Bookmark
Us
Print PreviewOrigin Of Hester Ann
For a number of years, I have noted that this name appears often in our line. The first Hester Ann Rogers that I have documented is the daughter of Dr. Rev William Rogers b. 1777, son of John (the Powder Maker) who was born 1757. This Hester Ann Rogers was b. ca 1815 and married. Benjamin C. Bratcher ca 1840.
Dr. Rev. William's daughter, Deliah b. 1806 named a daughter Hester Ann Monday b. ca 1836. Another daughter of William, Mary (Polly) Katherine Rogers b. ca 1811, also named a daughter Hester Ann Small b. 1838.
William's brother, Jesse Rogers b. 3 Mar 1791, also had a daughter by his second wife who was named Hester Ann. She was b. ca 1841 in Marion County, Tennessee and died in Webster Co, MO. She is buried near her parents in the Watts Cem near Rogersville, Webster Co, MO.
In addition, John (TPM)'s older brother, William b. 1748 in Culpeper Co, had a grandson, Jackson Henry Rogers b. ca 1817 in Adair Co, KY who named his daughter Hester A.(Ann?) who was born about 1849 in Adair Co.
So, who was the first Hester Ann and why was the name continued so many times? Was this another name that had religious significance for the Rogers like Fletcher proved to be or just a name that they liked (like Reuben Brawley), or was Hester Ann a person who was respected for some deed (like Robert Doak)?
There may have been an earlier Hester Ann Rogers. In Mary Kegley's book, Early Adventures on the Western Waters, Vol III, p.432, she mentions a Hester Ann Rogers Fisher. She appears to be the child of a Jacob Fisher b. ca 1775 and his wife Susana b. 1777 who settled on Cripple Creek in what is now Wythe Co, VA. The family Bible (written in German script) mentioned children Rebekah, Catharine, Joshua, Joseph, Reuben, Elijah, James (1810) and Andrew all born between 1799 and 1812. Mary indicates that family records add another child, Hester Ann Rogers, but no birth date is given. My point here is that this Hester Ann Rogers Fisher b ca 1812-1814? must have been named for a Hester Ann Rogers who was born before that.
So cousins, please let us know if any of you have any more Hester Anns identified or if you have some clue as to whom the first Hester Ann Rogers was.
Jerry
Thema:Hester Ann Rogers
Datum:3/10/2004 6:25:18 PM W. Europe Standard Time
Von:embralley@acctechmail.com
An:JRogers722@aol.com
Jerry:
I think I've found the Hester Ann connection! This may be old news to you now - so forgive me. She is probably mentioned in the Life of Fletcher, famous book in your line. She was an early Methodist icon. The Bralley's and many of the Lead Mine Mill Creek families were extremeley devout, high-spirited, old fashioned Methodists. The following is from the article below: "James Rogers, who was the husband of Hester Ann Rogers, was Wesley's resident assistant and they were present in Wesley’s home during his final hours and witnessed his death. Hester Ann Rogers was also Wesley’s housekeeper toward the end of Wesley’s life and by then she was a well known writer and promoter of Wesley’s doctrine of holiness, particularly using "the baptism of the Holy Spirit" to define her own experience. She and husband were close friends of Fletcher. She died at the age of 39 in childbirth. Thomas Coke preached her funeral in 1795. Her personal testimony of being baptized with the Holy Spirit was attached to his published sermon: “Lord, make this the moment of my full salvation! Baptize me now with the Holy Ghost, and the fire of pure love. Now, cleanse the thoughts of my heart, let me perfectly love thee.”
My question to you: Were your early Rogers connected to this James Rogers? Food for thought. Russ Bralley
John Fletcher Rediscovered
Laurence W. Wood, Ph. D. Frank Paul Morris Professor of Systematic Theology Asbury Theological Seminary Wilmore,KY 40390 Phone: 859 858 2152
In an article, entitled, "John Fletcher and the Rediscovery of Pentecost in Methodism," The Asbury Theological Journal , Vol. 53, No. 1 (Spring, 1998), 7-34, I explained the role of John Fletcher in early Methodism and the significance of his theology of Pentecost for early Methodism.
