1763

To his Brother Charles

LONDON, January 5, 1763. [Wesley wrote 1762, but the year was young. The contents of the letter show that it should be 1763, as Charles Wesley endorsed it.]

DEAR BROTHER, — You take me right. I am far from pronouncing my remarks ex cathedra. I only desire they may be fairly considered.

I was a little surprised to find Bishop Warburton [See letter of Dec. 11, 1762.] so entirely unacquainted with the New Testament; and, notwithstanding all his parade of learning, I believe he is no critic in Greek.

If Thomas Maxfield continues as he is, it is impossible he should long continue with us.[This was a time Of great ‘care and trouble’ to Wesley, due to Maxfield and Bell. Wesley had defended Maxfield from charges at the Conference of 1761, and had written plainly to him. See Journal, iv. 541-2; Tyerman’s Wesley, ii. 432-41.] But I live in hope of better things. Meantime festina lente!

I baptized two Turks two or three weeks ago.[On Dec. 4, 1762, at the desire of Maxfield, Wesley baptized these two men, who proved to be impostors. See Journal, iv. 540, v. 3; and letter of Feb. 8.] They seem to be strong in faith; and their story is very probable, but I am not sure it is true. I wait for farther evidence.

This week I have begun to speak my mind concerning five or six honest enthusiasts. [Maxfield led a select band in London. They had ‘dreams, visions, and impressions,’ and he encouraged these enthusiasts. See letter of Nov. 2, 1762.] But I move only an hair’s breadth at a time, and by this means we come nearer and nearer to each other. No sharpness will profit. There is need of a lady’s hand as well as a lion’s heart.

Mr. Whitefield has fallen upon me in public open-mouthed, and only not named my name. So has Mr. Madan. [See letters of July 12, 1758; and March 20, 1763.] But let them look to it. I go on my way. I have a sufficient answer as to George Bell [Wesley heard George Bell pray for nearly an hour on Nov. 24, and afterwards told him ‘what I did not admire.’ See next letter and that of Feb. 9.]; but I will not give it before the time.

We join in love to you both. My wife gains ground. She is quite peaceable and loving to all. Adieu!

To the Editor of the ‘London Chronicle’

WINDMILL HILL, January 7, 1763.

SIR,—When I returned to London two or three months ago, I received various accounts of some meetings for prayer which had lately been held by Mr. Bell and a few others. But these accounts were contradictory to each other. Some highly applauded them, others utterly condemned; some affirmed they had done much good, others that they had done much hurt. This convinced me it was requisite to proceed with caution and to do nothing rashly. The first point was to form my own judgment, and that upon the fullest evidence. To this end I first talked with Mr. Bell himself, whom I knew to be an honest, well-meaning man. Next I told him they were at liberty for a few times to meet under my roof. They did so, both in the Society room at the Foundry and in the chapel at West Street. By this means I had an opportunity of hearing them myself, which I did at both places. I was present the next meeting after that, which is mentioned by Mr. Dodd and Mr. Thompson in the Public Ledger. The same things which they blame I blame also; and so I told him the same evening: and I was in hopes they would be done away, which occasioned my waiting till this time. But, having now lost that hope, I have given orders that they shall meet under my roof no more. What farther steps it will be necessary for me to take is a point I have not yet determined. — I am, sir,

Your humble servant.

To Thomas Maxfield

LONDON, January 26, 1763.

MY DEAR BROTHER, — For many years I and all the preachers in connection with me have taught that every believer may and ought to grow in grace. Lately you have taught, or seemed to teach, the contrary. The effect of this is, when I speak as I have done from the beginning, those who believe what you say will not bear it — nay, they will renounce connection with us; as Mr. and Mrs. Coventry did last night. [See letter in May to a Friend.] This breach lies wholly upon you. You have contradicted what I taught from the beginning. Hence it is that many cannot bear it; but when I speak as I always have done, they separate from the Society. Is this for your honor or to the glory of God

O Tommy, seek counsel, not from man, but God; not from Brother Bell, but Jesus Christ! — I am

Your affectionate brother.

To his Brother Charles

LONDON, February 8, 1763.

DEAR BROTHER, — I think now the sooner you could be here the better; for the mask is thrown off. George Bell, John Dixon, [John and Elizabeth Dixon resigned their membership on Jan. 28 (Journal, v. 5).] Joseph Calvert, Benjamin Biggs, [Benjamin Biggs, whom John Murlin met at Whitehaven, was for three or four years his inseparable companion. He embarked with him in July 1758 for Liverpool; but the captain took them to the Isle of Man. Biggs was the only person present when his master, Sir James Lowther, died. The next heir, Sir William, gave him 50 a year for life, which he spent in doing good. On July 18, 1761, John Fletcher was at a meeting in Biggs’s house. See Wesley’s Veterans, ii. 161; Moore’s Mrs. Fletcher, p. 373; and letter of May 16, 1759.] &c. &c., have quitted the Society and renounced all fellowship with us. I wrote to Thomas, [Maxfield. See letters of Jan. 5 and 7.] but was not favored with an answer. This morning I wrote a second time, and received an answer indeed! The substance is, ‘You take too much upon you. We will not come up.’

I know all the history of the Turk. [See letters of Jan. 5 and Feb. 26.] I must leave London on Friday to bury Mrs. Perronet. [Wesley had ‘paid the last office of love’ (administered the Holy Communion) to her on Jan. 10. See Journal, v. 4, 8.] She died on Saturday morning.

The answer to the Bishop (who has broke his leg) is forthcoming. [Wesley’s letter to Bishop Warburton had just been published.] Mr. Madan wrote the Queries. I let him have the last word. I should not wonder if a dying saint were to prophesy. Listen to Sally Colston’s [Charles Wesley prayed by Mr. Colston, ‘desirous to be with Christ,’ at Bristol on Sept. 2, 1739. A letter from Sarah Colston is given in the Journal, iii. 197-8, dated Bristol, June 6, 1745, describing the happy death of ‘another of my charge,’ and closing with the words, ‘Oh that when He comes He may find me watching!’] last words!

Molly Westall died last week in huge triumph.

