Tags
Occasionally I come across well-known saying of John Wesley that Wesley most likely did not actually say. I came across one yesterday, and it made me think: I should start posting these.
So here is the first statement that John Wesley did not actually say:
In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; and, in all things, charity.
I came across Richard P. Heitzenrater’s chapter, “‘Unity, Liberty, Charity’ in the Wesleyan Heritage.” while reading through Unity, Liberty, and Charity: Building Bridges under Icy Waters, edited by Donald E. Messer and William J. Abraham. [This book was written because the editors were concerned about the “growing polarization and politicalization within our beloved church.” So, they “sought to encourage and participate in open theological conversations where persons of deep and diverse convictions could articulate their differences and explore possible convergences in thought and action” (5).]
In Heitzenrater’s chapter he found that a detailed search of Wesley’s word usage found that “the saying was not used by Wesley.” (29)
Wesley didn’t say that, we should stop saying that he did.
Interesting. Perhaps it grew out of an attempt to summarize the sentiments of “Catholic Spirit?”
Now what could be next…I’m guessing something pertaining to the quadrilateral.
The next thing you’ll tell me is that Wesley didn’t believe in open hearts, open doors, and open minds. Iconoclast.
What is the history of that attribution then, for those of us on the edge of our seats but without the book? Is there a similar (but most likely longer-winded) saying that is authentic Wesley?
If he didn’t say it, he should have!
Hmmm … I’ve seen that quote attributed to Phineas F. Bresee, one of the founders of the Church of the Nazarene.
According to Heitzenrater’s chapter, the statement came from a work by Rupertus Meldenius, whom Heitzenrater describes as an “obscure theologian of the sixteenth century.” It apparently first appeared in a treatise written in 1627 in the midst of the Thirty Years’s War called Paranaenesis votiva pro pace ecclesiae or “Votive Precept for Church Peace” (30-31)
Heitzenrater points out that the phrase was used by Richard Baxter, but interestingly, in an extract that Wesley published of the work where Baxter uses the phrase, Wesley omits it from his shorter edition.
Heitzenrater does not offer a similar saying that is found in Wesley. The closest suggestion he comes to is in the sermon “Catholic Spirit” where Heitzenrater notes “at the end of two pages of questions, Wesley concludes: ‘If thou art thus minded, may every Christian say… then ‘thy heart is right, as my heart is with thy heart.’ On this basis, he can then say, ‘Give me thine hand.'” (37)
One final note: The intent of this post is simply clarifying what Wesley did or did not say. The post is not attempting to evaluate the value or validity of the statement itself. My point at this stage is the very simply argument that Wesley did not say it, so we should not attribute it to him.
Here’s another one for you:
“When asked why so many people showed up to hear him preach, Wesley replied, ‘I simply set myself on fire and they come to watch me burn.'”
There are numerous citations of this apocryphal quotation on the internet, most attributed to Wesley, who did not say it.
Andrew, you beat me to it. I was planning on using this as the next post in my “Wesley didn’t say it” series. I think I probably still will use it! Especially because I saw that Craig Groeschel of LifeChurch tweeted this quote this weekend, attributing it to Wesley.
Pingback: Wesley Didn’t Say It: Set Myself on Fire… Watch Me Burn « Vital Piety
Marc’ Antonio de Dominis (1560-1624), archbishop of Split (Spalato) in book 4, chapter 8 of De republica ecclesiastica libri X, London/Hannover 1617-1622 seems to be the earliest person documented to write the Latin version. This was prior to Peter Meiderlin (aka Rupertus Meldenius), writing in 1626 in the first printing of his ‘Paraenesis votiva pro pace ecclesiae ad theologos Augustanae Confessionis’. http://www9.georgetown.edu/faculty/jod/augustine/quote.html
I love it when people get knowledge from scripture put a personal twist on it, and sell it as there own work. If I were to coin the fraise give me freedom or give me demise. Am I not saying liberty or death? To gain from something that isn’t yours is theft even if it is the idea. To claim what is God’s is a scary thing. I would be fear full. Giving praise to someone for it is wrong as well. We should turn our focus to The Lord, and not on man.
Kevin:
I’m just now seeing this, having come to it from your most recent “Wesley didn’t say it”. I would direct you to my little commonplace book (http://liberlocorumcommunium.blogspot.com/2010/03/in-necessariis-unitas-in-non.html), which is what James J. O’Donnell is quoting at the link provided by Mr. Keys, above. I refer to a much-overlooked 1999 article in Dutch by H. J. M. Nellen that I turned up a few years ago when researching this for Jeff Keuss, and to which I alerted Dr. O’Donnell (the Augustine specialist) and others.
I have not done any further research since then. But given that the attribution to Meiderlin lasted for a century and a half or so, it may be a while before De Dominis falls from his current position as the first person known to have put the thought into these words.
This is the unofficial motto of the Moravian Church, and of course the Moravians had a great and lasting impact on both Wesley brothers. Many early Methodist practices originated from John’s visit to the Moravians in Herrnhut. The Meldinius version was borrowed in the 17th century by Moravian Bishop John Amos Comenius as a clarification of the earlier formulation by Luke of Prague, who defined things as “Essential,” “Ministerial,” or “Accidental” to salvation.
1617, De Dominis: unitatem in necessariis, in non necessariis libertatem, in omnibus caritatem
1626, Meldinius=Meiderlin: in necessariis unitatem, in non necessariis libertatem, in utrisque caritatem [(utrisque instead of omnibus, but otherwise identical)]
1668, Comenius: in omnino necessariis Unitatem: in minus necessarius (qva Adiaphora vocant) Libertatem: in omnibus erga omnes Charitatem
Comenius (or at least the Comenius of the Unum Necessarium (1668)) seems no closer to Meldinius=Meiderlin (1626) than to De Dominis (1617). See http://www.moravianchurcharchives.org/thismonth/12_05%20In%20Essentials.pdf.
Indeed, he follows De Dominis rather than Meldinius=Meiderlin in the use of omnibus rather than utrisque, while making other changes: the addition of omnino, the substitution of minus for non, and the un-italicized insertion of “(qva Adiaphora vocant)”.
Pingback: Wesley Didn’t Say It: “Holy Conferencing” | Vital Piety
Pingback: Things John Wesley did not say | John Meunier
Pingback: Wesley Didn’t Say It: “Be present at our table, Lord…” | Vital Piety
Seems like the UMC church believes Wesley at least “requoted” his predecessors. http://www.umc.org/what-we-believe/section-2-our-doctrinal-history
Pingback: Unity, Liberty, Charity | Restless Pilgrim
Pingback: Commonplace Holiness Blog