Chapter L: Tyerman (2)

“DEAR SIR,—I hope this will find you and the rest of our
friends well. This morning the Rector sent for me. He told me
he had heard I had returned to my former strict way of life,
and that he must acquaint my father with it. I desired, he
would come to particulars, and said, that where I was wrong I
should be glad to be set right. He said, I looked thin, and
feared I would hurt myself by rigorous fasting. I told him,
I dined in the hall on Wednesdays, and that I eat bread and
butter on Friday mornings. He was pretty well satisfied with
this account. He advised me to take something else instead of
tea after fasting, which I promised to do. His next charge was
not sitting in the common room. I said, I intended to sit there
three nights every week, which he thought was sufficient. I
unguardedly told him that, if it were agreeable to him, I would
dine in the hall even on Fridays. He very much approved of this
proposal, and said, I might observe any other day as a fast
instead of it. I believe, if I would go into the hall on fast
days, all my other actions would be less taken notice of, and
I should put it out of the Rector’s or Mr. Hutchin’s power to
make any complaints of me to my father. If I could be sure of
not injuring religion by my example, I believe I might comply
with the Rector herein, for, you are very sensible, I might
notwithstanding observe the same degree of abstinence even
on those days. I depend on the advice of my friends in this
affair, and hope God will sanctify it to me. The Gospel tells
us, that the children of God must suffer persecution from
the world; but the Rector says, we must endeavour to have our
persons in esteem, and those things wherein we differ from the
world we must do privately. We must take care our good be not
evil spoken of. Though the Church enjoins fasting, yet, because
the bishops, the pillars of the Church, do not observe it,
it loses its force. When he finds his blood hot, he says, he
fasts, but unknown to anybody. He thinks it is a relative duty,
and not confined to any particular time. He looks upon it only
as a remedy against unchastity, and, if we are not troubled
with this passion, I suppose, not obligatory. He advised me
to read such books as were genteel accomplishments. I have,
through God’s assistance, in some degree, seen my own weakness,
by the effects of this anti-Christian doctrine, for it has
quite discomposed me, though I was enabled to see the fallacy
of it. I see nothing so well qualified to destroy my soul, to
make me eternally miserable, as the conversation of temporizing
Christians, which, I hope, by your advice and other means, God
will prevent, as I am sure He will, if I am faithful to Him.

“When I desire your advice in this affair, I only desire you to
prevent my eternal damnation; for it is in the greatest danger
from this most subtle, deceitful, and dangerous of all enemies.
Oh that I could express to you the danger I foresee from this
enemy! My eyes and my heart alone could; but these you cannot
see. May God enable you to comprehend it, and to do all that
is in your power to prevent it! You cannot sufficiently arm
me against the Rector. I suspect him of insincerity to you. I
want to know whether you ever did. I believe, and Mr. Horn is
of the same opinion, that my going to Ireland depends on my
going into the hall on fast days. The Rector said as much as if
you frightened others from religion by your example; and that
you might have done a great deal of good, if you had been less
strict, which I would be glad to be undeceived in, and to know
whether the example of a thorough mortified Christian, though
it would give the greatest offence, would not do more than that
of a plausible Christian, who would give no offence at all.
This is a point of great importance to me.

“It has pleased God to let me see that I can make no progress
in religion till I have acquired some sense of the misery and
nothingness of human nature, and of our entire dependence
on Him. Though I go into the common room to avoid a greater
evil,—though I would not live the life of those who spend their
time there for all the world,—though I am scarcely capable
of doing anything which is more disagreeable to me,—yet the
poison is not removed. While I am with them, I love my sense,
my judgment, my reason. It is true, I am all the time in pain;
but I cannot say, at that time, they lead an un-Christian,
dangerous life. I believe it is for want of faith, and for not
looking upon it as a great blessing, since it is not my own
choice. I want to know how to remove this delusion, and how to
make an advantage of that which God no doubt intended for my
good. If I do not make a use of this cross, I am satisfied it
will be the ruin of me.

“Oh lay this to your heart, and make my case your own. Do not
think you can spend your time better than in answering this
letter. I hope you will not forget to pray to God to enable
me to follow you wherever it is His will, and never to omit
putting me in mind of it when you write to me.

“Mr. Robson is in a dangerous way. He is convinced of the
necessity of being a Christian, but cannot leave the world.
Mr. Carter, I fear, is not steady. Mr. Hervey is gone. Mr.
Broughton is not yet returned. If he go to Georgia, it is best.”

This is a curious letter,—not remarkable for either intelligence or scholarship; but it partly unfolds the character of its writer; reveals some of the difficulties of the collegiate life of the Oxford Methodists; shows the importance which they attached to fasts; and points to Wesley as the leader of the religious brotherhood.

The Wesleys had left Oxford; but, for a time at least, Charles Morgan and Mr. Broughton carried on the work which they and the elder Morgan had commenced. Charles Morgan undertook the care of Bocardo, which he visited three days every week. He read an hour every other day, at the house of Mr. Fox, in the Catechism of the Bishop of the Isle of Man; and, in the same place, held a meeting every Sunday night with “a cheerful number of Christians.” “The Lord’s kingdom,” he writes, November 27, 1735, “increaseth apace; and I find-more and more comfort in the holy Scriptures every day.”

Our information concerning Robert Kirkham, William Morgan, and his younger brother Charles, is exhausted. As Oxford Methodists, they deserve notice; but, so far as is ascertained, they were of comparatively little use either to the Church or to the world. William Morgan had no opportunity for _public_ usefulness; and Robert Kirkham and Charles Morgan drift away into the great ocean of existence, and leave no track behind them.