J. Jones does good. I have seen the Colonel. [Colonel Gallatin. See letter of July 19, 1750.] James Morgan [Morgan was closely associated with Maxfield. See letter of Jan. 8, 1757.] has lately been in a violent storm, and is scarce alive. I advise him to retire to Kingswood for a season. We need all your prayers. God is preparing thoroughly to purge His floor. O let us be instant eukairws akairws. [2 Tim. iv. 2: ‘in season, out of season.’]

We join in love to Sally. Adieu!

[Charles wrote at the back of this letter: ‘Himself confirming my prophecy of the Ranters.’]

To the Editor of the ‘London Chronicle’ [1]

LONDON, February 9, 1763.

SIR,—I take this opportunity of informing all whom it may concern (1) that Mr. Bell is not a member of our Society; (2) that I do not believe either the end of the world or any signal calamity will be on the 28th instant; and (3) that not one in fifty, perhaps not one in five hundred, of the people called Methodists believe any more than I do either this or any other of his prophecies.—I am

Your humble servant.

To his Brother Charles

LONDON, February 26, 1763.

DEAR BROTHER,—I perceive verba fiunt mortuo [Plautus’s Poenulus, IV. ii. 18: ‘Words are wasted on a dead man.’]; so I say no more about your coming to London. Here stand I; and I shall stand, with or without human help, if God is with me.

Yesterday Mr. Madan and I with a few more gave the full hearing to the famous Turk and his associate. [See letter of Feb. 8.] He is an exquisite wretch; was originally a Spanish Jew, afterwards a Turk, then a Papist, then a Jew again, then a Protestant, and now at last (under Mr. Lombardi’s wing) a zealous Papist! Concerning his companion we are still in doubt. We fear he is little better; though we cannot prove it.

Mr. Gaussen tells us the stroke will come to-morrow evening; the rest say not till Monday. [The earthquake which Bell prophesied. The Gaussens were London friends. See C. Wesley’s Journal, ii, 217; and previous letter.] Let us live to-day! I labor for peace; but they still make themselves ready for battle.

Peace be with you and yours! Adieu!

To his Brother Charles

LONDON, March 6, 1763.

DEAR BROTHER, — To-morrow I set out for Norwich, which I have delayed as long as possible. I am likely to have rough work there; but the turbulent spirits must bend or break. [He spent ‘a few quiet, comfortable days . . . without any jar or contention.’ See Journal, v. 10.]

That story of Thomas Maxfield is not true. But I doubt more is true than is good. He is a most incomprehensible creature. I cannot convince him that separation is any evil, or that speaking in the name of God when God has not spoken is any more than an innocent mistake. I know not what to say to him or do with him. He is really mali caput et fons.[See letter of Dec. 23, 1762.]

Mr. Neal has grievously peached his associates. But I shall not hastily saddle myself with him and his seven children. The week after Easter week I hope to visit the classes in Bristol, or the week following. James Morgan is love-sick, John Jones physic-sick: so that I have scarce one hearty helper but La. Coughlan. [Lawrence Coughlan. See letters of March 6, 1759 (to Matthew Lowes), and Aug. 27, 1768.]

We join in love to you both. Adieu!

To Samuel Furly

NORWICH, March 10, 1763.

DEAR SAMMY, — When we revised the notes on St. Peter, our brethren were all of the same opinion with you. So we set Charles’s criticism aside, and let the note stand as it was.

I have not read Dr. Newton on the Prophecies. But the bare text of the Revelation from the time I first read it satisfied me as to the general doctrine of the Millennium. [See letters of Dec. 20, 1762, and March 27, 1764.] But of the particulars I am willingly ignorant since they are not revealed.

I scarce ever yet repented of saying too little, but frequently of saying too much. To the Bishop I have said more than I usually do, and I believe as much as the occasion requires. But I spare him. If he replies, I shall probably speak more plainly, it not more largely.

A notion has lately started up in London, originally borrowed from the Moravians, which quite outshoots my notions of perfection as belonging only to fathers in Christ — namely, that every man is saved from all (inward) sin when he is justified, and that there is no sin, neither anger, pride, nor any other, in his heart from that moment unless he loses justifying faith.

How will you disprove this position In particular, by what New Testament authority can you overthrow it These questions have puzzled many poor plain people. I should be glad of your answer to them at large.

It is a doubt whether I shall be able to leave London this summer, unless now and then for a week or two. Next week I am to return thither.—I am, dear Sammy,

Yours affectionately.

To the Editor of ‘Lloyd’s Evening Post’

LONDON, March 18, 1763.

SIR, — A pert, empty, self-sufficient man, who calls himself ‘Philodemas’ [See letter of Dec. 12, 1760, to the Editor of the London Magazine.] (I hope not akin to S. Johnson in the Public Ledger), made use of your paper a few days ago to throw abundance of dirt at the people called Methodists. He takes occasion from the idle prophecy of Mr. Bell, with whom the Methodists have nothing to do, as he is not, nor has been for some time, a member of their Society. Had he advanced anything new or any particular charge, it would have deserved a particular answer. But as his letter contains nothing but dull, stale, general slanders, which have been confuted ten times over, it would be abusing the patience of your readers to say any more concerning it. To Bishop Warburton, bringing particular charges, I have given particular answers; I hope to the satisfaction of every reasonable and impartial man. — I am, sir,

Your humble servant.

To the Countess of Huntingdon [2]

[LONDON, March 20, 1763.]

MY LADY, — For a considerable time I have had it much upon my mind to write a few lines to your Ladyship; although I cannot learn that your Ladyship has ever inquired whether I was living or dead. By the mercy of God I am still alive, and following the work to which He has called me; although without any help, even in the most trying times, from those I might have expected it from. Their voice seemed to be rather, ‘Down with him, down with him, even to the ground.’ I mean (for I use no ceremony or circumlocution) Mr. Madan, Mr. Haweis, [Dr. Thomas Haweis (1734-1820) was Madan’s curate at the Lock Hospital. He became Rector of All Saints’, Northampton; and had charge of Lady Huntingdon’s College, and managed several of her chapels. He was a director of the London Missionary Society.] Mr. Berridge, and (I am sorry to say it) Mr. Whitefield. Only Mr. Romaine has shown a truly sympathizing spirit and acted the part of a brother. I am the more surprised at this, because he owed me nothing (only the love which we all owe one another); he was not my son in the gospel, neither do I know that he ever received any help through me. So much the more welcome was his kindness now. The Lord repay it sevenfold into his bosom!

