Chapter XXVI: Part II (11)

It was decided, that they should preach most, where those of them who were clergymen could preach in a church; where they could get the greatest number of quiet and willing hearers; and where they had most success. It was agreed, that field preaching had been used too sparingly; that every alternate meeting of the society, in every place, should be strictly private; and that at the other meeting strangers might be admitted with caution, but not the same person above twice or thrice. To improve the usefulness of classleaders, it was resolved that each leader should be diligently examined, concerning his method of meeting a class; that all of them should converse with the preachers, as frequently and as freely as possible; that they should attend the leaders’ meeting every week, bringing notes of all sick persons in their classes; and that none should speak in the leaders’ meeting but the preacher or the steward, unless in answer to a question. The members were to be more closely examined, at the general visitation of the classes; the married men and married women, and the single men and single women were to be met apart once a quarter; and all the members were to be visited at their own houses, at times fixed for such a purpose. Tickets were to be given to none, till they were recommended by a leader with whom they had met three months on trial; and new members were to be admitted into the society only on the Sunday following the quarterly visitation, their names being read on the Sunday night previous. It was agreed, also that it was lawful for Methodists to bear arms; and that they might use the law as defendants, and perhaps in some cases as plaintiffs.[533]

Other regulations were adopted, either at this or ensuing conferences, as follows: preachers were to meet the children in every place, and give them suitable exhortations; they were to preach expressly and strongly against sabbath breaking, dram drinking, evil speaking, unprofitable conversation, lightness, gaiety, or expensiveness of apparel, and contracting debts without sufficient care to discharge them; they were to recommend to every society, frequently and earnestly, the books that Wesley published, as preferable to any other; they were to use their best endeavours to extirpate smuggling, and also bribery at elections; they were to speak to any that desired it, every day after the morning and evening preaching. As often as possible, they were to rise at four o’clock; to spend two or three minutes every hour in earnest prayer; to observe strictly the morning and evening hour of retirement; to rarely employ above an hour at a time in conversation; to use all the means of grace; to keep watchnights once a month; to take a regular catalogue of the societies once a year; to speak freely to each other, and never to part without prayer. They were never to preach more than twice a day, unless on Sundays or extraordinary occasions; to begin and end the service precisely at the time appointed; to always suit their subject to their congregations; to choose the plainest texts possible, and to beware of allegorizing and rambling from their texts. They were to avoid everything awkward or affected, either in phrase, gesture, or pronunciation; to sing no hymns of their own composing; to choose hymns proper for the congregation; not to sing more than five or six verses at a time, and to suit the tune to the nature of the hymns. After preaching, they were recommended to take lemonade, candied orange peel, or a little soft, warm ale; and to avoid late suppers, and egg and wine, as downright poison.[534]

Here we find six clergymen and four lay preachers, not elaborating an ecclesiastical structure, but carefully considering the greatest truths of the Christian religion, and investigating the duties of its preachers. Six days were spent in this important work. They desired nothing, said Wesley, but to save their own souls and those that heard them. Their doctrines, so simple and encouraging, were not the popular theology of the age; but they were in the Scriptures, and what every sinner needed. They little thought, that they were constructing a platform which would survive their times, and originating a long series of annual conferences which would become one of the most important institutions in the world; a central power, conveying religious benefits to every quarter of the globe, and serving as a model for framing other similar institutions both at home and abroad. The doctrines agreed upon are still the staple doctrines of the Methodist communities, and the elements of Methodist discipline may be found in the minutes of this the first Methodist conference.

Leaving Wesley’s first conference, we pass to his last sermon before the university of Oxford.

The day appointed for the sermon was Friday, August 24, the anniversary of St. Bartholomew, and occurred in Oxford race week. The duty came to Wesley by rotation; and had he declined it, he must have paid three guineas for a substitute. We have three accounts of this celebrated sermon. From Charles Wesley we learn, that he and Mr. Piers and Mr. Meriton were present at its delivery; that the audience was a large one, and much increased by the racers; that the congregation gave the utmost attention; that some of the heads of colleges stood during the whole service, and fixed their eyes upon the preacher; and that, after the sermon, the little band of four Methodist clergymen walked away in form, none daring to join them.[535]

Wesley’s own account is as follows:—

“I preached, I suppose the last time, at St. Mary’s. Be it
so. I am now clear of the blood of these men. I have fully
delivered my own soul. The beadle came to me afterwards, and
told me the vice-chancellor had sent him for my notes. I sent
them without delay, not without admiring the wise providence of
God. Perhaps few men of note would have given a sermon of mine
the reading, if I had put it into their hands; but, by this
means, it came to be read, probably more than once, by every
man of eminence in the university.”[536]

“I am well pleased that the sermon was preached on the very
day on which, in the last century, near two thousand burning
and shining lights were put out at one stroke. Yet what a wide
difference is there between their case and mine! They were
turned out of house and home, and all that they had; whereas I
am only hindered from preaching, without any other loss; and
that in a kind of honourable manner; it being determined that,
when my next turn to preach came, they would pay another person
to preach for me; and so they did, twice or thrice, even to the
time that I resigned my fellowship.”[537]

The third account is by the celebrated Dr. Kennicott, who was, at this period, in the twenty-fifth year of his age, and an undergraduate of Wadham College. He had no sympathy with the Methodists, and yet he appears to have been deeply impressed with Wesley’s sermon. He writes:—

