------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          Transcriber’s Note:

This version of the text cannot represent certain typographical effects.
Italics are delimited with the ‘_’ character as _italic_.

Footnotes have been moved to follow the paragraphs in which they are
referenced.

The occasional Greek word was printed without diacritical marks.

Minor errors, attributable to the printer, have been corrected. Please
see the transcriber’s note at the end of this text for details regarding
the handling of any textual issues encountered during its preparation.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     WESLEY’S DESIGNATED SUCCESSOR.

[Illustration: J Fletcher/Madeley]

                     WESLEY’S DESIGNATED SUCCESSOR:

            =The Life, Letters, and Literary Labours=

                                 OF THE

                      REV. JOHN WILLIAM FLETCHER,

                    _Vicar of Madeley, Shropshire_.








                                    BY

                             REV. L. TYERMAN,

                                AUTHOR OF

 “THE LIFE AND TIMES OF THE REV. SAMUEL WESLEY, M.A., RECTOR OF EPWORTH;”
           “THE LIFE AND TIMES OF THE REV. JOHN WESLEY, M.A.;”
             “THE LIFE OF THE REV. GEORGE WHITEFIELD, B.A.;”
                       AND “THE OXFORD METHODISTS.”








                           =New York:=
                           PHILLIPS AND HUNT.

                          =Cincinnati:=
                           WALDEN AND STOWE.

                             MDCCCLXXXIII.




               =I dedicate this Book to my Wife,=
             _Who has shared my joys and sorrows for nearly
                             thirty years_.

                                               _L. TYERMAN._




                                PREFACE.

                                  ---


“Jean Guillaume de la Flechere,” wrote Robert Southey, “was a man of
rare talents, and rarer virtue. No age or country has ever produced a
man of more fervent piety, or more perfect charity; no Church has ever
possessed a more apostolic minister. He was a man of whom Methodism may
well be proud, as the most able of its defenders; and whom the Church of
England may hold in remembrance, as one of the most pious and excellent
of her sons.”

“Fletcher was a saint,” said Isaac Taylor, “as unearthly a being as
could tread the earth at all.”

“Fletcher,” remarked Robert Hall, “is a seraph who burns with the ardour
of divine love. Spurning the fetters of mortality, he almost habitually
seems to have anticipated the rapture of the beatific vision.”

Dr. Dixon, one of the greatest of Methodist preachers, observed, “I
conceive Fletcher to be the most holy man who has been upon earth since
the apostolic age.”

No apology is needed for publishing the life of such a man, unless it
can be shown that a life worthy of him is already in existence.

Excepting the brief and exceedingly imperfect biography by the Rev.
Robert Cox, in 1822, only two Lives of Fletcher have been published
since his death, ninety-seven years ago; namely, Wesley’s in 1786, and
Benson’s in 1804.

It is true that, in 1790, the Rev. Joshua Gilpin, Vicar of Rockwardine,
appended twenty-nine biographical “Notes” to different chapters of
Fletcher’s “Portrait of St. Paul;” but the facts they contained, in
addition to those which Wesley had already given, were not many.

A year later, in 1791, the Rev. Melville Horne, Curate of Madeley,
published “Posthumous Pieces of the late Rev. John William De La
Flechere,” a volume of 435 pages, nearly 400 of which are filled with
Fletcher’s Letters to his friends. This volume has been of great service
to me in the present work. Many quotations are made from it, and are
indicated by the footnotes, “Letters, 1791.”

When Fletcher died, some of his admirers wished Mr. Ireland to be his
biographer; others desired Fletcher’s widow to undertake the task. Both
of them judiciously declined. Wesley was then fixed upon. He asked Mr.
Ireland to supply him with materials, but Mr. Ireland refused: Mrs.
Fletcher, however, rendered him important help. In unpublished letters
to Sarah Crosby, she writes:—

“Mr. Ireland knew and loved my dear husband as scarcely any other person
did; and if he chooses to print a journal of their travels and of the
great spiritual labours of which he was an eye-witness, it would not be
wrong. But this is not his intention. He only wishes to gather materials
for me. With a good deal of labour, I have collected some sweet
fragments, on different subjects, from little pocket-books, but I have
handed them to Mr. Wesley, who, however, tells me he has done nothing
towards the Life, and that he has enough to occupy his time for a year
to come. Indeed, he seems to be in doubt whether he will be able to
write the Life at all. I hope the accounts I have given him will not be
shortened; if they be, I shall repent that I did not print them myself.”