As to the prophecies of those poor, wild men, George Bell and half a dozen more, I am not a jot more accountable for them than Mr. Whitefield is; having never countenanced them in any degree, but opposed them from the moment I heard them. Neither have these extravagances any foundation in any doctrine which I teach. The loving God with all our heart, soul, and strength, and the loving all men as Christ loved us, is and ever was, for these thirty years, the sum of what I deliver, as pure religion and undefiled.

However, if I am bereaved of my children, I am bereaved! The will of the Lord be done!

Poor and helpless as I am,

Thou cost for my vileness care:

Thou hast called me by my name!

Thou cost all my burdens bear.

Wishing your Ladyship a continual increase of all blessings, I am, my Lady,

Your Ladyship’s servant for Christ’s sake.

To Mrs. ——

LONDON, March 21, 1763,

MY DEAR SISTER,—My coming into the country is quite uncertain, till I see what turn things here will take. I am glad to hear the work of God prospers among you; &c.

To the Editor of the ‘London Chronicle’ [3]

LONDON, April 5, 1763.

SIR, — Some time since, I heard a man in the street bawling, ‘The Scripture Doctrine of Imputed Righteousness asserted and maintained by the Rev. John Wesley!’ I was a little surprised, not having published anything on the head; and more so when, upon reading it over, I found not one line of it was mine, though I remembered to have read something like it. Soon after (to show what I really do maintain) I published Thoughts on the Imputed Righteousness of Christ, mentioning therein that ‘pious fraud’ which constrained me so to do.

The modest author of the former publication now prints a second edition of it, and faces me down before all the world — yea, and proves that it is mine.

Would you not wonder by what argument Oh, the plainest in the world. ‘There is not,’ says he, ‘the least fraud in the publication nor imposition on Mr. Wesley; for the words are transcribed from the ninth and tenth volumes of his Christian Library.’ But the Christian Library is not Mr. Wesley’s writing: it is ‘Extracts from and Abridgements of’ other writers; the subject of which I highly approve, but I will not be accountable for every expression. Much less will I father eight pages of I know not what which a shameless man has picked out of that work, tacked together in the manner he thought good, and then published in my name. He puts me in mind of what occurred some years since. A man was stretching his throat near Moorfields and screaming out, ‘A full and true Account of the Death of the Rev. George Whitefield!’ One took hold of him, and said, ‘Sirrah! what do you mean Mr. Whitefield is yonder before you.’ He shrugged up his shoulders, and said, ‘Why, sir, an honest man must do something to turn a penny.’ — I am, sir,

Your humble servant.

To Miss March

LONDON, April 7, 1763.

The true gospel touches the very edge both of Calvinism and Antinomianism; so that nothing but the mighty power of God can prevent our sliding either into the one or the other.

The nicest point of all which relates to Christian perfection is that which you inquire of. Thus much is certain: they that love God with all their heart and all men as themselves are scripturally perfect. And surely such there are; otherwise the promise of God would be a mere mockery of human weakness. Hold fast this. But then remember, on the other hand, you have this treasure in an earthen vessel; you dwell in a poor, shattered house of clay, which presses down the immortal spirit. Hence all your thoughts, words, and actions are so imperfect, so far from coming up to the standard (that law of love which, but for the corruptible body, your soul would answer in all instances), that you may well say till you go to Him you love:

Every moment, Lord, I need

The merit of Thy death.

To a Friend [4]

[LONDON, May] 1763.

At your instance I undertake the irksome task of looking back upon things which I wish to forget for ever. I have had innumerable proofs (though such as it would now be an endless task to collect together) of all the facts which I recite. And I recite them as briefly as possible, because I do not desire to aggravate anything, but barely to place it in a true light.

1. Mr. Maxfield was justified while I was praying with him in Baldwin Street, Bristol. [For his conversion, see letter of May 28, 1739.]

2. Not long after, he was employed by me as a preacher in London.

3. Hereby he had access to Mrs. Maxfield, [Miss Elizabeth Branford, one of the firstfruits of Whitefield’s ministry in London. She died on Nov. 23, 1777.] whom otherwise he was never likely to see, much less to marry; from whence all his outward prosperity had its rise.

4. He was by me (by those who did it at my instance) recommended to the Bishop of Derry to be ordained priest, who told him then (I had it from his own mouth), ‘Mr. Maxfield, I ordain you to assist that good man, that he may not work himself to death.’

5. When a few years ago many censured him much, I continually and strenuously defended him; though to the disgusting several of the preachers and a great number of the people.

6. I disgusted them, not barely by defending him, but by commending him in strong terms from time to time, both in public and private, with regard to his uprightness as well as usefulness.

7. All this time Mr. Maxfield was complaining (of which I was frequently informed by those to whom he spoke) that he was never so ill persecuted by the rabble in Cornwall as by me and my brother.

8. Four or five years since, a few persons were appointed to meet weekly at the Foundry. When I left London, I left these under Mr. Maxfield’s care, desiring them to regard him just as they did me.

9. Not long after I was gone some of these had dreams, visions, or impressions, as they thought from God. Mr. Maxfield did not put a stop to these; rather he encouraged them.

10. When I returned, I opposed them with my might, and in a short time heard no more of them. Meanwhile I defended and commended Mr. Maxfield as before, and, when I left the town again, left them under his care.

11. Presently visions and revelations returned: Mr. Maxfield did not discourage them. Herewith was now joined a contempt of such as had them not, with a belief that they were proofs of the highest grace.

12. Some of our preachers opposed them roughly. At this they took fire, and refused to hear them preach, but crowded after Mr. Maxfield. He took no pains to quench the fire, but rather availed himself of it to disunite them from other preachers and attach them to himself. He likewise continually told them they were not to be taught by man, especially by those who had less grace than themselves. I was told of this likewise from time to time; but he denied it, and I would not believe evil of my friend.

