April 27, 2017

5 Keys to Fill the "Sanctification Gap" (#UMC, @IVPacademic, @OfficialSeedbed)

Is holiness a missing element in evangelical theology? That's what Gordon T. Smith says in the opening chapter of his recent book, Called to Be Saints: An Invitation to Christian Maturity. Smith points to an observation made by Richard Lovelace in the late 1970s "that evangelical theology and spirituality were marked by a 'sanctification gap'" (14). Lovelace traced this to evangelicalism's emphasis on revivalism where the focus was on conversion leaving Christian maturity and holiness to be treated as secondary matters. Smith suggests that the gap remains and substantiates the case in part by pointing to the fact that theology texts in evangelical seminaries tend to give holiness superficial attention. When sanctification is in view, Smith observes, the interest is in how not when. That is to say, attention is given to the process of sanctification, not the goal or end of sanctification (14-15). He believes we need more than that.

The sanctification gap and Wesleyan identity
Reading Smith as a pastor steeped in Wesleyan theology, I cannot help but think of John Wesley's conviction, articulated in a letter near the end of his life, that the doctrine of entire sanctification "is the grand depositum which God has lodged with the people called Methodists; and for the sake of propagating this chiefly he appeared to have raised us up" (Works, XIII, 9). You might say that Wesley perceived a sanctification gap in 18th century English Christianity, and he was persuaded that God had specifically called and equipped the people of the Methodist movement to fill the gap. To that end, he rode countless miles on horseback to preach thousands of sermons and organize communities of worship and accountability committed to growing in grace and maturity that intentionally pursued, not just sanctification, but entire sanctification. For Wesley, that's what it meant to be Methodist.

Fast-forward to the 21st century and you'll find a Methodist family tree with no few branches. The denominations that trace their heritage to Wesley are many and varied. Some embrace robust teachings on holiness. Others don't emphasize it quite as much. Within my own branch of the Wesleyan family tree - The United Methodist Church - we have a number of tribes with distinct subgroup identities, but we are largely without a widely held sense of identity on the denominational level. The theorists would say that we have a number of competing subgroup identities but lack a superordinate social identity that cultivates and maintains a sense of coherence between the subgroups. We've got high church folks, low church folks, mainliners, progressives, and evangelicals. The point there is to illustrate the range of groups, not provide an exhaustive list of UMC subgroups. All that to say, the UMC is a denomination without an identity, and we are feeling the anxiety and the pain that comes with that. 

My hope is that we will be able to recover the identity that Wesley left us: we are the people called by God "to spread scriptural holiness over the land." The reason there are Methodist churches all over the world with so many branches on the Wesleyan tree is because John Wesley believed with all his heart that God raised up the people called Methodist to revitalize the Church with the message of holiness for the life of the world. That is who we are. That is our identity. That should be our mission. Because that is what it means to be Methodist. It's our vocation to fill the sanctification gap.

Can we fill the gap?
But how do we do it? What disciplines and practices and strategies have to be in play to pull this off? There are several key pieces. And at this point, I'm moving beyond the UMC to think in terms of the wider Wesleyan world. It's not clear that the UMC will ever succeed in forming a unifying identity. I should add that I'm not suggesting any of this is new information. Lot's of folks are thinking about this. I've been involved in dialogue about this sort of thing for years. Here are a few things that keep coming up.
  1. Preaching - Wesley believed that every Methodist preacher should preach the doctrine of holiness. I've heard the observation made many times that the doctrine of entire sanctification is seldom preached these days. This could be for a variety of reasons. Maybe we are unfamiliar with it. Maybe we don't understand it well enough to preach it confidently. Maybe we are afraid of being misunderstood. Maybe we don't believe it. Whatever the reason for the lack of homiletic attention to the doctrine of holiness, if we are going to forge and maintain an authentic Wesleyan identity, then we must have clear and robust preaching on holiness. 
  2. Singing - The observation has been made that the Methodist movement would never have made it with John's preaching alone. Charles Wesley's hymns were essential for planting the seeds of holiness in the hearts of the early Methodists. Not only do we need to be singing our own Wesleyan hymns about holiness, we need a new generation of songwriters who can ably transmit holiness theology melodically and lyrically. 
  3. Small groups - Wesleyans did small groups before small groups were cool. The movement happened because the people involved were involved with each other at deep levels. They didn't just worship together; they got deeply entrenched in one another's lives. They cared for each other. They got in each other's business, and they did it for love of Christ and love for one another. And if someone didn't show up a couple of times, they went looking for that person. This is essential. We can't be Wesleyan without deeply committed small groups explicitly focused on growing in holiness and entire sanctification. 
  4. Theologians - We also need theologians who can write the books and give the talks that lead the Church in thinking about entire sanctification. Some of these folks might be academic theologians; others might be pastor theologians. We've got some good folks out there doing this kind of work, but this is one of those things where there's never enough. And there's the question of who will receive the baton from the current generation of theological leaders in the Wesleyan tradition. Who will embody this key vocation as we move into the future? 
  5. Conferences and publishers - I am encouraged by the birth and growth of Seedbed and the New Room Conference. This sort of thing is going to be essential for connecting people of like heart and like mind around the topic of holiness. It's also essential for helping us discover new resources and develop a sense of group identity. Let's keep it growing.
All five of these center around our ability to speak and write about holiness with care, wisdom, clarity, and faithfulness. At the end of the day, we've got to be talking about holiness...a lot. So much that when people see us coming, they think "here come the people who talk about holiness." And our speaking must be filled with passion that is compelling and contagious. If we can do this, then we will be well on our way to filling the sanctification gap and recovering our God-given vocation to bless the Church and the world with the good news that God's grace is more powerful than the sin that besets us.