THE REV. JOHN CLAYTON, M.A., THE JACOBITE CHURCHMAN.

God has wisely and graciously hidden the future from us. We may form guesses concerning it; but we have not the slightest certainty that our guesses will be realised. Who, in 1732, could have foretold the future career of the Oxford Methodists? If the members of the Methodist fraternity could have seen beforehand the events of the next fifty years, what would have been the issue? Would the fellowship of the Hanoverian and Jacobite, the Methodist and Moravian, the Churchman and Dissenter, the Arminian and Calvinist, the itinerant Evangelist and the parish Priest, have been continued? That fellowship was of incalculable importance; but its maintenance depended upon the shortsightedness of those who were united in it. The drawing aside of the veil of futurity would, in all likelihood, have converted the loving brotherhood into an Ishmaelitish band, endangering, not only its future usefulness, but its present existence, by its own internecine fights. As it was, there went forth a number of brave-hearted men, all of them the better for their godly meetings in Wesley’s comfortable room in Lincoln College; and, though their courses were divergent, yet, in the main, they continued faithful to the cause of truth, and, with few exceptions, were always loyal to their great Master, Christ. In a qualified sense, we may apply to Oxford Methodism the words of the sacred text: “A river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads” (Gen. ii 10). Let us follow one of the out-flowings:—

John Clayton was the son of William Clayton, a bookseller in Manchester;[15] was born in 1709, and was educated by the Rev. John Richards, M.A., at the Grammar School in that important town. He entered Brazenose College in 1726, and became Hulme’s exhibitioner in 1729.[16] He was introduced to Wesley in 1732; and, by his recommendation, the Oxford Methodists took another important step, that of fasting twice a week. Wesley writes,—

“On April 20, 1732, Mr. Clayton meeting me in the street, and
giving Mr. Rivington’s[17] service, I desired his company to
my room, and then commenced our acquaintance. At the first
opportunity, I acquainted him with our whole design, which he
immediately and heartily closed with; and, not long after,
(Mr. Morgan having then left Oxford,) we fixed two evenings
in a week to meet on, partly to talk on that subject, and
partly to read something in practical divinity. The two points
whereunto, by the blessing of God, we had before attained,
we endeavoured to hold fast: I mean, the doing what good we
can; and, in order thereto, communicating as often as we have
opportunity. To these, by the advice of Mr. Clayton, we added
a third,—the observing the fasts of the Church; the general
neglect of which we can by no means apprehend to be a lawful
excuse for neglecting them. And in the resolution to adhere to
these and all things else, which we are convinced God requires
at our hands, we trust we shall persevere till He calls us
to give an account of our stewardship. As for the names of
Methodists, Supererogation-men, and so on, with which some of
our neighbours are pleased to compliment us, we do not conceive
ourselves to be under any obligation to regard them, much less
to take them for arguments. ‘To the law and to the testimony’
we appeal, whereby we ought to be judged. If by these it can be
proved we are in error, we will immediately and gladly retract
it: if not, we ‘have not so learned Christ,’ as to renounce
any part of His service, though men should ‘say all manner
of evil against us,’ with more judgment and as little truth
as hitherto. We do, indeed, use all the lawful means we know
to prevent ‘the good which is in us’ from being ‘evil spoken
of:’ but if the neglect of known duties be the one condition
of securing our reputation, why, fare it well; we know whom
we have believed, and what we thus lay out He will pay us
again.”[18]

These were brave Christian words; the noble utterance of an earnest, conscientious, godly man. The Methodist brotherhood, thus portrayed, present an example which all who are right-minded cannot but admire. There is no taking for “doctrines the commandments of men;” no ridiculous toying with ecclesiastical or superstitious trifles; but a stout-hearted adherence to great, scripture principles. Wesley and his friends were not pious for the purpose of being singular, but because they felt it to be a duty. To be laughed at was far from being pleasant; but they were quite prepared to sacrifice even their reputation, rather than dishonour the religion of their great Master. Men might brand them with opprobrious epithets; but that with them was of trifling importance, if only at the day of judgment, Christ acknowledged them as friends. They knew they were not following “cunningly devised fables;” they were not flippant dabblers in “doubtful disputations;” but earnest men who knew that what they held was truth, and who, at all hazards, were resolved to practise it.

Clayton had spent six years at Oxford, and was now a college tutor.[19] The following letter was addressed to Wesley about three months after he and Clayton became acquainted. It is long, but is full of interest, and casts considerable light on the doings and difficulties of the Oxford Methodists. Wesley, at the time, seems to have been in London; where he was now made a member of “The Society for the Propagation of Christian Knowledge,” and also formed a friendship with William Law.

“OXON, _August 1, 1732_.

“REV. AND DEAR SIR,—Excuse me for not interrupting you from
attending to the noble work you have taken in hand, whilst I
give you an account of the present state of our affairs at
Oxford.

