This last publication was intended, “_in usum juventutis Christianæ_”;
but it was also meant for his helpers, and may still be profitably
studied by numbers of Wesley’s ministerial successors. “A good
pronunciation is nothing but a natural, easy, and graceful variation
of the voice, suitable to the nature and importance of the sentiments
we deliver.” “The first business of a speaker is so to speak, that
he may be heard and understood with ease.” Persons with weak voices
are recommended to strengthen them, by “reading or speaking something
aloud, for at least half an hour every morning.” “The chief faults of
speaking are—1. The speaking too loud. 2. The speaking too low, which
is more disagreeable than the former. 3. The speaking in a thick
cluttering manner, mumbling and swallowing words and syllables, to cure
which defect, Demosthenes repeated orations every day with pebbles in
his mouth. 4. The speaking too fast, a common fault, but not a little
one. 5. The speaking too slow. 6. The speaking with an irregular,
desultory and uneven voice. But, 7. The greatest and most common fault
of all, is, the speaking with a tone—in some instances womanish and
squeaking; in others singing or canting; in others high, swelling, and
theatrical; in others awful and solemn; and in others, odd, whimsical,
and whining.” In reference to gesture, Wesley remarks, that it is
more difficult for a man to find out the faults of his own gesture
than those of his pronunciation; because he may hear his own voice,
but cannot see his own face. He recommends the use of a large looking
glass, after the example of Demosthenes; or, what is better still, to
have some excellent pattern constantly in view. Directions are given
concerning the motions of the body, of the head, the face, the eyes,
the mouth, the hands. The mouth must never be turned awry; neither must
a speaker bite or lick his lips, shrug his shoulders, or lean upon his
elbow. He must never clap his hands, nor thump the pulpit. The hands
should seldom be lifted higher than the eyes; and should not be in
perpetual motion, for this the ancients called “the babbling of the
hands.”
Wesley’s tract is small and unpretending; but it would not be a waste
of time if the students at Didsbury, Richmond, and Headingley would
occasionally give it their serious attention.
7. “An Extract of the Rev. Mr. John Wesley’s Journal, from September 3,
1741, to October 27, 1743.” 12mo, 123 pages.
8. “A Letter to the Rev. Dr. Conyers Middleton, occasioned by his late
‘Free Inquiry.’” 12mo, 102 pages. Middleton was born at Richmond, in
Yorkshire, in 1683, and died the year after Wesley wrote his letter.
He was a favourite of George I.; was hated by Dr. Bentley, the master
of his college; had three wives; was Woodwardian professor, and the
university librarian; a writer of great powers, but more an author
of whose productions are debased by the leaven of infidelity. Of an
irritable temper, he was always creating antagonists instead of
friends. But for his doubtful opinions and his quarrelsome disposition,
he might have adorned as well as acquired a mitre, instead of which
he held, at the time of his decease, no preferment but a small living
given to him by Sir John Frederick. The work which gave birth to
Wesley’s letter had recently been published, and was entitled, “A
Free Inquiry into the Miraculous Powers, which are supposed to have
subsisted in the Christian Church, from the earliest ages, through
several successive centuries.” Middleton’s professed object was to
denounce the practice of taking the primitive fathers as exponents
of the Christian faith, because this gave to papists an unassailable
advantage in the defence of their superstitions and errors. He rightly
contends, that “the Bible only is the religion of protestants”; but, in
pushing his principle, he was, perhaps wrongly, suspected of wishing to
undermine the authority of the Bible itself. The substance of Wesley’s
pungent answer may be guessed from the opening paragraph:—
“In your late ‘Inquiry,’ you endeavour to prove, first, that there
were no miracles wrought in the primitive church; secondly, that all
the primitive fathers were fools or knaves, and most of them both one
and the other. And it is easy to observe, the whole tenor of your
argument tends to prove, thirdly, that no miracles were wrought by
Christ or His apostles; and, fourthly, that these too were fools or
knaves, or both. I am not agreed with you on any of these heads. My
reasons I shall lay before you, in as free a manner, though not in so
smooth or laboured language, as you have laid yours before the world.”