13. When I returned in October 1762, I found the Society in an uproar and several of Mr. Maxfield’s most intimate friends formed into a detached body. Enthusiasm, pride, and great uncharitableness appeared in many who once had much grace. I very tenderly reproved them. They would not bear it; one of them, Mrs. Coventry, [See letter of Jan. 26.] cried out, ‘We will not be brow-beaten any longer; we will throw off the mask.’ Accordingly, a few days after, she came, and before an hundred persons brought me hers and her husband’s tickets, and said, ‘Sir, we will have no more to do with you; Mr. Maxfield is our teacher.’ Soon after, several more left the Society (one of whom was George Bell), saying, ‘Blind John is not capable of teaching us; we will keep to Mr. Maxfield.’

14. From the time that I heard of George Bell’s prophecy I explicitly declared against it both in private, in the Society, in preaching, over and over; and at length in the public papers. Mr. Maxfield made no such declaration; I have reason to think he believed it. [Maxfield says in his Vindication, p. 16: ‘At Wapping Mr. Bell mentioned the destruction that was to be on the 28th of February. As soon as he had done speaking, I stood up and set aside all that he had said about it; and went to the Foundery the next morning, and told Mr. Wesley what I had done.] I know many of his friends did, and several of them sat up the last of February at the house of his most intimate friend, Mr. Biggs, [See letter of Feb. 8.] in full expectation of the accomplishment.

15. About this time one of our stewards, [Mr. Arvin. who held the lease.] who at my desire took the chapel in Snowsfields for my use, sent me word the chapel was his, and Mr. Bell should exhort there, whether I would or no. Upon this I desired the next preacher there to inform the congregation that, while things stood thus, neither I nor our preachers could in conscience preach there any more.

16. Nevertheless Mr. Maxfield did preach there. On this I sent him a note desiring him not to do it, and adding, ‘If you do, you thereby renounce connection with me.’

17. Receiving this, he said, ‘I will preach at Snowsfields.’ He did so, and thereby renounced connection. On this point, and no other, we divided; by this act the knot was cut. Resolving to do this, he told Mr. Clementson, ‘I am to preach at the Foundry no more.’

18. From this time he has spoke all manner of evil of me, his father, his friend, his greatest earthly benefactor. I cite Mr. Fletcher [See Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon, i. 321-2.] for one witness of this, and Mr. Madan for another. Did he speak evil of me to Mr. Fletcher one day only Nay, but every day for six weeks together. To Mr. Madan he said (among a thousand other things, which he had been twenty years raking together), ‘Mr. Wesley believed and countenanced all which Mr. Bell said; and the reason of our parting was this: he said to me one day, “Tommy, I will tell the people you are the greatest gospel preacher in England; and you shall tell them I am the greatest.” For refusing to do this Mr. Wesley put me away!’

Now, with perfect calmness, and I verily think without the least touch of prejudice, I refer to your own judgment what connection I ought to have with Mr. Maxfield, either till I am satisfied these things are not so or till he is thoroughly sensible of his fault.

To Mr. ——

May 1763. [Fragment]

not so receive the sense they which I have been insisting on

And I do not know that [Joseph] Guilford [See Journal, v. 7, 362; vi. 149.] [had any other] objection to them than

more or less, than ‘By grace ye are saved through faith.’ And whenever we give up this fundamental truth, the work of God by us will come to an end.

It is true saving faith is both the gift and the work of God; yea, and a work of Omnipotence. But, still, this does not exclude any man; because God is ready to work it in every man: there being nothing more sure, taking the words in a sacred sense, than that ‘every man may believe if he will.’

The matters in question between Mr. Maxfield and me [See previous letter.] may sleep till I have the pleasure of seeing you. Wishing you all light and love, I remain, dear sir,

Your affectionate brother and servant.

To Mrs. Maitland [5]

LONDON, May 12, 1763.

DEAR MADAM, — Both in the former and in the Farther Thoughts on Perfection I have said all I have to say on that head. Nevertheless, as you seem to desire it, I will add a few words more.

As to the word, it is scriptural; therefore neither you nor I can in conscience object against it, unless we would send the Holy Ghost to school and teach Him to speak who made the tongue.

By that word I mean (as I have said again and again) ‘so loving God and our neighbor as to rejoice evermore, pray without ceasing, and in everything give thanks.’ He that experiences this is scripturally perfect. And if you do not yet, you may experience it: you surely will, if you follow hard after it; for the Scripture cannot be broken.

What, then, does their arguing prove who object against perfection ‘Absolute and infallible perfection’ I never contended for it. Sinless perfection Neither do I contend for this, seeing the term is not scriptural. A perfection that perfectly fulfils the whole law, and so needs not the merits of Christ I acknowledge none such—I do now, and always did, protest against it.

‘But is there not sin in those that are perfect’ I believe not; but, be that as it may, they feel none, no temper but pure love, while they rejoice, pray, and give thanks continually. And whether sin is suspended or extinguished, I will not dispute; it is enough that they feel nothing but love. This you allow ‘we should daily press after’; and this is all I contend for. O may God give you to taste of it to-day! — I am, dear madam,

Your very affectionate servant.

To Jenny Lee

ABERDEEN, May 26, 1763.

MY DEAR SISTER, — If you are likely to fall into a consumption, I believe nothing will save your life but the living two or three months upon buttermilk churned daily in a bottle. Change of air may do something, if you add riding every day. Else it will avail but little.

Your conscience will not be clear unless you find fault wherever occasion requires. Thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy brother, and not suffer sin upon him. Regard none who speak otherwise. You have but one rule, the oracles of God. His Spirit will always guide you, according to His word. Keep close to Him, and pray for, dear Jenny,

Your affectionate brother.

To Ann Foard [6]

NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE, June 3, 1763.

MY DEAR SISTER, — I take your writing exceeding kindly, particularly at this time; you have refreshed my bowels in the Lord. Sometimes I thought there was a kind of strangeness in your behavior. I am now persuaded it sprung only from caution, not from want of love. When you believed you had the pure love of God, you was not deceived: you really had a degree of it, and see that you let it not go; hold the beginning of your confidence steadfast till the end. Christ and all He has is yours! Never quit your hold! Woman, remember the faith! The Lord is increasing in you sevenfold! How wonderfully does He often bring to our remembrance what we have read or heard long ago! And all is good which He sanctifies.