“All that are masters of arts, and on the foundation of any
college, are set down in a roll, as they take their degree;
and, in that order, preach before the university, or pay three
guineas for a preacher in their stead; and as no clergyman can
avoid his turn, so the university can refuse none; otherwise
Mr. Wesley would not have preached. He came to Oxford some
time before, and preached frequently every day in courts,
public houses, and elsewhere. On Friday morning, having held
forth twice in private, at five and at eight, he came to St.
Mary’s at ten o’clock. There were present the vice-chancellor,
the proctors, most of the heads of houses, a vast number of
gownsmen, and a multitude of private people, with many of
Wesley’s own people, both brethren and sisters. He is neither
tall nor fat; for the latter would ill become a Methodist. His
black hair, quite smooth, and parted very exactly, added to
a peculiar composure in his countenance, showed him to be an
uncommon man. His prayer was soft, short, and conformable to
the rules of the university. His text was Acts iv. 31. He spoke
it very slowly, and with an agreeable emphasis.” [Here follows
a description of the sermon.] “When he came to what he called
his plain, practical conclusion, he fired his address with so
much zeal and unbounded satire as quite spoiled what otherwise
might have been turned to great advantage; for, as I liked
some, so I disliked other parts of his discourse extremely. I
liked some of his freedom, such as calling the generality of
young gownsmen ‘a generation of triflers,’ and many other just
invectives. But, considering how many shining lights are here,
that are the glory of the Christian cause, his sacred censure
was much too flaming and strong, and his charity much too weak
in not making large allowances. But, so far from allowances,
he concluded, with a lifted up eye, in this most solemn form,
‘It is time for Thee, Lord, to lay to Thine hand;’ words full
of such presumption and seeming imprecation, that they gave
an universal shock. This, and the assertion that Oxford was
not a Christian city, and this country not a Christian nation,
were the most offensive parts of the sermon, except when he
accused the whole body (and confessed himself to be one of the
number) of the sin of perjury; and for this reason, because,
upon becoming members of a college, every person takes an oath
to observe the statutes of the university, and no one observes
them in all things. Had these things been omitted, and his
censures moderated, I think his discourse, as to style, and
delivery, would have been uncommonly pleasing to others as well
as to myself. He is allowed to be a man of great parts, and
that by the excellent Dean of Christ Church (Dr. Conybeare);
for the day he preached, the dean generously said of him, ‘John
Wesley will always be thought a man of sound sense, though
an enthusiast.’ However, the vice-chancellor sent for the
sermon, and I hear the heads of colleges intend to show their
resentment.”[538]

This obnoxious sermon was published a few weeks after it was preached, and was advertised in the October magazines, price sixpence.[539] Another edition was issued in the same year, at Newcastle on Tyne, 12mo, eighteen pages.

In a preface to the reader, Wesley says, that he never intended to print the latter part of the sermon; but “the false and scurrilous accounts of it which had been published, almost in every corner of the nation, now constrained him to publish the whole, just as it was preached, that men of reason might judge for themselves.”

The sermon has three divisions, and considers Christianity under three distinct aspects—(1) As beginning to exist in individuals. (2) As spreading from one to another. (3) As covering the earth. Of these nothing need be said. That which gave offence was the “plain, practical application,” which is quite one third of the entire discourse. The following extracts will show what it was that gave the offence which Oxford authorities never pardoned; and also the fidelity and Christian courage of the preacher in uttering such sentiments before such a congregation.

“I beseech you, brethren, by the mercies of God, if ye do
account _me_ a madman or a fool, yet _as a fool bear with me_.
It is utterly needful, that some one should use great plainness
of speech towards you. It is more especially needful at _this_
time; for who knoweth but it is the _last_? And who will use
this plainness, if I do not? Therefore I, even I, will speak.
And I adjure you, by the living God, that ye steel not your
hearts against receiving a blessing at _my_ hands.

“Let me ask you then, in tender love, and in the spirit of
meekness, Is this city a _Christian_ city? Is _Christianity,
scriptural Christianity_, found here? Are we, considered as a
community of men, so filled with the Holy Ghost as to enjoy in
our hearts, and show forth in our lives, the genuine fruits of
that Spirit? Are all the magistrates, all heads and governors
of colleges and halls, and their respective societies, (not to
speak of the inhabitants of the town,) of one heart and soul?
Is the love of God shed abroad in our hearts? Are our tempers
the same that were in Christ? And are our lives agreeable
thereto?

“In the fear, and in the presence of the great God, before
whom both you and I shall shortly appear, I pray you that are
in authority over us, whom I reverence for your office sake,
to consider, Are you filled with the Holy Ghost? Are ye lively
portraitures of Him whom ye are appointed to represent among
men? Ye magistrates and rulers, are all the thoughts of your
hearts, all your tempers and desires, suitable to your high
calling? Are all your words like unto those which come out of
the mouth of God? Is there in all your actions dignity and love?

“Ye venerable men, who are more especially called to form the
tender minds of youth, are you filled with the Holy Ghost? with
all those fruits of the Spirit, which your important office so
indispensably requires? Do you continually remind those under
your care, that the one rational end of all our studies is
to know, love, and serve the only true God, and Jesus Christ
whom He hath sent? Do you inculcate upon them, day by day,
that without love all learning is but splendid ignorance,
pompous folly, vexation of spirit? Has all you teach an actual
tendency to the love of God, and of all mankind for His sake?
Do you put forth all your strength in the vast work you have
undertaken—using every talent which God hath lent you, and that
to the uttermost of your power?

