Today I started the reading for my independent study in the history of American Methodism. I am beginning with Frederick A. Norwood’s The Story of American Methodism: A History of the United Methodists and Their Relations
At the end of the Introduction Norwood tells of a document he wrote in 1966 that was put in a time capsule in Baltimore that was to be opened in 2066. Here is his hope for Methodism in 2066:
This is our hope for you, Methodist brethren of 2066: That our common heritage in Wesley may, as he himself always recommended, be placed in ‘catholic spirit,’ at the service of all Christians. If the Methodist Church in a hundred years matures into union with a larger ecumenical family, we rejoice in this fulfillment of our heritage. In this way the Wesleyan spirit shall enliven the whole.
I am certainly not against ecumenism or working towards greater unity within the Body of Christ. But this does seem to be a different focus than the stated goal of early Methodism to “reform the nation, particularly the church, and to spread scriptural holiness.” It would be great if our efforts to spread scriptural holiness were to lead to greater unity in the church. But, I would rather Methodists in 2066 be more effective at spreading scriptural holiness than they were in 1966 – or are now – than simply becoming a part of a super-mainline denomination that is primarily united by a willingness to spread nominal Christianity, rather than holiness.
Nathan Hatch and John Wigger, eds.
Richey, Rowe, and Schmidt, eds.
Russell E. Richey
John H. Wigger
Lester Ruth
Lester Ruth
Dee E. Andrews
David Hempton
Richey, Rowe, and Schmidt
There were 44 hits to the video when I discovered it and posted it on the Methodist blogosphere. At the end of the first week there were 619 views. This means that the momentum slowed down significantly after the first week as there were 140 views in the second week. (On the other hand, that is still more than three times as many views as the video had in its first six months of existence.)
by Darius L. Salter. So, I did something completely out of character, I made an impulse purchase and bought the book.
Among Wesley scholars this is the book that is usually cited related to the history of the early Methodist class meeting. Watson discusses, as the subtitle indicates, the origins and significance of the class meeting. The primary value of this book, in my view, is that it was the first in depth academic exploration of a piece of the Methodist organizational structure. It helped moved scholarship beyond passing references to the importance of the class meeting and began to actually look at it in its own right.
As I remember it when I read this book a few years ago, this is an easier read than Watson’s book. It also seems that it is currently being read by a wider audience (especially if the current amazon ranks of each book are any indication… though these can fluctuate quite a bit). To be fair, Watson’s Early Methodist Class Meeting is not necessarily intended to appeal to a lay audience.
Manskar takes a bit broader approach, focusing on the importance of accountable discipleship more generally, with roughly one third of the book focusing specifically on the distinctly Methodist approach to discipleship. In part, Accountable Discipleship also seeks to flesh out the rationale for Covenant Discipleship Groups, more on that below. (Manskar is also the director of Accountable Discipleship at the 
was.) The books in the trilogy are 
; 
; and 
.
(which is, incidentally, an excellent survey of American Religious History):
Kevin M. Watson 