Contents

Introduction 4
Reflections on Methodism Post-Wesley 7
Brian E. Beck
Unmasking Primitive Methodism 18
Susan Howdle
Lay Leadership – the legacy of Primitive Methodism 38
David Clark
The Future of Evangelism: A Personal Perspective 49
Rob Frost
Fundamental Fallacies 58
Warren R. Bardsley
Book Section
Review Article: On Gnostics and their Gospels 70
Andrew Gregory
Reviews 73
Books Received 89
Poem – Backwards to the Future 92
Alan Horner


Introduction
This edition of Epworth Review manages to touch on four of the five major British Methodist anniversaries occurring this year; 200 years of Primitive Methodism; 150 years since the first Assembly of the United Free Methodist Church; 100 years since the United Methodist Church was formed; 75 years since the three main branches of British Methodism (Wesleyan, Primitive and United) joined to form The Methodist Church of Great Britain. The primary focus, however, is on the particular contribution that Primitive Methodism has made to the British Methodist Church and what it still offers to the ongoing work of restructuring and equipping the Church to face the future.

The word ‘primitive’ has different connotations for different people. In these days of ‘New’ Labour and youth culture, fresh expressions and emergent Church, the desire to seek a way ahead for the future by understanding and even perhaps emulating the practices of the past must seem peculiarly ‘primitive’ to some. Nonetheless, the Church, not just the Methodist Church, has always had what might be termed a ‘primitive’ streak, which can be both positive and negative. History teaches that there is undoubtedly a right way and a wrong way to engage with the past for the sake of the future – especially where the life of the Church and the gospel are concerned.

Simply remembering and celebrating who we think we were, what we thought we were doing and why we believed as we did will do little to help us to hold on to and grow from our past. For that to happen, the past and the future need to be engaged in a critical dialogue, in an appropriate context, and for a specific reason. Brian Beck sets the context for this particular dialogue in his paper on Methodism after Wesley. The fracturing of Methodism and its subsequent (incomplete) healing are offered as a set of questions rather than answers to some of the key issues confronting the wider Church today with regard to the possibilities of doctrinal and structural unity. His paper provides the essential background for Susan Howdle’s ‘Unmasking’ of Primitive Methodism.

The romanticism of Primitive Methodism’s lay, evangelical and working-class history is acknowledged by Howdle as she explores the tradition from a personal as well as theological perspective. Her evaluation of what really mattered at local level is set skilfully alongside the wider aims and aspirations of the Primitive Connexion to provide a further set of questions for the current connexional conversations about structures, bishops and what it means to be church. These questions are developed further by David Clark, who explores the legacy of lay leadership from Primitive Methodism.

Clark’s paper identifies the need for a greater emphasis on the Christian education of the laity if the Church is to learn from, and build upon, its inheritance. It makes the point that ‘the ordained leadership of Methodism is now focused largely on the conduct of worship and the pastoral office’ – and it is evangelism that suffers as a result. But the Church cannot look backwards evangelistically, any more than it can structurally. Rob Frost’s personal perspective on evangelism today suggests that one of the key things that we can learn from the tradition’s historical emphasis on revival and evangelism is to be open to the opportunities that God provides.

Frost’s paper also hints at the negative implications of the Church being counter-cultural. He writes passionately about the challenges which face the Church’s evangelistic enterprise when mission and evangelism are increasingly seen as ‘inappropriate’ in Britain’s multicultural context. Our collective response to this dilemma will undoubtedly influence the future shape of the Methodist Church. Warren Bardsley’s paper therefore provides a timely reminder of the dangers inherent in adopting an unqualified ‘fundamentalist’ approach to the missiological and ecclesial challenges confronting us.
We also republish in this edition, as a tribute to him, a poem by Alan Horner who died last September. Alan was a regular contributor to the Epworth Review and had recently published a selection of over 150 of his poems under the title ‘A Picture With The Paint Still Wet’. His poetry provides an extra lens through which to view our celebration of history’s gift to the future.

The questions that are prompted by this investigation of our past can be heard as invitations to be open to the risky business of moving into God’s future. They are a reminder that the real ‘primitive’ root of our faith is not a set of buildings, or structures, not a set of doctrines or even ‘ministerial’ practices, but a relationship with Christ who was before all things began, and will be when all things end.
And finally, an apology for the apparent mix-up of the Wesley brothers in the January editorial. Charles Wesley was of course the younger brother whose words, and life, and deeds, did indeed shape the story of Methodism as our contributors so ably demonstrated.