“What example is set them” [the youth] “by us who enjoy
the beneficence of our forefathers,—by fellows, students,
scholars,—more especially those who are of some rank and
eminence? Do ye, brethren, abound in the fruits of the
Spirit,—in lowliness of mind, in self denial and mortification,
in seriousness and composure of spirit, in patience, meekness,
sobriety, temperance, and in unwearied, restless endeavours
to do good, in every kind, unto all men? Is this the general
character of fellows of colleges? I fear it is not. Rather,
have not pride and haughtiness of spirit, impatience and
peevishness, sloth and indolence, gluttony and sensuality, and
even a proverbial uselessness, been objected to us, _perhaps_
not always by our enemies, nor _wholly_ without ground?

“Many of us are more immediately consecrated to God, called
to minister in holy things. Are we then patterns to the rest,
in word, in conversation, in charity, in spirit, in faith, in
purity? From what motives did we enter upon this office? Was it
with a single eye to serve God? Have we clearly determined to
give ourselves wholly to it? Do we forsake and set aside, as
much as in us lies, all worldly cares and studies? Are we apt
to teach? Are we taught of God, that we may be able to teach
others also? What are the seals of our apostleship? Who, that
were dead in trespasses and sins, have been quickened by our
word? Have we a burning zeal to save souls from death; so that,
for their sake, we often forget even to eat our bread?

“Once more, What shall we say concerning the youth of this
place? Have _you_ either the form or the power of _Christian_
godliness? Are you humble, teachable, advisable? or stubborn,
self willed, heady, and high-minded? Are you obedient to your
superiors as to parents? Or do you despise those to whom you
owe the tenderest reverence? Are you diligent in pursuing your
studies with all your strength, crowding as much work into
every day as it can contain? Rather, do you not waste day after
day, either in reading what has no tendency to Christianity, or
in gaming, or in—you know not what? Do you, out of principle,
take care to owe no man anything? Do you remember the sabbath
day to keep it holy? Do you know how to possess your bodies
in sanctification and in honour? Are not drunkenness and
uncleanness found among you? Yea, are there not of you, who
glory in their shame? Do not many of you take the name of God
in vain, perhaps habitually, without either remorse or fear?
Yea, are there not a multitude of you that are forsworn? Be
not surprised, brethren; before God and this congregation, I
own myself to have been of that number; solemnly swearing to
_observe all those customs_, which I then knew nothing of; and
_those statutes_, which I did not so much as read over, either
then or for some years after. What is perjury, if this is not?

“May it not be one of the consequences of this, that so many
of you are a generation of triflers? triflers with God, with
one another, and with your own souls? How few of you spend,
from one week to another, a single hour in private prayer?
How few have any thought of God in the general tenour of your
conversation? Can you bear, unless now and then, in a church,
any talk of the Holy Ghost? Would you not take it for granted,
if one began such a conversation, that it was either hypocrisy
or enthusiasm? In the name of the Lord God almighty, I ask,
What religion are you of? Even the talk of _Christianity_ ye
cannot, will not bear. O my brethren! What a Christian city is
this? It is time for Thee, Lord, to lay to Thine hand.

“For indeed, what probability, what possibility is there,
that Christianity, scriptural Christianity, should be again
the religion of this place? that all orders of men among us
should speak and live as men filled with the Holy Ghost? By
whom should this Christianity be restored? By those of you
that are in authority? Are you desirous it should be restored?
And do ye not count your fortune, liberty, life, dear unto
yourselves, so ye may be instrumental in restoring it? But
suppose ye have this desire, who hath any power proportioned
to the effect? Perhaps some of you have made a few faint
attempts, but with how small success? Shall Christianity then
be restored by young, unknown, inconsiderable men? I know not
whether ye yourselves would suffer it. Would not some of you
cry out, ‘Young man, in so doing thou reproachest us’? But
there is no danger of your being put to the proof; so hath
iniquity overspread us like a flood. Whom then shall God send?
The famine, the pestilence, or the sword, the last messengers
of God to a guilty land? The armies of the Romish aliens, to
reform us into our first love? Nay, rather, let us fall into
Thy hand, O Lord, and let us not fall into the hand of man!”

This is not only the substance, but nearly the whole of the “plain, practical application,” that created so much offence. Who can find fault with it? Rather, who will not commend the bold preacher, who, in such yearning accents, gave utterance to truths of the highest consequence, but which perhaps no one but himself, in such a congregation, durst have uttered? Would to God that pulpits had more of this courageous, pitying fidelity, at the present day! Is it not a fact, that preaching now-a-days consists so much of polite and pious platitudes, that, so far from saving souls, it is almost powerless? The age is too refined to tolerate preachers of the stamp of Luther, Knox, and Wesley. The words of the prophets are, in this pretentiously polite period of the church’s history, well worth pondering: “They have healed the hurt of the daughter of my people slightly, saying, Peace, peace; when there is no peace.” “This is a rebellious people, lying children, children that will not hear the law of the Lord; which say to the seers, See not; and to the prophets, Prophesy not unto us right things; speak unto us smooth things; prophesy deceits.”