I recently read a review of it by my former Doctor of Ministry advisee, Vic Reasoner, in his journal, which he calls The New Arminian Magazine. He believes I have not properly interpreted John Fletcher. He says that no one in early Methodism connected the doctrine of perfect love with the baptism with the Holy Spirit.
Although Dr. Reasoner is a fine John Wesley Scholar, he unfortunately has not studied the writings of John Fletcher and he has not researched this theme in early Methodism. Some of the persons whom he cites as support for his view clearly do not agree with him. However, I am not surprised that Dr. Reasoner has drawn this conclusion, and he is not to be blamed for it. He is restating what is the prevailing prejudice in contemporary Wesley Studies which was adopted in the late 1970's, and this misunderstanding developed in part because it has never been seriously researched by recent scholars. It is also a prejudice which many wish were true. I expect some will continue to defend it vigorously, and others will simply allow that Fletcher and Wesley held to an incidental aberration.
I invite those who would like to know more about John Fletcher and his theology of Pentecost to read my recent book, The Meaning of Pentecost in Early Methodism, Rediscovering John Fletcher As Wesley's Vindicator and Designated Successor. You may preview it at the Scarecrow Publisher website:
Meaning of Pentecost in Early Methodism
Fletcher’s Last Check is his main treatise on Christian perfection. The connection between the baptism of the Spirit and Christian perfection is frequently made. Wesley edited, corrected, and published this work. Here is its main thesis: “O, baptize my soul, and make as full an end of the original sin which I have from Adam . . . .Give me thine abiding Spirit, that he may continually shed abroad thy love in my soul . . . . Send thy Holy Spirit of promise to fill me therewith, to sanctify me throughout.”
Although Fletcher did not literally and simply equate Pentecost and Christian perfection, he believed that the primary purpose of the Pentecostal outpouring of the Spirit was for the sanctification of the Church, which began on the day of Pentecost. Hence he made a functional equivalence between the two themes.
In his friendly disagreement with Lady Huntingdon, Fletcher explained to her that in substance she and Wesley agreed. He said to her in a letter: “With regard to perfection itself, I believe that when Mr. Wesley is altogether consistent upon that subject, he means absolutely nothing by it but the full cluster of Gospel blessings, which Lady Huntingdon so warmly presses the students to pursue; namely, Gospel faith, the immediate revelation of Christ, the baptism of the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of adoption, the kingdom that cannot be moved, the element of forgiving love, deep and uninterrupted poverty of spirit, and, in a word, a standing upon Mount Sion and enjoying its great and glorious privileges. And I am fully persuaded that, in this respect, there is more misunderstanding between my lady and Mr. Wesley about words and modes of expression than about things and essential principles. All the difference between them seems to me to consist in this: my lady is more for looking to the misery and depth of the fall; Mr. Wesley more for considering the power and effects of the recovery.”
Fletcher noted in this letter that the Countess herself had emphasized the baptism with the Holy Spirit. He also noted in this same letter that other Calvinists associated with Trevecca, such as “Mr. Harris,” also had spoken of “the fiery baptism [that] will burn up self.” Fletcher explained that by this phrase he only means: “I live not, but Christ lives in me.”
Fletcher publicly testified to having been made perfect in love through the baptism with the Holy Spirit. To be sure, Fletcher believed that everyday’s attainment of holiness was tomorrow’s aspiration. In this respect, he did not absolutize a second crisis moment as the American holiness movement sometimes did. In this respect, Fletcher frankly allowed that this perfection is an “imperfect perfection.” That is, it is capable of further increase in love and in grace. Similarly, in his treatise “On Perfection,” Gregory of Nyssa defines perfection as “participation in the Spirit” and conforming to the image of Christ. And yet, we never arrive “at the limit of perfection. For this is truly perfection: never to stop growing towards what is better and never placing any limit on perfection.” This is a dynamic understanding of perfection, denoting intention of heart rather than mere performance. It is always capable of further increase in love as opposed to a static notion of a perfect attainment and perfect performance. Fletcher learned from Wesley to respect the writings of these Early Greek Fathers in explaining the nature of perfection.