Bishop Warburton, who was no friend to Wesley, pronounced the answer to
Middleton “a scholar-like thing”; though, he adds, “perhaps more temper
might have been expected from this modern apostle.”[79]
It may be added, that the conclusion of Wesley’s letter was afterwards
published, in a separate form, under the title of “A Plain Account of
Genuine Christianity.” 12mo, 12 pages.[80]
9. “A Plain Account of the People called Methodists. In a letter to the
Rev. Mr. Perronet, vicar of Shoreham.” 12mo, 34 pages. The substance
of this pamphlet has been already given in previous chapters; but it
may be added here, that Wesley’s “Plain Account” immediately evoked the
following: “An Answer to a late pamphlet, entitled, ‘A Plain Account
of the People called Methodists.’ Addressed to the Rev. Mr. Wesley. By
a Clergyman of the Church of England. London: 1749.” 12mo, 31 pages.
The reverend pamphleteer tells Wesley, that he has read his letter to
Perronet, and considers “it to be as weak a performance as ever he met
with”; and therefore, that he cannot allow “it to pass uncensured”;
especially as by this “weak performance” Wesley was “sapping many of
the truths and principles of Christianity, like other sectarists, under
the specious pretence of greater sanctity and holiness.” If Wesley’s
“performance” was “weak,” this of his opponent was feebleness itself.
10. “A Serious Answer to Dr. Trapp’s Four Sermons on the Sin, Folly,
and Danger of being Righteous Overmuch. Extracted from Mr. Law.”
12mo, 48 pages. This production of the genius, piety, and pen of
William Law was as grand a piece of writing as can be found in the
English language. It is somewhat remarkable, however, that Wesley,
in republishing that part of it which contains Law’s account of the
_ground_ of the Christian religion, should have put into the hands
of his Methodist readers the author’s mystical views concerning the
primeval kingdom of Lucifer and his angels, and the results of their
rebellion and ruin. It is true, that Wesley, in a foot note, observes:
“This is the theory of Jacob Behmen, but quite incapable of proof;”
but then, in the same note, he says that, though the theory “is not
supported by Scripture, it is, notwithstanding, probable.”
Of course, by republishing the writings of other men, Wesley made
their sentiments his own, except in cases to which he himself makes
objection. On this ground, we give the two extracts following. The
first will help to exhibit one of the guiding principles of Wesley’s
life; the other will show his estimate of the office and the use of
human learning.
Addressing the younger clergy, he remarks: “Lay this down as an
infallible principle, that an _entire, absolute renunciation_ of all
worldly interest, is the only possible foundation of that virtue which
your station requires. Without this, all attempts after an exemplary
piety are vain. Detest therefore, with the utmost abhorrence, all
desires of making your fortunes, either by preferments or rich
marriages, and let it be your only ambition to stand at the top of
every virtue, as visible guides and patterns, to all that aspire after
the perfection of holiness.”
The other extract is not of trifling importance. “Human learning is by
no means to be rejected from religion; but if it is considered as a
key, or the key, to the mysteries of our redemption, instead of opening
to us the kingdom of God, it locks us up in our own darkness. God is
an all-speaking, _all-working_, _all-illuminating_ essence, possessing
the depths of every creature according to its nature; and when we turn
from all impediments, this Divine essence becomes as certainly the
true light of our minds here, as it will be hereafter. This is not
enthusiasm, but the words of truth and soberness; and it is the running
away from this enthusiasm, that has made so many great scholars as
useless to the church as tinkling cymbals, and Christendom a mere Babel
of learned confusion.”
11. “The Manners of the Ancient Christians, extracted from a French
Author.” 12mo, 24 pages. The French author, from whose works this was
taken, was the renowned Claude Fleury, the associate of Bossuet and
Fenelon; the preceptor of the Dukes of Burgundy, Anjou, and Berry; the
friend of Louis XIV.; the author of an Ecclesiastical History, the
fruit of thirty years of devoted study; a man of great learning and
simplicity, of high integrity, and ardent piety; who died in 1723, at
the age of 83.
12. “A Roman Catechism, faithfully drawn out of the allowed writings of
the Church of Rome. With a Reply thereto.” 12mo, 79 pages. This was a
republication of a work bearing the following title: “A Catechism truly
representing the Doctrines and Practices of the Church of Rome, with
an Answer thereunto. By a Protestant of the Church of England. London:
1686.” 12mo, 104 pages. On one page is the catechism, and on the
opposite page the answer, throughout. Wesley neglects to acknowledge
that the pamphlet was not an original production; and it has improperly
been placed in the last edition of his collected works.
