Chapter XIV: Preface (12)

The late candid Bishop of _Lincoln_, I am positive, did not think such a way of acting altogether so very criminal: for in a charge given to his clergy some years before his translation to the see of _Salisbury_, he told them to this effect, “that they were not to look upon themselves as ministers of a _Plato_, a _Pythagoras_, or any other heathen philosopher, consequently they were not to entertain their auditories with mere moral harangues; but that they were to consider themselves as ministers of JESUS CHRIST; and therefore if they would not preach the gospel in the church, they could not be justly angry if the poor people went out to hear it in a field.” A charge this, truly worthy of a sober-minded, moderate, wise Bishop of the Church of _England_. For even in acting thus seemingly irregular and disorderly, these modern enthusiasts only copy after the greatest and brightest examples the world ever saw, and whose examples it is more than criminal not to follow or copy after. Our blessed LORD, when denied the use of the synagogues, on seeing the multitude, went up and chose a mountain for his pulpit, and the heavens for his sounding board. At other times he sat by the sea-side, nay, went into a ship and preached, whilst the whole multitude stood on the shore. When _Peter_ and _John_, that this kind of enthusiasm might spread no further among the people, were straitly threatened and commanded that they should thenceforth speak at all to no man in CHRIST’s name, they calmly yet boldly replied unto their threatners and commanders, “Whether it be right in the sight of GOD, to hearken unto you, more than unto GOD, judge ye: for we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard.” A certain woman, named _Lydia_, a seller of purple, had her heart opened when the great apostle of the _Gentiles_ was preaching and praying by a river-side; and _Dionysius_ the _Areopagite_, a woman named _Damaris_, and others, believed, and clave unto the same Apostle, from the time they heard him preach in the midst of _Areopagus_, or _Mars-hill_. And we may suppose he was not less successful when he was obliged by the angry _Jews_ to preach in the school of one _Tyrannus_.

I believe you will agree, Reverend Sir, that the venerable _Fox_ and _Bradford_ did not appear less venerable for preaching at _Pauls-cross_; neither did I ever hear that Bishop _Latimer_ was looked upon as degrading his episcopal character, when he used to preach in _Cotton-Garden Westminster_, and King _Edward_ the sixth, that _Josiah_ of his age, with some of his court, looked out at the palace window to hear him. And I hereby appeal to the whole university, whether the Reverend Doctors of divinity, heads of houses, graduates or under-graduates, ever looked upon it as criminal, or beneath the dignity of their place and station, to sit out in the open air on St. _John_ Baptist’s day, to hear a master of arts preach from the stone pulpit in _Maudling-College_ yard; though, for fear it may be they should give further sanction to field-preaching, they have lately thought proper to adjourn into the chapel?

You know, Reverend Sir, who it was, that when those who were bidden in a regular way refused to come to the wedding-supper, without asking any one’s leave for so doing, sent forth some irregulars into the lanes and streets of the city, into the highways and hedges, with that glorious encouraging commission, not by fines and imprisonments, not by threats and expulsions, not by killing the body for the good of the soul, but by filling their mouths with gospel arguments, backed with the all-powerful energy of the Holy Ghost, to compel poor, wandering, weary, heavy laden sinners to come in. Armed with this panoply divine, and, as they think, authorised by the same LORD, some few of us continue to this day, amongst small and great, high and low, rich and poor, in church or chapel, in commons, streets, fields, whensoever or wheresoever divine providence opens a door, “to testify repentance towards GOD and faith in our LORD JESUS CHRIST;” and this not from contempt of, or in opposition to the godly admonitions of our ecclesiastical superiors, but because “the love of CHRIST constraineth us;” and we think that a wo, a dreadful wo, awaits us if we preach not the gospel. Not that we are enemies to a decent or even episcopal consecration, or setting apart churches and chapels for divine and holy worship: but we are more indifferent about the reputed outward sanctity of places, because our LORD, with great solemnity, said unto the woman of _Samaria_, “Woman, believe me, the hour cometh when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at _Jerusalem_, worship the Father: but the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in Spirit and in truth.” Hence we infer, that every place is then, and only then properly called holy, when like the ground around the burning bush, it is made holy by the divine presence of Him who spake to _Moses_ out of the bush; or like mount _Tabor_, which by the Apostle _Peter_ is called, by way of emphasis, the holy mount, because himself and _James_ and _John_, not only had upon that mount a visible outward manifestation, but also a blessed inward heart-felt sense of the Redeemer’s excellent glory. It was undoubtedly this which made _Peter_ to break out into that exclamation: “Master, it is good for us to be here.” And it was this that warmed, and not only warmed, but constrained the enraptured Patriarch _Jacob_, when he had only the ground for his bed, the stones for his pillow, and the open firmament for his curtains and furniture, to break forth into that extatic language, “How dreadful is this place! this is no other than the house of GOD, this is the gate of heaven.”

