Ephes. iv. 24. The sermon was taken down in shorthand, and, after his
death, was published, with the title, “The putting on of the New Man a
certain mark of the real Christian.” (8vo. 30 pp.) The sermon is not in
Whitefield’s collected works, but furnishes a good idea of the popular
style he adopted. It is full of brief illustrations, and is intensely
earnest; the style plain, familiar, and pointed. Three sentences
may interest the reader. “Let me tell you, no matter whether you
are Presbyterian or Independent, Churchman or Dissenter, Methodist
or no Methodist, unless you are new creatures, you are in a state of
damnation” (p. 17). “I like orthodoxy very well; but what signifies an
orthodox head with a heterodox heart?” (p. 19.) “I tell thee, O man;
I tell thee, O woman, whoever thou art, thou art a dead man, thou art
a dead woman, nay, a damned man, a damned woman, without a new heart”
(p. 27).
Whitefield, about this time, became acquainted with another clergyman,
who was a man after his own heart. The Rev. William Baddiley had been
made one of Lady Huntingdon’s domestic chaplains. He soon became a sort
of second Grimshaw, formed a number of Societies, and employed laymen
to assist him.[262] To him, Whitefield wrote as follows:――
“LONDON, _January 12, 1750_.
“MY VERY DEAR SIR,――I now sit down to answer your kind letter.
O that I may be helped to write something that may do you service
in the cause in which you are embarked!
“I see you are like to have hot work, for I find you have begun
to batter Satan’s strongest hold――I mean the self-righteousness
of man. Here, sir, you must expect the strongest opposition. It
is the _Diana_ of every age. It is the golden image, which man
continually sets up; and the not falling down to worship it,
much more to speak, write, or preach against it, exposes one
to the fury of its blind votaries, and we are thrown directly
into a den of lions. But fear not, Mr. Baddiley; the God whom
we serve is able to deliver us. If any one need give way, it
must be the poor creature who is writing to you; for, I believe,
there is not a person living more timorous by nature than I
am. But, in a degree, Jesus has delivered me from worldly hopes
and worldly fears, and often makes me as bold as a lion. But,
my dear sir, at first, I did not care to part with this pretty
character of mine. It was death to be despised, and worse than
death to think of being laughed at. Blessed be God! now contempt
and I are pretty intimate, and have been so for above twice
seven years. The love of Jesus makes it an agreeable companion,
and I no longer wonder that Moses made such a blessed choice.
There is no doing good without enduring the scourge of the
tongue; and take this for a certain rule――‘The more successful
you are, the more you will be hated by Satan, and despised by
those who know not God.’ What has the honoured lady suffered
under whose roof you dwell! Above all, what did your blessed
Master suffer! O let us follow Him, though it be through a sea
of blood.”
On the same day that Whitefield wrote to her domestic chaplain,
he wrote to the Countess herself. Perhaps it ought to be premised
that, at this time, Wesley had, besides the “Old Foundery,” two other
London chapels――one in West Street, Seven Dials, built by the French
Protestants; the other in Snowfields, Bermondsey, built by a Unitarian.
The “Mr. Gifford,” whom Whitefield mentions, was a man of some
importance. Besides being the respected minister of the Baptist
Church, in Eagle Street, London, he was chaplain to Sir Richard Ellys,
the learned author of “Fortuita Sacra.” He had a private collection
of coins, said to have been one of the most curious in Great Britain,
and which George II. purchased as an addition to his own. Through Sir
Richard Ellys, he became a personal friend of Lord Chancellor Hardwicke,
Archbishop Herring, Sir Arthur Onslow, the Speaker of the House of
Commons, and other persons of high social rank. He was also ultimately
appointed librarian of the British Museum, and was made a doctor by the
University of Aberdeen.
“LONDON, _January 12, 1750_.
“HONOURED MADAM,――Every day we have new hearers, and persons are
almost continually brought under convictions, or are edified, at
the Tabernacle.
“I have offered Mr. Wesley to assist occasionally at his chapel,
and I don’t know but it may be accepted. O that I may learn to
think it my highest privilege to be an assistant to all, but the
head of none! I find a love of power sometimes intoxicates even
God’s own dear children, and makes them to mistake passion for
zeal, and an overbearing spirit for an authority given them from
above. For my own part, I find it much easier to obey than to
govern, and that it is much safer to be trodden under foot than
to have the power to serve others so. This makes me flee from
that which, at our first setting out, we are too apt to court.