13. “A Letter to a Roman Catholic.” 12mo, 12 pages. Its object is to
mollify the papist, by showing, that he and the protestant equally
hold most of the great truths of the Christian religion; and that they
therefore ought to live in peace and love. Wesley writes: “O brethren,
let us not still fall out by the way! I hope to see you in heaven. And
if I practise the religion above described, you dare not say I shall
go to hell. You cannot think so. None can persuade you to it. Your own
conscience tells you the contrary. Then, if we cannot as yet think
alike in all things, at least, we may love alike. Herein we cannot
possibly do amiss.”
14. “Minutes of Several Conversations between the Rev. Messrs. John and
Charles Wesley and others.” Dublin: 1749.
15. It was also in this, or in a former year, that Wesley published his
threepenny tract, entitled, “An Extract of the Life and Death of Mr.
John Janeway,” a young man of remarkable piety, who died at the age of
twenty-three, in the year 1657.
16. “A Christian Library. Consisting of Extracts and Abridgments of
the Choicest Pieces of Practical Divinity which have been published in
the English Tongue. In Fifty Volumes. By John Wesley, M.A., Fellow of
Lincoln College, Oxford. Bristol: printed by Felix Farley.”
This work was begun in 1749, and completed in 1755. A prodigious
number of books were read. Folios and quartos had to be reduced to
12mo volumes. Some were abridged on horseback, and others at wayside
inns and houses where Wesley tarried for a night. During the six years
spent in finishing his task, he suffered a long and serious illness;
had to provide his school at Kingswood with necessary books; wrote
his “Explanatory Notes on the New Testament”; and was laboriously
engaged in preaching Christ, and governing his societies. The work
was Herculean. Such an enterprise had never before been attempted.
It was a noble effort to make the masses—his own societies in
particular—acquainted with a galaxy of the noblest men the Christian
church has ever had. His design was to leave out whatever might be
deemed objectionable or unimportant in sentiment, and superfluous in
language; to divest practical theology from logical technicalities and
unnecessary digressions; and to separate the rich ore of evangelical
truth from the base alloy of Pelagian and Calvinian error. In some
instances he failed in doing this. He writes:—“I was obliged to
prepare most of these tracts for the press just as I could snatch
time for it; not transcribing them; none expected it of me; but
only marking the lines with my pen, and altering or adding a few
words here or there, as I had mentioned in the preface. Besides, as
it was not in my power to attend the press, that care necessarily
devolved on others; through whose inattention a hundred passages were
left in, which I had scratched out. It is probable too, I myself
might overlook some sentences which were not suitable with my own
principles. It is certain, the correctors of the press did this in
not a few instances.”[81] This was written in 1772, as a reply to the
charge, that, in his writings, he had contradicted himself. “If,”
says he, “there are a hundred passages in the ‘Christian Library’
which contradict any or all of my doctrines, these are no proofs that
I contradict myself. Be it observed once for all, citations from
the ‘Christian Library’ prove nothing but the carelessness of the
correctors.”[82]
This is an important fact to be borne in mind by those who are
possessors of the first edition only. After the attack just mentioned,
Wesley read the whole of the ‘Christian Library’ with careful
attention, and marked with his pen the passages which he deemed
objectionable in sentiment; and, from this corrected copy, the new
edition, in thirty vols., octavo, issued in 1819-26, was printed.[83]
Wesley wrote not for pecuniary gain, but for the profit of his people.
Three years before the work was finished, he had already been a loser
to the amount of £200, no inconsiderable sum for a man like him. Still
the publication went on, and, in due time, one of the grandest projects
of his life was finished.
The first volume was published in 1749. Two years elapsed before the
second was given to the public. In the preface, he affirms his belief,
“that there is not in the world a more complete body of divinity,
than is now extant in the English tongue, in the writings of the last
and present century; and that, were a man to spend fourscore years,
with the most indefatigable application, he could go but a little
way, toward reading what had been published within the last hundred
and fifty years.” His endeavour was “to extract such a collection of
divinity as was all true; all agreeable to the oracles of God; all
practical, unmixed with controversy; and all intelligible to plain men.”
The opening volume contains—1. The Epistles of the apostolical fathers,
Clement, Ignatius, and Polycarp, whom he believed to be “endued with
the extraordinary assistance of the Holy Spirit,” and whose writings,
“though not of equal authority with the holy Scriptures,” he considered
to be “worthy of a much greater respect than any composures that have
been made since.” 2. The Martyrdoms of Ignatius and Polycarp. 3. An
Extract from the Homilies of Macarius, born about the year 301. 4.
An Extract of John Arndt’s “True Christianity”; Arndt was an eminent
protestant divine, who died in 1621.
