Joseph Benson had been urged to go to America; but Wesley deemed it
desirable to send him across the Tweed to put things right in the
northern part of the kingdom. “God,” says he, “has made practical
divinity necessary, and the devil controversial. Sometimes we must
write and preach controversially; but the less the better. I think we
have few, if any, of our travelling preachers, that love controversy;
but there will always be men whose mouth it is necessary to stop;
antinomians and Calvinists in particular. By our long silence, we have
done much hurt, both to them and the cause of God. The more you preach
abroad, the better; keep to the plain, old Methodist doctrine, laid
down in the minutes of the conference. At Trevecca, you were a little
warped from this; but it was a right hand error. You will be buried
in Scotland, if you sell your mare and sit still. Keep her, and ride
continually. Sit not still, at the peril of your soul and body! Billy
Thompson never satisfied me on this head, not in the least degree. I
say still, we will have travelling preachers in Scotland, or none. Our
preachers shall either travel there, as in England, or else stay in
England.”[192]
Such were some of the difficulties which this veteran evangelist had to
meet. No wonder that he wished for help.
Chapel debts, also, still pressed heavily upon him. Hence the following
to Mr. Hopper.
“_February 6, 1773._
“MY DEAR BROTHER,--I agreed last year, though contrary to my
judgment, that we would have no more weekly subscriptions. I
purposed, likewise, in my own mind, to concern myself with the debt
no more. But, upon reflection, it seemed to me, there was one way
still, namely, not to apply to the poor at all, (though I would not
reject any that offered,) but to take the burden on myself, and try
my personal interest with the rich. I began at London, where about
£500 are subscribed. Afterwards, I wrote to many in the country.
Liverpool circuit has subscribed about £100; Bradford circuit £130.
It must be now or never. I do not know that I shall concern myself
with this matter any more. Till now we never had a rational prospect
of clearing the whole debt in one year. Now it may be done. It
certainly will, if our brethren, in other circuits, do as these above
mentioned have done. What I desire of you is to second the letters
I have wrote, encouraging each man of property in your circuit to
exert himself; at least, to send me an answer: this, you know, is
but common civility. Now do what you can; and show that you, my old
friend, are not the last and least in love towards your affectionate
friend and brother,
“JOHN WESLEY.”[193]
It is now time to trace Wesley’s wanderings in 1773.
On Sunday evening, March 7, he set out from London to Ireland, taking,
for the first time, his carriage with him, which, however, he was
deprived of the opportunity of using. He writes: “March 30--I was a
little surprised to find the commissioners of the customs would not
permit my chaise to be landed, because, they said, the captain of a
packet boat had no right to bring over goods. Poor pretence! However, I
was more obliged to them than I then knew; for had it come on shore, it
would have been utterly spoiled.”
The result was, that Wesley had to hire a chaise instead of riding in
his own; a vehicle which at Ballibac ferry went overboard, and, with
difficulty, was recovered; and which, on another occasion, it took five
hours to drag less than a dozen miles; which, in a third instance, was
disabled by the breaking of the hinder axletree; and which, more than
once, was in danger of being dashed to pieces by furious mobs.
Everywhere his congregations were large. In many instances, he had
whole troops of soldiers to hear him; and nowhere did he meet with any
serious disturbance, except at Waterford, where the papists created a
riot, in which heavy blows were given; and at Enniskillen, where a mob
again and again fell upon the unfortunate carriage, cut it with stones
in several places, smashed its windows, and well-nigh covered it with
sludge.
Three months were spent in itinerating the sister kingdom. Scores
of towns and villages, between Dublin and Galway, Belfast and Cork,
were favoured with his ministry; and diversified were the incidents
with which he met. At Eyrecourt, the crowd gave him a loud huzza as
he passed into the market place to preach. At Clare, for want of
other accommodation, he was glad to accept a bed in the soldiers’
barracks. At Castlebar, on finding the “Charter school a picture of
slothfulness, nastiness, and desolation; and all the children, not
only dirty, but with their stockings hanging about their heels, and
in a most disreputable plight, he reported the facts to the trustees
at Dublin, with the hope of effecting a reformation.” At Limerick,
William Myles, a youth in the seventeenth year of his age, was one of
Wesley’s hearers, began to meet in class, and, five years afterwards,
became an itinerant preacher.[194] At Armagh, he wrote his invaluable
sermon “On Predestination,” preached it at Londonderry, and, at the
request of several of the clergy, published it.[195] At Armagh, also,
he heard what he had not heard for fifty years,--an anthem in a church.