Dr. Reasoner reflects the widespread assumption that early Methodist preachers did not link the baptism with the Spirit with Christian perfection. Chapter 12 will correct this misinformation.
The first systematic theologian of Methodism, Richard Watson, was heavily influenced by Fletcher. Here is what he said: "The Entire sanctification of the soul from sin is held forth, both as necessary to qualify us for heaven, and as the result of that baptism of the Spirit which we receive in answer to prayer, and through faith in Christ." This information is also contained in Chapter 12 for those who are interested.
Here is what Joseph Benson said in an essay on “Thoughts of Christian Perfection,” in The Arminian Magazine in 1781: “Allowing, what (I think) neither Reason nor Scripture forbids us to allow, that God may, and that he often does, instantaneously so baptize a soul with the Holy Ghost, and with fire, as to purify it from all dross, and refine it like gold, so that it is renewed in love, in pure and perfect love, as it never was before.”
Wesley published this essay written by Benson, showing that Wesley agreed with it as a designation for Christian perfection.
The subject of this essay by Benson was Christian perfection, and his concern was that some apparently assumed if they had been baptized with the Spirit and made perfect in love they saw no need for further growth. Affirming that this blessing of pure love may come instantaneously and “often does,” Benson (and Wesley) was urging his readers to recognize the need to grow more and more in grace.
As every Wesley Scholar knows, Wesley and Benson did not believe that one is “often” justified and fully sanctified at the same moment. In his sermon “On Sin in Believers,” Wesley noted that ZinzenTitel believed that one is justified and fully sanctified at the same moment, and Wesley called this an error with “fatal consequences.” Wesley on several occasions said he did not know of a single instance where these two events occurred at the same moment.
Specifically, Benson was not saying in this essay that believers are often justified and sanctified at the same moment, but rather he was speaking of already justified believers being baptized with the Spirit as the means of their full sanctification. In his essay "On Christian Perfection," Benson (and Wesley) urged those who had been fully sanctified to press on toward greater growth in grace. This Pentecostal focus continued to remain a preaching theme for Benson until the end of his life.
Adam Clarke also embraced this Pentecostal interpretation. In his Commentary on the Book of Acts, Clarke wrote: “John baptized with water, which was a sign of penitence, in reference to the remission of sin; but Christ baptizes with the Holy Ghost, for the destruction of sin [=entire sanctification].”
Wesley also preached on the baptism with the Spirit at annual conference, as well as in his evangelistic preaching around the country, according to Adam Clark. In his later published sermons, Wesley often highlighted the connection between Pentecost and entire sanctification. In his sermon “On Zeal” (1781), Wesley said: “This is that religion which our Lord has established upon earth, ever since the descent of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost . . . love enthroned in the heart [=entire sanctification].” Wesley believed that it was not until the day of Pentecost that entire sanctification became a possibility.
On May 19, 1738 (Whitsunday) Wesley heard Dr. John Heylyn, who became the prebendary of Westminister in 1743, "preach a truly Christian sermon (on 'They were all filled with the Holy Ghost'--and so, said he, may all of you be." On June 3, 1781 (Pentecost Sunday), Wesley wrote in his journal: “I preached on, ‘they were all filled with the Holy Ghost;’ and showed in what sense this belongs to us and our children.” The phrase, "to us and our children," is a paraphrase of Acts 2:39 where Peter says the Pentecostal gift of the Spirit is "to you and your children," showing that Wesley believed that Pentecost should be personalized for everyone today even as Dr. Heylyn had said "so may all of you be" filled with the Spirit as the disciples were on the day of Pentecost.
