[204] Manuscript letter.
[205] Wesley’s Works, vol. xii., p. 395.
[206] _Methodist Magazine_, 1825, p. 386.
[207] The following probably refers to the ghost stories,
in Wesley’s Journal, under date May 25, 1768. The
fifteenth number of his journal, containing these
accounts, was published in this same year, 1774.
[208] Glanvil, the author of “Some Considerations touching
the being of Witches and Witchcraft”; and Mather, the
author of “The Wonders of the Invisible World, or the
Trials of Witches.”
[209] Wesley’s Works, vol. xii., p. 131.
[210] Wesley’s Works, vol. xii., p. 373.
[211] Mr. Brooke was three years the junior of Wesley, and,
about the time when Methodism had its birth, was the
honoured friend of many of the most distinguished
personages in London society. Swift prophesied
wonders of him; Pope received him with open arms;
Pitt paid him marked attention; and the Prince of
Wales presented him with valuable tokens of his
friendship. The publication however of his tragedy,
“Gustavus Vasa,” offended the government, and he
retired to Ireland, and devoted his fine genius
wholly to the muses. He was a man of rare ability,
and an earnest Christian.
[212] Life of Mr. Henry Brooke, p. 90.
[213] He died in 1783, three years after Wesley published
his revised and abridged edition in two vols., 12mo.
[214] _Methodist Magazine_, 1787, p. 160.
[215] _Christian Miscellany_, 1846, p. 93.
[216] Asbury’s Journal, vol. i., p. 112.
[217] Palmer’s “Four Years in the Old World,” p. 260.
[218] Taylor’s manuscript journal.
[219] Memoirs of Cadogan, p. 37.
[220] _Methodist Magazine_, 1787, p. 44.
1775.
Age 72
According to his custom, Wesley spent the first two months of 1775 in
London, and in short preaching excursions to Northamptonshire and other
places.
The nation, at this period, was in a state of the highest excitement.
On February 9, the two houses of parliament presented an address to
King George III., stating that the British colonists in America had
risen in rebellion, and begging his majesty to “take the most effectual
measures to enforce obedience to the laws and authority of the supreme
legislature.” His majesty’s reply was affirmative; and parliament was
requested to increase both the naval and military forces.
Wesley was not the man to be silent in great emergencies. He writes:
“Sunday, January 29--Finding many were dejected by the threatening
posture of public affairs, I strongly enforced our Lord’s words, ‘Why
are ye fearful, O ye of little faith?’” Three weeks later, he preached
at the Foundery, what the _Westminster Journal_ described as, “an awful
sermon, on the horrid effects of a civil war”; observing “that, of all
scourges from God, war was the most to be deprecated, because it often
swept away all traces of religion, and even of humanity.” The text was
Daniel iv. 27: “Let my counsel be acceptable to thee, and break off thy
sins by righteousness, and thine iniquities by shewing mercy to the
poor; if it may be a lengthening of thy tranquillity.”
Both England and America were terribly excited; but space prevents our
entering into details. Suffice it to say, that the alleged grievance of
the American colonists was their being taxed, without their consent, by
the English parliament. Dr. Johnson was known to be a great hater as
well as a great genius. “Sir,” said he, concerning the miscellaneous
and mongrel colonists across the Atlantic, “Sir, they are a race of
convicts, and ought to be thankful for anything we allow them short
of hanging.” No wonder that the English government, already at their
wits’ end, applied to Johnson to assist them with his powerful pen. He
did so, by the publication, in 1775, of his famous pamphlet, entitled,
“Taxation no Tyranny; an Answer to the Resolutions and Address of the
American Congress.”[221] No sooner was it issued, than, with or without
leave, Wesley abridged it, and, without the least reference to its
origin, published it as his own, in a quarto sheet of four pages, with
the title, “A Calm Address to our American Colonies. By the Rev. Mr.
John Wesley, M.A. Price one penny.”
This was an injudicious and unwarrantable act, except on the
supposition that there was some secret understanding between him and
Johnson; and even then the thing had too much the aspect of plagiarism
to be wise. Johnson greatly reverenced Patty Hall, Wesley’s unfortunate
sister, and always treated her as one of his confidential friends. For
Wesley himself he also entertained great respect, and was only vexed
that he was not able to secure more of his company. “John Wesley’s
conversation,” said he, “is good, but he is never at leisure. He is
always obliged to go at a certain hour. This is very disagreeable to a
man who loves to fold his legs and have out his talk, as I do.”[222]
There was unquestionably a friendship between the two; and it is
possible that Wesley had Johnson’s consent to his publication of the
abridgment of Johnson’s pamphlet. In a letter to Wesley, dated February
6, 1776, Johnson wrote: “I have thanks to return for the addition
of your important suffrage to my argument on the American question.
To have gained such a mind as yours may justly confirm me in my own
opinion. What effect my paper has had upon the public I know not; but I
have no reason to be discouraged. The lecturer was surely in the right
who, though he saw his audience slinking away, refused to quit the
chair while Plato stayed.”[223] This certainly gives some countenance
to the supposition we have ventured to suggest. Still, there can be
no doubt that Wesley fairly exposed himself to acrimonious attack by
publishing the _brochure_ as his own.
Wesley was now one of the most conspicuous men in England; and,
perhaps, no ecclesiastical personage of the realm swayed a wider
influence over the masses, on questions involving religious interests.
Hence, the publication of his “Calm Address” produced an unparalleled
sensation; and this was the greater, because it was known that, up to
this period, Wesley had sympathised with the colonists rather than
otherwise. Indeed, he had declared five years before, in his “Free
Thoughts on Public Affairs”: “I do not defend the measures which have
been taken with regard to America; I doubt whether any man can defend
them, either on the foot of law, equity, or prudence.” Of course,
Wesley had a perfect right to change his opinions, which he says he
did on reading Johnson’s “Taxation no Tyranny”; but when a public man
like Wesley does that, he can hardly escape criticism of an unfriendly
nature. The world dislikes changelings, and hesitates to trust
them. Wesley, in the teeth of former sentiments, now made Johnson’s
sentiments his own, contending not only that the English parliament had
power to tax the American colonies, but also that it was a reasonable
thing for the colonists to reimburse the mother country for some part
of the large expense that had been incurred in defending the colonial
rights, and that the whole of the present agitation was promoted by
a few men in England, who were determined enemies to monarchy, and
who wished to establish a republican form of government, which, of
all others, was the most despotic. The result was, Wesley was at once
pounced upon as a plagiarist and a renegade of the worst description.
Countless pamphlets were published, only a few of which can be noticed
here.
One of his principal antagonists was the Rev. Caleb Evans, then a
baptist minister at Broadmead, Bristol, and in the thirty-seventh
year of his age,--a man of good sense, a diligent student, a faithful
pastor, and extensively useful; but a rampant advocate of what was
called liberty, and, therefore, a well wisher to the republican
rebellion across the Atlantic.
