them. One day he came, quite excited, telling her something new he had heard, and she told him that if

the waters were full of German war vessels that that ship could not go down, because she was on board. “Why,” he innocently asked, “Are you the wife of the Kaiser?” “No,” she replied, “but I am a daughter of the King!”

The following day Sister Blyden left, accompanied by Sister Knapp, enroute for New York, holding a series of missionary meetings along the way. As she sails on the 14th, when this is in print she will be on her way. As they went to take the street car, a crowd of students gathered on the corner, and amid the waving of handkerchiefs, and the shouting of farewells, sang, “Here am I, Lord, send me, send me!”48

(Photo from God’s Bible School archives. Used with permission)

Photo of Irene Blyden and Minnie Knapp at the time of their speaking tour to New York in 1916.

Minnie Knapp would write a lengthy fve-page article, spread over three issues of God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, detailing the trip and its success. She noted the people of the school singing, and people waving handkerchiefs from the windows of the offces and dormitories, and she noted, “The last glimpse we had was the cook running out, both arms up, face aglow, and shouting her blessing.”49 This was followed by those in the engine room, stopping their work long enough to wave. While most of Knapp’s writing was positive, about full churches and generous gifts to support the missions, she does note one element that disturbed her, “Our frst meeting was at Maysville, and we reached there on time. As this was Kentucky, Irene was not permitted to occupy the same coach with me, but thank God, there is a time coming when there will be no bars, for to Him, ‘Black, brown, yellow, red and white, All are precious in His sight.’”50

Some of the churches had never had a missionary visit before, and most were packed even if problems delayed their arrival or changed the venues for their talks. Irene both preached sermons and also shared her story of conversion and described the work of the Caribbean missions. Of course, Minnie Knapp herself was also a draw, as many people connected with God’s Bible School came out to welcome her. Several of the offerings gathered up $100 for the mission work. The gift which touched Irene the most came in Milton, Pennsylvania, where a group of children came out of Bethel Institute and sang, then, “little Lillian Owen stepped up to Sister Irene and said, ‘On behalf of the children of Bethel Institute, we present you with this offering.’ What a surprise! Irene could do nothing but burst into tears, and exclaimed, ‘God bless you!’ The offering was a saltcellar flled with nickels and pennies, that the children have been saving for this meeting ever since they knew we were coming. The amount was something like two dollars.”51 In Northville, New York, the pair was taken by the pastor A.B. Blann to Wells, New York for an unexpected meeting. The church was pastored by a Brother Boswell, and Blann, along with Boswell and his wife had all be classmates of Irene’s at God’s Bible School.

Finally, it was time to leave, and Minnie Knapp helped Irene fnd her way to her stateroom on the S.S. Patrina, where a stack of mail from her friends at God’s Bible School was waiting. They prayed with her and sang a hymn, and then waved to her from the pier until her boat passed beneath Brooklyn Bridge. In a letter printed in God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate for July 6, 1916, Irene recorded her safe arrival to Nevis and thanked her many friends at God’s Bible School. When the boat arrived on

Saturday, April 22nd, she was met by Miss Coulter (who worked with her on the mission) and they travelled to St. Croix with enough time to attend a baptism at the seashore. Back in Nevis, Irene was greeted by church members singing a hymn and welcoming her home, along with Brother Coone who had been helping out while she was gone.52

Minnie Knapp Tours the Caribbean Missions (1918)

In April of 1918, Minnie Knapp, the widow of Martin Wells Knapp, one of the leaders of God’s Bible School and College made a trip to visit the mission work in the Caribbean, and she visited Irene’s work as part of the trip. Knapp noted that Irene joined the group in Antigua, where she had been with Sister Coone after the death of Brother Coone. Knapp wrote,

We almost have to pinch ourself to believe we are really at Nevis. After years of correspondence, and love and interest in the place and people, we are at last privileged to be here. Irene has been their pastor for eight years, and a wonderful work has been accomplished. They have about one hundred members here in Charleston, the main church. One of the interesting characters is a young man called “Sammy.” One of the workers of St. Croix told me what Irene had to take to wake him up. He was full of mischief. One night while sitting in the back of the hall, he was worse than usual. The song service was progressing and she tried to get his eye, but failed, so she walked deliberately down the aisle, took a switch, and gave him such a whipping that he was perfectly quiet, and some time later he was blessedly converted and sanctifed, and is now a helper on the mission place. The people consider it her privilege to rebuke, exhort and punish, if necessary, as well as preach and lead them to Jesus. We are told that mothers with naughty children will bring them to her to be corrected or punished. She is greatly loved here, and respected by everyone, both white and black.53

Mrs. Knapp also noted that there is a small cemetery where six people had been buried since the start of the work, and that before there were any buildings, they needed to request a place to bury people, and so a special gate was built into this mission cemetery which became known as Blyden’s Gate.54 After visiting the new church building at Brown Hill, Mrs. Knapp noted,

Everywhere we go “Miss Blyden” (as they respectfully call her), is recognized, and greeted with smiles of welcome. It is very evident that she is a much-beloved

friend and teacher. This is her stamping ground, and no itinerant preacher has done more. In her early days when she was strong, she would take a band of her converts, tramp two, four, six and eight miles a day to these country villages and hold a rousing street meeting. She kept this up for years until the Lord, through some of His willing servants, supplied her with a horse and carriage. This strenuous work has told on her and her health is not robust now. Pray that this remarkable handmaiden may be kept for the work of this needy island.55

An Image from Knapp’s book on her trip to the Caribbean, showing her with Irene and R.G. Finch observing traditional ways of washing clothes on Nevis. (Image in the Public Domain)

Before leaving Nevis, Mrs. Knapp and her companions gave Irene a number of gifts that had been sent from her friends in the United States. To make it more entertaining, they presented the gifts like Christmas presents, complete with a Christmas stocking in April. Mrs. Knapp described the event,

Dear Irene sat right down on the foor, untied the stocking, acting for all the world like a little child flled with hilarious joy. She put the stocking round her neck

and danced with glee, then as she took out the box of candy, a box of hickory nuts, two oranges and a fve dollar bill wrapped in several pieces and pressed clear down in the toe there was another dance. Her joy knew no bounds, and the rest of us laughed until the tears came, sharing her joy. The Word says, “Rejoice with them that do rejoice,” and this was one of those times. The fve dollars was given by a Methodist minister and his wife in Ohio. There was a beautiful dress pattern, a box of Christmas cookies, one of nuts from Florida, a fruit dish, two pounds of tea and six silver knives and forks from a student from Minnesota. Our only regret was there wasn’t a dozen more gifts. It was one of those rare and happy times. Those who gave will read these lines, but can never know how they blessed His dear child.56

Such was the relationship between Minnie Knapp and Irene Blyden, that Knapp desired to visit Irene’s birthplace on the island of Saba. The boat from St. Kitts to Saba was so small that people travelling on the boat slept on deck. The sea was rough, and while Minnie Knapp enjoyed seeing the stars at night, at one time the boat lurched and her deck chair became unsteady and a sail came loose. Irene and O.L. King helped pull the sail in and stabilize the chair. Minnie Knapp wrote, “Dear, precious Irene laid beside us on top of the deck, never sleeping all night, keeping faithful watch. We never made a move but her hand was outstretched upon our chair to assure us all was well. How like a mother watching her child!”57 In the dangerous landing on the small rocky beach, the boat had to run through the waves and surf and be secured on the beach. Knapp noted that she covered her eyes and hid her face in Irene’s lap during the ordeal. Since Saba is a rocky island without roads, Minnie Knapp was carried in a chair up the steep steps while Irene, Finch, and King climbed on foot. Minnie Knapp was able to meet Irene’s mother. Knapp noted, “She (Irene) is from a family of eleven children. The fve brothers are all sailors and are away from home. Five sisters live around home.”58 Minnie Knapp would have been about 50 years old at this time, and would die in 1930 at age 62.59 Throughout her work, she refers to the “good, solid work” that Irene had accomplished, and while the trip to Saba was challenging, Knapp did not regret visiting Irene Blyden’s work and home. This is truly a testament to the kind of relationship which had developed over time between the pair.

Later Life and Legacy (1919-1958)

In August 27, 1919 Irene Blyden married her former classmate from God’s Bible School and College, Rev. Richard Alfred Taylor on the island of Saba. Peisker briefy described the rest of her ministry,

…Miss Irene Blyden was left to shepherd the converts. In 1919, she married Rev. Alfred Taylor, and together they labored on Nevis until Brother Taylor’s death in 1945. Mrs. Taylor carried on alone until the following year. After the starting of the work, a hall was rented in Charlestown. Interest spread to outlying villages.

The city church at Charlestown is known as the Taylor Memorial church. But a more signifcant and living monument for the Taylors is built in the hearts of a loving and faithful people. Mrs. Taylor is now retired but continues to make her home on the island.

The Taylors and other workers preached the unsearchable riches of Christ with loving compassion. They also warned of God’s wrath, and condemned sin and unrighteousness. The work has grown from its meager beginning until the gospel of Christ has a very strong infuence over the entire island. I found that the Pilgrim Holiness Church in Nevis is held in high regard for its standards of righteousness and holy living.60

Irene and Alfred would have four children: Katherine Alice Taylor, born September 4, 1920, Ira Moulton Taylor, born January 8, 1922, Alarick Wingrove Taylor, born November 29, 1923, and Wilma Marie Taylor, born August 11, 1925. Ira Moulton Taylor would become a pastor on Antigua for the Pilgrim Holiness Church, while Wingrove Taylor followed in his parents’ footsteps, studying at God’s Bible School and College and going on to pastor in Trinidad and Tobago, becoming District Superintendent there from 19621964. He then became president of the Caribbean Pilgrim College (19641974) in Barbados, which was renamed the Caribbean Wesleyan College. From 1974 to 1994 he was elected as General Superintendent of The Wesleyan Holiness Church (Caribbean Provisional General Conference of The Wesleyan Church). He passed away December 26, 2017. Irene Blyden Taylor’s spiritual legacy continued through her children.

In an account from about 1923, two former students of God’s Bible School and College, R.G. Finch and Charles L. Slater61, also travelled down to evangelize and see the missions of the Pilgrim Holiness Church of the West Indies. Irene is mentioned in a few places, but in an interesting

patriarchal way she is never mentioned for her evangelistic work or success, but rather for her role in the 1920s as a wife and mother. At the time of their arrival in the Caribbean, the evangelists found Irene and Richard Taylor living on St. Kitts. R.G. Finch, the Superintendent of the West Indies and South America for the Pilgrim Holiness Church noted, “In this native home we found Sister Taylor (formerly Irene Blyden) and her sweet little girl, Catherine, and boy, Ira Moulton. These children show what splendid type of native children can be raised when properly fed and cared for. Sister Taylor is careful in feeding and caring for these children as the best mothers in America and the children with chubby, fat hands and feet and smiling faces show the result of it.”62 As the evangelistic pair made their way by boat to Saba, the rough weather provided a trying experience, but Finch did note, “Sister Blyden-Taylor is a splendid sailor. If ever sick she does not show it, but bravely sits up waiting on the sea-sick crowd. For years this has been her post of duty on the Saba trip.”63 These are about the only comments made of the woman who others later called “the Apostle of Nevis.”

In another undated work by L.L. Miller, a Pilgrim Holiness missionary sent to Barbados, he records his arrival at St. Kitts with his wife, where Richard and Irene Taylor welcomed them. He wrote,

The Taylors are wonderful people and do their best to make us feel at home. This is the beginning of “frst”. It was the frst time that fsh came to the table with the heads on and the eyes in. My conscience is troubled by the sad look in the eyes of those poor fsh about to be devoured! Sister Taylor rises to the occasion, as she sees our predicament and has them beheaded. Her son Wingrove is delighted to get the heads. It is our frst time to sleep under mosquito net. Out in the night not a street car, auto, nor a sound is heard except the waves breaking on the beach, and the little tree frogs high in the palm trees calling to each other. 64

If nothing else, Irene is recognized for her hospitality in helping to welcome new missionaries, and she is often seen in these texts as accompanying the missionaries on boats.

An image of Irene Blyden Taylor in Later Life. (Image in the Public Domain)

In a fascinating document held by the Wesleyan Archives, Ira M. Taylor wrote a detailed account of the death and funeral of his mother. Irene Blyden Taylor passed away on October 9, 1958 in Charlestown, Nevis.65 Her son recounts that she was laughing while others were mourning. He also pointed out “her three major qualities: (1) Her deep concern for others, (2) Her great sense of humour, (3) Her unfinching faith in God.”66 He reported that after fnding out from a doctor the fnality of her sickness, she told her son, “Death has its mysteries; none of us know what it is like, but we certainly do know what is beyond it.” At another time, as she was wrestling with the end of life and was experiencing diffculty in breathing, he reported that she said loudly, “I have served the Lord in the days of my strength. Blessed be the name of the Lord.”67 Her last words before passing were to quote Psalms 27:4, “One thing have I desired of the Lord, that will I seek after; that I may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my

life, to behold the beauty of the Lord, and to enquire in His temple.”68 The report ended noting that hundreds of people from Nevis came out to view Mother Taylor lying in state under the canopy of the church. Her grave was so covered with fowers that enough spilled over to cover Richard Taylor’s grave (he had passed 13 years earlier), and the people joined in singing, “Don’t you hear the bells a ringing, Don’t you hear the angels singing.”69

Concluding Lessons

By 1958, when Irene Blyden Taylor died, there were fve Pilgrim Holiness Churches on the island with a total membership of 265. In 1958 the population of St. Kitts and Nevis was 54,644, but Nevis is the smaller of the two islands. The population has been fairly consistent, and while the number for just Nevis in 1958 was not found, the most recent number of 12,277 in 2011 is likely close. This means Irene Blyden Taylor during her lifetime saw the conversion of around 2% of the population. It seems like a small number, but it helps to put it in context. Imagine a missionary to China with its 1.412 billion people who brought about the conversion of 2% of the population. That number would be 28,240,000 people! Numbers don’t always tell the whole story.

Irene Blyden Taylor was an evangelist, church planter, missionary, pastor, and a mother. She was a pioneer Holiness woman of African descent who made a real difference in reaching others for Christ. In the process of examining her life it is possible to engage in several important missiological lessons. First, is the importance of training local people for ministry as opposed to relying on foreign missionaries. Irene Blyden Taylor’s success in large part emerged because she understood the people and cultures around her, because they were an essential part of her own identity as well. This reduced cultural barriers and helped her plant stronger, lasting ministries. Second, is the lesson of how missions spread through networks into even remote areas of the world. Connecting Attleboro, Massachusetts with the Caribbean island of Saba is a big stretch for the modern imagination, and yet that was the network which allowed Irene to encounter the ideas of sanctifcation and receive further training and support. Much of mission history has focused on the missionary encounters with large population centers, but to truly understand the effectiveness of mission it is also essential to understand much smaller encounters and how they developed. Third, is the well-known spiritual lesson of obedience. Where we wish to

go is not always where God sends us. Irene desired to go to Africa, but God showed her that the small island of Nevis was her Africa. Irene was obedient to that call, but the principal missiological lesson to learn from the life of Irene Blyden Taylor is the lesson she likely taught C.O. Moulton at the start of her life: the boat might be small, but God is great!

End Notes

1 I wish to expressly thank the archives of God’s Bible School and College for their help in locating materials and helping to identify people in the photo from 1907. I also wish to thank the archives of the Wesleyan Church for their help, especially with the unpublished manuscript about Irene Blyden Taylor’s death and funeral.

2 Most of this information comes from C.O. Moulton, Exploits in the Tropics, published in 1907, Pickett Publishing Company, Louisville, KY: 53-62, as Moulton sets the stage for his own entrance into the mission work. Paul Westphal Thomas and Paul William Thomas, The Days of Our Pilgrimage: History of The Pilgrim Holiness Church (The Wesley Press: Marion, IN) note that Bayley and Ross had attended a conference by A.B. Simpson in New York (page 74). This idea is supported by other evidence from The Christian Alliance 6:10 (March 6, 1891): 158 “Letters from the West Indies,” which discusses the early trip with Penny and the others to St. Kitts through a letter from D.A. Ross.

3 Penny’s involvement with the faith-cure movement and his leaving in December of 1890 for missions in the West Indies can be confrmed with “Carried Barrels of Tracts,” Boston Daily Globe, December 9, 1890: 20.

4 North Attleboro had been a regional center for the Holiness Movement going back to the 1870s. In 1879, the Holiness leader J.A. Wood took charge of the Free Church in North Attleboro for a short time. Wood in 1866 was one of the principal founders of the National Camp Meeting Association for the Promotion of Holiness. He wrote, “During the winter of 1878 Brother McDonald and I held a series of meetings in the Free Evangelical Church at North Attleboro with most blessed results. The church was without a pastor and urged either of us to become their pastor… After repeated requests to return to them I consented to supply them for four months, commencing with February, 1879.” He ended up serving an additional year. J.A. Wood, Autobiography of Rev. J. A. Wood. Chicago, IL: The Christian Witness Company (1904): chapter on North Attleboro, MA.

5 Deacon Jason Guild, according to documents reviewed from the Family Search genealogical website, was a retired jeweler living at 4 High St. in North Attleboro, Massachusetts. He was born in 1824 and died January 3, 1907. He had married Adalaide Blackenton in 1846 and had one son, Wallace, but both seemed to have died early. Little else is known of him, but he got involved in this mission work with his niece Nellie Guild,

but does not appear to have been one of the permanent missionaries on the islands, although he travelled back and forth several times.

6 Nellie Guild was born Helen Francis Guild on August 3, 1862 and was the daughter of Nancy Pherson and Charles Guild. Charles was the brother of Jason Guild. While in the 1910 census she is listed as living with her mother and Christine Pfanstiehl and working as a clerk in a post offce, it is not clear if this was a permanent move away from the West Indies or temporary. On December 31, 1915 she is listed as arriving in New York from Bermuda on the S.S. Bermudian, so she may have been active in the West Indies missions to this point. She appears to have inherited her uncle’s house in North Attleboro and would ultimately marry Fred Dunnell after his wife Adelia passed away.

7 According to documentation retrieved from the Family Search genealogical website, Adelia Eaton (originally from Nova Scotia) married Fred Ashley Dunnell (from Lee, Maine) in North Attleboro on March 24, 1881. They do not appear to have had any children and left the West Indies on the ship the Korona for New York on February 2, 1907. By the 1910 census, the couple was running a laundry in New Jersey. By the 1920 census the couple was boarding with Nellie F. Guild in North Attleboro, with a Dutch born woman from the West Indies named Christine Pfanstiehl. The house they were living in appears to have been the house originally owned by Jason Guild, Nellie’s uncle. It appears that Adelia Dunnell passed away in the early 1920s and on December 25, 1925 Fred Dunnell married Nellie Guild, when both were in their 60s.

8 The information is scarce on this group, and so it is not clear if all of them made the initial trip. It is possible that Miss Jessie Purdy may have come around 1902 and not with the original group. Jessie Purdy however, came from North Attleboro, MA, and would spend the rest of her life in St. Kitts (into the 1950s), where she would be recognized as a pioneer of the Pilgrim Holiness Church. It appears she was born Jessie Amelia Purdy on July 1, 1870 in Nova Scotia, but was the only daughter of John K. and Ann Purdy who lived in North Attleboro at least through the 1910 census.

9 Moulton, Exploits: 60-61. This reference is important, since this mission work is often claimed by various groups. While it clearly did merge into the Apostolic Holiness Union of Rees and Knapp eventually, at least in 1907 it was a separate mission group fowing out of Holiness work in New England. While Moulton doesn’t name the mission group explicitly, it may be part of a little-known group, which Rev. Arthur Greene of North Attleboro noted he was president of (at least by 1909) called The Bible Home and Foreign Missionary Society. Rev. R. Wingrove Ives noted that the frst organized Apostolic Holiness Union church in the Caribbean was established in 1912 by Superintendent R.G. Finch, A Missionary’s Cry from the Island of Barbados. Kingswood, KY: Missionary Offce (circa 1927): 13. This would have been under the International Holiness Apostolic Union. In 1913, it became the International Apostolic Holiness Church. In 1922, with the merger with the Pilgrim Church of California, the group became the Pilgrim Holiness Church. So, really until 1912 the Caribbean groups discussed here were not connected to any particular denomination.

10 “Wrath of God.” Boston Daily Globe, July 9, 1902: 17.

11 Since Moulton also had ties to North Attleboro, MA, he was likely familiar with the workers already established on St. Kitts. His connections likely came through the Portsmouth Camp Meeting. His connection to the group can also be seen when his daughter, Lila Newall Moulton married Frank E. Ware on February 23, 1914 in North Attleboro, where they were married by J.H. Hartman, who was part of the earlier work in the West Indies.

12 Moulton, Exploits: 35-40.

13 While newspaper articles often refer to “Charles O. Moulton,” his legal name seems to have been Cyrus Orlando Moulton, and his personal background is a bit confusing. His headstone in Guiana is recorded to have said, “In loving memory of Cyrus O. Moulton born in Yanken, W. Va. July 24, 1872. Died in Georgetown, Demarara, S.A., January 27, 1909 aged 36 years.” Apparently, he was the son of Cyrus F. and Nancy H. (or possibly Margaret) Moulton and was born in 1872, but no records show a birth in West Virginia. In an article written on Moulton’s life in God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate it indicated he was born July 24, 1872 in Yonkers, New York. Some records indicate possibly either New York or Providence, Rhode Island. He married Eva Frances Brown on December 17, 1897 in Boston, but the two are recorded as parents of an infant, Harold Earl Moulton born in October 15, 1894 who died of meningitis on December 20, 1894 in Providence, and a daughter, Lila Newell Moulton born in 1896 in Taunton, MA. Both of these children appear to be born before their parents were married. In the previously mentioned article (“Brother and Sister Moulton,” God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, April 17, 1902: 9) it indicates that while Moulton joined the Methodist church at age 10, he was expelled at age 18. After his father’s death in 1899, he was saved and sanctifed the same year, and in 1901 felt called to the West Indies as a missionary. Later, two more children would be born in Barbados: Morris Kimber Moulton born July 18, 1904 and Eva Donna Moulton born January 8, 1908. Cyrus O. Moulton died in Georgetown, Guiana after attempting mission work in this area with John Corrigan, who had died two weeks after they arrived. Moulton and James M. Taylor (of the Faith and Love Mission) had started evangelistic work in 1908 in Guiana, where they planted what would eventually become the Pilgrim Holiness Church.

14 C.O. Moulton, Exploits in the Tropics, published in 1907, Pickett Publishing Company, Louisville, KY: 52.

15 All information on birth, census, or immigration records come from searches on FamilySearch.com and in each case, where possible, the scan of the original document was examined for a complete analysis of the information.

16 C.O. Moulton, Exploits in the Tropics, published in 1907, Pickett Publishing Company, Louisville, KY: 46-47.

17 Anonymous, R.G. Finch: The Man and His Mission. Colorado Spring, CO: Emmanuel Press 1967: 146

18 Ibid., 157-158.

19 Pilgrims in the Northern Caribbees. Foreign Missionary Study Course, by Armor D. Peisker. Indianapolis, IN: Pilgrim Holiness Church (1953): 49.