Your turn: Do you perceive a sanctification gap? What evidence do you see for a sanctification gap? What must we do beyond the 5 keys mentioned here? Is holiness essential to Wesleyan identity? Leave a comment with your input. 

Dr. Matt O'Reilly is pastor of St. Mark Church in Mobile, Alabama, a fellow of the Center for Pastor Theologians, and an adjunct member of the faculties of Asbury Theological Seminary and Wesley Biblical Seminary. Hear him on the So What? Podcast, connect on Facebook, or follow @mporeilly.

April 25, 2017

The United Methodist Church and the Sovereignty of God (#UMC)

To say that United Methodist anxiety levels are heightened would be an understatement. As deeply entrenched sides await this week's arguments before the Judicial Council (our ecclesial high court), worry and frustration abound. And there's no promise that it will subside, regardless of the Council's decision. It's painful. And in the midst of these stormy times, I have become persuaded that what the Church needs most - right now! - is a good dose of the doctrine of the sovereignty of God. Now don't get me wrong. I'm not talking about the doctrine of meticulous sovereignty that characterizes Calvinist theology propagated by the young, restless, and Reformed. I'm not talking about a God who irrevocably elects and condemns. I'm talking about what John Wesley meant when he said in his sermon "On Divine Providence" that God "is infinite in wisdom as well as power: And all his wisdom is continually employed in managing all the affairs of his creation for the good of all his creatures" (Sermon 67:14). About this teaching Wesley said, "There is scarce any doctrine in the whole compass of revelation, which is of deeper importance than this;" he also said there is no other doctrine so "little regarded, and perhaps so little understood (Sermon 67:7)  In painful times, we need to focus on what's important. We need to know that God has not given up on his children. He loves us. And he is at work for our good.

Providence and well-being
Wesley's doctrine of God's providence derives from his doctrine of creation. If God made everything that exists, then God knows every detail about everything that exists, because he is the author of that detail. And he did not create this complex world only to ignore the details. After all, the number of the hairs on our heads, be they many or few, are known by God (Luke 12:7). Scripture led Wesley to conclude that God is deeply concerned with what seem the most insignificant details in the lives of his children. There is no affair so small that it is beneath the regard of the triune God. "For we know that, to those who love God, he works all things together for good, to those who are called according to his purpose" (Romans 8:28, emphasis added). 

Brothers and sisters, the current troubles of the United Methodist Church have not taken God by surprise. He is not caught off-guard. He frets not. He is not wondering what to do with us. To the contrary, he is at rest. And from that posture he is working within our circumstances to bring good for those who love him and are committed to his purpose for the Church and the world. His countenance is marked by noble and kingly joviality. His care for his beloved is unhindered. And his ultimate purpose to fill his creation with the knowledge of his glory will not be undone. Rest assured. 

Be patient
This means that, despite what we want, we can and must be patient. We want all of our problems to be resolved, and we want them to be resolved now. Patience feels like doing nothing. And we don't want to wait around for the next press release or the next conference or the next declaratory decision. We want to do something. We want it fixed. We want the pain to go away. 

But patience is not idleness; it's the fruit of the Spirit. It's an expression of faith that we can trust God to work for our good no matter how long it takes. It is of the utmost importance to remember that God's great priority is not our daily or temporal comfort. He is primarily concerned to fill the world with the unparalleled beauty of his glory by reproducing his holy love in creatures who bear his image and bear it well. And that takes time. 