At Lisburn, all his spare time was taken up by poor patients, who came
to him for physic. He writes: “What has fashion to do with physic? Why,
in Ireland almost as much as with headdress. Blisters, for anything or
nothing, were all the fashion when I was in Ireland last. Now the grand
fashionable medicine, for twenty diseases, is mercury sublimate! Why is
it not a halter, or a pistol? They would cure a little more speedily.”
On the 5th of July, Wesley started for England, having to hold his
annual conference in London. He says: “About eleven we crossed Dublin
bar, and were at Hoylake the next afternoon. This was the first night
I ever lay awake in my life, though I was at ease in body and mind. I
believe few can say this: in seventy years I never lost one night’s
sleep.”
Wesley reached the metropolis on the 17th of July; and, on the 21st,
made the following entry in his journal: “We had our quarterly meeting
at London; at which I was surprised to find, that our income does not
yet meet our expense. We were again near £200 bad. My private account I
find still worse. I have laboured as much as many writers; and all my
labour has gained me, in seventy years, a debt of five or six hundred
pounds.”
There is some obscurity in this, as will appear from the following
correspondence.
“To Messrs. THOMAS BALL and ALEXANDER MATHER.
“LEWISHAM, _February 27, 1772_.[196]
“THE thing which I desire you to do is this, to see that an exact
account be kept of all the books in Great Britain and Ireland,
printed and sold on my account. You comprehend how many particulars
are contained under this general. To do this accurately will require
much thought. But you will bear that burden for God’s sake, and for
the sake of your affectionate brother,
“JOHN WESLEY.”
(Reply.)
“REVEREND AND DEAR SIR,--I beg to lay before you Mr. Mather’s
account, sent me by letter of the 18th past, of the gross value of
your books, taken in February and March, 1773; viz.:--
£ _s._ _d._
“In London, etc. 3754 4 0
Bristol 4253 4 8
Country 2716 1 8
Cash 183 2 1
Debts 23 2 1
--------------
10929 15 4
Stock in February, 1772 8833 0 7
--------------
£2096 14 9
--------------
“Supposed to be owing in March last to printers, binders, etc., £500.
“I am, reverend sir, your most obedient and dutiful servant,
“THOMAS BALL.
“Examined 21st September, 1773:--THOMAS MARRIOTT,
RICHARD KEMP.”[197]
According to the above statement, Wesley was in debt to printers and
binders to the amount of £500; but, at the same time, he was possessed
of books whose gross value was nearly £11,000. How to reconcile the
discrepancy we hardly know. The facts are furnished as we find them.
One thing is certain, there was something wrong. Some have supposed
that Wesley’s wife had, by means of false keys, obtained access to the
book steward’s cash, and helped herself;[198] but of that there is no
conclusive proof; and it is certainly neither generous nor just to
assert the thing without proving it. All that we know further is, that
poor Samuel Franks, the book steward, a man of great uprightness and
earnest piety,[199] but naturally of a sensitive disposition, within
a fortnight, fell into a fit of insanity, and hanged himself.[200]
Without mentioning this, Wesley writes: “October 6--The rest of the
week I made what inquiry I could into the state of my accounts. Some
confusion had arisen from the sudden death of my bookkeeper; but it was
less than might have been expected.”
Here we must leave the matter. On the supposition that Wesley
considered his stock of books not his own, but merely held in trust
for the general good, it was quite correct, that, as the result of his
literary labours, he was in debt to the amount, as he himself says, “of
five or six hundred pounds.” In one respect, he was the possessor of a
large amount of property; in another, he was actually in debt.
Wesley’s conference began in London on August 3. He writes: “August
3--Our conference began. I preached mornings as well as evenings; and
it was all one. I found myself just as strong as if I had preached but
once a day.” Good old simple hearted Samuel Bardsley, then an itinerant
of five years’ standing, writes, in a manuscript letter now before us:
“I never was at a more comfortable conference. We had a deal of love
among us. Dear Mr. Wesley laboured hard. I had the pleasure of hearing
him preach twelve times. He said, he had not preached so much at a
conference these twenty years, and never was more assisted.”