Evans’s first publication was “A Letter to the Rev. Mr. John Wesley,
occasioned by his ‘Calm Address’”: 12mo, 24 pages. He taunts Wesley
with having so suddenly changed his opinions; with having, at the late
election, advised the Bristol Methodists to vote for the “_American
candidate_”; and with having, at no remote period, recommended a book
entitled, “An Argument in Defence of the exclusive right claimed by the
Colonies to tax themselves.”
Wesley’s reply to this was the republication of his “Calm Address,”
with a preface prefixed, in which he acknowledges that the “Address”
was an extract “of the chief arguments from ‘Taxation no Tyranny,’”
with “an application” of his own “to those whom it most concerned.” In
a page and a half he answers Evans’s objections, and says that all “the
arguments in his tract may be contained in a nutshell.”
Another attack on Wesley, which, before the year was out, reached a
second edition, was “A Cool Reply to a Calm Address, lately published
by Mr. John Wesley. By T. S.” 12mo, 33 pages. What this production
lacked in argument it made up in scurrilous innuendo. Wesley is told
that his “religious principles are a species of popery,” and that he is
in quest of “a mitre”; though he “ought to sit in sackcloth and pour
dust upon his head.”
Evans also, before the expiration of 1775, issued a new edition of
his letter, 12mo, 32 pages, in the preface to which he waxes angry,
in exposing what he calls “the shameful versatility and disingenuity
of this artful man;” and does his utmost to fasten upon Wesley a
deliberate falsehood, because Wesley had denied that he had ever seen
the book which Evans had accused him of recommending, though both
William Pine, his own printer, and the Rev. James Roquet, his friend,
were both prepared to attest on oath that he had recommended the book
to them.
Here then was a direct personal issue between them. Thomas Olivers, in
his “Full Defence of the Rev. John Wesley,” 12mo, 24 pages, published
in 1776, gives the explanation. Wesley’s denial was not owing to
untruthfulness, but forgetfulness. “Mr. Wesley,” says Olivers, “is now
an old man, and yet has such a variety and multiplicity of business
as few men could manage, even in the prime of life. There are few
weeks in which he does not travel two or three hundred miles; preach
and exhort in public between twenty and thirty times, and often more;
answer thirty or forty letters; speak with as many persons in private,
concerning things of deep importance; and prepare, either in whole
or in part, something for the press. Add to all this, that often, in
that short space of time, a variety of tracts on different subjects
pass through his hands, particularly as he travels, and that if any
tract does not immediately relate to his office as a divine, though he
may give it a cursory reading, yet he does not think it necessary to
charge his memory with its contents: I say, when all these things are
considered, no one will think it strange that his memory should often
fail.”
This was a reasonable explanation of an awkward discrepancy; but
Wesley, who was incapable of falsehood, hardly needed the defence of
his ingenious friend Olivers. He had already written the following to
Mr. Roquet himself.
“_November 12, 1775._
“DEAR JAMES,--I will now simply tell you the thing as it is. As I
was returning from the Leeds conference, one gave me the tract which
you refer to, part of which I read on my journey. The spirit of it
I observed to be admirably good; and I _then_ thought the arguments
conclusive. In consequence of which, I suppose, (though I do not
remember it,) I recommended it both to you and others; but I had so
entirely forgotten it, that even when it was brought to me the other
day, I could not recollect that I had seen it.
“I am, etc.,
“JOHN WESLEY.”[224]
Besides the pamphlets already mentioned, there were published, in 1775:
“A Second Answer to Mr. John Wesley. By W. D.” 12mo, 22 pages. Also,
“A Wolf in Sheep’s Cloathing; or an Old Jesuit Unmasked. Containing an
account of the wonderful apparition of Father Petre’s Ghost, in the
form of the Rev. John Wesley. By Patrick Bull, Esq.” 12mo, 24 pages: a
vile production in which Wesley is branded as “a chaplain in ordinary
to the Furies, or minister extraordinary to Bellona, goddess of war;”
and is said to have “solicited to be made bishop of Quebec;” but
who, for “the jacobitical doctrines contained in his ‘Calm Address,’
deserves to be presented, not with _lawn sleeves_, but with a _hempen
neckcloth_; and, instead of a mitre, ought to have his head adorned
with a white nightcap drawn over his eyes.”
Toplady was not likely to allow such an opportunity to pass without
embracing it to vent his venom. Hence the publication of his 12mo
tract of 24 pages, entitled, “An Old Fox Tarr’d and Feather’d”; with
a fox’s head, in canonicals, for a frontispiece. The opening sentence
is characteristic of the whole effusion. “Whereunto shall I liken Mr.
John Wesley? and with what shall I compare him? I will liken him unto
_a low and puny tadpole in divinity_, which proudly seeks to disembowel
_a high and mighty whale in politics_.” He then proceeds to say,
that, “both as to matter and expression Wesley’s ‘Calm Address’ is a
bundle of Lilliputian shafts, picked and _stolen_ out of Dr. Johnson’s
pincushion. If Mr. Wesley had the least spark of shame remaining, the
simple detection of such enormous literary theft would be more terrible
to his feelings than an English _pumping_ or an American _tarring and
feathering_.”
Another pamphlet, issued in the same year, was “A Constitutional Answer
to the Rev. Mr. John Wesley’s ‘Calm Address to the American Colonies’”:
12mo, 23 pages. The last sentence is as follows: “As I have formerly
seen you, with pleasure, in the character of a _Christian minister_,
doing some good in the moral world; so it is with regret I now see
you in the character of a _court sycophant_, doing much more mischief
in the political world; injuring, perhaps irreparably injuring, your
_country_.”
“Americus,” also, in the _Gentleman’s Magazine_,[225] had his fling
against the poor Methodist. One sentence from his polished quiver must
suffice, as a specimen of others: “And now, Mr. Wesley, I take my leave
of you. You have forgot the precept of your Master, that God and mammon
cannot be served together. You have one eye upon a pension, and the
other upon heaven,--one hand stretched out to the king, and the other
raised up to God. I pray that the first may reward you, and the last
forgive you!”
These extracts might be multiplied almost _ad infinitum_. We only add,
that Fletcher, as well as Olivers, came to the defence of Wesley.
The former published his “Vindication of the Rev. Mr. Wesley’s ‘Calm
Address’: in some Letters to Mr. Caleb Evans.” 12mo, 70 pages. This
evoked from Evans an unworthy acrimonious “Reply,” 12mo, 103 pages, in
which the angry baptist not only rakes up the whole story respecting
Wesley, Roquet, and Pine, but finishes by telling the loving and
accomplished Fletcher, that he is “the most verbose, and most unmeaning
and unfair disputant, that ever took up the polemical gauntlet.”
