It is fairly common practice to study the theology of John Wesley and the hymns of Charles. It is also common to assume the brothers were in constant agreement on matters of theology. But this isn’t really accurate. Assumptions can result in painting with too broad a brush.
So, was Charles Wesley really an Arminian? Charles answered this question himself in the negative. While it is true that Charles was adamantly against certain Calvinist doctrines, he was likewise contrary to some Arminian doctrines. It is a mistake to categorize Charles as something he himself denied.
History has pigeonholed Charles Wesley into a caricature of his true self. We are often presented with a false option of saying we are either this or we must be that. Charles defied those options for himself.
Denial Of Being Arminian
Charles Wesley would not have chosen the term Calvinist or Arminian if asked to label himself theologically. He considered himself first and foremost as an Anglican.
Charles was ordained as a minister in the Church of England after graduating from Oxford. Charles studied there with his friend, George Whitefield. Whitefield was also an ordained Anglican minister.
And, Whitefield was a Calvinist.
This was a fierce point of contention between Whitefield and both John and Charles Wesley.
Charles called his friend George Whitefield “the reprobating lion.” He stated that the followers of Calvin preached “the other gospel.”
But does the truth that Charles Wesley had issues with the followers of Calvinism prove that he was an Arminian?
No. It does not.
Theology is more fluid than that.
Look at what Charles wrote when he was accused of being an Arminian.
To several God showed himself the God of consolation also, particularly to two young Welshmen whom his providence sent hither from Carmarthen.They had heard most dreadful stories of us—Arminians, freewillers, perfectionists, Papists—which all vanished like smoke when they came to hear with their own ears.
-Charles Wesley, MS Journal entry Sunday, May 31, 1741, bold added.
Charles Wesley was certainly not a Calvinist. It appears by his own testimony that he was not an Arminian either. If you’re interested, you can read this post on Charles’s thoughts against Calvinism.
Charles considered the stories that he was an Arminian to be just as dreadful as stories that he was a follower of the Pope and the dead doctrines of Rome!
It is unfair to lump Charles into a theological camp that he himself denied. It is more fair—and more historically accurate—to view Charles Wesley as his own man.
He was not a follower of John Calvin. He was not a follower of Jacobus Arminius. Charles Wesley was a follower of Jesus Christ.
As a follower of Christ, Charles had a theology deeply rooted in his own study of the Scriptures.
Questioning Predestination
One of the main reasons Charles Wesley has been labeled as theologically Arminian is because of his rejection of the Calvinistic teaching on predestination and reprobation.
Charles believed God offered grace freely and to all. Not just to “the elect” on the Calvinistic scheme.
I began preaching faith and free grace.
-Charles Wesley, MS Journal entry Saturday, June 24, 1738.
Charles stated in no uncertain terms his protest against the idea that some were created for salvation and others for condemnation. Charles denied that predestination was absolute in that sense.
A dispute arising about absolute predestination, I entered my protest against that doctrine.
-Charles Wesley, MS Journal entry Friday, September 22, 1738.
Charles also viewed the disruption to the ministry of the gospel and unity over predestination to be the work of Satan in their midst.
The sower of tares is beginning to trouble us with disputes about predestination.
-Charles Wesley, MS Journal entry Friday, June 22, 1739.
The Horrible Decree
The flip-side and natural conclusion of absolute election is absolute reprobation. Charles termed this as the horrible decree.
Through mercy, we could none of us see aught of the horrible decree there [in Rom. 9], but only his justice in rejecting them who had first rejected Him.
-Charles Wesley, MS Journal entry Friday, September 21, 1739.
Charles viewed the Calvinistic position as unjust. He also thought it brought forth bad fruit.
The first time he heard the other gospel [he] came home elect, and in proof of it, beat his wife.
-Charles Wesley, MS Journal entry Monday, June 8, 1741, emphasis original.
God’s Universal Love
“Free grace” can be a loaded term. It’s important to let Charles define what he means.