My dear sister, continue to love and pray for

Your affectionate brother.

To Henry Venn [7]

BIRMINGHAM, June 22, 1763.

REVEREND AND DEAR SIR, — Having at length a few hours to spare, I sit down to answer your last, which was particularly acceptable to me, because it was wrote with so great openness. I shall write with the same. And herein you and I are just fit to converse together, because we both like to speak blunt and plain, without going a great way round about. I shall likewise take this opportunity of explaining myself on some other heads. I want you to understand me inside and out. Then I say, Sic sum: si placeo, utere. [Terence’s Phormio, iii. ii. 42: ‘Such I am: if you like me, use me.’]

Were I allowed to boast myself a little, I would say, I want no man living—I mean, none but those who are now connected with me, and who bless God for that connection. With these I am able to go through every part of the work to which I am called. Yet I have labored after union with all whom I believe to be united with Christ. I have sought it again and again, but in vain. They were resolved to stand aloof. And when one and another sincere minister of Christ has been inclined to come nearer to me, others have diligently kept them off, as though thereby they did God service.

To this poor end the doctrine of Perfection has been brought in head and shoulders. And when such concessions were made as would abundantly satisfy any fair and candid man, they were no nearer — rather farther off, for they had no desire to be satisfied. To make this dear breach wider and wider, stories were carefully gleaned up, improved, yea invented and retailed, both concerning me and ‘the perfect ones.’ And when anything very bad has come to hand, some have rejoiced as though they had found great spoils.

By this means, chiefly, the distance between you and me has increased ever since you came to Huddersfield, and perhaps it has not been lessened by that honest, well-meaning man Mr. Burnett [G. Burnett, Vicar of Elland.] and by others, who have talked largely of my dogmaticalness, love of power, errors, and irregularities. My dogmaticalness is neither more nor less than a ‘custom of coming to the point at once,’ and telling my mind flat and plain without any preface or ceremony. I could, indeed, premise something of my own imbecility, littleness of judgment, and the like: but (1) I have no time to lose, I must dispatch the matter as soon as possible; (2) I do not think it frank or ingenuous — I think these prefaces are mere artifice.

The power I have I never sought. It was the undesired, unexpected result of the work God was pleased to work by me. I have a thousand times sought to devolve it on others; but as yet I cannot. I therefore suffer it till I can find any to ease me of my burthen.

If any one will convince me of my errors, I will heartily thank him. I believe all the Bible as far as I understand it, and am ready to be convinced. If I am an heretic, I became such by reading the Bible. All my notions I drew from thence; and with little help from men, unless in the single point of Justification by Faith. But I impose my notions upon none: I will be bold to say there is no man living farther from it. I make no opinion the term of union with any man: I think, and let think. What I want is holiness of heart and life. They who have this are my brother, sister, and mother.

‘But you hold Perfection.’ True — that is, loving God with all our heart, and serving Him with all our strength. I teach nothing more, nothing less than this. And whatever infirmity, defect, anomia, is consistent with this any man may teach, and I shall not contradict him.

As to irregularity, I hope none of those who cause it do then complain of it. Will they throw a man into the dirt and beat him because he is dirty Of all men living those clergymen ought not to complain who believe I preach the gospel (as to the substance of it). If they do not ask me to preach in their churches, they are accountable for my preaching in the fields.

I come now directly to your letter, in hopes of establishing a good understanding between us. I agreed to suspend for a twelvemonth our stated preaching at Huddersfield, which had been there these many years. If this answered your end, I am glad: my end it did not answer at all. Instead of coming nearer to me, you got farther off. I heard of it from every quarter; though few knew that I did, for I saw no cause to speak against you because you did against me. I wanted you to do more, not less good, and therefore durst not do or say anything to hinder it. And, lest I should hinder it, I will make a farther trial and suspend the preaching at Huddersfield for another year.

1. To clear the case between us a little farther. I must now adopt your words: ‘I, no less than you, preach justification by faith only, the absolute necessity of holiness, the increasing mortification of sin, and rejection of all past experiences and attainments. I abhor, as you do, all Antinomian abuse of the doctrine of Christ, and desire to see my people walking even as He walked. Is it, then, worth while, in order to gratify a few bigoted persons or for the sake of the minute differences between us,’ to encourage ‘all the train of evils which follow contention for opinions in little matters as much as in great’

2. If I was as strenuous with regard to perfection on one side as you have been on the other, I should deny you to be a sufficient preacher; but this I never did. And yet I assure you I can advance such reasons for all I teach as would puzzle you and all that condemn me to answer; but I am sick of disputing. Let them beat the air and triumph without an opponent.

3. ‘None, you say, preach in your houses who do not hold the very same doctrine with you.’ This is not exactly the case. You are welcome to preach in any of those houses, as I know we agree in the main points; and whereinsoever we differ you would not preach there contrary to me. ‘But would it not give you pain to have any other teacher come among those committed to your charge, so as to have your plan disconcerted, your labors depreciated, and the affections of your flock alienated’ It has given me pain when I had reason to fear this was done, both at Leeds, Birstall, and elsewhere. And I was ‘under a temptation of speaking against you’; but I refrained even among my intimate friends. So far was I from publicly warning my people against one I firmly believed to be much better than myself.

4. Indeed, I trust ‘the bad blood is now taken away.’ Let it return no more. Let us begin such a correspondence as has never been yet; and let us avow it before all mankind. Not content with not weakening each other’s hands, or speaking against each other directly or indirectly (which may be effectually done under the notion of exposing this and that error), let us defend each other’s characters to the uttermost against either ill— or well-meaning evil-speakers. I am not satisfied with ‘Be very civil to the Methodists, but have nothing to do with them.’ No: I desire to have a league offensive and defensive with every soldier of Christ. We have not only one faith, one hope, one Lord, but are directly engaged in one warfare. We are carrying the war into the devil’s own quarters, who therefore summons all his hosts to war. Come, then, ye that love Him, to the help of the Lord, to the help of the Lord against the mighty! I am now wellnigh miles emeritus senex, sexagenarius [‘A worn-out old warrior, who has seen his sixtieth year.’]; yet I trust to fight a little longer. Come and strengthen the hands till you supply the place of

Your weak but affectionate brother.