“I cannot but think it an extraordinary piece of Providence
that, when we had lost our best advocate and patron, all
opposition against us should immediately cease; for, since you
left us, nobody has thought it worth while to attack either
Mr. Smith or me,[20] or to endeavour to remove us from those
principles wherein you, by the grace of God, have fixed us. I
have gone every day to Lincoln, big with expectation to hear
of some mighty attack made upon Mr. Smith; but, I thank God,
I have always been disappointed; for not one of the Fellows
has once so much as tried to shake him, or to convert him from
the right way, wherein, I hope, he at present walks. Indeed,
on Sunday, he met with a rub from Mr. Veesy, who refused to
read Prayers for him in your chapel, for fear of contributing
anything to his going to Christ Church. But Mr. Smith had the
heart to desire that favour of the Rector which Mr. Veesy
had denied him, who immediately promised to read for him,
and encouraged him to proceed in the way he was in, and, if
possible, to make further progress in virtue and holiness. He
goes out of town to-morrow morning, and so will be entirely
out of danger from the Fellows of Lincoln. We had conversation
this morning, whilst we were at breakfast together, concerning
the temptations which may arise from strange company and
travelling; and Mr. Smith seems to be fore-armed against, and
determined to oppose them to the utmost of his power. He joins
with me in best respects to your brother and you, and desires
you won’t forget to send the bands and the poems you promised
him.

“Poor Mr. Clements[21] is still recovering. He was with me last
night two hours, but I doubt to no purpose.

“My little flock[22] at Brazenose are, God be praised, true to
their principles, and I hope to themselves too.

“_Bocardo_,[23] I fear, grows worse upon my hands. They have
done nothing but quarrel ever since you left us; and they
carried matters so high on Saturday, that the bailiffs were
sent for, who ordered Tomlyns to be fettered and put in the
dungeon, where he lay some hours, and then, upon promise of
his good behaviour, was released again. He has been much
better ever since that time, and I hope will be better for
it all his lifetime. Wisdom has never been to hear me read,
notwithstanding his promise. I sent for him yesterday, but
he would not come down; and when I had done reading, I went
upstairs to him, and upbraided him with breaking his promise,
upon which he very easily replied, that he had thought better
of it since he had seen me, and was determined never to come
near Blair, lest his indignation should rise at the sight of
him.

“The _Castle_ is, I thank God, in much better condition. All
the felons were acquitted, except Salmon, who is referred to
be tried at Warwick, to our great disappointment,—and the
sheep-stealer, who is burnt in the hand, and who, I verily
believe, is a great penitent. I got Mrs. Jopping a copy of her
son’s indictment at the assizes, which has made her mighty easy
ever since; and she is now endeavouring to bring her mind into
a due frame for the devout participation of the holy communion
on Sunday next. Jempro is discharged, and I have appointed
Harris to read to the prisoners in his stead. Two of the
felons likewise have paid their fees, and are gone out, both
of them able to read mighty well. There are only two in the
jail who want this accomplishment,—John Clanvills, who reads
but moderately, and the horse-stealer, who cannot read at all.
He knows all his letters, however, and can spell most of the
common monosyllables. I hear them both read three times a week,
and I believe Salmon hears them so many times a day.

“One of my college scholars has left me, but the others go
on mighty well. The woman, who was a perfect novice, spells
tolerably, and so does one of the boys, and the others make
shift to read with spelling every word that is longer than
ordinary. The boys can both say their Catechism as far as the
end of the Commandments, and can likewise repeat the morning
and evening prayers for children in ‘Ken’s Manual.’

“Mrs. Tireby has been very ill this last week, so that she has
made no great proficiency. I am to go down at six o’clock to
hear the determination of a meeting of St. Thomas’s parish,
respecting separating Bossum and his wife. When I had promised
to give a crown towards clothing the woman, and the overseer
had determined to take her in upon that condition, the
churchwarden would needs have him try to put the man upon me
too, to get a crown towards clothing him; but, as he is able
to work for his living, I don’t think him a proper object for
charity; nor can I at this time afford to do anything for him,
because I am apprehensive that I must be forced to contribute
to Salmon’s relief, who will want near twenty shillings to
subpœna proper witnesses to Warwick at his trial; and I cannot
but think it a much greater act of charity to relieve a
suffering innocent than to relieve an idle beggar.

“I have been twice at the school,—namely on Tuesday and
Saturday last, and intend to go again as soon as I have
finished this letter. The children all go on pretty well,
except Jervaise’s boy, who, I find, truants till eleven
o’clock in a morning. I threatened the boy what we would do
to him if ever he truanted any more, and he has promised (as
all children do) that he will do so no more; nay, his mother
assures me that she will take care for the future that he shall
not. I got a shilling for her from our Vice Principal, and
gave her sixpence myself, to preserve the gown that is in pawn
from being sold; and the woman who has it promised not to sell
it, provided Jervaise will bring her sixpence a week towards
redeeming it.

“I have obtained leave to go to St. Thomas’s workhouse twice a
week; and, indeed, I cannot but hope it will be a noble field
of improvement. I am sure the people stand much in need of
instruction, for there is hardly a soul that can read in the
whole house, and those that can, don’t understand one word of
what they read.

“I think I have nothing further to add about our affairs; only
I must beg the favour of you, if you can conveniently, to pay
Mr. Rivington thirty shillings for my use, and I will repay it
when you come to Oxford. Pray don’t forget a few Common Prayer
Books for the Castle.

“You cannot imagine the pleasure it is to me to know that you
are engaged every morning in prayer for me. I wish for nine
o’clock more eagerly than ever I did before, and I think I
begin to perceive what is meant by that union of souls which
is so much talked of in Père Malebranche and Madam Bourignon,
which I never understood before. Good sir, continue your
prayers for me, for I feel that I am benefited by them.

“I do not envy you the happiness, which I know you will have
from the conversation of so many pious men as you will meet
with in London, because I assure myself that I shall have the
benefit of it when I have the pleasure to see you again at
Oxford.

“Mr. Hall is not yet come home, so that I am pretty much taken
up amongst the poor people and the prisoners, and have not yet
had time to consider of any improvements or additions to be
made to the list of books for our pupils.