20 An article written by Irene’s son, Wingrove Taylor (“Three Drops of Water” by Wingrove Taylor. in God’s Clock Keeps Perfect Time: God’s Bible School’s First 100 Years:1900-2000. Compiled and Edited by Kevin M. Moser and Larry D. Smith. Cincinnati, OH: Revivalist Press, 56) indicates that Irene’s family was Anglican and that Irene was converted when God’s Bible School led an evangelistic outreach on the island. He indicates that Irene responded the frst night and the team saw her potential and helped her enroll at God’s Bible School. This is likely a combination of events. Likely Irene did respond on the frst night she encountered the Dunnells and Miss Guild, but this group was not directly connected to God’s Bible School. It is likely Moulton, who spotted Irene’s potential, helped her enroll at God’s Bible School. There is no evidence of God’s Bible School being involved in an evangelistic outreach on the islands until Irene returned in 1910 with James M. Taylor.

21 “Services at Camp Hebron,” Boston Daily Globe, July 8, 1903: 25.

22 “New Chain of Missions,” Boston Daily Globe, July 10, 1903: 17.

23 C.O. Moulton, Exploits in the Tropics, published in 1907, Pickett Publishing Company, Louisville, KY: 53-54.

24 “Bible School Notes,” God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, November 5, 1903: 14-15.

25 Smith is referring here to the International Apostolic Holiness Union and Prayer League established by Rees and Knapp is 1897, however the work in the West Indies began in 1890 from New England and Moulton’s book seems to indicate the locus of his mission work was New England and not God’s Bible School. This is not to imply there was not a connection, but Smith seems to oversimplify the relationship between God’s Bible School and the mission work in the Caribbean.

26 Larry D. Smith, A Century on the Mount of Blessings: The Story of God’s Bible School. Cincinnati, OH: God’s Bible School and College (2016): 143.

27 Cf. Robert A. Danielson, “From the Archives: Arthur Greene: Pioneering Pentecostal Evangelist.” The Asbury Journal 71(2): 156-166 (2016).

28 Mrs. M. W. Knapp, “Farewell Meetings,” God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, May 11, 1916: 8.

29 Oswald Chambers (1874-1917) travelled to the United States in late 1906 with Juji Nakada. He taught at God’s Bible School and College during the spring of 1907, when the photograph with Irene Blyden was taken. He remained connected to God’s Bible School and College, and The Revivalist through 1910, though not as a teacher. Chambers is most known for his devotional work, My Utmost for His Highest

30 Rev. O.L. King sailed from New York on February 2, 1918 with his wife to work on the island of Antigua, and later St. Kitts. He wrote one brief work, which gives statistics and illustrations of the work in this area about 1920, it is Antigua, by Rev. and Mrs. O. L. King, no date given, Kingswood, KY: Missionary offce. In his brief account of the work on Nevis, he noted, “Rev. R. A. Taylor and his wife, Irene Blyden Taylor, are natives of the West Indies and in charge of the work on Nevis. Both are graduates of God’s Bible School. The spirit of the ‘Hilltop’ is present in the Mission Home at Nevis, and there one feels ‘nearer home’.” (Page 26).

31 Oswald Chambers, “Impressions of the 1909 Salvation Park Camp,” God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, July 8, 1909: 3.

32 Guy Wilkinson, “God’s Blessing Still on Shantytown,” God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, January 16, 1908: 14.

33 “Three Drops of Water” by Wingrove Taylor. in God’s Clock Keeps Perfect Time: God’s Bible School’s First 100 Years:1900-2000. Compiled and Edited by Kevin M. Moser and Larry D. Smith. Cincinnati, OH: Revivalist Press (2000): 56-57.

34 James M. Taylor was a prolifc holiness missionary evangelist, and he had made an earlier visit to the Caribbean in 1906 which was after Irene Blyden was at God’s Bible School and College. This journey is recorded in Campaigning for God in Caribbean Waters by James M. Taylor, revised edition 1912, Knoxville, TN: James M. Taylor. He notes in a brief preface that the original book was published in 1909 but was poorly done, and he originally went as part of his own independent mission called Faith and Love Mission, which he dissolved in order to focus on missionary evangelism helping existing mission work. In general, Taylor travelled at the request of C.O. Moulton and worked with him. He did not visit Saba or Nevis, but does record a few days on St. Kitts.

35 Larry D. Smith, A Century on the Mount of Blessings: The Story of God’s Bible School. Cincinnati, OH: God’s Bible School and College (2016): 144. Again, Smith seems to oversimplify a much more complicated situation. He also indicates that Irene Blyden was a convert of Moulton’s, but that does not appear to be the case, since she was apparently converted before Moulton arrived on the island. James Taylor is also a complex fgure in Holiness missions. He was an independent missionary out of Tennessee and seems to have worked with numerous groups. His earlier visit in 1906 was largely supported by the Holiness Union of the South, a different group

danielson: irene blyden taylor: god’s apostle to nevis 209

than represented by God’s Bible School, which was led by H.C. Morrison (cf. Robert A. Danielson, “H.C. Morrison and the Holiness Union of the South.” The Asbury Journal 79(1): 52-91 (2024): especially footnote 17. Also, H.C. Morrison, “The Atlanta Convention; Chap. II.” The Pentecostal Herald (November 7, 1906): 1). Taylor would go on to work under the Methodist Episcopal Church in mission work in Puerto Rico, and would team up in 1912 with another former missionary of Morrison’s named Sidney Edwards for a mission trip through Central America (cf. Robert A. Danielson, “Sidney W. Edwards: Early Holiness/Methodist Missionary Pioneer in Cuba, Puerto Rico, and Costa Rica.” The Asbury Journal 78(1): 121-150 (2023).

36 In an article by Rev. Eldon B. Nelson, entitled “Prayer—Faith— Reality.” Pilgrim Holiness Advocate 36(25) June 23, 1956: 11, he writes about the dedication of a new church building at Brown’s Hill, and he wrote, “The work at Brown Hill was started after much prayer. In the year 1911 Miss Blyden (now Mrs. Irene Taylor) and Miss Coulter felt the leadings of the Spirit, and went to hold open-air meetings on the very spot where the old church stood. Regular open-air services were held in Brown Hill during the week. After a time, when people got saved, they went, singing, all the way into Charlestown for the Sunday services, a distance of about three miles.” In 1915 money was given to buy a house in a separate location, which was moved to Brown Hill and enlarged. Nelson went on to note, “Brown Hill, once only a preaching point, today is one of the Strongest Pilgrim Holiness churches on the island of Nevis.”

37 Pilgrim Missions in the Caribbean Area: Adult Missionary Society Programs and Field Studies. Compiled by Annie Eubanks. Indianapolis, IN: Pilgrim Holiness Church (1959): 16-17

38 James M. Taylor, God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, “Sister Blyden’s Letter,” April 21, 1910: 15.

39 Pilgrims in the Northern Caribbees. Foreign Missionary Study Course, by Armor D. Peisker. Indianapolis, IN: Pilgrim Holiness Church (1953): 37-38.

40 Ralph Goodrich Finch was the superintendent of the mission work at this time for the International Apostolic Holiness Church. Conficts with the Pilgrim Holiness Church in which Finch was removed as General Superintendent of Foreign Missions in 1930 led Finch to separate in 1936 forming the Emmanuel Association of Churches (known as Emmanuel Methodists), which is a part of the Conservative Holiness Movement.

41 George Biernes was in charge of the mission work in Georgetown.

42 Today, Georgetown is the capital of Guyana on the coast of South America.

43 Irene Blyden, “A Message from Irene Blyden.” God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, December 3, 1914: 11.

(2025)

44 J.M. Coone, “Chapter II” in Full Gospel Work in the West Indies and South America, by Ralph G. Finch. No publisher or date given, circa 1916.

45 The photograph of the missionaries speaking at the 1915 camp meeting can be seen on page 86 of God’s Clock Keeps Perfect Time: God’s Bible School’s First 100 Years:1900-2000. Compiled and Edited by Kevin M. Moser and Larry D. Smith. Cincinnati, OH: Revivalist Press (2000). It is added to this article with permission of God’s Bible School.

46 “A Pentecostal Diary: The 1915 Camp-meeting Day by Day,” God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, July 8, 1915: 12.

47 B.S., “A Glimpse of Some of the Morning Missionary Meetings,” God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, July 15, 1915: 10.

48 “Bible School Notes,” God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, April 27, 1916: 11.

49 Mrs. M. W. Knapp, “Farewell Meetings,” God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, May 11, 1916: 8. This article continued on page 9, and then May 18, 1916: 8-9, and May 25, 1916: 11.

50 Ibid.

51 Mrs. M. W. Knapp, “Farewell Meetings,” God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, May 18, 1916: 9.

52 Irene Blyden, “From Sister Blyden,” God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, July 6, 1916: 9.

53 Diary Letters: A Missionary Trip through the West Indies and to South America, by Mrs. M. W. Knapp. Cincinnati, OH: God’s Revivalist Offce (1919): 213.

54 Ibid., 218.

55 Ibid., 221.

56 Ibid., 226-229.

57 Ibid., 246.

58 Ibid., 257.

59 “Missionary Dies: Mrs. Knapp, 62 is Summoned,” The Cincinnati Post, February 1, 1930: 13.

60 Pilgrims in the Northern Caribbees. Foreign Missionary Study Course, by Armor D. Peisker. Indianapolis, IN: Pilgrim Holiness Church (1953): 38.

danielson: irene blyden taylor: god’s apostle to nevis 211

61 Charles L. Slater would later become mostly known for his work in missionary work in southern Africa. Cf. Maude E. Slater, Missionary Evangelist: A Biography of Charles L. Slater, 1951, place of publication unknown, published by Maude E. Slater.

62 Campaigning for God in Southern Waters. Ralph G. Finch and Charles L. Slater. Louisville, KY: Pentecostal Publishing Company (1923): 7.

63 Ibid., 9.

64 L.L. Miller, “Instead of the Briar”: Missionary Experiences of Rev. and Mrs. L.L Miller on Barbados, B.W.I., no date, Indianapolis, IN: Foreign Missionary Offce, Pilgrim Holiness Church: 8.

65 Ira M. Taylor, “The Hour of Her Triumph (A Tribute to My Mother).” Unpublished 8-page typed manuscript from the fles of the Archives of the Wesleyan Church. Written note indicates it was received by Paul William Thomas from Mrs. E.E. Phillippe on October 25, 1962.

66 Ibid., 1.

67 Ibid., 3.

68 Ibid., 6.

69 Ibid., 8.

Works Cited

Anonymous

1967 R.G. Finch: The Man and His Mission. Colorado Spring, CO: Emmanuel Press.

Blyden, Irene

1914 “A Message from Irene Blyden.” God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, December 3, 1914: 11.

1916 “From Sister Blyden,” God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, July 6, 1916: 9.

Boston Daily Globe

1890 “Carried Barrels of Tracts.” December 9, 1890: 20.

1902 “Wrath of God.” July 9, 1902: 17.

1903 “Services at Camp Hebron.” July 8, 1903: 25.

1903 “New Chain of Missions.” July 10, 1903: 17.

(2025)

Chambers, Oswald

1909 “Impressions of the 1909 Salvation Park Camp,” God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, July 8, 1909: 2-5.

The Cincinnati Post

1930 “Missionary Dies: Mrs. Knapp, 62 is Summoned.” February 1, 1930: 13.

Coone, J.M.

1916? “Chapter II” in Full Gospel Work in the West Indies and South America, by Ralph G. Finch. No publisher or date given: 21-28

. Danielson, Robert A.

2016 “From the Archives: Arthur Greene: Pioneering Pentecostal Evangelist.” The Asbury Journal 71(2): 156166.

2023 “Sidney W. Edwards: Early Holiness/Methodist Missionary Pioneer in Cuba, Puerto Rico, and Costa Rica.” The Asbury Journal 78(1): 121-150.

2024 “H.C. Morrison and the Holiness Union of the South.” The Asbury Journal 79(1): 52-91.

Eubanks, Annie

1959 Pilgrim Missions in the Caribbean Area: Adult Missionary Society Programs and Field Studies. Compiled by Annie Eubanks. Indianapolis, IN: Pilgrim Holiness Church.

Finch, Ralph G. and Charles L. Slater 1923 Campaigning for God in Southern Waters. Louisville, KY: Pentecostal Publishing Company.

God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate 1902 “Brother and Sister Moulton,” God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, April 17, 1902: 9.

1903 “Bible School Notes,” God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, November 5, 1903: 14-15.

1915 “A Pentecostal Diary: The 1915 Camp-meeting Day by Day,” God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, July 8, 1915: 12.

1915 B.S., “A Glimpse of Some of the Morning Missionary Meetings,” God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, July 15, 1915: 10.

1916 “Bible School Notes,” God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, April 27, 1916: 11.

Ives, Rev. R. Wingrove 1927? A Missionary’s Cry from the Island of Barbados Kingswood, KY: Missionary Offce.

King, Rev. and Mrs. O.L. nd Antigua. Kingswood, KY: Missionary Offce.

Knapp, Mrs. M.W.

1916 “Farewell Meetings,” God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, May 11, 1916: 8-9, May 18, 1916: 8-9, and May 25, 1916: 11.

1919 Diary Letters: A Missionary Trip through the West Indies and to South America. Cincinnati, OH: God’s Revivalist Offce.

Miller, L.L. Nd

“Instead of the Briar”: Missionary Experiences of Rev. and Mrs. L.L Miller on Barbados, B.W.I. Indianapolis, IN: Foreign Missionary Offce, Pilgrim Holiness Church.

Morrison, H.C.

1906 “The Atlanta Convention; Chap. II.” The Pentecostal Herald. (November 7, 1906): 1.

Moulton, C.O.

1907 Exploits in the Tropics. Louisville, KY: Pickett Publishing Company.

Nelson, Rev. Eldon B. Nelson

1956 “Prayer—Faith—Reality.” Pilgrim Holiness Advocate 36(25), June 23, 1956: 11.

Peisker, Amor D.

1953 Pilgrims in the Northern Caribbees. Foreign Missionary Study Course. Indianapolis, IN: Pilgrim Holiness Church.

Ross, D.A.

1891 “Letters from the West Indies.” The Christian Alliance 6(10) (March 6, 1891): 158.

Slater, Maude E.

1951 Missionary Evangelist: A Biography of Charles L. Slater. Place of publication unknown, published by Maude E. Slater.

Smith, Larry D.

2016 A Century on the Mount of Blessings: The Story of God’s Bible School. Cincinnati, OH: God’s Bible School and College.

Taylor, Ira M.

nd “The Hour of Her Triumph (A Tribute to My Mother).” Unpublished 8-page typed manuscript from the fles of the Archives of the Wesleyan Church. Written note indicates it was received by Paul William Thomas from Mrs. E.E. Phillippe on October 25, 1962.

Taylor, James M.

1910 “Sister Blyden’s Letter,” God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, April 21, 1910: 15.

1912 Campaigning for God in Caribbean Waters. Revised edition. Knoxville, TN: James M. Taylor.

Taylor, Wingrove

2000 “Three Drops of Water,” in God’s Clock Keeps Perfect Time: God’s Bible School’s First 100 Years:1900-2000. Compiled and Edited by Kevin M. Moser and Larry D. Smith. Cincinnati, OH: Revivalist Press: 56-57.

Thomas, Paul Westphal and Paul William Thomas

1976 The Days of Our Pilgrimage: History of The Pilgrim Holiness Church. Marion, IN: The Wesley Press.

Wilkinson, Guy

1908 “God’s Blessing Still on Shantytown,” God’s Revivalist and Bible Advocate, January 16, 1908: 14.

Wood, J.A.

1904

Autobiography of Rev. J. A. Wood. Chicago, IL: The Christian Witness Company.

The Asbury Journal 80/1: 215-253

DOI: 10.7252/Journal.01.2025S.09

Nicholas M. Railton

Charles Wesley and the Jews

Abstract: This article focuses on Charles Wesley, the poet of Methodism, and his attitude to Jews. Wesley’s eschatology was shaped by, among other infuences, his natural father and his spiritual mentor, Vincent Perronet. His understanding of biblical prophecy was expressed most clearly in some hymns he wrote for the early Methodists. The hymns speaking of the return of the Jewish nation to the Holy Land have largely fallen into abeyance. A satirical drawing produced during the anti-Jewish protests of 1753 featuring Charles Wesley is discussed. Given the hostility against the existence and policies of the one Jewish state in the world, a re-reading of Wesley’s verses could, and should, feed into Methodist discourse.

Keywords: Charles Wesley, Samuel Wesley, Jews, restoration, naturalization, hymn.

Nicholas M. Railton, M.A., PhD., is a retired university lecturer and secondary school teacher.

Introduction

The British Methodist Church does not enjoy a good reputation among the Jewish community in Britain. On the contrary, as far as Jewish leaders in the United Kingdom are concerned, British Methodists have still not come to terms with Israel’s existence as a reconstituted Jewish state in the land God had promised them long ago. The Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis of the United Hebrew Congregations of the Commonwealth has criticised their politicking and insisted they would in no way advance the cause of peace in the region. Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks (1948-2020), the previous Chief Rabbi of the Commonwealth, was equally adamant that the Methodist report on Justice for Palestine and Israel (2010)1 was “unbalanced, factually and historically fawed” and offered “no genuine understanding of one of the most complex conficts in the world today.”2 Dozens of hostile notices of motion and memorials on Israel have been presented to Conference over the years. Israeli policies of self-defence and the resettlement of Judea and Samaria have attracted far more more attention than any other issue. Indeed, in contrast to the obesession with Israel, discussions of other military conficts and humanitarian catastrophes pale into insignifcance. The latest manifestation of this latent hostility took place at Conference in 2024. Following the worst pogrom since the holocaust, petitioners at the British Methodist Conference called on the British Government to recognise the State of Palestine and cease supplying Israel with arms and related products. They encouraged all Methodists to endorse the boycott of “all Israeli products” until the state of Palestine was established.3 For the Government of Israel and the Knesset such calls were, and are, tantamount to rewarding those who had perpetrated, and afterwards celebrated, mass murder and rape of Jews.

One wonders what John Wesley (1703-1791), the founder of British Methodism, and his brother Charles Wesley (1707-1788), the poet of Methodism, would make of this attitude to Israel. Very little has been written on the topic of Methodism and the Jews.4 The following article aims to partially fll this gap by considering Charles Wesley’s hymns against the backdrop of anti-Jewish protests in Britain in 1753. Knowledge of what Wesley wrote about Jews can hopefully provide a useful context within which to evaluate modern British Methodist responses to the State of Israel.

Samuel Wesley and the Jews

Before considering Charles Wesley’s convictions it may be helpful to frst record that forms of millennialism frst associated with the English Civil War had survived into eighteenth-century Britain, mainly in groups spiritually linked to the Puritans. Through their mother, the Wesley brothers were exposed to Puritan infuence.5 Their father Rev. Samuel Wesley (16621735), a High Churchman, wrote a piece on the millennium in 1691, in which he stated that the time was coming when the Jews would be called, the fullness of the Gentiles brought in, and the saints would reign on earth. The Jews shall be restored to their privileged position as well as to their land. As a nation they were indestructible. Their salvation (he references Rom 11:13-15) will bring resurrection life to the whole world.6 His authorities were, apart from the Bible and ancient Jewish commentators, the Church Fathers and Joseph Mede (1586-1639). The end-times conversion of the Jewish nation to their Messiah was part and parcel of most millenarian eschatological systems though non-millenarians (Samuel Wesley calls them ‘Antichiliasts’) might also believe such events would one day occur. He could not abide those opinionated theologians who rejected doctrines simply because Jews held them.

In the publication of the four-man Athenian Society, Samuel Wesley, their chief writer, had authored other answers to questions relating to the Jews which have yet to receive any attention: “Whether it be for the advantage of England, that the Jews be permitted to live and trade here?”; “Whether a Christian magistrate can tolerate the Jews, since their expectation of a triumphant Messias is a direct blasphemy against Jesus Christ whom they reject and their ancestors had the presumptuous boldness to brag, that they had crucifed the God of the Christians?”; “Is it lawful for Christian Princes to permit Jews to live quiet in their Dominions, and to give them a free Toleration for their Religion?” In answer to the frst question Samuel Wesley says the Jews were not strong enough to do much mischief and they are not numerous enough to conquer the world. He hoped they would fnd a place among Christians where “hopes of their return and conversion” could be nourished. It was, in addition, “just that Shem should now dwell in the tents of Japhet.” As for some of the lies spread about Jews, they were little more than “guess and supposition.” He wanted to discard “the false calumnies that are cast upon that dispersed nation.” He warned that boasting against the Jews was unwarranted since “they bear us, not we

them.” “They are our elder brethren, and we are but grafted into the common stock with ’em [sic].” They carefully observed the eternal moral law even to the present. Though some played a part in the crucifxion of Jesus “yet we are the better for it, for had he not been crucifed, our religion had never had a being.” The idea that Jews used the blood of Christians during the feast of unleavened bread “is so express against the fundamentals of their religion, that nothing can be more [sic], being both forbidden to kill and to eat blood; is so far from the doctrine of their expositors, that they teach quite contrary.” The treatise of Kings by “Rabbi Moses of Egypt” (Maimonides) is quoted as a source. Hostile lies, rooted in ignorance of the Talmud, led to the tragic history of false imprisonment and cruel death that had characterised their fate in Christian Europe. Christians had no right to mistreat those of other faiths. Samuel Wesley openly supported the inclusion of Jews in the English commonwealth and expected great advantages to ensue from such toleration. “We all owe ’em [sic] a greater debt, to wit, our prayers that God wou’d call home his ancient people the Jews.” Provided there was no inter-marriage and they were willing to obey the laws of the country and were not admitted to any public offce, Jews should “undoubtedly” be permitted to live under the protection of Christian governments. Romans 9-11 are quoted as a biblical reason to have compassion on Jews and hope for their fnal salvation. Christians should eternally be thankful that they had received the scriptures from Jews. Jews worshipped the same God as Christians, “tho’ not in the same manner.” Hard-hearted discourtesy and severity were unlikely to persuade them to accept Jesus as their Messiah: “Violence must be avoided, since Faith cometh by Persuasion, and not by Force.” Wesley understands the apostle’s words “all Israel shall be saved” to mean that most Jews will be converted at some point in the future. Thus, “all the Jews, before the last Judgment, shall be converted and acknowledge Christ as the true Messiah.” He also warned Gentile believers not to be too high-minded in their relations with Jews for they, too, could be cut off.7

Such relatively broad-minded opinions were by no means universal when Samuel Wesley had them published by his brother-inlaw John Dunton in the Athenian Mercuries 8 Such views helped form the spiritual atmosphere in which the Wesley brothers grew up.

Vincent Perronet

While his father was certainly the greatest infuence on his thinking, there was another Anglican clergyman who mentored Charles

Wesley. Wesley held the burial service at Shoreham and preached the funeral sermon for Vincent Perronet (1693-1785), that “wise and worthy” friend, the “Archbishop of the Methodists.”9 The Anglican vicar played a fatherly role in the lives of the Wesley brothers and other Methodists. He once wrote to Charles Wesley: “I make no doubt Methodism, notwithstanding all the wiles of Satan, is designed by divine Providence to introduce the approaching millennium.”10 Vincent Perronet was a student of biblical prophecy, the coming of Christ’s Kingdom, and the millennium. The commentary of Johann Albrecht Bengel (1687-1752) on Revelation helped shape his views.11

John Fletcher (1729-1785), too, addressed Perronet as his “Father in Christ.”12 Fletcher looked forward to the millennium for whose inauguration Perronet prayed. “O that the happy thought, the glorious hope may animate me to perfect holiness in the fear of God.”13 The blessed hope should have practical effects in the hearts of its adherents.