To Duncan Wright [8]

LONDON, July 4, 1763.

DEAR DUNCAN,—You have chosen the better part, and will never regret of your choice. Write down the sermon you preached upon that subject, with what additions you see good, and I will correct and print it, if I live to return to London. Perhaps I may likewise print the ‘Advice concerning Children’ in a separate tract. I am glad Rd. Blackwell [Richard Blackwell became a preacher about 1766, and died of fever at Aberdeen on Dec. 27, 1767. See Atmore’s Memorial, p. 54.] goes to Colchester. Perhaps he and you by turns may spend the ensuing year in London.—I am

Yours affectionately.

To Richard Hart [9]

LONDON, July 11, 1763.

DEAR SIR,—Abundance of business has prevented my writing so soon as I desired and intended; nor have I time now to write so largely as I could wish, and as your openness and frankness would otherwise constrain me to do. But I cannot delay any longer to write a little, lest I should seem to slight your correspondence.

What you before observed is of great importance—namely, ‘If it be the professed aim of the gospel to convince us that Jesus is the Christ; if I, a sinner, am convinced of the reality of this fact, am not I, who believe, authorized to expect life, not through any condition, or any act, inward or outward, performed by me, but singly through the name which Jesus assumed, which stands for His whole character or merit’

Here is the hinge on which Mr. Sandeman’s [See letter of Oct. 14, 1757.] whole system turns. This is the strength of his cause, and you have proposed it with all the strength and clearness which he himself could devise.

Yet suffer me to offer to your consideration a few queries concerning it: —

Is every one who is convinced of the reality of this fact, ‘Jesus is the Christ,’ a gospel believer Is not the devil convinced of the reality of this fact Is, then, the devil a gospel believer

I was convinced of the reality of this fact when I was twelve years old, [See sect. 14 of letter in Dec. 1751 to Bishop Lavington.] when I was without God in the world. Was I then a gospel believer Was I then a child of God Was I then in a state of salvation

Again, you say, ‘I who believe am authorized to expect life, not through any condition or act, inward or outward, performed by me.’

‘I who believe.’ But cannot you as well expect it without believing If not, what is believing but a condition For it is something sine qua non. And what else do you, or I, or any one living mean by a condition And is not believing an inward act What is it else But you say, ‘Not performed by me.’ By whom, then God gives me the power to believe. But does He believe for me He works faith in me. But still is it not I that believe And if so, is not believing an inward act performed by me

Is not, then, this hypothesis (to waive all other difficulties) contradictory to itself

I have just set down a few hints as they occurred. Wishing you an increase of every blessing, I am, dear sir,

Your very affectionate brother.

To Dorothy Furly [10]

LONDON, July 16, 1763.

MY DEAR SISTER, — 1. So far as I know what will make me most holy and most useful I know what is the will of God.

2. Certainly it is possible for persons to be as devoted to God in a married as in a single state.

3. I believe John Downes is throughly desirous of being wholly devoted to God, and that (if you alter your condition at all) you cannot choose a more proper person.—I am, my dear sister,

Your affectionate brother.

To Mrs. Bennis [11]

PEMBROKE, August 23, 1763.

MY DEAR SISTER, — You did well to write. This is one of the means which God generally uses to convey either light or comfort. Even while you are writing you will often find relief; frequently while we propose a doubt it is removed.

There is no doubt but what you at first experienced was a real foretaste of the blessing, although you were not properly possessed of it till the Whit Sunday following. But it is very possible to cast away the gift of God, or to lose it by little and little; though I trust this is not the case with you: and yet you may frequently be in heaviness, and may find your love to God not near so warm at some times as it is at others. Many wanderings likewise, and many deficiencies, are consistent with pure love; but the thing you mean is the abiding witness of the Spirit touching this very thing. And this you may boldly claim on the warrant of that word, ‘We have received the Spirit that is of God; that we may know the things which are freely given to us of God.’ — I am, my dear sister,

Your affectionate brother.

To Christopher Hopper [12]

BRISTOL, September 3, 1763.

MY DEAR BROTHER,—I am much inclined to think you will be more useful this year than ever you have been in your life. From the first hour abate nothing of our Rules, whether of Society or bands. Be a Methodist all over. Be exact in everything. Be zealous; be active. Press on to the one thing, and carry all before you. How much may be done before summer is at an end! Their little misunderstandings at Edinburgh you will soon remove by hearing the parties face to face. I hope a preacher is gone northward, and Brother Roberts come southward. [Robert Roberts, of Leeds, is named in the Deed of Declaration,1784. He was a farmer’s son, born at Upton near Chester in 1731. He became a preacher in 1759, and died in 1799, a zealous, judicious man. See letters of Nov. 2.] I hate delay. ‘The King’s business requires haste!’ — I am, with love to Sister Hopper,

Yours most affectionately.

Take the field everywhere as often as possible. Who goes to the Highlands now quickly

To George Merryweather

LONDON, October 5, 1763.

MY DEAR BROTHER, — Your letter was sent from hence to Bristol. But I had left Bristol before it came. I have no objection to Mr. Jaco’s [See letter of Sept. 3, 1756, to Samuel Walker.] coming to Yarm to open the house; but I suppose he cannot stay long. He will soon be wanted again in his own circuit.

It is strange that the number of hearers should decrease if you have regular preaching. I hope the morning preaching is never omitted. If it be, everything will droop.

What relates to the account I will give Mr. Franks. [See letters of Jan. 25, 1762 (to Matthew Lowes), and Nov. 18, 1765.] Probably he will find where the mistake lies. O be in earnest! — I am

Your affectionate brother.

To Lady Frances Gardiner [13]

WELLING, November 2, 1763,

MY DEAR LADY,—You are again a messenger of glad tidings. Many were formerly of opinion that our preaching would not be received in North Britain, and that we could be of no use there. But they had forgotten that the Lord sendeth by whom He will send and that He hath the hearts of all in His hand. I have never seen the fields more white for the harvest than they were from Edinburgh to Aberdeen last summer; and if I live to take another journey into the North, especially if I should have a little more time to spare, I doubt not but I should find an open door as far as Caithness, and perhaps the Isles of Orkney.