Wesley understood this and made the point in paragraph 15 of "On Divine Providence." To summarize, it takes time because being made in the image of God comes with some degree of liberty, and far too often we've use that liberty to mess things up. God will not magically fix all of our problems today because that would counteract his work of making human beings in his image with the relative freedom that involves. I don't know how long it will take to find resolution for our United Methodist mess. I do expect that it will get worse before it gets better. But we must not allow that expectation to rob us of joy. We must trust that God is at work to renew us in the image of Christ in the midst of this mess. That's what we need. That's what the Church needs. That's what the world needs. That takes patience. So, pray for me. And I'll pray for you.

There's a condition
I cited Romans 8:28 above to make the point that God is attentive to every detail in the lives of his children, and that he is at work in every circumstance to bring good. It would be inattentive, however, to neglect the point that this promise comes with a condition. It is for "those who love God" and "are called according to his purpose." Let us not forget that, for Jesus, love is expressed in obedience (John 14:15). God has revealed his purposes in scripture. He has called us to be his people. He requires our believing obedience. If we are committed to those things, we can rest assured that he is at work for our good. The operative word there is rest. Love Jesus. Obey scripture. Rest in the knowledge that God loves you and is at work for your good. 

I don't know what the Judicial Council will decide after all the arguments are made later this week. I do know that, whatever they decide, a lot of people will be unhappy. Now more than ever, the faithful need to remember that the God who loves us is at work in us to reproduce his character in us for the life of the world. That is what matters. And he will not be thwarted. The bride of the Lamb will one day be clothed with holiness and splendor. You can count on it. God will not give up. And neither must we. 

Dr. Matt O'Reilly is pastor of St. Mark Church in Mobile, Alabama, a fellow of the Center for Pastor Theologians, and an adjunct member of the faculties of Asbury Theological Seminary and Wesley Biblical Seminary. Hear him on the So What? Podcast, connect on Facebook, or follow @mporeilly.

April 19, 2017

New Post: Resurrection Makes Us Holy (@OfficialSeedbed)

During my recent trip to Wilmore, Kentucky, I had the opportunity to film another episode for Seedbed's growing Seven Minute Seminary series. This one explores the relationship between future bodily resurrection, Christian identity, and holiness. These three themes were at the heart of my PhD research, and I'm grateful to Seedbed for making some of that available more broadly. If you receive this via an email subscription, click here to watch the video. And be sure to check out my other contributions to Seven Minute Seminary over on the video page.

Dr. Matt O'Reilly is pastor of St. Mark Church in Mobile, Alabama, a fellow of the Center for Pastor Theologians, and an adjunct member of the faculties of Asbury Theological Seminary and Wesley Biblical Seminary. Connect on Facebook or follow @mporeilly.

April 17, 2017

Resources for Easter and the Great Fifty Days - @sowhat_podcast, @officialseedbed

We are now into the season of Easter (or Eastertide). That's right. If you follow the Church calendar, Easter is not just one day. It's fifty days. And that, of course, is why we call it "The Great Fifty Days." In the spirit of the season, I wanted to point to a few resources that I've had the chance to be part of, along with some great colleagues, that highlight the significance of the season. The first three are from the team at So What? Podcast (Web, Soundcloud, iTunes). The fourth is a 7 Minute Seminary (with bonus footage) from Seedbed. All of them dig into the significance of the resurrection of Jesus in the past and the resurrection of believers in the future, and all of them take the practical and pastoral significance of resurrection as major points of consideration. 

Dr. Matt O'Reilly is pastor of St. Mark Church in Mobile, Alabama, a fellow of the Center for Pastor Theologians, and an adjunct member of the faculties of Asbury Theological Seminary and Wesley Biblical Seminary. Connect on Facebook or follow @mporeilly.

April 11, 2017

In Memoriam Dr. Dennis F. Kinlaw (#UMC)

Serious engagement with the Wesleyan tradition began for me during my college years with a book by Dr. Dennis F. Kinlaw. A Christian since childhood, I had long suspected there was more to the faith than the mere forgiveness that often characterized evangelicalism in the second half of the last century. The book was The Mind of Christ, and it was given to me at a missions conference in 2000 by Dr. Harold Spann, then Chancelor of Wesley Biblical Seminary. That book exposed me like never before to the deep truth for which I longed but had not yet understood. With it, Dr. Kinlaw taught me that forgiveness of sin is only the beginning of the Christian journey, not its end. I learned that forgiveness is an instrument and necessary means to the end of holiness. I learned that what the world really needed was to see women and men embody the holy love that is the character of God revealed in Christ and Spirit, and to do it consistently and comprehensively. And I learned that all of that is above all a work of grace. It is no understatement to say that this book set me to the course I am on today. Other important volumes have come along. This one will always have a prominent place among them.

