1752

To the Society at Monyash, Derbyshire [1]

POOLE, NEAR NANTWICH, March 25, 1752.

MY DEAR BRETHERN, -- I should very willingly have spent time among you; but at present my time will not permit, I have so many places to visit, between Manchester, Yorkshire, Lincolnshire and so on, Berwick-upon-Tweed. Blessed be God that you are not yet moved from the hope of the gospel. He has permitted a fiery trial to fall upon you; but I trust the sharpest part of it is past. May God enable you to sand fast together in one mind and in one judgment! Watch, over one another in love; and let not that which is lame be turned out of the way. Do all things without murmurings and disputings, following peace with all men; and the God of peace be with you! -- I am, my dear brethren,

Your affectionate brother.

To Ebenezer Blackwell

EPWORTH, April 16, 1752.

DEAR SIR, -- After taking a round of between three and four hundred miles, we came hither yesterday in the afternoon. [Mrs. Wesley and her daughter left London with him on March 15, and visited Birmingham, Manchester, and Birstall on the way to Epworth. See Journal, iv. 12-19.] My wife is at least as well as when we left London: the more she travels the better she bears it. It gives us yet another proof that whatever God calls us to He will fit us for; so that we have no need to take thought for the morrow. Let the morrow take thought for the things of itself. I was at first a little afraid she would not so well understand the behavior of a Yorkshire mob; but there has been no trial: even the Methodists are now at peace throughout the kingdom. It is well if they bear this so well as they did war. I have seen more make shipwreck of the faith in a calm than in a storm. We are apt in sunshiny weather to fie down and sleep; and who can tell what may be done before we awake

You was so kind as to say (if I did not misunderstand you) that you had placed the name of Richard Ellison among those who were to have a share of the money disposed of by Mr. Butterfield. [Richard Ellison who married Wesley’s sister Susanna had lost his property, and appealed to Wesley, who interested Blackwell in the case. See Stevenson's Wesley Family, pp. 283-4; and letter of July 3, 1751.] Last night he called upon me. I find all his cows are dead, and all his horses but one; and all his meadow-land has been under water these two years (which is occasioned by the neglect of the Commissioners of the Sewers, who ought to keep the drains open): so that he has very little left to subsist on. Therefore the smallest relief could never be more seasonable than at this time.

I hope my brother puts forth all his strength among you, and that you have many happy opportunities together. Our best service attends both Mrs. Blackwell and you. We are now going round Lincolnshire, and hope to be at York in less than ten days. Have we any time to lose in this span of life --I am, dear sir,

Your very affectionate servant.

To Dr. Lavington, Bishop of Exeter

NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE, May 8, 1752.

MY LORD -- In my late letter to your Lordship I used no ceremony (I suppose it was not expected from one who was so deeply injured: and I trust I used no rudeness; if I did, I am ready to ask your Lordship's pardon.

That letter [The Bishop of Exeter’s letter, pp. 2-3; see also Dr. Lavington’s letter in December 1751 to him.] related to a matter of fact published on your Lordship’s authority which I endeavored to falsify, and your Lordship now again endeavors to support.

The facts alleged are (1) that I told Mrs. Morgan at Mitchell, ‘You are in hell; you are damned already’; (2) that I asked her to live upon free cost; (3) that she determined to admit no more Methodists into her house.

At first I thought so silly and improbable a story neither deserved nor required a confutation; but when my friends thought otherwise, I called on Mrs. Morgan, who denied she ever said any such thing. I wrote down her words; part of which I transcribed in my letter to your Lordship, as follows:

‘On Saturday, August 25, 1750, Mr. Trembath of St. Gennys, Mr. Haime of Shaftesbury, and I called at Mr. Morgan's at Mitchell. The servant telling me her master was not at home, I desired to speak with her mistress, the “honest, sensible woman.” I immediately asked, “Did I ever tell you or your husband that you would be damned if you took any money of me” (So the story ran in the First Part of the Comparison; it has now undergone a very considerable alteration.) “Or did you or he ever affirm” (another circumstance related at Truro) “that I was rude with your maid” She replied vehemently, "Sir, I never said you was or that you said any such thing. And I do not suppose my husband did. But we have been belied as well as our neighbors.” She added: “When the Bishop came down last, he sent us word he would dine at our house; but he did not, bring invited to a neighboring gentleman’s. He sent for me thither, and said, Good woman, do you know these people that go up and down Do you know Mr. Wesley Did not he tell you you would be damned if you took any money of him And did not he offer rudeness to your maid I told him, No, my Lord; he never said any such thug to me, nor to my husband that I know of. He never offered any rudeness to any maid of mine. I never saw or knew any harm of him; but a man told me once (who, I was told was a Methodist preacher) that I should be damned if I did not know my sins were forgiven.”’