If then, Reverend Sir, for this and such like things we are accounted irregular and disorderly, we are truly sorry for it: sorry, but not upon our own accounts, having the testimony of a good conscience that we act with a single eye, and in direct conformity to the authority of the word of GOD: but we are sorry, barely on account of our impeachers and condemners, especially for those, who being set apart for the ministerial office, and loaded with ecclesiastical preferments, preach very seldom, or not at all; or, if they do preach now and then, preach only as though they were barely reading wall-lectures, and seldom or ever so much as mention or quote the homilies of our church, though they have subscribed to an article which says, that “they contain godly and wholesome doctrine, and which judges them to be read in churches by the ministers diligently and distinctly, that they may be understood of the people.” It is to be feared, that it is owing to such irregularity and disorder as this, that when our people hear of our articles or homilies quoted by some few in the pulpit, that they are ready to cry out, “What new doctrine is this? Thou bringest certain strange things to our ears:” At least if it is not so at home, I am sure it is abroad. Hence it was that about three years ago, after I had been preaching to a very large auditory in one of the most polite places on the continent of _America_, and in preaching, as is my usual custom, had strongly been recommending the book of homilies, numbers were stirred up to go to the stores to purchase them: but upon enquiring after the book of homilies, the storekeeper, surprized at the novelty of the word _homilies_, begged leave to know what muslins they meant, and whether they were not _hummims_.

What a pity therefore is it, Reverend Sir, that the book of homilies, which ought to be in every hand, and as common as our common prayer books, should never yet have found a place in the large catalogue of books given away by the truly laudable society for promoting christian knowledge, though founded soon after the glorious revolution. If this be not remedied some way or another, we shall very soon become disorderly indeed: our pulpits will still continue to contradict our reading-desks, and we shall never have the honour of being stiled regular and orderly, till, regardless of subscriptions, oaths, rubrics, and ordination-offices themselves, our practices give the lie to our professions, and we seek the fleece not the flock, and “preach ourselves, and not CHRIST JESUS the LORD.”

Dead formalists, and proud self-righteous bigots, may loudly exclaim and cry out, “the temple of the LORD, the temple of the LORD, the temple of the LORD are we!” They may not only cry out, but also cast out; and thinking they thereby do GOD service, though most notoriously deficient in their own moral conduct, may plead conscience, and say, “Let the LORD be glorified.” But to such as these our LORD once said, “Ye are they that justify yourselves before men, but GOD knoweth your hearts.” Like the chief priests, and the scribes and pharisees of old, they may plead their law; for the breach of which, these irregulars, as they imagine, ought to be condemned and suffer; nay, a time may come when they may be permitted to enforce their clamorous accusations, by urging, as their godly predecessors once did against our Master, that “we found these fellows perverting the nation, and forbidding to give tribute unto _Cæsar_: but _Pilate_ knew that for envy they delivered Him.” And though they could plead their loyalty, and say, “If thou let this man go, thou art not _Cæsar_’s friend, we have no king but _Cæsar_;” yet both our LORD and his Apostles rendered themselves, and strictly taught all that heard them, to “render unto _Cæsar_ the things that are _Cæsar_’s, and unto GOD the things that are GOD’s.” Fain would the Methodists copy after such gloriously divine examples: and blessed be GOD, after a trial of near forty years, upon the most severe scrutiny, their loyalty cannot be justly so much as once called in question: for, as they fear GOD, so they dearly love and honour their King, their rightful sovereign King _George_; and have been, and continue to be, steady, invariable friends to the protestant succession in the illustrious house of _Hanover_. And if so, supposing these Methodists should be convicted of acting somewhat irregular, since it is only the irregularity of preaching and recommending unfeigned love to GOD, and, for his great name sake, undissembled, disinterested loyalty to their King; is it not the interest as well as duty of civil government, if not to encourage, yet not to oppose them? For it is certainly a most incontestable truth, that every additional proselyte to true Methodism, is an additional loyal subject to King _George the Third_, whom, with his royal most amiable consort, our gracious Queen _Charlotte_, the Methodists with one united voice earnestly pray, GOD long to continue to be a nursing father and nursing mother to our church, and people of every denomination whatsoever.