Fletcher quotes from one of Dr. Heylyn's Pentecost sermons in which he says:“To wash, cleanse, baptize, and sanctify, are commonly synonymous in Scripture; hence the phrase being baptized with the Holy Ghost, which is elsewhere called being baptized with fire, to signify the universal and intimate purification of the inmost springs of action thereby. . . . With this view the prophet Malachi compares the Spirit to a refiner of gold or silver, destroying the dross, and separating all heterogeneous particles from those metals by force of fire, till they are reduced to perfect purity. Thus the Spirit sanctifies the soul, by abolishing all sordid inclinations, by purging away the multiplicity of carnal desires, and reducing all the powers of the mind to one simply constant pursuit, viz. that of God’s glory.”
This Pentecost theme was a preaching theme of Wesley’s closest associates, including Thomas Coke and Henry Moore, as well as main women leaders, such as Mary Bosanquet (who married John Fletcher) and Hester Ann Rogers.
James Rogers, who was the husband of Hester Ann Rogers, was Wesley's resident assistant and they were present in Wesley’s home during his final hours and witnessed his death. Hester Ann Rogers was also Wesley’s housekeeper toward the end of Wesley’s life and by then she was a well known writer and promoter of Wesley’s doctrine of holiness, particularly using "the baptism of the Holy Spirit" to define her own experience. She and husband were close friends of Fletcher. She died at the age of 39 in childbirth. Thomas Coke preached her funeral in 1795. Her personal testimony of being baptized with the Holy Spirit was attached to his published sermon: “Lord, make this the moment of my full salvation! Baptize me now with the Holy Ghost, and the fire of pure love. Now, cleanse the thoughts of my heart, let me perfectly love thee.”
Pentecostal perfection was also a theme in early American Methodism.
Francis Asbury introduced Fletcher’s writings as required reading for his preachers, especially his treatise on Christian Perfection, which highlights the baptism with the Spirit as the means of perfect love.
It is thus not surprising to find Pentecostal language used in testimonies of early American Methodists. In 1804, an "itinerating minister" explained to John Bangs that "it was my privilege not only to be justified by faith, but to have a clean heart, which blessing God gave me by the baptism of the Holy Ghost . . . . I have held on my way, and grown stronger and stronger, and now enjoy the blessing of perfect love."
Fletcher believed that he derived this Pentecostal theme from Wesley’s standard sermons. He believed that it was derived from the theology of the Anglican Reformers and contemporary Anglicans, such as William Law and Archbishop Tillotson. He also highlighted its source in the Early Greek Fathers.
Fletcher particularly cites from the homilies (ca. 380) of pseudoMacarius, who was an intimate friend of Gregory of Nyssa.
Fletcher writes: “From the preceding extract I conclude, that, if Macarius, who lived near 1300 years ago, so clear preached the baptism and dispensation of the Holy Spirit, Mr. John Wesley and I cannot reasonably be charged with novelty for doing the same thing.” Fletcher quotes from the eighteenth homily of pseudo-Macarius to show that he equated perfection with the baptism with the Spirit: "'For when the soul is throughly cleansed from all its corrupt affections; and is united, by an ineffable communion, to the Spirit: and is become Spirit itself: then it is all light, all eye, all spirit, all joy, all rest, and gladness, all love, all bowels, all goodness and clemency. As a stone in the bottom of the sea, is every way surrounded with water: so are those' [who are baptized with the Holy Ghost] 'every way drenched with the Holy Spirit, and made like Christ himself; possessing unalterably within themselves the virtues of the power of the Spirit, being blameless within and without--spotless and pure. For being brought to perfection by the Spirit . . . .'"
Fletcher also quotes from Macarius’ twenty seventh homily: “‘The great men, and the righteous, and the kings’ [celebrated in the Old Testament] ‘knew that the Redeemer was to come; but that his blood was to be poured out upon the cross, they neither knew nor had heard; neither had it entered into their hearts that there was to be the baptism of the fire and of the Holy Ghost, &c that Christians were to receive the Comforter, and be clothed with power from on high, and be filled with the Godhead, and mixed together with the Holy Spirit.’”