It was Wesley’s fidelity, far more than the novelty of his doctrines and proceedings, that brought upon him the persecutions he encountered. Of these, he and the Methodists had already had their share; but the vials of the people’s wrath were far from being emptied. The outrages in Staffordshire and other places have been already mentioned. “In Cornwall,” says Wesley, “the war against the Methodists was carried on with far more vigour than that against the Spaniards.” “At St. Ives,” writes Henry Millard, “the word of God runs and is glorified; but the devil rages horribly.” At Camborne, Thomas Westall was pulled down while preaching in Mr. Harris’s house; was carried to Penzance, where Dr. Borlase wrote a “mittimus” committing him to the house of correction at Bodmin as a vagrant; and here he was kept till the next quarter sessions, when the justices, then assembled, knowing a little more of the laws of God and man than Dr. Borlase and his Penzance _confrères_, declared his commitment to be illegal, and set him at liberty. “For what pay,” asks Wesley, justly proud of his preachers, “could we procure men to do this service,—to be always ready to go to prison or to death?” Dr. Borlase was a man of unquestioned sense and learning; but he was a bigot of the purest water. On his asking Jonathan Reeves to point him out a man who had been the better for hearing the Methodists, Jonathan pointed to John Daniel, then before him. “Get along,” cried the doctor. “Get along; you are a parcel of mad, crazy headed fellows;” and taking them by the shoulders, he thrust them to the doors. After this, we find him issuing warrants for the apprehension of Methodists; sending Thomas Maxfield to be a soldier; and signing a warrant for the arrest of Wesley himself; yet all this was not sufficient to prevent Wesley rendering to the Cornish bigot his due share of literary praise. “I looked over,” writes Wesley, in 1757, “Dr. Borlase’s Antiquities of Cornwall. He is a fine writer, and quite master of his subject. He has distinguished, with amazing accuracy, the ancient Saxon monuments from the more ancient Roman, and from those of the Druids, the most ancient of all.”[540] The doctor died in 1772.

Dr. Borlase was not alone; for his brother clergymen raged against the Methodists without measure, and, in their sermons, retailed the grossest lies concerning them. A poor woman complained to the mayor of St. Ives of some one throwing a huge stone into her house, which fell on a pillow within a few inches of her suckling child. His worship damned her, and said she might go about her business. One of the clergy told Jonathan Reeves, he wished the Bible were in Latin only, so that none of the common people could read it.[541] The mob at St. Ives saluted Wesley with stones and dirt; and pulled down the meeting-house, “for joy that Admiral Matthews had beat the Spaniards.” It was a gratifying fact, however, that, notwithstanding the fierceness of the Cornish persecution, not more than three or four of the Methodists turned cowardly deserters, while the rest, instead of being shaken, were confirmed in their principles by the violence of their enemies.

The press was still vigorously employed. An anonymous pamphlet, entitled “Observations upon the Conduct and Behaviour of a certain Sect usually designated by the name of Methodists,” 4to, pages 24, was written by Dr. Gibson, and obtained considerable approval from his brother bishops.[542] In this prelatical publication, the Methodists are charged with setting government at defiance, by appointing public places of religious worship, and by preaching in the open air, without taking the prescribed oaths, and subscribing the declaration against Popery. They broke the rules of the church of which they professed themselves members, by going to other than their own parish churches to receive the sacrament. Their doctrines and practices were a dis-service to religion—1. Because they set the standard of religion so high, that some were led to disregard religion altogether. 2. Because they carried the doctrine of justification by faith alone to such a height, as not to allow that the observance of moral duties is a condition of being justified. 3. Because a due attendance on the public offices of religion answered the purposes of devotion better than the “sudden agonies, roarings, screamings, tremblings, ravings, and madness of the Methodists.” 4. Because their exalted strains of religion led to spiritual pride, and to contempt of their superiors. In short, the irregular practices of the Methodists were of the like nature as those which had so great a share in bringing in the religious confusions of the last century.

Whitefield replied to this pamphlet in two small quarto tracts, of fourteen and twenty-four pages respectively. This evoked “A Serious and Expostulatory Letter,” by the Rev. Thomas Church, M.A., vicar of Battersea, and prebendary of St. Paul’s;[543] and also another letter, of fifty pages, “by a Gentleman of Pembroke College, Oxford.” In the latter production, the Methodists are censured for “suffering their heated imaginations to mount to such an exalted pitch, that it hurries them out of their senses, evaporates the religious spirit, and leaves nothing but sensuality in the heated machine.” Whitefield’s answer to “Observations on the Conduct and Behaviour of the Methodists” is politely said to be “stuffed with the coaxing and wheedling of the _woman_, the daring of the _rebel_, the pertness of the _coxcomb_, the evasions of the _jesuit_, and the bitterness of the _bigot_.” It is unblushingly affirmed, that the Methodists “can curse, rail, and _berogue_ their antagonists, though in Scripture language, so as hardly to be exceeded by any pope, or _spiritual bully_, that ever yet appeared in Christendom.” They are a “rag-tag mob,” using “lascivious and blasphemously languishing expressions when they talk of the Redeemer’s love.” “They cant and blaspheme the Holy Spirit, and appeal to starts and sallies of flesh and blood for the inspiration of the Holy One.” They are “a set of creatures of the lowest rank, most of them illiterate, and of desperate fortunes; cursing, reviling, and showing their teeth at every one that does not approve of their frenzy and extravagance.” Whitefield was “crafty and malicious enough to be suspected of any wicked enterprise,—a person of wicked principles, travelling over all counties, to establish newfangled societies”; and he and his friends were “heads and spiritual directors of hot-brained cobblers, all big with venom against the clergy of the Established Church.” The author “trembles and shudders,” lest the Methodists should be “betrayed, by their feelings and stretchings, into a bed of eternal fire and brimstone, appointed for the reception of the lewd, the concupiscent, and the blasphemous.”