Samuel Wesley’s sons both believed a day was coming when the Jewish nation would be converted to Christ. John believed in the millennium as a scriptural doctrine without falling into “wild and extravagant fancies” and “speculations” about dates.14 But it was Charles Wesley, above all, who gave expression to the eschatological role for the Jewish people as his father had outlined in the article on the millennium. Charles read books on prophecy during his student days. The work by Thomas Hartley, Paradise Restored, on the millennium was in his library. He and his brother John were in contact with Dr. John Robertson, who in 1757 published the introduction and excerpts from Bengel’s commentary on Revelation.15

From his intensive studies of biblical prophecy, as well as discussions with his father and Perronet, Charles Wesley became a millennialist.16 Though there is no mention of Jews in his journal (which ended in 1756) and no sermons dedicated to the topic, he certainly preached from time to time on the Lord’s second coming.17 Charles was aware, too, of the ill-treatment of Jews in Catholic states. He wrote about the earthquake in Lisbon in November 1755: “On the day of the earthquake they were to have had an act of faith; that is, a bonfre of the poor Jews and heretics. All the English, therefore, went out of town, as usual, and so escaped.”18 This comment seems to have been inspired by the sermons of his brother John and, more especially, of George Whitefeld, who condemned the “outrageous barbarity” of the Holy Inquisition in Portugal. “Mahometan Christians” had plundered, tortured, burned, and raped Jews.

The innocent blood of the “fugitive nation” had screamed to God and drawn down Divine vengeance in the form of an earthquake and tsunami.19 Following the massive destruction of Lisbon, John Wesley, who had got to know, and personally like, Portuguese Jews in Georgia, asked whether God was “now making Inquisition for Blood.” “How long”, he wondered, “has their Blood been crying from the Earth?” He quotes Jeremiah 5:9, 29: “And shall I not visit for these Things, saith the Lord; shall not my soul be avenged of such a City as this?” Innocent blood cried out for punishment.20

The founding fathers of Methodism saw the human response to Jews as a kind of touchstone for the authenticity and truth of a religion. In their eyes, Catholicism clearly failed to pass the test. And those who touched the apple of God’s eye could expect a reaction sooner or later.

Charles wrote his note on the Lisbon earthquake two years after popular unrest surrounding the bill to grant citizenship to Jews in Britain. On the streets of merry old England, deeply rooted, ancient prejudices against Jews had resurfaced. And the name of Charles Wesley and George Whitefeld had been dragged into the debate.

The Act to Naturalize Jews (1753)

In the middle of the eighteenth century somewhere between 5,000 and 8,000 Jews lived in England, a country whose total population was around 5.7 million people at the time.21 The Jews were a tiny minority in an offcially Christian state. Ever since Oliver Cromwell had permitted Jews to settle in England and open synagogues,22 they had been able to practice their religion but were not able to become British citizens. But on 7 July 1753 the king had signed a law that opened up to Jews this opportunity.23 The bishops of the national church, who also took seats in the upper house of Parliament supported this endeavour,24 and in the House of Commons there was a clear majority of 41 votes in favour. On 28 November 1753, however, the law was repealed after months of street protests. The Prime Minister Henry Pelham (1694-1754) felt the need to take this step to appease public opinion, knowing that elections were scheduled for the following year.25

Country parsons had stirred up the anti-Jewish feeling in the country, believing that certain biblical prophecies could only be fulflled if Jews were treated as scattered sojourners without any guaranteed legal status.26 Tracts appeared on market-places and reminded the reading

221

public of the praise-worthy laws adopted by King Edward I (1239-1307) to discriminate against Jews. One such measure enforced upon Jews was the wearing of a yellow identifcation badge.27

Horace Walpole (1717-1797), a writer and politician, was glad that at least the bishops, if not “the very lowest of the Clergy,” had agreed to remove “absurd distinctions” that stigmatised and shackled loyal and diligent subjects of the kingdom. For Walpole the whole affair unfortunately showed how, even in an age of enlightenment, the English people, supported and egged on by ignorant clergymen, still clung to the most ridiculous and primitive prejudices. “The little Curates preached against the Bishops for deserting the interests of the Gospel” and “this holy spirit” seized the populace. Suddenly it seemed that most people were “zealous for the honour of the prophecies that foretell calamity and eternal dispersion to the Jews.”28

Over eighty tracts were published on the topic of naturalisation.29 The role of the Jews in biblical prophecy and the divine plan of salvation became central to the public discussions.30

The politician Edward Weston (1703-1770) reminded readers of the particular brutality shown to Jews by Portuguese Catholics and called for a gracious, merciful treatment of Jews in Britain. For him it was clear that history, experience, reason, and scripture demanded such an attitude. He argued for the opposite of the Catholic treatment of Jews and pleaded for support for naturalisation.31 But while supporters of the bill claimed that humanitarian motives were important, they were sure the country would beneft economically from the measure; others hoped the law would enable Great Britain to fulfl its divine calling to repatriate Jews in their promised land. Bishops were willing to grant Jews more civil rights without demanding that they take the Protestant oath and partake in the sacrament. At the bottom of the clerical pyramid, however, clergy who referred pejoratively to the proposal as the “Jew Bill” seemed to fear that the fulflment of prophecies could be thwarted by the proposed act of Parliament.

The evangelical camp within the national Anglican Church was divided on the political issue. The Methodist Anglican Rev. William Romaine (1714-1795) wrote three pamphlets on the topic full of anti-Semitic tropes. He did not omit to say that the skin of Jews had a pungent smell and that Jews involved in commerce were known for their usury.32 If he was in fact the author of An Answer to a Pamphlet then he also believed that there was

historical evidence for the ancient blood libel, namely that Jews, out of pure hatred of the Christian religion, killed children at Passover so as to mix their blood into their matzot. The author refers to the expulsion of Jews from England in 1290 and, with other ludicrous arguments, pleaded against the naturalisation of Christ’s enemies. “For murdering and blaspheming Christ, God drave [sic] them out of the Holy Land, and made them Vagrants all over the Earth, and who ever heard of a natural-born Vagrant?”, the author asked. Allowing Jews into the country would be worse than tying a living man to a dead carcass. It was suicidal to allow hostile foreigners into the country. “The Jews murdered Christ, and would murder us if they had Power.” One day they might hold power, were they to be tolerated as subjects. He quotes from the Magdeburg Centuries, compiled by Lutheran scholars, and there saw “what a prevailing Engine the Jews Money” was. The “all-powerful Gold” brought Jews back to England at the time of Cromwell. “Money is their Idol. Money they most ardently worship.” In this context, he criticises the banker Mr. G-----n [Samson Gideon], who might one day be made their Messiah. Cromwell, too, comes in for criticism. “The Jews were then brought in under a Pretence of its being a very probable Means of their general Call and Conversion: But hitherto no such good Effect has been produced.” Few, indeed, had been converted since then. He wondered why rich Jews were leaving Europe in order to be converted in England. The author found a biblical reason for this lack of success. “I cannot fnd any one Passage in the Old Testament or the New, which authorizes us to suppose, that the whole Nation of the Jews is ever to be converted.” He did not believe that Rom 11:23,26 provided any such assurance. For him Israel stood for the whole body of believers, whether Jew or Gentile. Neither money nor false hopes should determine policy, but rational thought based on experience and correct understanding of scripture. “We love their Persons; but their Principles we do and must detest. Their Infdelity and Immoralities we cannot love: And we think Christ’s Command to love our Enemies, no more proves that the Jews ought to be naturalised, than it requires us to take our implacable Enemy into our Bosom, even while he is attempting to destroy us.” Welcoming strangers holding a religion so very different from that of the national Church by misunderstanding and misapplying the commandment to love one’s neighbour had to be resisted, especially when one knew that the newcomers would seek to undermine and ultimately destroy traditional British society. Johann Christoph Wagenseil (1633-

1705) is quoted to strengthen the argument. The foreigners “lately imported among us” included “Murderers, Crucifers, Blasphemers, Vagrants” would become “natural-born Jew-Englishmen” in opposition to the laws of God and the laws of reason. Such people could only be expected to be ignorant of British history and culture. Scripture, tradition, history, reason, and experience all spoke against incorporating Jews into the body politic. It would be absurd, indeed monstrous, to think otherwise. Judaism was not compatible with Britishness. Romaine recommended learning from Muslim rulers:

They refuse to admit a Jew into their Communion: For they entertain such a bad Opinion of the Jews Principles, that they will not receive a Convert from among them; but whenever a Jew professes his Desire to become a Mahometan, they oblige him frst to turn Christian. […] and they think no Jew can be a true Believer in Mahomet, who disbelieves Jesus Christ; and therefore they naturalize no Jew, unless he frst turn Christian. Whereas we naturalize them with all their infdel Tenets and immoral Practices, which shews, that [we] have less Concern about our own Safety, and less Regard for Christ’s Honour than the very Turks have.

That lesson at least should be learned from the followers of the Mahomet. The fate of England lay in the balance. Were Jews to be admitted, the political and religious establishment would be seriously endangered. There was a serious choice to be made. A Bible verse on the front cover made the point: The multitude of the city was divided, and part held with the Jews, and part with the Apostles (Acts 14:4 KJV).33 The cover of another pamphlet posted the same warning:

Thus Step by Step, a Nation is undone, And Prodigals lose what their Fathers won; A Jew, a Turk, or Devil may come here, And Naturalize; it will not cost them dear.34

These were the arguments of a well-educated man who even claimed to have lived among Jews and known Jews personally. From experience he could “solemnly declare, that I never met with one Jew, who had any Inclination to be converted.”35 In other words, Jews did not belong in England.

Most British subjects had, in contrast, never met a single Jew and were no doubt ignorant of Jewish religion and culture. These would be open to persuasion regarding the aims of Jews wanting to become naturalized. Anti-Jewish arguments found expression on satirical prints. Charles Wesley (1707-1788) and George Whitefeld (1714-1770) were represented on one such poster (Vox Populi Vox Dei or the Jew Act Repealed, 1753) as enemies of Jewish emancipation.36

The artist puts the following statements into speech bubbles: “Thou Mitered Infdel has Dignity made thee forget God” (Charles Wesley); “Wo unto you; whose mouths speak great sweelling words having Mens Persons in Admiration because of advantage” (George Whitefeld). While Wesley claims bishops, conscious of their position in society, had forgotten God as they pursued naturalization, Whitefeld implies they had their eyes on potential economic benefts for themselves.

The Methodists are standing near to a bishop, who is not named. He is the person they are speaking to. For Wesley the bishop is an infdel. His support for naturalization lies in his lack of true faith. The mitre does not bear the inscription ‘Holy to the Lord’ but rather “£1000.” Presumably that is what his vote in the House of Lords cost. One poem gave expression to this scene:

Our Rulers have dar’d the Decree to revoke, Which was in Judea so frequently spoke, T’incorporate with us that fugitive Tribe: But, what is it Britons won’t do for a Bribe? The fourth that rose up, did, with great Exclamations, (Producing, for Evidence, Scripture Quotations) Declare such Proceedings wou’d draw on a Curse; And wou’d have said more – but was dumb’d by a Purse.37

The bishop would like to feel shame, but he does not. The Jewish fnancier Samson Gideon (1699-1762)38 and the deist Lord Bolingbroke39 are also in the picture. Supported by a mob of Jews and deists they call for naturalization.

It would seem that two of the clearest voices of Methodism had opposed Jews’ being granted a more equal position in British society. They look down unfeelingly on a Jew lying on the ground. The Jew is lying on bags of money and the Devil stands behind him. Instead of a hat a snake is curled up on the top of his head. The message is clear: the Jew and the Devil are allies. The Magna Carta (1215) and the Gospels are instrumentalised

in the battle to keep Jews excluded from citizenship. The people have managed to thwart the plans and dash the hopes of the elites. London is saved. The whole image is undergirded with the following lines:

God’s word declares the Iews a Vagrant race Till they their King Messia’s Laws Embrace Therefore Deistical attempts are Vain Still must they Wander like that Murderer Cain See how Worth Weighs & Vanity how Light The Iew Asham’d Lays prostrate at the Sight Skreens with one hand his Never blushing face Thus to be foold & Baffed with disgrace

But Hear Ye Deaf and look ye Willful Blind In Prophecys Messias you may fnd The Scepters Gone from Royal Judah’s Seed The Daily Sacrifce Hath Ceas’t to Bleed That Temple Honour’d by Our Lord is Razed And ’mongest the Gentiles his Great Name is praised Consider this & to your Duty Turn And Look on him whome you have pierc’d & mourn Go hear ye Deaf, & Look you Willful Blind And then you will a Happier Canaan fnd.

But was it true that Charles Wesley and George Whitefeld were on the side of those who attacked the bishops? And was the vox populi truly the vox dei or was it, after all, the vox diaboli?40

Three bishops – Thomas Secker (1693-1768), bishop of Oxford; Thomas Hayter (1702-1762), bishop of Norwich, and Robert Hay Drummond (1711-1776), bishop of St. Asaphs – actually did support the legal change for humanitarian and theological reasons. It is no longer possible to ascertain what Wesley and Whitefeld actually thought about the measure. One theological opponent of the Wesley brothers was the pastor at St.-Stephen’s Church in Bristol, Josiah Tucker (c.1712-1799), one of the most signifcant Anglican supporters of naturalization.41 Tucker was a Whig and, politically, far more liberal-minded than the Wesleys. He was of the view that London businessmen were behind the campaign to torpedo the Act. They were motivated, not by views on biblical prophecy, but concern about their own privileges. The religious arguments employed in their service by Romaine were merely empty phrases to deceive the masses.42

John Wesley did not comment on the satirical attack on his brother and the Calvinist Methodist Whitefeld, so we are unable to state categorically which position the founder of Methodism took on the

Naturalization Bill. He hardly ever commented on day-to-day politics and does not seem to have preached on the 1753 protests. His journal is silent on the matter.

At the end of the seventeenth century Samuel Wesley provided reasons why Jews should be treated compassionately and granted freedom and toleration in Great Britain. He had written of the appalling cruelties suffered by Jews as a result of ignorance and bigotry in Christian countries. One of the books in Charles Wesley’s library was Johann Georg Keyssler’s Travels through Germany, Bohemia, Hungary, Switzerland, Italy and Lorrain (1760). The anti-Jewish laws in Sardinia, including the wearing of a discriminatory yellow badge, made of wool or silk, are described in the work.43 These were the kinds of laws some people in England were calling for in the middle of the eighteenth century. The polemicist John Tutchin (c.1660-1707) called for such distinguishing badges because not all Jews could be recognised by their looks, clothing, or smell. He wanted the “enemies of the Saviour” to be locked up in their homes on Sundays so that Christians did not have to inhale the Jewish stench on the Day of the Lord 44 In 1753, similar demands were raised. The hostile slogan chanted on the streets was:

‘No Jews! No Jews! No wooden shoes!’45

and Charles Wesley was instrumentalised by a satiricist as a British patriot and opponent of the naturalization. This hysteria provided the backdrop to Wesley’s poetic pronouncements on the restoration and renewal of the Jewish people in the land promised to them.

Wesley’s Songs of Zion

Charles Wesley’s true convictions were put into verse form and published as hymns to be sung by Methodists all around the country.46 In 1758, he published a hymnbook with prayers of intercession for various organisations, individuals, and groups. It included a hymn of intercession for Jews:

Father of faithful Abraham, hear, Our earnest suit for Abraham’s seed; Justly they claim the softest tear, From us, adopted in their stead,

Who mercy thro’ their fall obtain, And Christ by their rejection gain.

Outcasts from thee, and scatter’d wide Through every nation under heaven, Blaspheming whom they crucifed, Unsaved, unpitied, unforgiven. Branded like Cain, they bear their load, Abhorr’d of men, and cursed of God.47 But hast Thou fnally forsook, For ever cast thine own away? Wilt thou not bid the murderers look On Him they pierc’d, and weep, and pray? Yes, gracious God, thy word is past, All Israel shall be sav’d at last.

Come then, Thou great Deliverer come, The veil from Jacob’s heart remove, Recieve thine antient people home, That quicken’d by they dying love, The world may there reception fnd Life from the dead for all mankind.48

The hymn begins with a challenge to Christians to be particularly merciful to Jewish people. It is full of biblical imagery and concludes with a reference to Romans 11:15-27. Wesley was as certain as his father that the Messiah would one day return to Jerusalem and be worshipped on the Mount of Olives. A mighty Jewish-Christian congregation would be gathered there:49

That place where once I walk’d below, On Olivet I will appear, My bleeding feet to Israel shew, While those who pierc’d behold me near; Again I will forsake my throne, And to my footstool earth descend, And fll the world with peace unknown, With glorious joy that ne’er shall end.

Out of Jerusalem

The Lord a church shall raise, To magnify the Christian name And spread the Founder’s praise.

The most well-known hymn on the conversion and restoration of the Jews appeared in 1762. In the preface to the frst volume of Short Hymns Charles Wesley names the key men who had inspired him to write the

hymns: Matthew Henry (1662-1714), Robert Gell (1595-1665) and Johann Albrecht Bengel. The biblical inspiration came from Isaiah 66:19-20:50

Almighty God of love, Set up th’ attracting sign, And summon whom thou dost approve For messengers divine.

From Abraham‘s favour’d seed Thy new apostles chuse, In isles and continents to spread The dead reviving news.

Them snatch’d out of the fame Thro’ every nation send The true Messias to proclaim The universal Friend;

That all the God unknown May learn of Jews t’adore And see thy glory in thy Son ’Till time shall be no more.

O that the chosen band Might now their brethren bring, And, gather’d out of every land, Present to Sion‘s King;

Of all the ancient race Not one be left behind, But each impell’d by secret grace His way to Canaan fnd!

We know, it must be done, For God hath spoke the word, All Israel shall their Saviour own, To their frst state restor’d:

Re-built by his command, Jerusalem shall rise, Her temple on Moriah stand Again, and touch the skies.

Send then thy servants forth To call the Hebrews home, From west and east, and south and north Let all the wanderers come;

Where‘er in lands unknown The fugitives remain, Bid every creature help them on Thy holy mount to gain:

An offering to their GOD There let them all be seen, Sprinkled with water and with blood, In soul and body clean;

With Israel‘s myriads seal’d Let all the nations meet, And shew the mystery fulfll’d, Thy family compleat!

The hymn “Almighty God of love” was sung by British and American Methodists proud of their roots in Israel.51 Various aspects of early Methodist eschatology fnd expression: the conversion and calling of the Jews to apostolic ministry throughout the world; the Jews were to teach the unbelieving Gentiles; all Israel shall be saved; the holy land will be settled by Jews from around the world and be brought to life again; the Third Temple will be built on Mount Moriah, where the promised son, Isaac, was going to be sacrifced; Jews and Gentiles will be united under the lordship of the Messiah; God will be worshipped in Jerusalem. This will all take place because God had promised it all in His word.

There are other hymns on the restoration of Israel in the Holy Land: “Messiah, full of grace” (on Ezekiel chapter 37), “Come, O thou breath divine” (on Ezekiel 37:9-10) and “Thy Deity to prove” (on Ezekiel 37:13-14):52

Inspir’d at God’s command, By thee, the Spirit of grace, Let the whole house of Israel stand And their Restorer praise.

Thy Deity to prove By signs infallible, O let the Spirit of thy love In ancient Israel dwell!

To life eternal rais’d They then shall understand Who sav’d, and brought them back, and plac’d In their own happy land.

Messiah, full of grace, Redeem’d by thee, we plead, The promise made to Abraham’s race, To souls for ages dead.

Their bones, as quite dried up, Throughout the vale appear: Cut off and lost their faint hope To see thy kingdom here.

Open their graves, and bring The outcast forth, to own Thou art their Lord, their God, their King, Their true Anointed One.

To save the race forlorn, Thy glorious arm display! And show the world a nation born, A nation in a day!

When the house of Jacob’s sons Their Canaan repossess, Shall not all thy chosen ones Abide in perfect peace?

Israel’s, Judah’s tribes command To fock from every side, All unite, and to the land Of their forefathers guide.

Come, then, thou great Deliverer, come, Receive thy ancient people home! That, quicken’d by thy dying love, The world may their reception fnd Life from the dead for all mankind.

In the songs, the Jews, God’s chosen people and frst love, are not abhorred by Wesley. Many Christians had, indeed, treated them as the murderers of Christ, as pariahs feeing from God’s presence, as the descendants of those who had blasphemed the name of Christ. But they were still loved by God, for their fathers’ sake, and could look forward to a national resurrection as a result of God’s unconditional mercy. On one day a nation would be reborn. Jews would look upon the one they had pierced, as Zechariah had prophesied. Christ would return to Jerusalem to cries of “Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.” He would be worshipped as King of Israel. The greatest revolution in history would begin. Their conversion and

restoration would be as great a miracle as Christ’s resurrection. All Jews would make alijah, return to the promised land and go up to Jerusalem:

Pour out the promised gift on all; Answer the universal “Come!”

The fullness of the Gentiles call, And take thine ancient people home.53

It was clear to Charles Wesley that the return of the Jews to their country would evoke as much hatred as their frst conquest of Canaan had once done:

Thou didst with Thine almighty hand

The seven devoted nations chase, Cast out the heathen from their land, And plant Thine Israel in their place.54

It is highly unlikely, but not absolutely impossible, that the man who wrote such hymns would oppose the naturalization of Jews in 1753 – a step his own father had specifcally supported. It would seem that Charles Wesley’s critics that year were, at best, rather confused.

Concluding Remarks

It is rather ironic, given the current hostility among British Methodists towards the Jewish state, that in the very frst published critique of “this sect called Methodists,” a letter in Fog’s Weekly Journal of December 9, 1732, the handful of Oxford students were compared with the “Essenes among the Jews.” The letter writer’s stated source was Pliny’s Natural History. The critic saw similarities in the abstemiousness, the sexual chastity and the exemplary moral lifestyle in the two sects.

Representatives of all theological camps in the eighteenth century were convinced that the Jewish nation would one day be restored to Zion. Dean Humphrey Prideaux (1648-1724) was an opponent of millenarianism and yet held to the doctrine taught by Paul in Romans 11. The Jews would one day return to the Promised Land.55 Some Unitarians were also of the view, that all Old Testament prophecies relating to the Jewish people would be fulflled one day.56 The English philosopher John Locke also believed, on the basis of Romans 11, that the Jews would be converted and restored. Jews quoted Locke’s paraphrase of that chapter during the debates of 1753.57

During the eighteenth century there were Bible students who believed the national conversion and restoration of Jews in the Holy Land would take place in 1793 or 1794.58 There is, however, no evidence that Charles Wesley had a predilection for date setting.

Charles Wesley wrote hymns about the impact of the conversion of the Jewish people on the world which he wanted Methodists to sing. The message was to be imbibed and learned by heart:

The world shall their reception fnd, Life from the dead for all mankind.

These two lines point to a spiritual revolution that would be fully realized in the millennial reign of Christ.59 His father, Rev. Samuel Wesley, was inspired by this hope. So was his brother John.60 So were, according to Luke Tyerman, John Fletcher61 and Rev. Henry Piers (1694-1770), a friend of the Wesleys who had introduced John to Vincent Perronet.62 There were other Methodist preachers who taught their people about the eschatological role to be played by the Jews. Their voices multiplied after the French Revolution, which intimated that a great change was underway in the political affairs of the nations. The conversion of the Jews was still a key element of their eschatology.63 The frst Methodist bishop, Thomas Coke (1747-1814), believed in the restoration of the Jews in the land promised to them. Many countries would seek to exterminate them and prevent their return to the Holy Land. Coke believed, like John Wesley, that God would destroy the Ottoman Empire to make way for His people.64 There is a cloud of early Methodist witnesses to the doctrine of the future conversion and restoration of the Jews. But how many British Methodists are listening to them today?