1750
[Sidenote: 1750 Age 47]
Whitefield was now an evangelist at large,—the minister of no church
in particular, but a preacher labouring for all. Early in January, he
wrote: “I have offered Mr. Wesley to assist occasionally at his chapel.
Oh that I may be a freedman, and ready to help all that preach and
love the Lord Jesus in sincerity! I am a debtor to the greek and to
the barbarian, to the wise and to the unwise; and think it my highest
privilege to preach Christ and Him crucified to all.”[84] Accordingly,
on Friday, January 19, Wesley read prayers at West Street chapel, and
Whitefield delivered “a plain, affectionate discourse.” On the Sunday
following, the order was reversed; Whitefield read the prayers, and
Wesley preached; after which, they unitedly administered the sacrament
to about twelve hundred people.[85] On Sunday, the 28th, the liturgy
was read by Wesley, and Whitefield preached the sermon. The two
friends were now visibly as well as really united. Wesley remarks: “By
the blessing of God, one more stumbling block is removed. How wise
is God in giving different talents to different preachers! Even Mr.
Whitefield’s little improprieties, both of language and manner, were
a means of profiting many, who would not have been touched by a more
correct discourse, or a more calm and regular manner of speaking.”
The fraternization was not confined to Whitefield. In the same week,
Howel Harris preached in the old Foundery, Wesley observing concerning
him—“a powerful orator, both by nature and grace; but owing nothing
to art or education.” “Thanks be to God,” writes the Countess of
Huntingdon, “for the unanimity and love which have been displayed on
this happy occasion. May the God of peace and harmony unite us all in
a bond of affection! In forbearance toward each other, and mutual
kindness, may we imitate His blessed disciples, so that all those
who take knowledge of us may say, ‘See how these Christians love one
another!’”[86]
We purposely refrain from following Whitefield in his wondrous
wanderings; but it may be interjected here, that, during the year,
when at Rotherham, the town crier was employed to give notice of a
bear baiting, it being understood that Whitefield was the bear; and,
accordingly, when he began to preach a mob surrounded him, and a row
ensued. In Cumberland, his enemies injured his chaise, and cut off the
tail of one of his horses. At Ulverstone, a clergyman, looking more
like a butcher than a minister, charged a constable to arrest him. But
none of these things checked his triumphal march. People, by thousands,
flocked to hear him. At a single sacramental service, Grimshaw’s
church, at Haworth, was thrice filled with communicants. From his
leaving London to his reaching Edinburgh, he preached ninety times,
to about a hundred and forty thousand people. At Lady Huntingdon’s,
he seemed to think himself at the gates of paradise. He writes:
“October 11.—For a day or two, her ladyship has had five clergymen
under her roof. Her house is indeed a Bethel. To us in the ministry,
it looks like a college. We have the sacrament every morning, heavenly
conversation all day, and preach at night. This is to _live at court_,
indeed.”[87]
Wesley began the year by preaching, in London, to a large congregation
at four o’clock in the morning. At the end of the month, he paid a
visit to Canterbury, where a society had been already formed; and,
during three days, preached in the butter market,[88] and other places,
including an antinomian meeting-house, situated in Godly Alley.
The introduction of Methodism into the city of Canterbury was opposed
not only by mobs, but by parsons. Hence the issue of the following
furious effusion: “The Impostor Detected: or, the Counterfeit
Saint turned inside out. Containing a full discovery of the horrid
blasphemies and impieties, taught by those diabolical seducers, called
Methodists, under colour of the only real Christianity. Particularly
intended for the use of the city of Canterbury, where that mystery
of iniquity has lately begun to work. By John Kirkby, rector of
Blackmanstone, in Kent.” London: 1750. 8vo, 55 pages.
Meek Mr. Kirkby tells his Canterbury friends, that the Methodists,
“spiritual Ephraimites, are the true successors of the pharisees, in
hypocrisy and spiritual pride, and nauseously abuse sacred things.”
Wesley is accused of “matchless impudence and wickedness, and of
impious cant. He is a chameleon; uses blasphemous jargon; basely belies
Christianity; and nonsense is the smallest of his failings. In him the
angel of darkness has made his incarnate appearance; and he and his
brother are murderers of sense as well as souls, and just about as
fitly cut out for poets as a lame horse would be for a rope dancer.”
The polite author continues: “the sacred names of God and Christ are
dreadfully blasphemed by the Methodists to serve their wicked purposes:
Hypocrisy is their trade, and seeming sanctity their disguise. Wesley
and his abettors are not only impious blasphemers of God, but also the
most wicked damners of their brethren. Among them religion is impiously
mocked; and the senseless effusions of a dissembling hypocrite are
interpreted to be the language of the Holy Ghost.”