These are fair specimens of the foul foamings of this valiant defender of Church and state.

Another pamphlet, published in 1744, was “A Charge against Enthusiasm,” delivered, in several parts of his diocese, by the Bishop of Lichfield; and the object of which was to prove that “the indwelling and inward witnessing of the Spirit in believers’ hearts, as also praying and preaching by the Spirit, are all the _extraordinary gifts_ and operations of the Holy Ghost, belonging only to the apostolical and primitive times, and that, consequently, all pretensions to such favours in these last days are vain and enthusiastical.”

Another, published at a shilling, was “Remarks on Mr. J. Wesley’s last Journal, by Thomas Church, A.M.,”[544] the prebendary of St. Paul’s already mentioned. Mr. Church sums up his charges against Wesley thus: “It is impossible for you to put an entire stop to the enormities of the Moravians, while you still (1) too much commend these men; (2) hold principles in common with them, from which these enormities naturally follow; and, (3) maintain other errors more than theirs, and are guilty of enthusiasm to the highest degree.” Mr. Church’s “Remarks,” however, will have to be noticed in the next chapter.

In addition to all this foam and fury against the Methodists, must be mentioned an equally vile attack of another kind. At the Brecon assizes, held in the month of August, the grand jury deemed it their duty to make a presentment to the presiding judge to the following effect: “that the Methodists held illegal meetings,” and that their “preachers pretended to expound the Scriptures by virtue of inspiration”; that, by this means, “they collected together great numbers of disorderly persons, very much endangering the peace of our sovereign lord the king; and that, unless their proceedings were timely suppressed, they might endanger the peace of the kingdom in general.” At all events, “the pretended preachers, or teachers, at their irregular meetings, by their enthusiastic doctrines, very much confounded and disordered the minds of his majesty’s good subjects”; and this, “in time, might lead to the overthrowing of our good government, both in Church and state.” Finally, the judge is requested, if the authority of the present court was not sufficient for the purpose, to apply to some superior authority, in order to put an end to the “villainous scheme” of “such dangerous assemblies.”[545]

Thus had Methodism to make its way through the opposition of vulgar mobs, fiery priests, lampooning pamphleteers, unjust magistrates, and grand juries. Gamaliel’s advice was set aside: “Refrain from these men, and let them alone; for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought: but if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.”

Wesley’s longest journey, in 1744, was from London to Cornwall, thence to Newcastle, and thence to London. Nearly three months were spent upon this evangelistic tour: many hundreds of miles were traversed, not by rail, or even in stage coaches, but on horseback, over the most miserable roads, the rider sometimes battered with rain and hail for hours together, and at others plunging through drifts of snow enough to engulf both man and beast. About a hundred sermons were preached: some, at Gwennap and at St. Stithian, to thousands upon thousands of attentive hearers; some in public houses; some on village greens; and a few in parish churches.

One of the churches Wesley was permitted to occupy was at Laneast, in Cornwall, of which Mr. Bennett was the aged clergyman. Another was at Landau, in Wales. “Such a church,” says Wesley, “I never saw before. There was not a glass window belonging to it; but only boards, with holes bored here and there, through which a dim light glimmered. Yet even here the light of God’s countenance has shone on many hearts.” In the former of these churches a strange scene was witnessed in the month of August. Charles Wesley was preaching “against harmless diversions,” having three clergymen, Messrs. Meriton, Thompson, and Bennett, among his auditors. “By harmless diversions,” exclaimed the preacher, “I was kept asleep in the devils arms, secure in a state of damnation, for eighteen years.” No sooner were the words uttered than Meriton added aloud, “And I for twenty-five!” “And I,” cried Thompson, “for thirty-five!” “And I,” said Bennett, the venerable minister of the church, “and I for above seventy.”

Strange and stirring incidents came across Wesley’s path. In his father’s church, at Epworth, he heard Mr. Romley preach two of the bitterest and falsest sermons he ever listened to. On proceeding to Syke House, some of his friends met him and said a drunken mob was awaiting his arrival, who would press all the men in the congregation for soldiers. Others declared, the mob was just about to fire the meeting-house, or pull it to the ground. Wesley calmly answered, “Our only way is to make the best use of it while standing;” and, accordingly, he entered it at once, and expounded the tenth chapter of Matthew. At Durham, he met John Nelson and Thomas Beard, at that time with their regiment, and took them to his inn, and said, “Brother Nelson, lose no time; speak and spare not, for God has work for you to do in every place where your lot is cast; and when you have fulfilled His good pleasure, He will burst your bonds asunder, and we shall rejoice together.”[546] At Chinley, in Derbyshire, lived a poor widow, of the name of Godhard, with a family of four small children. At her request, Wesley made Chinley a resting place, and preached. Finding the widow’s house too small, he stood upon a chair near to a miller’s dam. The miller, enraged at Wesley and his congregation daring to worship in such proximity to his premises, let off the water for the purpose of drowning Wesley’s voice. The effort was a failure; truth triumphed; Chinley became a Methodist preaching place; and, in order to provide the preachers when they called with a cup of tea, the poor widow and her children set apart the whole of every Friday night for winding bobbins, depositing the earnings, as a sacred treasure, in an old pint mug, and never touching them except to meet the necessities of Wesley’s itinerants when paying their gospel visits.[547]

