#wesleyan

[wesleyaninaditch]

As my name might suggest, I am a Methodist. I was born Methodist, baptized Methodist, confirmed Methodist, and attend Methodist services.

As I have aged, I’ve developed a healthy respect for not only other Christian denominations, but also other religious traditions. I credit my ability to see the beauty of other faiths to my security in my own beliefs.

The reason I remain a proud Methodist is my fundamental belief in the Wesleyan conception of sin and Christian perfection.

I love the teaching of sin as a narrow offense, limited to willful transgressions against God (and as an extension, humanity) vs. the “infirmities” which cause us to do harm unintentionally. Not only does it teach us to recognize that people can do harm without wishing to, but also that sin includes things that we might not expect, and that things can be socially acceptable or legal yet remain sinful.

So many of the great sins of this era (bigotry, exploitation, and the accumulation of wealth are among the greatest) can be justified by its perpetrators using various smokescreens, appeals to legality, or a sense of “might makes right.” A Wesleyan framework provides moral clarity that cuts through the bullshit: no Wesleyan justification is possible for the existence of billionaires, transphobia, the death penalty, or mass deportations, because such acts can only be done in knowing opposition to God’s will.

The other great thing about this definition is it allows for Christian perfection, or a life free of sin. When sin is defined as the intentional violation of God’s law, it suggests that we can work towards perfection in this life, rather than waiting for the resurrection.

Christian perfection does not mean that Christians are capable of never doing harm, or that they can achieve perfect wisdom to act like Jesus would in all things. But it does suggest that we can live in a world where people no longer intentionally do harm to each other and intentionally seek to do good. In the same way a healthy fruit tree will inevitably bear good fruit, a Christian moving towards perfection will feel compelled to correct injustice and render aid.

[wrestlingisbest]

[vintagepipemen]

Unidentified student, Wesleyan College, 1960.

[gnosticgnoob]

dope shit/deep dive about John Wesley? is he a heavy hitter█

֍ ChatGPT said:

Oh yeah—John Wesley is absolutely a heavy hitter, but he’s a weird kind of heavyweight: not an empire-builder like Augustine, not a doctrine-detonator like Luther, not a metaphysical titan like Aquinas. Wesley’s power is praxis + psychology + organization. He changed how Christianity functions on the ground.

Here’s the deep dive.

1. Wesley didn’t set out to found a church—and that matters

Wesley was an Anglican priest to the bone. He never left the Church of England. Methodism began as a method for holy living, not a denomination.

That origin story explains a lot:

He wasn’t trying to win a theological civil war.

He was trying to fix Christian failure.

His beef wasn’t “wrong doctrine,” but dead faith.

That alone puts him in a different class.

2. Wesley took justification by faith seriously—and then refused to stop there

Luther cracked the door open. Wesley walked through and said:

“Okay, you’re forgiven. Now what kind of person are you becoming?”

Key moves:

Salvation is by grace, full stop.

But grace is active, not passive.

Faith that doesn’t transform behavior is a lie you’re telling yourself.

This is where Wesley quietly wrecks a lot of modern Christianity.

3. Christian Perfection (aka the most misunderstood Wesley doctrine)

This is Wesley’s most controversial idea—and his most important.

He did NOT mean sinless perfection. He meant:

a heart fully oriented toward love of God and neighbor,

a will no longer divided,

habitual sin losing its grip.

Think directional wholeness, not moral flawlessness.

This is devastating to:

cheap grace,

despairing guilt cultures,

“I’m saved so whatever” Christianity.

4. Wesley invented scalable discipleship

This is one of the most underrated facts in Christian history.

Wesley created:

class meetings (small accountability groups),

bands (even more intense moral confession),

lay preachers,

itinerant circuits.

People had to:

show up,

confess,

change,

be known.

Modern megachurches wish they had this level of formative power.

5. Wesley cared intensely about the poor—structurally

This is where he parts ways with WASP Christianity hard.

He opposed slavery early and forcefully.

He insisted wealth was spiritually dangerous.

He said, effectively: If you’re rich and comfortable, your soul is at risk.

One of his sharpest lines:

“Earn all you can, save all you can, give all you can.”

Notice the trap: if you stop at step one, you’re damned by your own success.

6. He took emotion seriously—but refused emotional bullshit

Wesley believed in:

assurance,

felt grace,

conversion experiences.

But:

feelings had to produce fruit,

enthusiasm without discipline was suspect,

emotion without ethics was delusion.

He walked a razor’s edge between dead rationalism and runaway revivalism.

7. He normalized women’s leadership (quietly but radically)

For his time? Wild.

Women led class meetings.

Women preached informally.

Women exercised moral authority.

He didn’t theorize feminism—but he practiced something dangerously close.

8. Wesley is a nightmare for Social Darwinist Christians

If someone claims Wesley’s lineage and believes:

the strong deserve to dominate,

poverty is moral failure,

compassion weakens society—

they are flatly contradicting his theology.

Wesley’s Christianity produces:

mutual aid,

discipline,

social responsibility,

moral seriousness.

Not vibes. Not dominance. Formation.