_Quantum sufficit._ It is time to bid adieu to the Christian rector of
Blackmanstone.
Returning to London, Wesley spent Sunday, February 4, with the Rev.
Charles Manning, vicar of Hayes, in whose church he preached. He
writes: “what a change is here within a year or two! Instead of the
parishioners going out of church, the people come now from many miles
round. The church was filled in the afternoon likewise; and all
behaved well but the singers, whom I therefore reproved before the
congregation.”
Mr. Manning, for some years, was one of Wesley’s most faithful friends.
Wesley preached in his church at least fifteen times; and through him
also gained access to the churches at Uxbridge and Hillingdon. Mr.
Manning attended the sittings of Wesley’s conference in 1747; he was
the most noted of the Methodist clergy in Middlesex, and was subjected
to a large amount of petty persecution. Clergymen would turn their
backs upon him while he was reading prayers or preaching. The singers
were most obstreporous. His churchyard was used for fighting cocks. On
one occasion, William Blackall came into the church, while the psalm
was being sung, with a pipe in his mouth and a pot of beer in his hand,
and, seating himself in his pew; behaved with the greatest indecency
during the whole of Manning’s sermon. On the 5th of November, while
he was preaching, a constable and three other fellows took possession
of the belfry, rung the bells, and spat upon the heads of the people
seated in their pews beneath. Such was the heathenism, in the midst
of which Charles Manning laboured. No wonder that Wesley thought even
decent behaviour a fact worth mentioning.
On the 8th of February, London was startled, in the midst of its
noisy bustle, by the rockings and rumblings of an earthquake. The
inhabitants, struck with panic, rushed into the streets, fearing
to be buried beneath the ruins of their tottering houses. Exactly
a month afterwards, a second shock occurred, more violent and of
longer continuance. Ten days later, Gosport, Portsmouth, and the Isle
of Wight were shaken. People became frantic with fear. Meanwhile,
a crazy soldier took upon himself to prophesy, that, on the 4th of
April, there would be another earthquake, which would destroy half of
London and Westminster.[89] The prophet was sent to Bedlam for his
foolhardiness; but thousands were credulous enough to believe the silly
prognostication of this mad enthusiast. When the looked for night
arrived, Tower Hill, Moorfields, Hyde Park, and other open places,
were filled with men, women, and children, who had fled from houses
which they expected to become heaps of ruins; and there, filled with
direful apprehensions, they spent long hours of darkness, beneath
an inclement sky, in momentary expectation of seeing the soldier’s
oracular utterance fulfilled. Multitudes ran about the streets in
frantic consternation, quite certain that the final judgment was about
to open; and that, before the dawn of another day, all would hear the
blast of the archangel’s trumpet. Places of worship were packed,
especially the chapels of the Methodists, where crowds came during the
whole of that dreary night, knocking and begging for admittance. At
midnight, amid dense darkness, and surrounded by affrighted multitudes,
Whitefield stood up in Hyde Park, and, with his characteristic pathos,
and in tones majestically grand, took occasion to call the attention of
listening multitudes to the coming judgment, the wreck of nature, and
the sealing of all men’s destinies.
The scene was awful. London was in sackcloth. Women made themselves
what Horace Walpole calls “_earthquake gowns_, that is, warm gowns
in which to sit out of doors all night.” Within three days, seven
hundred and thirty coaches had been counted passing Hyde Park Corner
filled with families removing to the country.[90] Sherlock, bishop of
London, a fortnight before the expected shock,[91] had published a
letter, addressed “to the clergy and people of London and Westminster,
on occasion of the late earthquakes”; and sixty thousand copies had
been already sold to eager purchasers. This 12mo tract of twelve
pages was ably written, and was a faithful warning of the just
judgments which the people and the nation might expect unless they
repented of the enormous sins with which they were now disgraced.
“The gospel,” says Sherlock, “had been not only rejected, but treated
with malicious scorn. The press swarmed with books, some to dispute,
and some to ridicule the great truths of religion, both natural and
revealed. Blasphemy and horrid imprecations might be heard on every
hand. Lewdness and debauchery so prevailed among the lowest classes,
as to keep them idle, poor, and miserable. By lewd pictures, sold in
the open day, the abominations of the public stews were exposed to
view. Histories or romances of the vilest prostitutes were published.