She asked me what she could do more, being convinced of her want of faith, and not able to give it herself. I preached the freeness of the grace, and betook myself to prayer for her, labouring, sighing, looking for the witness of the Spirit, the fullness of the promises, in her behalf.
-Charles Wesley, MS Journal entry Friday, July 7, 1738.
Charles believed the testimony of Scripture was that God loved all. As a result, God freely offered grace so that all could claim the promises of salvation in Christ.
Took a walk with Mr Seward, whose eyes it has pleased God to open, to see He would have all men to be saved. His wife, who refuses to see me, is miserably bigoted to the particular scheme.
-Charles Wesley, MS Journal entry Monday, August 20, 1739, bold added.
In contrast to the “other gospel” of reprobation and absolute predestination, Charles viewed the preaching of salvation as freely available to all as the “true gospel.”
Preached the true gospel (gospel to every creature), prayed, and left her a prisoner of hope.
-Charles Wesley, MS Journal entry Sunday, May 16, 1741.
God’s Effectual Call
The “I” in TULIP is for God’s Irresistible Grace. Some Calvinist’s use the terminology “effectual calling” when referring to the effect that God’s grace has on regenerating the elect at their hearing of the gospel.
Charles likewise used the terminology of effectual calling.
While we were singing, a poor drunken servant of Mr Seward’s was struck. His master had last night given him warning, but now he seems effectually called.
-Charles Wesley, MS Journal entry Tuesday, August 21, 1739, bold added.
Charles looked for and rejoiced in the effectual work of God in conversion.
Talked with several in whom the work of conversion is effectually begun.
-Charles Wesley, MS Journal entry June 2, 1740.
On Perseverance And Assurance
The 11th of Romans led me unawares to speak of final perseverance, whereby some, I would hope, were cut off from their vain confidence.
-Charles Wesley, MS Journal entry Sunday, September 23, 1739.
Charles believed that Scripture was clear on perseverance. Christians were not called to have a vain confidence in a theological assertion from a supposedly eternal decree by God.
Instead, Christians were to be humble. They were to work out their salvation with fear and trembling.
This was contrary to the effects of Calvinistic teaching in Charles’s experience. But contrary to many Arminian theologians, Charles did not deny that you could have a genuine assurance of salvation.
See here the true assurance of faith! How consistent an humble, not doubting, a filial, not servile, fear of offending! I desire not such an assurance as blots out those Scriptures, “Be not high-minded, but fear”; “Work out your salvation with fear and trembling”; etc.
-Charles Wesley, MS Journal entry Wednesday, September 26, 1739.
Charles viewed some of the effects of believing in absolute predestination as rotten fruit. When one believed they were elect from eternity past by the unchangeable decree of God, Charles saw their pride lead them into sin without repentance.
Some were present who fancy themselves elect, and therefore sink back into their old tempers.
-Charles Wesley, MS Journal entry Tuesday, June 24, 1740.
The Leaven of Calvin
At six expounded Isaiah 53 in the courtyard and was greatly assisted to purge out the leaven of Calvin.
-Charles Wesley, MS Journal entry Friday, August 28, 1741.
Charles saw Calvinistic teaching as leaven. The effects were pervasive.
Charles believed that accepting absolute predestination resulted in pride, inhumane actions toward others, and hardness of heart.
The first time her mother heard of it she turned her out of doors, and has ever since treated her with true predestinarian meanness.
-Charles Wesley, MS Journal entry Wednesday, September 2, 1741, bold added.
Charles described an unpleasant encounter with a professing believer.
Visited a dying woman, who fell upon me with revilings for not coming sooner … She went on so violently that I feared her last breath would go in curses. I hoped she was not in her senses, but the attendants assured me that was her language continually. She had no trouble about her soul. When I told her she would be lost if she died unchanged, she answered, “Ye will go to hell before me.” I could not account for it till they told me she was a constant hearer of the predestinarians.
-Charles Wesley, MS Journal entry Saturday, July 4, 1741, bold added.