The harvest surely has not been more plenteous for many hundred years. But there is the same complaint still — the laborers are few. We found this particularly at our last Conference. We had none to spare, and very hardly enough to supply our stated circuits. Mr. Roberts [Lady Gardiner said in her letter, ‘Mr. Roberts’s preaching has been remarkably blessed to many in Edinburgh.’ see letter of Sept. 3.] was allotted for the Newcastle Circuit, whence I have had complaint upon complaint. He ought to have been there long ago. Several congregations have suffered loss for want of him. All our preachers should be as punctual as the sun, never standing still or moving out of their course.

I trust your Ladyship is still pressing on to the mark, expecting and receiving blessing upon blessing. Oh how can we sufficiently praise Him who deals so bountifully with us! — I am, my dear Lady,

Your affectionate servant.

To the Right Honourable The Lady Frances Gardiner, In Edinburgh.

To Christopher Hopper [14]

WELLING, November 2, 1763.

MY DEAR BROTHER, — ‘Dundee,’ you say, ‘would be thankful for a preacher.’ But who would give him things needful for the body He cannot live upon air; and we now expect that Scotland should bear its own burthen. John Hampson [Hampson was a popular preacher. He remained in Manchester, where the account-book for Dec. 27, 1762, and March 28, 1763, notes payments of 3 3s. to him; in Dec. it is 2 2s. In April and Dec. 1764, 3 3s.; in July 3 13s. 6d.] you must think of no more. But I doubt our Newcastle friends are out of all patience for want of R. Roberts. [See letter of Sept. 3.] In spring you will need a fourth preacher. But what would he have to do

Why, then, I think you must get the plat without Cannongate. ‘The earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof.’ Sevenpence halfpenny! Pshaw! Let it be eightpence, even money. By-and-by we may give Mr. Trail more work. O let us work in this fruitful season! We join in love to Sister Hopper and you. — I am

Yours affectionately.

To Dorothy Furly [15]

LEWISHAM, December 15, 1763.

MY DEAR SISTER, — It has seemed to me for some time that God will not suffer Cornelius Bastable [See letters of Aug. 19, 1759, and Oct. 12, 1778.] to live at Cork. He may starve there, but he cannot live. The people are not worthy of him.

Salvation from sin is a deeper and higher work than either you or Sarah Ryan can conceive. But do not imagine (as we are continually prone to do) that it lies in an indivisible point. You experienced a taste of it when you were justified; you since experienced the thing itself, only in a low degree; and God gave you His Spirit that you might know the things which He had freely given you. Hold fast the beginning of your confidence steadfast unto the end. You are continually apt to throw away what you have for what you want. However, you are right in looking for a farther instantaneous change as well as a constant gradual one. But it is not good for you to be quite alone; you should converse frequently as well as freely with Miss Johnson, and any other that is much alive. You have great need of this. — I am, my dear sister,

Your affectionate brother.

Editor’s Introductory Notes

[1] George Bell left Wesley’s Society on February 4. He had prophesied that the end of the world was to come on the 28th. ‘The terror occasioned by that wonderful prophecy spread far and wide,’ Bell and his followers ascended a mound near St. Luke’s Hospital on the 27th to await events; and there he was arrested, taken before a magistrate, and committed to prison. See Journal, v. 9.

[2] This letter is without date, but is marked ‘Received at Brighthelmstone, March 21, 1763. S. H.’ The Countess seems to have sent it to William Romaine. He had been at Oxford with the Wesleys, and was at the Leeds Conference of 1762 with Whitefield, Madan, Venn, and the Countess of Huntingdon, to whom he was chaplain. Romaine replies from Lambeth on March 26: ‘Enclosed is poor Mr. John’s letter. The contents of it, as far as I am concerned, surprised me; for no one has spoken more freely of what is now passing among the people than myself. Indeed, I have not preached so much as others whose names he mentions, nor could I.... I pity Mr. John from my heart. His Societies are in great confusion; and the point which brought them into the wilderness of rant and madness is still insisted on as much as ever. I fear the end of this delusion. As the late alarming Providence has not had its proper effect, and Perfection is still the cry, God will certainly give them up to some more dreadful thing. May their eyes be opened before it be too late!’ See Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon, i. 330; and letter of Sept. 9, 1756.

[3] The tract against which Wesley is protesting is stated in an old magazine to have been compiled by William Mason. See Green’s Anti-Methodist Publications, No. 345; and for Wesley’s published reply, Green’s Bibliography, No. 211.

[4] Wesley sent this account of his troubles with Maxfield and Bell to a friend, and gives it in the Journal, v. 10-13. See letters of November 2, 1762, and February 14, 1778, to Maxfield.

[5] Penelope Maitland was sister to the Rev. Martin Madan and wife of General Maitland. She wrote on May 2: ‘I hope, sir, that neither myself or any of my family shall ever forget the greatness of our obligations to you, under whose ministerial labors God has graciously imparted a measure of His grace.’ She says: ‘I think, in your Second Thoughts on Perfection, you say you mean by this term “rejoicing evermore, praying without ceasing, and in everything giving thanks.”‘ But she asks, ‘Would it not be safer to call it a high state of grace than perfection’ Mrs. Maitland, or someone, adds: ‘Remark—what a contradiction is this! He denies sinless perfection, but believes those who are perfect (according to this definition) have no sin!’ See letter of Nov. 9, 1750.

[6] Miss Foard was born in Southwark in 1741, joined the Methodist Society in 1761, and in 1770 married John Thornton, an undertaker, of Southwark. She had received a good education, and ‘was a woman of no ordinary mental stature; but, to a strong and reflective intellect, united erudition and accomplishments which, at that period especially, came not within the usual limits of a female education.’ Wesley visited the family, ‘and was the centre of delighted interest to them and to the social circle who were privileged to meet him there and listen to his animating and instructive conversation.’ Mrs. Thornton died at Bath on March 18, 1799.