Friendly visits for conversation had degenerated into meetings for
gambling; and men, who had lost all principles of religion, and
were lost to all sense of morality, in time of sickness, when fears
of futurity were revived, became an easy prey to popish priests,
and greedily swallowed their absolution cordials, which, like other
cordials, gave present ease, but wrought no cures.”
Sherlock’s letter was timely, and faithful, and did him honour; but
it also helped to create the excitement which gave credence to the
mad soldier’s prophecy, and which led to the strange scenes witnessed
during the night of April 3, and the early morn of April 4. There can
be no question that, at this period, the wickedness of London and of
the nation was enormous. The people were not only glutted with all
the inordinate gratifications and pleasures common to the country;
but they had grown delicate in vice, and had adopted all the dainties
of debauchery from abroad; and it is a fact, that the very parties,
who fled from London for fear of another earthquake, on returning,
seemed desirous of apologizing for their cowardice by plunging into
revels and riotings more dissolute than ever. Conscious of their
folly, they imputed blame to Sherlock, for raising unnecessary fears,
by his pastoral, excellent, and truly seasonable charge. Grub Street
pamphlets, the harangues of coffee house libertines, and the craven and
calumnious whispers of drawing rooms, once more filled with fugitives
returned to forsaken homes, soon made his lordship the public butt of
abusive ridicule.[92]
Where was Wesley in this unparalleled commotion? For nearly three weeks
after the first shock, on February 8, he remained in London, and held a
“solemn fast day,” and two watchnight meetings, besides other services,
at all of which there were remarkable manifestations of the presence
and power of God. He then, on February 27, set out for Bristol; but was
succeeded by his brother, who preached, at least, on four different
occasions, respecting the fearful events which were then exciting
the public mind. One of these was published, and is now included in
Wesley’s collected sermons, with the title “The Cause and Cure of
Earthquakes.” He also issued a pamphlet, entitled “Hymns occasioned by
the Earthquake, March 8, 1750. In two parts.” The hymns were nineteen
in number, some of which are published in the Methodist Hymn-book. One
of these is the hymn numbered 555; and another is that commencing with
the line: “How weak the thoughts and vain.” Two or three of the verses
may be quoted here:—
“How happy then are we,
Who build, O Lord, on Thee!
What can our foundation shock?
Though the shattered earth remove,
Stands our city on a rock,
On the rock of heavenly love.
A house we call our own,
Which cannot be o’erthrown;
In the general ruin sure,
Storms and earthquakes it defies;
Built immovably secure,
Built eternal in the skies.
High on Thy great white throne,
O King of saints, come down;
In the New Jerusalem
Now triumphantly descend;
Let the final trump proclaim
Joys begun which ne’er shall end.”
Such was Charles Wesley’s happy, hopeful, buoyant spirit, when all
around him were well-nigh paralysed with fear.
During this earthquake commotion, the once gay and sprightly, but for
long, long years, the cruelly treated and broken hearted Mehetabel
Wesley was taken to the peace and purity of heaven. Of all the Wesley
children, none were gifted with finer poetic genius than she. An
unhappy marriage with an ignorant, drunken, brutal glazier, of the
name of Wright, clouded, with distressing darkness, a life which ought
to have been full of sunshine and of happiness. At the time of her
peaceful death, Wesley was in Wales; but his brother had the mournful
pleasure of repeatedly seeing her in her last sickness, of following
her to her quiet grave, and of improving her blissful release from the
sorrows of an afflicted life, by preaching from the text: “Thy sun
shall no more go down, neither shall thy moon withdraw itself; for the
Lord shall be thine everlasting light, and the days of thy mourning
shall be ended.” She died on the 21st of March, in the fifty-third year
of her age.
On his way from London to Bristol, besides preaching at Colnbrook,
Reading, Blewbury, Oxford, and Cirencester, Wesley read Dr. Bates’s
“_Elenchus Motuum nuperorum in Anglia_,” and pronounces his thoughts
generally just, and his Latin not much inferior to Cæsar’s, but says
“he has no more mercy on the Puritans, than upon Cromwell.”
Seventeen days were spent in Bristol and at Kingswood, during which he
began writing his French Grammar; met the preachers every day at four
in the afternoon; and expelled a boy from Kingswood school, who had
studiously laboured to corrupt all the others. The Kingswood society
was stationary; that at Bristol a great deal worse. They complained of
the want of lively preachers, and had among them an almost universal
deadness. He writes: “What cause have we to be humbled over this
people! Last year more than a hundred members were added; this year
near a hundred are lost. Such a decay has not been in this society,
since it began to meet together.”
