Executive Summary:
In chapter 1 Tolar-Burton introduces John Wesley, outlines her argument and defines key terms.
Wesley is situated as a man who clearly understood the power of language and therefore encouraged "ordinary Methodist men and women" to become "readers, writers, and public speakers" (1). Tolar-Burton is primarily interested in the role of Methodist women primarily because their work has gone largely unstudied regardless of their importance to the development of Methodism. Although the introduction provides an overview for subsequent chapters, the majority of the chapter provides contextual information and analysis surrounding the early development of Methodism. In total Tolar-Burton uses eight sections to separate and identify relevant traditions of the time which informed, supported and complicated Wesley’s approach to religious practices.
Questions/Challenges:
Maybe it’s just me and my very “unreligious” background but I found myself enjoying Tolar-Burton’s prose and condemning the content. I very clearly appreciate the inclusion of “ordinary” people as promoted by Wesley and am thankful for literacy artifacts that were created by followers. However, in describing the typical rhetorical elements of the Church before Wesley Tolar-Burton states, “The printed sermons of famous preachers were used liberally by the lazier or less gifted Anglican clergy as a way to avoid the burden of having to write their own sermons week after week, year after year” (15). I’m struck by the description of Church clergy as being “lazy” or “less gifted” if they utilized sermons from “famous preachers.” Perhaps it’s my new found interest in “authorship” but I wonder if drawing from and delivering “famous” sermons would be nothing more than a literacy practice or a method for keeping consistency in the doctrine?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I'd like to hear more about why you "condemned the content" in Burton and what you mean by that and in what areas. I do see your questioning of the sentence about the lazy or less gifted clergy--it hit me, too, but I"m not sure if it hit me the same way it hit you.I think Burton is trying to indicate there are multiple factors at work here--the lower literacy rates of some clergy, the use of published sermons to bolster their authority (not unlike Cliff notes), and the lack of inspiration clergy might have. But I'm not sure, though, what you saw here that you condemned or took issue with? Was it the idea that the clergy were just appropriating doctrine or???
ReplyDelete