Your Lordship replies: ‘I neither sent word that I would dine at their house, nor did I send for Mrs. Morgan; every word that passed between us was at her own house at Mitchell’ (page 7). I believe it; and consequently that the want of exactness in this print rests on Mrs. Morgan, not on your Lordship.

Your Lordship adds: 'The following attestations will sufficiently clear me from any imputation or even suspicion of having published a falsehood.’ I apprehend otherwise; to waive what is past, if the facts now published by your Lordship, or any part of them, be not true, then certainly your Lordship will be under more than a ‘suspicion of having published a falsehood.’

The attestations your Lordship produces are (1) those of your Lordship’s Chancellor and Archdeacon; 2) those of Mr. Bennet.

The former attests that on June or July 1748 Mrs. Morgan did say those things to your Lordship (page 8). I believe she did, and therefore acquit your Lordship of being the inventor of those falsehoods.

Mr. Bennet avers that in January last Mrs. Morgan repeated to him what she had before said to your Lordship (page 11). Probably she might: having said these things one, I do not wonder if she said them again.

Nevertheless Beam Mr. Trembath and Mr. Haime she denied every word of it

To get over this difficulty your Lordship publishes a second letter from Mr. Bennet, wherein he says, ‘On March 4 last Mrs. Morgan said, "I was told by my servant that I was wanted above-stairs; where, when I came, the chamber door being open I found them" (Mr. Wesley and others) “round the table on their knees.”’ He adds: ‘That Mrs. Morgan owned one circumstance in it was true; but as to the other parts of Mr. Wesley’s letter to the Bishop, she declares it is all false.’

I believe Min. Morgan did say this to Mr. Bennet, and that therefore nether is he ‘the maker of a lie.’ But he is the relater of a whole train of falsehoods, and those told merely for telling sake. I was never yet in any chamber at Mrs. Morgan’s. I was never above-stairs there in my life. On August 25, 1750, I was bellow-stars all the time I was in the house. When Mrs. Morgan came in, I was standing in the huge parlor; nor did any of us kneel while we were under the roof. This both Mr. Trembath and Mr. Haime can attest upon oath, whatsoever Mrs. Morgan may declare to ire contrary.

But she declared father (so Mr. Bennet writes, ‘That Mr. John Wesley some time ago said to a maid of hers such thugs as were not fit to be spoken’ (page 11); and Mr. Morgan declared that he ‘did or said such indecent things to the above-named maid’ (the same fact, I presume, only a little embellished) ‘in his chamber in the night, that she immediately ran downstairs, and protested she would not go near him or any of the Methodists~ more’ (page 12).

To save trouble to your Lordship as well as to myself, I will put this cause upon a very short issue: If your Lordship will only prove that ever I lay one night in Mrs. Morgan's house, nay, that ever I was in the town of Mitchell after sunset, I will confess the whole charge.

What your Lordship mentions ‘by the way’ I will now consider. “Some of your Western correspondents imposed on the leaders of Methodism by transmitting to London a notoriously false account of my Charge to the clergy. Afterwards the Methodists confessed themselves to have been deceived; yet some time after, the Methodists at Cork in Ireland your own brother at the head of them, reprinted the same lying pamphlet as my performance.’ (Pages 4-5.)

My Lord, I know not who are your Lordship's Irish correspondents; but here are almost as many mistakes as lines. For (1) They were none of my correspondents who sent that account to London. (2) It was sent, not to the leaders of Methodism, but to one who was no Methodist at all. (3) That it was a false account I do not know; but your Lordship may early put it out of dispute. And many have wondered that your Lordship did not do so long ago by printing the Charge in question. (4) I did never confess it was a false account; nor any person by my consent or with my knowledge. (5) That account was never reprinted at Cork at all. (6) When it was reprinted at Dublin, your Lordship had not disowned it. (7) My brother was not in Dublin when it was done; nor did either he or I know of it till long after.

Therefore, when my brother was asked how he could reprint such an account after your Lordship had publicly disowned it, I do not at all wonder that ‘he did not offer a single word in answer.’

Whether this as well as my former letter, be ‘mere rant and declamation’ or plain and sober reason, I must refer to the world and your Lordship's own conscience. -- I am, my Lord,

Your Lordship’s most obedient servant.

To his Wife [2]

NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE May 22, 1752.