Hampson and Whitehead censure Wesley for turning a politician. This
is a point upon which opinions will differ. Certain it is, however,
that the political part which Wesley took made him as many enemies
as his caveat against Calvinism had done. Within three weeks, forty
thousand copies of his “Calm Address” were printed and put into
circulation; and excited so much anger among the English friends of
the revolted colonists, that they would willingly have burnt both him
and his Address together. To accuse him of mercenary motives was an
unfounded, base, malignant fabrication. It is true, that the government
were so pleased with his little tract that copies were ordered to be
distributed at the doors of all the metropolitan churches; and it is
said that one of the highest officers of state waited upon him, asking
whether government could in any way be of service to either himself
or his people. Wesley replied that he “looked for no favours, and
only desired the continuance of civil and religious privileges.” The
nobleman pressed the question, but again received the same answer.
In retiring, he observed: “In all probability, sir, you have some
charities which are dear to you; by accepting £50 from the privy purse,
to appropriate as you may deem proper, you will give great pleasure to
those for whom I act.” This was accepted; but “Mr. Wesley,” says Dr.
Clarke, who related the story, “expressed himself to me as sorry that
he had not requested to be made a royal missionary, and to have the
privilege of preaching in every church.[226]”
This might be true; but, in conclusion, we must add to it Wesley’s own
account, as published at the time, in _Lloyd’s Evening Post_.
“SIR,--I have been seriously asked,--From what motive did you publish
your ‘Calm Address to the American Colonies’?
“I seriously answer, Not to get money. Had that been my motive, I
should have swelled it into a shilling pamphlet, and have entered it
at Stationers’ Hall.
“Not to get preferment for myself, or my brother’s children. I am a
little too old to gape after it myself; and if my brother or I sought
it for them, we have only to show them to the world.
“Not to please any man living, high or low. I know mankind too well.
I know they that love you for political service, love you less than
their dinner; and they that hate you, hate you worse than the devil.
“Least of all, did I write with a view to inflame any; just the
contrary. I contributed my mite toward putting out the flame which
rages all over the land. This I have more opportunity of observing
than any other man in England. I see with pain to what a height this
already rises, in every part of the nation. And I see many pouring
oil into the flame, by crying out, ‘How unjustly, how cruelly, the
king is using the poor Americans; who are only contending for their
liberty, and for their legal privileges!’
“Now there is no possible way to put out this flame, or hinder its
rising higher and higher, but to show that the Americans are not
used either cruelly or unjustly; that they are not injured at all,
seeing they are not contending for liberty,--this they had even in
its full extent, both civil and religious; neither for any legal
privileges, for they enjoy all that their charters grant. But what
they contend for is the illegal privilege of being exempt from
parliamentary taxation,--a privilege this which no charter ever gave
to any American colony yet; which no charter can give, unless it
be confirmed both by king, lords, and commons; which, in fact, our
colonies never had; which they never claimed till the present reign;
and probably they would not have claimed it now, had they not been
incited thereto by letters from England.
“This being the real state of the question, without any colouring or
aggravation, what impartial man can either blame the king, or commend
the Americans?
“With this view, to quench the fire, by laying the blame where it was
due, the ‘Calm Address’ was written.
“As to reviewers, newswriters, _London Magazines_, and all that kind
of gentlemen, they behave just as I expected they would. And let them
lick up Mr. Toplady’s spittle still; a champion worthy of their cause.
“Sir, I am your humble servant,
“JOHN WESLEY.”
Thus things proceeded. England was flooded with political pamphlets;
the houses of parliament echoed with the sonorous periods of senatorial
oratory; and the hill sides and river banks of America rang with sharp
and dissonant peals of musketry. Blood had been shed at Lexington; and,
at the bungling battle at Bunker Hill, the English had lost 1050 men,
in killed and wounded. In the month of November, Wesley says: “I was
desired to preach, in Bethnal Green church, a charity sermon for the
widows and orphans of the soldiers that were killed in America. Knowing
how many would seek occasion of offence, I wrote down my sermon.”
The discourse was immediately published, with the title, “A Sermon
preached at St. Matthew’s, Bethnal Green, on Sunday, November 12,
1775. By John Wesley, M.A. For the benefit of the widows and orphans
of the soldiers who lately fell near Boston, in New England.” 8vo, 33
pages. Wesley speaks of the terrible distress from which the nation was
suffering. Thousands were totally unemployed. He had seen not a few
of them “standing in the streets, with pale looks, hollow eyes, and
meagre limbs.” He says, he had “known families, who, a few years ago,
lived in an easy, genteel manner,” driven to the necessity of repairing
to the fields “to pick up the turnips which the cattle had left: and
which they boiled, if they could get a few sticks for that purpose,
or otherwise ate them raw.” Thousands had “screamed for liberty till
they were utterly distracted, and their intellects quite confounded.”
“In every town, men, who were once of a calm, mild, friendly temper,
were now mad with party zeal, foaming with rage against their quiet
neighbours, ready to tear out one another’s throats, and to plunge
their swords into each other’s bowels.” He then proceeds to descant,
in withering terms, on the sins of the nation,--money getting, lying,
gluttony, idleness, and profanity. The sermon altogether, considering
the time and circumstances of its delivery, was one of the boldest
he ever preached; and, of course, added to the rage that his “Calm
Address” had kindled. The _Gospel Magazine_, in reviewing it, remarks:
“So many barrels of _tar_ have of late been lavished on Mr. Wesley,
and so many bags of _feathers_ have been shaken over him, on account
of his new political apostasy, that it might seem unmerciful in us,
should we add to the _anointings_ and to the _powderings_, which he has
already so plentifully, though not undeservedly, received. We shall
therefore, from a principle of compassion, touch his sermon with the
tenderer hand, and let the sermoniser himself very lightly off, the
enormity of his demerits considered.” And then the tender reviewer, in
his unmerited compassion, proceeds to describe “the sermon as being
as dry as an old piece of leather that has been tanned five thousand
times over”; and the preacher as “a tip-top _perfectionist_ in the
art of lying.” All this revives a recollection of “The Old Fox tarred
and feathered,”--and of its polite author, the Rev. Augustus Toplady,
who had just now become the courteous editor of the misnamed _Gospel
Magazine_.
At the conference of 1774, Wesley had 2204 members of society in
America, and seven itinerant preachers, Messrs. Rankin, Asbury,
Shadford, Williams, King, Dempster, and Rodda; and to direct these, in
the midst of a great rebellion, required more than ordinary wisdom.
A few extracts from his letters to Thomas Rankin will not be without
interest.
“LONDON, _March 1, 1775_.