There are numerous parallels between Macarius and Wesley/Fletcher. PseudoMacarius equates circumcision of heart, perfection, and the baptism with the Holy Spirit. In his forty seventh homily, pseudoMacarius writes: “They were made known to be people of God by circumcision; here, God’s peculiar people receive the sign of circumcision inwardly in their heart. The heavenly knife cuts away the unwanted portion of the mind, which is the impure uncircumcision of sin. With them was a baptism sanctifying the flesh; with us, a baptism of Holy Ghost and fire, for this is what John preached; He shall baptize you with Holy Ghost and fire .”
PseudoMacarius also often uses the phrase, filled with the Spirit. In his nineteenth homily, he writes: “The man who desires to come to the Lord, and to be found worthy of eternal life, and to become the dwelling-place of Christ, and the be filled with the Holy Ghost, that he may be able to produce the fruits of the Spirit, and perform the commandments of Christ purely and faultlessly, ought to begin by first believing the Lord steadfastly, and giving himself wholly to the words of His commandments, and renouncing the world altogether, that his whole mind may be occupied about nothing secular.” Using the metaphor of eradication, he writes in the twenty sixth homily that “when the Holy Ghost comes . . . sin is eradicated , and man recovers the primal fashioning of the pure Adam.”
PseudoMacarius also speaks of “the grace of the sanctifying perfection of the Spirit” (Homily 40), receiving “the Spirit in full assurance” (Homily 20), and “Christians receive the Paraclete, and are endued with power from on high, and are filled with the Godhead, and their souls mingled with the Holy Ghost” (Homily 27). The point of his homilies was to call monks to be “perfected in the Holy Ghost.” These descriptive phrases taken from the homilies of pseudoMacarius are not isolated references, but shape the theology of his sermons. In The Scripture Way of Salvation,Wesley cites Macarius to show that believers still retain the stain of original sin until they are cleansed from it by the Spirit. PseudoMacarius thus calls believers to pray to “the Lord, and the Spirit having perfected us in Himself and Himself perfected in us, when we are once cleansed from every defilement and spot of sin” (homily xix).
George A. Maloney, a recent Roman Catholic patristic scholar, writes of pseudoMacarius: “The preponderant accent is . . . placed on the personal and intimate experience of fire and baptism in the Holy Spirit that effects a mystical oneness with the indwelling Jesus Christ.” Maloney further writes: “Macarius is one of the first witnesses of what modern Christians would call the baptism in the Holy Spirit. He conceives this to be an ongoing process of surrendering to the indwelling guidance of the Holy Spirit to the degree that the individual cries out for the Spirit to heal the roots of sinfulness that lie deeply within the soul. When one begins consistently to give himself or herself over entirely to seeking the love of Christ in all things, then, according to Macarius, that person is receiving the baptism in the Holy Spirit of Jesus Christ. The sign of the true progress in the baptism of the Spirit is the continued desire to surrender to the Spirit’s gifts, especially faith, hope, and love.”
Fletcher also believed that it was found in contemporary Anglican homilies, such as Heyleyn's sermons.
Fletcher particularly believed that Wesley’s doctrine of perfection was an evangelical application of the Anglican rite of confirmation. This rite assumed that the Pentecostal bestowal of the Spirit was given to those who were already Christian believers and had been baptized with water.
Fletcher believed the significance of the Methodist revival was that it had made this theme more consistent and had raised the believer’s consciousness of the real possibility of loving God perfectly with one’s heart.
Did John Wesley really allow and affirm that Christian perfection and the baptism with the Spirit were functionally equivalent?
Some recent Wesley scholars (as Randy Maddox) believe that Wesley allowed it but did not affirm it. John Fletcher believed that Wesley did affirm it. Fletcher said: “My friend [Wesley] . . . chiefly rests the doctrine of Christian perfection on being baptized and filled with the Spirit,” noting that “this is Mr. Wesley’s sentiment.”