MY DEAR LOVE, -- Give the glory to God. Your name is precious among this people. They talk of you much and know not how to commend you enough, even for those little things, your plainness of dress, your sitting among the poor at the preaching, your using sage-tea and not being delicate in your food. Their way of mentioning you often brings tears into my eyes. Bless God for all His benefits. I rejoice for your sake; but I condemn myself. I have not made such use of the time we have been together as I might have done. The thing which I feared has come upon me. I have not conversed with you so seriously as I thought. I ought always to speak seriously and weightily with you, as I would with my guardian angel. Undoubtedly it is the will of God that we should be as guardian angels to each other. O what an union is that whereby we are united! The resemblance even of that between Christ and His Church. And can I laugh or trifle a moment when with you O let that moment return no more!

To Ebenezer Blackwell

NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE, May 25, 1752.

DEAR SIR, -- I want your advice. T. Butts [See letter of March 27, 1751.] sends me word that, after our printers’ bills are paid, the money remaining received by the sale of books does not amount to an hundred pounds a year. It seems, therefore, absolutely necessary to determine one of these three things, -- either to lessen the expense of printing (which I see no way of doing, unless by printing myself); to increase the income arising from the books (and how this can be done I know not); or to give up those eighty-six copies [Hymns and Sacred Poems published in 1749; a second edition appeared in 1752. Charles Wesley seems by deed to have had eighty-six copies for sale among his friends.] which are specified in my brother’s deed, to himself, to manage them as he pleases. Now, which of these ways, an things considered, should' you judge most proper to be taken

I receive several agreeable accounts of the manner wherein God is carrying on His work in London; and am in hopes both Mrs. Blackwell and you partake of the common blessing. My wife set out for Bristol last week. [See previous letter.] I hope her fears will prove groundless, and that all her children will live to glorify God. Anthony, I hear, is recovered already.

The people in all these parts are much alive to God, bung generally plain, artless, and simple of heart. Here I should spend the greatest part of my life, if I were to follow my own inclinations. [‘I know no place in Great Britain comparable to it for pleasantness.’ See Journal, iv. 323.] But I am not to do my own will, but the will of Him that sent me. I trust it is your continual desire and care to know and love and serve Him. May He strengthen you both therein more and more! -- I am, dear,

Your ever affectionate servant.

To John Topping [3]

[June 11, 1752.]

REVERAND SIR, To your first question, ‘whether any orthodox members of Christ’s Church ever took upon them the public office of preaching without Episcopal ordination, and in what century' I answer, Yes, very many, after the persecution of Stephen in the very first century, as you may read in the 8th chapter of the Acts. But I must likewise ask you, ‘In what century did any drunkard take that office upon himself either with or without Episcopal ordination And can he who is not a member of Christ’s Church be a minister of it’

To your second question, ‘Whether a pretence to an immediate mission to preach ought not to be confirmed by miracles’ I answer, Yes, by the grand miracle of saving sinners from their sins. I read of no other wrought by the preachers abovementioned.

To your third question, 'By what scriptural authority I reconcile such a mission to preach with a non-administration of the sacraments’ I answer, ‘By the authority of the very same scriptures; wherein we do not find that they who then preached (except Philip alone) did so much as administer baptism to their own converts.’ -- I am, reverend sir,

Your well-wisher.

[This is apparently an instruction to Wesley’s preacher at Newcastle, who may have sent on the letter to Topping.]

If the priest makes any reply, as ’tis very probable he will, send it to Mr. Wesley as soon as you get it, and let him know how to send to you. Direct to Mr. Wesley at the Foundry, near Moorfields, London.

I trust that none of you will ever forget that the only way to put to silence the ignorance of foolish men is by walking as becometh the gospel. And that you may al do this, striving together for the hope of the gospel, is the fervent prayer of

Your affectionate brother.

To Ebenezer Blackwell

DUBLIN, July 20, 1752

DEAR SIR, -- Finding no ship ready to sail, either at Bristol or Chester, we at length came back to Whitehaven, and embarked on Monday last. [His wife and her younger daughter had come with him. See Journal iv. 37.] It is generally a passage of four-and-twenty hours; but the wind continuing contrary all the way, we did not reach this place till Friday evening. My wife and Jenny were extremely sick, particularly when we had a rolling sea; but a few days, I trust, will restore their strength. They are already much better than when they landed.

Last month a large mob assaulted the new house here and did considerable damage. [See Journal iv. 38.] Several of the rioters were committed to Newgate. The bills were found against them all, and they were tried ten days since; but in spite of the clearest evidence, a packed jury brought them in ‘Not guilty.’ I believe, however, the very apprehension and trial of them has struck a terror into their companions. We now enjoy great quietness, and can even walk unmolested through the principled streets in Dublin.

I apprehend my brother is not at all desirous of having those copies transferred to him. I cannot easily determine, till I have full information concerning the several particulars you touch upon, whether it be expedient to make such an alteration (though it would ease me much, or to let all things remain just as they are. Therefore I believe it will be best to take no farther step till I return to London. [In reply to the letter of May 23 Blackwell had evidently advised that Wesley should be relieved of the management of his book affairs.]