The events of 7 October 2023 were “reminiscent of the Nazi holocaust,” said Benjamin Netanyahu before the General Assembly of the UN on September 27, 2024. Going by the recent memorials to Conference, British Methodists have not been reminded of those dark days, though they have good reason to do so. One of their own, Rev. John Leale (18921969), was President of the States of Guernsey Controlling Committee during the German occupation of the islands. During the war the Methodist preacher proved to be very accommodating to German demands. The leading British offcial on the islands never protested against any of the twelve anti-Semitic regulations introduced by the occupying power. The order for Jews on the islands to wear a yellow badge with “Jew” printed

on it was adopted with Leale’s backing. The order bears his signature. The Methodist preacher rejected out of principle any form of resistance to the Germans. He considered it an honour to be able to present a report to Dr Richard Brosch from the Feldkommandantur with a complete list of Jews on the islands. The British police had fulflled the request for such a list to be produced. Three Jewish women were handed over to the occupiers. Therese Steiner, Marianne Ilse Hanna Grunfeld and Auguste Spitz were subsequently deported on April 21, 1942, gassed and turned into ash in Auschwitz.65

End Notes

1 The report, along with other statements on Israel, are available online. https://www.methodist.org.uk/faith/prayer/israel-palestine/ statements-and-briefings/a-summary-of-the-methodist-conferenceposition-on-israel-palestine/ (accessed August 4, 2023).

2 Simon Rocker, “Chief Rabbi slams Methodist report,” Jewish Chronicle June 23, 2010, https://www.thejc.com/news/chief-rabbi-slamsmethodist-report-m7x59fy [accessed on November 10, 2023]; Marcus Dysch, “Fury as Methodists vote to boycott Israel,” Jewish Chronicle July 1, 2010, https://www.thejc.com/news/fury-as-methodists-vote-to-boycottisrael-fdmzdtip [accessed on November 10, 2023]; Tom Wilson, “What have Methodists got against the Jews?,” Times of Israel, September 19, 2016, https://blogs.timesofsrael.com/what-have-methodists-got-againstthe-jews/ [accessed on November 9, 2023]; Lee Harpin, “Chief Rabbi condemns Methodists’ ‘misguided and deplorable’ anti-Israel motions,” Jewish News, July 5, 2021, https://www.jewishnews.co.uk/chief-rabbicondemns-methodists-misguided-and-deplorable-anti-israel-motions/ [accessed on November 9, 2023]; Alan Simons, “The Methodist Church joins the ranks of the asinine,“ Times of Israel, July 3, 2022 https://blogs. timesofisrael.com/the-methodist-church-joins-the-ranks-of-the-asinine/ [accessed on September 14, 2023].

3 Conference 2024 Agenda 57 (Memorials 8 and 9). Available online at https://www.methodist.org.uk/faith/prayer/israel-palestine/ statements-and-briefings/a-summary-of-the-methodist-conferenceposition-on-israel-palestine/.

4 Patrick Streiff, “Methodismus und Judentum. Aus den Anfängen des Methodismus,” in: Mitteilungen der Studiengemeinschaft für Geschichte der Evangelisch-methodistischen Kirche, 17/2 (October 1996): 2-10.

5 Frank Baker, “Wesley’s Puritan Ancestry,” The London Quarterly and Holborn Review 187 (1962): 180-186; John A. Newton, “Samuel Annesley (1620-1696),” Proceedings of the Wesley Historical Society 45 (September 1985): 29-45.

6 “What think you of the Millennium? And whether do you believe ’tis yet to come, or already past?,” in: The Athenian Oracle […], vol. 1, 3rd edition, London: J. and J. Knapton et al 1728: 282-288; Randy L. Maddox, “Millennial Hopes in the Wesley Family: Samuel Wesley Sr.’s Bequest,” in: Wesleyan Theological Journal 55/1 (Spring 2020): 193-213; William Maude, “Samuel Wesley on the Millennium,” The Rainbow: A Magazine of Christian Literature, with Special Reference to the Revealed Future of the Church and the World, January 1, 1868: 22-30.

7 The Athenian Oracle […], vol. 1, 3rd edition, London 1728: 125, 156-158, 520-521. Spelling, grammar and italics as in the original. Samuel Wesley was a keen student of Maimonides and recommended his works to all students of the New Testament, ibid.: 517-519 (What was the chiefest Errors of Maimonides? And of what Use can the Reading of his Works be?).

8 L. Tyerman, The Life and Times of the Rev. Samuel Wesley, M.A., Rector of Epworth, London: Simpkin, Marshall and Co. 1866: 131-158.

9 Thomas Jackson, The Life of the Rev. Charles Wesley, M.A., Sometime Student of Christ-Church, Oxford […],London: Mason 1841, vol. 1: 445-446, 488; vol. 2: 429-430; Charles Wesley, letter to Miss [Elizabeth Perronet] Briggs, dated Dec 9, 1782, in: Thomas Jackson (ed.), The Journal of the Rev. Charles Wesley, M.A. […], vol. 2, London: Mason 1849: 284.

10 Thomas Jackson, The Life of the Rev. Charles Wesley, M.A., Sometime Student of Christ-Church, Oxford […], vol. 2, London: Mason 1841: 429.

11 “Memoirs of the Rev. Vincent Perronet, A.M. Late Vicar of Shoreham, in Kent,” in: The Methodist Magazine, For April, 1799: 161.

12 Letters of the Rev. John Fletcher, Vicar of Madeley, ed. Melvill Horne, New York: Lane and Scott 1849: 273.

13 L. Tyerman, Wesley’s Designated Successor: The Life, Letters, and Literary Labours of the Rev. John William Fletcher, London: Hodder and Stoughton 1882: 399.

14 Robert Southey, The Life of Wesley; and the Rise and Progress of Methodism, vol. 1, New York: Evert Duyckinck and Long 1820: 138.

15 Thomas Jackson, The Life of the Rev. Charles Wesley, M.A., Sometime Student of Christ-Church, Oxford […], vol. 1: 236; “Letter CXXXII. From the Rev. Mr. Wesley, to Dr. Robertson, Sept. 24, 1753,” in: The Arminian Magazine, For October 1780: 552-558; The Journal of the Rev. John Wesley, A.M. Sometime Fellow of Lincoln College, Oxford, Standard Edition, ed. Nehemiah Curnock, vol. 4, London: Kelly [1913]: 99 (September 10, 1754); [J. E. Winter], “In and Around Castle Cary,” Proceedings of the Wesley Historical Society, 5/ 1 (1905): 15-16; John Christian Frederic Burk, A Memoir of the Life and Writings of John Albert Bengel, Prelate of Württemberg, London: Ball 1837: 337-338; Kenneth G. C. Newport, “Charles Wesley’s Interpretation of Some Biblical Prophecies

railton: charles wesley and the Jews 235

according to a Previously Unpublished Letter dated 25 April, 1754,” Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 77/2 (1995): 51. The ‘previously unpublished letter’ discussed by Newport was in fact a copy of a letter by Rev. David Imrie, Pastor from 1751 to 1783 in St. Mungo, Annandale, Dumfries. “Edinburgh,“ The Scots Magazine 17 (June 1755): 320; Annals of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, from The Final Secession in 1739, to the Origin of the Relief in 1752 [...], Edinburgh: Johnstone 1838: 215 (fn.). Imrie wrote on 14 July 1755 that the letter was full of mistakes and ought not to be published.

16 “Charles Wesley’s Millennarianism,” in: The Quarterly Journal of Prophecy 1 (October 1848): 95-100; Kenneth G. C. Newport, “Premillennialism in the Early Writings of Charles Wesley,” Wesleyan Theological Journal 32/1 (Spring 1997): 85-106; Kenneth G. C. Newport, “Charles Wesley and the End of the World,” Proceedings of the Charles Wesley Society 3 (1996): 33-56. Kenneth G. C. Newport, “Charles Wesley’s Interpretation of Some Biblical Prophecies According to A Previously Unpublished Letter Dated 25 April, 1754,” Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 77(2) (1995): 31-52.

17 Thomas Jackson (ed.), The Journal of the Rev. Charles Wesley, M.A. […], vol. 1: 351.

18 Jackson, The Life of the Rev. Charles Wesley, vol. 2: 95 (December 7, 1755).

19 George Whitefeld, A Brief Account of some Lent and other Extraordinary Processions and Ecclesiastical Entertainments Seen last Year at Lisbon. In Four Letters to an English Friend, London: Strahan 1755: 19; A Letter from a Clergyman at London to the Remaining disconsolate Inhabitants of Lisbon. Occasioned by the Late Dreadful Earthquake […], London: Griffths 1755: 2-12.

20 Serious Thoughts Occasioned by the late Earthquake at Lisbon, 2nd edition, London: [n.n.] 1755: 6-7.

21 The other Side of the Question. Being a Collection Of what hath yet appeared in Defence of the late Act, in Favour of the Jews, London: Griffths 1753: 35; [Philo-Patriæ], Considerations on the Bill To Permit Persons professing the Jewish Religion to be Naturalized by Parliament […], London: Baldwin 1753: 17; [Jonas Hanway], A Review of the Proposed Naturalization of the Jews […], London: Waugh 1753: 66-67.

22 J. F. A. de le Roi, Die evangelische Christenheit und die Juden in der Zeit der Herrschaft christlicher Lebensanschauungen unter den Völkern. Von der Reformation bis zur Mitte des 18. Jahrhunderts, Karlsruher und Leipzig: Reuther 1884: 163-168; Samuel Weller Singer (ed.), Anecdotes. Observations, and Characters, of Books and Men. By the Rev. Joseph Spence, London: Carpenter 1820: 77-79. The Jews had to pay £60,000 for this privilege.

(2025)

23 The law was titled: An Act to permit persons professing the Jewish religion to be naturalised by Parliament, and for other purposes therein mentioned. Nicholas Tindal, The Continuation of Mr. Rapin’s History of England; from the Revolution to the Present Times, vol. 21, London: Osborne et al 1759: 480-83; James Picciotto, Sketches of AngloJewish History, London: Trübner 1875: 80-91; Avinoam Yuval-Naeh, “The 1753 Jewish Naturalization Bill and the Polemic over Credit,” Journal of British Studies 57 (July 2018): 467-492.

24 The Unprejudiced Christian’s Apology for the Jews […], London: Owen 1753: 43-44.

25 William Coxe, Memoirs of the Administration of the Right Honourable Henry Pelham […], vol. 2, London: Longman et al 1829: 245253, 290-298; John Pugh, Remarkable Occurrences in the Life of Jonas Hanway, Esq. […], London: Printed for the Author 1787: 122-126

26 [Samuel Eccles], The Candid Determination of the Jews, in preferring a Thief and a Robber before our Saviour. A Sermon Preached June 10, 1753, London: [s.n.] 1753: 11-14.

27 An Historical Treatise Concerning Jews and Judaism, in England […], 2nd edition, London: Baldwin 1753: 21 (Yellow Badges, whereby to distinguish them from Christians).

28 Memoirs of the Reign of King George the Second. By Horace Walpole, ed. Lord Holland, 2nd edition, vol. 1, London: Colburn 1846: 357- 358.

29 ‘List of Pamphlets Relating to the Jew Bill of 1753’, in: Albert M. Hyamson, ‘The Jew Bill of 1753’, Transactions of the Jewish Historical Society of England, 6 (1908-1910): 178-88; ‘The “Jew Bill,“ 1753’, in: Joseph Jacobs und Lucien Wolf (eds.), Bibliotheca Anglo-Judaica. A Bibliographical Guide to Anglo-Jewish History, London: The Jewish Chronicle 1888: 63-69; “Pamphlets relating to the Jews,“ The Monthly Review, For August, 1753: 156-60.

30 [Robert Clayton], An Enquiry into the Time of the Coming of the Messiah, and the Restoration of the Jew: In a Letter From Robert, Lord Bishop of Clogher, to an Eminent Jew, London: Brindley 1751; [A Presbyter of the Church of England], An Explanation of Some Prophecies Contained in the Book of Daniel. Wherein the Particular Times of the Destruction of the Mahometans, and of the Restoration of the Jews, are pointed out, London: Say 1753; [Anonymous], Refections On the Past and Present State of the Jews, And of the Land of Canaan […] As also on the Future State of both […], London: Baldwin 1753; The Kingdom of Israel Restored by Christ, and Judaism Subverted […], London: Cooper and Sympson 1753; The Full and Final Restoration of the Jews and Israelites, Evidently set forth to be Nigh at Hand; With their Happy Settlement in their own Land […], London: Cooper 1753; [Edward Weston], Remarks Upon Some Passages In a Dedication to the Jews, By W. Warburton, D.D. Dean of Bristol, London: Owen 1759; Mel Scult, Millennial Expectations and Jewish Liberties. A Study of the Efforts

railton: charles wesley and the Jews 237

to Convert the Jews in Britain, up to the Mid Nineteenth Century, Leiden: Brill 1978: 56-68; Andrew Crome, “The 1753 ‘Jew Bill’ Controversy: Jewish Restoration to Palestine, Biblical Prophecy, and English National Identity,“ English Historical Review 130/547 (December 2015): 1449-1478.

31 [Edward Weston], ΔΙΑΣΠΟΡΑ. Some Refections Upon the Question relating to the Naturalization of Jews, London: Owen 1754: 4143; [Edward Weston], Remarks Upon Some Passages In a Dedication to the Jews, By W. Warburton, D.D. Dean of Bristol, London: Owen 1759: 58. Weston was the son of the bishop of Exeter, Dr Stephen Weston (16651742). The General Biographical Dictionary […], ed. Alexander Chalmers, vol. 31, London: Nichols et al 1817: 320.

32 William Romaine, A Practical Comment on The 107th Psalm […], 4th edition, London: Worrall and Withers 1760: vi; A Modest Apology for the Citizens and merchants of London, who petitioned the House of Commons against Naturalizing the Jews, 2nd edition, London: Webb 1753; [A Christian], A Full Answer to a Fallacious Apology Artfully Circulated through the Kingdom, in Favour of the Naturalization of the Jews, London: Fox 1753; An Answer to a Pamphlet, entitled Considerations on the Bill to permit Persons professing the Jewish Religion to be naturalized […], London: Cooke 1753. William Bromley Cadogan, The Life of the Rev. William Romaine, M.A. […], London: Bensley 1796: 25-26; “Memoir of the Rev. W. Romaine,” The Christian Guardian, and Church of England Magazine, October 1831: 366.

33 An Answer to a Pamphlet: 4-7, 18-33, 39. Italics as in the original.

34 J.E. (Gent.), Some Considerations on the Naturalization of the Jews […], London: Leage 1753.

35 An Answer to a Pamphlet: 31.

36 Israel Solomons, “Satirical and Political Prints on the Jews’ Naturalisation Bill, 1753,“ Transaction of the Jewish Historical Society of England 6 (1908-1910): 205-33; Frederic George Stephens (ed.), Catalogue of Prints and Drawings in the British Museum. Divison 1. Political and Personal Satires (No. 3117 to No. 3804). Vol. 3, Part II: 1751 to c. 1760, [London:] Printed by Author of the Trustees 1877: 858. Though the names of the Methodists are clearly printed, and their physiognomies known to students of Methodism, Solomons apparently did not recognise the two preachers. The satirical print can be seen online: https://www.britishmuseum.org/ collection/object/P_1868-0808-3933.

37 The Jews Naturalized; or, The English Alienated. A Ballad […], London: Webb [1753]: 3-4.

38 James Picciotto, Sketches of Anglo-Jewish History, London: Trübner 1875: 59-64; Thomas Binney (ed.), Tower Church Sermons. Discourses, Preached in the Tower Church, Belvedere, Erith, Kent, London: Jackson and Walford 1852: ix (fn.); John Nichols (ed.), Literary Anecdotes

of the Eighteenth Century […], vol. 9, London: Printed for the Author 1815: 642-43. Gideon converted to Christianity in 1754 but did not get baptised. Gideon was related to Sir Culling Eardley Smith (1805-1863), one of the founders of the Evangelical Alliance. He was a friend of Horace Walpole.

39 Henry St. John, Lord Viscount Bolingbroke (1678-1751) is probably portrayed. Bolingbroke considered the national church to be merely a useful political instrument. John Broughton sought his political help to ensure the rectory of Epworth was offered one day to John Wesley, Thomas Macknight, The Life of Henry St. John, Viscount Bolingbroke, Secretary of State in the Reign of Queen Anne, London: Chapman and Hall 1863: 608, 676; Luke Tyerman, The Life and Times of the Rev. John Wesley, M.A., Founder of the Methodists, vol. 1, London: Hodder and Stoughton 1870: 102-103. John Wesley, The Doctrine of Original Sin: According to Scripture, Reason and Experience, Bristol: Farley 1757: v; “A Letter from the Late President Montesquieu, to the Author of the View of Lord Bolingbroke’s Philosophy,” The Arminian Magazine, For June 1785: 325-327.

40 Sir Roger Newdigate (1719-1806), who represented the University of Oxford in the House of Commons suggested the street demagogues represented the interests of the Devil. The Parliamentary History of England, from the Earliest Period to the Year 1803, Vol. XV: 1753-1765, London: Longman et al 1813: 132; The London Magazine, November 1753, 493; The Magazine of Magazines, December 1754: 626. See also Edward Moore, “On the Danger of Repealing the Witch Act, 23 August 1753,” in: Lionel Thomas Berguer, The British Essayists […], vol. 26, London: Rivington et al 1823: 189.

41 “Dean Tucker. 1712-1799,” in: Joseph Stratford, Gloucestershire Biographical Notes, Gloucester: The ‘Journal’ Offce 1887: 129-36. In 1739 Tucker attacked Whitefeld for the latter’s supposedly blasphemous and fanatical notions. Luke Tyerman, The Life of the Rev. George Whitefeld, B.A., of Pembroke College, Oxford, vol. 1, New York: Randolph 1877: 253-254; Josiah Tucker, A Brief History of the Principles of Methodism […], Oxford: Fletcher 1742.

42 Salim Rashid, Josiah Tucker, „Anglican Anti-Semitism, and the Jew Bill of 1753,“ in: Historical Magazine of the Protestant Episcopal Church 51/2 (Juni 1982): 191-201.

43 Randy L. Maddox, “Collection of Books owned by the Charles Wesley Family in The John Rylands University Library,” Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library 88:2 (2006): 133-177 (149); John George Keysler, Travels through Germany, Bohemia, Hungary, Switzerland, Italy and Lorrain [...], vol. 1, London: Linde 1756: 208-209.

44 John Tutchin, England’s Happiness Considered in Some Expedients […], London: Bragg 1705: 24-25.

45 Foreigners, and, above all, the French, were perceived by the native English to always wear clogs, at least before they fed to England.

railton: charles wesley and the Jews 239

46 [Ernst F. Ströter], “Wesley’s Hymns on Israel and the Blessed Hope,” Our Hope 3/3 (September 1896): 98-101.

47 Methodists once sang about the cursed Jews branded with the mark of Cain: A Collection of Hymns, for the Use of the People Called Methodists, 6th edition, London: New Chapel 1788: 421-422; Hymn Book of the United Methodist Free Churches, comprising the Collection of Hymns, by the Rev. John Wesley, London: Reed 1861: 421-422; “Hymn 280,” in: Hymns for the Use of the Methodist New Connexion, Principally from the Collection of the Rev. John Wesley, 12th edition, London: Bakewell 1845: (unpaginated). See the comments on the revision of the text, which was considered no longer appropriate, in: “The New Hymn Book,” Quarterly Review, 2/1 (January 1848): 69-131 (122).

48 “Hymn XXXII,” in: Hymns of Intercession for All Mankind, London: Paramore [1758]: 28. Spelling as in the original.

49 Charles Wesley, Short Hymns on Select Passages of the Holy Scriptures, vol. 1, Bristol: Farley 1762: 378 (on Isaiah 60,13), 386 (on Isaiah 66,7-8). Italics in the original.

50 Charles Wesley, Short Hymns on Select Passages of the Holy Scriptures, vol. 1, Bristol: Farley 1762: 391-392 (italics in the original). The song appeared, sometimes in shortened form, in hymnbooks throughout the nineteenth century: “Hymn CCCCXL” in [John Wesley], A Collection of Hymns, For the Use of the People Called Methodists, 5th edition, London: Paramore 1786: 421-422; “Hymn 440,” in: John Wesley, A Collection of Hymns For the Use of the People called Methodists, London: G. Whitfeld [sic] 1804: 422-423; “Hymn 452,” in: Hymn Book of the United Methodist Free Churches comprising the Collection of Hymns, London: Reed 1867: 422-423; “Hymn 943,” in: Hymns for Divine Worship. Compiled for the Use of the Methodist New Connexion, London: Cooke 1863: 719-720; “Hymn 750,” in: A Collection of Hymns for Public, Social, and Domestic Worship, Nashville: Publishing House of the M. E. Church, South 1860: 539-540; “Hymn 662,” in: Hymn and Tune Book of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, Nashville: Publishing House of the M. E. Church, South 1889: 336; “Hymn 662,” in: Wilbur F. Tillett, Our Hymns and Their Authors. An Annotated Edition of the Hymn-Book of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, Nashville: Publishing House of the M. E. Church, South 1892: 265266.

51 “Hymn 921,” in: The Psalmist: A New Collection of Hymns for the Use of the Baptist Churches, Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication Society 1850: 482; “Hymn 1073” in: Hymns and Songs of Praise for Public and Social Worship, ed. Roswell D. Hitchcock, Zachary Eddy und Philip Schaff, New York: Randolph 1874: 402; Andrew Bonar, “Prayer Union for Israel,” Service for the King, ed. Mrs. Pennefather, 1882: 229.

52 Charles Wesley, Short Hymns on Select Passages of the Holy Scriptures, vol. 2, Bristol: Farley 1762: 50-57 (italics in the original); “Hymn 450” and “Hymn 451” in: John Wesley, Hymn Book of the United Methodist Free Churches, comprising the Collection of Hymns, London:

Reed 1861: 421-424; John Wesley, A Collection of Hymns for the Use of the People Called Methodists, London: Wesleyan Methodist Book-Room [c.1880]: 185-186.

53 “Hymn 924: Head of the Church,” in: Hymnal of the Methodist Episcopal Church With Tunes, New York: Phillips and Hunt 1881: 342.

54 “Psalm XLIV. Part I,” in: The Poetical Works of John and Charles Wesley […], Collected and arranged by G. Osborn, D.D., Band VIII, London: Wesleyan-Methodist Conference Offce 1870: 99 (italics in the original).

55 J. W. Brooks, Elements of Prophetical Interpretation, London: Seeley and Burnside 1836: 79-80. Prideaux names Hilary (c.315-c.367), Ambrosius (c.339-397), Aquinas (1225-1274), Scotus (c.1266-1308), Cajetan (1480-1547), Peter Martyr (1205-1252), Beza (1519-1605), Pareus (1548-1622) and Dr. Andrew Willet (1562-1621) as his authorities.

56 Joseph Priestley, Discourses on the Evidence of Revealed Religion, vol. 1, London: Johnson 1794: 203-241; Joseph Priestley, Letters to the Jews […], Birmingham: Pearson and Rollason 1786; Solomon de A. R., The Reply of The Jews to the Letters addressed to them by Doctor Joseph Priestley, Oxford: Rivington 1787.

57 The Jews Advocate, London: Cooper, Reeve and Sympson 1753: 5-11; John Locke, A Paraphrase and Notes on the Epistles of St. Paul […], 5th edition, London: Birt et al 1751: 310-318.