“DEAR TOMMY,--As soon as possible, you must come to a full and clear
explanation, both with brother Asbury, and with Jemmy Dempster. But I
advise brother Asbury to return to England the first opportunity.
“There is now a probability that God will hear prayer, and turn the
counsels of Ahithophel into foolishness. It is not unlikely that
peace will be reestablished between England and the colonies. But,
certainly, the present doubtful situation of affairs may be improved
to the benefit of many. They may be strongly incited now ‘to break
off their sins by repentance, if it may be a lengthening of their
tranquillity,’
“I add a line to all the preachers:--
“_My Dear Brethren_,--You were never in your lives in so critical
a situation as you are at this time. It is your part to be
peacemakers; to be loving and tender to all; but to addict
yourselves to no party. In spite of all solicitations, of rough or
smooth words, say not one word against one or the other side. Keep
yourselves pure: do all you can to help and soften all; but beware
how you adopt another’s jar. See that you act in full union with
each other; this is of the utmost consequence. Not only let there
be no bitterness or anger, but no shyness or coldness, between you.
Mark all those who would set one of you against the other. Some
such will never be wanting. But give them no countenance; rather
ferret them out, and drag them into open day. The conduct of T.
Rankin has been suitable to the Methodist plan. I hope all of you
tread in his steps. Let your eye be single. Be in peace with each
other, and the God of peace will be with you.”
Under the same date, Charles Wesley wrote to Rankin as follows.
“MY DEAR BROTHER,--As to public affairs, I wish you to be like-minded
with me. I am of neither side, and yet of both; on the side of New
England, and of Old. Private Christians are excused, exempted,
privileged, to take no part in civil troubles. We love all, and pray
for all, with a sincere and impartial love. Faults there may be on
both sides; but such as neither you nor I can remedy: therefore, let
us, and all our children, give ourselves unto prayer, and so stand
still and see the salvation of God.”
The war was not the only thing that gave Wesley trouble. Thomas
Rankin and Francis Asbury were not able to agree; and Miss Gilbert
had actually written to Asbury, stating that Mr. Gilbert was about
to leave Antigua; and wishing him to come, and to take charge of
the three hundred Methodists in that island. Asbury was inclined to
accept of this invitation; but was deterred by his want of ordination,
and therefore, as he thought, want of authority to administer the
sacraments of the Christian church. Wesley wished him to return to
England. What a disaster, if he had![227] These facts will cast light
on the following letters.
“PORTARLINGTON, _April 21, 1775_.
“DEAR TOMMY,--Brother Asbury has sent me a few lines, and I thank him
for them. But I do not advise him to go to Antigua. Let him come home
without delay. If one or two stout, healthy young men would willingly
offer themselves to that service, I should have no objection; but
none should go, unless he was fully persuaded in his own mind. I
am afraid, you will soon find a day of trial: the clouds are black
both over England and America. It is well if this summer passes
over without some showers of blood. And if the storm once begins in
America, it will soon spread to Great Britain.
“I am, dear Tommy, etc.,
“JOHN WESLEY.”
“BALLINROBE, _May 19, 1775_.
“DEAR TOMMY,--I doubt not but brother Asbury and you will part
friends; I hope I shall see him at the conference. He is quite an
upright man. I apprehend he will go through his work more cheerfully
when he is a little distance from me.
“We must speak the plain truth, wherever we are, whether men will
hear, or whether they will forbear. And among our societies we must
enforce our rules, with all mildness and steadiness.
“Never was there a time, when it was more necessary for all that
fear God, both in England and in America, to wrestle with God in
mighty prayer. In all the other judgments of God, the inhabitants of
the earth learn righteousness; but wherever war breaks out, God is
forgotten, if He be not set at open defiance. What a glorious work
of God was at Cambuslang and Kilsyth, from 1740 to 1744! But the war
that followed tore it all up by the roots, and left scarce any trace
of it behind; insomuch that, when I diligently inquired a few years
after, I could not find one that retained the life of God!”
“CLARMAIN, _June 13, 1775_.
“DEAR TOMMY,--I am afraid our correspondence, for the time to come,
will be more uncertain than ever, since the sword is drawn; and it
is well if they have not, on both sides, thrown away the scabbard.
What will the end of these things be, either in Europe or America?
It seems, huge confusion and distress, such as neither we nor our
fathers had known![228] But it is enough, if all issues in glory
to God, and peace and goodwill among men. Never had America such a
call to repentance; for, unless general reformation prevent general
destruction, what a scene will soon be opened! Ruin and desolation
must soon overspread the land; and fair houses be turned into ruinous
heaps. But what are those strange phenomena which you speak of? Send
me an account of just so much as you can depend on. Should you not
appoint in America, as we do in England and Ireland, one or more
general days of fasting and prayer?”
“NEAR LEEDS, _July 28, 1775_.
“DEAR TOMMY,--I rejoice to hear that the work of our Lord still
prospers in your hands. If the temple is built even in troublous
times, it is not by the power of man. I rejoice too over honest
Francis Asbury, and hope he will no more enter into temptation. I
know no reason why you should not print the names of the American
preachers. You may print an edition of the ‘Christian Pattern,’ and
apply the profits of it to the payment of the debt. The societies
should pay the passage of the preachers. But you must not imagine,
that any more of them will come to America till these troubles are at
an end.
“Certainly, this is the point which we should insist upon, in season
and out of season. The universal corruption of all orders and degrees
of men loudly calls for the vengeance of God; and, inasmuch as all
other nations are equally corrupt, it seems God will punish us by
one another. What can prevent this, but a universal, or, at least, a
general repentance?”
“LONDON, _August 13, 1775_.
“DEAR TOMMY,--I am not sorry that brother Asbury stays with you
another year. In that time, it will be seen what God will do with
North America; and you will easily judge whether our preachers are
called to remain any longer therein. If they are, God will make their
way plain, and give them favour even with the men that delight in
war. The clouds do indeed gather more and more; and it seems a heavy
storm will follow; certainly it will, unless the prayers of the
faithful obtain a longer reprieve.”
“LONDON, _October 20, 1775_.
“DEAR TOMMY,--I am glad you are going into North Carolina; and why
not into South Carolina too? I apprehend, those provinces would bear
much fruit, as most parts of them are fresh, unbroken ground. And as
the people are further removed from the din of war, they may be more
susceptible of the gospel of peace.
“A paper was sent to me lately, occasioned by the troubles in
America; but it would not do good. It is abundantly too tart; and
nothing of that kind will be of service now. All parties are already
too much sharpened against each other; we must pour water, not oil,
into the flame. I had written a little tract[229] upon the subject
before I knew the American ports were shut up. I think there is not
one sharp word therein; I did not design there should. However, many
are excessively angry; and would willingly burn me and it together.