9. Why Wesley matters now

Because he offers a third way:

not rigid dogmatism,

not hollow liberalism,

not identity Christianity.

He asks one brutal question:

“What kind of people is your faith actually producing?”

That question alone makes him dangerous.

10. Verdict

Is Wesley a heavy hitter?

Yes—but not because he wrote one killer book. He’s a heavy hitter because he engineered a system that changed people at scale.

He didn’t just interpret Christianity. He made it work.

If you want, next we could:

pit Wesley vs Calvin head-to-head,

trace how Methodism decayed into respectability,

or ask whether Wesley’s model could survive the internet age.

Wesley still throws punches.

You said:

to what extent you look at churches all along a street and see a "Methodist" one, what can you say about that congregation that is different from other congregations maybe? For someone who looks at many churches and just sees the same thing over and over and doesn't know the diff█

֍ ChatGPT said:

Totally fair question. From the sidewalk, most churches do blur together. But if you know what Methodism was trying to do, there are some real tells—even now, even after a lot of dilution.

I’ll give you (1) the original Wesleyan DNA, (2) what that DNA often looks like in practice today, and (3) the caveats, because this is where the disappointment usually lives.

1. The original Methodist “signature” (what made them different)

If you time-traveled to an early Methodist congregation, you’d notice:

A. Faith was meant to be observable

Methodists didn’t ask first:

“Do you believe the right things?”

They asked:

“Is your life actually changing?”

This showed up as:

small accountability groups,

concrete expectations about behavior,

mutual correction without pretending everyone was fine.

That alone separated them from many mainline Protestants.

B. Salvation was processual, not a checkbox

Methodists rejected:

“I prayed the prayer, I’m done.”

“God elected me, so shrug.”

They emphasized:

sanctification,

growth in love,

becoming less cruel, less selfish, less numb over time.

If Christianity wasn’t making you kinder and braver, something was wrong.

C. The poor were spiritually central, not an afterthought

Methodism grew among:

workers,

the dispossessed,

people excluded from polite Anglican life.

So poverty wasn’t explained away as moral failure—it was treated as a spiritual emergency for the rich and a moral obligation for the church.

2. What that tends to look like today (best-case Methodist church)

If a Methodist congregation is still breathing Wesley’s air, you might notice:

A. Less obsession with purity tests

Compared to:

hyper-doctrinal churches,

culture-war churches,

Methodists often tolerate:

ambiguity,

disagreement,

people being unfinished.

That’s not relativism; it’s confidence that formation matters more than slogans.

B. A strong ethic of organized compassion

Methodist churches are often:

overrepresented in food banks,

disaster response,

education,

healthcare chaplaincy.

Not because they’re “nice,” but because service is seen as discipleship, not charity cosplay.

C. A faint but real moral seriousness

Even when theology is softened, you can sometimes still feel:

a discomfort with greed,

an unease with cruelty,

a bias toward social responsibility.

When Methodism is healthy, it produces quietly disciplined people, not loud moralizers.

3. What Methodism has largely lost (and why churches look the same now)

Here’s the painful part.

A. The accountability spine is mostly gone

Most modern Methodist congregations:

no longer require class meetings,

don’t expect confession,

don’t press people toward transformation.

Without that, Methodism becomes:

polite,

socially concerned,

but spiritually thin.

This is why you look at the street and see sameness.

B. Respectability tamed the movement

Methodism succeeded too well.

Once it became:

middle-class,

institutional,

respectable,

it lost the sharp edge that made it dangerous to complacency.

Wesley would be deeply suspicious of many Methodist churches today.

4. One honest sidewalk test

If you walked into:

a Methodist church,

a Calvinist church,

a Pentecostal church,

and listened carefully, the difference wouldn’t be the music or the slogans.

It would be the answer—explicit or implicit—to this question:

“What do you expect God to do to a person over time?”

Calvinist spaces often emphasize status before God.

Pentecostal spaces emphasize power and experience.

Methodist spaces (at their best) emphasize character formation.

Not conversion alone. Not feelings alone. Becoming different.

5. Why this matters for your earlier frustration

Your rage at the contradiction between Jesus and mainstream Christian culture?

Wesley shared that rage—but he responded by building structures that forced people to face themselves.

That’s the Methodist inheritance.

Whether any given Methodist church still lives up to it? That’s a coin flip.

But if you ever encounter one that does, it won’t feel flashy. It will feel… uncomfortably sincere.

And that’s how you know it’s not just another building on the street.

[waybackwanderer]

Hints for Heterosexuals Jun 1997 Archived Web Page 🏳️‍🌈

[ezekieltobiasfletcher]

Stained glass from Memorial Chapel at Wesleyan University. Took my 17 y.o. for open house today. I'm hopeful for the future based on what I saw of my kid's generation today.

[hellodirtgoodbyeinnocence]

we care

[historyfiles]

A picture gallery showcasing several churches in Restormel in Cornwall, in this series which is designed to be part of an all-inclusive set of photos of all churches.

East Street Wesleyan Methodist Chapel in Newquay was built in 1904 to replace a smaller building which itself had been built following the Methodist division of 1852.