How do tradition, reason, and experience help a Wesleyan theologian interpret Scripture and come to sound theological conclusions?

 

Introduction

“I trust wherein so ever I have mistaken; my mind is open to conviction. I sincerely desire to be better informed. Point out a better way than I have known. Show me it is so, by plain proof of scripture.”[1] This is how Wesley’s commitment to the final authority of Scripture that he was willing for his theology to be corrected in the light of the Word of God.[2] However, within the parameters of biblical truth, there are some things the Scripture does not make explicit or address in detail. This was the place, i.e., under the primary commitment to Scripture as the first source of theology, where Wesley saw a proper role for reason, tradition, and experience.[3]

Tradition

“And what you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses entrust to faithful men, who will be able to teach others also.” 2 Tim. 2:2[4], in this verse, Paul asks Timothy to entrust what he has heard from him to faithful people who can teach others. And this verse mainly talks about the wholesome doctrine as Wesley writes in his notes.[5] And definitely, this is an order that will extend, and each man will give another man, and here we get a tradition. As Basil, the Great says: “For I hold it apostolic to abide also by the unwritten traditions…. “Hold fast the traditions which ye have been taught whether by word, or our Epistle.”[6] Also, what has been said by St. Gregory of Nyssa: “for it is enough for proof of our statement, that the tradition has come down to us from our fathers, handed on, like some inheritance, by succession from the apostles and the saints who came after them.”[7] So, tradition does not mean church law or customs. Wesley had a special appreciation for the early church's tradition, the Ecumenical Councils, and the Anglican church. He found these segments of church tradition particularly helpful because he saw them as the best interpreters of scripture.[8]

So, it is not the pronouncements of the church, speaking ex. Cathedra, nor the practices of the church; rather, tradition is a history of:[9]

1.     The church’s understanding of Scripture.

2.     Its use of reason in formulating doctrine.

3.     Its models for the application of truth in experience.

And the implications of tradition are many, but the most important is confirming the canonicity of the Scriptures. This is what makes us should be proud of our faith and know that it is trustworthy, especially when we add reason to that.

Reason

Wesley saw reason as something based on God's personality, reflecting a part of God's image in man. That’s why Jesus said to the Scribe who came to ask him about which commandment is the most important “And when Jesus saw that, he answered wisely” Mark 12:34. So God cared about wisdom and reasoning. If God is the source of reason, then true religion will reflect that.[10] Reason is given to us according to Wesley and how to use it: [11]

1. For Man to understand what God was saying to him through his Word.
2. To work out the implications of scriptural data.
3. In explicating Christian doctrine.

E.g., in the doctrine of the Trinity. Accordingly, we can reject error and protect faith from heresies. And live the correct experience of God’s word.

Experience

Wesley was vitally concerned about the application of biblical truth to life and would not be content to view truth only in the objective sense. It must become subjectively experienced if it is to do what God intended.[12] But what Wesley means by experience?

Experience to Wesley may be understood to mean “evangelical experience.”[13] Concerning one friend, he wrote, “The theory of religion he certainly has. May God give him the living experience.”[14] Wesley did not provide a basis for the emphasis on experience that came later with Schleiermacher, who focused on a religion of feeling. Wesley repeatedly warned people not to be overly concerned about moods or feelings but to focus on the promises of God.[15] God has objectively revealed himself to mankind through his Word, and his revelation was in no sense produced by man’s feelings, desires, or experiences. There is an objective reality about God and his revelation apart from any experience; therefore, experience is not to be understood as that which produces revelation.[16] Wesley was deeply convinced that biblical truth works in practical life, and if it does not, then something is wrong.[17]

Closure

So, tradition, reason, and experience help a Wesleyan theologian interpret Scripture and come to sound theological conclusions by using these three tools with their restricted role in building theology always as secondary criteria and subordinate to the Word of God, the Wesleyan theologian can have a method that is constructive and staggering in presentation.

---

[1] John Wesley, The Journal of John Wesley, ed. Nehemiah Curnock, 8 vols, (London: Robert Culley, 1909), 1:447. Hereafter referred to as Journal.

[2] Allan Coppedge, Doing Theology in today’s world, ed. John Woodbridge and Thomas Edward McComsikey, (Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1994), p. 269.

[3] Ibid, p. 273.

[4] All verses used in the assignment are from ESV translation.

[5] Wesley's Notes on the Bible, https://biblehub.com/commentaries/wes/2_timothy/2.htm, Last accessed: 12.01.2023.

[6] Basil the Great, On the Holy Spirit, (Moscow: Roman Roads Media, 2015), p. 22

[7] Gregory of Nyssa, Against Eunomius, (Ohio: Beloved Publishing LLC, 2014), 4:6.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Coppedge, Doing Theology, p. 275.

[10] Ibid, p. 273.

[11] Ibid, p. 274.

[12] Ibid, p. 276.

[13] Robert E. Childs, Theological Transition in American Methodism: 1790-1935, (New York: Abingdon, 1965) p. 80.

[14] Wesley, The Letters of the Reverend John Wesley, A.M., ed. John Telford, 8 vols., (London: Epworth, 1931), 7:47.

[15] Wesley, Letters, 8:190.

[16] Coppedge, Doing Theology, p. 277.

[17] Ibid.