58 “Burton’s Essay on the Numbers of Daniel and St. John,” The Critical Review: or, Annals of Literature 22 (August 1766): 90-92; “A Call to the Jews,” The Critical Review: or, Annals of Literature, 56 (August 1783): 145-146. Tobias Smollett (1721-1771) was the editor of this journal. He was no friend of John Wesley or of Methodism.

59 Quoted in: John Wilkinson, Israel My Glory, or, Israel’s Mission, and Missions to Israel, 4th edition, London: Mildmay Mission to the Jews Bible and Tract Depot 1891: 156.

60 Luke Tyerman, The Life and Times of the Rev. John Wesley, M.A., Founder of the Methodists, vol. 2, London: Hodder and Stoughton 1870: 522-524; Luke Tyerman, The Life and Times of the Rev. Samuel Wesley, M.A., Rector of Epworth and Father of the Revs. John and Charles Wesley, the Founders of the Methodists, London: Simpkin, Marshall and Co. 1866: 146-147; “Of the Renovation of All Things,” The Arminian Magazine, For March 1784: 154-155; The Arminian Magazine, For April 1784: 209211; “Letter CCCXII From the Rev. Mr. Wesley to the Rev. Mr. H.,” in: The Arminian Magazine, For September 1783: 498-500.

61 John Fletcher, “Letters on the Prophecies,” in: The Works of the Rev. John Fletcher with a Life by the Rev. Abraham Scott, vol. 2, London: Allman 1836: 565-76; John Fletcher, “A Letter upon the Prophecies.” London, Nov. 20th, 1755’, in: The Works of the Rev. John Fletcher, Late Vicar of Madeley, vol. 9, London: Mason 1860: 362-381; John Fletcher, “Letter

V. Socinianism Unscriptural,” in: ibid.: 433; Letter from John Fletcher to Vincent Perronet dated September 6, 1777, in: The Works of the Rev. John Fletcher, Late Vicar of Madeley, vol. 1, London: Mason 1859: 214; Luke Tyerman, Wesley’s Designated Successor: The Life, Letters, and Literary Labours of the Rev. John William Fletcher, Vicar of Madeley, Shropshire, London: Hodder and Stoughton 1882: 20-21, 376-377, 537-538.

62 Henry Piers, The Sins of Jews and Christians, under Law, Under Gospel, considered and compared: In a Sermon Preached in the ParishChurch of Bexley in Kent […], London: Lewis 1762. On Henry Piers see The Journal of the Rev. John Wesley, A.M. Sometime Fellow of Lincoln College, Oxford, Standard Edition, ed. Nehemiah Curnock, vol. 1, London: Kelly [1909]: 455 (April 24, 1738), 456 (fn. 1), 458 (fn. 2); vol. 2 [1911]: 387 (fn. 1); vol. 3 [1912]: 145 (August 14, 1744); Thomas Timpson, Church History of Kent; from the Earliest Period to the Year MDCCCLVIII […], London: Ward 1859: 544; Thomas Jackson, The Life of the Rev. Charles Wesley, M.A. […], vol. 2, London: John Mason 1841: 424-425.

63 Thomas Taylor, “Sermon VI. The Gathering in of the Jews. Rom. Xi. 23,” in: Thomas Taylor, Ten Sermons on the Millennium; or, The Glory of the Latter Days; and Five Sermons on What appears to follow that happy Æra, Hull: Prince 1789: 133-159; David Simpson, “Sect. XVIII. Conversion of the Jews,” in: David Simpson, A Key to the Prophecies; or, A Concise View of the Predictions contained in the Old and New Testaments […], Newcastle Upon Tyne: Watson 1812: 314-318. Both these preachers were friends of John Wesley: “An Account of the Life of Mr. Thomas Taylor: in a Letter to the Rev. Mr. J. Wesley,” The Arminian Magazine, For July 1789: 367-383; “An Account of the Life of Mr. Thomas Taylor: in a Letter to the Rev. Mr. J. Wesley,” The Arminian Magazine, For August 1789: 420-441; “Memoir of the Late Rev. David Simpson, M.A.,” The Methodist Magazine, For January, 1824: 14-20; “Memoir of the Late Rev. David Simpson, M.A.,” The Methodist Magazine, For February, 1824: 47-54; “Memoir of the Late Rev. David Simpson, M.A.,” The Methodist Magazine, For March, 1824: 90-98.

64 Thomas Coke, The Recent Occurrences of Europe considered, in relation to such Prophecies as are either Fulflling or Unfulflled, London: Printed for the Author 1809: 280, 298; Thomas Coke, A Commentary on the New Testament, vol. 2, London: Printed for the Author 1803: 118 (on Rom 11,1), 123 (on Rom 11,26), Appendix (i, iv, lviii, lxi, lxiv).

65 Herbert White, “John Leale – Our Foremost Champion,” Guernsey Society Review 61/3 (2005): 92-94; Madeleine Bunting, “Islanders aided Nazis in hunting down Jews,” The Guardian, January 6, 1993: 18.

Works Cited

Anonymous

1753 The Unprejudiced Christian’s Apology for the Jews […], London: Owen.

1753 An Answer to a Pamphlet, entitled Considerations on the Bill to permit Persons professing the Jewish Religion to be naturalized […], London: Cooke.

1753 The Kingdom of Israel Restored by Christ, and Judaism Subverted […], London: Cooper and Sympson.

1753 Some Considerations on the Naturalization of the Jews […], London: Leage.

1753 Refections On the Past and Present State of the Jews, And of the Land of Canaan […] As also on the Future State of both […], London: Baldwin.

1753 The Full and Final Restoration of the Jews and Israelites, Evidently set forth to be Nigh at Hand; With their Happy Settlement in their own Land […], London: Cooper.

1753 The Jews Naturalized; or, The English Alienated. A Ballad […], London: Webb.

1753 An Explanation of Some Prophecies Contained in the Book of Daniel. Wherein the Particular Times of the Destruction of the Mahometans, and of the Restoration of the Jews, are pointed out, London: Say.

1753 A Full Answer to a Fallacious Apology Artfully Circulated through the Kingdom, in Favour of the Naturalization of the Jews, London: Fox

1753 A Modest Apology for the Citizens and merchants of London, who petitioned the House of Commons against Naturalizing the Jews, 2nd edition, London: Webb.

1753 “Pamphlets relating to the Jews,“ The Monthly Review, For August, 1753: 156-160.

1753 The other Side of the Question. Being a Collection Of what hath yet appeared in Defence of the late Act, in Favour of the Jews, London: Griffths.

1753 An Historical Treatise Concerning Jews and Judaism, in England […], 2nd edition, London: Baldwin.

1753 The Jews Advocate, London: Cooper, Reeve and Sympson.

1755 “Edinburgh,“ The Scots Magazine 17 (June 1755): 320.

1766 “Burton’s Essay on the Numbers of Daniel and St. John,” The Critical Review: or, Annals of Literature 22 (August 1766): 90-92.

1784 ‘Of the Renovation of All Things’, The Arminian Magazine, For March 1784: 154-155.

1785 “A Letter from the Late President Montesquieu, to the Author of the View of Lord Bolingbroke’s Philosophy,” The Arminian Magazine, For June 1785: 325-327.

1799 “Memoirs of the Rev. Vincent Perronet, A.M. Late Vicar of Shoreham, in Kent,” in: The Methodist Magazine, For April, 1799: 161.

1824 “Memoir of the Late Rev. David Simpson, M.A.,” The Methodist Magazine, For January, 1824: 14-20.

1831 “Memoir of the Rev. W. Romaine,” The Christian Guardian, and Church of England Magazine, October 1831: 366.

1848 “Charles Wesley’s Millennarianism,” in: The Quarterly Journal of Prophecy 1 (October 1848): 95-100.

1848 “The New Hymn Book,” Quarterly Review, 2/1 (January 1848): 69-131.

1783 “A Call to the Jews,” The Critical Review: or, Annals of Literature, 56 (August 1783): 145-146.

1887 “Dean Tucker. 1712-1799,” in: Joseph Stratford, Gloucestershire Biographical Notes, Gloucester: The ‘Journal’ Offce.

Baker, Frank

1985 “Wesley’s Puritan Ancestry,” The London Quarterly and Holborn Review 187 (1962): 180-186.

Baptist Churches

1850 The Psalmist: A New Collection of Hymns for the Use of the Baptist Churches, Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication Society.

Binney, Thomas (ed.)

1852 Tower Church Sermons. Discourses, Preached in the Tower Church, Belvedere, Erith, Kent, London: Jackson and Walford.

(2025)

Bonar, Andrew 1882 “Prayer Union for Israel,” Service for the King, ed. Mrs. Pennefather: 229.

Brooks, J. W.

1836 Elements of Prophetical Interpretation, London: Seeley and Burnside.

Bunting, Madeleine 1993 “Islanders aided Nazis in hunting down Jews,” The Guardian, January 6, 1993: 18.

Burk, John Christian Frederic 1837 A Memoir of the Life and Writings of John Albert Bengel, Prelate of Württemberg, London: Ball.

Cadogan, William Bromley

1796 The Life of the Rev. William Romaine, M.A. […], London: Bensley.

Chalmers, Alexander 1817 The General Biographical Dictionary […], ed. Alexander Chalmers, vol. 31, London: Nichols et al: 320.

Church of Scotland

1838 Annals of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, from The Final Secession in 1739, to the Origin of the Relief in 1752 [...], Edinburgh: Johnstone.

[Clayton, Robert]

1751 An Enquiry into the Time of the Coming of the Messiah, and the Restoration of the Jew: In a Letter From Robert, Lord Bishop of Clogher, to an Eminent Jew, London: Brindley.

[Cobbett, William]

1816 The Parliamentary History of England, from the Earliest Period to the Year 1803, Vol. XV: 1753-1765, London: Longman et al.

Coke, Thomas 1803 A Commentary on the New Testament, vol. 2, London: Printed for the Author.

1809 The Recent Occurrences of Europe considered, in relation to such Prophecies as are either Fulflling or Unfulflled, London: Printed for the Author.

Coxe, William 1829 Memoirs of the Administration of the Right Honourable Henry Pelham […], vol. 2, London: Longman et al.

railton: charles wesley and the Jews 245

Crome, Andrew

2015 “The 1753 ‘Jew Bill’ Controversy: Jewish Restoration to Palestine, Biblical Prophecy, and English National Identity,“ English Historical Review 130/547 (December 2015): 1449-1478.

Curnock, Nehemiah

1909-1913 The Journal of the Rev. John Wesley, A.M. Sometime Fellow of Lincoln College, Oxford, Standard Edition, ed. Nehemiah Curnock, 8 vols., London: Kelly.

de A. R., Solomon

1787 The Reply of The Jews to the Letters addressed to them by Doctor Joseph Priestley, Oxford: Rivington.

de le Roi, J. F. A.

1884 Die evangelische Christenheit und die Juden in der Zeit der Herrschaft christlicher Lebensanschauungen unter den Völkern. Von der Reformation bis zur Mitte des 18. Jahrhunderts, Karlsruher und Leipzig: Reuther.

Dysch, Marcus

2010 “Fury as Methodists vote to boycott Israel,” Jewish Chronicle July 1, 2010, https://www.thejc.com/news/ fury-as-methodists-vote-to-boycott-israel-fdmzdtip [accessed on November 10, 2023].

[Eccles, Samuel]

1753 The Candid Determination of the Jews, in preferring a Thief and a Robber before our Saviour. A Sermon Preached June 10, 1753, London: [s.n.].

Fletcher, John

1859 The Works of the Rev. John Fletcher, Late Vicar of Madeley, vol. 1, London: Mason.

1860 The Works of the Rev. John Fletcher, Late Vicar of Madeley, vol. 9, London: Mason.

[Hanway, Jonas], 1753 A Review of the Proposed Naturalization of the Jews […], London: Waugh.

Harpin, Lee

2021 “Chief Rabbi condemns Methodists’ ‘misguided and deplorable’ anti-Israel motions,” Jewish News, July 5, 2021, https://www.jewishnews.co.uk/chief-rabbicondemns-methodists-misguided-and-deplorable-antiisrael-motions/ [accessed on November 9, 2023].

Hitchcock, Roswell D., Zachary Eddy und Philip Schaff 1874 Hymns and Songs of Praise for Public and Social Worship, ed. Roswell D. Hitchcock, Zachary Eddy and Philip Schaff, New York: Randolph.

Holland, Lord [Henry Richard Vassall] 1846 Memoirs of the Reign of King George the Second. By Horace Walpole, ed. Lord Holland, 2nd edition, vol. 1, London: Colburn.

Horne, Melvill 1849 Letters of the Rev. John Fletcher, Vicar of Madeley, ed. Melvill Horne, New York: Lane and Scott.

Hyamson, Albert M.

1908-1910“The Jew Bill of 1753,“ Transactions of the Jewish Historical Society of England, 6 (1908-1910): 178-188.

Jackson, Thomas 1841 The Life of the Rev. Charles Wesley, M.A., Sometime Student of Christ-Church, Oxford […], 2 vols., London: Mason.

Jackson, Thomas 1849 “Letter to Miss [Elizabeth Perronet] Briggs,” in: Thomas Jackson (ed.), The Journal of the Rev. Charles Wesley, M.A. […], vol. 2, London: Mason.

Jacobs, Joseph und Lucien Wolf (eds.) 1888 Bibliotheca Anglo-Judaica. A Bibliographical Guide to Anglo-Jewish History, London: The Jewish Chronicle.

Keysler, John George 1756 Travels through Germany, Bohemia, Hungary, Switzerland, Italy and Lorrain [...], vol. 1, London: Linde.

Locke, John 1751 A Paraphrase and Notes on the Epistles of St. Paul […], 5th edition, London: Birt et al.

Macknight, Thomas 1863 The Life of Henry St. John, Viscount Bolingbroke, Secretary of State in the Reign of Queen Anne, London: Chapman and Hall.

Maddox, Randy L.

2006 “Collection of Books owned by the Charles Wesley Family in The John Rylands University Library,” in: Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library 88:2 (2006): 133-177.

railton: charles wesley and the Jews 247

2020 “Millennial Hopes in the Wesley Family: Samuel Wesley Sr.’s Bequest,” in: Wesleyan Theological Journal 55/1 (Spring 2020), 193-213.

Maude, William

1868

“Samuel Wesley on the Millennium,” The Rainbow: A Magazine of Christian Literature, with Special Reference to the Revealed Future of the Church and the World, January 1, 1868: 22-30.

Methodist Church of Great Britain

2001-2024 Methodist Conference Positions on Israel Palestine https://www.methodist.org.uk/faith/prayer/israelpalestine/statements-and-briefings/a-summary-of-themethodist-conference-position-on-israel-palestine/ (accessed August 4, 2023).

2024 Conference 2024 Agenda 57 (Memorials 8 and 9). Available online at https://www.methodist.org.uk/ faith/prayer/israel-palestine/statements-and-briefngs/asummary-of-the-methodist-conference-position-onisrael-palestine/ (accessed on September 24, 2024).

Methodist Episcopal Church

1881 Hymnal of the Methodist Episcopal Church With Tunes, New York: Phillips and Hunt.

Methodist Episcopal Church, South

1860 A Collection of Hymns for Public, Social, and Domestic Worship, Nashville: Publishing House of the M. E. Church, South.

1889 Hymn and Tune Book of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, Nashville: Publishing House of the M. E. Church, South.

Methodist New Connexion

1845 Hymns for the Use of the Methodist New Connexion, Principally from the Collection of the Rev. John Wesley, 12th edition, London: Bakewell.

1863 Hymns for Divine Worship. Compiled for the Use of the Methodist New Connexion, London: Cooke.

Moore, Edward

1823

“On the Danger of Repealing the Witch Act, 23 August 1753,” in: Lionel Thomas Berguer, The British Essayists […], vol. 26, London: Rivington et al.

Newport, Kenneth G. C.

1995 “Charles Wesley’s Interpretation of Some Biblical Prophecies according to a Previously Unpublished

(2025)

Letter dated 25 April, 1754,” Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 77/2 (1995): 31-52.

1996 “Charles Wesley and the End of the World,” Proceedings of the Charles Wesley Society 3 (1996): 33-56.

1997 “Premillennialism in the Early Writings of Charles Wesley,” Wesleyan Theological Journal 32/1 (Spring 1997): 85-106.

Newton, John A.

1985 “Samuel Annesley (1620-1696),” Proceedings of the Wesley Historical Society 45 (September 1985), 29-45.

Nichols, John (ed.)

1815 Literary Anecdotes of the Eighteenth Century […], vol. 9, London: Printed for the Author

Osborn, G (ed.)

1870 The Poetical Works of John and Charles Wesley […], Collected and arranged by G. Osborn, D.D., Band VIII, London: Wesleyan-Methodist Conference Offce.

[Philo-Patriæ]

1753

Considerations on the Bill To Permit Persons professing the Jewish Religion to be Naturalized by Parliament […], London: Baldwin.

Picciotto, James 1875 Sketches of Anglo-Jewish History, London: Trübner.

Piers, Henry

1762 The Sins of Jews and Christians, under Law, Under Gospel, considered and compared: In a Sermon Preached in the Parish-Church of Bexley in Kent […], London: Lewis.

Priestley, Joseph 1786 Letters to the Jews […], Birmingham: Pearson and Rollason.

1794 Discourses on the Evidence of Revealed Religion, vol. 1, London: Johnson.

Pugh, John

1787 Remarkable Occurrences in the Life of Jonas Hanway, Esq. […], London: Printed for the Author.

Rashid, Salim

1982 “Josiah Tucker, Anglican Anti-Semitism, and the Jew Bill of 1753,“ in: Historical Magazine of the Protestant Episcopal Church 51/2 (June 1982): 191-201.

railton: charles wesley and the Jews 249

Rocker, Simon

2010

Chief Rabbi slams Methodist report, Jewish Chronicle June 23, 2010, https://www.thejc.com/news/chiefrabbi-slams-methodist-report-m7x59fy [accessed on November 10, 2023].

Romaine, William

1760 A Practical Comment on The 107th Psalm […], 4th edition, London: Worrall and Withers

Scott, Abraham (ed.)

1836 “John Fletcher, ‘Letters on the Prophecies’,” in: The Works of the Rev. John Fletcher with a Life by the Rev. Abraham Scott, vol. 2, London: Allman.

Scult, Mel

1978 Millennial Expectations and Jewish Liberties. A Study of the Efforts to Convert the Jews in Britain, up to the Mid Nineteenth Century, Leiden: Brill.

Simons, Simon

2022

Simpson, David

1812

“The Methodist Church joins the ranks of the asinine,“ Times of Israel, July 3, 2022 https://blogs.timesofsrael. com/the-methodist-church-joins-the-ranks-of-theasinine/ (accessed on September 14, 2023).

A Key to the Prophecies; or, A Concise View of the Predictions contained in the Old and New Testaments […], Newcastle Upon Tyne: Watson.

Singer, Samuel Weller (ed.)

1820 Anecdotes. Observations, and Characters, of Books and Men. By the Rev. Joseph Spence, London: Carpenter.

Solomons, Israel

1908-1910 “Satirical and Political Prints on the Jews’ Naturalisation Bill, 1753,“ Transaction of the Jewish Historical Society of England 6 (1908-1910).

Southey, Robert

1820 The Life of Wesley; and the Rise and Progress of Methodism, vol. 1, New York: Evert Duyckinck and Long.

Stephens, Frederic George (ed.)

1877

Catalogue of Prints and Drawings in the British Museum. Divison 1. Political and Personal Satires (No. 3117 to No. 3804). Vol. 3, Part II: 1751 to c. 1760, [London:] Printed by Author of the Trustees.

(2025)

Streiff, Patrick

1996 “Methodismus und Judentum. Aus den Anfängen des Methodismus,” in: Mitteilungen der Studiengemeinschaft für Geschichte der Evangelisch-methodistischen Kirche, 17/2 (October 1996): 2-10.

[Ströter, Ernst F.]

1896 “Wesley’s Hymns on Israel and the Blessed Hope,” Our Hope 3/3 (September 1896): 98-101.

Taylor, Thomas

1789 “An Account of the Life of Mr. Thomas Taylor: in a Letter to the Rev. Mr. J. Wesley,” The Arminian Magazine, For July 1789: 367-383.

1789 Ten Sermons on the Millennium; or, The Glory of the Latter Days; and Five Sermons on What appears to follow that happy Æra, Hull: Prince.

Tillett, Wilbur F.

1892 Our Hymns and Their Authors. An Annotated Edition of the Hymn-Book of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, Nashville: Publishing House of the M. E. Church, South.

Timpson, Thomas 1859 Church History of Kent; from the Earliest Period to the Year MDCCCLVIII […], London: Ward.

Tindal, Nicholas 1759 The Continuation of Mr. Rapin’s History of England; from the Revolution to the Present Times, vol. 21, London: Osborne et al.

Tucker, Josiah 1742 A Brief History of the Principles of Methodism […], Oxford: Fletcher.

Tutchin, John 1705 England’s Happiness Considered in Some Expedients […], London: Bragg.

Tyerman, Luke

1866 The Life and Times of the Rev. Samuel Wesley, M.A., Rector of Epworth and Father of the Revs. John and Charles Wesley, the Founders of the Methodists, London: Simpkin, Marshall and Co.

1870 The Life and Times of the Rev. John Wesley, M.A., Founder of the Methodists, 2 vols., London: Hodder and Stoughton.

1877 The Life of the Rev. George Whitefeld, B.A., of Pembroke College, Oxford, vol. 1, New York: Randolph.

1882

Wesley’s Designated Successor: The Life, Letters, and Literary Labours of the Rev. John William Fletcher, Vicar of Madeley, Shropshire, London: Hodder and Stoughton.

United Methodist Free Churches

1861 Hymn Book of the United Methodist Free Churches, comprising the Collection of Hymns, by the Rev. John Wesley, London: Reed.

1867 Hymn Book of the United Methodist Free Churches comprising the Collection of Hymns, London: Reed.

Wesley, Charles

1762 Short Hymns on Select Passages of the Holy Scriptures, 2 vols., Bristol: Farley.

Wesley, John

1755 Serious Thoughts Occasioned by the late Earthquake at Lisbon, 2nd edition, London: [n.n.].

1753 “Letter CXXXII. From the Rev. Mr. Wesley, to Dr. Robertson, Sept. 24, 1753,” in: The Arminian Magazine, For October 1780: 552-558.

1783 “Letter CCCXII From the Rev. Mr. Wesley to the Rev. Mr. H.,” in: The Arminian Magazine, For September 1783: 498-500.

1757 The Doctrine of Original Sin: According to Scripture, Reason and Experience, Bristol: Farley.

1786 A Collection of Hymns, For the Use of the People Called Methodists, 5th edition, London: Paramore.

1788 A Collection of Hymns, for the Use of the People Called Methodists, 6th edition, London: New Chapel.

1804 A Collection of Hymns For the Use of the People called Methodists, London: G. Whitfeld [sic].

1880 A Collection of Hymns for the Use of the People Called Methodists, London: Wesleyan Methodist Book-Room.

[Wesley, John and Charles]

1758 Hymns of Intercession for All Mankind, London: Paramore.

(2025)

Wesley, Samuel

1728 “What think you of the Millennium? And whether do you believe ’tis yet to come, or already past?,” in: The Athenian Oracle […], vol. 1, 3rd edition, London: J. and J. Knapton et al: 282-288.

1728 “What was the chiefest Errors of Maimonides? And of what Use can the Reading of his Works be?,” in: The Athenian Oracle […], vol. 1, 3rd edition, London: J. and J. Knapton et al: 517-519.

1728 “Whether it be for the advantage of England, that the Jews be permitted to live and trade here?,” in: The Athenian Oracle […], vol. 1, 3rd edition, London: J. and J. Knapton et al: 125.