Every body is loudly complaining of the badness of our times, and the degeneracy of our morals. Sinners now proclaim their sin like _Sodom_, and the nation hath suffered more than a _second deluge_ by an innundation of every sin, and every kind of corruption that was ever committed or practised under heaven: “The whole head is sick, the whole heart faint; from the crown of the head to the sole of our feet, we are full of wounds and bruises, and putrifying sores.” Shall there no man be found then to stand in the gap? None dare to attempt at least to stem the impetuous torrent? None venture to go out with their lives in their hand, and cry to a profane, careless, busy world, “Ho! every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters.” Can any considerate, much more can any real good man be so cruel, as even to wish that the gospel should be confined either to church or meeting, when there are so many thousands and tens of thousands, who as to spiritual things, know not their right hand from their left, and who never go either to church or meeting at all? If some are called to be settled ministers (and may the great Head of the church fill all our parish-churches and meeting-houses with true evangelical pastors!) may not others be called out to be itinerants? Have there not been presbyters at large, even from the earliest times of christianity? And if some of a more inferior rank and order should be qualified, and thrust forth by the great LORD of the harvest, when the harvest is so great, and the labourers so few, who shall dare to say to Him, “What dost thou?” Shall our eye be evil because he is good? If _Isaiah_ was a courtier, was not the Prophet _Amos_ a herdsman? In the days of _Moses_, when the _Israelites_ were under a more immediate divine theocracy, news was brought him, and that too even by a _Joshua_, that _Eldad_ and _Medad_ were prophesying in the camp, without his licence or his ordination; what doth this meek man of GOD say? “Enviest thou for my sake? Would to GOD all the LORD’s people were prophets.” And in the days of our LORD himself, his beloved disciple _John_, before his heart was more enlarged by divine love, said unto him; “Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not with us, and we forbad him, because he followeth not with us.” But what said JESUS, that good Shepherd and Bishop of souls? “Forbid him not.”

Such instances, such striking instances as these, methinks, should make good men careful not to give way to a narrow, selfish, bigotted spirit; and caution them against joining with the world in smiting their fellow-servants, by crying down or speaking slightingly and reproachfully of a method of preaching and acting, which, maugre all opposition, for these thirty years last past hath been blessed and owned of GOD to the converting of thousands; not to a bare name, sect, or party, or merely to head or notional knowledge; but “from darkness unto light, from the power of Satan unto GOD;” from holding the mere form, to the true abiding possession and practice of true scriptural godliness, in heart, lip, and life. But if good or bad men now dislike, and therefore oppose such an irregular way of acting, they may be told to their comfort, that their uneasiness on this account, in all probability, will not be of long continuance; for few will choose to bid, or offer themselves candidates for such _airy pluralities_: to go thus without the camp, bearing all manner of reproach; to become in this manner; “Spectacles to GOD, to angels, and to men;” to sacrifice not only our natural, but spiritual affections and connections, and to part from those who are as dear to them as their own souls, in order to pass the _Atlantic_, and bear the colds and heats of foreign climes; these are such uninviting things to corrupt nature, that if we will have but a little patience till a few old weary heads are laid in the silent grave, these uncommon gospel-meteors, these field-phenomenas, that seldom appear in the latitude of _England_, scarce above once in a century, without the help of any coercive means, will of themselves soon disappear. They begin to be pretty well in disrepute already: yet a little while, and in all human probability they will quite vanish away. But though I am neither a prophet, nor the son of a prophet, I am greatly mistaken, if in the Redeemer’s own good time and way, some spiritual phœnix will not hereafter arise, some blessed gospel-instrument be raised, that shall make the devil and his three-fold army, “The lust of the flesh, the lust of the eye, and the pride of life,” to fly before the sound of the gospel trumpet.

I have dwelt the longer upon this particular, Reverend Sir, because the present learned Bishop of _Gloucester_, in his late volume, intitled, “The Doctrine of Grace,” is pleased to observe more than once, that he finds fault not so much with the matter, as the manner of the Methodists preaching. But if by the _manner_, his Lordship would have us to understand, not their manner of preaching in the field, but the manner of their delivery, whether in the church or field, I would humbly ask his Lordship, if he ever heard any of them preach? If not, doth our law condemn any man, or any set of men, unheard? And I would humbly enquire further of his Lordship, and all others whom it may concern, how they would have them or any others to preach?