This was written on June 20, 1786, and shows that ten months after
Fletcher’s death, Wesley had not even begun Fletcher’s biography.
Fourteen weeks afterwards, he made a start. An extract from his journal
is worth quoting:—

“1786. September 25. Monday. We took coach” at Bristol, “in the
afternoon; and on Tuesday morning reached London. I now applied myself
in earnest to the writing of Mr. Fletcher’s Life, having procured the
best materials I could. To this I dedicated all the time I could spare
till November, from five in the morning till eight at night. These are
my studying hours; I cannot write longer in a day without hurting my
eyes.”

For little more than a month the venerable biographer, now in the
eighty-fourth year of his age, devoted all the time he “could spare” in
preparing the Life of one whom he pronounced the most “unblameable man,
in every respect, that, within four-score years,” he had “found either
in Europe or America!” The biography was finished in the month of
November, and in December was published with the title “A Short Account
of the Life and Death of the Rev. John Fletcher. By the Rev. John
Wesley. _Sequor, non passibus æquis._ London, 1786.” It certainly was a
“_Short Account_,”—a 12mo volume of 227 pages, which would have been
much smaller if the type and the space between the lines had been
different. This was the first Life of Wesley’s greatest friend, and his
“Designated Successor“! The veteran was far too busy to do justice to
his great “helper.”

Eighteen years elapsed before another and larger Life was given to the
public. This was undertaken in 1801 by the Rev. Joseph Benson, at the
request of Fletcher’s widow, and of the Methodist Conference of that
year. In 1804 it was published with the following title:—“The Life of
the Rev. John W. de la Flechere, compiled from the Narratives of the
Reverend Mr. Wesley; the Biographical Notes of the Reverend Mr. Gilpin;
from his own Letters; and other Authentic Documents, many of which were
never before published. By Joseph Benson.” This is the only Life of
Fletcher which, _in a separate form_, has been circulated during the
last seventy-eight years.

Of course, during this long period of nearly fourscore years, many new
facts and incidents concerning Fletcher have come to light; and, among
these new biographical materials, special mention must be made of the
Fletcher MSS. deposited in the Wesleyan Mission House, London, in 1862.
Since then, the Methodist “Committee on Book Affairs” has repeatedly
expressed the opinion that a new Life of Fletcher ought to be prepared,
and, at least, two of the foremost men in Methodism have been requested
to undertake the work. One of the two is dead, and the other seems to
have as much literary labour in hand as he is able to accomplish. Under
such circumstances, I have had the temerity to attempt the task.

I have carefully used _all_ the _biographical matter_ that I have found
in the “Short Account” by Wesley; in the Letters published by Melville
Horne; in Gilpin’s “Notes;” in the Life by Benson; in the Fletcher MSS.,
just mentioned; in other MSS. belonging to myself; in MSS. kindly lent
to me; and in all the Methodist and other publications relating to
Fletcher with which I am acquainted.

I have no artistic talent; and if I had, I should not employ it in
writing biographies. In such publications I am only desirous to see the
man, not the artist’s drapery. I want to know his doings, sayings, and
sufferings, rather than to read philosophic discourses concerning them.
My aim, therefore, from first to last, has been to let Fletcher speak
for himself. His Letters are invaluable; the man who can read them
without being profited is greatly to be pitied. The extracts from his
sermons show how the first Methodists used to preach. The chapters
respecting the Calvinian controversy may, to some readers, be somewhat
dry, but they could not be omitted, because that controversy was the
great event in Fletcher’s life, and hastened his death. Besides, it was
by his publications on this subject that he rendered service to Wesley
and the Methodist movement, which neither Wesley himself nor any other
of Wesley’s friends could have furnished. I have refrained from
discussing the truths which Fletcher’s pen defended; but I have said
enough to indicate what the doctrines were which created Methodism, and
which alone can perpetuate its spiritual life and power.