“I thank God that I have fully conquered my affection for a
morning’s nap, and rise constantly by five o’clock at the
farthest, and have the pleasure to see myself imitated by the
greatest part of my pupils. I have talked with Mr. Clements,
and I hope have made him a proselyte to early rising, though I
cannot to constant communion.

“Pray God prosper all those designs you have undertaken of
doing good at London, and send you a good journey to Oxford.

“I am, rev. and dear sir, your most affectionate friend, and
most obliged humble servant,

“J. CLAYTON.”

“I hope you will not forget to pay my due compliments to Sir
John Philips, Mr. Wogan, and all my other good friends.

“To the Rev. Mr. John Wesley. To be left with Mr. Rivington,
bookseller, in St Paul’s Churchyard, London.”

This long epistle, besides unfolding Clayton’s character, helps us to a better understanding of the position and practices of the Oxford Methodists. The debtors in Bocardo, the prisoners in the Castle, and paupers in the streets were objects of their beneficent compassion. They had their schools for the children of the poor; and, in their mission of mercy, were about to visit the workhouse of St. Thomas’s. Early rising was a habit, and prayer for each other a daily practice. Constant communion was enforced; though the dogma of the _real presence_ of the body and blood of Christ was, as yet at least, no article of their faith.

Wesley being absent, there was a lull in the storm of Methodist persecution; but this was of short duration. Within a month after the date of Clayton’s letter, poor William Morgan died; an event which furnished an occasion for a violent attack upon the Oxford brotherhood, in what was then one of the most literary and respectable papers published,—_Fogg’s Weekly Journal_. They were accused of mopishness, hypocrisy, censoriousness, enthusiasm, madness, and superstitious scruples. “Among their own party,” says the writer, “they pass for religious persons and men of extraordinary parts; but they have the misfortune to be taken by all who have ever been in their company, for madmen and fools.”

Hardly any evil is without a good. The virulence of _Fogg’s Weekly Journal_ excited the curiosity of a gentleman who had no acquaintance with the Methodists, but who now sought an interview with them, and shortly after published an octavo pamphlet of thirty pages, entitled,—“The Oxford Methodists: Being some account of a Society of young Gentlemen, in that City, so denominated: setting forth their Rise, Views, and Designs.” In this first defence of Methodism ever published, the slanderous accusations cast upon Wesley and his friends were refuted; and the Methodists were described as follows:—

“There are three points to which these gentlemen think
themselves obliged to adhere:—1. That of visiting and relieving
the prisoners and the sick, and giving away Bibles, Common
Prayer Books, and the ‘Whole Duty of Man’; and of explaining
the Catechism to the children of poor families, and of dropping
a shilling or so to such families where they deem it needful.
2. That of weekly communion. 3. That of observing strictly
the fasts of the Church, which has caused some to call them
‘Supererogation Men.’”

To return to Clayton. About the time of the publication of this pamphlet (the beginning of 1733), Clayton removed to Manchester; where, during the ensuing summer, he was visited by Wesley, who, on Sunday, June 3rd, preached thrice in three different churches, namely, the Cathedral, and Salford, and St Anne’s churches. Whether these pulpits were obtained through Clayton’s influence, there is no evidence to show; but, remembering the odium connected with the name, it certainly is a curious fact, that in the populous and thriving town of Manchester, the Oxford Arch-Methodist was allowed to occupy so prominent a position.

When Clayton left Oxford, Clayton’s pupils left Methodism. Ten days after his visit to Manchester, Wesley wrote,—

“_1733, June 13th._

“The effects of my last journey, I believe, will make me more
cautious of staying any time from Oxford for the future.
One of my pupils told me at my return, that he was more and
more afraid of singularity; and another, that he had read an
excellent piece of Mr. Locke’s, which had convinced him of
the mischief of regarding authority. Our seven and twenty
communicants at St. Mary’s were on Monday shrunk to five; and
the day before, the last of Mr. Clayton’s pupils who continued
with us, informed me that he did not design to meet us any
more.”[24]

This was somewhat discouraging. Meanwhile, besides keeping two fast days every week, Clayton, and also Wesley, began to evince other High Church proclivities. Hence the following, sent to Wesley only a month after his visit to Manchester:—

“_July, 1733._

“REV. AND DEAR SIR,—I have been thinking upon the two points
which you proposed to my consideration in your last, and must
acknowledge myself to be utterly unable to form any judgment
upon them which will be serviceable to you.

“My own rule is to spend an hour every Friday in looking over
my diary,[25] and observing the difference between it and the
preceding week; after which, I examine the resolutions set
down in the account of my last weekly examination, and inquire
how I have kept them, and then see what others are necessary
to be formed, which I write down at the end of my diary for
every week, that so they may be materials for my subsequent
examination.

“As to your question about Saturday,[26] can only answer
it by giving an account how I spend it. I do not look upon
it as a preparation for Sunday, but as a festival itself;
and, therefore, I have continued festival prayer for the
three primitive hours, and for morning and evening, from the
Apostolical Constitutions, which, I think, I communicated to
you whilst at Oxford. I look upon Friday as my preparation for
the celebration of both the Sabbath and the Lord’s-day; the
first of which I observe much like a common saint’s day, or
as one of the inferior holidays of the Church. I bless God, I
have generally contrived to have the Eucharist celebrated on
Saturdays as well as other holidays, for the use of myself and
the sick people whom I visit.