1728 “Whether a Christian magistrate can tolerate the Jews, since their expectation of a triumphant Messias is a direct blasphemy against Jesus Christ whom they reject and their ancestors had the presumptuous boldness to brag, that they had crucifed the God of the Christians?,” in: The Athenian Oracle […], vol. 1, 3rd edition, London: J. and J. Knapton et al: 156-158.

1728 “Is it lawful for Christian Princes to permit Jews to live quiet in their Dominions, and to give them a free Toleration for their Religion?,” in: The Athenian Oracle […], vol. 1, 3rd edition, London: J. and J. Knapton et al: 520-521.

[Weston, Edward],

1754 ΔΙΑΣΠΟΡΑ. Some Refections Upon the Question relating to the Naturalization of Jews, London: Owen.

1759 Remarks Upon Some Passages In a Dedication to the Jews, By W. Warburton, D.D. Dean of Bristol, London: Owen.

White, Herbert 2003 “John Leale – Our Foremost Champion,” Guernsey Society Review 61/3 (2005): 92-94.

Whitefeld, George

1755 A Brief Account of some Lent and other Extraordinary Processions and Ecclesiastical Entertainments Seen Last Year at Lisbon. In Four Letters to an English Friend, London: Strahan.

1755 A Letter from a Clergyman at London to the Remaining disconsolate Inhabitants of Lisbon. Occasioned by the Late Dreadful Earthquake […], London: Griffths.

Wilkinson, John 1891

Israel My Glory, or, Israel’s Mission, and Missions to Israel, 4th edition, London: Mildmay Mission to the Jews Bible and Tract Depot.

Wilson, Tom

2016 “What have Methodists got against the Jews?,” Times of Israel, September 19, 2016, https://blogs.timesofsrael. com/what-have-methodists-got-against-the-jews/ [accessed on November 9, 2023].

[Winter, J. E.]

1905 “In and Around Castle Cary,” Proceedings of the Wesley Historical Society, 5/ 1 (1905): 15-16.

Yuval-Naeh, Avinoam

2018 “The 1753 Jewish Naturalization Bill and the Polemic over Credit,” Journal of British Studies 57 (July 2018): 467-492.

The Asbury Journal 80/1: 254-269

From the Archives: The Robert A. Danielson Collection of Christian Tracts and Pamphlets- “Little Preachers” of the Gospel Message1

I never imagined that 28 boxes of Christians tracts and pamphlets would end up being tied to my name! Just to make the situation clear, this collection is what archivists call an “artifcial collection.” Over many years, the B.L. Fisher Library at Asbury Theological Seminary had accumulated many boxes of tracts and pamphlets, and early in my library career I took on the task of organizing all of them into a usable collection. After more than a year of sorting, organizing, eliminating duplicates, and putting tracts in alphabetical order by publisher, to my surprise the collection was named after me, so no, I am not some kind of secret collector or hoarder of religious tracts! But the experience taught me to appreciate the value of this material for research purposes, and I thought this might be a good forum to write about the role of tracts and pamphlets in studying Christian evangelism especially.

My own personal experience with tracts occurred as a child of the 1970s. My parents were good Methodists, and so we went to the Methodist church on Sunday morning, but my parents were also an early part of the Charismatic Movement in a time before there were many Charismatic or Neo-Charismatic churches. So, on many Sunday evenings we would attend a small Pentecostal church in town. It was a major eye-opening experience for me with ecstatic worship, people speaking in tongues, prophesying, dancing in the aisles, and getting “slain in the spirit.” It was a far cry from our Sunday morning experience, and the budding anthropologist in me enjoyed the difference. My brother, however, was not much of a fan of going to churches of any kind, and so he always looked for something to keep himself occupied. He was the one who found the table in the back of the church with piles of tracts for members to take and distribute, and he also took a special liking to picking up and collecting the Jack Chick tracts. These are early evangelistic tracts developed in a graphic novel format,

and are still in publication today through Chick Publications. They were a little bit strong on the hellfre and brimstone themes for children, but they entertained my brother and introduced me to the world of tracts. I also remember how annoyed my brother became when he found what looked to be a folded-up dollar bill on the foor of a store, only to fnd it was a tract! I actually found the design rather clever!

In general, in archives we see all of this type of material as ephemera- items designed to be disposed of after use. Most were never under copyright, and in fact were designed to be replicated and handed out as much as possible. Many do not have authors, and so have to be organized by publisher. Tracts tend to be one piece of paper, so it can be two-sided, folded into four sides, or folded into a trifold with six sides. Anything larger than that, which requires a staple to hold it together is considered a pamphlet. Tracts and pamphlets for evangelistic purposes are still being produced today and can easily be found online and purchased, often in bulk, to be given away.

Throughout the history of the Church, small publications have been important for spreading theology and doctrine, in much the same way that political tracts were used to pass on political ideas. As groups were formed, like the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge in 1701, and even John Wesley’s Society for the Distribution of Religious Tracts Among the Poor in 1782, the idea of using print to communicate important religious ideas continued to fourish, but in more organized societies. About 1790, English religious writer Hannah More (1745-1833) wrote a political tract to counter Thomas Paine’s support of the French Revolution in his political tracts. Published as “Will Chip” this narrative dialog between two common men helped explain complex political concepts in a simplifed way the average person could understand. In 1794 Paine attacked Christianity as an avowed deist, and so More published a series called Cheap Repository Tracts from 1795-1798 to support religious faith and fght social vices.

Some of the earliest publishers of Christian tracts soon followed, including: the Religious Tract Society of London (1799), the New York Tract Society (1812), the New England Tract Society (1814), and the American Tract Society (1825). Many of these early tracts would be considered more like booklets, often held together with staples or sewed together with string. It was not until 1844 that cheaper paper made of wood pulp was invented, and with this discovery newspapers and other less expensive forms of publication began to explode in popularity. For the most part, the use of

easily available paper and printing helped the development of Christian tracts. It is diffcult to say when the format we are most familiar with came into being, but the heyday of tracts seems to be from the 1920s through the 1970s, although as I mentioned, they continue to be published and sold today.

While tracts are often colorful with eye catching images or slogans, they are meant to convey a message, and more than that, they are expected to take on a life of their own. As one scholar noted, “…though printed by societies and publishing houses- also distributed by members of individual churches- the effectiveness of tracts does not merely rest with the distributors alone. As objects, frequently discarded in the very public places they were initially viewed, tracts also take on their own agency via a network of interactions between the recipient, the distributor and God. This agency allows the tract to retain the potential for acceptance and conversion with each encounter between the tract and subsequent viewers.”2 While Sagan goes on to argue that an evangelical gospel tract has the intent of creating a conversion event, I would disagree with this to a certain point. In looking at a large collection of tracts from a wide array of publishers, it is possible to see a number of categories. While a large percentage were indeed designed for pursuing conversions, others were designed for spiritual encouragement, personal testimonies, and warnings of dangerous social, political, and cultural trends. The last category is especially interesting for those fascinated by the Holiness tradition and its attempts to shape contemporary culture.

Since conversion is the most obvious goal, I will illustrate it with a typical example where Jesus encounters a businessman who is too busy with his work and making money to consider the state of his soul. Published by the Pilgrim Tract Society of Randleman, North Carolina, the opening page of the four-page original shows the happy Mr. O.U. Foolish Man at his desk with bags of money and a paper on “How To Make Money Easy.” He is rejecting Jesus because he is too busy, but on the second page he is encountering Death in the same setting, and he asks death to wait until he is able to repent and get ready to die. To which Death responds with the identical words of the business man to Jesus, “I positively can’t do it, I’m too busy.” The rest of the tract includes scriptures and a call to repent. While there is not a date, the image appears to be from about the 1940s and could even be reminding people of the earlier tragedies of the Great Depression in the 1930s.

THE MAN WHO KNEW HOW TO MAKE EASY MONEY

Jesus: "Will you please give me a few moments time to consider your soul's salvation?"

Mr. O.U. Foolish Man: "I posi~ tively can't do it: I'm too busy."

You're STRONG and WELL - That's Fine. You HOPE to Remain So - That's Natural. You MAY nE Dissa11pointed - That's Possible.

“The Man Who Knew How To Make Easy Money.” Pilgrim Tract Society, no date.

(Image from the B.L. Fisher Archives and Special Collections of Asbury Theological Seminary, used with Permission.)

Another major theme of many tracts is encouragement for those who are already Christians. Often these take the form of poetry and are meant in some ways to be used by the faithful to encourage those who are going through a diffcult time. One I have always enjoyed was a poem called “When I am Old” which encourages the Christian not to give up their faith, even when age begins to take its toll. But there are many examples of these kinds of tracts. One which encourages Christians to go out and

evangelize the lost is “Evangelize” by Harry Rosenblum, published by the Osterhus Publishing House in Minnesota (again with no date, but likely in the 1950s). It is a four-page tract with a lengthy poem and is designed to encourage Christians to be more involved in foreign missions. It is clear that material like this was not aimed to convert others, but rather to inspire and motivate Christians to be more involved in various forms of ministry.

EVANGELIZE!

Harry Rosenblum

The Master said, "GO!

The night's spent. Arise!"

The world lies in darkness, their sin testifies. Shout till the rafters ring back from the skies, "Get busy, God's children. EVANGELIZE!"

Adam's race lost, ruined, and desolate lies. The time for Christ's coming alarmingly flies. Creation's travail we but faintly surmise. There's work for God's children: EVANGELIZE!

GO! Plant and water; win souls, 0 ye wise. God gives the increase; He'll vitalize. Spread love, joy, and peace. Their fears exorcise. Fear not, little flock; EVANGELIZE!

They're wounded and bleeding. 0 don't criticize. We're interns for Jesus; their souls cauterize. Their minds have been blinded by the father of lies. You're lights, ye, God's children. EVANGELIZE! Be ready and watching; the Word publicize, To tell of redemption, how God justifies. Be patient, long-suffering; the erring advise. Store treasure in heaven: EVANGELIZE!

Obey your Lord's calling; your wo_rk systemize. Forgetting the past, press on toward the prize. You've qiven up all without compromise; Preach Christ, dead and risen. EVANGELIZE!

“Evangelize.” Written by Harry Rosenblum. Osterhus Pub. House, no date.

(Image from the B.L. Fisher Archives and Special Collections of Asbury Theological Seminary, used with Permission.)

Another example is a fairly simple one-page tract, printed on only one side called “The Holy Life” published by The Wayside Evangel in Kansas City, Missouri. This poem by an unknown author seeks to encourage the reader to live a holy life, and many of the themes clearly resonate with the Holiness Movement of the 1920s or 1930s. Such material was likely designed to be kept in a believer’s Bible as a persistent reminder, or sent to a fellow Christian to encourage them in living a more holy lifestyle.

THE HOLY LIFE

There is a faith unmixed with doubt, A love all free from fear ; A walk with Jesus, where is felt His presence always near. There is a rest that God bestows, Transcending pardon's peace, A lowly, sweet simplicity, Where inward conflicts cease.

There is a service God-inspired, A zeal that tireless grows, Where self is crucified with Christ, And joy unceasing flows. There is :. being "right with God," That yields to His command Unswerving, true fidelity, A loyalty that stands.

There is a meekness free from pride, That feels no anger rise At slights, or hate, or ridicule, But counts the cross a prize. There is a patience that endures Without a fret or care, But joyful sings, "His will be done, My Lord's sweet grace I share."

There is a purity of heart, A cleanness of desire, Wrought by the Holy Comforter With sanctifying fire. There is a glory that awaits Each blood-washed soul on high, When Christ returns to take His bride With Him beyond the sky.

Troost Ave., Kansas City, llo.

“The Holy Life.” The Wayside Evangel, no date. (Image from the B.L. Fisher Archives and Special Collections of Asbury Theological Seminary, used with Permission.)

Personal testimonies were often published by people as tracts, likely to be handed out to encourage people to attend evangelistic meetings and to hear specifc speakers, but also to encourage either conversion or living a moral and transformational life. A good example of this type of tract is a four-page tract entitled “Does God Still Perform Miracles Today?” published by the Gospel Tract Society of Covington, Kentucky, likely in the 1940s. The cover shows Tommy Thomas, who the inside tells us is an evangelist and personal worker of Cookeville, Tennessee. There is a lengthy poem on the life of this evangelist, who is described as “Ex-convict, Dope-fend, Drunkard, Pickpocket, Short-changer, Confdence man and Counterfeiter. Converted in Marion, Ohio Jail on Christmas Day, 1942, after Spending Many Years in Criminal Life.”

Believing Thomas' Life Story THE MAN WHO SPENT YEARS BEHIND PRISON BARS • ON CHAIN-GANGS AND IN STOCKADES DOWN SOUTH -WAS A DOPE-FIEND • DRUNKARD • PICKPOCKET • SHORT-CHANGER - CONFIDENCE MAN AND COUNTERFEITER. SPENT YEARS IN CARNIVAL LIFE. HIS BODY WAS HEALED FROM HEART TROUBLE -DROPSY -PELLAGRA -THE FIRST STAGE OF CANCER AND OTHER DISEASES -ALL THRU FAITH IN GOD

“Does God Still Perform Miracles Today.” Gospel Tract Society, no date. (Image from the B.L. Fisher Archives and Special Collections of Asbury Theological Seminary, used with Permission.)

One of the other more interesting categories has to do with warnings about political, social, and cultural issues. I have seen all kinds of examples of this type of tract. They are not just about drugs, tobacco, gambling, or sexual behavior, but also miniskirts, long hair on men, women wearing pants, and all kinds of other social critiques. These are interesting because they shine a light on the concerns in the minds of evangelical Christians from different periods of time in ways which may not be captured well in traditional publications. One excellent older example of this type of tract is a one-page tract printed on both sides titled, “Can Beauty Shops Add TRUE Beauty to a Child of God?” which was published by the Pilgrim Tract Society, probably in the 1930s. It shows three views of a woman with a fashionable haircut of the time, short and waved, labelling this as “The Mark of the World” and commenting “Thou Hast Made Thy Beauty to be Abhorred.” Written by an anonymous person calling himself, “The Old Tract Man” he criticized beauty parlors and ends asking, “Christian Women, Will you invite the wrath of God by following the Beauty Shop methods of “the Cursed woman!” (The later phrase referring to Jezebel in scripture).

ABHORRED. 81:e , HE RKOFI#li OR

, '

Wbere women are Axed np OUT-side, to offset wh&t they lack IN-side; SALVATION. Can Beauty Shops Add TRUE Beauty to a Child of,God?

by '"I'HE OLD

TRACT MAN"

Sister: God ·NE:VJ.]R allows His true handmaiden• to remain UN-attractive. In spite of wrinkles, who pot that peaceful .beautr IN, (NOT ON) your sainted g,andmother's faeef Ra;n spoils the latter, but FOREVER "permanent" i, tho foundatil,n of a beautiful Christian character ON 'fhich HER beauty rests. The writer was on.ee 'llerved by icNATURALLY pretty girl clerk. ll)'onth.s '.later, A.FTEH- she tried to improve ( f) her head in ii Beauty Shop L aa-w---h,,r again. One look WfiS PTIOUgh • as I thought; "Horrors! I and does she, call THAT "" improvefmentf" Ezekiel 16:25 says; ''Thou h,11,,t made thy beauty to be ABHORRED." Shake,peare ;.a, right in .\aying,. "What 'POOI.S th~•• -ta.I• "8. "· An •cod ollter,·u aay1, « ~auty •R~~lle are a lfYMMlr """" to WO'll\<0than "Beauty Shops are a. greater curse to woma1f than tbe saloons were- fo man.'._ Bible pr(?of of this

“Can Beauty Shops Add TRUE Beauty to a Child of God?” Pilgrim Tract Society, no date.

(Image from the B.L. Fisher Archives and Special Collections of Asbury Theological Seminary, used with Permission.)

Another classic example of warning literature is the pamphlet “Open Doors To Hell” also published by the Pilgrim Tract Society, likely in the 1940s or 1950s. It pictures a young man being escorted by death and alcohol to an early grave from a beer parlor. But the subject is not just alcohol, the tract also warns “The Saloon, Tobacco Shop, Card Table,

Lodge Room, Theater & TV, Dance Hall, Billiard Hall, and The House of Ill-Fame” were all potential dangers leading to judgement. Such views were typical of the Holiness Movement which saw these as all social ills which could impact people’s lives. Alcohol was a major issue going back to the Temperance Movement, and of course prostitution (the “house of illfame”) was a moral issue of infdelity which could also carry physical harm through sexually transmitted diseases. Most of the other issues however, were of concern because they wasted money and time which could be better spent in ministry and Christian service. They became seen as vices in their own right, because they were often connected with alcohol as well.

OPEN DOORS J:O HELL;

THE SALOON, TOBACCO SHOP, CARD TABLE, LODGE ROOM, THEATER & TV, DANCE HALL, BILLIARD HALL, and THE HOUSE OF ILL-FAME

But know thou that for all these things God will bring thee into judgment.-Eccl. ll:9.

The Lord "will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts." (I Cor. 4:6).

For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ: that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it he good or bad.-II Cor. 5:10. 1JSC.AP~ FQfl TffY LIF~I

“Open Doors To Hell.” Pilgrim Tract Society, no date. (Image from the B.L. Fisher Archives and Special Collections of Asbury Theological Seminary, used with Permission.)

Tracts issuing warnings for political issues also go way back to Hannah More and “Will Chip” in the 1790s, so it is not unusual to fnd them among larger collections of tracts. A good example here is “While Communists Work Christians Are Sleeping” published by Osterhus Publishing House, likely in the time period of growing fears of communism in the 1950s and 1960s. It shows an image of a decidedly oriental man making large strides and casting out communist literature to humanity, followed by a smaller fgure in the distance carrying Christian literature without much urgency. In this time period, the communist rejection of God and religion as part of their system of modernization was seen as a critical threat to the Church. This tract goes on to argue that literature distribution (including tracts) was a key to long term success. It includes quotes from anonymous missionaries in Japan and Latin America who attribute high levels of success to the distribution of Christian literature. It also points to the loss of China (pointing to a post-1949 publication date) to the failure to distribute enough Christian literature.

WHILE COMMUNISTS WORK CHRISTIANS ARE SLEEPING

LET'S HELP THE LITTLE FELLOW!

A man met a communist in San Francisco at midnight on his way to a meeting. The communist told him his destination.

•why there won't be anyone there/' the man exclaimed. "Every one will be there who should ~~;s wi 5

5 'af~~~~ and eight hours I give to communism; one half my income I give to communism.••

One had planned to have a debate on commun~~-su::cri:Ti~t::n:~~u~e

"What books would you advise me in order to be informed on communism?" he asked the girl in charge.

“While Communists Work Christians Are Sleeping.” Osterhus

Publishing House,

no date.

(Image from the B.L. Fisher Archives and Special Collections of Asbury Theological Seminary, used with Permission.)

Some tracts come with a combination of messages, such as “Wake Up, Watchman!” published by the Railroad Evangelistic Association of Indianapolis, Indiana. As the back of this one-page track notes, “It has a two-fold purpose.” First to warn those who are sinners of the need to repent or risk facing God’s impending judgement, but second for the Christian, “it is your duty to warn the unsaved of God’s judgement.” The image on the front displays a car of sinners speeding toward the railroad tracks while God’s judgement in the form of an oncoming train is racing down the tracks toward an impending collision. Meanwhile the Christian with the stop sign to warn about the train is fast asleep in his comfortable guardhouse.

WAl<El/P, WATCHMAN I

“Wake Up, Watchman!” Railroad Evangelistic Association, no date. (Image from the B.L. Fisher Archives and Special Collections of Asbury Theological Seminary, used with Permission.)

Other forms of tracts developed in part to make their points in terms of issues the ordinary people were thinking about. One good example would be “Mass Media Brainwashing,” written by Mary Alice Tenney and published by Light and Life Press of the Free Methodist Church as a “Moral Issues Pamphlet” (likely in the 1960s). The visual image is of a television where a man seems to be advertising cigarettes, while “hogwash” drips into the tv set. This six-page trifold tract deals with the infuence of media (mostly television) which infuences children and shapes their values more

3117. Horth O.lawore Slrfft lndianapoll1w,Indiana "'6205

than the Christian faith. It encourages Christians to be frm in their own conscience, apply scriptural values to what they see and watch, and also encourages Christian parents to control which mass media material enters their home.

MASS MEDIIIA

“Mass Media Brainwashing.” By Mary Alice Tenney, Light and Life Press, no date.

(Image from the B.L. Fisher Archives and Special Collections of Asbury Theological Seminary, used with Permission.)

Another, more humorous example of this kind of tract is “Like To Make A Space Flight?” written by Theodore H. Epp and published by the Tract Evangelistic Crusade (also likely from the 1960s). With the image of an alien in a fying saucer, it makes use of the space craze of the time.

The frst half of the four-page tract is loaded with statistics and facts about the diffculties it would take to travel into space, and how humans would need to adapt. The text then shifts to the idea that “Just as your life would have to be adapted and changed to live on the moon, so you must have a changed heart and life in order to enter heaven.” It is a gentler entrance into the typical call to repentance and conversion which are seen in other conversion-oriented tracts. The tract also uses a poem on the last page called “Space Man” by Mildred Wood Harris, which refers to the fact that we have put a man in space, which happened in 1961, and the poem itself is copyrighted in 1961, but was used with permission. This gives a good idea of the date for this tract.

1-1/(£ ·• ,To MM£ HERE'S HOW TO GET THERE

“Like

To Make A Space Flight?” By Theodore H. Epp, Tract Evangelistic Crusade, no date.

(Image from the B.L. Fisher Archives and Special Collections of Asbury Theological Seminary, used with Permission.)

E,- Theodore B. Epp

Taking a trip to outer to be the "talk of the town" In of the fact that the moon ltseH la 2'0.000 away from the earth.

While much less numerous, it is also possible to fnd tracts about tracts, most likely used as advertisements sent out with bundles of tracts to those who ordered them. A good example would be “Little Preacher Cards” from the Pilgrim Tract Society. This is a larger two-sided tract, but printed on paper for a four-sided traditional tract. In total it displays ten different tracts and encourages people to order packets of assorted designed from 45 different titles. All ten tracts displayed are geared toward encouraging repentance or conversion. This tract about tracts gives a little glimpse into how tracts functioned, since the reader is encouraged to order tracts for a free-will offering, but also asked to include costs for postage. Clearly, this was seen as a ministry and was not about making money. Distribution was the key and the offering and the postage would cut down costs and allow more tracts to be distributed.

LITTLE PREACHER CARDS

Here is reproduced a few of the many different designs of PILGRI1"1 LIT1.'LE PREACHERS. Each one has appropriate.Scripture and other salvation messages on the back side. They are made up in packets of assorted deiigns of more than 45 titles. \Ve are distributing these like our other tracts on the free~w-ill offering plan. (Don't forget to include postage for mailing_ of your order. Do not ask us to break packs.) MoR.ALITV MAY !'.!.f.PA MANOUT ::.;;,.;::;:.:.:.=:.:.;.;.:.::;.:_;;_:;.;.,\of JAIL,IUTITIS NO PASSPORT INTO HEAVEN ;;- 81J.: H..WE' THIS WARNING SIGN WllS PUT O/VEVtRY Sill • WHEN GOD SR/D:~Wf /t/;JJ;eS0tSf1Jfs]}t/lTH,." "l!!llfV!atv111/f ;;;;;;/Jf CHl?IST, 1""'1>THOU <'$HALTBE <5/lVEP. "lier, 16,Jt. ~

rrHethat being often reoroved hardeneth his ned( 5hallsuddenly be destroyed, and that with.outremedy.'!p,.,u,•

“Little Preacher Cards.” Pilgrim Tract Society, no date. (Image from the B.L. Fisher Archives and Special Collections of Asbury Theological Seminary, used with Permission.)