I remember the great Doctor _Delany_, when I had the honour of being with him, many years ago, at the Right Reverend Dr. _Boulter_’s, then Lord Primate of _Ireland_, among other hints proper for a young preacher, gave me to understand, that whenever he went up into a pulpit, he desired to look upon it as the last time he should ever preach, or the last time that the people should ever hear him. O that all preachers, whether within or without doors, however dignified or distinguished, went always up into their respective pulpits thus impressed! They would then preach, as _Apelles_ once said he painted, _for Eternity_. They would then act the part of true gospel christian orators, and not only calmly and ♦coolly inform the understanding, but by persuasive pathetic address, endeavour to move the affections, and warm the heart. To act otherwise, bespeaks a sad ignorance of human nature, and such an inexcuseable indolence and indifference in the preacher, as must constrain the hearers, whether they will or not, to suspect, that the preacher, let him be who he will, only deals in the false commerce of unfelt truths.

♦ “cooly” replaced with “coolly”

Were our lawyers, our counsellors, or our players to act thus, both the bar and the stage would soon be deserted; and therefore the answer of Mr. _Betterton_, to a worthy prelate, when he asked him, “How it came to pass that the clergy, who spoke of things real, affected the people so little, and the players, who spoke of things barely imaginary, affected them so much,” is worthy of lasting regard. “My Lord, says Mr. _Betterton_, I can assign but one reason, which is, we players speak of things imaginary as though they were real, and too many of the clergy speak of things real as though they were imaginary.” Thus it was in his, and all know it is too much the case in our time: hence it is, that even on our most important occasions, the worthy gentlemen concerned in our public charities, generally find themselves more obliged to the musicians than the preachers, for the largeness of their collections: and hence, no doubt it is, that upon our most solemn anniversaries, after long previous notice hath been given, when some even of our Lords Spiritual do preach, perhaps not two Lords temporal come to hear them.

Sorry am I, Reverend Sir, to find so true, what a celebrated orator, in one of his lectures delivered, (if I am not mistaken, in the University of _Oxford_) takes the liberty of saying, “That it is to be feared this is too much the state of the pulpit-elocution in general, in the Church of _England_: on which account, there never was perhaps a religious sect upon earth, whose hearts were so little engaged in the act of public worship, as the members of that church. To be pleased, we must feel, and we are pleased with feeling. The Presbyterians are moved; the Methodists are moved; they go to their meetings and tabernacles with delight; the very Quakers are moved; fantastical and extravagant as the language of their emotions is, yet still they are moved by it, and they love their form of worship for that reason: whilst much the greater part of the members of the Church of _England_, are either banished from it through disgust, or reluctantly attend the service as a disagreeable duty.” Thus far Mr. _Sheridan_.

But why go I to the bar or stage to fetch vouchers in defence of earnestness in heart and action, when speaking for the most High GOD, and offering salvation to precious and immortal souls, for whom the ever-adorable Mediator shed his precious blood. You know, Reverend Sir, the character given of _Bucolspherus_, one of the Reformers, _Vividus vultus, vividi oculi, vividæ manus, denique omnia vivida_. You have also heard of a Prophet who was commanded by the LORD GOD himself, to smite with his hand, and stamp with his foot; and gospel-ministers in general are commanded to “cry aloud, and spare not, and to lift up their voices like trumpets.” But why refer I even to Reformers or Prophets? Rather let me mention the GOD and Saviour of all, even our LORD JESUS CHRIST; on whose manner of preaching, the multitudes that followed him, when he came down from the mount, made this just observation, that “He spake as one having authority, and not as the scribes.” And after his resurrection, when beginning at _Moses_ and all the Prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself, the two disciples at _Emmaus_ said one to another, “Did not our hearts burn within us while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?” And I believe we may venture to affirm, that if preachers in general spake and opened the scriptures more under the influence and energy of his blessed Spirit, whether in consecrated or unconsecrated ground, within or without doors, they would find their hearers hearts in a degree would burn within them too.

But I have done.――You will be so good, Reverend Sir, as to pardon not only the freedom but prolixity of this. I have already mentioned my motives for writing; and therefore shall now close with the advice given upon a similar occasion to an ecclesiastical council by _Gamaliel_, a doctor of law, and had in reputation among all the people: “And now I say unto you, refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or work be of men, it will come to nought; but if it be of GOD, ye cannot overthrow it: lest haply ye be found to fight against GOD.” To this GOD, and the word of his grace, I most humbly recommend you and the whole University; and earnestly praying, that all at all times may have a right judgment given them in all things, I beg leave to subscribe myself, Reverend Sir,

Your willing servant for CHRIST’s sake,

GEORGE WHITEFIELD.