“Dr. Deacon[27] gives his humble service to you, and lets
you know that the worship and discipline of the primitive
Christians have taken up so much of his time, that he has
never read the Fathers with a particular view to their
moral doctrines, and therefore cannot furnish you with the
testimonies you want out of his collection. However, if you
will give me a month’s time, I will try what I can do for
you. I have made some progress in the earliest authors, and
should have made more had I not been interrupted; first, with
the public ceremony of the bishop’s triennial visitation;
and, secondly, with the blessing of a visit which the truly
primitive Bishop of Man made to our town; with both which
affairs the clergy have been almost wholly taken up for a week.

“I was at Dr. Deacon’s when your letter came to hand; and we
had a deal of talk about your scheme of avowing yourselves a
society, and fixing upon a set of rules. The doctor seemed
to think you had better let it alone; for to what end would
it serve? It would be an additional tie upon yourselves, and
perhaps a snare for the consciences of those weak brethren that
might chance to come among you. Observing the Stations[28] and
weekly communion are duties which stand upon a much higher
footing than a rule of a Society; and they, who can set aside
the command of God and the authority of His Church, will
hardly, I doubt, be tied by the rules of a private Society.

“As to the mixture, Mr. Colly told me he would assure me it
was constantly used at Christ Church. However, if you have
reason to doubt it, I would have you to inquire; but I cannot
think the want of it a reason for not communicating. If I could
receive where the mixture was used, I would; and, therefore,
I used to prefer the Castle to Christ Church; but, if not, I
should not think myself any further concerned in the matter
than as it might be some way or other in my power to get it
restored.[29]

“Pray be so kind as to call on Mr. Hollins, head of our
college, for four pictures of mine, namely, ‘Whitechapel
Altar-piece,’ ‘Mary Magdalene,’ and our two founders; and get
them sent up, by any convenient opportunity, to Mr. Rivington,
who will send them down to me.

“My best respects attend your brother. I must beg the favour
of him to give himself the trouble of writing out the hymns to
‘God the Father and God the Son,’ for me. A person of quality,
Lady Catherine Gray, borrowed mine, and has lost them.

“I am, dear sir, your most affectionate friend and servant,

“J. CLAYTON.”

This is an important letter, not only as exhibiting the religious earnestness, but also the high churchism of the Oxford Methodists. The following, which was written two months later, is likewise full of interest. It was addressed, like the former one, “to the Rev. Mr. Wesley, Fellow of Lincoln College, Oxon.”

“MANCHESTER, _September 10, 1733_.

“REV. AND DEAR SIR,—I was last week at Dr. Lever’s, where I
but narrowly missed of seeing Mr. Brooke, of our college, who
came the evening after I left Alkrington. I saw Dr. Lever
to-day, who joins with me in sincere respects to your brother
and yourself. His new dignity and his being put in Commission
of the Peace, have, at present, quite unfitted him for serious
talk; and, therefore, I must wait for a more favourable
opportunity of pressing those virtues, which you first
convinced him of the necessity of.

“Dr. Deacon tells me, that, he had no view in fixing the
Psalms for common days; but, after reading your letter, is
convinced of the expediency of serving any of those three
ends you mention. The feasts and the fasts were the days he
principally regarded; but he would take it as a favour from
you if you would communicate to me any improvements you may
possibly make in it. He thinks your third rule would be most
expedient,—namely, to put together such psalms as best explain
and illustrate each other. And he knows not but that on this
scheme the proper psalms for festivals and fasts may be more
advantageously fixed, by transposing some from the first,
second, and other Sundays, etc., to those which have psalms
which better answer them. He will consider this point as soon
as he has leisure, but desires, in the meantime, that you would
let us know your thoughts upon the matter, because his order
for reading the Psalter is likely soon to see the light, being
to be published with a collection of Primitive Devotions, both
public and private, which is even now in the press.[30]

“Poor Miss Potter![31] I wonder not that she is fallen. Where
humility is not the foundation, the superstructure cannot
be good. And, yet, I am sorry to hear the tidings of her,
especially that she has a great man for her confessor, who
dissuades her from constant communion. I am sure, she has
great occasion to use all the means of grace, which Providence
provides for her, and hope that God will in time open her eyes
to see the great need she has of help from above. I would not
persuade you to leave off reading with her. Who knows whether
you may not raise her again to the eminence from which she has
fallen? At least, though she neglect the weightier matters of
the law, yet keep up in her that reverend respect she bears it,
even by the tithing of ‘mint, anise, and cummin.’

“As to reading the ancients, I fancy ‘Cotelerii[32] Biblioth.
Patrum Apostol.’ would be the best book to begin with; for,
though I will not say, that, all the works there contained
are genuine, yet I dare avow them to be very ancient, and
to contain the primitive doctrine and discipline of the
Church, though published under feigned names. You will find
a dissertation upon every work, which contains the several
testimonies of Fathers and Councils, whereby the authority is
confirmed; and, according to the evidence produced, you must
judge of the authenticity of the several pieces. The Epistles
of St. Clement are universally owned to be his; and so are
the smaller Epistles of St. Ignatius; and, indeed, I think,
Whiston, in his ‘Primitive Christianity,’ has urged such
arguments in defence of the larger as can never be answered.
St. Barnabas’s Epistle, and Hermas’s Pastor are works of the
Apostolic age, as may be proved by the internal characters
both of language and doctrine, whether they be the works
of the venerable authors they are ascribed to or not. The
Apostolical Canons are learnedly defended by Bishop Beveridge,
and they sufficiently vindicate the Constitutions.[33] The
Recognitions[34] of Clement are generally reckoned the most
modern piece in these two volumes, but they are really a most
admirable work.