From that point forward, I read everything by Dr. Kinlaw that I could get. I sought out his sermons online and listened to as many as I could find. Some repeatedly. Kinlaw had a way of communicating stunningly rich and deep theological truth in a clear and understandable way. His turns of phrase often gave me pause and prompted extended reflection on scripture, discipleship, and ministry. My first published book review was in the Wesleyan Theological Journal, and the book I chose to review was Let's Start with Jesus. With this book, Dr. Kinlaw flexed his theological muscles to interpret scripture in light of the Church Fathers and give us a vision of the unparalleled beauty of the God who is triune. This book was altogether robust and practical in every way as an invitation to dwell in the beauty of God's perfect love, and to have that love made perfect in us.

During my time as a student at Asbury Theological Seminary, I was privileged on one occasion - and long after his retirement - to have Dr. Kinlaw as a substitute lecturer. The course was Triune Theism taught by Dr. Al Coppedge, who is also a mentor to me and son-in-law to Dr. Kinlaw. Dr. Coppedge had to be away one day, and the class was a small one. So, we were instructed to meet at Dr. Kinlaw's house that day instead of in our regular classroom. We were to read Let's Start with Jesus beforehand so that we could discuss it with the man who penned it. That day will always stand as a highlight of my seminary education. I couldn't be more grateful.

Word began to circulate yesterday that Dennis Kinlaw died, and the Wesleyan world now feels the weight of losing one to whom so many of us looked for leadership, instruction, and nurturing. He modeled a combination too rarely seen. He was a scholar thoroughly familiar with advanced issues in biblical criticism, but his sermons never sounded like lectures. He was both theologian and preacher. And he was one of the first to model the union of those two vocations for me. My own sense of calling and vocation has been indelibly stamped by his preaching, his scholarship, his witness. He was a man set apart by and for the love of Christ to preach scriptural holiness. And we are all the better for it. His death for us is a loss, though it is gain for him. He has joined the saints at rest in the presence of the One whose love abounded in his life. And he now waits in hope, with all the saints, for the sure and certain hope of the resurrection of the dead. Thanks be to God.

February 14, 2017

N.T. Wright: Paul Was Not a "Religious" Figure (@fortresspress)

So says N.T. Wright in the opening chapter of his Paul and his Recent Interpreters (Fortress, 2015): "though we have been accustomed to thinking of Paul as a 'religious' figure, that is a function of the way our culture has seen things in the last two hundred years," but this is "not a necessarily 'correct' way to approach him" (10). Having just wrapped up my Ph.D. in Pauline studies, I've been eager to dig into this book and work through Wright's assessment of the field. As an aside, the home stretch of writing and defending the dissertation is the reason for the lack of regular posts here at the blog.

Back to Wright's point. His concerns emerge from the reality that the word "religion" means something very different now than it did in Paul's world. In our day, religion is often seen as a private affair set off in its own compartment away from one's public or professional life. In the ancient world, religion intersected with every aspect of life. You couldn't set it off to the side while you go about other business. That's how we often treat religion today. Paul's religious thought engaged every aspect of life with the claims of Jesus, the resurrected Messiah and Lord. He did have something to say about what we might call "religion", but he also had something to say about philosophy, ethics, cosmology, economics, and government, among other things. Wright prefers to call Paul a "public figure," and he is happy to remind us that Paul "was not inviting people into a private 'religious' world" (10, italics original).

This is one instance where we modern folk have something to learn from the ancients in general and Paul in particular. Our culture is deeply fragmented. We have tried to sort religion and politics and ethics and activism into separate bins, only to be taken aback when someone takes public action and grounds it in their religious conviction. We need to learn the lesson that religion is part of an integrated whole. Worship encompasses all of life. If we follow those who label Paul a "religious" figure and attempt to mute his voice in our secular society, we do so to our detriment. If, however, we allow him to speak at his full volume and engage our culture with the message of the gospel, we may just find a fresh and compelling vision of God's world and our place in it.