Indeed it is provoking; I suppose above forty thousand of them have
been printed in three weeks, and still the demand for them is as
great as ever.
“I am entirely of your mind. I am persuaded, love and tender measures
will do far more than violence. And if I should have an interview
with a great man, which seems to be not unlikely, I will tell him so,
without any circumlocution.
“I am, dear Tommy, your affectionate friend and brother,
“JOHN WESLEY.”[230]
The “great man” referred to was probably Lord North, the prime minister
of the English cabinet, to whom, and to the Earl of Dartmouth, Wesley
had, four months before, addressed most important letters, in which
he strongly endeavoured to convince the government of the exceedingly
critical condition of public matters. No man in the kingdom had
suffered more from the violation of English law than Wesley had; and
yet now, in England’s extremity, no man evinced a more loyal spirit
than was evinced by him. Indeed, his loyalty became, in the eyes of his
enemies, a crime, and brought him, not reward, but ruffianly reproach.
An extract from the letters to the two ministers of state may fitly,
for the present, close these American reminiscences.
“ARMAGH, _June 15, 1775_.
“MY LORD,--Whether my writing do any good or no, it need do no harm;
for it rests with your lordship whether any eye but your own shall
see it.
“I do not enter upon the question, whether the Americans are in
the right or in the wrong. Here all my prejudices are against
the Americans; for I am a high churchman,[231] the son of a high
churchman, bred up, from my childhood, in the highest notions of
passive obedience and non-resistance; and yet, in spite of all my
long rooted prejudices, I cannot avoid thinking, if I think at all,
that an oppressed people asked for nothing more than their legal
rights, and that in the most modest and inoffensive manner that the
nature of the thing would allow.[232] But waiving all considerations
of right and wrong, I ask, is it common sense to use force towards
the Americans? These men will not be frightened; and it seems, they
will not be conquered so easily as was at first imagined. They will
probably dispute every inch of ground; and, if they die, die sword
in hand. Indeed, some of our valiant officers say, ‘Two thousand
men will clear America of these rebels.’ No, nor twenty thousand,
be they rebels or not, nor perhaps treble that number. They are as
strong men as you; they are as valiant as you, if not abundantly
more valiant, for they are one and all enthusiasts,--enthusiasts for
liberty. They are calm, deliberate enthusiasts; and we know how this
principle ‘breathes into softer souls stern love of war, and thirst
of vengeance, and contempt of death.’ We know men, animated with this
spirit, will leap into a fire, or rush into a cannon’s mouth.
“‘But they have no experience in war.’ And how much more have our
troops? Very few of them ever saw a battle. ‘But they have no
discipline.’ That is an entire mistake. Already they have near as
much as our army, and they will learn more of it every day; so that,
in a short time, if the fatal occasion continue, they will understand
it as well as their assailants.[233] ‘But they are divided amongst
themselves.’ No, my lord, they are terribly united; not in the
province of New England only, but down as low as the Jerseys and
Pennsylvania. The bulk of the people are so united, that to speak a
word in favour of the present English measures would almost endanger
a man’s life. Those who informed me of this are no sycophants; they
say nothing to curry favour; they have nothing to gain or lose by me.
But they speak with sorrow of heart what they have seen with their
own eyes, and heard with their own ears.
“These men think, one and all, be it right or wrong, that they are
contending _pro aris et focis_; for their wives, children, and
liberty. What an advantage have they herein over many that fight
only for pay! none of whom care a straw for the cause wherein they
are engaged; most of whom strongly disapprove of it. Have they not
another considerable advantage? Is there occasion to recruit troops?
Their supplies are at hand, and all round about them. Ours are three
thousand miles off. Are we then able to conquer the Americans,
suppose they are left to themselves, suppose all our neighbours
should stand stock still, and leave us and them to fight it out? But
we are not sure of this. Nor are we sure that all our neighbours will
stand stock still. I doubt they have not promised it; and, if they
had, could we rely upon those promises? ‘Yet, it is not probable
they will send ships or men to America.’ Is there not a shorter way?
Do they not know where England and Ireland lie? And have they not
troops, as well as ships, in readiness? All Europe is well apprised
of this; only the English know nothing of the matter! What if they
find means to land but two thousand men? Where are the troops in
England or Ireland to oppose them? Why, cutting the throats of their
brethren in America! Poor England, in the meantime!
“‘But we have our militia--our valiant, disciplined militia. These
will effectually oppose them.’ Give me leave, my lord, to relate a
little circumstance, of which I was informed by a clergyman who knew
the fact. In 1716, a large body of militia were marching towards
Preston against the rebels. In a wood, which they were passing by, a
boy happened to discharge his fowling piece. The soldiers gave up all
for lost, and, by common consent, threw down their arms, and ran for
life. So much dependence is to be placed on our valorous militia.
“But, my lord, this is not all. We have thousands of enemies, perhaps
more dangerous than French or Spaniards. As I travel four or five
thousand miles every year, I have an opportunity of conversing
freely with more persons of every denomination than any one else in
the three kingdoms. I cannot but know the general disposition of
the people,--English, Scots, and Irish; and I know a large majority
of them are exasperated almost to madness. Exactly so they were
throughout England and Scotland about the year 1640, and, in a great
measure, by the same means; by inflammatory papers, which were
spread, as they are now, with the utmost diligence, in every corner
of the land. Hereby the bulk of the population were effectually cured
of all love and reverence for the king. So that, first despising,
then hating him, they were just ripe for open rebellion. And, I
assure your lordship, so they are now. They want nothing but a leader.
“Two circumstances more are deserving to be considered: the one, that
there was, at that time, a decay of general trade almost throughout
the kingdom; the other, there was a common dearness of provisions.
The case is the same, in both respects, at this day. So that, even
now, there are multitudes of people that, having nothing to do, and
nothing to eat, are ready for the first bidder; and that, without
inquiring into the merits of the case, would flock to any that would
give them bread.
“Upon the whole, I am really sometimes afraid that this evil is
from the Lord. When I consider the astonishing luxury of the rich,
and the shocking impiety of rich and poor, I doubt whether general
dissoluteness of manners does not demand a general visitation.
Perhaps the decree is already gone forth from the Governor of the
world. Perhaps even now:
‘As he that buys, surveys a ground,
So the destroying angel measures it around.
Calm he surveys the perishing nation;
Ruin behind him stalks, and empty desolation.’
“But we Englishmen are too wise to acknowledge that God has anything
to do in the world! Otherwise should we not seek Him by fasting and
prayer, before He lets the lifted thunder drop? O my lord, if your
lordship can do anything, let it not be wanting! For God’s sake, for
the sake of the king, of the nation, of your lovely family, remember
Rehoboam! Remember Philip the Second! Remember King Charles the First!