“And now for the last page of your letter. I would answer it;
and, yet, for my unworthiness, I dare not,—for my ignorance,
I cannot. How shall I direct my instructor in the school of
Christ? Or teach you, who am but a babe in religion? However,
I must be free to tell you my sentiments of what you inquire
about. On Wednesday and Friday, I have, for some time, used the
Office for Passion week out of ‘Spinckes’[35] Devotions,’ and
bless God for it. I found it very useful to excite in me that
love of God, and sorrow for having offended Him, which makes up
the first great branch of repentance. You know it consists of
meditations on our Saviour’s life, all the meditations being
joined with proper devotions. I could only wish, I was provided
with two such Offices, one for Wednesday, and the other for
Friday.

“Refer your last question to Mr. Law. I dare not give
directions for spending that time which I consume in bed, nor
teach you, who rise at four, when I indulge myself in sleep
till five.

“Dear Sir, pray for me that I may press forward in the paths
of perfection, and, at length, attain the land of everlasting
life. Adieu!

“JOHN CLAYTON.”

“I believe you will see a young gentleman of my acquaintance,
who is a very pious man, but who greatly stands in need of
Christian prudence to direct him. In particular, with regard to
his conduct towards his parents, his religion sometimes seems
to savour of self. Will you instruct and save him?”

These letters are long, perhaps also dry and tedious; but they are useful in casting considerable light on Oxford Methodism. We learn, that the godly brotherhood, though unevangelical, were, in the highest degree, conscientious and devout. In this respect, they put to shame, not only the great bulk of professing Christians, but, many who, at the present day, are known by the name of Methodists. Doubtless, they sought salvation by the practice of piety and good works; but the piety and good works themselves are not to be censured, but commended. Self-examination, prayer, sacramental attendance, fasting, diligence, kindness to the poor, deep concern for the conversion of sinners, and early rising, are not things of slight importance; but deserve far more practical recognition than what they get.

As to the special religious observance of saint days and of the Jewish Sabbath; and the sacred adoption of ecclesiastical canons and decretals, opinions will differ; but most Methodists will concur in the Methodist Preachers’ opinions, as stated by Wesley himself, in 1755:

“They think the Decretals are the very dregs of Popery; and
that the Canons of 1603, are as grossly wicked as absurd. They
think—1. That, the spirit which they breathe is, throughout,
truly Popish and anti-Christian. 2. That, nothing can be more
diabolical than the _ipso facto_ excommunication so often
denounced therein. 3. That, the whole method of executing these
Canons, the process used in our Spiritual Courts, is too bad to
be tolerated (not in a Christian, but) in a Mahometan or Pagan
nation.”[36]

Dr. Deacon, the non-juring clergyman, was Clayton’s bosom friend, and Wesley’s chosen counsellor. William Law, another non-juror, was consulted as their guide. Mr. Spinckes’ volume, made up of extracts from the works of the most eminent of the high-church party, was one of their books of devotion. Under such circumstances, it is not surprising to find them plunging into the authentic and unauthentic writings of the Christian Fathers; listening to Apostolical and other Canons as to the voice of oracles; displaying ridiculous anxiety about sacramental wine being mixed with water; and assuming an arrogant willingness to become auricular confessors. Up to the time of Clayton’s admission among the Oxford Methodists, we find none of these proclivities. The Bible had been their sole supreme authority in faith and morals; and, hence, though their views of evangelical truth were unquestionably defective, their lives were free from the practice of popish follies. Now it began to be otherwise. Some of the young men were priests; and priests, according to the Canons of the Church, were invested with the terrible prerogatives of enforcing auricular confession, of pronouncing divine absolution, and of administering the body and blood of the blessed Jesus! “Poor Miss Potter” had a confessor, who, though a great man, was, evidently in Clayton’s estimation, heretical. Emily Wesley indignantly and righteously refused all confessors, her brother not excepted. Well would it be if the priests of the present day, who “creep into houses, and lead captive silly women,” were answered, as this noble-minded young lady answered Wesley, the Arch-Methodist. She writes:—

“To open the state of my soul to you, or any of our clergy, is
what I have no inclination to at present; and, I believe, I
never shall. I shall not put my conscience under the direction
of mortal man, frail as myself. To my own Master I stand or
fall. Nay, I scruple not to say, that all such desire in you,
or any other ecclesiastic, seems to me like church tyranny, and
assuming to yourselves a dominion over your fellow-creatures,
which was never designed you by God.... I farther own, that, I
do not hold frequent communion necessary to salvation, nor a
means of Christian perfection. But do not mistake my meaning: I
only think communing every Sunday, or very frequently, lessens
our veneration for that sacred ordinance; and, consequently,
our profiting by it.”

This was a sensible rebuke of priestly pretensions.