On the 19th of March, Wesley and Christopher Hopper set out for
Ireland; but it was not until the 6th of April that they were able to
sail from Holyhead to Dublin. In riding to Brecknock, Wesley’s horse
fell twice; but without hurt either to man or beast. While they were
crossing the Welsh mountains, rain was incessant; and the wind blew so
boisterously, that it was with the utmost difficulty they could save
themselves from being blown over their horses’ heads. In a cottage on
the road, Wesley “sat down for three or four hours, and translated
Aldrich’s Logic.” At Holyhead, he overtook John Jane, a preacher, in
the third year of his itinerancy, who had set out from Bristol with
three shillings in his pocket. For six nights out of seven he had been
entertained by utter strangers; and, on his arrival, had just a penny
left. Five months afterwards, this brave-hearted itinerant died, his
last words being, “I have found the love of God in Christ Jesus.” A
friend, who was with him at the time, observes:[93] “all his clothes,
linen and woollen, his stockings, hat, and wig, are not thought
sufficient to pay his funeral expenses, which amount to £1 17_s._
3_d._ All the money he had was one shilling and fourpence. But he had
enough. Food, raiment, and a good conscience were all he wanted here.”
“Enough,” adds Wesley, “for any unmarried preacher of the gospel to
leave to his executors.”
Wesley and Hopper embarked at Holyhead on the 29th of March, and
found on board Mr. Griffith, of Carnarvonshire, “a clumsy, overgrown,
hardfaced man, who poured out such a volley of ribaldry, obscenity,
and blasphemy, every second or third word being an oath, as was scarce
ever heard at Billingsgate.” Wesley says: “His countenance I could only
compare to that which I saw in Drury Lane thirty years ago, of one of
the ruffians in ‘Macbeth.’ Finding there was no room for me to speak, I
retired into my cabin, and left him to Mr. Hopper.” Hopper adds: “God
stopped his mouth, and he was confounded.”[94] Jonah was on board; and,
after being tossed by a tremendous storm for two and twenty hours, the
Methodist itinerants were thankful to get back to the bay that they had
left.
On landing, Wesley preached to “a room full of men, daubed with
gold and silver,” some of whom “rose up and went away railing and
blaspheming.” The next night, he was about to preach again, when
Griffith, at the head of a drunken rabble, burst open both the outer
and inner doors, struck Wesley’s host, kicked the poor man’s wife, and,
with twenty full mouthed oaths and curses, demanded, “Where is the
parson?” Wesley was locked in another room, the door of which Griffith
broke. The man was far too big to be a climber; but, notwithstanding
this, impelled by his bad passions, he mounted a chair to search for
Wesley on the top of the bed tester; but the burly detective fell down
backwards, and then with his troop departed. Wesley having descended
to a lower room, and spent half an hour in prayer with a small company
of poor people gathered for the purpose, Griffith and his gang again
assembled. Griffith burst into the house; a young girl, standing in the
passage with a pail of water, drenched him from head to foot, and made
the bully cry “Murder! murder!” Another locked the door, when, finding
himself a prisoner, the poor wretch had to beg most piteously to be
released, and to give his word of honour, that he and his companions
would quietly decamp.
At length, after a detention which had severely taxed Wesley’s
patience, he and Hopper again embarked, and on April 6 arrived safe at
Dublin.
To his great annoyance, he found that, during his absence, the Dublin
society had been beguiled by a man of the name of Roger Ball, who had
been employed to preach to the Dublin congregations, and had been
domiciled as a member of Wesley’s family. The man was an antinomian
of the worst description, a crafty debauchee, full of deceit, and
holding the most abominable errors, by means of which he had done a
large amount of mischief. Some were disposed to give up the sacrament;
and all were inclined to drop the Tuesday and Thursday preaching, on
the ground that “the dear Lamb is the only teacher.” For years, this
infamous man hung upon the skirts of the Methodist societies.
Six days after his arrival in Dublin, Wesley had an unexpected
interview with a woman of great, though unenviable fame. Lætitia
Pilkington was the daughter of a Dublin physician, and was born in
that city, in 1712. Her sprightliness and charms attracted numerous
admirers, and among others, the Rev. Matthew Pilkington, author of a
well known volume of miscellanies. To this gentleman she was married.
Dissension soon sprung up, which ended in separation. She then fell
into a licentious life, and once was in the Marshalsea for debt.