Already Wesley’s lay preachers had become a considerable host. In different parts of the kingdom there were, at least, forty of these devoted evangelists.[548] Some of them, as John Brown, of Newcastle, David Taylor, John Downes, John Nelson, William Shepherd, John Slocomb, Thomas Westall, Thomas Beard, John Haime, Thomas Richards, John Bennet, and Thomas Maxfield, have been already mentioned. Besides these, there were—John Haughton, originally a weaver, who, whilst the mob, in the city of Cork, were burning Wesley in effigy, threw up the window and began to preach to the people in the street; and who, afterwards, obtained episcopal ordination and settled in the sister country;—Jonathan Reeves, who was with Wesley when he laid the first stone of the Orphan House at Newcastle, and who, after passing through a great amount of persecution, became an ordained minister of the Church of England, preached in London, and died in 1778, testifying that all his hope was in Christ Jesus;—Enoch Williams, pious, deeply devoted to his work, faithful and successful, and brought to an untimely grave in 1744;—Thomas Williams, extremely popular as a preacher; but haughty, revengeful, headstrong, and unmanageable; a great favourite among the London young ladies; but a maligner of the two Wesleys; expelled in 1744, but taken back on declaring, before many witnesses, that the slanders he had propagated against Wesley and his brother were grossly false; the man who introduced Methodism into Ireland in 1747, but who was again expelled from the Methodist society in 1755; and then, through the Countess of Huntingdon, obtained episcopal ordination, and for several years acted as a clergyman in the neighbourhood of High Wycombe;—Thomas Meyrick, a native of Cornwall, educated for the law, a poet, but expelled from the Methodist connexion in 1750, after which he became a clergyman of the Established Church, and died, we fear, a drunkard, at Halifax, in 1770;—John Trembath, one of Wesley’s most courageous preachers, though somewhat vain and stubborn; then a farmer and a fibber; and, for a long series of years, an impoverished vagabond, who died about 1794;—Alexander Coates, a poor Scotch “laddie,” fond of books, who could speak in Gaelic, read with fluency in Dutch and Danish, and had some acquaintance with Hebrew, Greek, and Latin; the honoured instrument in the conversion of Mr. Crosse, the well known Bradford vicar; one of the best of men, and a most useful preacher, who died, at Newcastle, in 1765, in perfect peace;—William Darney, another Scotchman, honest, bold, impetuous, a rhymer, and painfully eccentric, but who was used by Providence in converting Grimshaw, and who prided himself upon never “_dabbing_ people with untempered mortar”;—Nicholas Gilbert, a man of deep piety, and of great simplicity, possessed of considerable talents, and pronounced by Wesley “an excellent preacher”;—Samuel Larwood, who in 1754 became a Dissenting minister in the borough of Southwark;—James Jones, one of the first fruits of Wesley’s ministry in Staffordshire, as bold as a lion, and who built, at his own expense, the first Methodist chapel at Tipton Green;—Joseph Jones, who left the itinerancy in 1760, became a farmer in the county of Somerset, and acted as a local preacher to the end of life;—Herbert Jenkins, who afterwards became one of Whitefield’s preachers, and laboured in the Tabernacle connexion;—John Maddern, a man of genuine piety, and a lively, zealous preacher;—Henry Millard, who, after narrowly escaping a violent death at the hands of a Cornish mob, fell a victim to an attack of small pox, in 1746;—William Prior, of whom Charles Wesley, in a manuscript letter now before us, dated 1755, writes: “William Prior is ordained, without learning, interest, or aught but Providence to recommend him”;—Robert Swindells, a man of great benevolence, who was never heard to speak an unkind word of any one, had no enemy, and died full of days, riches, and honour in 1783;—James Wheatley, of Norwich notoriety, where he was often dragged by the hair of his head through the streets of the city, built a large chapel, and became immensely popular, but who ultimately died, beneath a cloud, in Bristol;—Francis Walker, a native of Tewkesbury, pious, honest, and upright, his talents small, but his preaching lively, zealous, and useful, an instrument of great good to souls wherever he went, and who settled in the city of Gloucester, where he died in peace. And to all these must be added William Biggs, Thomas Crouch, John Hall, Thomas Hardwick, Francis Scott, David Tratham, Thomas Willes, and William Holmes.

Little more remains to be related concerning the year 1744. The Newcastle society was increasingly earnest, there hardly being a trifler left. The society at Bristol was not so perfect as it should have been, many of the members crying out, “Faith, faith! Believe, believe!” but making little account of the fruits of faith, either of holiness or good works. The London society was poor, but generous. At a single collection, in the month of February, they contributed nearly fifty pounds to relieve the destitute around them, and which Wesley at once laid out in buying clothes for those whom he knew to be diligent and yet in want. A month later, they made a second collection of about thirty pounds. A month later still, a third collection of about six-and-twenty pounds; and to these three collections were added ninety pounds more in the shape of private subscriptions; making altogether £196 raised by the poor London Methodists, and employed in providing clothing for three hundred and sixty persons.