Clayton was young, only twenty-four; but, besides his scholarship, he was evidently a man of extensive reading. As the son of a bookseller, he had had the opportunity of gratifying literary cravings from his earliest days. He was a man of energy; and, though he reproaches himself for his sluggishness in not rising earlier than at five o’clock, he was exemplary for his diligence. All this had already made him a man of mark. In this very year, 1733, he was appointed to preach the ordination sermon in Manchester cathedral; and was so ardent in the enforcement of the rubrics of the Church, and so successful in his ministerial and pastoral office as to bring seventy old people, all of them above sixty years of age, to be confirmed by the bishop in Salford church.[37]

Three years later, he was selected to occupy another important post. Darcy Lever, Esq., LL.D., has been already mentioned as one of the friends of Clayton and of the two Wesleys. This gentleman, being appointed, in 1736, to fill the distinguished office of High Sheriff of Lancashire, made Clayton his chaplain. In such a capacity, Clayton had to preach at the Lancaster assizes; and chose for his text, the words,—“He beareth not the sword in vain; for he is the minister of God, a revenger, to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil” (Rom. xiii. 4). This was a ticklish subject for so young a man; but the chaplain was not without courage; and gave utterance to sentiments, which, at the present day, would scarcely be popular. The discourse was printed, and the title will suggest an idea of the preacher’s faithfulness. “The Necessity of duly executing the Laws against Immorality and Profaneness: Set forth in a Sermon, preached at the Assizes held at Lancaster, before the Honourable Sir Lawrence Carter, one of the Barons of his Majesty’s Court of Exchequer. By John Clayton, A.M. late of Brazenose College, Oxon. Published at the request of the High Sheriff, and the Gentlemen of the Grand Jury. London. 1736.” 8vo, 29 pp. Two or three extracts may be useful, as serving to illustrate Clayton’s views and style, and also the alarming wickedness of the nation.

“If drunkards, swearers, and debauchers were constantly brought
to justice, it would doubtless lessen the number of criminals,
and abate the commonness of the vices. Many a poor family would
be rescued from beggary and starving, were the drunken, idle
master of it properly corrected. Besides, this strict execution
of the penal laws against these lesser crimes, would be a most
probable means of preserving us from those more dreadful vices
of perjury, robbery, and murder; and would make sanguinary
laws less needful, and capital punishments less frequent; for
experience teaches us that vice, as well as virtue, is of a
progressive nature” (p. 15).

Again,—

“The fountain from which the Magistrate draws his power, for
the punishment of wickedness and vice, is none other but
God himself. All power, whether spiritual or temporal, is
originally derived from the Supreme Monarch of the world, who
is King of kings, and Lord of lords. Since, therefore, _every
Power_, whether it be supreme or subordinate, does primarily
and originally derive all its authority from above, surely the
gift of God ought to be used to His honour and glory. Authority
is a sacred thing, of divine original, and, therefore, as it
may not be resisted by subjects without danger of damnation, so
neither may it be lightly neglected, nor wantonly misapplied by
those entrusted with it; lest they provoke that God to anger,
_who putteth down one Ruler_, and setteth up another” (p. 17).

Again,—

“Wickedness is grown to such a head in the world,—immorality
and profaneness are become so epidemical among us, that, it is
much to be feared, nothing but discipline and wholesome rigour
can prove a cure for it. The infection of vice is extended so
far and wide, and the contagion of sin spreads so prodigiously
fast, that it seems necessary to use severe methods towards the
corrupted parts, if we hope either to recover them, or to save
those that are as yet untouched with the disease. God knows,
the flagrant impiety of our days, the excessive corruption of
these dregs of time,—this rust of the iron age, into which
we are fallen,—is such as every good man must complain of,
and for which charity itself can find no sufficient excuse or
extenuation” (p. 7).

Advocates of political expediency may object to these high-toned sentiments; but there are still a few who have old-fashioned hardihood enough to exclaim with the Psalmist, “Who will rise up for me against the evildoers? or who will stand up for me against the workers of iniquity?” (Psalm xciv. 16).

The friendship between Clayton and the Wesley brothers was unbroken until the latter departed from Church usages, and became out-door evangelists. In 1735, when urged by Oglethorpe and others to go to Georgia, Wesley, not only sought advice from his brother Samuel and William Law, but went to Manchester to consult with Clayton and others whose judgment he respected; and, six weeks after his return from the Georgian colony, we find him spending several days with his old Oxford friend. He writes:—

“1738. March 15. I set out” (from Oxford) “for Manchester,
with Mr. Kinchin, Fellow of Corpus Christi, and Mr. Fox, late
a prisoner in the city prison. _Friday_, the 17th, we spent
entirely with Mr. Clayton, by whom, and the rest of our friends
here, we were much refreshed and strengthened. Mr. Hoole, the
Rector of St. Ann’s church, being taken ill the next day, on
Sunday, 19th, Mr. Kinchin and I officiated at Salford chapel
in the morning, by which means Mr. Clayton was at liberty to
perform the service of St. Ann’s; and, in the afternoon, I
preached there on those words of St Paul, ‘If any man be in
Christ, he is a new creature.’”[38]

Two months after the date of this extract from his journal, Wesley, ceasing to rely on the merit of his own good works, and trusting solely for salvation in the infinitely meritorious sacrifice of Christ, experienced an amazing change. His own words must be quoted. After relating that, for “above ten years,” he had “dragged on heavily,” “trusting to his own works and his own righteousness,” “in a refined way, zealously inculcated by the mystic writers,”[39] he remarks:—

“1738. May 24. In the evening I went very unwillingly to a
society in Aldersgate Street, where one was reading Luther’s
preface to the Epistle to the Romans. About a quarter before
nine, while he was describing the change which God works in
the heart through faith in Christ, I felt my heart strangely
warmed. I felt I did trust in Christ, Christ alone, for
salvation; and an assurance was given me, that He had taken
away my sins, even mine, and saved me from the law of sin and
death.”[40]

This was the turning point in Wesley’s history. Hitherto, like his friend Clayton, he had hoped to be saved by works; now he was saved by faith. This new experience confirmed his new conceptions of gospel truth, and he began to preach accordingly. He insisted upon good works as much as ever; but he henceforth taught, that man is saved, not by these, but by faith in Christ only. His new doctrine was the means of his being shut out of churches; and this led to his preaching in the open air; and the whole resulted in a rupture of the friendship between him and Clayton, who, so far as there is evidence to show, went on to the end of life, as he and Wesley had begun at Oxford,—a sincere, earnest, self-denying, devout, and laborious Pharisee, trusting in his own righteousness, instead of trusting solely in Christ Jesus.