November 17, 2016

Apocalyptic Liturgy: Preaching Eschatology All Year Long (#UMC)

Advent is nearly upon us, which means the beginning of a new liturgical year. What's striking about the Church year is that it doesn't start with a celebration of the birth of Christ but with a period of time focused on the second coming of Christ. That's what "Advent" is all about. It comes from the Latin adventus, which is a noun that means "arrival" or "visit." It can even mean "invasion," which puts an interesting spin on things. The verbal form means "to come." The thing about Advent is that it isn't as much about the first coming of Christ as it is the second coming of Christ. It's less about the past and more about the future. To put it another way, liturgical purists would much rather sing "Lo, He Comes with Clouds Descending" during Advent than any of the traditional Christmas carols.

I've been reminded a few times of late that much preaching spends little time attending to what scripture says about the future, and a helpful online conversation with Taylor Burton-Edwards (@TWBE) earlier this week prompted me to spend some time thinking about how the Church year gives our worship an eschatological orientation. I want to suggest that our preaching about God's plans for God's world should not be limited to the four Sundays just before Christmas. The whole of the calendar invites us to think about the present in light of what God has in store for us and for the world. Let's think about it in terms of the two major cycles that structure our calendar: (1) Advent-Christmas-Epiphany and (2) Lent-Easter-Pentecost.

Advent, Christmas, Epiphany

That Christmas is preceded by four weeks of preparation focused on the second coming of Christ means we arrive at the nativity with our thinking thoroughly immersed in worship oriented toward the future. That is, Christmas takes its meaning in the context of a world looking forward to the Advent of Christ. We should not think of Christmas solely as an event that happened a couple thousand years ago. Rather, Christmas marks the beginning of an invasion by God into the world in which we dwell. That divine incursion inaugurates the overthrow of the powers that have gone to war against God's good creation and the creatures made in his image who live here. The days of sin and death are numbered, and when Christ returns, their number will be up. He is currently putting all of his enemies underfoot; death is the last enemy that will be defeated. That will happen when he comes again and raises the dead. It is especially clear when considered in relation to Advent that Christmas is nothing if not apocalyptic.

But what of Epiphany? How does our apocalyptic approach to the calendar illumine the visit of the Magi? Well, what if I told you it sheds light on the multi-ethnic nature of the Church and her global mission now in anticipation of Christ's return? In Matthew's gospel, the Magi come from beyond the borders of Judah. They are foreigners come to worship the one born King of the Jews. Why? Because his birth has inaugurated the new age in which the nations shall gather to worship God on his holy mountain. Epiphany finds its proper home in the eschatological Messianic age that has been inaugurated, though not yet consummated, by the Incarnation. In the overall structure of Matthew's gospel, the arrival of the Magi as representatives of the nations at the beginning anticipates the Great Commission to disciple all nations that comes at the end. Epiphany tells us that the new age has dawned and the time has come for the nations to be incorporated into the family of Abraham. On top of that, it means we must embody the passion of God for bringing the nations to adore the Christ.

One other point is worth making. I mentioned above that the Church year starts with Advent. That means that every subsequent season is observed in the context of a year that begins by looking to the future return of Christ. And each season in the year derives its meaning from its relationship to the first season of the year. The point is that the calendar doesn't simply tell the Christian story chronologically; it tells the story eschatologically. The first coming is celebrated after our hope for the second coming is declared. The story-as-a-whole is dramatized relative to the hope for Christ's Advent. The Church calendar is apocalyptic in its entirety because Advent comes first. 

Lent, Easter, and Pentecost

The eschatological orientation of the second major cycle comes clearly into focus with the climax of Lent on Good Friday which then finds its resolution in Easter Sunday. The cross and resurrection constitute the central apocalyptic event in which God overturns the power of death with the bodily resurrection of Jesus. This marks the beginning of the new creation that is now advancing and will come to its fulfillment when Christ comes again. We need to be clear on this. Easter is fundamentally an eschatological event. The resurrection of Jesus is the first work of God's new creation, and it guarantees the resurrection of believers at Christ's second coming, which is instrumental to the consummation of the new creation. Given this framework, Lent should be understood as a period of waiting in which we actively anticipate the eschatological redemption begun with the death and resurrection of Jesus.

This leaves us to talk about Pentecost, which is thoroughly and altogether eschatological in nature. Throughout scripture the last days are characterized by the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. We find this language explicit in the prophet Joel and in the account of Pentecost in Acts 2. This is why, by the way, when the suggestion is made that the "signs of the times" reveal we are "living in the last days," I am often inclined to point out that the Bible says we've been living in the last days for about 2,000 years now. You know, since Pentecost. Even more important, like Epiphany, the season of Pentecost informs the global scope of our shared mission. Pentecost marks the initial incorporation of the nations into the people of God. The Spirit empowers believers to cross ethnic barriers in order to build a diverse Church. Once again, the future-focus of the Church calendar informs the way we live and engage in mission in the present.