It was now that Joseph Bradford was received on trial; and that Thomas
Olivers was appointed to be Wesley’s travelling companion; honest
Bradford taking the place of Olivers a year afterwards, and retaining
it for the next eight years. Wesley’s effort to extinguish the chapel
debts had resulted in a subscription amounting to £2237. Forty-seven
preachers were present, and, “in order to lay a foundation for future
union,” signed the following agreement.
“WE whose names are underwritten, being thoroughly convinced of the
necessity of a close union between those whom God is pleased to use
as instruments in this glorious work, in order to preserve this union
between ourselves, are resolved, God being our helper,--
“I. To devote ourselves entirely to God: denying ourselves, taking up
our cross daily, steadily aiming at one thing, to save our own souls,
and them that hear us.
“II. To preach the old Methodist doctrines, and no other, contained
in the minutes of the conferences.
“III. To observe and enforce the whole Methodist discipline, laid
down in the said minutes.”
Wesley had failed in obtaining the consent of Fletcher to be his
successor; and, hence, the drawing up and signing of this conferential
compact.
On the first Sunday night, after the conference concluded, Wesley set
out, by coach, on his accustomed tour to Cornwall, which occupied the
next three weeks.
In returning, he spent a month at Bristol, and among the societies
round about. On October 6, he started in his chaise, at two o’clock
in the morning, and, in the evening, arrived in London; thus, in one
winter’s day, driving in his own conveyance a distance of one hundred
and fourteen miles. The rest of October, except the Sundays, was spent
in what he calls his “little tours,” through the five counties of
Bedford, Northampton, Oxford, Buckingham, and Kent.
Ten days, in November, were spent in Norfolk; then he met the London
classes; and afterwards went off to Sussex, and then to Kent. The last
entry in his year’s itinerary is: “London: December 25, and on the
following days, we had many happy opportunities of celebrating the
solemn feast days, according to the design of their institution. We
concluded the year with a fast day, closed with a solemn watchnight.”
Thus, in observing feast and fast days, ended the year 1773. One of
these, of course, was Christmas day, another St. Stephen’s, a third
St. John’s, and a fourth the Innocents’ day. To some it may seem
strange, that Wesley, the Methodist, should observe such festivals as
these; but, in such matters, Wesley was still the Churchman. Besides,
throughout life, it was one of his most sacred delights to think, not
only of the living, but likewise of the dead. On the 12th of June, in
this very year of 1773, he wrote a letter, an extract from which is
worth preserving.
“It has, in all ages, been allowed, that the communion of saints
extends to those in paradise, as well as those on earth, as they are
all one body, united under one Head; and
‘Can death’s interposing tide
Spirits one in Christ divide?’
“But it is difficult to say, either what kind, or what degree of
union, may be between them. It is not improbable, their fellowship
with us is far more sensible than ours with them. Suppose any of
them are present, they are hid from our eyes, but we are not hid
from their sight. They, no doubt, clearly discern all our words and
actions, if not all our thoughts too. For it is hard to think these
walls of flesh and blood can intercept the view of an angelic being.
But we have, in general, only a faint and indistinct perception of
their presence, unless in some peculiar instances, where it may
answer some gracious ends of Divine Providence. Then it may please
God to permit, that they should be perceptible, either by some of our
outward senses, or by an internal sense, for which human language has
not a name. But I suppose this is not a common blessing. I have known
but few instances of it. To keep up constant and close communion with
God is the most likely mean to obtain this also.”[201]
Up to the present, nothing has been said concerning the progress, in
1773, of the Calvinian controversy. Fletcher’s pen was not idle, but
the only works he published were: first, “An Appeal to Matter of Fact
and Common Sense; or, a Rational Demonstration of Man’s Corrupt and
Lost Estate,” 12mo, 296 pages; and, secondly, “A Dreadful Phenomenon
Described and Improved, being a Particular Account of the Earthquake at
Madeley, on May 27, 1773:” 12mo, 104 pages. Neither of these, however,
had any immediate bearing on the matters in dispute.
On the other side, good old Berridge, of Everton, brought out his
“Christian World Unmasked”; which, if full of faults, is, at all
events, free from dulness; a book, like its author, often odd,
sometimes coarse, but always pious; full of genius, and full of
goodness; seasoned with Calvinism’s highest flavour, but entirely free
from the personal scurrility so characteristic of others.