Thanks be to God for taking any pains with me! I cannot well buy
humility at too dear a rate.
“His Majesty seems to have been acquainted with some
things about us, by what passed in his discourse with Lady
Chesterfield.[263] The particulars are these. Her ladyship wore
a suit of clothes, with a brown ground and silver flowers. His
Majesty, coming round to her, first smiled, and then laughed
quite out. Her ladyship could not imagine what was the cause of
this. At length, His Majesty said, ‘I know who chose that gown
for you――Mr. Whitefield. I hear that you have attended on him
this year and a half.’ Her ladyship answered, ‘Yes, I have, and
like him very well.’
“I have been with the Speaker about the poor people in Ireland.
Mr. Gifford introduced me, and opened the matter well. His
honour expressed a great regard for your ladyship, and great
resentment at the indignities of the poor sufferers; but said,
Lord Harrington and the Secretary of State were the most proper
persons to apply to; and he did not doubt that your ladyship’s
application would get the people’s grievances redressed. I
wished for a memorial to acquaint him with particulars. He
treated me with great candour, and assured me no hurt was
designed us by the State.”
Six days after this, Whitefield wrote to Mr. Lunell, as follows:――
“LONDON, _January 18, 1750_.
“VERY DEAR SIR,――Last Monday, I waited upon the Speaker of the
House of Commons, with one Mr. Gifford, a Dissenting minister,
who opened the case of our poor suffering brethren in a proper
manner. The Speaker said that, though it did not properly belong
to him, he would make a thorough search into the affair. He
wondered that application had not been made to Lord Harrington,
the king’s representative in Ireland; and wanted to be informed
of more particulars. For want of a memorial, I could only shew
him the contents of your letter. Two things, therefore, seem
necessary. Be pleased to send a well-attested narrative of the
whole affair; and wait upon Lord Harrington yourself. A friend
of mine intends writing to Baron B――――. Is he in Dublin? As soon
as I hear from you, more may be done. Meanwhile, the dear souls
have my constant prayers, and shall have my utmost endeavours
to serve them. I count their sufferings my own. Hearty _Amens_
are given, when our friends are mentioned in prayer at the
Tabernacle.
“To-morrow, I am to preach at Mr. Wesley’s chapel. O that it may
be for the Redeemer’s glory, and His people’s good!”
To avoid a recurrence to the rioting at Cork, the following letter, to
Mr. Lunell, is added:――
“LONDON, _January 28, 1750_.
“VERY DEAR SIR,――I am glad to find the storm is a little abated
at Cork. I always thought it was too hot to last long. I see, by
Mr. Haughton, that suffering grace is always given for suffering
times. If they have honoured him so far as to give him some
lashes, for preaching the everlasting gospel, I shall rejoice.
I am persuaded, the persecution will stir up the resentment of
persons in power on this side the water. I beg, for the dear
people’s sake, you will continue your accounts. They direct me
in my prayers, and also excite the prayers of others. On Monday,
your letter shall be read, and we will besiege the throne of
grace once more, on our dear brethren’s behalf. Surely, we shall
prevail. I will use all endeavours to extricate our friends out
of their troubles. Enclosed, you have a letter to the judge.
You may send or deliver it, as you think proper. I hope you will
wait on Lord Harrington, and let me hear what he says. The Duke”
(of Newcastle) “was spoken to; and, last post, I wrote to Lady
Huntingdon for the memorial, which, if sent, shall be put into
the hands of some who are very near His Majesty. Some honourable
women are much your friends. Jesus makes them so; and, when His
people are distressed, if needful, a thousand _Esthers_ shall be
raised up.
“I have now preached three times in Mr. Wesley’s chapel; and,
each time, the Lord was with us of a truth.”
The result of all this correspondence was: 1. A well-attested
narrative of the persecution of the Methodists at Cork was presented
to Lord Harrington, the king’s representative in Ireland. 2. A
memorial was presented to His Majesty King George II., by the Countess
of Chesterfield. 3. The Duke of Newcastle, then Secretary of State,
was spoken to on the subject, and expressed great resentment at the
proceedings of the magistrates and clergymen of Cork. 4. At the Lent
assizes, 1750, the depositions of the persecuted Methodists were laid
before the grand jury, but were all rejected; a true bill, however,
was found against Daniel Sullivan, one of Wesley’s hearers, for
discharging a pistol, without a ball, over the heads of Butler and his
mob, while they were pelting him with stones; and, finally, several of
the preachers, who, together with Charles Wesley, had been in August,
1749, presented, by the grand jury of the Cork assizes, as “persons of
ill-fame, vagabonds, and common disturbers of the public peace,” were
ordered into the dock as common criminals; but were all “acquitted,”
says John Wesley, “with honour to themselves, and shame to their
persecutors.” It is somewhat remarkable, that, though the Methodists
of Cork were all followers of Wesley, the applications to Government
officials on their behalf were all made by Whitefield and his friends.