Already some of Wesley’s people began to profess Christian perfection; but he was extremely cautious in receiving their testimony. At the end of the year, he writes:—

“I was with two persons who believe they are saved from all
sin. Be it so, or not, why should we not rejoice in the work
of God, so far as it is unquestionably wrought in them? For
instance, I ask John C——, ‘Do you always pray? Do you rejoice
in God every moment? Do you in everything give thanks? In loss?
In pain? In sickness, weariness, disappointments? Do you desire
nothing? Do you fear nothing? Do you feel the love of God
continually in your heart? Have you a witness in whatever you
speak or do, that it is pleasing to God?’ If he can solemnly
and deliberately answer in the affirmative, why do I not
rejoice and praise God on his behalf? Perhaps, because I have
an exceeding complex idea of sanctification, or a sanctified
man. And so, for fear he should not have attained all I include
in that idea, I cannot rejoice in what he has attained.”

This is significant language. Wesley preached the doctrine; but he was slow to believe those who professed to experience it; and it is a fact more remarkable, that, so far as there is evidence to show, Wesley never, to the day of his death, professed as much as this himself. Hundreds, if not thousands, of his followers did; perhaps he himself was restrained from doing so, by a dislike to high profession, or by a conscientious fear, that he hardly reached the standard above set up.

The thing occasioned him great anxiety. A short time before his death, he wrote as follows:—

“Four or five and forty years ago, I had no distinct views of
what the apostle meant by exhorting us to ‘leave the principles
of the doctrine of Christ, and go on to perfection;’ but two
or three persons in London, whom I knew to be truly sincere,
desired to give me an account of their experience. It appeared
exceeding strange, being different from any that I had heard
before. The next year, two or three more persons at Bristol,
and two or three at Kingswood, coming to me severally, gave
me exactly the same account of their experience. A few years
after, I desired all those in London who made the same
profession, to come to me all together at the Foundery, that
I might be thoroughly satisfied. I desired that man of God,
Thomas Walsh, to give us the meeting there. When we met, first
one of us, and then another, asked them the most searching
questions we could devise. They answered every one without
hesitation, and with the utmost simplicity, so that we were
fully persuaded, they did not deceive themselves. In the years
1759 to 1762 their numbers multiplied exceedingly, not only in
London and Bristol, but in various parts of Ireland as well as
England. Not trusting to the testimony of others, I carefully
examined most of these myself; and, in London alone, I found
652 members of our society who were exceeding clear in their
experience, and of whose testimony I could see no reason to
doubt. I believe no year has passed since that time, wherein
God has not wrought the same work in many others; and every one
of these (without a single exception) has declared, that his
deliverance from sin was _instantaneous_; that the change was
wrought in a moment. Had half of these, or one third, or one
in twenty, declared it was _gradually_ wrought in _them_, I
should have believed this, with regard to _them_, and thought
that _some_ were gradually sanctified and some instantaneously.
But as I have not found, in so long a space of time, a single
person speaking thus, I cannot but believe, that sanctification
is commonly, if not always, an _instantaneous_ work.”[549]

This is a subject of vast importance, and will often recur in future pages. Meanwhile, all will give Wesley credit for the utmost sincerity, though some may doubt whether human experience is, in itself, sufficient to settle and decide Christian doctrine.

Wesley’s pen was, if possible, more busily employed than ever; not so much in composing original productions, as in abridging and revising the works of others. During the year 1744, he published the following:—

1. The sermon preached before the Oxford university on August 24.

2. An Extract from his Journal, from November 1, 1739, to September 3, 1741. With prefatory Letter to the Moravian Church, dated June 24, 1744; and two hymns annexed, on “The Means of Grace,” and “The Bloody Issue,” both having reference to the Moravian controversy.

3. The Rules of the Band Societies. These, as we have already seen, were read at the conference held in June. During the year, they were published in the form following:—“The Nature, Design, and General Rules of the United Societies, in London, Bristol, Kingswood, and Newcastle upon Tyne. The fourth edition. To which are subjoined the Rules of the Band Societies. London: printed by William Strahan. 1744.” 12mo, twelve pages. The _Rules_ of the band societies were the same as those which Wesley had drawn up for the Moravian bands, in 1738. The band society members were composed, as previously stated, of persons who professed to have obtained the forgiveness of sins. They were middle class Methodists; that is, in a more advanced state than the members of the “United Societies,” but not so advanced as the “Select Societies.” The questions to be proposed to every one before he was admitted were to the following effect:—1. Have you forgiveness of sins? 2. Peace with God? 3. The witness of the Spirit? 4. Is the love of God shed abroad in your heart? 5. Has no sin dominion over you? 6. Do you desire to be told of your faults? 7. Do you desire we should tell you whatsoever we think, fear, or hear concerning you? 8. Is it your desire and design, on this and all other occasions, to speak everything that is in your heart, without exception, without disguise, and without reserve?

The propriety of such questions will be doubted, and especially of other five which had to be proposed at every meeting, and which have been given in a previous chapter. (See page 210.) It would have been no loss to Methodism or to the religious world, if these queries, first drawn up by Wesley on Christmas day, 1738, had been allowed to slumber in the shades of Moravian oblivion. At present, they are never used; and though, in the first instance, they might be adapted to the Moravian brotherhood, they are far too inquisitorial for Methodists.

The bands had to meet once a week; and were bound to observe the following “Directions”:—

I. To abstain from evil, especially buying or selling on the sabbath; tasting spirituous liquors; pawning; backbiting; wearing needless ornaments, as rings, earrings, necklaces, lace, and ruffles; and taking snuff or tobacco.