Toplady sent nothing to the press; but his private letters were as
full of bitterness as ever. “I am told,” he writes, “that Mr. Fletcher
has it in contemplation to make an attack on me. He is welcome. I am
ready for him. Tenderness has no effect on Mr. Wesley and his pretended
_family of love_. For my own part, I shall never attempt to hew such
millstones with a feather. They must be served as nettles; press them
close, and they cannot sting. Cobbler _Tom_ laments publicly, from his
preaching tub (misnamed a pulpit), that such an antinomian as myself
should have such crowded auditories, while the preachers of the _pure
gospel_ (by which he means _free will_, _merit_, and _perfection_)
are so thinly attended. The envy, malice, and fury of Wesley’s party
are inconceivable. But, as violently as they hate _me_, I dare not,
I cannot hate _them_ in return. I have not so learned Christ. Your
idea of Mr. John Wesley and his associates exactly tallies with mine.
Abstracted from all warmth, and from all prejudice, I believe him to
be the most rancorous hater of the gospel system that ever appeared in
England. I except not Pelagius himself. The latter had some remains of
modesty, and preserved some appearances of decency; but the former has
outlived all pretentions to both.”[202]
Could this impulsive reviler be actually sincere, when he said he durst
not, and could not, hate Wesley and his party?
Toplady, so far as printing was concerned, was silent; but Richard Hill
begun the year as vigorously as ever, by publishing his “Finishing
Stroke; containing some Strictures on the Rev. Mr. Fletcher’s pamphlet,
entitled, ‘Logica Genevensis, or a Fourth Check to Antinomianism:’”
8vo, 57 pages. This characteristic piece is dated January 2, 1773.
The author confesses, that he had formed a resolution to be silent;
but “Logica Genevensis” was too provoking to be passed in silence.
This, however, was to be the real “finishing stroke.” Sir Richard
writes: “the unfair quotations you have made, and the shocking
misrepresentations and calumnies you have been guilty of, will, for the
future, prevent me from looking into any of your books, if you should
write a thousand volumes. So here the controversy must end; at least,
it shall end for me.”
Poor Sir Richard! Such was his resolve; and yet, almost before the
printer’s ink was dry, his godly impetuosity sent forth another
octavo pamphlet, of the same size as the former one, entitled “Logica
Wesleiensis; or the Farrago Double Distilled. With an heroic Poem
in Praise of Mr. John Wesley:” 63 pages. Hill, as usual, is angry
and vindictive. He tells his readers, that he had never seen Wesley
“above four or five times in his life; once in the pulpit at West
Street chapel; once at a friend’s house; and once or twice at his own
lodgings in Vine Street.” He writes: “I find it just as easy to catch
an eel by the tail, as to lay hold of Mr. Wesley for one single moment.
Oh, what quirks, quibbles, and evasions does this gentleman descend to,
in order to shift off his own inconsistencies!” As a specimen of the
writer’s “heroic poem,” we give the following.
“A choice _Preservative_ I have,
The like was never known;
With potions, juleps, drops, and pukes,
Peculiarly my own.
Help _Cobbler_ Tom, and thou Swiss friend,
To lay John Calvin’s ghost;
For what with _cynics_, _bigots_, _bears_,
I fear the day is lost.
We three shall incantations raise,
With _thunderings_, lightnings, hail;
And if the hobgoblin won’t avaunt,
I’ll bring my comet’s tail.”
Sir Richard was not content with this. During the year, he published
another octavo pamphlet, of 30 pages, with the wordy title, “Three
Letters written by Richard Hill, Esq., to the Rev. J. Fletcher, vicar
of Madeley, setting forth Mr. Hill’s Reasons for declining any further
Controversy relative to Mr. Wesley’s Principles.”
He states, that he has heard that Fletcher “wishes to have done with
controversy;” and upon the strength of this, he has written to his
London bookseller to stop the sale of his own publications. He begs
pardon for “whatever may have savoured too much of his own spirit”;
and says, restraint should be put upon several of Wesley’s preachers,
“particularly upon one Perronet, of whose superlatively abusive and
insolent little piece Charles Wesley had testified his abhorrence from
the pulpit.” He wishes Wesley to be made acquainted with the action he
has taken, and says: “If I stop the sale of my books, I hope that of
the Four Checks will be stopped also.” He adds, that his mother’s death
had recently taken place; and then, at the end of his pamphlet, gives
“a proposed title” to Fletcher’s works, and also “A Creed for Arminians
and Perfectionists”; the latter signed by “J. F., J. W., and W. S.”