Preaching our Apocalyptic Calendar

I'll finish up by saying that the eschatological orientation of the Church calendar ought to find its way into every corner of our preaching. If observing and celebrating these days and seasons governs the annual shape of our worship, then we must allow them to point us forward to what God intends to do in the future. The Church calendar tells the story of God's invasion into this world to overthrow death and bring about a new creation in Christ and the Spirit. The calendar gives our preaching essential resources to tell that story, too. If we don't, then we probably haven't allowed the calendar to lend it's full weight to ordering our worship. We need to invite our people to consider what it means for God to be at work in history and how he intends to bring that work to its fulfillment. How do the many seasons of the year relate to the first season? How should we live if Easter marks the beginning of the new creation? What do we do given that Pentecost inaugurated the last days? These sorts of questions must be raised if we are to learn from the rhythms of worship that come in the Christian year. If the calendar is apocalyptic, then our preaching should be, too.

November 15, 2016

Chronological Snobbery and the Question of Christ

Ever tempted to think we have little to learn from people who lived long ago? If so, C.S. Lewis would warn you against what he called "chronological snobbery." For Lewis, that term referred to the widespread tendency among us modern folk to think we have reached a level of enlightenment and that the ancients have nothing to teach us. I bring this up because I came across a quote today that helpfully pushes back against that sort of arrogance. The quote comes in a little book I'm reading as part of my Christmas preaching preparation. It's called For Us and for Our Salvation: The Doctrine of Christ in the Early Church by Stephen J. Nichols. The introduction takes on the problem of chronological snobbery head on:
In our contemporary struggle to present Christ as the Bible portrays him, we should not work in a vacuum. We owe it to ourselves to look to the past and to learn from the church's struggles. Perhaps in no area of theology is this more necessary or beneficial than in the doctrine of Christ in the early church. The first four or five centuries of the church's existence witnessed the launch of nearly every possible challenge. Further, one is hard-pressed to offer a better response to those challenges than that offered by the early church leaders. We may be able to devise fresh and contemporary ways to illustrate their teachings and expressions, or we may have to think of new ways to relate their teachings to particular challenges that we face in our day, but there is practically no room for improvement on those teachings. What these early church leaders said and did is tried and true (14). 
Despite our radically different contemporary contexts, the early Church has much to teach us. And when it comes to the question of Christ, their wisdom has stood the test of time. 

November 7, 2016

Why John Wesley was not Pelagian (@SoWhat_Podcast, #UMC)

The new episode of the So What? Podcast went live this morning. In this edition we continue the discussion of Pelagius and Pelagianism. It was particularly fun to get clear on the Wesleyan critique of Pelagianism and how it differs from the Reformed (or Calvinistic) critique. There's also some great Wesley quotes on original sin. Check it out below or subscribe in iTunes. And don't forget to give us review.

October 4, 2016

A Wesleyan Approach to Pastoral Authority (@9Marks, #UMC)

I am grateful for the invitation to contribute to the most recent volume of the 9 Marks Journal. My essay is on pastoral authority from a Wesleyan/Methodist perspective. It's part of a round-table discussion with Kevin DeYoung offering a Presbyterian approach and Benjamin Merkle giving a Baptist perspective. Here's an excerpt:
Methodist founder John Wesley considered himself “a man of one book,” and that book was the Bible. Wesley believed that essential doctrines must be grounded in scripture. His attitude toward pastoral ministry was no different. This is clear in Wesley’s sermon, “On Obedience to Pastors,” in which he exposits Hebrews 13:17. He introduces the sermon insisting that the nature of pastoral authority can be understood if we “simply attend to the oracles of God” and “carefully examine the words of the Apostle.” Later in the sermon he rejects views on pastoral authority that cannot be proved from Scripture, and he refuses to “appeal to human institutions,” insisting again on what “we find in the oracles of God.” Wesley also believed Scripture puts limits on the pastor’s authority. He didn’t expect members of a congregation to obey the pastor if that pastor instructed them to disobey Scripture. And when pastors shepherd the flock in a way that accords with scripture, Wesley says, “we do not properly obey them, but our common Father” (italics original). The point should be clear: faithful Methodists locate the source of a pastor’s authority in scripture.

Click through to read the rest.