However, Wesley at first had some reservations about what he thought Fletcher was teaching and which the young Benson had written down in an essay on the baptism with the Spirit in 1770. Benson had sent Wesley this essay when he was the twenty-one year principal at Trevecca College where John Fletcher was president. This was before Fletcher had written his Checks to Antinomianism. After reading this essay, Wesley expressed disagreement with three ideas that he read in this essay. The three ideas that Wesley did not like were (1) what Benson said about "a doctrine of dispensations," (2) "receiving the Spirit," and (3) "the baptism with the Spirit." Benson had apparently given early expression to these ideas which he had heard from Fletcher. When Wesley edited and corrected Fletcher's Checks, he came across these ideas in a more developed form, and he changed his mind about two of them. While Wesley insisted that Fletcher change his views about the meaning of "receiving the Spirit" by allowing that "babes in Christ" have also received the witness of the Spirit, Wesley came to accept Fletcher's idea of the baptism with the Spirit and the doctrine of dispensations, which interpreted the baptism with the Spirit as the highest stage of sanctifying grace. Wesley said no one since the days of the apostles had written with greater clarity on the doctrine of dispensations and holiness. The later sermons of Wesley reflect that he had come to affirm Fletcher's interpretation. Benson essay on "Christian Perfection," which Wesley published (as noted above) in 1781 shows that Wesley now affirmed that full sanctification was through the baptism with the Spirit.
Because Wesley spoke of his intimate friendship with Fletcher and as having "no secrets between us for many years" and because they traveled together on preaching missions for many hundreds of miles, Fletcher's report that Wesley embraced the concept of the baptism with the Holy Spirit as the basis of perfection should be considered reliable.
Surely if Wesley disagreed with Fletcher's interpretation of his own theology, he would have corrected it as he did other matters before he published Fletcher's Checks.
Fletcher said in the Fifth Check he assumed that Wesley agreed with whatever he wrote, noting that Wesley would otherwise have changed the wording of his manuscript or else delete his comments. And Wesley even allowed this comment to stand in the text! To be sure, Wesley's editorial changes, if they were significant, were sent back to Fletcher for his approval. As Melville Horne, Fletcher's successor as the vicar of Madeley, put it, “Mr. Wesley was his confidential Aristarchus. He revised, corrected, approved, printed, and sold, Mr. Fletcher’s works.”
Wesley’s choice of Fletcher as his successor also indicates the high regard he had for Fletcher. He noted that Fletcher’s precise understanding of Methodist theology as explained in his writings and his popularity among the preachers qualified him to be the “sole” leader of Methodism.
On one occasion, Wesley pleaded with Fletcher to travel with him and serve as a joint leader with him. Here is what Wesley said:
“You would do more good and gain more benefit from being among us. Come, then, and if you do not wish to be an equal partner with me, I will be ready to serve under you.”
(Cf. Patrick Streiff, Reluctant Saint? A Theological Biography of Fletcher of Madeley, trans. G. W. S Knowles (Peterborough: Epworth, 2001, p. 133).
This respect for Fletcher was shared widely among the preachers, and it shows why his writings underwent more than 174 reprints in the 19th century and shaped the theology of early Methodism. Wesley’s imprimatur shows that he considered Fletcher to have given a proper interpretation of his own theology.
I have shown in my book that Wesley's later sermons accented a Pentecostal interpretation of Christian perfection and that Wesley himself preached on this theme. Would it not be remarkably strange if Wesley's closest preachers preached on the baptism with the Spirit as functionally equal to Christian perfection, and yet Wesley disagreed with this? To be sure, Wesley only rarely used the actual phrase, "baptism with the Spirit," in his published writings, but he defined perfection as possible because of Pentecost. However, he used "filled with the Spirit" on many occasions in his published writings for Christian perfection.