Colley Cibber obtained her release from prison, and procured her a
subscription of fifteen guineas, with which she opened a book shop in
St. James’s Street. She was the author of a comedy, called “The Turkish
Court”; a tragedy, entitled “The Roman Father”; and also another
piece, “The Trial of Constancy,” and other poems. Her most famous
production, however, was her own Life, in two volumes, written with
indecent freedom, but shrewd and entertaining, and displaying extensive
knowledge of the world. Dean Swift was one of her intimate friends,
and had a high opinion of her intellectual faculties. Her memory was
remarkable, if it be true, as stated, that she was able to repeat
almost the whole of Shakspeare by heart.
These particulars will give increasing interest to the following
extract from Wesley’s Journal: “1750. April 12.—I breakfasted with one
of the society, and found she had a lodger I little thought of. It
was the famous Mrs. Pilkington, who soon made an excuse for following
me upstairs. I talked with her seriously about an hour; we then sang,
‘Happy Magdalene.’ She appeared to be exceedingly struck: how long the
impression may last, God knows.”
Mrs. Pilkington was now thirty-eight years of age. Five months
afterwards she died.
Having spent thirteen days in Dublin, Wesley set out, on the 19th of
April, on a country excursion. At Portarlington, he preached to almost
all the gentry in the town. At Mountmellick, he found the society much
increased in grace, and yet lessened in number; a case which he thought
was without a parallel. At Tullamore, many of his congregation were
drunk; but the bulk paid great attention. He rebuked the society for
their lukewarmness and covetousness; and had the pleasure of seeing
them evince signs of penitence. At Tyrrell’s Pass, he found a great
part of the society “walking in the light, and praising God all the
day long.” At Cooley-lough, he preached to backsliders. In the midst
of the service at Athlone, a man passed by on a fine prancing horse,
which drew off a large part of the congregation. Wesley paused, and
then raising his voice, said, “If there are any more of you who think
it is of more concern to see a dancing horse than to hear the gospel
of Christ, pray go after them.” The renegades heard the rebuke; and
the majority at once returned. At Aghrim, he preached “to a well
meaning, sleepy people,” and “strove to shake some of them out of sleep
by preaching as sharply as he could.” At Nenagh, he preached in the
assembly room. At Limerick, he “told the society freely and plainly
of their faults.” At Killdorrery, a clergyman would talk with him
whether he would or not; and this made him too late for preaching at
Rathcormuck in the evening.
Here let us pause for a moment. The clergyman at Rathcormuck was the
Rev. Richard Lloyd, who, twelve months before, had permitted Wesley
to preach in his pulpit, and had shown him great attention. On this
occasion, likewise, there was the same brotherly affection. It so
happened, that, at the time of Wesley’s visit, there was an Irish
funeral. An immense crowd of people had assembled, to do honour to the
dead; Mr. Lloyd read part of the burial service in the church; after
which Wesley preached; and, as soon as his discourse was ended, the
customary Irish howl was given. Wesley writes: “It was not a song, but
a dismal, inarticulate yell, set up at the grave by four shrill voiced
women, who were hired for that purpose. But I saw not one that shed a
tear; for that, it seems, was not in their bargain.”
Mr. Lloyd got into trouble by his allowing Wesley to occupy his church.
The neighbouring clergy complained to the bishop. The bishop directed
Mr. Davies, the archdeacon, to deliver to Lloyd an episcopal order,
that he must not “suffer any person to preach in his church, who was
not a licensed preacher of that or the neighbouring diocese.” In a long
letter to the bishop, dated “July 4, 1750,” and sent as an answer to
his order, Mr. Lloyd remarks:—
“I confess that Mr. Wesley has preached (though seldomer than has been
wished) in my church. And I thought, that a fellow of Lincoln College,
Oxford, who is admitted to preach before the university there, and
has preached in many churches in London, and other parts of England,
as also in Dublin, might be permitted to preach here also.” He adds:
“The mobs at Cork, and some other places in this kingdom, have obliged
the Methodists to seek the protection of government, which undoubtedly
they will have. Several of them, of good fortunes, to escape the
persecution, are preparing to settle in England; and, because the
clergy are supposed to have encouraged it, numbers of others resolve
to quit our church. At this rate, we may, in a short time, have only
the refuse left. Religion, my lord, is now at a very low ebb in the
world; and we can scarce see the outward form of it remaining. But
corrupt as the world is, it is thought better that the devil should
reign, than that Mr. Wesley should preach, especially in a church.”