From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Christianity / Arminianism / Methodism (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Arminianism (marked as Top-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Methodism work group (marked as Top-importance).
WikiProject Religion (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Unreferenced Sections[edit]

I notice that two "Unreferenced Section" tags have been there for over a year. The facts presented in these paragraphs are adequately covered by the works mentioned in the reference section. Do we need to cite a particular page of a particular book to verify facts that are reported in so many works and are generally accepted as being mainstream history? Dbfirs 21:21, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

It would be better by far to give real citations for these sections. That would be the ideal. On the other hand, the user who added the tags has fewer than 100 contribs, and made no effort whatsoever to explain why any of the info in the sections might be wrong. I think it would be perfectly fine to remove the tags. But again, that doesn't mean we shouldn't reference the sections. carl bunderson (talk) (contributions) 19:48, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
I went ahead and removed the tags. carl bunderson (talk) (contributions) 04:03, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Primitive Methodism[edit]

The American section mentions William Hammet's American Primitive Methodists who evidently pre-date the British Primitive Methodist Church (which joined with Wesleyans etc to form the British Methodist Church in 1932). Are the original American Primitive Methodists still in existence, or is there an offshoot of the British Primitive Methodist Church still functioning in the USA (as implied in the paragraph on British Methodism)? Do current American Primitive Methodists trace their origins to William Hammet, or to Lorenzo Dow, William Clowes and Hugh Bourne? Dbfirs 18:12, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Improvements to the article[edit]

I would like to go over some ideas for improvement. Here are some:

1) The lead

The current lead doesn't really give a good overview of Methodism. It seems to focus most attention on history, particularly early history with John Wesley.

2) History

The sections "Wesleyan Revival" and "Missions to America" should be subsections under a single "History" heading. This history section would need to be expanded such as adding sections on further development of Methodism in and outside of Britain and USA. The spread of Methodism to other countries should be told. Also recent history of Methodism should be addressed to.

3) Methodism in the United States

Perhaps this should be its on article with a summary remaining as a section here?

What does anyone else think? I'm not familiar enough with Methodism to materially contribute to the article, but I'm willing to help organize and copy edit. Ltwin (talk) 23:35, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree with your points on the lead section. It doesn't really serve to explain what methodism is adequately. Perhaps should start with a couple of lines of what it is, and how it is different from other religions/forms of christianity. (talk) 16:53, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

I agree we could say more, but Methodism is diverse and differs little (on average) from other branches of Christianity. Perhaps we could mention the emphasis on Arminianism as opposed to the Anglican emphasis on Calvinism, but this is described later in the article. The phrase "a movement of Christianity" sums up what Methodism is, and if we start describing how one branch of Methodism differs from other denominations, then we are not representing the whole diversity of the movement. Dbfirs 20:09, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
(later) I see that Thomas Paine has changed "a movement of Christianity" to "a Christian denomination", and I don't really disagree except that perhaps we should say "a group of denominations", and to point out that this definition excludes the original meaning of the word as a movement within the Anglican denomination. I'm not sure to what extent the episcopal Methodism of America can be regarded as the same denomination as the non-episcopal British Methodism, but I suppose a broad brush could paint them together. What does anyone else think? Dbfirs 22:00, 4 August 2010 (UTC) (talk) 01:18, 3 May 2011 (UTC)The article mentions Salvation Army as being started by the Methodist. It was actually Edgar Helms who was Methodist who started Goodwill Industries, now know as Goodwill Industries International. See for more information.