After the date of Wesley’s conversion, we hear of no further friendly meetings. Clayton’s death did not occur till 1773, but, during this long interval of thirty-five years, though Wesley’s visits to Manchester were numerous, there is no mention made of any interview between the two Oxford Methodists. No proof exists, that Clayton ever ranked himself among Wesley’s opponents and slanderers; but, from this period, he ceased to be one of Wesley’s friends. Coldness sprang up, and separation. In 1756, Charles Wesley spent nearly a fortnight among the Manchester Methodists, the object of his visit being to prevent their seceding from the Established Church. He himself attended the Church services, and took with him as many of the Methodists as he could. He heard Clayton preach “a good sermon on constant prayer,” and, at the same service, by the senior chaplain’s invitation, went “with the other clergy” present to the communion table, and received the sacrament; but even this was not enough to regain Clayton’s favour; and, hence, the following entries in Charles’s journal:—

“1756. Tuesday, October 26. My _former_ friend, Mr. Clayton,
read the prayers at the Old Church, with great solemnity.”
“Saturday, October 30. I dined with my candid friend and
censor, Dr. Byrom. I stood close to Mr. Clayton in church (as
all the week past), but not a look would he cast towards me;

“So stiff was his parochial pride,”

and so faithfully did he keep his covenant with his eyes, not
to look upon an old friend when called a Methodist.”

It has been already shown, that Clayton was an intimate friend of Dr. Deacon, the non-juror; and there can be no doubt that, substantially, the ecclesiastical and political opinions of both were identical. Hence, it is not surprising that both were implicated in the rebellious proceedings of 1745.

Charles Edward Stuart, a young man of twenty-five, with a few attendants, five or six hundred broad-swords, about two thousand muskets, and rather less than £4,000 in cash, set out from France, to overturn the government of Great Britain, and, on behalf of his father, to demand its throne. Such was his success, that, on September 16th, he entered Edinburgh. Three days afterwards, the battle of Preston Pans was fought; and, immediately, the handsome Young Pretender began, as prince regent, to exercise various acts of sovereign authority. He appointed a council; ordered regiments to be levied for his service; and held drawing-rooms, which were, for the most part, brilliantly attended, and generally ended in a public supper and a ball. On the last day of October, Charles Edward quitted Edinburgh, at the head of six thousand men; and, in a fortnight, took Carlisle. On November 29th, he and his troops reached Manchester; and then proceeded, by regular marches, to Derby, where they arrived on December 4th. This was their nearest approach to London. Before the year was ended, they were hastily retreating to Carlisle, Glasgow, Stirling, and the Highlands.

There we leave them, and return to Manchester. A local authority[41] has stated, that, previous to the rebellion of 1745, Charles Edward had passed several weeks at Ancoats Hall, the seat of Sir Oswald Moseley; and, that, the leading inhabitants, the clergy of the Collegiate Church, together with Dr. Deacon and his followers, were all warm adherents of the cause of the exiled Stuarts, and recognised, as their political leaders, Colonel Townley, Dr. Byrom, Mr. Dickenson, and others; who were accustomed to hold their meetings in a public-house, contiguous to Jackson’s Ferry, near Didsbury.

To what extent Clayton was associated with these sympathising and plotting Jacobites, it is impossible to determine; but, when the prince marched through Salford, in 1745, this high churchman, with more hardihood than prudence, fell upon his knees before him, and prayed for the blessing of God on the adventurous Chevalier.[42] Charles Edward made the “Palace” hostelry, in Market Street Lane, his residence; and hither Jacobites of both sexes flocked to welcome him. Three sons of Dr. Deacon, true to their father’s principles, enlisted beneath the Pretender’s banner; Charles Deacon being placed at the head of the recruiting department, and Thomas and Robert Deacon being made Lieutenants.

The results were disastrous. Charles, Thomas, and Robert Deacon fell into the hands of the Royalists, at Carlisle; were tried, condemned, and executed in London, in July, 1746; the head of the eldest, together with that of Adjutant Siddal, being sent to Manchester, and fixed on the Exchange. Townley, the colonel of the Manchester Jacobinical regiment, was hanged on Kennington Common, had his bowels torn out, and his heart cast into a fire; and eight of his officers and men were treated in the same barbarous manner.[43]

Great excitement followed. People on both sides were roused. Whitworth’s _Manchester Magazine_, the only newspaper published in the town, took the part of the Government; Dr. Deacon, Dr. Byrom, Clayton, and others, were obliged to send all their attacks, replies, and other Jacobite outpourings to the city of Chester, where they obtained insertion in the _Chester Courant_. For two years, this paper warfare was continued; and, in 1749, the whole of what had been printed, both in Manchester and Chester, was collected and published, in a 12mo volume of 324 pages, entitled, “Manchester Vindicated; being a complete Collection of the Papers lately published in Defence of that Town in the _Chester Courant_, together with all those on the other Side of the Question, printed in the _Manchester Magazine_, or elsewhere, which are answered in the said _Chester Courant_, Chester, 1749.”

In _Whitworth’s Magazine_ of September 23rd, 1746, we find the following:—