Such is the substance of the three letters, which, in the first
instance, were sent to Fletcher privately, and were not intended for
publication. By some means, however, the fact of the letters having
been written became bruited abroad, and certain hasty logicians deduced
the unauthorised inference, that Sir Richard had recanted his Calvinian
doctrines. This was too bitter a pill to be swallowed; and, hence,
the writer, who was weary of the war, gave his private letters to the
public, and attached to them a preface which had better not been penned.
For instance, he speaks of Thomas Olivers as “a journeyman cordwainer,
who had written a pamphlet against him, which, though in itself
_black of the grain_, was afterwards _lacquered up_, _new soled_,
and _heel tapped_ by his master, before it was exposed to sale.” He
adds: “I shall not take the least notice of him, or read a line of his
composition, any more than, if I was travelling, I would stop to lash,
or even order my footman to lash, every impertinent little quadruped in
a village, that should come out and bark at me; but would willingly let
the contemptible animal have the satisfaction of thinking he had driven
me out of sight.”
He then proceeds to accuse Fletcher of “misrepresenting facts,”
and of using “artifices, false glosses, pious frauds, declamation,
chicanery, and evasion, to throw dust into the eyes of his readers;”
and concludes, by saying, that though he cannot read any more of the
productions of Fletcher’s pen, and, therefore, cannot write replies
to them, yet, notwithstanding all in his letters to the contrary, he
shall still keep on sale his “Paris Conversation”; his “Five Letters”;
his “Review of Wesley’s Doctrines”; his “Logica Wesleiensis”; and his
“Finishing Stroke.”
Such was the position of Sir Richard Hill in 1773. He wished for peace.
Why? Because he was vanquished.
What action did Wesley take? On the 1st of April was published, “Some
Remarks on Mr. Hill’s Farrago Double Distilled. By John Wesley.”[203]
12mo, 44 pages.
Wesley’s “Remarks” are characterised by his wonted keenness, courtesy,
wit, and brevity. In conclusion, he writes:
“I beg leave, in my turn, to give you a few advices. 1. Be calm. Do
not venture into the field again till you are master of your temper.
2. Be good natured. Passion is not commendable; but ill nature still
less. 3. Be courteous. Show good manners, as well as good nature, to
your opponent, of whatever kind. 4. Be merciful. When you have gained
an advantage over your opponent, do not press it to the uttermost.
Remember the honest quaker’s advice to his friend a few years ago:
‘Art thou not content to lay John Wesley upon his back, but thou
wilt tread his guts out?’ 5. In writing, do not consider yourself as
a man of fortune, or take any liberty with others on that account.
Men of sense simply consider what is written; not whether the writer
be a lord or a cobbler. 6. Lastly, Remember, ‘for every idle word
men shall speak, they shall give an account in the day of judgment.’
Remember, ‘by thy words shalt thou be justified; or by thy words
shalt thou be condemned.’”
Wesley’s other publications, in 1773, were nine 12mo volumes of his
collected works, making together 3439 pages. In these were included
five small works, now first published: namely,--1. “An Extract of Two
Discourses on the Conflagration and Renovation of the World: written by
James Knight, D.D., late Vicar of St. Sepulchre, London;” in which, by
the way, a theory is propounded antagonistic to the millenarian theory,
which Wesley countenanced some years before. 2. “An Extract from a
Treatise concerning Religious Affections: by the late Rev. Jonathan
Edwards.” 3. “A Short Account of John Dillon.” 4. “Instructions for
Members of Religious Societies.” 5. “Christian Reflections. Translated
from the French.” These “Reflections” are three hundred and thirty-six
in number. We give one as a specimen of the rest. “The three greatest
punishments which God can inflict on sinners, in this world, are: 1. To
let loose their own desires upon them. 2. To let them succeed in all
they wish for. And, 3. To suffer them to continue many years in the
quiet enjoyment thereof.”
Besides the above, Wesley also published “A Short Roman History.” 12mo,
155 pages.