This was not for want of sympathy on the part of Wesley, but because
Whitefield, by the aristocratic acquaintances he had formed, was in a
better position to render help.
Another incident must be noticed. In the foregoing letters, Whitefield
mentions, with seeming emphasis, his preaching in Wesley’s chapels.
This, in fact, was a notable occurrence. Except for a few months,
the friendship between Whitefield and Wesley had been unbroken; but,
up to the present, Whitefield had but rarely preached to Wesley’s
congregations. Indeed, of the ten or eleven years that had elapsed
since the first formation of Wesley’s Societies, Whitefield had spent
more than six in America and Scotland, where Wesley had no Societies
or congregations at all; and, during the remaining four or five,
his relationship to the Welsh Calvinistic Methodists was such as to
prevent his rendering fraternal services like those referred to in
his letters to Mr. Lunell. Now, however, he was in a new position.
After considerable correspondence between Wesley and himself, it had
been found that the amalgamation of their respective Societies was
impracticable. For this and for other reasons, Whitefield resigned his
office of moderator; and openly and repeatedly declared that he would
neither found a sect, nor be at the head of one founded by others. His
work for life was to be an evangelist at large,――the friend and helper
of all Christian denominations, and the enemy of none. Hence, during
his recent visit to the north of England, Charles Wesley introduced him
to the Methodists of Newcastle; and Wesley himself to the Methodists
of Leeds; and, for the next twenty years, as opportunity permitted,
Whitefield rendered to Wesley’s Societies and congregations, throughout
the kingdom, an amount of valuable service, the results of which
cannot now be rightly estimated. The fraternal co-operation, begun
at Newcastle and Leeds in 1749, was now continued in London in 1750,
greatly to the delight of Whitefield and Wesley, and of their friends.
Wesley’s memoranda of these memorable London services are as follows:――
“1750. Friday, January 19. In the evening, I read prayers at
the chapel in West Street, and Mr. Whitefield preached a plain,
affectionate discourse. Sunday, 21st. He read prayers, and I
preached: so, by the blessing of God, one more stumbling-block
is removed. Sunday, 28th. I read prayers, and Mr. Whitefield
preached. How wise is God in giving different talents to
different preachers! Even the little improprieties both of his
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.”[264]
This was a new fact in Methodist history. Partisans, on both sides, had
done their utmost to keep Whitefield and Wesley apart from each other;
but now their machinations were utterly and finally frustrated. The
Methodist chieftains were united, though it had been found impossible
to unite their Societies. The event afforded satisfaction to others,
as well as to themselves. Hence the following, addressed to Mrs. Jones,
widow of R. Jones, Esq., of Fonmon Castle, a personal friend of the
Wesleys, on the occasion of whose death, Charles Wesley composed a
well-known “Elegy.” The writer of the letter, William Holland, had been
a “painter, in a large way of business, in Basinghall Street.” He was a
member of the first Moravian “congregation” in London, and was one of
its “elders.” He became a preacher, and removed to Yorkshire, where he
succeeded Viney in the stewardship; but, in 1746, he returned to London,
resumed his trade, left the Brethren, and died in 1761.
“ROLLS BUILDINGS, FETTER LANE,
“LONDON, _January 27, 1750_.
“DEAR MRS. JONES,――I arrived safe and well last Saturday,
and found my wife and family well. The evening before, Mr.
Whitefield preached in Mr. Wesley’s chapel, and Mr. J. Wesley
read prayers. On Sunday, Mr. Whitefield read prayers, and Mr.
J. Wesley preached; and, afterwards, they and two more clergymen
administered the sacrament to Mr. Howell Harris and several of
Mr. Whitefield’s Society, and to many hundreds of Mr. Wesley’s.
Monday morning, Mr. H. Harris preached in the Foundery; a
duke and another nobleman were there to hear Mr. J. Wesley.
On Wednesday, Thursday, and yesterday, Mr. Whitefield preached
again at the chapel; as also he is to do to-morrow morning, and
Mr. J. Wesley in the afternoon.
“You will please to let the enclosed be delivered as directed.
They and you will excuse brevity by reason of the frank.[266]
“My wife joins me in respects to you and your children. I am,
your friend and servant,
“WILLIAM HOLLAND.”[267]
To return to Whitefield. In the midst of his benevolent endeavours to
assist the poor Methodists at Cork, Whitefield, with his characteristic
kindliness, was caring for the welfare of persons of another class.
The following was written to Mr. Habersham, formerly his manager at
Bethesda, and who still took a profound interest in his Orphan House.
To understand the letter, it must be added, that, though, from the
first settlement of Georgia, the province had been under a _military_
government, the trustees, about this period, established a kind of
_civil_ government, and committed the charge to a president and four
councillors. Mr. Stephens was now the president. In 1751, the province
was divided into eleven districts; a colonial assembly of sixteen
members was inaugurated at Savannah; Henry Parker was made president;
and James Habersham provincial secretary. As yet, slavery was not
formally introduced, but it practically existed. The term for which
European servants had been engaged being now generally expired, the
difficulty of procuring labour was met by permitting the colonists to
hire negroes from their owners in South Carolina.[268]
“LONDON, _January 18, 1750_.
“MY VERY DEAR MR. HABERSHAM,――Blessed be God, for dealing so
favourably with my dear families, and for giving the prospect
of such a plentiful crop! I take it as an earnest, that the Lord
Jesus will be the Lord God of Bethesda, and will let the world
see that designs founded on Him shall prosper.
“I shall not wonder to hear, by-and-by, that you are president.
O that you and I may be clothed with humility, and that the more
we are exalted by others, the more we may be abased in our own
eyes! O that something may now be done for the poor negroes! A
good beginning is of vast consequence. Pray stir in it, and let
us exert our utmost efforts in striving to bring some of them to
the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. This night,
I have agreed to take little Joseph and his sister. All their
relations are desirous that I should have them, as they will
be but poorly provided for here. I think they have a kind of
natural right to be maintained at Bethesda. I suppose, in your
next, you will acquaint me with particulars concerning their
father, and how he has left his affairs. I hear there is a
little infant, besides the other two. I would willingly have
that likewise, if it could be kept till it is about three years
old. I hope to be rich in heaven, by taking care of orphans on
earth. Any other riches, blessed be God! are out of my view. If
the crop answers expectation, I would have the poor of Savannah
reap the benefit. Pray let one barrel of rice be reserved for
them.
“We have had a blessed winter here. I am pretty well in health,
but my wife is ill.”
On Friday, February 2nd, Whitefield arrived at Gloucester, where
he spent the next ten days. Daily, he preached either in the city or
in its vicinity. “Some young fellows,” says he, “behaved rudely; but
that is no wonder; the carnal mind is ♦enmity against God.” To Colonel
Gumley, who had been converted under his preaching at Lady Huntingdon’s,
and who was the father of the Countess of Bath, he wrote, on February
8th:――
“Contrary to my intentions, I have been prevailed on to
stay all this week in Gloucester; so that I do not expect to
be at Bristol till the 12th instant. I am sorry to hear you
are ill of an ague. Everything we meet with here, is only to
fit us more and more for a blessed hereafter. Christ is the
believer’s _hollow square_; and if we keep close in that, we
are impregnable. Here only I find my refuge. Garrisoned in this,
I can bid defiance to men and devils. O, my dear sir, what did
I experience on the road this day! How did I rejoice at the
prospect of a judgment to come, and in the settled conviction
that I have no designs but to spend and be spent for the good of
precious and immortal souls. The hand of the Lord Jesus, without
adding our carnal policy to it, will support His own cause.
When human cunning is made use of, what is it, but, like Uzzah,
to give a wrong touch to the ark of God, and to provoke God to
smite us? A bigoted, sectarian, party spirit cometh not from
above, but is sensual, earthly, devilish. Many of God’s children
are infected with it. They are sick of a bad distemper. May the
Spirit of God convince and cure them!”
On arriving at Bristol, Whitefield wrote to the Countess of Huntingdon,
as follows:――
“BRISTOL, _February 12, 1750_.
“HONOURED MADAM,――Since I wrote last, we have been favoured both
in Gloucester city, and in the country, with very pleasant and
delightful seasons. I have preached about twenty times within
these eight or nine days; and, though frequently exposed to rain
and hail, am much better than when I left London. Everything
I meet with seems to carry this voice with it,――‘Go thou and
preach the gospel. Be a pilgrim on earth. Have no party, or
certain dwelling-place; but be continually preparing for, and
labouring to prepare others for, a house not made with hands,
eternal, in the heavens.’ My heart echoes back,――‘Lord Jesus,
help me to do or suffer Thy will! And, when Thou seest me in
danger of nestling, in pity, put a thorn in my nest, to preserve
me from it!’”
On his way to Plymouth, Whitefield held sweet intercourse with two
eminently pious Dissenting ministers,――the well-known Rev. Richard
Pearsall, of Taunton, and the Rev. Risdon Darracott, of Wellington.
Writing to Lady Huntingdon, he said:――
“PLYMOUTH, _February 25, 1750_.
“The day after I wrote my last letter to your ladyship, I
preached three times, once at Kingswood, and twice at Bristol.
It was a blessed day. The next morning, I came on my way
rejoicing. At Taunton, I met with Mr. Pearsall, a Dissenting
minister, a preacher of righteousness before I was born.[269] At
Wellington, I lay at the house of one Mr. Darracott, a flaming
successful preacher of the gospel, and who may justly be styled,
‘the star in the West.’[270] He has suffered much reproach; and,
in the space of three months, has lost three lovely children.
Two of them died the Saturday evening before the sacrament
was to be administered; but weeping did not hinder sowing. He
preached next day, and administered as usual; and, for his three
natural, the Lord has given him above thirty spiritual children.
He has ventured his little all for Christ; and last week a saint
died, who left him £200 in land. At his place, I began to take
the field for this spring. At a very short warning, a multitude
assembled. The following evening, I preached at Exeter; and last
night and this morning I have preached here. This afternoon, God
willing, I am to take the field again.”
Mention has been already made of Benjamin Franklin issuing his
“Proposals relating to the Education of Youth in Pennsylvania,” a step
which led to the founding of the present university of Philadelphia.
This was a subject in which Whitefield took a profound interest, not
only because the meeting-house which had been built for himself was
likely to be occupied for this purpose; but, also, because, knowing the
principles of his friend Franklin, he was afraid that, in the proposed
academy, religion might not occupy the position which it ought to
have. Franklin had written him on the subject; and the following is
the substance of his answer:――
“PLYMOUTH, _February 26, 1750_.
“MY DEAR MR. FRANKLIN,――I am glad that the gentlemen of
Philadelphia are exerting their efforts to erect an academy. I
have often thought such an institution was exceedingly wanted;
and I am persuaded, if well conducted, it will be of public
service. I have read your plan, and do not wonder at its meeting
with general approbation. It is certainly well calculated to
promote polite literature; but, I think, there wants _aliquid
Christi_ in it, to make it as useful as I would desire it might
be.
“It is true you say, ‘The youth are to be taught some public
religion, and the excellency of the Christian religion in
particular;’ but methinks this is mentioned too late, and too
soon passed over. As we are all creatures of a day, as our
whole life is but one small point between two eternities, it
is reasonable to suppose that the grand end of every Christian
institution for forming tender minds should be to convince them
of their natural depravity, of the means of recovering out of
it, and of the necessity of preparing for the enjoyment of the
Supreme Being in a future state. These are the grand points in
which Christianity centres. Arts and sciences may be built on
this, and serve to embellish the superstructure, but without
this there cannot be any good foundation.
“I should be glad to contribute, though it were but the
least mite, and to promote so laudable an undertaking; but
the gentlemen concerned are so superior to me, in respect to
knowledge of both books and men, that anything I could offer
would be, I fear, of little service. The main thing will be
to get proper masters, who are acquainted with the world, with
themselves, and with God, and who will consequently care for
the welfare of the youth that shall be committed to them. I
think, also, that, in such an institution, there should be a
well-approved Christian orator, who should not be content with
giving a public lecture upon oratory in general, but who should
visit and take pains with every class, and teach them early how
to speak, and read, and pronounce well. An hour or two in a day,
I think, ought to be set apart for this. It would serve as an
agreeable amusement, and would be of great service, whether
the youth be intended for the pulpit, the bar, or any other
profession whatsoever. I should also like the youth to board in
the academy, and, by that means, to be always under the master’s
eye. If a fund could be raised, for the free education of those
of the poorer sort who appear to have promising abilities, I
think it would greatly answer the design proposed. It has often
been found, that some of our brightest men, in Church and State,
have arisen from an obscure condition.