Charles thought the doctrines of Calvinism could lull believers to sleep. He sought to wake them up.
God gave me words to awaken some who were lulled fast asleep by the opiate of final perseverance.
-Charles Wesley, MS Journal entry Wednesday, September 9, 1741.
For a fuller view of Charles’s anti-Calvinistic thoughts, don’t miss this post with quotes from Charles against Calvinism.
Human Wickedness
The Calvinistic doctrine of Total Depravity (the “T” in TULIP) was formulated as a response to Arminian theological stance that the fall of humanity as marred the image of God, but not completely.
Arminian theology typically asserts that human sinfulness is a major problem. But it hasn’t rendered humans incapable of doing good or seeking the Lord. God’s prevenient grace has enabled all to have the ability to believe.
Calvinistic teaching contrastingly articulated that the extent of human depravity after the fall was not just a problem. It was extensive and complete. Human beings are spiritually dead.
This Calvinistic doctrine can be misunderstood. Some mistakenly think this means that human beings are as wicked as they can possibly be. That in every situation they will do the most evil thing possible.
That’s not really true. It’s a misunderstanding of the position.
However, the Calvinistic position does teach that human beings are completely spiritually dead. They are incapable of doing anything “good.” Even if they don’t always and necessarily do that which is most evil.
The fall has extended to every area of the human being. Intellect, emotions, will. Complete and total depravity. Nothing untainted. Completely devoid of any goodness.
Charles was much more in line with the Calvinistic view than the Arminian view on this doctrine.
We pleaded the promise in behalf of our seeking friends … The day before our coming had been led to read the Homily on Justification, which convinced him that in him dwelt no good thing. Now he likewise saw that the thoughts of his heart were only evil continually for as much as whatsoever is not of faith is sin.
-Charles Wesley, MS Journal entry Saturday, June 10, 1738.
Charles abided by the Homilies and Articles of the Anglican Church. In the above quote, Charles praises the providence of God in leading his seeking friend to read the Homily on Justification.
This homily faithfully convinced the reader of the truth that no good thing dwelt in his flesh. That his internal disposition was only evil continually. That whatever is not from faith is sin.
This summarizes Charles’s view on human depravity. It’s why he constantly prayed for God to give grace and power for people to believe the gospel and put their faith in Jesus.
Their salvation relied on the power and intervention of God. Not on some inherent internal ability they had to believe in their own power and strength.
This is Charles Wesley’s view. It is not a typical Arminian view, however.
God’s Role In Salvation
A typical teaching associated with Arminian theology is that humanity is free to believe the gospel. But Charles seemed to think that God needed to be more active in granting the power to believe.
We asked particularly that if it was the will of God, someone might now receive the atonement. While I was yet speaking of words, Mr Brown found power to believe. He rose and told me my prayer was heard, and answered in him.
-Charles Wesley, MS Journal entry Saturday, June 3, 1738.
Charles prayed that God would grant the gift of faith. Charles prayed that God would give people power to believe.
This type of language is more consistent with typical Calvinist theology than it is with Arminian systems. It acknowledges God’s sovereignty and necessity in working in the salvation of individuals.
Faith had come to her by hearing. We joined in giving glory to God, for we perceived and confessed it was his doing. It pleased him likewise to bless me with a deep and hitherto unknown dread of ascribing anything to myself.
-Charles Wesley, MS Journal entry Sunday, June 11, 1738.
Charles blessed God for His sovereign role in salvation. This is not a typical Arminian view.
Related Questions
What are the doctrines of Arminianism? The doctrines of Arminian theology are summarized in the five Articles of Remonstrance. These were written and presented in document in 1610. They were primarily an objection to the Calvinistic teachings on predestination.
What are the doctrines of Calvinism? The five points of Calvinism are summarized by the acronym, TULIP. Each letter represents a doctrine: Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, and Perseverance of the Saints. These positions were articulated in response to the Articles of Remonstrance.
0 Comments