“I am, with true regard, my lord, your lordship’s obedient servant,
“JOHN WESLEY.”[234]
Whatever may be thought of the principle advocated in Wesley’s “Calm
Address to the American Colonies,” namely, that taxation without
representation is no tyranny, there can be no doubt that his letters
to the premier and to the colonial secretary are full of warnings and
foresight which were terribly fulfilled; and, for fidelity, fulness,
terseness, in short, for _multum in parvo_, were perhaps without a
parallel in the correspondence of these ministers of state.
Much space has been occupied with these American affairs. If an apology
were needed, the reader might be courteously reminded (1) that John
Wesley’s “Calm Address” threw, not Methodism only, but the nation,
into a fever of excitement, and, directly and indirectly, gave birth
to scores of pamphlets on the same subject; (2) that the American
rebellion is one of the greatest events in English history; and (3)
that, in consequence of the great majority of the clergy of the English
Church fleeing from the colonies, when the colonies most needed them,
Methodism, under the sagacious management of the apostolic Asbury, took
the place which had hitherto been occupied by Anglican episcopacy;
and, henceforth, literally became the predominant religion of what is
likely to be the greatest and most prosperous country in the world.
We must now return to Wesley in a more private capacity.
The reader has long lost sight of Peter Bohler. In 1739, after the
conversion of the two Wesleys, Bohler went to Georgia, and his life,
since then, had been spent in unwearied Christian work, partly in
America and partly in Europe. His labours now were nearly ended;
and, on April 27, 1775, he peacefully expired, in London, at the age
of sixty-three. For years past, correspondence seems to have ceased
between Wesley and his early Moravian friend. Within three months of
Bohler’s death, it was renewed. Wesley wrote to him on the 5th of
February, and Bohler, in a beautifully Christian letter, responded. A
few days later, Wesley wrote again, as follows.
“_February 18, 1775._
“MY DEAR BROTHER,--When I say, ‘I hope I shall never be constrained
to speak otherwise of them’ (the Moravians), I do not mean, that I
have any expectation this will ever happen. Probably it never will.
I never did speak but when I believed it was my duty so to do. And,
if they would calmly consider what I have spoken from March 10,
1736, and were open to conviction, they might be such Christians as
are hardly in the world besides. I have not lost sight of you yet.
Indeed, I cannot, if you are ‘a city set upon a hill.’
“Perhaps no one living is a greater lover of peace, or has laboured
more for it, than I; particularly, among the children of God.[235]
I set out, near fifty years ago, with this principle, ‘Whosoever
doeth the will of my Father who is in heaven, the same is my brother,
and sister, and mother.’ But there is no one living that has been
more abused for his pains, even to this day. But it is all well. By
the grace of God, I shall go on, following peace with all men, and
loving your Brethren beyond any body of men upon earth, except the
Methodists.
“Wishing you every gospel blessing, I remain your very affectionate
brother,
“JOHN WESLEY.”[236]
Thus ended Wesley’s intercourse with Bohler, till it was renewed in
heaven.
Eleven days after the above was written, Wesley left London for
Ireland, proceeding, as usual, by way of Bristol and the midland
counties. Nothing remarkable occurred in his journey to Liverpool.
Of course, he was preaching continually, and, winter though it was,
sometimes out of doors. While doing so, at Newcastle under Lyne, “a
buffoon,” he says, “laboured to interrupt him; but, as he was bawling,
with his mouth wide open, some arch boys gave him such a mouthful of
dirt as quite satisfied him.”
At Dublin, at the request of “the good old dean,” he assisted in
administering the Lord’s supper in St. Patrick’s. At Maryborough,
he complied with the wish of the clergyman, and preached in the
parish church. The Methodist chapel at Waterford he describes as “a
foul, horrid, miserable hole.” For the first time, he preached at
Clones, using, as his church, an old Danish fort. Here Methodism had
been introduced about the year 1768. The papists were furious, and
magistrates refused to interfere; but, just when the place was about to
be given up, a military pensioner, an old presbyterian, took his stand
in the centre of the market, and, shouldering his musket, declared that
he would shoot the first man that attempted to disturb the preacher.
The rioters were frightened; and the rough old soldier mounted guard
every sabbath afternoon, until opposition ceased.[237]
At Londonderry, Wesley accepted the bishop’s invitation to dinner;
the prelate remarking, “I know you do not love our hours, and will
therefore order dinner to be on the table between two and three
o’clock.” “We had,” says Wesley, “a piece of boiled beef, and an
English pudding. This is true good breeding.”
At Castle Caulfield, writes Wesley, with the utmost _sang froid_, “the
rain came plentifully, through the thatch, into my lodging room; but I
found no present inconvenience, and was not careful for the morrow.”
Six days afterwards, Wesley was seized with illness, which nearly
proved fatal; but for three days more, though in a burning fever, he
continued travelling and preaching almost as usual. He had now reached
the town of Lurgan, where, four years previously, a society had been
formed, one of the first members being Isaac Bullock, an old soldier,
who had been at the capture of several islands in the West Indies,
and was one of sixty, called “the forlorn hope,” who, in 1762, first
entered the breach at the storming of Havannah, only six of the sixty
escaping with their lives. The house of this sturdy veteran was the
preaching place of the Lurgan Methodists.[238] Here Wesley was obliged
to succumb to fever. He sent for a physician, who told him he must
rest. Wesley replied, he could not, as he “had appointed to preach
at several places, and must preach as long as he could speak.” The
doctor gave him medicine, and off he went to Tanderagee, and then to
a gentleman’s seat, three miles beyond Lisburn, where nature sank,
and the conquered evangelist was compelled to take his bed. Strength,
memory, and mind entirely failed. For three days, he lay more dead than
alive. His tongue was black and swollen. He was violently convulsed.
For some time his pulse was not discernible. Hope was almost gone;
when Joseph Bradford, his travelling companion, came with a cup, and
said, “Sir, you must take this.” Wesley writes: “I thought, ‘I will,
if I can swallow, to please him; for it will do me neither harm nor
good.’ Immediately it set me a vomiting; my heart began to beat, and my
pulse to play again; and, from that hour, the extremity of the symptoms
abated.” Six days afterwards, to the astonishment of his friends, and,
as he says, “trusting in God,” he set out for Dublin, where, within a
week, he was preaching as usual.
This was a memorable epoch, even in Wesley’s eventful life. The house
in which he lay so dangerously ill was the hospitable dwelling of Mr.
Gayer, of Derryaghey,[239] a devoted Methodist of great respectability,
who had built a chapel in the village, and, for the accommodation
of the preachers, a room, which went by the name of “the prophet’s
chamber.” His daughter, afterwards Mrs. Wolfenden, was now a converted
girl, sixteen years of age, and, with her mother, was Wesley’s nurse.