Thanks for the link. I hadn't heard of Goodwill Industries. Do they operate only in North America? Dbfirs 07:53, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Yes Goodwill Industries operates in North America but also is expanding to international location. The website should have more information. I worked at Goodwill Industries International a while ago, the company was reaching out to Italy and Asia. Sorry I don't know the details more than that, wasn't my area. Edgar Helms created Goodwill Industries and was a Methodist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:20, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Denomination vs. Movement[edit]

Methodism is not a denomination. A denomination is an "identifiable religious body under a common name, structure, and doctrine" according to the Wikipedia article on denominations. The [[United Methodist Church", "Free Methodist Church, and "African Methodist Episcopal Church" are all denominations that follow Methodist doctrine. A movement is a group of denominations that hold similar beliefs and may come from the same source. For example, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod are denominations. Both are part of Lutheranism, a movement within Christianity that can trace its origins back to the 1517 Protestant Reformation led by Martin Luther. KitHutch (talk) 21:27, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I agree that "movement" is the better term. I'm pleased to see that it has been changed back. Dbfirs 18:41, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Greek Orthodox NOT Armenian[edit]

The Church is Greek Orthodox in outlook, not "Armenian." Since the Creeds of Ancient Armenia were developed in the context of the Greek Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantium). Also, why is there no mention of the following in this article?

"We believe it would not be right for us to administer either Baptism or the Lord's Supper unless we had a commission so to do from those Bishops whom we apprehend to be in a succession from the Apostles."[63] – Rev. John Wesley, A.D. 1745

In 1763, Greek Orthodox bishop Erasmus of Arcadia, who was visiting London at the time,[64] consecrated Rev. John Wesley a bishop,[65][66] and ordained several Methodist lay preachers as priests, including John Jones.[67][68] In light of Wesley's episcopal consecration, the Methodist Church can lay a claim on apostolic succession, as understood in the traditional sense.[69] Since the Rev. John Wesley ordained and sent forth every Methodist preacher in his day, who preached and baptized and ordained, and since every Methodist preacher who has ever been ordained as a Methodist was ordained in this direct "succession" from Wesley, then the Methodist Church teaches that it has all the direct merits coming from apostolic succession.[70] --Nikoz78 (talk) 16:53, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Methodism is neither Armenian nor Greek Orthodox in outlook. The article links to "Arminian" which is a theological position (believing that anyone is free to accept God's salvation, as opposed to a Calvinist position that restricts salvation to "the elect"), not a link to any other church. Dbfirs 18:35, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

I understand that, my apologies for not making myself clear. The concept of Free Will is Greek Orthodox in origin ("Byzantine"), not Armenian. See: Greek Orthodox Church, specifically...

"Historically, the term Greek Orthodox has also been used to describe all Eastern Orthodox Churches, since "Greek" in "Greek Orthodox" can refer to the Greek heritage of the Byzantine Empire.[20][21][22] During eight centuries of Christian history most major intellectual, cultural, and social developments in the Christian church took place within the Empire or in the sphere of its influence,[23][24][25] thus most parts of the liturgy, traditions, and practices of the church of Constantinople were adopted by all, and still provide the basic patterns of contemporary Orthodoxy.[26][27][28] However, the appellation "Greek" was abandoned by Slavic and other national orthodox churches in connection with their peoples' national awakenings, from as early as the 10th century A.D.[29][30][31][32][33]" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikoz78 (talkcontribs) 15:24, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I think the concept of "Free Will" pre-dates Christianity, and even Judaism. I was interested in your link between Methodism and the Orthodox Church, and in your history of Eastern Orthodoxy, and your cite from Apostolic succession. I think this is probably more important to the American Methodist Church, since there are no Methodist bishops in the UK. Dbfirs 15:58, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Oldest Church[edit]

The German Wikipedia [here: and here:] provides the information, that the oldest church (worldwide!) used by Methodists is the Aegidienkirche in Erfurt (Thuringia, Germany). If that's true, it sure is a fact worth mentioning! (talk) 09:36, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

I very much doubt whether this information can be verified in any meaningful way (in fact I'm sure that someone somewhere will be able to prove the statement to be false), so I would oppose adding it to our article. Dbfirs 15:58, 2 May 2011 (UTC)


"The original Methodist body led by Wesley was known as the Wesleyan Methodist Church." How can this be reconciled with the statement that the Methodists remained within the Churchof England until after John Wesley's death? --rossb (talk) 07:45, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