When Wesley went to Herrnhut in 1738 to learn from the German Pietists, Christian David was of particular help to him. Wesley heard this lay preacher describe the state of those who are ‘weak in faith’, who are justified, but have not yet a new, clean heart; who have received forgiveness through the blood of Christ, but have not received the indwelling of the Holy Ghost.”
This distinction between justifying faith and a subsequent receiving of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is a common distinction in the pietist movement. To be sure, this distinction did not mean that the Spirit was absent in the life of a believer previously, but it did mean that a special reception and greater measure of the Spirit was to be expected for the purpose of full sanctifying grace.
This distinction can be seen in the writings of Gerhard Tersteegen (1697-1769). Wesley translated some of the hymns of this pietist, which are still sung today. In his sermon, “The Out-pouring of the Holy Ghost,” Tersteegen said: “Now, if we are not thus sanctified by His Holy Spirit, renewed into His most sacred image, and made partakers of His divine nature; if we have not celebrated the Pentecost of the New Testament in spirit and in truth, how shall we be able to stand before Him?”
Tersteegen further writes: “The vital need for all is the baptism with the Spirit and the heavenly unction to the conversion and renewal into the image of God which entirely depends upon it.” He notes that Pentecost marked the day when the law of God was written on the hearts so we could “love Him with all our hearts, with all our souls, and with all our strength (Deut. 10:12).” He believes that many have not “attained to fullness and perfection” because they only go “half-way.” What does it mean to receive the “Holy Pentecostal Spirit”? It means “humility.” It means “the Spirit . . . enkindles in our hearts the love of God and of Jesus Christ.” It means “He fills it entirely, so that the world finds no more room or place in it because this Guest makes Himself sole Lord and Master of it.” Tersteegen uses these phrases interchangeably--“the indwelling of the Spirit,” “the abiding indwelling” of the Spirit, being “filled with the Spirit,” “receiving the Holy Spirit, and “baptism with the Spirit.”
Another term often used interchangeably with Christian perfection is “birth of the Spirit.” Wesley at times equated Christian perfection with being “fully born of the Spirit,” distinguishing it from being “partially born again.” Fletcher wrote an essay on this subject, distinguishing birth of water (justifying faith) from birth of the Spirit (full sanctifying grace). Wesley’s and Fletcher’s descendents equated being “born again” with justifying faith without paying closer attention to Wesley’s use of this term. This confusion is reflected in Dr. Reasoner’s critique.
Interested readers will find these kinds of important issues clarified in my book.
Of particular interest may be the last chapter of the book, which shows the baptism liturgy has been recently revised in mainline denominations to include both the gestures of water and the laying on of hands (the bestowal of the Pentecostal Spirit).
This corresponds with Fletcher’s belief that the Christian life depends upon both justifying faith (symbolized in water baptism) and in the special reception of the fullness of the Spirit given on the day of Pentecost (symbolized in the primitive church through the laying on of hands). Fletcher believed the special thing about Methodism was its emphasis upon the personal appropriation of Easter in justifying faith (forgiveness of sins) and of Pentecost in full sanctifying grace.
This brings me to a final comment. The link between the baptism with the Spirit and the ability to love God with all one’s heart, mind, and soul is not an innovation first created by Fletcher. It has been a main part of the history of theology since the early Greek Fathers. In the light of the new baptismal liturgy with its twofold emphasis upon Easter and Pentecost, Fletcher’s relevance becomes all the more important. Wesley's view of confirmation was at best ambiguous, although Wesley said he promoted it with “scrupulous exactness” as a loyal priest of the Church of England. Why he deleted it from the Sunday Service is a mystery. Some of Wesley's closest associates, including Adam Clarke and Mary Bosanquet, affirmed its importance as a rite of the Church. Fletcher argued strongly for the liturgy of water baptism and confirmation as the basis for the Christian life. Methodists would in particular benefit from Fletcher's defense of the rite of confirmation.
Please feel free to contact me at the following address: Asbury Theological Seminary, Wilmore, KY 40390.
This page was last updated on: June 15 2010 08:04:17