Great anxiety was felt for Wesley’s life, and, while a few select
friends were praying that, as in the case of Hezekiah, God would add
to his days fifteen years, Mrs. Gayer suddenly rose from her knees, and
cried, “The prayer is granted!” Marvellously enough, Wesley’s recovery
immediately commenced, and he survived, from June 1775 to March 1791, a
period of just fifteen years, and a few months over.
But even this was not all the wonder. Alexander Mather, at the time,
was at Sheerness, in Kent, where he read, in the newspapers, that
Wesley was actually dead. Mather says, he was not able to give credence
to this; and, before he went to preach, he opened his Bible on the
words, “Behold, I will add unto thy days fifteen years” (Isa. xxxviii.
5); and away he went to the chapel, and began to pray that the promise,
made to Hezekiah, might be fulfilled in the case of Wesley.[240] These
are striking facts. We give them as we find them. The sceptic will
sneer; but the Christian will exercise an unfaltering faith in the
glorious text, which, in the history of the church, has been confirmed
in instances without number: “The effectual fervent prayer of a
righteous man availeth much.”
The news of Wesley’s dangerous illness created the utmost consternation
among his friends. The following is a letter, hitherto unpublished,
addressed by Charles Wesley to Joseph Bradford, Wesley’s faithful
companion.
“BRISTOL, _June 29, 1775_.
“DEAR JOSEPH,--Be of good cheer. The Lord liveth, and all live to
Him. Your last is just arrived, and has cut off all hope of my
brother’s recovery. If he could hold out till now, that is, ten
days longer, he might recover; but I dare not allow myself to hope
it, till I hear from you again. The people here, and in London, and
every place, are swallowed up in sorrow. But sorrow and death will
soon be swallowed up in life everlasting. You will be careful of my
brother’s papers, etc., till you see his executors. God shall reward
your fidelity and love. I seem scarce separated from him whom I shall
so very soon overtake. We were united in our lives, and in our death
not divided. Brethren, pray a very little longer for your loving
servant--CHARLES WESLEY.
“_Thursday Evening._
“Yours of the 20th, I have this moment received. It only confirms
my fears. My brother, soon after you wrote, in all probability,
entered into the joy of his Lord. Yet write again, and send me the
particulars. I have not, and never more shall have, strength for such
a journey. The Lord prepare us for a speedy removal to our heavenly
country!
“CHARLES WESLEY.”
The tidings of Wesley’s recovery produced corresponding joy. His old
friend and former itinerant, now the Rev. Dr. John Jones, of Harwich,
wrote to him as follows.
“HARWICH, _July 29, 1775_.
“REVEREND AND DEAR SIR,--I cannot express what I felt when I was
informed that you were both senseless and speechless. It was like
life from the dead when I heard you were out of danger and able to
sit up. It gave me some hope, that God has not yet given up these
sinful nations, and that He will strive with us a little longer. Time
was when you would have taken my advice, at least, in some things.
Let me entreat, let me beseech you, to preach less frequently,
and that only at the principal places. You must be satisfied with
directing others, and doing less yourself. You yourself do not know
of how great importance your life is. Far be it from me to desire you
not to travel; I only beg you not to go beyond your strength.
“JOHN JONES.”[241]
Another friend, in London, wrote the following.
“LONDON, _July 8, 1775_.
“REVEREND SIR,--God, who comforteth those who are cast down, hath
comforted us by graciously restoring you to us again. The prayer of
faith has saved the sick. The voice of joy and gladness is now found
in the dwellings of the righteous; where eight days past there were
mourning, lamentation, and woe. Every social repast was embittered,
and we literally mingled our drink with our tears. Could you, from
the bed of sickness, have cast your eyes on the congregation, the
first sabbath in the month, and beheld distress in every face, keen
anguish in every heart, your generous soul would have been willing
to have tarried awhile, absent from your Lord, to return to comfort
those mourners in Sion. The tidings of your recovery was received
with melting gratitude and joyous tears. O sir, what a week of
suspense and anguish! You will not surely blame us, that our prayers
helped to detain you in the vale below. Forgive your weeping friends
if they have brought you back from the skies: surely, in the end, you
will be amply recompensed! O yes! being longer employed in the work
of faith, and labour of love, your crown will be the brighter.”[242]
These are specimens of the loving congratulations of Wesley’s
friends.[243] His illness was sharp, though short. The only lasting
effect was, it stripped him, at all events for months afterwards, of
his beautiful head of hair.[244]
Having spent three weeks in Dublin, and regained his strength, he, on
July 23, embarked for England, having in the morning of that day again
assisted in administering the Lord’s supper in St. Patrick’s cathedral.
Landing at Parkgate, he proceeded to Leeds to meet his conference,
preaching, as he travelled, with as much zest as ever; except that he
spent a day or two at Miss Bosanquet’s, making conference preparations.
Notwithstanding the warnings and entreaties of his friends, his labours
were unabated. Referring to his illness and recovery, he wrote, in
1781: “From this time” (1775) “I have, by the grace of God, gone on in
the same track, travelling between four and five thousand miles a year,
and, once in two years, going through Great Britain and Ireland; which,
by the blessing of God, I am as well able to do now as I was twenty or
thirty years ago. About a hundred and thirty of my fellow labourers
are continually employed in the same thing. We all aim at one point,
not at profit, any more than at ease, or pleasure, or the praise of
men; but to spread true religion through London, Dublin, Edinburgh,
and, as we are able, through the three kingdoms. This is our point. We
leave every man to enjoy his own opinion, and to use his own mode of
worship, desiring only, that the love of God and his neighbour be the
ruling principle in his heart, and show itself in his life by a uniform
practice of justice, mercy, and truth. And, accordingly, we give the
right hand of fellowship to every lover of God and man, whatever his
opinion or mode of worship be, of which he is to give an account to God
only.”[245]
Dr. Jones’s advice to Wesley was lost labour. Wesley’s life was a
perpetual motion. Work seemed to be essential to its continuance.
There are but few who can sincerely sing the lines, which he, from his
inmost heart, sang so often:
“Oh that, without a lingering groan,
I may the welcome word receive,
My body with my charge lay down,
And cease _at once to work and live_!”
Wesley, however, could give advice, though it was not always that he
took it. The following extract from a letter to his brother, written
at this period, contains an example of this, besides referring to his
publishing affairs and the movements of his miserable wife.
“LONDONDERRY, _June 2, 1775_.
“DEAR BROTHER,--I thought it strange, that poor Samuel Franks should
leave me £900 in debt. But it is stranger still, that John Atlay
should have paid £1600 out of nine; and that I am £160 in debt
notwithstanding!
“Mr. Walthen’s method of radical cure I shall hardly try.[246] I am
very easy, and that is enough.
“Has my friend taken a house at Bristol? Is Noah with her? What are
they doing?
