17 Comments
⭠ Return to thread

Rev. Rickman, I come in the spirit not of a critic but of possibly offering help as a wordsmith (my profession). My thought is to give some feedback from the perspective of a reader of your product. My comments are provided simply for your consideration; they are numbered to match your numbering. Please take this simply as an offering.

1. I am unclear whether your reference is to the church of the Apostolic era (early Christian church) or the early Methodist church. Also, I am unclear what you mean by “the universal (consensual)”.

2. You might consider restating 2 along the following lines: “2. Methodists understand themselves to be sinners who, but for the substitutionary atoning work of Christ Jesus, are justly condemned.

3. You might consider restating 3 along the following lines: “3. Methodists believe those lacking faithful covenant with Christ may face damnation.” [Explanation: This is my personal comment; for I believe it would be presumptive for a human to judge that God in His mercy lacks the power to withhold damnation. The story of Jonah and Neneveh comes to my mind, although it is not directly in point.]

4. I suggest changing “primarily” to “particularly”. [Explanation: For me, I would not emphasize holiness and purity over loving God fully as commanded by the greatest and first commandment.]

6. And 7. I suggest adding “strive to” after the initial word “Methodists”.

9. I suggest restating 9 as follows, to avoid needlessly categorizing the Holy Spirit by gender: “Methodists believe the Spirit is a person, essential for salvation, and still pouring out signs and wonders today.”

10. I suggest restating the final sentence along the following lines: “In dealing with ‘disorderly walkers’ we strive to follow the processes sanctioned by the Apostles in terms of correction of brothers and sisters and excluding members.”

11. Please consider changing “as they abide by” to “as long as they abide by”.

12. I suggest adding “strive to” after the initial word “Methodists”.

Possible Addition: I suggest that you consider an additional distinction regarding the Wesleyan doctrines of Grace. Or, perhaps this could be treated in an introduction.

Expand full comment

Some of my phrasing was because of constraints on space. I can't fit much more into the space afforded in the format. But some of it contains theological arguments that I have yet to make. I will do an article on each one that (hopefully) explains what each phrasing is meant to convey. You might still find yourself in a place of disagreement with me on some of these when it is all over, but then, that is probably to be expected! I don't think many will find themselves agreeing with 100% of what I offer in this series. There is going to be a lot of content that is somewhat...disagreeable. The intent is to say the things that very few are saying so that we can go some directions we are reluctant to go. I hope to persuade, but I also know we are living in a time where persuasion isn't very common. I also realize I could be wrong about some of these things. The only way for me to see that is to receive correction. I'll be glad to have folks like you on board to offer helpful feedback, as you already have.

Expand full comment

I understand. I doubt that you and I will have any disagreements over basic Wesleyan theology.

Expand full comment

I wrote this before I read your response regarding Grace.

Expand full comment
Error