II. To maintain good works,—especially almsgiving; reproving sin; together with diligence, frugality, and self denial.

III. To use all the ordinances of God; especially service at church, and sacrament once a week; likewise every public meeting of the bands; the ministry of the word every morning; private prayer every day; reading the Scriptures at every vacant hour; and observing all Fridays in the year as days of fasting or abstinence.

4. Another of Wesley’s publications, in 1744, was “Modern Christianity exemplified at Wednesbury, and other adjacent places in Staffordshire.” 12mo, twenty-eight pages. The substance of this pamphlet has been already given in the account of the Staffordshire riots; but the prayer at the end of it is too remarkable to be passed without notice. The following is an extract:—

“Lo, I come, if this soul and body may be useful to anything,
to do Thy will, O God. If it please Thee to use the power
Thou hast over dust and ashes, here they are to suffer Thy
good pleasure. If Thou pleasest to visit me either with pain
or dishonour, I will humble myself under it, and, through Thy
grace, be obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
Hereafter no man can take away anything from me, no life, no
honour, no estate; since I am ready to lay them down, as soon
as I perceive Thou requirest them at my hands. Nevertheless,
O Father, if Thou be willing, remove this cup from me; but if
not, Thy will be done.”

What was the spirit of the ancient martyrs if this was not?

5. A fifth publication, “Hymns for Times of Trouble and Persecution” (12mo, forty-seven pages), was issued in the names of “John and Charles Wesley” unitedly. It contains thirteen hymns for times of trouble; sixteen for times of persecution; and four to be sung in a tumult.

The remainder of Wesley’s publications, during the present year, were collections or abridgments of the works of other authors, namely:—

1. “A Collection of Moral and Sacred Poems from the most celebrated English authors.” Three volumes, 1024 pages, in 12mo. The work is dedicated to “the right honourable the Countess of Huntingdon.” Wesley truly observes, that there is nothing in the collection “contrary to virtue; nothing that can in any way offend the chastest ear, or give pain to the tenderest heart. Whatever is really essential to the most sublime divinity, as well as the purest and most refined morality, will be found therein. The most just and important sentiments are here represented with all the ornaments both of wit and language, and in the clearest, fullest, strongest light.”

“There is,” writes Mr. Marriott,[550] “a circumstance little known regarding this ‘Collection.’ A few months after the publication of these volumes, Dodsley (the publisher) called upon Wesley for reparation of a piracy, which the latter had unwittingly committed, and for which he agreed to pay him £50.” This was done on February 8, 1745, by payment of a £20 bank note, and a cheque for £30, payable in three months.

2. “A Brief Account of the occasion, process, and issue of a late Trial at the Assize held at Gloucester, 3rd March, 1743. Between some of the people called Methodists, Plaintiffs, and certain Persons of Minchinhampton, in the said county, Defendants. Extracted from Mr. Whitefield’s Letter. By John Wesley.” Twelve pages, 12mo.

This was a sort of companion tract to “Modern Christianity at Wednesbury.” Appended is “a prayer for his majesty King George,” in ten verses of four lines each, which, in a somewhat altered form, is now the 465th hymn in the Methodist Hymn-Book.

3. “A Collection of Prayers for Families.” 12mo, 24 pages.

Wesley considered family religion as indispensable to the preservation and extension of the work of God. Some of the first Methodists neglected it; and, as a consequence, their children shook off all religion and abandoned themselves to wickedness.[551] “Family religion,” said Wesley, twenty years after this, “is the grand desideratum among the Methodists.”[552]

To promote this, Wesley published his “Prayers for Families,” in 1744. The prayers are only fourteen in number; that is, a prayer for every morning and every evening during a single week; but anything more devout, scriptural, appropriate, and religiously rich it would be difficult to conceive.

4. “The Case of John Nelson, written by himself. Published by John Wesley.” 12mo, 36 pages.

5. “An Extract of Count Zinzendorf’s Discourses on the Redemption of Man by the Death of Christ.” 12mo, 78 pages.

These loosely worded “Discourses,” sixteen in number, were first published in 1740, in 12mo, two hundred and two pages. They were all founded upon Luther’s explanation of the second article of the Apostles’ creed; “I believe in Jesus Christ, His only Son our Lord.”

6. “A Serious Call to a Holy Life. Extracted from a late author.” 12mo, 230 pages. This was an abridgment of the well known work of William Law, and was printed by John Gooding, of Newcastle upon Tyne. It consists of nineteen chapters, dwelling on Christian devotion; the duties of all orders and ranks of men and women, of all ages, to practise it; the happiness arising from doing so; and recommendations in reference to it.

It is impossible to give the reader, by any brief description here, an adequate idea of this powerful and pungent book. He must read it for himself. When will the young people of the present day, imbibing the froth of sensational writing, learn that books, like wine, are none the worse for being old?

7. “The Life of God in the Soul of Man; or, the Nature and Excellency of the Christian Religion.” 12mo, forty-eight pages.

This was an extract from an excellent treatise, written by the Rev. Henry Scougal, a Scottish minister, who died at the early age of twenty-eight, in the year 1678. The book breathes the sublimest piety; and, in style, is pure and elegant.

8. “The Distinguishing Marks of a Work of the Spirit of God. Extracted from Mr. Edwards, minister of Northampton, in New England.” 12mo, 48 pages.

By publishing this calm, pointed, argumentative treatise, Wesley made its sentiments his own; and, from it, the reader may easily infer what were Wesley’s opinions respecting the religious revival with which he and his contemporaries were connected. (See page 218.) The following is a synopsis of the answers to objections.