“Preach as much as you can, and no more than you can. You never will
be much stronger till you add change of air to exercise; riding
two or three hundred miles point blank forward. Now you have an
opportunity. Meet me at Leeds with honest John Murlin. When you are
tired you may change places with him. You would return a stout,
healthy man.
“Peace be with you and yours! Adieu!
“JOHN WESLEY.”[247]
Another instance of advice giving is too racy to be omitted. The letter
was addressed to John King, one of his preachers in America.
“NEAR LEEDS, _July 28, 1775_.
“MY DEAR BROTHER,--Always take advice or reproof as a favour: it is
the surest mark of love.
“I advised you once, and you took it as an affront; nevertheless I
will do it once more.
“Scream no more, at the peril of your soul. God now warns you by me,
whom He has set over you. Speak as earnestly as you can; but do not
scream. Speak with all your heart; but with a moderate voice. It was
said of our Lord, ‘He shall not _cry_’: the word properly means, He
shall not _scream_. Herein, be a follower of me, as I am of Christ.
I often speak loud, often vehemently; but I never scream; I never
strain myself. I dare not: I know it would be a sin against God and
my own soul. Perhaps one reason why that good man, Thomas Walsh, yea,
and John Manners too, were in such grievous darkness before they
died, was, because they shortened their own lives.
“O John, pray for an advisable and teachable temper! By nature you
are very far from it: you are stubborn and headstrong. Your last
letter was written in a very wrong spirit. If you cannot take advice
from others, surely you might take it from your affectionate brother,
“JOHN WESLEY.”[248]
The above characteristic letter was written at Miss Bosanquet’s,
Cross Hall, Morley, where Wesley had arranged to have if possible, a
few days’ retirement, before he met his conference, at Leeds. In a
letter to that lady, dated May 29, 1775, and therefore previous to his
illness, he writes: “The last day of June, I hope to be in Dublin, and
the end of July in England. If I have a ready passage, probably I may
have an opportunity of hiding myself a day or two with you; but I do
not desire any of the preachers to come to me till I send for them. If
they do, I shall run away; I will not be in a crowd.”[249]
One or two days’ retirement was not much for an old man to wish; but
it was more than he could get. The preachers would not be prevented
seeing him; and who can blame them? If the magnet attracts the needle,
the magnet has no right to censure the needle for yielding to its own
attractive influence. An extract from an unpublished letter, written,
at this period, by simple hearted, loving Samuel Bardsley, will
illustrate what we mean. “I never was at a better conference. The Lord
was with us of a truth. Had you seen us, and our dear, aged father and
friend in the midst of us, and beheld the freedom and harmony there
were among us, you would have blessed God on our behalf. We seemed to
be determined to live and preach the gospel more than ever. On the
Thursday before the conference began, Mr. Oliver and I had the pleasure
of drinking tea and supping with dear Mr. Wesley, at Miss Bosanquet’s,
where we stopped all night. We were there when he arrived from Ireland,
and I need not tell you with what joy and thankfulness we received the
man of God, and especially as he appeared with his usual cheerfulness,
and as well as we had seen him for some years. I had the pleasure of
being with him alone, and desired him not to send me far from home. If
he had proposed Worcester to me, I would have gone; but, as he did not,
I thought it best to leave it to him where to send me; so he fixed me
in this circuit (Haworth), which I shall love, if I have health, and
live near to God.”
The conference at Leeds opened on August 1, and concluded, its sittings
two days afterwards. It was the largest that had assembled for many
years, and was unexampled for its free discussion.[250] Wesley writes:
“Having received several letters, intimating that many of the preachers
were utterly unqualified for the work, having neither grace nor gifts
sufficient for it, I determined to examine the weighty charge with all
possible exactness. In order to this, I read those letters to all the
conference; and begged, that every one would freely propose and enforce
whatever objection he had to any one. The objections proposed were
considered at large; in two or three difficult cases, committees were
appointed for that purpose. In consequence of this, we were all fully
convinced, that the charge advanced was without foundation; that God
has really sent those labourers into His vineyard, and has qualified
them for the work; and we were all more closely united together than we
had been for many years.”
The very day after the conference concluded, Wesley again set out on
his blessed wanderings, and preached at Bradford and Great Horton. He
then took coach to London; spent five days there; and then went off to
Wales, Bristol, and Cornwall; and got back to London on October 6. The
remainder of the year was spent, partly in the metropolis, and partly
in his usual tours through Bedfordshire, Northamptonshire, Oxfordshire,
Buckinghamshire, Norfolk, Kent, and Surrey.
The nation was too much excited, in 1775, to take much interest in
the Calvinian controversy; which, however, still proceeded. Fletcher
published “The Second Part of the Scripture Scales”: 12mo, 237 pages.
Also, “The Last Check 1775 to Antinomianism. A Polemical Essay on
the Twin Doctrines of Christian Imperfection and a Death Purgatory.”
12mo, 327 pages. Toplady, likewise, issued “The Scheme of Christian and
Philosophical Necessity Asserted; in opposition to Mr. John Wesley’s
Tract on that Subject.”
As usual, Toplady excelled in abusiveness. He tells his readers, that
the chief ingredients in Wesley’s tract are “an equal portion of gross
heathenism, Pelagianism, Mahometism, popery, Manicheanism, ranterism,
and antinomianism, culled, dried, and pulverized, _secundum artem_;
and, above all, mingled with as much palpable atheism as could be
possibly scraped together.” Wesley is taunted as a “poor gentleman, who
is necessarily an universal meddler; and, as necessarily, an universal
miscarrier.” “He paddles in metaphysics, knows a little, presumes a
great deal, and so jumps to conclusions.” His “Thoughts on Necessity”
are “as crude and dark as chaos.”
This scurrility was a thing to which Wesley had been long accustomed.
It was cast upon him by writers of all descriptions. In this same
year, 1775, an octavo pamphlet of 35 pages was published, with the
title, “A Letter to a Friend on the Subject of Methodism;” in which
the anonymous writer, among a multitude of other calumnies, declares
that the tendency of Wesley’s system is “to fill parishes with whores,
rogues, and bastards”; and defines Methodist preaching as “a ridiculous
effusion, delivered with an enthusiastic air, a distorted countenance,
a whining, snivelling accent, and a soporific, nasal twang.” Wesley had
too much of a gentleman’s self respect to even notice vulgarities like
these; and yet they were far from being pleasant, and tend to show that
Methodism struggled into its mighty manhood amid the incessant peltings
of every kind of pitiless persecution. The storm, during Wesley’s
lifetime, from one quarter or another, was perpetual; but, powerless to
destroy, it simply made the roots of the tree strike deeper.
Two of Wesley’s publications, in 1775, have been already noticed. The
others were: