apostolic doctrine and episcopal dignity to these pretended
saint errants and non-apostolical preachers! To complete their
unhappiness, we have made them a theatrical scoff, and the
common jest and scorn of every chorister in the street.”
Five days afterwards, there appeared, in the same journal, a letter
by Wesley, replying to this “very angry gentleman,” whom he presumed
to be “a retainer of the theatre.” This evoked a disgracefully abusive
answer, on November 24, which concluded with the polite assertion, that
“arguing with Methodists is like pounding fools in a mortar.” Wesley
again replied, on December 3; and his opponent, angrier than ever, in a
long epistle, on December 12. In one of his quiet, but caustic letters,
Wesley concluded the correspondence on December 26.
During this lengthened controversy, between Wesley and his nameless
adversary, two more pamphlets were given to the public. The first
was entitled, “A Letter to Mr. F――te. Occasioned by the Christian
and Critical Remarks on his Interlude, called ‘The Minor.’ To
which is added an Appendix, relative to a Serious Address to the
Methodists themselves.” (12mo. 28 pp.) The thing was full of banter
and badness,――bespattering Whitefield, and extolling Foote. The second
was an equally vile production: “Observations, Good or Bad, Stupid or
Clever, Serious or Jocular, on Squire Foote’s Dramatic Entertainment,
entitled ‘The Minor.’ By a Genius.” (12mo. 15 pp.) In the _Genius’s_
estimation, “the _fable_ of ‘The Minor’ is pretty and entertaining; the
_manners_ happily described; the _sentiments_ just and natural; and the
_language_ easy and spirited!!!” The critique of the _Monthly Review_
on this production of “a Genius” was contained in a single line: “All
the humour of this lies in the title-page.”
These lengthened details may be somewhat tedious; but they show the
terrible _fracas_ in which Whitefield was involved during the year
1760. This certainly was one of the most painful years of his eventful
life. The persecution also was novel. He had been abused by clergymen
in England, Scotland, and America, by pamphleteers learned and
illiterate, and by mobs; but now, for the first time, he was ridiculed
by theatrical comedians and their friends. Other opponents had been
severe; but, as a rule, they had not been ribald and profane. Now it
was otherwise. The farce of Foote, and the ballads in the streets, were
steeped in blasphemy and filth. And yet, with the exception already
mentioned, they are never noticed in any of Whitefield’s published
letters. That he suffered――keenly suffered――it is impossible to doubt;
but there is no evidence that he murmured or complained. No man more
fully realized the truth and meaning of the Saviour’s beatitude,
“Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and
shall say all manner of evil against you _falsely_, for my sake.”
“The Minor” was not the only farce published against Whitefield. At
least, three other kindred productions were printed during the ensuing
year. First, there was “An Additional Scene to the Comedy of ‘The
Minor.’ London, 1761.” (8vo. 19 pp.) In this, Whitefield was described
as “a priestly-looking man, with a cast in his eyes, and wearing a
white flaxen wig,” and who, on being introduced to Foote, presented a
comedy of his own composing, and requested Foote to act it. Then, there
was “The Register Office: a Farce of Two Acts. Acted at the Theatre
Royal in Drury Lane. By J. Reed. London, 1761.” (8vo. 47 pp.) A filthy
thing, in which Whitefield is called “Mr. Watchlight,” instead of
“Dr. Squintum;” and “Mrs. Snarewell” answers to “Mrs. Cole” in “The
Minor” by Foote. “Lady Wrinkle” and “Mrs. Snarewell” are both _dramatis
personæ_ in the printed farce; but a foot-note states, “These two
characters were not _permitted_ to be played.” Then, finally, there
was “The Methodist: a Comedy: being a Continuation and Completion of
the Plan of ‘The Minor’ written by Mr. Foote: as it was intended to
have been acted at the Theatre Royal in Covent Garden, but for obvious
reasons suppressed. With the original Prologue and Epilogue. London,
1761.” (8vo. 60 pp.) This, if possible, was even more profane and
polluted than “The Minor” itself; and, though not acted, it soon passed
through three editions. “Squintum” and “Mrs. Cole” were both among the
leading characters; but to quote what they are made to say would be
a crime. Half a dozen lines, however, taken from the prologue, may be
given:――
“No private pique this just resentment draws,
Or brands a wretched _Squintum_, or his cause;
But, since the laws no punishment provide
For such as draw the multitude aside,
The poet seizes the corrective rod,
To scourge the bold blasphemer of his God.”
A disgusting specimen of the audacious falsehoods of the _blaspheming_
Foote! To use one of Whitefield’s own expressions, none but a wretched
being, “_half a beast and half a devil_,” could have written “The
Minor” and “The Methodist.” The following is the _Monthly Review’s_
critique on the latter of these infamous productions:――
“Mr. Foote’s ‘Minor’ is the foundation of this despicable
superstructure, by means of which the scandalous abuse of
Mr. Whitefield, under the opprobrious name of Dr. Squintum,
is carried to such a height, as, in our judgment, reflects
the utmost disgrace upon literature.”[483]
It is mournful to relate, that the wretched Foote hunted Whitefield,
with undiminished hatred, to the end of Whitefield’s life. Two months
after the great preacher’s death, in 1770, Foote was acting “The
Minor” in the theatre at Edinburgh. The first night’s audience was
large; but the indecency of the piece so shocked the people, that,
at the following night’s performance, only ten of the female sex had
effrontery sufficient to witness such profane impurity. Meanwhile,
the news arrived of Whitefield’s decease, and loud was the outcry
against ridiculing the man after he was dead. The Revs. Dr. Erskine,
Dr. Walker, and Mr. Baine denounced Foote’s outrageous behaviour from
their respective pulpits. “How base and ungrateful,” exclaimed the
last-mentioned minister, “is such treatment of the dead! and that,
too, so very nigh to a family of orphans, the records of whose hospital
will transmit Mr. Whitefield’s name to posterity with honour, when
the memory of others will rot. How illiberal such usage of one, whose
seasonable good services for his king and country are well known; and
whose indefatigable labours for his beloved Master were countenanced by
heaven!”[484]
Here, while the buffoon, as it were, gesticulates, capers, and makes
grimaces over Whitefield’s corpse, we take our leave of Foote for ever.
Before passing from the year 1760, one more publication must be
mentioned. Its title was “Pious Aspirations for the use of Devout
Communicants, either before, at, or after the Time of Receiving.
Founded on the History of the Sufferings of Christ, as related by
the Four Evangelists. Extracted from the English Edition of the three
Volumes of the Rev. Mr. J. Rambach, late Professor of Divinity in the
University of Giessen. By George Whitefield, Chaplain to the Right
Honourable the Countess of Huntingdon. London, 1760.” (12mo. 104 pp.)
This little book is often beautiful, and always intensely earnest and
devout.
The first glimpse of Whitefield, in 1761, is on February 21, when he
wrote as follows:――
“London. The distance that Plymouth lies from London, is one
great cause of my coming there so seldom. What can I do, who
have so many calls, and so few assistants? London must be minded;
for, surely, there the word runs, and is glorified more and
more. I returned in post-haste, last month, from Bristol. Both
in going and coming, dear Mr. H―――― and I were in great jeopardy.
Once the machine fell over; and, at another time, we were
obliged to leap out of the post-chaise, though going very fast.
Blessed be God, we received little hurt. Good was to be done. On
the Fast-day, near £600 were collected for the German and Boston
sufferers. Grace! grace! I wish you had collected at Bristol.
When can you move? Pray let me know directly. I want my wife to
ride as far as Plymouth. Nothing but exercise will do with her.”
The general fast, here mentioned, was held on Friday, February 13. On
that day, Whitefield preached early in the morning, at the Tabernacle,
from Exodus xxxiv. 1, etc., and collected £112. In the forenoon, at
Tottenham Court Road, he selected, as his text, “Blow the trumpet in
Zion, sanctify a fast, call a solemn assembly.” Here the collection was
£242. In the evening, he preached again in the Tabernacle, choosing for
his text, “The Lord said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into
the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation.”
The third collection amounted to £210.[485] The ridicule of Foote, so
far from lessening, had increased Whitefield’s popularity. On the day
in question, not only did his congregations crowd the two chapels, but
comprised an assemblage of the aristocracy of England rarely witnessed
in a Methodist meeting-house. Among others present, there were the
Countess of Huntingdon, Lady Chesterfield, Lady Gertrude Hotham, Lady
Fanny Shirley, Lord Halifax, Lord Holdernesse, Secretary of State; Lord
Bute, who soon succeeded him in his office; the Duke of Grafton, then
rising rapidly into public life; Lady Harrington; Charles Fox then a
boy, but, afterwards, the celebrated statesman and orator; William Pitt,
Lord Villiers, and Soame Jennys, who held office in the Board of Trade,
and acquired imperishable fame by his “View of the Internal Evidences
of the Christian Religion.” The collections, made on the occasion,
were for a twofold purpose, partly for the benefit of the plundered
Protestants in the Marche of Brandenburg, and partly to relieve the
distresses of the inhabitants of Boston, in New England, where a fire
had destroyed nearly four hundred dwelling-houses. No wonder that they
amounted to upwards of £560.[486]
Soon after this, Whitefield received assistance in his London work,
from Berridge, of Everton, late moderator of Cambridge. Hence the
following extracts from his letters:――
“LONDON, _February 23, 1761_.
“The Redeemer’s work is upon the advance. All opposition is
over-ruled for the furtherance of the gospel. A new instrument
is raised up out of Cambridge University. He has been here
preaching like an angel of the churches.”
Again, to the Rev. John Gillies, of Glasgow:――
“LONDON, _March 14, 1761_.
“One Mr. Berridge, late moderator of Cambridge, has been
preaching here with great flame. The awakening is rather greater
than ever. Satan’s artillery has done but little execution.
“‘Thoughts are vain against the Lord,
All subserve His standing word;
Wheels encircling wheels must run,
Each in course to bring it on.
Hallelujah!’”
The truth is, Whitefield needed help. During his late visit to the
city of Bristol, he had caught a cold, which so seriously affected his
health, that, in one of the London newspapers, it was announced that he
was dead.[487] His illness disabled him during the whole of the months
of March and April. Hence the following, from _Lloyd’s Evening Post_:――
“April 13. The Rev. Mr. Whitefield is so well recovered from his
late illness, that he appeared abroad on Saturday last.
“April 29. The Rev. Mr. Whitefield was so well on Sunday, as to
assist in administering the sacrament of the Lord’s supper.”
The following letters were written when Whitefield was convalescent:――
“CANONBURY HOUSE, _April 27, 1761_.
“MY VERY DEAR FRIEND,――Accept a few lines of love unfeigned
from a worthless worm, just returning ♦from the borders of the
eternal world. O into what a world was I launching! But the
prayers of God’s people have brought me back. Lord Jesus, let
it be for Thy glory, and the welfare of precious and immortal
souls! O how ought ministers to work before the night of
sickness and death comes, when no man can work! You will
not cease to pray for me, who am indeed less than the least
of all. Weakness forbids my enlarging. Hearty love to all
who are so kind as to enquire after a hell-deserving, but
redeemed, creature. Not only pray, but also give thanks to the
never-failing Emmanuel, who has been ease in pain, health in
sickness, life in death, to yours, for His great name’s sake,
“GEORGE WHITEFIELD.”
The next was addressed to the Rev. John Gillies, of Glasgow.
“CANONBURY HOUSE, _May 2, 1761_.
“Indeed, my dear friend, the news you have heard was true. I
have been at the very gates of what is commonly called death.
They seemed opening to admit me, through the alone righteousness
of the blessed Jesus, into everlasting life. But, at present,
they are closed again. For what end, an all-wise Redeemer can
only tell. I have, since my illness, once assisted a little
at the Lord’s supper, and once have spoken a little in public.
But my locks are cut. Natural strength fails. Jesus can renew;
Jesus can cause to grow again. By His divine permission, I
have thoughts of seeing Scotland. If I relapse, that will be a
desirable place to go to heaven from. I love, I love the dear
people of Scotland! Ten thousand thanks to you, and all my dear
Glasgow friends.”
It is a disgraceful fact, that, while Whitefield was thus tottering
back from the margin of the grave, the _St. James’s Chronicle_, of
April 28, filled a column and a half of its folio sheet, with what it
was pleased to call “Similes, Metaphors, and Familiar Allusions made
use of by Dr. Squintum.” Only the last in the list shall be given.
“I will tell you the very picture of damned souls in hell. Have
you never seen a potter’s oven, where he bakes his pots? Now the
longer these pots bake, the harder they grow. Just so does one
of these damned souls. God keep you and me, dear brethren, from
ever being one of their unhappy number! (Sighing by the people.)”
For the next twelve months, Whitefield was an invalid, and, with a
few exceptions, was obliged to refrain from preaching. The following
extracts from his letters are painfully interesting. His health was
gone, and yet, when he could, he tried to preach.
“PLYMOUTH, _June 5, 1761_.
“Through Divine mercy, I am somewhat improved in my health
since my leaving London. At Bristol, I grew sensibly better, but
hurt myself by too long journeys to Exeter and hither. However,
blessed be God! I am now recovered from my fatigue, and hope
bathing will brace me up for my glorious Master’s use again.
The few times I have been enabled to preach, the infinitely
condescending Redeemer has breathed upon the word. Who knows but
I may get my wings again? Abba, Father, all things are possible
with Thee!”
“BRISTOL, _June 11, 1761_.
“These few lines leave me rather hurt by my late western
journey. I strive to put out to sea as usual, but my shattered
bark will not bear it. If this air does not agree with me,
I think of returning, in a few days, to my old nurses and
physicians. Blessed be God for an interest in an infinitely
great, infinitely gracious, and sympathising, unchangeable
Physician! I hope you and yours enjoy much of His heart-cheering
consolations. These have been my support in my younger days;
these will be my cordials in the latter stages of the road.
Jesus lives when ministers die.”
In the beginning of July, Whitefield had returned to London. Meanwhile,
news had arrived of the English fleets having taken Belleisle, on
the coast of Brittany, and Dominica in the West Indies. Pondicherry,
also, the capital settlement of the French in the East Indies, had been
surrendered to the British troops, and the English were left undisputed
masters of the rich coast of Coromandel, and of the whole trade of the
vast Indian Peninsula, from the Ganges to the Indus. Considering how,
for the last quarter of a century, Whitefield’s whole soul had been
absorbed in the great work of preaching Christ and saving souls, it is
curious to see him so profoundly interested in the war which was now
raging in the four quarters of the earth, and in the victories won by
the British arms. Hence the following:――
“London, July 6, 1761. Blessed be God, I am better! Blessed be
God that you are so likewise! Who knows what rest and time may
produce? Oh to be blanks in the hands of Jesus! When shall this
once be? What good news by sea and land! Grace! Grace!”
Wesley was now in Yorkshire, and was anxious about the health of
his old and much-loved friend. He had been in company with Venn, who
had become vicar of Huddersfield, and Venn had created fears that
Whitefield’s labours and life were almost ended. Hence, in a letter
to Mr. Ebenezer Blackwell, the London banker, Wesley wrote:――
“Bradford, July 16, 1761. Mr. Venn informs me that Mr.
Whitefield continues very weak. I was in hope, when he wrote
to me lately, that he was swiftly recovering strength. Perhaps,
sir, you can send me better news concerning him. What need have
we, while we do live, to live in earnest!”[488]
For weeks after this, Whitefield was almost entirely silent. To an
afflicted friend, he wrote:――
“LONDON, _October 13, 1761_.
“MY DEAR FELLOW-PRISONER,――I hope the all-wise Redeemer is
teaching us to be content to be buried ourselves, and to bury
our friends. This is a hard but important lesson. I have not
preached a single sermon for some weeks. Last Sunday, I spoke a
little; but I have felt its effects ever since. Father, Thy will
be done! Glory be to God, that some good was done at Plymouth!
The news drove me to my knees, and stirred up an ambition to
be employed again. I have met with changes. My two old servants
are married, and gone. Mr. E――――” (query John Edwards?) “has
preached for me some time. As yet, the congregations are kept
up.”
Immediately after this, Whitefield set out for Edinburgh, to obtain
medical advice. While halting at Leeds, he received news of the death
of one of his assistants at Bethesda; and wrote as follows:――
“Leeds, October 24, 1761. I am still in this dying world, but
frequently tempted to wish the report of my death had been
true, since my disorder keeps me from my old delightful work
of preaching. But Jesus can teach us to exercise our passive as
well as active graces. Fain would I say, ‘Thy will be done!’
I know now what nervous disorders are. Blessed be God that they
were contracted in His service! I am riding for my health; but
I think a voyage would brace me up. I impute my present disorder,
in a great measure, to the want of my usual sea voyages.
“What sudden changes here! O that my great change were come!
Happy Polhill! Bethesda’s loss is thy gain! To be carried to
heaven in an instant; from a ship’s cabin into Abraham’s bosom;
O what a blessing! God sanctify and make up the loss! We shall
find few Polhills.
“I see you are running in arrears. Some way or other, I trust,
they will be discharged. But I would have the family reduced as
low as can be. The keeping of those who are grown up hurts them,
and increases my expense. I have little comfort in many whom I
have assisted. But our reward is with the Lord. I can at present
bear very little of outward cares.”
Five days later, Whitefield had reached Newcastle, where he wrote the
following to Mr. Robert Keen, of London:――
“NEWCASTLE, _October 29, 1761_.
“MY DEAR STEADY FRIEND,――Hitherto the Lord has helped me.
Surely His mercy endureth for ever. I bear riding sixty miles a
day in a post-chaise quite well. Friends, both here and at Leeds,
are prudent, and do not press me to preach much. But, I hope,
I am travelling in order to preach. If not, Lord Jesus help
me to drink the bitter cup of a continued silence with a holy
resignation, believing that what is, is best! Everywhere, as I
came along, my spiritual children gladly received me. I hope you
go on well at London. It is the Jerusalem――the Goshen. To-morrow,
I may set forwards towards Edinburgh.”
At Edinburgh, Whitefield consulted four eminent physicians.[489] There
are only two more letters to tell the remainder of his story during the
year 1761: the first addressed to the Rev. John Gillies, of Glasgow;
the second to Mr. Robert Keen, of London.
“Edinburgh, November 9, 1761. Though I have been very ill since
my coming to Edinburgh, yet I must come to see my dear friends
at Glasgow. I cannot be there till noon on the 12th inst. Little,
very little, can be expected from a dying man.”
“Leeds, December 1, 1761. It is near ten at night and I am to
set off to-morrow in the Leeds stage for London. Silence is
enjoined me for a while by the Edinburgh physicians. They say my
case is then recoverable. The great Physician will direct.”
The poor fellow apparently was dying; but, even under such
circumstances, his enemies could not restrain their malice. It
is a painful thing to advert again to hostile publications, but
Whitefield’s history cannot be fully told without it. Some, belonging
to 1761, have been already noticed; others, unfortunately, are, as yet,
unmentioned:――
1. “A Funeral Discourse, occasioned by the much-lamented Death of Mr.
Yorick, Prebendary of Y――k, and Author of the much-admired ‘Life and
Opinions of Tristram Shandy.’ Preached before a very mixed Society of
_Jemmies_, _Jessamies_, _Methodists_, and _Christians_, at a nocturnal
meeting in Petticoat Lane; and now Published, at the unanimous request
of the hearers, by Christopher Flagellan, A.M. London, 1761.” (8vo.
48 pp.) It is enough to say that this profane and filthy production was
dedicated to “the Right Honourable the Lord F――――g, and _to the very
facetious Mr. Foote_!”
2. “A Journal of the Travels of Nathaniel Snip, a Methodist Teacher of
the Word. Containing an Account of the many Marvellous Adventures which
befel him in his way from the town of Kingston-upon-Hull to the City
of York. London, 1761.” (8vo. 32 pp.) This was an infamous production,
full of burlesque and banter; but the foot-note, at the end of it, will
be quite enough to satisfy the reader’s craving:――
“As Snip’s manuscript concludes thus abruptly, I beg leave
to finish the whole with an account of what I observed at a
puppet show, exhibited at one of the principal towns in the
west of Yorkshire. Punch was introduced in the character of
Parson Squintum, the field-preacher, holding forth to a number
of wooden-headed puppets, mostly composed of old women and
ungartered journeymen of different callings. The more noise
Punch (_alias_ Squintum) made, the more the audience sighed and
groaned. At last, _Squintum_ said something about _a woman with
the moon under her feet_, and pointed up to the sky, on which he
desired them to fix their eyes with steadfastness. They did so;
and, while their eyes were thus fixed, he very fairly picked all
their pockets, and stole off. Oh, Punch, Punch! Thou Alexander
the Coppersmith! thou Ananias Inlignante! what will become of
thee hereafter, for thus vilifying the _Inspired of Heaven_, the
_Grand Obstetrix_ of those _chosen few_, who are _impregnate_
with the _New Birth_!”
3. A third of these malignant productions _professed_ to have for
its author the most notorious quack of the age, “Dr. Rock,” and was
entitled, “A Letter to the Reverend Mr. G――e Wh――――d, A.B., late
of Pembroke College, Oxford.” (12mo. 8 pp.) The purport of this
bantering tract was, a proposal that, as Rock and Whitefield were
both quacks, they should enter into partnership. The thing displayed
cleverness,――perhaps too great to affiliate it on the great empiric.
One or two extracts must suffice:――