I am fully persuaded, if you had always one or two faithful friends near you who would speak the very truth from their heart and watch over you in love, you would swiftly advance in running the race which is set before you. I am afraid you was not forwarded by one who was in town lately; neither was that journey of any service to his own soul. He has not brought back less indolence and gentle inactivity than he carried to London. [Was this Robert Swindells who was in England in Sept. 1751, and now in Ireland See letter of Dec. 20 1751.] Oh how far from the spirit of a good soldier of Jesus Christ, who desires only ‘to be flead alive and to conquer’ [‘Stand thou firm as an anvil when it is smitten. It is the part of a great athlete to be bruised (or flayed) and conquer.’ (Epistle of St. Ignatius to Polycarp, sec. 3.)] Our best wishes attend both Mrs. Blackwell, Mrs. Dewal, and yourself. -- I am, dear sir,

Your most affectionate servant.

To his Brother Charles [4]

ATHXONE. August 8, 1752.

DEAR BROTHE, -- I almost wonder that I hear not one word from you since the trial at Gloucester. Either Mr. I'Anson or someone else should have wrote by the next post. Does every one forget me as soon as we have the sea between us

Some of our preachers here have peremptorily affirmed that you are not so strict as me; that you neither practice, nor enforce nor approve of the Rules of the Bands. I suppose they mean those which condemn needless self-indulgence, and recommend the means of grace, fasting in particular, which is wellnigh forgotten throughout this nation. I think it would be of use if you wrote without delay and explain yourself at large.

They have likewise openly affirmed that you agree with Mr. Whitefield, touching Perseverance at least, if not Predestination too. Is it not highly expedient that you should write explicitly and strongly on this head likewise

Perhaps the occasion of this latter affirmation was that both you and I have often granted an absolute, unconditional election of some, together with a conditional election of all men. I did incline to this scheme for many years; but of late I have doubted of it more and more: (1) because all the texts which I used to think supported it, I now think prove either more or less either absolute reprobaton and election, or neither; (2) because I find this opinion serves all the ill purposes of absolute predestination, particularly that of supposing infallible perseverance. Talk with any that holds it, and so you will find.

On Friday and Saturday next is our little Conference at Limerick.

I hope my sister feels herself in a good hand, and that you can trust Him with her and all things. [Charles Wesley’s first child, called John after his brother, was born on Aug. 21, and died of small-pox on Jan. 7, 1754.] We join in love.

Editor’s Introductory Notes

[1] Monyash was about thirty-five miles north-east from Poole. The little Society greatly coveted from Wesley in its trial, dual apparently to the conduct of John Bennet, who had renounced his conection with Wesley, and vehemently preached against him in that part of the country. See Journal, iv, 14-15.

[2] Mrs. Wesley was with him in Osmotherley on April 27 and 28. Two days later they reached Newcastle, where Mrs. Wesley evidently made a very favorable impression. Wesley’s marriage was in its happiest stage. She had set out for Bristol a week before on account of her son’s illness. See Journal, iv. 23n 25; and next letter.

[3] Wesley says in his Journal for July 29 1748: ‘At noon I went to the Cross in Allendale Town, where Mr. Topping with a company of the better sort waited for us. I soon found it was but a vain attempt to dispute or reason with him. He skipped so from one point to another that it was not possible to keep up with him; so after a few minutes I removed about an hundred yards, and preached in peace to a very large congregation, it being the general pay-day, which is but once in six months.’ John Topping was Vicar of Allendale. See W.H.S. xiii. 71-2.

[4] Wesley says in his Journal for March 15, 1768, that the mob at Gloucester was ‘for a considerable time both noisy and mischievous; but an honest magistrate, taking the matter in hand, quickly tamed the beasts of the people.’ The reference in this letter may be to that action. Mr. I’Anson was his lawyer.

The Wesleys had met at Shoreham in November 1751, and agreed to act in concert with the preachers, ‘so that nether of them should admit or refuse any but such as both admitted or refused.’ Six weeks later they were again at Shoreham, and agreed to the lines on which they should act in these matters. The Conference at Limerick was the first held in Ireland, and had important discussions on doctrine and the work of the preachers. See Whitehead’s Wesley, ii. 269-70; Crookshank’s Methodism in Ireland i. 91.

Edited by Michael Mattei 2000 Wesley Center for Applied Theology. All rights reserved. No for-profit use of this text is permitted without the express, written consent of the Wesley Center for Applied Theology of Northwest Nazarene College, Nampa, Idaho 83686 USA. Contact the webmaster for permission.