What's the primary argument of your book?
My book examines the early Methodist predestinarian controversy in the mid-eighteenth century. Essentially, I argue that because of the sociological function of theological doctrine, the first predestinarian controversy should be understood as concluding in 1749 (not earlier, say 1741-2, as many scholars suggest).
What led you to study this subject?
I was assisted by my doctoral supervisor in determining this broad area; I am grateful to Dr. David Rainey for suggesting this! Additionally, I have always retained an interest in a good theological row, so examining the conditions under which resolution might be achieved intrigued me.
How does your book contribute to the field?
My research attempts to get beyond a simplistic understanding of how the predestinarian controversy was settled. There is much literature on the predestinarian controversy, but not a great deal that looks at the sociological function of doctrine in this case (there are notable exceptions, however, Leif Dixon among them).
What does it mean to you to be a scholar in the Wesleyan tradition?
For me, there are two unique dimensions to this: first, it means exploring and understanding my own roots as a follower of Christ; an experience that has been formed in large measure by Wesleyan institutions and spirituality. Second, it is about contributing to that ongoing understanding in a wider community. Hopefully saying something of value to the Wesleyan tradition and the Church, but more importantly, listening and learning from others engaged in that same effort.
How do you see your scholarly work as part of your ministry?
I am a professor at a small liberal-arts college and Seminary in Saskatchewan, Canada. The scholarly project is my “stock and trade” as it were! More essentially, however, I see modeling a life of studying and reflection as an important aspect of my work of making disciples here at the college and in my community.
What are some of the differences between writing a doctoral thesis and writing a scholarly monograph?
Some folks speak about writing a dissertation as though you are writing for an audience of two (an external and internal supervisor). While obviously reductive, there is an aspect of the truth there. In a scholarly monograph, I think one must consider a much wider audience—how will you speak to non-specialists? Your work may still be of a very refined caliber to be sure, but what of scholars who are outside your discipline? And maybe more relevant to those in a Christian tradition: how will your monograph serve Christ and his Church?
A last comment would be concerning one’s editor. I found incredible assistance and wisdom from my editor at Routledge, Dr. William Gibson. There is less of a supervisor/student relationship in the monograph process, but no less an experience of learning as a result.
Did you find new evidence or learn new information while rewriting?
Yes! This was one of the most exciting aspects of primary-source research. I discovered some particularly valuable source material that Whitefield made use of in his sermons that greatly expanded my understanding of how he inherited and augmented Reformed theology. In addition to this, simply reading the letters, essays and sermons of both Wesley and Whitefield added more to my understanding of them than simple bare cogitation—a picture emerged of them in a much more fully-orbed manner.
What made NTC and Manchester ideal places to undertake your doctoral studies?
It’s not an exaggeration to say that NTC holds a very dear place in my heart indeed. The community is warm, welcoming, and knowable. This was a vital aspect for me, especially because postgraduate research can be a very challenging, and at times lonely, undertaking. Mid-morning coffee break was almost a foretaste of the Kingdom as far as I’m concerned. Second to this is the resources: the MWRC is an outstanding institution in Methodist research and the John Rylands Library likewise. A veritable gold-mine of knowledgeable people and essential documents.
What are some other projects in progress or ones you're looking forward to post-publication?
At present I am in the preliminary research for my second monograph, a book that continues further down the path of early Methodist theological sources. In many ways, the research I undertook in Manchester has furnished me with a number of fruitful avenues of inquiry. As we used to say, whatever gets cut from the thesis often becomes material that can be worked into an article, or possibly another book entirely!
What advice do you have for recent doctoral graduates who want to publish their theses?
My advice would be: you can do it! I know that might sound a bit over-enthusiastic, but when I began my research, I thought that no one would care enough to read about it, and maybe more personally, that I wasn’t “up to snuff” to publish my work. My point is, academic-types can often suffer from being their own worst critic. I was astonished, and humbled, when people I researched with, looked up to, and respected, encouraged me to submit my work for publication and appreciated what I had to say. Listen to those you work with—both the critiques and the endorsements—again, you can do it!