The whole paragraph was slightly confused. I've made a couple of alterations, but it could probably benefit from further improvement. Dbfirs 18:59, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism in History Section - Philippines[edit]

I am deeply concerned about the vandalism that is recently attacking this article. I see how some unregistered user tried to delete a history of a new group in the Philippines and if not continued to mutilate information. There must be a move to protect this and the Wikipedia as a whole. Christian Eilers (talk) 23:16, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

There is rather too much detail of the controversy (for a general article on Methodism). Perhaps a reference would help. I'd recommend shortening the paragraph. Dbfirs 12:41, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Largest mainline Christian denomination in South Africa[edit]

The article states "The Methodist Church of Southern Africa is the largest mainline Christian denomination in South Africa". The numbers I have seen refute this. Is there evidence for this claim? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:31, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

It looks cited to me. carl bunderson (talk) (contributions) 18:59, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

File:FrancisAsbury.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:FrancisAsbury.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests March 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:FrancisAsbury.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:34, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Why this article deserves praise[edit]

This article deserves praise for mentioning George Whitfield, as well as the Wesley brothers, as been important in the foundation of Methodism. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 21:19, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Integration of the Central Jurisdiction[edit]

Someone who is familiar with the details should write a paragraph on the racial integration of the United Methodist Church in the Southern United States. All of the Conferences in the UMC are geographical, and do not overlap. The exception was during the days of racial segregation, when there was a Central Jurisdiction over much of the Southeastern US that was a segregated African-American jurisdiction. It overlapped many all-white conferences in the South, in which the churches, by custom and state law, did not allow blacks to attend. Although the national UMC did not condone racial segregation, it did not enforce integration in the white southern conferences. After segregation in public accommodations was outlawed by the federal Civil Rights Act in the 1960s, it became an embarrassment for there to be separate black and white conferences over the same geographic areas in the South. I don't know the details, but after a protracted struggle the black Central Jurisdiction was somehow merged with the white conferences in its geographic area. There were white ministers who lost their churches because of support for civil rights and integration, and there were white churches that left the UMC and joined the Southern Methodists. Someone who knows more details should tell that story. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ddoggett002 (talkcontribs) 04:47, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

How about mentioning that in the article on the United Methodist Church since it's part of the history of that denomination and it's really part of the history of other Methodist denominations. KitHutch (talk) 11:21, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Yes, it belongs in the article on the United Methodist Church, not here, because it is not part of Methodist history elsewhere in the world. Dbfirs 20:25, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

The other Methodists[edit]

The Methodic school of ancient medicine (Methodics, Methodists, or Methodici, Greek: Μεθοδικοί) took an approach to medicine so similar to modern Methodists' approach to theology that I propose including it in See also. --Pawyilee (talk) 15:37, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

let's not do that, it's a coincidence of translation from the Greek. The Methodic school of medicine emphasized the treatment of diseases rather than the history of the individual patient, while the Methodists in religion focused entirely on the individual rather than on generic "sin". Rjensen (talk) 18:58, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Constant addition of linkfarm[edit]

The article is not the Yellow Pages for every church website for each country in the world. Hazhk has added a link that goes to a website that serves this purpose. --NeilN talk to me 05:36, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes, Hazhk's one summary link was useful. I've restored it after deletion (again) by Dbfirs 11:12, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
The IP user is being constantly disruptive. He's reinstating mistakes - World Methodist Council, not 'Methodist World Council - and unhelpfully changing links. I'm not going to revert for the nth time because frankly I can't be bothered. If there's some way of warning the user their behaviour is unacceptable, since they've not responded to any talk page messages, then somebody please be my guest. -- Hazhk Talk to me 11:43, 27 June 2013 (UTC)


The IP user has vandalism this article heavily. I suggest temporarily banning s/he or protecting this page. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 21:46, 27 November 2014 (UTC)