OBSERVATIONS
ON
Select PASSAGES of SCRIPTURE.
TURNED INTO
CATECHETICAL QUESTIONS.

Begun, _March 12, 1738_.

OBSERVATIONS
on Select PASSAGES of SCRIPTURE.

LUKE, CHAPTER XXIII.

Ver.

8. Q. _WHY would not JESUS CHRIST shew |Herod| a miracle?_

_A._ Because in all probability, it was only to satisfy his
curiosity that he desired to see one.

Q. _What may we learn from |Herod|’s never having seen CHRIST
before?_

_A._ That CHRIST was no friend to courts; that pomp and
greatness keep thousands from JESUS CHRIST; and that we ought
therefore rather to thank GOD for our being in a lower estate.

12. Q. _What may we learn from the friendship made between |Pilate|
and |Herod|, by the death of CHRIST?_

_A._ That Jew and Gentile, by CHRIST’s death, were to be
united together in one body: _Herod_ being a Jew, and _Pontius
Pilate_ a Gentile.

18. Q. _When do we as these Jews did?_

_A._ When we prefer our sins, (which are robbers, because they
rob us of GOD’s favour) to our Saviour’s service.

26. Q. _What may we learn from |Simon| the Cyrenian’s bearing the
cross?_

_A._ That they who would follow CHRIST, must follow him by the
way of the cross.

31. Q. _What is the meaning of this verse?_

_A._ A good man in scripture is compared to a green fruitful
tree, (See _Psalm_ 1st.) and wicked men to chaff, and are
represented also by a barren fig-tree: the meaning of the
verse therefore seems to be this: If they do this to me, who
am a good man, how will GOD deal with that wicked people the
Jews?

32. Q. _Why was CHRIST crucified with the thieves?_

_A._ To fulfill this saying, “And he was numbered with the
transgressors.” _Isaiah_ liii. 12.

Q. _Why between them?_

_A._ As though he was the unworthiest and basest of the three.

34. Q. _What may we learn from hence?_

_A._ To pray for our most bitter enemies.

38. Q. _Why was the superscription written in |Hebrew|, |Greek|,
and |Latin|?_

_A._ To shew that JESUS CHRIST was to be the Saviour of all
nations, tribes, and languages.

39. Q. _What may we learn from the behaviour of the impenitent
thief?_

_A._ That for the generality, those who live all their lives
in sin, die hardened.

40. Q. _What may we learn from the behaviour of the penitent thief,
and CHRIST’s behaviour towards him?_

_A._ That there is mercy for the worst of sinners, through
CHRIST the Saviour.

Q. _May wicked men draw any reasons from hence, to defer their
repentance till a death-bed?_

_A._ No, by no means.

Q. _Why?_

_A._ Because probably this thief had never heard of CHRIST
before. 2dly, He might not have been so notorious a sinner
as is imagined, though drawn in by surprize or temptation to
commit the crime for which he suffered. 3dly, GOD converted
him, to honour his Son’s death, that he might in the very
agonies thereof triumph over the devil. 4thly, Because he
gave uncommon instances of his faith: he calls CHRIST, “Lord,”
when his own disciples had forsook him, when the High-priest,
scribes, and rulers were deriding him, and his own divinity
under an eclipse: none of which circumstances are applicable
to a wilfully wicked man, that defers repentance till he comes
to die.

44. Q. _What is the sixth hour?_

_A._ Twelve at noon.

Q. _What the 9th?_

_A._ Three in the afternoon.

45. Q. _What was the vail of the temple?_

_A._ A curtain that parted the two places, where the Jews and
Gentiles worshipped.

Q. _Why was it rent in twain?_

_A._ Because by the death of CHRIST, the partition wall between
Jew and Gentile was to be broken down.

46. Q. _Why did CHRIST cry with a loud voice?_

_A._ To shew that he died full of vigour.

Q. _What may we learn from his calling GOD, Father?_

_A._ That we are to acknowledge GOD to be our father, though
under the severest dispensations of his providence.

51. Q. _What learn you from hence?_

_A._ That we must not follow a multitude to do evil.

53. Q. _Why was it remarked, that CHRIST’s grave was hewn out of
a rock?_

_A._ Because then it could not be said, that his disciples
digged under, and stole it away.

Q. _Why that he was laid in a grave, where never man before was
laid?_

_A._ Because then if any one’s body did rise, it must be that
of the LORD JESUS.

56. Q. _What may we learn from the last part of this verse?_

_A._ That even the most civil offices due to our nearest
friends, ought not to hinder us, if possible, from keeping the
sabbath-day holy.