For anyone interested in Evangelical and Holiness theology at the grass-roots level, tracts and pamphlets provide a fascinating glimpse of which issues mattered or were considered important. These inexpensive pieces of paper were designed to initiate theological discussion with the average man or woman in the street. While it is unclear how much of an impact they had, it can be assumed that they certainly triggered many Christians and non-Christians to think about what scripture had to say on various topics. With a large enough collection, it would be possible to even pursue a doctoral dissertation on the topic. In a world of digital media, these forms of religious communication are a thing of the past, but understanding how they might have shaped and infuenced society is still a study worth pursuing.

The archives of the B.L. Fisher library are open to researchers and works to promote research in the history of Methodism and the WesleyanHoliness movement. Images, such as these, provide one vital way to bring history to life. Preservation of such material is often time consuming and costly, but are essential to helping fulfll Asbury Theological Seminary’s mission. If you are interested in donating items of historic signifcance to the archives of the B.L. Fisher Library, or in donating funds to help purchase or process signifcant collections, please contact the archivist at archives@ asburyseminary.edu.

End Notes

1 All images used courtesy of the Archives of the B.L. Fisher Library of Asbury Theological Seminary who own all copyrights to these digital images, unless otherwise noted. Please contact them directly if interested in obtaining permission to reuse these images.

2 Sean Geoffrey Sagan, “Only a Tract: the Production and Distribution of Evangelical Gospel Literature and the Construction of Social Boundaries.” Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Riverside, 2017: 7.

The Asbury Journal 80/1: 270-284

Dwight D. Swanson

Thomas Oord on “The Death of Omnipotence”: “Not Born of Scripture” 1

Dwight D. Swanson has been at Nazarene Theological College, Manchester, for over 28 years, currently Senior Research Fellow; Honorary Research Fellow at the Centre for Biblical Studies, University of Manchester for 25 years; Co-founder in 2014 of the Manchester Centre for the Study of Christianity and Islam. Ordained minister in the Church of the Nazarene. Also taught in Switzerland and the Philippines.

In a recent book Thomas Jay Oord declares The Death of Omnipotence. The good news, if that is disturbing, is his announcement of the Birth of Amipotence. This book is a continuation of Oord’s Process/ Relational Theology publications addressing the problem of evil, with the addition of his proposed replacement term “amipotence.” Philosophical theology is not my academic discipline, and this is not the focus of this essay. It is rather the biblical/philological presentation used to underpin the philosophical that gives rise to what follows. My attention was frst drawn to Tom’s thinking on this point from his January 2023 blog article “Mistranslating Pantokrater [sic] as ‘Omnipotent’,”2 and when his email offer of a free copy of the book arrived not long after I accepted—to see his larger argument.

The frst chapter of the book, “Not Born of Scripture,” is a reworking of the blog article and retains many aspects of the genre. Eleven times in the frst chapter Oord speaks of mistranslation or mistaken translation. His thesis is that the Septuagint translators “mistranslated” the Hebrew Sabaoth and Shaddai as pantokrator, and that Jerome’s omnipotens derives from the Greek, and thus perpetuates the mistake.

Had Jerome followed the original texts, he probably would not have used omnipotens...Jerome’s mistaken translation from a mistaken Greek translation of Hebrew led the world’s two largest religions to adopt a bogus view of divine power!

There is a little diffculty here, in that it is commonly accepted that Jerome’s Vulgate was the frst Christian translation to derive directly from the Hebrew.3 (It is even possible for the modern pilgrim to the Holy Land to visit the very chamber in the crypt of the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem where he learned his Hebrew from Jews and worked on his translation!) Such a basic error in fact drew me to look more closely at the scholarly citations.

The opening line of the frst chapter is: “The words ‘omnipotent’ and ‘omnipotence’ are not in the Bible” (11). I am certain Tom knows that saying this is a bit disingenuous. The words are in the Latin Bible, which is a reasonable translation of the Greek and Hebrew, as is the English “almighty.” Are these translations not “the Bible”? That they are not in the Hebrew Bible is because, er, they are translations.

So, this view from the beginning the book makes the words a translation problem. Oord is bothered that “almighty” is considered a synonym for “omnipotence” for “many readers.” The problem, however, is not the translation but the interpretation: what do these English words mean? Oord summarizes common meanings given to omnipotence: 1. God exerts all power. 2. God can do absolutely anything. 3. God can control others or circumstances.4 The question that follows, then, should be whether this defnition is appropriate to the evidence; that question is not asked in this book.

There is a wave in the direction of recognition of versions and translations in the frst footnote. There Oord writes that the Protestant canon is used as the basis for this study, while recognizing the pluriformity, or fuidity, of the text in ancient manuscripts. This is a rather limiting factor given the evidence of pluriformity comes from texts outside the much later Protestant canon. Pluriformity in this context is a term which derives from Qumran studies, describing the phenomenon of textual diversity among the manuscripts of the “biblical”5 scrolls; in short, no two manuscripts are textually identical.6 Transmission in this period was not focussed on rigid attention to each word, but there was variation in areas of grammar, syntax, and sometimes vocabulary. This does not lead to the conclusion that seems to be implied here that the Bible is therefore a matter of individual scribal choice, relativizing the ideas of canon and text. The textual situation is, rather, much the same as can be seen in the plethora of modern English translations—some are literal, and some are literary, but all are recognizably the Bible, regardless of particular vocabulary. The evidence of this phenomenon amongst the biblical manuscripts among the Dead Sea Scrolls, however, actually renders Oord’s disclaimer irrelevant—with regard to the Hebrew vocabulary under study here, there is no variation at all. Every extant instance of these two words in the DSS mss is consistent with the MT,7 which serves to show that, whether or not the scribes of the Scrolls knew their etymology (see next section), they did not vary in transmission of what is already a Sacred Name. But, since these are presented in this book as a translation problem, what follows discusses the translation issues.

On El Shaddai

First unequivocal statement: “’God Almighty’ is a mistranslation of el Shaddai” (12).

This headline statement is footnoted, citing without comment a number of respected scholars, inferring that these articles support this declaration. Such footnotes are commonly used in scholarly writing for such purposes. None of the respected authorities, in fact, say what Oord infers—nor would one expect to fnd them saying so since theirs are textual/ linguistic, not translation studies. William Albright, frst cited, is primarily interested in isolating the etymological origins of the word, examining Ugaritic, Phoenician, Sumerian, Akkadian (West-Semitic), Amorite, Assyrian, and Egyptian texts. He is fully aware that this is a different matter to translation. Of the LXX rendering, which he states cannot be later than the second century BCE, he says,

The etymology and primary meaning of the name had long since been forgotten, and there was not even a standard tradition which could be employed by the translators of the earlier versions…8

In this one sentence alone, the whole of Oord’s enterprise is rendered irrelevant. Application of the etymology derived from modern scholarly discussion is anachronistic, being a different discussion from the etymology derived by the ancient translators. And so, we could simply stop at this point, the premise of the book negated. But it is necessary to look at the details of the proposed thesis.

For this a reading of the other scholars cited in footnote 2 will be useful.

Frank Moore Cross9 essentially follows Albright, Shadday10 meaning “the mountain one.” In a footnote he acknowledges the “primitive meaning is obviously ‘breast’… However the secondary meaning developed for transparent reasons.”11 William G Dever follows Cross.12

E. L. Abel13 accepts and expands on the argument of Lloyd Bailey14 that El Shadday is a variant of “mountain,” is related to the Amorite god Bel Shade, and therefore that El Sadday was a lunar deity. Jean Ouellette rejects the Amorite argument of either of these, and prefers “belonging to the plain.”15

None of these articles discusses the translation “Almighty,” let alone the idea of a mistranslation. While it is true that “breasts” is largely

agreed to be the oldest etymology, none suggest it was understood that way by the Hebrews; in fact, “breasts” is not even discussed by Bailey, Abel, and Ouellette. “Mountain” may not be the oldest etymology, but is considered to be the most likely origin for the Hebrew word.

Second unequivocal statement: “The oldest and most likely meaning of shaddai is ‘breasts’” (12).

Albright concludes that the etymology of Shaddai must be found in the Akkadian šadû. Of three proposed etymologies from šadû he fnds Dhorme’s 1922 proposal of “breast, two breasts” as “probably correct,” while also noting that words for breast often develop the meaning of mountain.16 He then goes on to argue rather for a “phonetic equivalent” in an archaic Akkadian orthography with the meaning “mountaineer” (citing an inscription describing Cilicians). It is this older form that he suggests the Hebrew preserves into the category of personal name.17 Thus, while “breasts” is the probable etymological origin, it arrives in the Hebrew as a personal name via an older Akkadian form meaning “mountain.”18

Oord admits Shaddai can refer to “the one of the mountain,” but cites Cross claiming he “prioritizes ‘breast’ over ‘mountain’ as a translation of shaddai.”19 However, Cross speaks of “breast” as a “primitive meaning” in relation to “secondary meaning”; he does not prioritize. Contrary to Oord’s reading, Cross writes this in a footnote to his discussion of Albright’s article where his conclusion is, “In any case, the epithet šadday seems to mean ‘the mountain one’.”20 Returning to Albright’s article, he goes on to ask the important question, “Was the original meaning of the name šaddai still remembered in the Mosaic period or not?” (191). Repeating his earlier agnostic statement (quoted above and footnote 7), he offers the conclusion that “in the earliest Israelite prose and poetic tradition, Yahweh appears as a mountain-god” (191).

Third statement: “Nearly every occurrence of shaddai in Genesis is associated with nourishing breasts and fertility” (12).

There are six occurrences of Shaddai in Genesis, so the question “How many is ‘nearly every’”? Oord cites Klaus Koch, suggesting that this statement derives from him.21 Koch, however, says nothing at all about breasts in his article, and his discussion of fruitfulness/increase (not solely fertility) is part of his focus on the promise of the Land.22 It is David Biale who (selectively) summarizes several pages of Koch’s presentation of

evidence with: “As Koch has recently pointed out [NB: footnote to Koch, 323], all the passages using El Shaddai in Genesis, with one exception, are fertility blessings.” He does not specify which text is the odd one out for Koch, presumably 43:14.23

Oord mentions 49:25 (the one explicit use of “breasts” amongst the six, in a play on words in the Hebrew),24 28:3, 48:3-4, and 35:11, which are, indeed, about fertility—the fertility of the children of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The odd one out appears to be 43:14, where the title is spoken by Jacob, not to him, who prays for the compassion of El Shaddai in the face of the potential death of Benjamin.25 In Biblical Theology these are understood as reiterations of the promise of covenant and blessing made to Abraham in 12:1-3;26 the focus is on becoming a “great nation,” and not suckling breasts.

The evidence suggests that “only one occurrence” of Shaddai is about nourishing breasts.

In sum, from his study of the six occurrences of Shaddai in Genesis Oord argues that El Shaddai means “God of Breasts,” and thus “God Almighty” is a mistranslation. This argument mistakes etymology for meaning, apparently under the impression that “earliest” etymological meaning governs all future uses of the word-root, which is not what the scholarship invoked here is suggesting.27 The evidence offered for etymology does not answer the question of how the biblical authors understood the term when using it, let alone the earliest translators. As to the translations, the LXX in each instance reads “my God” or “your God,” and does not translate Shaddai at all. The Vulgate does translate all with omnipotens—so Jerome must be translating from the Hebrew.

Job: A destructive turn

Oord’s treatment of the Book of Job takes a different tack. In a little over two pages he argues that Shaddai takes on a destructive meaning in the “later books of the Bible,”28 and it “is especially evident” in Job (15). Job’s friends, he says, attribute pain, death, and destruction to Shaddai, and so (according to Oord) “misunderstand God.” They are portrayed in Job as ignorant of who God is and how he works, therefore we today must surely “question the association of shaddai with God-ordained destruction.”29 Job seems to accept this portrayal, experiencing for himself the pain of the “barbs of Shaddai” (6:4), while remembering the good old days of Shaddai’s favour (29:5). Elihu, on the other hand, according to Oord, is claimed to “rightly

speak for God,” and does not associate Shaddai with destruction. Shaddai is, rather, nourishing (33:4), and does not torment (37:23). Noting that Job speaks of “shaddai,” and never “El shaddai,” Oord follows speculation by “some” that the word refers to “vital forces, unqualifed powers or natural factors that destroy,” rather than to God.30 Thus, it follows, the destructive Shaddai references are not to be connected with God—a point Oord makes emphatic by repetition. And, thus, by this is God saved from the persistent wish, even among today’s readers, for “a male God to sanction violence” (17).

The Hebrew Job is indeed a ferce challenge to traditional wisdom theologies. Full of wit and biting irony, there is little doubt that the Book of Job is questioning the prevalent view of God. The anonymous author would no doubt approve of much of Oord’s critique of Shaddai

But the evidence of mistranslation is a different matter. Firstly, consider the data. Beyond the six instances of Shaddai in Genesis there are 47 in the rest of the OT; 31 of these are in Job—a cluster that needs to be accounted for. The LXX translates Shaddai as pantocrator only in Job, and in only 16 places; the 9 other instances demand nuance in interpretation of Greek Job. The Vulgate translates with omnipotens in the Pentateuch and 25 times in Job. Studies of the text of Job have long noted the differences between the Hebrew and the Greek, if not agreeing on the reasons.31 The Greek is so different from the Hebrew that some consider it more of a commentary, with adjustments deriving from a theological exegetical method.32 The Dead Sea Scrolls include the oldest extant copy of Job, a 3rd C BCE Aramaic version. John Gray observed in 1974 that this Targum agrees in many places with the Greek over the Hebrew, raising the question of whether the LXX refects more accurately the ur-text of Job than the MT.33 That is to suggest that the Hebrew version is the revision, not the Greek. The pertinent point, once again, is that translation is not at issue, but the meaning in context. Dates for the Book of Job suggested by commentators range from the 7th—2nd C BCE, but a setting in the Persian period (late 6th 4th) seems most likely, with the depiction of the divine court in Job 1. A Ptolemaic era Targum and a Greek Job line of transmission of the Hebrew place the versions remarkably close to each other in time—capable of being conceived as an active theological conversation.34 The meaning of Shaddai, as well as pantokrator, will be found somewhere in this milieu. Secondly, let us look at Oord’s depiction of Shaddai overall. Job’s friends certainly represent the traditional view of God and his exercise

of judgement. A reading of Job with an eye to how Shaddai is spoken of suggests, to me, that God’s role in retributive judgement is accepted by all. Job’s complaint is not about how God requites wrong-doing—it is that he is innocent. It is the justice of God’s judgement that is called in question.

Further to this point, it is curious that Oord makes Elihu the certifed champion of God. This is surprising given the portrayal in the book of an arrogant self-assured young man whom YHWH doesn’t even bother to name in his fnal speech, for good or ill.35 Elihu’s speech simply drips with the irony of the unself-aware. The persistent presence of the 1st Person is a clue, along with his assurance to Job and his friends that “one who is perfect in knowledge is with you” (36:4; cf YHWH’s evaluation of Job in 1:1, 8, 2:3), and his fnal word that Shaddai “does not regard any who are wise in their own conceit” (37:24). In the end, his view of Job’s guilt and a retributive Shaddai is the same as the friends, if not more robust.

This brings us, thirdly, to the occurrence of Shaddai. The names of God in Job do need to be taken into account. The fact that Job never uses the Genesis “El-Shaddai,” just Shaddai, is undoubtedly signifcant. We have seen that Oord infers from this that “biblical references to shaddai as destructive are not directly connected with God” (16). The evidence, however, is otherwise. Every instance of Shaddai is in poetic parallel with “God,” albeit not “El” but “Eloha”—a sort of hybrid of the shortened form and the longer “Elohim” (which appears in Ch 2). This play with the names of God is where Job can be seen to question the sort of God who can be so arbitrary in inficting pain on his devoted people. This view would suggest that Job is, indeed, questioning YHWH/God’s use of his power.

But there is more to be seen here. In his focus on Shaddai, Oord ignores the words and actions of YHWH, which differ between the narrative brackets of chs 1-2 & 41 and the poetic inner core. In the brackets, the covenant name YHWH is used, appearing in the poetry only in ch 40 (1,3,6). The latter is signifcant because there YHWH parallels Shaddai in self-reference, in the same way the “Eloha” does elsewhere, and apparently with the same understanding of the nature of Shaddai: “Shall a fault-fnder contend with Shaddai?” This is not all, because it is YHWH, not Shaddai, who brings down the violence, death, and destruction on Job’s children and property—the explicit narrative reason for this was not judgement, but as part of a game with the Satan. Job, the man in the story, struggles with just this sort of God, and calls this God out.

So, while the Book of Job does actually offer the strongest case for Oord’s critique of Shaddai, YHWH cannot be distanced from the judgement on Shaddai. This kind of God looks remarkably like a Persian king whose word is absolute and instantly obeyed, who is virtually almighty. Job mourns his lost children, but doesn’t react to the violence of God. His complaint is the injustice visited on him. This is all about vindication (cf 4:17, 6:29). If God is Shaddai then he should vindicate Job; God doesn’t, therefore cannot be who he says he is. It is part of the genius of the Book of Job that, after everyone including YHWH has spoken, the matter is not neatly resolved by the “happily ever after” ending.

Finally, some comments on Oord’s understanding of the “biblical writers.” He expresses puzzlement as to why Job uses the word Shaddai differently from earlier writers, and why he connects the nurturing El Shaddai with the violent Shaddai; and then answers his own question with two anachronistic readings: one, “some biblical writers wanted to portray deity as both good and evil” (16); two, “biblical writers intentionally exchanged the God of feminine breasts for a God of masculine aggression” (17).36

Biblical students have long wrangled over the matter of authorial intent, and even those who say we can’t know write as though they know. What the writers “want” to say, or “intentionally” change is a fraught matter. With regard to the frst answer above, it is not so much that the writers “wanted” to see God as source of good and evil; that was common theology, which can be seen across the Old Testament. Such a view is uncomfortable to Western theodicy, and Oord “wants” to remove such an unpalatable depiction that has become a stumbling block for (for want of a better word) a progressive portrayal of a God of love.

The second answer is more directly about the nature of scriptural conversation, or in other words, intertextuality. Oord presents a picture of a linear progression in canonical development of theology; early books actually saw God as nurturing and protecting, later are seeking to sanction violence. To today’s readers God cannot be both, so the latter must be rejected. The reality, of course, is that the canonical conversation is far messier than this. Contradictory or competing views exist side-by-side, and even within the same space: “The Lord, the Lord, a God merciful and gracious, abounding in steadfast love…yet by no means clearing the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the parents on the children…” (Exod 34:6-7, NRSV). The theological challenges to our time cannot easily be dodged.

In sum, the argument from the etymology of Shaddai is found wanting; the argument for wilful theological mistranslation is simply without foundation.

On YHWH Sabaoth, Lord of Hosts

The main focus of Oord’s assault on omnipotence has been on the 50+ occurrences of Shaddai in the OT, which cluster in Genesis and Job. The examination of Sabaoth, in contrast, is brief, perhaps because there is so little to go on despite the prominence of this title over Shaddai.

It is only at this point that Oord moves from the Hebrew to the Greek, saying, “The authors of the Septuagint translate shaddai and sabaoth with the Greek word pantokrator (παντοκράτωρ)” (21). Translation issues require a study of their own, which cannot be included here. For now, all we can do is to offer some perspective on this seemingly innocuous assertion. Firstly, παντοκράτωρ does not appear in the Greek Pentateuch; it is used six times out of 18 instances of Sabaoth in the “historical” books; zero of 18 in the Psalms; three of four times in 1 Chronicles. The title for YHWH is predominant in the Prophets: 57 times in Isaiah, none translated pantokrator; and 85 times in Jeremiah, ten as pantokrator. The Twelve (aka Minor Prophets), by contrast, translates all 90 instances with pantokrator

The most common English translation is “Lord of Hosts,” refecting a military origin; this is also the case in the LXX, frequently overtly in military contexts. It might be more accurately translated in today’s English as “Lord of Armies.” Oddly, Oord’s brief treatment seems not to be too bothered by the military basis of this word. His point is that Sabaoth never means “omnipotence” (19), nor was this the purpose of the LXX translators when coining the word pantokrator. 37 Citing an article on the Psalms by Judith Krawelitzki, he concludes that the translators “did not want to portray Israel’s God as omnipotent.”38 The merit of this assertion is that Oord is, at last, talking about the meaning of the words, albeit an argument from silence. But, even accepting the notion that neither Sabaoth nor Pantokrator mean that God is almighty in the sense of “he can do anything,” there remains the fact that the Lord of Hosts acts in destructive military ways. This is also true of the Apocalyptic vision of John, whose Pantokrator rides a white horse, clothes dipped in blood, followed by the armies of heaven making war against the armies of the nations and ruling them with a rod of iron (Revelation 19). If this Lord is not omnipotent, he is more powerful than anyone else; and doesn’t necessarily come across as nurturing.

Conclusions

When I responded to Tom’s offer of a free copy of this book, I told him I had read the blog article and “was not persuaded of that line of argument” [5 April 2023]. Tom replied that he hoped I would be convinced by the scholars he quotes. Having examined the quoted scholars, I not only remain unconvinced, but have new doubts about the philosophers and theologians cited in the rest of the book, particularly with regard to the Trinity.

What we have shown: Oord’s study misunderstands the nature of etymology, and mistakes translation for meaning. The case for mistranslation is not only unproven, but the evidence shows otherwise. This “biblical” argument cannot be used to bury omnipotence. The proof, such as it may exist, lies elsewhere.

Having examined the misconception in this book of how translation works, we return to the basic issue: the question of the meaning of the words. It is not unreasonable to suggest that the 3rd to 1st C BCE LXX translators of the Hebrew knew the meanings of the words they used. If Pantokrator should not be understood as omnipotent, as in “God can do anything,” the question remains as to how it was understood. This brings us into the world of exegesis, understanding words in their context.

Clearly, Oord’s problem is not really with “omni,” but with “power.” The defnition of omnipotence as essentially coercive and controlling is a problem of concepts of power; that God might be all-powerful simply suggests a greater degree of coercion. The choice of “amipotence” as a substitute seems to me to miss this point. By his reasoning it is not the “omni” that should be replaced, but the “potence.” This does not translate “all loving,” but something like “love power.” More appropriate would be “omnicaritas,” or “omnidiriget” (sticking with Latin, and the most common Vulgate words for love). Indeed, retaining “potence” in this construction allows for the continued potential of coercion, coercive love. I don’t think this is what Oord intends (though, that is to presume knowledge of authorial intent).

Finally, a word about the publication. Oord, and SacraSage Press, could do with a good copy editor. There are too many basic errors in the footnotes, and the Hebrew is left-to-right, not surviving transition from word-processor to fnal copy. Such untidy proofng always draws my focus to the question of the accuracy in the scholarship.

End Notes

1 Oord, The Death of Omnipotence and Birth of Amipotence, SacraSage Press, 2023.

2 https://thomasjayoord.com/index.php/blog/archives/themistranslation-of-pantokrater-as-omnipotent, frst accessed March 2023. Further quotations follow.

