2 responses

  1. my better half is a Wesley scholar and he was an interesting fellow, not unlike a more priggish William James in that he searched out many accounts/methods of mysticism, was focused on experiential-knowing, and made his own hybrid theology out of various sources including natural philosophers, too bad his followers generally haven’t followed suit reducing this rich approach to their ridiculous “quadrilateral.”

    • What’s ridiculous about it?

      [1] Scripture: we find that we live in a story. We act the portion of the play in which heaven and earth are brought together, where Christ’s love is made manifest over and over. That’s a fairly mystical framework.

      [2] Tradition: he wasn’t just talking about Church tradition. He meant anything in the world that contributes to one’s understanding of God. The natural philosophers can do that.

      [3] Experience: we see what needs repair. We actively make two worlds one.

      [4] Reason: we learn and think about how best to do that.

      What am I missing?

%d bloggers like this: