1765

 

LONDON, January 1, 1765. SIR,--If you please to insert in your Magazine my answer to a letter directed to me in November last, you will oblige Your humble servant.

SIR,--I am obliged to you for your queries and remarks; and so I shall be to any who will point out anything wherein they think I have been mistaken. It would not be strange if there should be many mistakes in the Compendium of Natural Philosophy, as philosophy is what for many years I have only looked into at leisure hours. Accordingly in the Preface of that treatise I said, 'I am throughly sensible there are many who have more ability as well as leisure for such a work than me; but as none of them undertakes it, I have myself made some little attempt in the following volumes.'

Q. 1. 'You say the Sun revolves upon his axis once in twenty-seven hours. Should it not be once in twenty-seven days nearly' Yes, it should. This was an error of the press.

Q. 2. 'You say he is supposed to be abundantly larger than the Earth. Is it not demonstrable that he is so' I do not know whether it is or no.

Q. 3. 'You tell us the Moon turns always the same side to the Earth. Should it not be nearly the same' Yes.

Q. 4. 'You say it does not appear that she moves round her own axis. How, then, do you account for her turning always the same side to the Earth' I think, full as well without the supposition as with it. But I do not undertake to account for anything.

Q. 5. 'Why do you say the Moon is supposed to be forty-five times smaller than the Earth when the Moon's bulk is nicely known' It is not known by me, nor, I doubt, by any man else.

Q. 6. 'You say Jupiter is supposed to be twenty-five times larger than the Earth, and in the next page that his diameter is supposed to be 130,655 miles. If so, is he not 4,096 times larger than the Earth' Undoubtedly. But I do not undertake to defend either one supposition or the other.

Q. 7. 'You inform us that even a good eye seldom sees more than an hundred stars at a time. Do you mean at one look' Yes.

Remark 1. 'You say (page 148), " Even with respect to the distance of the Sun, it is wisest to confess our ignorance, and to acknowledge we have nothing to rest upon here but mere uncertain conjecture."'

I did not say this of the distance of the Sun in particular. My words are: 'With regard to their distance from the Earth (the distance of all the bodies in the solar system), there is such an immense difference in the calculations of astronomers, even with respect to the distance of the Sun, that it is wisest to confess our ignorance'--namely, with regard to their distance (page 146).

To prove that we are not ignorant hereof you say: 'The knowledge of the Sun's distance depends on finding its parallax, or the angle that the semi-diameter of the Earth appears under at the Sun; which angle is so very minute that an error of a single second will give the distance very considerably greater or less than the true distance.' It will; and therefore I doubt whether the distance of any heavenly body can ever be known by this means.

'But Mr. Keil says: " We are assured, by various methods made use of to obtain the Sun's parallax, that his distance from us is more than twenty-eight millions of miles."' He may be assured; but I am not. 'He says farther: " Two eminent astronomers have since determined the Sun's distance to be about seventy-six millions of miles." Now, if the least distance possible is absolutely determined, how can it be wisest to confess our ignorance' If it be: but I doubt it cannot be determined at all--at least, not by the Sun's parallax, 'seeing this is so very minute that an error of a single second will give the distance very considerably greater or less than the true.'

Remark 2. 'In page 143 you tell us'--the whole paragraph runs thus: 'It is now almost universally supposed that the Moon is just like the Earth, having mountains and valleys, seas with islands, peninsulas and promontories, with a changeable atmosphere, wherein vapours and exhalations rise and fall; and hence it is generally inferred that she is inhabited like the Earth, and, by parity of reason, that all the other planets, as well as the Earth and Moon, have their respective inhabitants.' (I take this to be the very strength of the cause. It was this consideration chiefly which induced me to think for many years that all the planets were inhabited.) 'But after all comes the celebrated Mr. Huygens, and brings strong reasons why the Moon is not, and cannot be, inhabited at all, nor any secondary planet whatever. Then' (if the first supposition sinks, on which all the rest are built) 'I doubt that we shall never prove that the primary are. And so the whole hypothesis of innumerable suns and worlds moving round them vanishes into air.'

In order to prove that there are innumerable suns you say,-- (1) 'It is found by observations on the parallax of the Earth's orbit that a fixed star is ten thousand times farther from the Sun than we are.' I can build nothing on these observations, till parallaxes can be taken with greater certainty than they are at present. Therefore I shall want proof that any one fixed star is one thousand times farther from the Sun than we are.

(2) 'They are fiery bodies.' I suppose they are; but this cannot be proved from their distance till that distance itself is proved.

(3) 'It is demonstrable that Sirius is as big as the Sun.' Demonstrate it who can.

(4) 'Seeing the fixed stars are not much less than the Sun, they are to be esteemed so many suns.' 'Not much less'! How is this proved To argue from the distance is to prove ignotum per aeque ignotum. ['A thing unknown by one equally unknown.']

'You see, sir, the hypothesis of innumerable suns is so far from vanishing into air that it is almost altogether founded on demonstration.' Indeed, I do not see one tittle of demonstration yet from the beginning to the end.

In order to prove that the planets are inhabited you say,--

(1) 'The Earth is spherical, opaque, enlightened by the Sun, casting a shadow opposite thereto, and revolving round it in a time exactly proportioned to its distance. The other planets resemble the Earth in all these particulars. Therefore they likewise are inhabited.' I cannot allow the consequence.

(2) 'The Earth has a regular succession of day and night, summer and winter. So probably have all the planets. Therefore they are inhabited.' I am not sure of the antecedent. But, however that be, I deny the consequence.

(3) 'Jupiter and Saturn are much bigger than the Earth.' Does this prove that they are inhabited

(4) 'The Earth has a moon, Jupiter has four, Saturn five, each of these larger than ours. They eclipse their respective planets, and are eclipsed by them.' All this does not prove that they are inhabited.

(5) 'Saturn's ring reflects the light of the Sun upon him.' I am not sure of that. And, till the fact is ascertained, no certain inference can be drawn from it.

(6) 'But is it probable God should have created planets like our own and furnished them with such amazing apparatus, and yet have placed no inhabitants therein' Of their apparatus I know nothing. However, if all you assert be the probability of their being inhabited, I contend not.

(7) 'They who affirm that God created those bodies, the fixed stars, only to give us a small, dim light, must have a very mean opinion of the divine wisdom.' I do not affirm this; neither can I tell for what other end He created them: He that created them knows. But I have so high an opinion of the divine wisdom that I believe no child of man can fathom it. It is our wisdom to be very wary how we pronounce concerning things which we have not seen.

Remark 3. 'Suppose some intelligent beings in one of the planets, who were Slaves to no sect, who sought no private road, But looked through nature up to nature's God, [Pope's Essay on Man, iv. 331-2.] viewed the Earth from thence; they would argue it must be inhabited, as we argue the other planets are. But the superstitious would oppose this doctrine, and call it mere uncertain conjecture.'

I see no argument in this; but perhaps I do not understand it. Are you applauding the supposed inhabitants of Venus for not being slaves to the Christian sect Otherwise what has superstition to do in the case Why is this dragged in by head and shoulders If there be superstition here, it is on your side, who believe because you will believe; who assent to what you have no evidence for, and maintain what you cannot prove. At present you are the volunteer in faith; you swallow what chokes my belief.

Remark 4. 'You quote Dr. Rogers.' But I do not undertake to defend his hypothesis or any other. 'Our best observators could never find the parallax of the Sun to be above eleven seconds.' But I cannot depend on their observations; especially when I find one of the chief of them, in computing the distance of the Sun, to stride from twenty eight millions to seventy-six; near fifty millions of miles at once! After this, let any impartial man judge what stress is to be laid on parallaxes.

'But Dr. Rogers supposes the parallax of the Sun to be five minutes, which others cannot find to be above eleven seconds. Why, doctor, if this be true' (namely, that the parallax which lately was but eleven seconds is now increased to five minutes), 'the Earth has approximated thirty times nearer' (a little harmless tautology) 'to the Sun.' That is, if both the computation of Mr. Keil and that of Dr. Rogers be true. But who ever supposed this If the one be true, the other is undoubtedly false.

'To conclude: since there is no arguing against facts, and since the Sun's parallax is not found to exceed eleven seconds, ought you not to give up that hypothesis as absurd and ridiculous'

Yes; as soon as any of those facts appear. Till then, I neither espouse nor give it up. But I still look upon it as ingenious, and as probable as any other.

Before I conclude, permit me, sir, to give you one piece of advice. Be not so positive, especially with regard to things which are neither easy nor necessary to be determined. I ground this advice on my own experience. When I was young, I was sure of everything; in a few years, having been mistaken a thousand times, I was not half so sure of most things as I was before; at present I am hardly sure of anything but what God has revealed to man.

Upon the whole, an ingenious man may easily flourish on this head: 'How much more glorious is it for the great God to have created innumerable worlds than this little globe only!' But, after all, I would only ask this one plain question: Suppose there are more worlds than there are sands on the seashore, is not the universe finite still It must be, unless it be God. And if it be finite, it can still bear no proportion to Him that is infinite--no more than this ball of earth does. How large soever it be, still, compared to Him, it is as nothing, as the small dust of the balance. Do you ask, then, 'What is this spot to the great God' Why, as much as millions of systems. Great and little have place with regard to us; but before Him they vanish away. Enlarge the bounds of creation as much as you please; still it is as but a drop to the Creator; And still the power of His almighty hand Can form another world from every sand! [Broome's Ecclesiasticus, in Moral and Sacred Poems, ii. 99.] Yet, were this done, there would be no more proportion than there is now between Him and His creatures. In this respect, one world and millions of worlds are just the same thing. Is the Earth a cypher, a nothing, to the infinitely great, glorious, wise, and powerful God So is any number of worlds which can be conceived: so is all finite being to the infinite.

To his Brother Charles

[1] LONDON, January 11, 1765.

DEAR BROTHER,--I believe Thomas Goodwin wrote that book. Pray hasten John's [Wesley's Extract of John Goodwin's Treatise on Justification, which William Pine, of Bristol, was printing. See letter of Dec. 31, 1764.] tract, and give Pine the Preface.

Mr. Tooth [Samuel Tooth. See Stevenson's City Road Chapel, p. 476; and letter of Sept. 27, 1778, to him.] is not a Calvinist yet, nor Mr. Downing half an one. I have a letter from him to-day, and hope to be with him at Ovington to-morrow.

I have no objection to Mr. Trail's preaching in Weavers' Hall; but I am not rightly satisfied as to his preaching at all.

On Monday morning I desired the preachers and the stewards to meet me. It was then inquired,--

1. Can James Thwayte, B. Russen, Rd. Perry, James Satles, John Oliver, and T. Bryant, [Oliver was stationed in Lancashire at the next Conference. For Bryant's ordination, see letters of July 5 and Dec. 15, 1764.] who have bought an ordination in an unknown tongue, be received by us as clergymen No.

2. Can we receive them any longer as preachers No.

3. Can we receive them as members of our Society No. And this I ordered to be signified to each of them immediately. Adieu.

To the Rev. Mr. C. Wesley, In Bristol.

To Thomas Rankin OVINGTON, January 13, 1765.

DEAR TOMMY,--I will give you a month from this day to make a fair trial of William Darney whether he will walk according to our Rules or no; if not, we must part. But if he had rather, he may go into the Wiltshire Round, [Darney went to the London Circuit in September.] where a preacher is now wanting. T. Bryant is not now in connexion with us. [See previous letter.] I am glad you give me warning concerning Richard Austen. I trust that you will soon set them right at the Dock. Gentleness, added to plainness of speech, will have influence upon honest Brother Jones. [See letter of June 9.] I advise you gradually to remove all such leaders and stewards as do not cordially love the Methodist doctrine and discipline.--Dear Tommy, Your affectionate friend and brother. Pray give my love to Brother Mallon, of Mary Week Society. I thank him for his letter, and exhort him to stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ has made him free. To Mr. Rankin, At Mr. John Andrews', In Redruth, Cornwall. Per Gloucester,

To the Printer of the 'St. James's Chronicle'

[2] LONDON, February 5, I 765.

SIR,--To the four questions proposed to me in your last week's paper, I answer:

1. None of those six persons lately ordained by a Greek bishop were ordained with my consent or knowledge.

2. I will not, cannot, own or receive them as clergymen.

3. I think an ordination performed in a language not understood by the persons ordained is not valid.

4. I think it is absolutely unlawful for any one to give money to the Bishop (or to any one for him) for ordaining him.--I am, sir, Your humble servant.

To Thomas Rankin LONDON, February 9, 1765.

DEAR TOMMY,--I have little more to add to my last but that I have wrote to Brother Jane and the leaders at the Dock to the same effect as I wrote to James Stevens and to you at St. Austell. You have only to go on steadily, and lovingly, and to overcome evil with good.--I am, dear Tommy, Yours affectionately. To Mr. Rankin, At Mr. Wood's, Shopkeeper, In Port Isaac, Near Camelford, Cornwall.

To the Printer of the 'St. James's Chronicle' [LONDON, February 10, 1765.]

SIR,--In the St. James's Chronicle published on Saturday last there was an innocent thing wrote by an hat-maker in Southwark. It may be proper to take a little more notice of it than it deserves, lest silence should appear to be an acknowledgement of the charge.

I insert nothing in the public papers without my name. I know not the authors of what has been lately inserted; part of which I have not seen yet, nor did I see any part before it was printed.

A year or two ago I found a stranger perishing for want and expecting daily to be thrown in prison. He told me he was a Greek bishop. I examined his credentials,, and was fully satisfied. After much conversation (in Latin and Greek, for he spoke no English at all) I determined to relieve him effectively; which I did without delay, and promised to send him back to Amsterdam, where he had several friends of his own nation. And this I did, without any farther view, merely upon motives of humanity. After this he ordained Mr. John Jones, a man well versed both in the languages and other parts of learning.

When I was gone out of town, Bishop Erasmus was prevailed upon to ordain Lawrence Coughlan, a person who had no learning at all.

Some time after, Mr. Maxfield, or his friends, sent for him from Amsterdam, to ordain Mr. S--t and three other persons, as unlearned as any of the Apostles, but I believe not so much inspired.

In December last he was sent for again, and ordained six other persons, members of our Society, but every way, I think, unqualified for that office. These I judged it my duty to disclaim (to waive all other considerations) for a fault which I know not who can excuse, buying an ordination in an unknown tongue.

As to the other tale, 'The Bishop told me himself' (I pray in what tongue for he speaks no English, and you no Greek, any more than your interpreter so called) 'that Mr. Wesley desired Mr. Jones to know of him if he would consecrate him bishop' Mr. Jones solemnly declares that he never told the Bishop any such thing. But, be that as it may, the point does not turn on the validity of ordination by a Greek bishop, but on the validity of ordination procured by money and performed in an unknown tongue.

My advice to you is either be silent or procure a better defender of your cause.

To Six Preachers

[3] NORWICH, February 27, 1765. Mr. Madan, Mr. Romaine, and the good-natured Mr. Shirley are almost out of patience with me for not disowning you on the house-top. In this situation of things it would be utter madness in me to do anything which they would call contumacy. I am every way bound to my good behaviour, and obliged to move with all possible circumspection. Were I to allow your preaching now, I should be in a hotter fire than ever. That you will preach again by-and-by I doubt not; but it is certain the time is not come yet.

To Thomas Rankin

[4] LONDON, March 9, 1765.

MY DEAR BROTHER,--Nothing can hurt you, if you are calm, mild, and gentle to all men, especially to the froward. I think you have done all you could do at present for poor brother Jane. [See letter of Feb. 9.] I will send to William Atkinson [See letter of Jan. 7, 1756.] and ask him how the house is settled. I know nothing about it; for I never saw the writings.

I suppose the Bill intended to be brought into Parliament will never see the light. The great ones find other work for one another. They are all at daggers' drawing among themselves. Our business is to go straight forward.--I am, dear Tommy, Your affectionate friend and brother. To Mr. Rankin, At Mr. John Andrews', In Redruth, Cornwall.

To John Newton

[5] LIVERPOOL, April 9, 1765.

DEAR SIR,--I have just finished your Narrative, a remarkable proof, as you observe, that with God all things are possible. The objection current here, that you talk too much of Mrs. Newton, seems to me of no force at all. I cannot apprehend that you could well have spoken less or any otherwise than you do. And as to what you speak concerning Particular Redemption and the points connected therewith, you speak in so calm and dispassionate a manner as cannot give offence to any reasonable man. Nothing of this kind gives any offence to me; for I think, and let think.

I believe every one has a right to think for himself and (in some sense) to speak for himself: I mean, to use any mode of expression which appears to him most agreeable to Scripture. You yourself in time past was in the same sentiment. You did not so much inquire, 'Is a man of this or that opinion' or 'Does he make use of this or the other mode of expression' but 'Is he a believer in Jesus Christ' and 'Is his life suitable to his profession' Upon this ground commenced the acquaintance (perhaps I might say more, the friendship) between you and me. We both knew there was a difference in our opinions, and consequently in our expressions. But, notwithstanding this, we tasted each other's spirits, and often took sweet counsel together.

And what hinders it now I do not know that our opinions differ a jot more now than formerly. But a dying man has drawn a sword, and wounded, if not me, yet many others, and you among the rest. Poor Mr. Hervey (or Mr. Cudworth rather), painting me like an hideous monster, with exquisite art both disfiguring my character and distorting my sentiments, has made even Mr. Newton afraid of me, who once thought me at least an harmless animal. A quarrel he could not make between us; neither can any one else. For two must go to a quarrel, and I declare to you I will not be one.

But I do not think it is enough for us not to quarrel: I am persuaded we may help each other. Why not O beware of bigotry! of an undue attachment to opinions or phrases! You of all men ought to fly from this; as you appear to be designed by Divine Providence for an healer of breaches, a reconciler of honest but prejudiced men, and an uniter (happy work!) of the children of God that are needlessly divided from each other. Perhaps your very opinion and way of speaking may enable you to do this among those to whom I have no access; as my opinion and way of speaking enable me to calm those who would not give you so favourable an hearing. In the name of Him that has shown you mercy, I beseech you show this mercy to your brethren! Soften and sweeten as far as in you lies their rugged or bitter spirits! Incite them everywhere to insist upon the one point--Faith that worketh by love, or (in other words) Christ enlightning, justifying, sanctifying, reigning in the believing soul.

'Oh, but Mr. Hervey says you are half a Papist.' What if he had proved it too What if he had proved I was a whole Papist (though he might as easily have proved me a Mahometan). Is not a Papist a child of God Is Thomas a Kempis, Mr. De Renty, Gregory Lopez gone to hell Believe it who can. Yet still of such (though Papists) the same is my brother and sister and mother.

I have waited a fortnight for a passage to Dublin, but am now determined to move toward Scotland first. If you should favour me with a few lines, please to send direct to Newcastle-upon-Tyne. Peace be with you both.--I am, dear sir, Your affectionate brother and servant. To the Rev. Mr. Newton, At Oulney, Bucks.

To Dr. Erskine

[6] EDINBURGH, April 24, 1765.

REVEREND SIR,--Between thirty and forty years I have had the world upon me, speaking all manner of evil. And I expected no less, as God had called me to testify that its deeds were evil. But the children of God were not upon me; nor did I expect they would. I rather hoped they would take knowledge that all my designs, and thought, and care, and labour were directed to this one point--to advance the kingdom of Christ upon earth. And so many of them did, however differing from me both in opinions and modes of worship. I have the pleasure to mention Dr. Doddridge, Dr. Watts, and Mr. Wardrobe [Minister of Hexham, and then of Bathgate. See Journal, iv. 116, 164.] in particular. How, then, was I surprised as well as concerned that a child of the same Father, a servant of the same Lord, a member of the same family, and (as to the essence of it) a preacher of the same gospel, should, without any provocation that I know of, declare open war against me! I was the more surprised, because you had told me, some months since, that you would favour me with a letter. And had this been done, I make no doubt but you would have received full satisfaction. Instead of this, you ushered into this part of the world one of the most bitter libels that was ever written against me;--written by a dying man (so far as it was written by poor, well-meaning Mr. Hervey), with a trembling hand, just as he was tottering on the margin of the grave. A great warrior resigned his crown, because 'there should be some interval,' he said, 'between fighting and death.' But Mr. Hervey, who had been a man of peace all his life, began a war not six months before he died. He drew his sword when he was just putting off his body. He then fell on one to whom he had the deepest obligations (as his own letters, which I have now in my hands, testify), on one who had never intentionally wronged him, who had never spoken an unkind word of him or to him, and who loved him as his own child. O tell it not in Gath! The good Mr. Hervey (if these Letters were his) died cursing his spiritual father.

And these Letters another good man, Mr. Erskine, has introduced into Scotland, and warmly recommended. Why have you done this 'Because you have concealed your principles, which is palpable dishonesty.'

When I was first invited into Scotland (about fourteen years ago), Mr. Whitefield told me: 'You have no business there; for your principles are so well known, that if you spoke like an angel none would hear you. And if they did, you would have nothing to do but to dispute with one and another from morning to night.'

I answered: 'If God sends me, people will hear. And I will give them no provocation to dispute; for I will studiously avoid controverted points, and keep to the fundamental truths of Christianity. And if any still begin to dispute, they may; but I will not dispute with them.'

I came: hundreds and thousands flocked to hear. But I was enabled to keep my word. I avoided whatever might engender strife, and insisted upon the grand points--the religion of the heart and salvation by faith--at all times and in all places. And by this means I have cut off all occasion of dispute from the first day to this very hour. And this you amazingly improve into a fault, construe into a proof of dishonesty. You likewise charge me with holding unsound principles, and with saying, 'Right opinions are (sometimes) no part of religion.'

The last charge I have answered over and over, and very lately to Bishop Warburton. [See letter of Nov. 26, 1762.] Certainly, had you read that single tract, you would never have repeated that stale objection.

As to my principles, every one knows, or may know, that I believe the Thirty-first Article of the Church of England. But can none be saved who believe this I know you will not say so. Meantime, in the main point (Justification by Faith) I have not wavered a moment for these seven-and-twenty years. And I allow all which Mr. Hervey himself contends for in his entrance upon the subject,--'Come to Jesus as a needy beggar; hang upon Him as a devoted pensioner.' And whoever does this, I will be bold to say shall not perish everlastingly.

As to your main objection, convince me that it is my duty to preach on controverted subjects, Predestination in particular, and I will do it. At present I think it would be a sin. I think it would create still more divisions. And are there not enough already I have seen a book written by one who styles himself Ecclesiae direptae et gementis Presbyter. ['A Presbyter of a torn-asunder and groaning Church.'] Shall I tear ecclesiam direptam et gementem ['A Church torn asunder and groaning.'] God forbid! No: I will so far as I can, heal her breaches. And if you really love her (as I doubt not you do), why should you hinder me from so doing Has she so many friends and helpers left, that you should strive to lessen their number Would you wish to turn any of her friends, even though weak and mistaken, into enemies If you must contend, have you not Arians, Socinians, Seceders, infidels to contend with; to say nothing of whoremongers, adulterers, Sabbath-breakers, drunkards, common swearers O ecclesia gemens! And will you pass by all these, and single out me to fight with Nay, but I will not. I do and will fight with all these, but not with you. I cannot; I dare not. You are the son of my Father, my fellow labourer in the gospel of His dear Son. I love your person; I love your character; I love the work wherein you are engaged. And if you will still shoot at me (because Mr. Hervey has painted me as a monster), even with arrows drawn from Bishop Warburton's quiver (how unfit for Mr. Erskine's hand!), I can only say, as I always did before, the Lord Jesus bless you in your soul, in your body, in your relations, in your work, in whatever tends to His own glory!--I am, dear sir, Your affectionate brother.

To John Newton

[7] LONDONDERRY, May 14, 1765.

DEAR SIR,--Your manner of writing needs no excuse. I hope you will always write in the same manner. Love is the plainest thing in the world: I know this dictates what you write; and then what need of ceremony

You have admirably well expressed what I mean by an opinion contradistinguished from an essential doctrine. Whatever is 'compatible with a love to Christ and a work of grace' I term an opinion. And certainly the holding Particular Election and Final Perseverance is compatible with these. 'Yet what fundamental error,' you ask, 'have you opposed with half that frequency and vehemence as you have these opinions' So doubtless you have heard. But it is not true. I have printed near fifty sermons, and only one of these opposes them at all. I preach about eight hundred sermons in a year; and, taking one year with another, for twenty years past I have not preached eight sermons in a year upon the subject. But, 'How many of your best preachers have been thrust out because they dissented from you in these particulars' Not one, best or worst, good or bad, was ever thrust out on this account. There has been not a single instance of the kind. Two or three (but far from the best of our preachers) voluntarily left us after they had embraced those opinions. But it was of their own mere motion: and two I should have expelled for immoral behaviour; but they withdrew, and pretended 'they did not hold our doctrine.' Set a mark, therefore, on him who told you that tale, and let his word for the future go for nothing.

'Is a man a believer in Jesus Christ and is his life suitable to his profession' are not only the main but the sole inquiries I make in order to his admission into our Society. If he is a Dissenter, he may be a Dissenter still: but if he is a Church-man, I advise him to continue so; and that for many reasons, some of which are mentioned in the tract upon that subject.

When you have read what I have wrote on occasion of the Letters lately published, I may say something more on that head. And it will then be time enough to show you why some part of those Letters could not be wrote by Mr. Hervey.

I think on Justification just as I have done any time these seven-and-twenty years, and just as Mr. Calvin does. In this respect I do not differ from him an hair's breadth.

But the main point between you and me is Perfection. 'This,' you say, 'has no prevalence in these parts; otherwise I should think it my duty to oppose it with my whole strength-- not as an opinion, but as a dangerous mistake, which appears to be subversive of the very foundations of Christian experience, and which has, in fact, given occasion to the most grievous offences.' Just so my brother and I reasoned thirty years ago. 'We think it our duty to oppose Predestination with our whole strength--not as an opinion, but as a dangerous mistake, which appears to be subversive of the very foundations of Christian experience, and which has, in fact, given occasion, to the most grievous offences.'

That it has given occasion to such offences I know; I can name time, place, and persons. But still another fact stares me in the face. Mr. Haweis and Mr. Newton hold this, and yet I believe these have real Christian experience. But if so, this is only an opinion; it is not subversive (here is clear proof to the contrary) 'of the very foundations of Christian experience.' It is 'compatible with a love to Christ and a genuine work of grace.' Yea, many hold it at whose feet I desire to be found in the day of the Lord Jesus. If, then, I 'oppose this with my whole strength,' I am a mere bigot still. I leave you in your calm and retired moments to make the application.

But how came this opinion into my mind I will tell you with all simplicity. In 1725 I met with Bishop Taylor's Rules of Holy Living and Dying. I was struck particularly with the chapter upon Intention, and felt a fixed intention to give myself up to God. In this I was much confirmed soon after by the Christian Pattern, and longed to give God all my heart. This is just what I mean by Perfection now: I sought after it from that hour.

In 1727 I read Mr. Law's Christian Perfection and Serious Call, and more explicitly resolved to be all devoted to God in body, soul, and spirit. In 1730 I began to be homo unius libri, ['A man of one book.' In Preface to Sermons, vol. i. (1746). See Works, v. 3; W.H.S. v. 50.] to study (comparatively) no book but the Bible. I then saw in a stronger light than ever before that only one thing is needful, even faith that worketh by the love of God and man, all inward and outward holiness; and I groaned to love God with all my heart and to serve Him with all my strength.

January 1, 1733, I preached the sermon on the Circumcision of the Heart, which contains all that I now teach concerning salvation from all sin and loving God with an undivided heart. In the same year I printed (the first time I ventured to print anything) for the use of my pupils A Collection of Forms of Prayer; and in this I spoke explicitly of giving 'the whole heart and the whole life to God.' This was then, as it is now, my idea of Perfection, though I should have started at the word.

In 1735 I preached my farewell sermon at Epworth, in Lincolnshire. In this likewise I spoke with the utmost clearness of having one design, one desire, one love, and of pursuing the one end of our life in all our words and actions.

In January 1738 I expressed my desire in these words: O grant that nothing in my soul May dwell but Thy pure love alone O may Thy love possess me whole, My joy, my treasure, and my crown! Strange flames far from my heart remove! My every act, word, thought, be love! [Gerhardt's hymn, translated by Wesley (Hymns and Sacred Poems, 1739). In his Plain Account of Christian Perfection he says: 'In the beginning of the year 1738, as I was returning from Savannah, the cry of my heart was, O grant that nothing in my soul May dwell but Thy pure love alone!' See Works, xi. 369.] And I am still persuaded this is what the Lord Jesus hath bought for me with His own blood. Now, whether you desire and expect this blessing or not, is it not an astonishing thing that you or any man living should be disgusted at me for expecting it Is it not more astonishing still 'that wellnigh all the religious world should be up in arms concerning it,' and that they should persuade one another that this hope is 'subversive of the very foundations of Christian experience' Why, then whoever retains it cannot possibly have any Christian experience at all I then my brother, Mr. Fletcher, and I, and twenty thousand more, who seem both to fear and to love God, are in reality children of the devil and in the road to eternal damnation!

In God's name I entreat you make me sensible of this! Show me by plain, strong reasons what dishonour this hope does to Christ, wherein it opposes Justification by Faith or any fundamental truth of religion. But do not wrest and wiredraw and colour my words as Mr. Hervey (or Cudworth) has done in such a manner that when I look in that glass I do not know my own face I 'Shall I call you,' says Mr. Hervey, 'my father or my friend For you have been both to me.' So I was, and you have as well requited me! It is well my reward is with the Most High. Wishing all happiness to you and yours, I am, dear sir, Your affectionate brother and servant. To the Rev. Mr. Newton, At Mr. Clunies', Harp Lane, Thames Street, London.

To Lady Maxwell

[8] LONDONDERRY, May 25, 1765.

MY DEAR LADY,--It is not easy for me to express the satisfaction I received in the few hours I lately spent with you. Before I saw you I had many fears concerning you, lest your concern for the one thing should be abated, lest your desires should be cooled or your mind a little hurt by any of the things which have lately occurred. So much the greater was my joy, when all those fears were removed, when I found the same openness and sweetness as before both in your spirit and conversation, and the same earnestness of desire after the only thing which deserves the whole strength of our affection. I believe tenderness and steadiness are seldom planted by nature in one spirit. But what is too hard for almighty grace This can give strength and softness together. This is able to fill your soul with all firmness as well as with all gentleness. And hereunto are you called, for nothing less than all the mind which was in Christ Jesus.

It was with great pleasure that I observed your fixed resolution not to rest in anything short of this. I know not why you should--why you should be content with being half a Christian, devoted partly to God and partly to the world, or more properly to the devil. Nay, but let us be all for God. He has created the whole, our whole body, soul, and spirit. He that bought us hath redeemed the whole; and let Him take the purchase of His blood. Let Him sanctify the whole, that all we have and are may be a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving!

I am not afraid of your being satisfied with less than this; but I am afraid of your seeking it the wrong way. Here is the danger, that you should seek it, not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. See how exactly the Apostle speaks: you do not seek it directly, but as it were by works. I fear lest this should be your case, which might retard your receiving the blessing. Christ has died for you; He has bought pardon for you. Why should not you receive it now while you have this paper in your hand Because you have not done thus or thus See your own works. Because you are not thus and thus more contrite more earnest more sincere See your own righteousness. O let it all go! None but Christ! None but Christ! And if He alone is sufficient, if what He has suffered and done, if His blood and righteousness are enough, they are nigh thee! in thy mouth, and in thy heart! See, all things are ready! Do not wait for this or that preparation! for something to bring to God! Bring Christ! Rather, let Him bring you, bring you home to God! Lord Jesus, take her! Take her and all her sins! Take her as she is! Take her now! Arise, why tarriest thou Wash away her sins! Sprinkle her with Thy blood! Let her sink down into the arms of Thy love and cry out, 'My Lord and my God!'

Let me hear from you as soon as you can. You do not know how great a satisfaction this is to, my dear Lady, Your ever affectionate servant. Be pleased to direct to the New Room in Dublin.

To James Knox

[9] SLIGO, May 30, 1765.

DEAR SIR,--Probably this is the last trouble of the kind which you will receive from me. If you receive it in the same spirit wherein it is wrote, I shall be glad. If not, my record is with the Most High. I did not choose it should be delivered till I was gone, lest you should think I wanted anything from you. By the blessing of God I want nothing, only that you should be happy in time and in eternity.

Still, I cannot but remember the clear light you had with regard to the nature of real scriptural Christianity. You saw what heart-religion meant, and the gate of it--Justification. You had earnest desires to be a partaker of the whole gospel blessing. And you evidenced the sincerity of those desires by the steps you took in your family. So that in everything you was hastening to be not almost but altogether a Christian.

Where is that light now Do you now see that true religion is not a negative or an external thing, but the life of God in the soul of man, the image of God stamped upon the heart Do you now see that, in order to this, we are justified freely through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ Where are the desires after this which you once felt, the hungering and thirsting after righteousness And where are the outward marks of a soul groaning after God and refusing to be comforted with anything less than His love

Will you say, 'But if I had gone on in that way, I should have lost my friends and my reputation' This is partly true. You would have lost most of those friends who neither love nor fear God. Happy loss! These are the men who do you more hurt than all the world besides. These are the men whom, if ever you would be a real Christian, you must avoid as you would avoid hell-fire. 'But then they will censure me.' So they will. They will say you are a fool, a madman, and what not. But what are you the worse for this Why, the Spirit of glory and of Christ shall rest upon you. 'But it will hurt me in my business.' Suppose it should, the favour of God would make large amends. But very probably it would not. For the winds and the seas are in God's hands as well as the hearts of men. 'But it is inconsistent with my duty to the Church.' Can a man of understanding talk so and talk so in earnest Is it not rather a copy of his countenance Indeed, if you can mean 'inconsistent with my pleasing this or that clergyman,' I allow it. But let him be pleased or displeased, please thou God! But are these clergymen the Church Unless they are holy men, earnestly loving and serving God, they are not even members of the Church; they are no part of it. And unless they preach the doctrines of the Church contained in her Articles and Liturgy, they are no true ministers of the Church, but are eating her bread and tearing out her bowels.

'But you will not leave the Church.' You never will by my advice. I advise just the contrary. I advise you to lose no opportunity of attending the services of the Church, of receiving the Lord's supper, and of showing your regard to all her appointments. I advise you steadily to adhere to her doctrine in every branch of it; particularly with respect to the two fundamental points, Justification by Faith and Holiness. But, above all, I cannot but earnestly entreat you not to rest till you experience what she teaches; till (to sum up all in one word) God 'cleanses the thoughts of your heart by the inspiration of His Holy Spirit, that you may perfectly love Him and worthily magnify His holy name.' Unless this be done, what will it profit you to increase your fortune, to preserve the fairest reputation, and to gain the favour of the most learned, the most ingenious, the most honourable clergymen in the kingdom What shall it profit a man to gain all these and to lose his own soul

I know to God all things are possible. Therefore it is possible you may take this kindly. If so, I shall hope to receive a line from you directed to Mr. Beauchamp's in Limerick. If not, let it be forgotten, till we meet at the judgement-seat of Christ.--I am, dear sir, Your affectionate servant. To Mr. James Knox. He came to nothing!

To Peggy Dale

[10] CASTLEBAR, June 1, 1765.

MY DEAR MISS PEGGY,--Certainly you not only need not sin, but you need not doubt any more. Christ is yours. All is yours. You can give Him all your heart; and will He not freely give you all things But you can only return what He has given by continually receiving more. You have reason to bless Him who has cast your lot in a fair ground. Even in this world He does not withhold from you any manner of thing that is good. Let your heart be always open to receive His whole blessing!

How far do you find power over your thoughts Does not your imagination sometimes wander Do those imaginations continue for any time or have you power to check them immediately Do you find continually the spirit of prayer and are you always happy I trust you will be happier every day; and that you will not forget, my dear sister, Your affectionate brother. Miss Dale, At the Orphan House, In Newcastle-upon-Tyne. By Portpatrick. Pd. two pence.

To the Leaders and Stewards LIMERICK, June 9, 1765.

MY DEAR BRETHREN,--Yours of March evening, 28th, I received yesterday. I shall have little time to spare this autumn; yet I will endeavour (with God's leave) to spend a few days in Cornwall. I hope to be at Tiverton on Tuesday, September 3; on Wednesday, 4th, at Bideford; on Thursday evening, 5th, at Millhouse; on Friday at Port Isaac; on Saturday the 7th at St. Cuthbert's; on Sunday morning and afternoon at St. Agnes; on Monday, 9th, St. Just; Tuesday, 10th, St. Ives; Friday, 13th, St. Just; Saturday, 21st, Bristol. [The Journal, v. 141-8, shows how closely he kept to his plan.] Let Mr. Rankin fix the time and place of the Quarterly Meetings.

Peace be multiplied upon you.--I am, my dear brethren, Your affectionate brother.

To Thomas Rankin

[11] LIMERICK, June 9, 1765.

DEAR TOMMY,--You see my plan on the other side. [The previous letter.] Tell me of any alteration or addition which you think proper, and fix your Quarterly Meetings as you please, only let full notice be given.

Brother Roberts [See letter of Sept. 3, 1763.] has reunited them at the Dock; and I have a mild, loving letter from Brother Jones. [See letter of Jan. 13.] Nevertheless it is a doubt whether I ought to go to the Dock at all before the house is settled.

'Tis pity, if a ready passage should offer, but one could exchange with Geo. Story. You know the man. If it cannot be, we must be content. Peace be with your spirit.--I am, dear Tommy, Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Peggy Dale KILKENNY, July 5, 1765.

MY DEAR SISTER,--Although it is certain the kind of wandering thoughts which you mention are consistent with pure love, yet it is highly desirable to be delivered from them, because (as you observe) they hinder profitable thoughts. And why should not you be delivered Indeed, in what manner this will be done we do not know. Sometimes it pleases our Lord to work a great deliverance even of this kind in a moment. Sometimes He gives the victory by degrees. And I believe this is more common. Expect this and every good gift from Him. How wise and gracious are all His ways!

Do you commonly find in yourself the witness that you are saved from sin And is it usually clear Or do you frequently lose it I do not know why you should ever lose any good gift. For is not He the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever And yet you have known but a little of Him. You are to sink a thousand times deeper into Him: That sea of light and love unknown, Without a bottom or a shore.

I hope Miss Lewen and you speak to each other, not only without disguise, but without reserve. How is your lot cast in a fair ground! How well are you situated for making the best of a short life! Secluded from the world and all its care, Hast thou to joy or grieve, to hope or fear That is, with regard to present things No: God has given you a nobler portion. You have nothing to care for but how you may most entirely and effectually present yourself a living sacrifice to God.

When I reflect upon your earnest desire to do this and upon your simplicity of heart, it gives an unspeakable pleasure to, my dear sister, Your affectionate brother. I expect to be at Dublin till the end of this month. I send Miss Lewen's letter by Portpatrick to try which comes soonest. [The letter to Miss Lewen is missing.] To Miss Peggy Dale, At the Orphan House, Newcastle-upon-Tyne.

To Lady Maxwell KILKENNY, July 5, 1765.

MY DEAR LADY,--As yours was sent from Dublin to Cork, and then back again hither, I did not receive it till yesterday. I am now setting my face again towards England; but I expect to be in Dublin till the beginning of next month, and then to cross over, so as to be at Manchester (if it please God) about the middle of August. Either at Dublin or at Manchester I hope to have the pleasure of hearing from you. This is indeed a pleasure, as it is, to write to you; though sometimes I do this with fear--a fear lest I should give you any pain, as I know the tenderness of your spirit. I wish I could be of some service to you; that I could encourage you to cast yourself on Him that loves you, that is now waiting to pour His peace into your heart, to give you an entrance into the holiest by His blood. See Him, see Him! full of grace and truth! full of grace and truth for thee! I do not doubt but He is gradually working in you; but I want you to experience likewise an instantaneous work. Then shall the gradual go on swiftly. Lord, speak! Thy servant heareth! Say Thou, 'Let there be light'; and there shall be light, Now let it spring up in your heart!

It may be He that does all things well has wise reasons, though not apparent to us, for working more gradually in you than He has done of late years in most others. It may please Him to give you the consciousness of His favour, the conviction that you are accepted through the Beloved, by almost insensible degrees, like the dawning of the day. And it is all one how it began, so you do but walk in the light. Be this given in an instant or by degrees, hold it fast. Christ is yours; He hath loved you; He hath given Himself for you. Therefore you shall be holy as He is holy, both in heart and in all manner of conversation.

Give me leave, my dear friend, to add a word likewise concerning your bodily health. You should in any wise give yourself all the air and exercise that you can. And I should advise you (even though long custom made it difficult, if that were the case) to sleep as early as possible; never later than ten, in order to rise as early as health will permit. The having good spirits, so called, or the contrary, very much depends on this. I believe medicines will do you little service: you need only proper diet, exact regularity, and constant exercise, with the blessing of God.

Your speaking or writing was never tedious to me yet; and I am persuaded never will be. Your letters are more and more agreeable to, my very dear Lady, Your most affectionate servant.

To Thomas Rankin

[12] KILKENNY, July 15, 1765.

DEAR TOMMY,--I received yours yesterday. I suppose you have now my answer to your last. The Conference is to begin at Manchester on Thursday, August 20.

I have no objection to what you proposed to Mr. Hoskins, only my age. If he had left that gentleman trustee, I would not have given a groat for all his legacies. I wish he would not delay. A day ought not to be lost. Yours affectionately. I hope to set out for Cornwall (as I said before) immediately after the Conference. If possible, let the will be finished before I come. This would prevent much reproach. You will carry Mr. Hoskins's letter directly. To Mr. Rankin, At Mr. John Andrews', In Redruth. Per Gloucester.

To Miss March NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE, August 9, 1765.

I have many fears concerning you, lest you should sink beneath the dignity of your calling, or be moved to the right hand or the left from the simplicity of the gospel. Is your heart still whole with God Do you still desire and seek no happiness but in Him Are you always or generally sensible of His presence Do you generally, at least, find communion with Him And do you expect all that you enjoyed once, and more; to be sanctified throughout before you go hence

I hope no inward or outward reasonings are able to move you from walking exactly according to the gospel. O beware of voluntary humility; of thinking, 'Such an one is better than me, and why should I pretend to be more strict than her' 'What is that to thee follow thou Me!' You have but one pattern: follow Him inwardly and outwardly. If other believers will go step for step with you, well; but if not, follow Him!

Peace be with your spirit.

To Miss March BRISTOL, August 31, 1765.

You may be assured it is not a small degree of satisfaction to me to hear that your soul prospers. I cannot be indifferent to anything which concerns either your present or future welfare. As you covet, so I want you to enjoy, the most excellent gifts. To your outward walking I have no objection. But I want you to walk inwardly in the fullness of love, and in the broad light of God's countenance. What is requisite to this but to believe always now to believe with your whole heart, and to hold fast the beginning of this confidence steadfast unto the end And yet a self-complaisant thought, yea, or a blasphemous one, may steal across your spirit; but I will not say that is your own thought. Perhaps an enemy hath done this. Neither will I blame you for 'feeling deeply the perverseness of others,' or for 'feeling your spirit tried with it.' I do not wish that you should not feel it (while it remains), or that you should feel it otherwise than as a trial. But this does not prove that there is sin in your heart or that you are not a sacrifice to love. O my friend, do justice to the grace of God! Hold fast whereunto you have attained; and if you have not yet uninterrupted communion with Him, why not this moment, and from this moment If you have not, I incline to think it is occasioned by reasoning or by some inward or outward omission.

To Richard Walsh

[13] REDRUTH, September 9, 1765.

MY DEAR BROTHER,--I doubt very much whether either Jeremy Coombs or Sister Weyworth spoke any such thing.

I advise you to go to Mr. Henderson and relate to him what you mentioned to me. I have no objection to your speaking at those times and places which he shall think proper. On the 23rd and 24th of next month (Wednesday and Thursday) I expect, God willing, to be at Salisbury myself.--I am Your affectionate brother.

To Thomas Rankin

[14] ST. JOHN'S, September 11, 1765.

DEAR TOMMY,--There is a good work in Cornwall. But where the great work goes on well we should take care to be exact in little things.

I will tell you several of these just as they occur to my mind. Grace Paddy at Redruth met in the select society, though she wore a large glittering necklace and met no band.

They sing all over Cornwall a tune so full of repetitions and flourishes that it can scarce be sung with devotion. It is to those words, Praise the Lord, ye blessed ones. Away with it! Let it be heard no more.

They cannot sing our old common tunes. Teach these everywhere. Take pains herein.

The Societies are not half supplied with books; not even with Jane Cooper's Letters, or the two or three Sermons which I printed last year; no, not with the shilling Hymn--Book or Primitive Physick.

They almost universally neglect fasting.

The preaching-houses are miserable, even the new ones. They have neither light nor air sufficient; and they are far, far too low and too small. Look at Yarm house.

Recommend the Notes on the Old Testament in good earnest. Every Society as a Society should subscribe. Remind them everywhere that two, four, or six might join together for a copy, and bring the money to their leader weekly.

We have need to use all the common sense God has given us as well as all the grace.--I am, dear Tommy, Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Mrs. Crosby KINGSWOOD, October 5, 1765.

MY DEAR SISTER,--You oblige me much by speaking so freely. What an admirable teacher is experience! You have great reason to praise God for what He has taught you hereby, and to expect that He will teach you all things. But, whatever you find now, beware you do not deny what you had once received: I do not say 'a divine assurance that you should never sin or sustain any spiritual loss.' I know not that ever you received this. But you certainly were saved from sin, and that as clearly and in as high a degree as ever Sally Ryan [See letter of Oct. 12, 1764.] was. And if you have sustained any loss in this, believe and be made whole.

I never doubted but [Miss Dale] would recover her strength, though she has long walked in a thorny way.

A general temptation now is the denying what God had wrought. Guard all whom you converse with from this, and from fancying great grace can be preserved without great watchfulness and self-denial.--I am Your affectionate brother.

To Miss March BRISTOL, October 13, 1765.

A year or two ago you was pretty clear of enthusiasm: I hope you are so still. But nothing under heaven is more catching, especially when it is found in those we love; and, above all, when it is in those whom we cannot but believe to be sound of understanding in most instances, and to have received larger measures of the grace of God than we have ourselves.

There are now about twenty persons here who believe they are saved from sin (1) because they always love, pray, rejoice, and give thanks; and (2) because they have the witness of it in themselves. But if these lose what they have received, nothing will be more easy than to think they never had it. There were four hundred (to speak at the lowest) in London who (unless they told me lies) had the same experience. If near half of these have lost what they had received, I do not wonder if they think they never had it: it is so ready a way of excusing themselves for throwing away the blessed gift of God. I no more doubt of Miss Dale's having this once than I doubt of her sister's [Miss Peggy. See letter of June 4, 1767.] having it now. Whether God will restore her suddenly as well as freely I know not; whether by many steps, or in one moment. But here again you halt, as Sarah Crosby did, and Sarah Ryan does. You seem to think pain, yea much pain, must go before an entire cure. In Sarah Ryan it did, and in a very few others. [See previous letter.] But it need not: pain is no more salutary than pleasure. Saving grace is essentially such, saving pain but accidentally. When God saves us by pain rather than pleasure, I can resolve it only into His justice or sovereign will. To use the grace we have, and now to expect all we want, is the grand secret. He whom you love will teach you this continually.

To Christopher Hopper

[15] BRISTOL, October 16, 1765.

MY DEAR BROTHER,--So honest Sander [Alexander Coates. See letter of July 7, 1761.] has outrode all the storms and got safe into the haven! The Lord does all things well. I should not wish to stay here any longer than I could be useful.

You and James Kershaw are considerate men. You must set your wits to work to find out ways and means. I will venture to answer for one fifty pounds, payable next August. Let our brethren pray in good earnest, and God will provide the rest.--I am Yours affectionately. I am returning to London.

To Peggy Dale LONDON, November, 6, 1765.

MY DEAR SISTER,--By our intercourse with a beloved friend it often pleases God to enlighten our understanding. But this is only the second point: to warm the heart is a greater blessing than light itself. And this effect I frequently find from your letters. The Lord repay it sevenfold into your own bosom! Do you still remain in the persuasion that you shall not live beyond three-and-twenty [See letter of Dec. 31. She died at the age of thirty-three.] Do you remember when or how it began Does it continue the same, whether your health is worse or better What a mercy is it that death has lost its sting! Will this hinder any real or substantial happiness Will it prevent our loving one another Can Death's interposing tide Spirits one in Christ divide Surely no! Whatever comes from Him is eternal as Himself. --My dear sister, adieu! To Miss Dale, At the Orphan House, Newcastle-upon-Tyne .

To William Orpe

[16] LONDON, November 13, 1765.

MY DEAR BROTHER,--You must in no wise return to your father's; it would be at the price of your soul. You have already made the experiment, and you made it long enough, till you had wellnigh quenched the Spirit. If you should leap into the furnace again, how would you expect that God would bring you out

As to your temptation concerning preaching, it is nothing uncommon. Many have had it as well as you, and some of them for a time gave place to the devil and departed from the work. So did John Catermole; so did James Morgan: but God scourged them back again. Do not reason with the devil, but pray, wrestle with God, and He will give you light. --I am Your affectionate brother. To Mr. Will. Orpe, At Mr. Dickenson's, Near the Dolphin, In Birmingham.

To Thomas Rankin LONDON, November 18, 1765.

DEAR TOMMY,--You have satisfied me with regard to the particulars which I mentioned in my letter from Cornwall. Only one thing I desire you to remember: never sit up later than ten o'clock--no, not for any reason (except a watch-night), not on any presence whatsoever. In general, I desire you would go to bed about a quarter after nine.

Likewise be temperate in speaking--never too loud, never too long: else Satan will befool you; and, on presence of being more useful, quite disable you from being useful at all.

Rd. Henderson [See letter of Sept. 9.] desired that he might be the book-keeper this year in Wiltshire, and save me two shillings in the pound. But whoever you approve of, so do I. Write to Mr. Franks [See letters of Oct. 5, 1763, and July 9, 1766 (to his brother).] accordingly.--I am, dear Tommy, Your affectionate friend and brother. To Mr. Thomas Rankin, At Mr. Joseph Garnet's, In Barnard Castle, County of Durham.

To George Gidley

[17] LONDON, November 25, 1765.

DEAR GEORGE,--I have well considered the case of Nath. Fenton. It is certain we can have justice by moving the Court of King's Bench. But it would probably cost forty or fifty pounds. Now, I doubt whether this would be worth while, whether you had not better leave them to themselves for the present. Only pray send Mr. Hale (as I promised) my Answers to the Bishop of Exeter.

If the Justice at Exeter will grant you warrants, take them by all means; and inform him (what probably he does not know) that I have tried already with the whole Bench of Justices whether the Conventicle Act affects the Methodists, and have cast them in Westminster Hall. And if any, high or low, has a mind to fight with me again, let them begin as soon as they please.--I am Your affectionate friend and brother.

To Lady Maxwell

[18] LONDON, December 1, 1765.

MY DEAR LADY,--Perhaps there is scarce any child of man that is not at some time a little touched by prejudice, so far at least as to be troubled, though not wounded. But it does not hurt unless it fixes upon the mind. It is not strength of understanding which can prevent this. The heart, which otherwise suffers most by it, makes the resistance which only is effectual. I cannot easily be prejudiced against any person whom I tenderly love till that love declines. So long, therefore, as our affection is preserved by watchfulness and prayer to Him that gave it, prejudice must stand at a distance. Another excellent defence against it is openness. I admire you upon this account. You dare (in spite of that strange reserve which so prevails in North Britain) speak the naked sentiments of your heart. I hope my dear friend will never do otherwise. In simplicity and godly sincerity, the very reverse of worldly wisdom, have all your conversation in the world.

Have you received a gleam of light from above, a spark of faith O let it not go! Hold fast, by His grace, that token of His love, that earnest of your inheritance. Come just as you are, and come boldly to the throne of grace. You need not delay! Even now the bowels of Jesus Christ yearn over you. What have you to do with to-morrow I love you to-day. And how much more does He love you! He Pities still His wandering sheep, Longs to bring you to His fold! To-day hear His voice--the voice of Him that speaks as never man spake, the voice that raises the dead, that calls the things which are not as though they were. Hark! What says He now 'Fear not; only believe! Woman, thy sins are forgiven thee! Go in peace; thy faith hath made thee whole.' Indeed, I am, my dear Lady, Your ever affectionate servant.

To William Orpe LONDON, December 14, 1765.

MY DEAR BROTHER,--You have a clear call to go home for a short season. But let it be as short as you can. 'Let the dead bury their dead. But follow thou Me.'

I do not know that either getting a licence or taking the oaths would signify a rush. These are things which the mob has little regard to. [Orpe was second of the three preachers in Staffordshire, where Methodists had to suffer much from the mob.] Not that there is anything in those oaths that at all entangles your conscience. The Very same thing which you thereby engage to do every honest man must do without that engagement. We in particular shall 'bear true allegiance to our Sovereign Lord King George,' whether we swear so to do or no. The main point is to be all devoted to God. You might begin the Sunday service at Birmingham as soon as the Church service ends.--I am Your affectionate brother. To Mr. Will. Orpe, At Mr. Ezekiel King's, In Stroud, Gloucestershire.

To Christopher Hopper

[19] LONDON, December 17, 1765.

MY DEAR BROTHER,--I am glad you have been at Edinburgh, especially on so good an errand. But I wonder T. Olivers [Olivers had been appointed to Glasgow in August.] ever disappointed them at Musselburgh. It is bad husbandry to neglect old places in order to preach at new. Yet I am informed he has been useful in Scotland. Whether he should now go to Glasgow or delay it a little longer I have left to T. Taylor's [Taylor was Assistant in Edinburgh. See Wesley's Veterans, vii. 43-4; and letter of July 8, 1766.] choice. If you can spare Moseley Cheek six or eight days, let him visit poor Dunbar. If Brother Williams's affairs are not made up, he should not stay at so public a place as Edinburgh.

On one condition--that Michael [Michael Fenwick. See letter of Sept. 12, 1755, to Ebenezer Blackwell.] will make it a point of conscience to follow your directions in all things, great and small--I consent to his staying at Newcastle. If he is guideable, he may do well. O cure him of being a coxcomb!--I am Yours affectionately. To Mr. Hopper, At the Orphan House, Newcastle-upon-Tyne.

To Peggy Dale LONDON, December 31, 1765.

MY DEAR PEGGY,--Whether that persuasion [See letter of Nov. 6.] was from nature or from God a little time will show. It will be matter of great joy to me if God gives you many years to glorify Him in the body before He removes you to the world of spirits. The comfort is, that life or death, all is yours, seeing you are Christ's: all is good, all is blessing! You have only to rest upon Him with the whole weight of your soul. Temptations to pride you may have, or to anything; but these do not sully your soul. Amidst a thousand temptations you may retain unspotted purity. Abide in Him by simple faith this moment! Live, walk in love! The Lord increase it in you a thousandfold! Take out of His fullness grace upon grace. Tell me from time [to time] just what you feel. I cannot tell you how tenderly I am, my dear sister, Your affectionate brother.

Edited by Jerry James (Pastor), and converted to HTML by Steven F. Johnson. 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. Contact the webmaster for permission.