Wesley and Child Theology

My friend Peter Benzie has just put his MTh thesis online.  From the abstract,

Through considering the writings of John Wesley, as well as the work of other scholars, this thesis finds that children were evident in his theology. Wesley is shown to have undertaken something akin to child theology when he, for instance, allowed his theology to be informed and changed by the many instances of childhood faith he witnessed. He is shown to be a man who treasured children as a gift from God, who, he believed entrusts parents and teachers with the responsibility of educating them so that they can live lives of true holiness, that is, loving God and their neighbour.

Check it out and share it round with anyone you think might be interested.

Olsen on the "Two Evangelicalisms"

Wow, Roger Olsen is really saying what he thinks, he is even arguing an amicable split would be better than trying to continue together under the same label. I'm particularly interested that he traces this division to Whitefield and Wesley,

This is a reason why I increasingly view evangelicalism as two movements rather than one. We are like ships passing in the night even though we both call ourselves evangelicals and stand in that movement’s historical trajectory. Wesley and Whitefield have been pitted against each other. Indeed. Thank God they could both serve as catalysts for the Great Awakening, but their profoundly different views of God largely kept them apart. Wesley’s hermeneutic was captivated by God’s love revealed above all else in Jesus Christ. Whitefield’s hermeneutic was captivated by God’s glory revealed above all else in God’s sovereign election of individuals to heaven or hell.

Is this descrition valid, or does it obscure more through over simplification?  It strikes me as making sense, but then my knowledge of Whitfeld is limited and of Wesley only slightly less so.   Is this just another example of using complex historical situations as blunt instruments to pigeon hole opponents? But, interestingly, I think the target of Olsen's critique would probably be quite happy with his typology.

What do you think?