3 So common that there is no need to cite examples here.

4 Oord, 3. The defnition is of vital importance to the whole of this discussion, and needs to be established clearly. This summary is undoubtedly well known to those who have read Oord’s previous publications, but it would be helpful to have a recognizable widely agreed defnition, or this argument may be seen as attacking a straw person. For example, read H Orton Wiley, the frst renowned Nazarene theologian, from Oord’s alma mater, in Christian Theology Vol 1 (Kansas City, MO: Beacon Hill Press, 1940): 349: “Omnipotence is rightly defned as that perfection of God by virtue of which he is able to do all that He pleases to do.” This does not ft any of Oord’s given meanings.

5 I use scare quotes since we are talking about the books of the Christian canon, which at this point are not yet what we call “Bible.” Oord is correct in noting that there was no defnitive canon at this time. But it is unhelpful for him to state baldly that “there is no defnitive canon.” By this does he refer to the period of transmission of the ancient manuscripts, or to present theology?

6 The term and concept was introduced by Eugene Ulrich in “Pluriformity in the Biblical Text, Text Groups, and Questions of Canon,” in The Madrid Qumran Congress: Proceedings of the International Congress on the Dead Sea Scrolls—Madrid, 18-21 March, 1991, eds Julio Trebolle Barrera and Luis Vegas Montaner, Leiden: Brill, 1992), 1:23-41; it has been enlarged upon by Ulrich and others since, including this writer.

7 The ms evidence for Shaddai is some of the most fragmentary of the Scrolls, and only one instance survives, in 4QGenf. There is no evidence from Job. With regard to Sabaoth, the Great Isaiah Scroll (1QIsaa) is consistent with MT in 47 of 57 instances, with 10 minuses (sometimes termed “omissions”); the same is true of 14 instances in other Isaiah mss, where one (1QIsac) is in Paleo-Hebrew script, as part of the Nomina Sacra.

8 Albright, “The Names Shaddai and Abram,” JBL 54 (1935): 180. K Koch, similarly, of the “fruitless results of all these proposed etymological derivations as far as the exegesis of the extant texts is concerned” in “Saddaj,” VT 26 (1976): 309. To this may be added Nahum M. Sarna, speaking to the “great antiquity” and “obsolescence” of the title, “Notwithstanding the various conjectures, the original meaning of the divine name shaddai still eludes us” (“El Shaddai,” Exodus Commentary, Philadelphia: JPS, 1991): 269.

9 Frank Moore Cross, “Yahweh and the God of the Patriarchs,” HTR 55 (1962): 225-259.

10 Transliterations of the title differ over time and language of origin amongst scholars. No attempt is made here to impose consistency.

11 Cross: 246; the same is noted in his monograph Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1973): 53.

12 William G Dever, Did God Have a Wife? (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2005): 257-258. Oord does not give page numbers for Dever, and cites the title as Does God Have a Wife?

13 E. L. Abel, “The Nature of the Patriarchal God ‘El Sadday’,” Numen 20 (1973): 49-59.

14 Lloyd Bailey, “Israelite ‘El šadday and Bel Shade,” JBL 87 (1968): 434-438.

15 Jean Ouellette, “More on ’El Shadday and Bel Shade,” JBL 88 (1969): 470-471.

16 Albright: 183-84. P. Dhorme, “L’Emploi Métaphorique des Noms de Parties du Corps en Hébreu et en Akkadien (Suite),” RB 31.2 (1922): 215-233. The brief discussion is found on page 230 (Cross, HTR: 246).

17 Albright: 188.

18 Oord points to the example of the Grand Tetons as a less ancient naming of mountains, giving credit in footnote 12 for the observation to a conversation partner. Interestingly, Cross gives this very example in the sentence immediately following that which Oord has just quoted in footnote 10 and repeats it in Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1973): 56; it is further repeated without acknowledgement to Cross by William G. Dever, Did God Have a Wife?: 257.

19 Oord: 13, footnote 10, citing Cross, Canaanite Myth: 53.

20 Citation as note 18.

21 Klaus Koch, “Saddaj,” VT 26 (1976): 323.

22 Koch: 323. “…durch El-Saddajs Dazwischentreten entsteht erstmals ein ausgesprochener übermenschlicher Rechtsgrund für den Sitz eines bestimmten Landes.”

23 Biale, “The God with Breasts: El Shaddai in the Bible,” History of Religions (1982): 247.

24 Oord could have used this text as evidence for Shaddai as “God of the Womb,” if he so desired, since Biale makes the implicit connection here. In his last testament to Joseph Jacob prays, among other things, that Shaddai will bless him with “blessings of the breasts (šadayim) and of the womb (reḥem).” (If, on the reasoning here, vagina were to be claimed as the “oldest and most likely” meaning of reḥem, how should we translate Exod 34:6?). Interestingly, Oord does not cite Dever at this point, as he might have. His interest in Dever’s take on 49:25 is reserved for use as an example of Shaddai as a destructive motif, “the old Amorite-Canaanite storm god,” glossing over the rest of the sentence, “associated with the awesome (and procreative) powers of nature,” Did God Have a Wife?: 258.

25 Biale argues reasonably that loss of a child is implicitly connected to fertility (247).

26 Also noted by Dever in his survey of the Genesis texts.

27 This sort of word-study approach was effectively deconstructed by James Barr, The Semantics of Biblical Language, London: Oxford University Press, 1961.

28 Determination of early and late dates of “books” or even texts has its own range of questions, which we will leave aside here. There is broad consensus on the late date of the Book of Job amongst canonical books.

29 Oord: 15.

30 Citing Thorkild Jacobsen, 20th C expert on Mesopotamian religion, and a work by Robert di Vito on personal names in Sumerian and Akkadian. As in his dependence on Biale, Oord’s interpretation of the Old Testament is partial to the History of Religions approach of the mid-20th C.

31 Harry M Orlinsky, “Studies in the Septuagint of the Book of Job,” Hebrew Union College Annual 1957, Vol 28: 54-56. The LXX frequently lacks stichoi and verses, even paragraphs of the MT, making it fve-sixths shorter. Origen assumed the fault was with the Greek translators, and offered a version corrected towards the MT in his famous Hexapla. His version remained “canonical” for Christians for a long time.

32 See John Gray, “The Massoretic Text of the Book of Job,” ZAW 1974: 340-341, who described this as refecting Alexandrian Judaism.

33 We shall pursue this line of enquiry no further, particularly since we have already noted that Shaddai is not found in the surviving fragments of 11QtJob.

34 I tend towards late Persian for the Hebrew. If, however, we were to follow an argument for the Targum and Greek refecting a Hebrew earlier than our MT, then we have three interpretations of that imagined earliest Hebrew text. Things get curiouser.

35 There are questions about the speech of Elihu; it breaks in before Zohar can give his third speech, and is not mentioned by YHWH. In an obscure contribution to the volume Sapiental, Liturgical and Poetical Texts from Qumran, eds Daniel K. Falk, Florentino García Martínez, and Eileen M Schuller (Leiden: Brill, 2000), in an article “4QcrypA Words of the Maskil to all Sons of Dawn: The Path of the Virtuous Life” (49-61), I examined a number of terms and phrases the scroll manuscript shares with the speech of Elihu in Job. My suggestion was that Elihu’s speech may be representative of a “wisdom” argument by precursors of the Qumran community recently entering the scene, and was inserted into the book at a later date to counter the upstart group.

36 Oord citing Biale: 256. Italics mine.

37 On this coinage see the next footnote.

38 Judith Krawelitzki, “God the Almighty? Observations in the Psalms,” Vetus Testamentum (2014): 443. Asking the reasonable question why the terminology for omnipotence is absent from the Pss, Krawelitzki answers “that any kind of abstract thinking about God’s power was not inherent in the intellectual world of Hebrew-speaking Jews of the 5th or 4th centuries BCE” (440). This is rather different than the idea the translators “didn’t want” to portray God’s omnipotence. The article’s focus is Pss 115, 135, and 139, and the phrase “He does whatever he pleases”—which she argues does not mean omnipotence. Krawelitzki’s discussion of pantokrator takes place in her footnotes; notes 17 and 18 discuss the coinage of the word by the LXX translators.

The Asbury Journal 80/1: 285-290

DOI: 10.7252/Journal.01.2025S.12

Book Reviews

The Gospel of Matthew Wilson, Walter T.

Eerdmans Critical Commentary Series

Eds. David N. Freedman and Astrid B. Beck

2 Volumes

Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. 2022, Vol. 1: 632 pp., Vol. 2: 610 pp., hardback, $45.00, each

ISBN-978-0-8028-8181-6

ISBN-978-0-8028-8182-3

Reviewed by Kenny R. Johnston

Walter Wilson’s The Gospel of Matthew is the latest commentary in Eerdmans Critical Commentary series, a series designed to be “[a] ccessible to serious general readers and scholars alike” (back cover). Wilson’s commentary is more than successful in this regard, not least because it is well informed in the various critical issues confronting Matthean scholarship while written in a clear, well-organized way that is readable for laypersons without being uninteresting and bland.

The two-volume commentary has two simple organizing features, an original translation of the text by Wilson and an interpretive commentary with no further subdividing structures. It is a stark contrast to the type of organizing features seen, for instance, in the Zondervan Exegetical Commentary series, where one fnds a “main idea,” “translation,” “structure and literary form,” “exegetical outlines,” and an “explanation of the text.” Although one will not fnd lengthy linguistic discussions in Wilson’s commentary, he nevertheless incorporates a discussion of the Greek where relevant. Similarly, he discusses important hermeneutical options for the text throughout but is not exhaustive in the same way that one fnds, for instance, in Allison and Davies’ three-volume commentary (A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Matthew 2003).

He is, nevertheless, conversant with the best of those options. This level of simplicity in Wilson’s commentary only works because the writing is of the highest literary and scholarly quality. I fnd this to be one of my favorite characteristics about the commentary. It is simply a joy to read both in style and comprehension of the interpretive issues without being cumbersome.

Textually, Wilson holds to the priority of Mark, Q, and M, which his analysis evidences throughout. Specifcally, Wilson sees the author as a “pervasive” but also “conservative editor” of Mark who draws upon material from M (M being “special material … best conceptualized as a plurality of disparate written and oral traditions” [1.6; 1.4]) and Q. Structurally, he sees Matthew’s use of Mark, M, and Q as resulting in a continuous alternation between narrative and discourse with six narrative sections and fve discourse sections (with the discourse of parables in Matthew 13 at the center of the structure). The narrative and discourse sections coalesce to highlight what it means to be a disciple. The discourse material identifes “the ideals of discipleship” while the narrative material identifes the challenges of meeting those ideals (1.5–6).

The genre of Matthew, argues Wilson, is rooted in the model of the Old Testament narrative but with an invitation to “interpret Scripture in a new light” (1.7). “In keeping with its messianic focus, the gospel’s construal of salvation history is cast in an eschatological mode, with the theme of fulfllment functioning as both a narrative motif and a hermeneutical key” (1.7). Consequently, at the heart of Matthew’s construal of salvation history is a biographical sketch of the Messiah who is “the last and most critical” of fgures who serve “as mediators between God and God’s people” (1.8).

Wilson dates Matthew between 75 and 95 CE, with the place of writing likely being Antioch in Syria, where there was a prominent Jewish community of believers (1.2–3). These two facts have bearing on the purpose of Matthew’s gospel for Wilson. “Jesus’s estrangement from the leaders of the people and ‘their’ synagogues…, then, mirrors the situation of the Matthean community, whose interactions with the Jewish milieu out of which it originated are marked by increasing disaffection, especially visà-vis the leaders of emerging rabbinic Judaism…” (1.10). For this reason, “Matthew’s particular version of the gospel story can be understood as a response to these developments…” (1.11).

One important narrative feature of Wilson’s interpretation of the text is that the confict between Jesus and the Jewish leaders is “set against the backdrop of a cosmic confict between divine and satanic agents…, a

fact that also has implications for how the nature and scope of the Messiah’s saving work are conceived” (1.15). Thus, the local story of salvation for Israel gets played out on a “global” stage where all the nations are also invited to the ideals of discipleship, which are no longer defned by ethnic distinctions but by “obedience to the will of the Father” (1.15–16).

I write this review as a pastor rather than as a New Testament scholar. With that in mind, I have used Wilson’s commentary as a staple for preaching through Matthew’s gospel for the last two years. It has quickly become one of my favorites. It is up to date and conversant on Matthean scholarship without being inaccessible. It is well written, simple in format, and compelling in its arguments.

However, Wilson’s commentary might be criticized for the same reasons it is praised. It can tend to be overly to the point without giving a wide view of the options (whether linguistic, hermeneutic, or historical). The only place I fnd this simplicity ultimately problematic, however, is in the introduction where Wilson’s methodology and approach are not discussed, the introduction consisting of a meagre twenty pages. The work is positively simple and clear and well-written, but for that reason, a lengthier introduction would prove benefcial to help the reader grasp how Wilson and ECC is approaching their commentary on Matthew’s gospel.

I believe that Wilson’s The Gospel of Matthew will quickly gain favor as an essential commentary. This will especially be the case for pastoral theologians who are interested in preaching and teaching the text as scholars as well as pastors but who fnd many scholarly commentaries exhausting to read.

Groaning After Full Redemption: John Wesley’s Quest for Scriptural Holiness

Joshua Nickel

Middletown, DE: Independent 2024, 189 pp., paperback, $10.00

ISBN: 979-8321858868

Reviewed by W. Brian Shelton

For half a century, John Wesley promoted a doctrine of entire sanctifcation with energy and humility. The energy started just after Aldersgate, when he investigated Londoners who reported experiences of perfection. By 1784, he had found 652 society members with such an experience. However, humility persisted in his own faith journey, from his scrambling to discover instantaneous sanctifcation after returning from America until his 1767 comment to Dr. Dodd that he had not attained it entirely. While his ongoing tenor about Christian perfection was optimistic, it was intermingled with second thoughts from public critique of the doctrine to his own apprehension about preaching what he did not himself achieve. The result is a conficted individual “groaning after full redemption” (1).

Joshua Nickel is the author of several books that make wellresearched historical and theological application to a life of Christian discipleship. These works are self-published, as is Groaning After Full Redemption, likely contributing to scholarly oversight of a talented writer and articulate theologian. Here, Nickel thoroughly traces Wesley’s pursuit to understand entire sanctifcation and to endorse it from the pulpit and in letters. Across twelve chapters, he presents the writings of John Wesley into a timeline marked by tenacity to understand the Spirit’s work on the human heart, both in its extent and its experience. Nickel realizes one tenet central to Wesley’s evolving struggle: “But he was always clear on this: God deserves the whole heart, always, and this kind of comprehensive love and devotion is possible” (10).

Nickel aptly subtitles his work, “John Wesley’s Quest for Scriptural Holiness.” Upon his return from America, Wesley was “looking for the kind of faith that a man cannot have without knowing that he has it… he knows that he does not have it” (56). His early encounters with the Moravians saw him witness the assurance of faith that he lacked, sometimes coming gradually and sometimes instantaneously. Since his mid-twenties,

progressive sanctifcation had been Wesley’s default doctrine, motivating his ministry until he had to ft testimonies of instantaneous sanctifcation into his theological system. “It does seem fair to say that he never set out to promote the instantaneous blessing, and that it was not even his idea. It was the testimony of others that he could not dismiss” (176-177). In fact, when the testimonies of instantaneous perfection began to come to him, Nickel remarks it “was something Wesley was not prepared for. But was he prepared to deny it?” (71). The author captures well Wesley’s reticence to allow experience to stand without a scriptural evaluation, trying to reconcile the evident work of the Spirit in the eighteenth-century church while matching it with biblical phenomena. Any dissonance in Wesley’s writings echoes that popular acknowledgement that he wrote with varying systematic precision.

This study recognizes how terminology is essential to understanding Wesley, as it navigates and synthesizes expressions like “saved from inbred sin,” “instantaneous deliverance from sin,” “constant indwelling of the Spirit,” “a thorough, inward change,” and “perfection” itself. A dual acceptance and variance of the language marks how Wesley “did not have fondness for any term” (89). He disliked the term “perfection” in a 1756 letter to Thomas Dodd and he prevented equating perfection to “baptism of the Spirit” in a 1770 letter to Joseph Benson. Terminology pivots around one ongoing focus: “When Wesley says that sanctifcation is always instantaneous, he means entire sanctifcation” (176).

Perhaps the greatest feature of the book is Nickel’s use of primary sources to identify milestones to Wesley’s development of entire sanctifcation, contextualized in the dynamics of Methodism, its fgures, and its controversies. A sample of these illustrates the thoroughness of the book: his defense of a second work of grace in a 1738 letter to his brother Samuel, his sense of hurt in the 1741 correspondence with George Whitfeld for teaching perfection, the 1744 frst Methodist Conference that defended perfection but downplayed its instantaneous state, the 1747 second conference that conceded to speak of perfection rarely, his 1762 journal admission that many had lost their state of perfection, the reputations of George Bell and John Maxwell who championed perfection but sorely embarrassed Methodism by 1763, his encouragement to teach perfection to the recently justifed in a 1775 letter to Thomas Rankin, and his realization of differing views on the doctrine in his 1784 sermon “On Patience.” These milestones comprise a timeline in which John Wesley

grew more confdent in teaching entire sanctifcation, although marked by shrewd management and a certain disquiet around the doctrine. The thrust of his developing theology makes the book a profound biography of the humble champion of perfection.

While Nickel’s writing style is at captivating, other limitations mark this self-published work. There is no citation of occasional quotations, such as his important explanation of “On Patience” that neither names or cites the sermon (175-176). There is no bibliography, no index, and no table of contents, as chapters are simply numbered. The scholarship is not extensive, but it faithfully draws from contemporary and nineteenth century writers to suffce and complement the narrative. The use of Wesley’s primary sources is broad, detailed, and impressive. The spiritual and political milieu of the Church of England does not condition the story much, especially with the Great Awakening transforming the spiritual climate of England and America along the theme of holiness. Yet, the story is about the angst of the man John Wesley more than the reward to his parishioners.

This is among the most readable of all John Wesley biographies and it is now essential for any study of his doctrine of entire sanctifcation. The storyline becomes richer with its focus on this momentous and heartfelt theme in its main character. The cover captures Wesley’s humility the best: “Through trial and error, controversy and failure, heartbreak and persecution, he pursued his goal with relentless energy and a singleness of purpose rarely seen in church history.”

The Asbury Journal 80/1: 291-293

Books Received

The following books were received by the editor’s offce since the last issue of The Asbury Journal. The editor is seeking people interested in writing book reviews on these or other relevant books for publication in future issues of The Asbury Journal. Please contact the editor (Robert.danielson@asburyseminary. edu) if you are interested in reviewing a particular title. Reviews will be assigned on a frst come basis.

Alegre, Rakel Ystebø, Jan-Åke Alvarsson, Nikolaj Christensen, and Tommy H. Davidsson, eds.

2024 Empowered Voices: Scandinavian Women in Early Pentecostalism. Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications. ISBN: 979-8-3852-1853-0. Price: $38.00.

Beers, Holly

2025 Colossians and Philemon Word and Spirit Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. ISBN: 978-1-5409-6386-4. Price: $22.99.

Bird, Michael F.

2025 Romans. Lexham Interpreter’s Translation. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Academic. ISBN: 978-1-6835-9814-5. Price: $17.99.

Clark, Lewie

2024 Single-Minded Service: Recovering the Essential Role of Singles in Kingdom Leadership. Snapshot Series No. 6. Littleton, CO: William Carey Publishing. ISBN: 978-164508-655-0. Price: $22.99.

Cook, John A.

2024 The Biblical Hebrew Verb. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. ISBN: 978-1-5409-6112-9. Price: $34.99.

Compton, Dr. Lisa and Taylor Patterson

2024 Skills for Safeguarding: A Guide to Preventing Abuse and Fostering Healing in the Church. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic. ISBN: 978-1-5140-1073-0. Price: $49.99.

Félix-Jäger, Steven

2025 The Problem and Promise of Freedom: A Public Theology for the Church. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. ISBN: 978-1-5409-6814-2. Price: $26.99.

Glanville, Mark R.

2025

Preaching in a New Key: Crafting Expository Sermons in Post-Christian Communities. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic. ISBN: 978-1-5140-1099-0. Price: $28.00.

Grey, Jacqueline and Paul W. Lewis

2024 Introduction to Biblical Interpretation: Participating in God’s Story of Redemption. Foundations for Spirit-Filled Christianity. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. ISBN: 978-1-5409-6336-9. Price: $22.99.

Hanger, Jeannine Marie

2024

Engaging Jesus with Our Senses. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. ISBN: 978-1-5409-6672-8. Price: $24.99.

Hardy, H. H., II and M. Daniel Carroll R., eds.

2024 The State of Old Testament Studies: A Survey of Recent Research. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. ISBN: 978-1-5409-6365-9. Price: $44.99.

Kirk, Betsy

2025

Lindsay, Mark R.

2024

Moo, Douglas J.

Sacred Courage: Thinking Biblically About Fear and Anxiety. Littleton, CO: William Carey Publishing. ISBN: 978-1-64508-615-4. Price: $16.86.

Markus Barth: His Life & Legacy. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic. ISBN: 978-1-5140-0162-2. Price: $39.99.

2024 The Letters to the Colossians and to Philemon. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. Second Edition. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. ISBN: 9780-8028-7937-0. Price: $50.99.

Morgan, Anna R.

2024 Growing Women in Ministry: Seven Aspects of Leadership Development. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. ISBN: 978-1-5409-6719-0. Price: $29.99.

Padilla DeBorst, Ruth, M. Daniel Carroll R., and Miguel Echevarría

2024 Reading the Bible Latinamente: Latino/a Interpretation for the Life of the Church. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. ISBN: 978-1-5409-6656-8. Price: $19.99.

Stephenson, Lisa P. and Ruthie Wienk

2024 Redemptive Service: Loving Our Neighbors Well. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. ISBN: 978-1-5409-65219. Price: $26.99.

Storms, Sam

2024 Romans Word and Spirit Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. ISBN: 978-1-5409-6413-7. Price: $26.99.

Urga, Abeneazer G., Jessica A. Udall, and Edward L. Smither, eds.

2025 Reading James Missiologically: The Missionary Motive, Message, and Methods of James. Littleton, CO: William Carey Publishing. ISBN: 978-1-64508-635-2. Price: $26.99.

Vander Lugt, Wesley, ed.

2024 A Prophet in the Darkness: Exploring Theology in the Art of Georges Rouault. Studies in Theology and the Arts. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic. ISBN: 978-1-51401105-8. Price: $36.99.

Witherington, Ben, III

2024 2 Corinthians. Word and Spirit Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. ISBN: 978-1-5409-6746-6. Price: $26.99.

About First Fruits Press

Under the auspices of B. L. Fisher Library, First Fruits Press is an online publishing arm of Asbury Theological Seminary. The goal is to make academic material freely available to scholars worldwide, and to share a valuable resource that would not otherwise be available for research. First Fruits publishes in fve distinct areas: heritage, academic books, books, journals, and papers.

In the Journals section, back issues of Te Asbury Journal will be digitized and so made available to a global audience. At the same time, we are excited to be working with several faculty members on developing professional, peer-reviewed, online journals that would be made freely available.

Much of this endeavor is made possible by the recent gif of the Kabis III scanner; one of the best available. Te scanner can produce more than 2,900 pages an hour and features a special book cradle that is specifcally designed to protect rare and fragile materials. Te materials it produces will be available in ebook format, easy to download and search.

First Fruits Press will enable the library to share scholarly resources throughout the world, provide faculty with a platform to share their own work and engage scholars without the difculties ofen encountered by print publishing. All the material will be freely available for online users, while those who wish to purchase a print copy for their libraries will be able to do so. First Fruits Press is just one way the B. L. Fisher Library is fulflling the global vision of Asbury Teological Seminary to spread scriptural holiness throughout the world.