Wisdom for Wesleyans (from the Oxford Institute – those unable to attend in person)

Posted by

>It only comes around once every five years, so if you enjoy Wesleyan studies, reflection, and conferencing, I recommend that you browse through this year’s group papers. Here you will find some great reflections from veteran Wesley scholars, Phd. students in Wesleyan studies, and up and coming Wesleyan theologians.

  • For the uninitiated, there were 10 working groups that included
    1. Biblical Studies
    2. Wesley Studies and Early Methodism
    3. History and Development of Methodism (post Wesley)
    4. Systematic Theology
    5. Mission and Evangelism
    6. Ethics, Economics, and Globalization
    7. Christian Formation
    8. Science, Technology, and Public Policy
    9. Worship and Spirituality
    10. Ecumenism and other Faiths

There were a lot of Durhamites present, including several RUMC representatives (Ed Phillips and Edgardo Colon-Emeric). I, for one, plan to do a more thorough scan of the papers this fall, but already have a few reading recommendations for Christian Conversation readers:


(Please note this intellectual property agreement before clicking links to actual papers):

  • I may be a little biased, but I found Edgardo’s paper “A Church without Saints forgets how to Serve” to be excellent. The close examination of Gregory Lopez’s life and the Thomistic distinction between the first and second perfection were especially illuminating.
  • Also worthy of note (scanned over, but not yet read in detail):

2 comments

  1. >This stuff is great. Thanks for putting it up, as I had no idea so much of it was available online. After you posted though, it looks like they did some rearranging, so the links have changed. The Ed Phillips one doesn’t even appear to be available, and that one sounded interesting. You didn’t happen to save it by chance?

  2. >Gary,Thanks for the heads up. I have tried to update all the links. As for Ed’s, I may have put that up prematurely (he had an additional disclaimer at the top of the paper that indicated it was for the Institute only and a work in progress). My assumption that if it was posted on the internet it was at last available to the reading public may have been erroneous. My apologies to Ed (but I will look forward to the published version)K

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s