[7] John Pawson says in his An Affectionate Address to the Members of the Methodist Societies, 1795: ‘For some years (and at the hazard of their lives) our preachers had preached in Huddersfield, where they formed a Society, and procured peace. Through the interest of our people the Rev. Mr. Venn got to be vicar of that parish, and for some time was made very useful. But in a while he petitioned Mr. Wesley to withdraw the preachers from his parish, as he thought himself quite sufficient for the work without them. Mr. Wesley did so for several years, to the unspeakable grief of our Society, till in the year 1765 we began to visit that place again without Mr. Wesley’s knowledge, and by this means a door was opened into that dreadful wilderness beyond Huddersfield, where much good has been done. Mr. Venn’s curate took the pains to go from house to house to entreat the people not to come to hear us, but he lost his bad labor.’ John Riland was curate to Venn in 1763. See letters of August 15, 1761, and April 19, 1764.

[8] Wesley stayed in London on account of the ferment caused by Maxfield’s separation. Duncan Wright was born in Perthshire in 1736, enlisted as a soldier, joined the Methodist Society at Limerick in 1756, and began to preach. He ‘walked in darkness’ from 1758 to 1763; but in June of 1763 God ‘restored to me the joy of His salvation.’ At the end of 1764 he became an itinerant. He spent some time in London, as Wesley suggested. He died at Hoxton in May 1791, and was buried in Wesley’s vault. See Wesley’s Veterans, ii. 18-50.

[9] Richard Hart was Vicar of St. George’s, Bristol. He had been at Bradford, Wilts. See Journal, iv. 355; and also v. 63-4, where in a genial letter to Wesley he suggests that a book of the New Testament should be studied when the ministers met together.

[10] Miss Furly was married to John Downes in June 1764. Her husband died suddenly while preaching in West Street Chapel in 1774. Charles Wesley visited her in her bereavement. ‘She surprised me and all who saw her. So supported, so calm, so resigned! A faithful friend received her into his house. She had one sixpence in the world, and no more! But her Maker is her husband!’ Mrs. Downes died in 1807, at the age of seventy-six. See Methodist Magazine, 1813, pp. 217-22; and letters of November 7, 1751, and May 28, 1764.

[11] This is the first of twenty-seven letters to Elizabeth Bennis, who became the first member in Limerick. She saw Robert Swindells pass her door on March 17, 1749, with a great mob shouting and insulting him. She heard such an account of his morning sermon that she went to hear him in the evening, and was much affected. She was asked to spend the evening in company with him, and did not miss a sermon whilst he stayed for three days. When Swindells returned to the town about a month later, she was the first to stand up and give her name as a member. On June 21 at the five-o’clock preaching she says, ‘I found my burden in a moment taken off and my soul set at liberty.’ In 1757, under the preaching of Thomas Olivers, she and two others began to seek for cleansing of the heart from all sin. After Wesley’s visit in 1762, Mrs. Bennis had received special blessing. On Whit Sunday, May 22, ‘whilst she knelt at the Lord’s Table and pleaded in earnest prayer, the question was spoken to her heart, “Believest thou that I am able to do this”‘ Her soul eagerly answered, “Lord, I do believe Thou art able.” And the word came again, “Be it unto thee according to thy faith.” In receiving the memorials of her dying Lord, she was enabled to lay hold of Christ for complete salvation from all sin.’ She found the blessing of entire sanctification on June 2, 1763, and proved ‘a golden spur’ to the preachers In her first letter to Wesley (August 2, 1763) she tells him how she had been laughed at and reasoned out of her earnestness, till his visit had revived her desire after holiness. Her husband, who was a prosperous man, died in 1788. The family emigrated to America, and she passed away at Philadelphia in 1807. Her Correspondence with Wesley and Others was printed by her son in Philadelphia, and reprinted in Cork in 1819. See Crookshank’s Memorable Women of Irish Methodism, pp. 20-30; and letter of March 29, 1766.

[12] Hopper was in London in July, where ‘our Conference began and ended in love.’ He and his wife lived in ‘a little dark room at Edinburgh, encompassed round with old black walls, disagreeable enough: but we had a good season; many poor sinners were converted to God. We saw the fruit of our labors, and rejoiced.’

[13] Wesley read Dr. Doddridge’s Account of Colonel Gardiner on October 20, 1747, and asks, in his Journal, iii. 321, ‘What matters it whether his soul was set at liberty by a fever or a Lochaber axe, seeing he has gone to God’ On April 24, 1751, he and Christopher Hopper rode by Preston Field, and saw the place of battle and Colonel Gardiner’s house. In 1769 Wesley speaks of Gardiner’s conversion as an answer to his mother’s prayers. His widow was the daughter of the Earl of Buchan. She wrote to Wesley on July 25, 1763, that she had never been at the preaching-house in a morning, as they preached so early; ‘but I ventured to the High School yard the morning you left Edinburgh; and it pleased God, even after I had got home, to follow part of your sermon with a blessing to me.... I dare venture to say that Christ and all with Christ is mine.’ The sermon was preached on May 29, when the General Assembly was meeting, and many ministers as well as nobles and gentry were present. Christopher Hopper was the Assistant in Edinburgh. He says: ‘My dear Edinburgh friends were very kind, especially Lady Gardiner, that good old saint who is now with Jesus in paradise.’ See Journal, v. 15; Moore’s Wesley, ii. 249; Wesley’s Veterans, i. 144.

[14] Hopper labored in Scotland in 1763-5. In the summer of 1764 we laid the foundation of our octagon at Aberdeen ; and in 1765 that of ‘our octagon at Edinburgh.... I collected all I could, gave all I could spare, and borrowed above 300 to carry on and complete that building.’ See Wesley’s Veterans, i. 145.

[15] Wesley ‘lodged once more at Elizabeth Johnson’s, a genuine old Methodist,’ in Hillgrove Street, Bristol, in March 1784. Her father, a West Indian merchant, left her nothing because she was a Methodist; but her uncle bequeathed to her 400 a year, and she lived with her gay sister, to whom her father left 1,000 a year. She was subsequently converted, and became a Methodist. See Journal, vi. 484; Sutcliffe’s manuscript History of Methodism, i. 267; and letter of March 4, 1760.

Edited by Jerry James (Pastor), converted to HTML by Trent Friberg, and formatted by Michael Mattei 1998 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. Direct all inquiries to the webmaster.