The portrait of Fletcher is taken from an exceedingly scarce engraving,
in the Methodist Museum, at Centenary Hall, London.

I think I may say, without exposing myself to the charge of arrogance or
conceit, that, in this volume, the reader will find all the facts of any
importance that are known concerning Fletcher, and that here, more than
in any previous publication, is illustrated the intellectual and saintly
character of one of the holiest men that ever lived.

                                                         L. TYERMAN.

STANHOPE HOUSE, CLAPHAM PARK, S.W.
        _October 7, 1882._




                            GENERAL CONTENTS

                                  ---

                              INTRODUCTION.

                                                                     PAGE

 Wesley requests Fletcher to be his successor—Others who might
   have been designated                                               1–3


                                CHAPTER I.

         FROM FLETCHER’S BIRTH TO HIS COMING TO ENGLAND IN 1752.

 Parentage—Birthplace—Early piety—Remarkable deliverances from
   danger—-Education at Geneva—Removed to Lentzburg—Wishes to be
   a soldier                                                          4–9


                               CHAPTER II.

         FROM HIS COMING TO ENGLAND TO HIS ORDINATION, 1752–1757.

 Arrives in London-Admitted to Mr. Burchell’s school—Becomes
   tutor to sons of Thomas Hill, Esq.—Letter to his brother
   Henry—Introduced to Methodists—His conversion—A millenarian—A
   Catechumen—Acquaintance with Mr. Vaughan—Richard Edwards, his
   class-leader—Letters to Wesley—His ordination                    10–27


                               CHAPTER III.

       FROM HIS ORDINATION TO HIS SETTLEMENT AT MADELEY, 1757–1760.

 A favourite among the first Methodists—Preaches in
   Shropshire—Letter to Wesley—Thomas Walsh—Letter to his
   class-leader—Introduced to Lady Huntingdon—Preaching to
   French prisoners—Letter to Charles Wesley—Letter to Sarah
   Ryan—Christian Perfection—Fletcher and his foes—Proposal to
   go to the West Indies—Death of Thomas Walsh—Letter to Charles
   Wesley—A Convert—Conversion of Mr. Richard
   Hill—Temptation—Letters to Charles Wesley—Dorothy
   Furley—Visits Lady Huntingdon—Her ladyship’s
   proposal—Fletcher’s first published sermon—Earl
   Ferrars—Glorious services at Everton—Choosing a
   benefice—Letters to Lady Huntingdon—Commencement of ministry
   at Madeley                                                       28–60


                               CHAPTER IV.

                  FIRST TWO YEARS AT MADELEY, 1760–1762.

 Madeley—Branded a Methodist—Increasing labours—Madeley Wood and
   Coalbrook Dale—Rev. Mr. Prothero’s sermon—The
   publicans—Fletcher’s first sermons at Madeley—Mary
   Matthews—Answers to an objection—“The Rock Church”—Letter to
   a Papist—Persecutions—Letter to Rev. Mr. Hutton—Testimony of
   Rev. Mr. Gilpin                                                  61–83


                                CHAPTER V.

                 THREE QUIET SUCCESSFUL YEARS. 1762–1765.

 Fanaticism among the London Methodists—Rules of Fletcher’s
   Methodist Societies—A troublesome member—A quiet year—Reasons
   for and against matrimony—The furious butcher—Letters to Miss
   Hatton—Wesley’s first visit to Madeley—Simplicity of
   living—Alexander Mather—Fletcher at Breedon—Fletcher’s first
   pastoral letter—Fletcher and his relatives                      84–105


                               CHAPTER VI.

                        TWO YEARS MORE. 1766–1767.

 Fletcher depressed—Rejoicing on account of other men’s
   success—Letters to Miss Hatton and Miss Ireland—Thanks for a
   present—An excursion to Brighton, etc.—Pastoral letter—Miss
   Hatton dying—Letter to Whitefield—Lady Huntingdon at
   Madeley—Captain Scott—Fletcher in Yorkshire—Letter to Lady
   Huntingdon—Rev. Cradock Glascott—Trevecca College—Fletcher
   appointed chaplain of the Earl of Buchan—James
   Glazebrook—“Manifestations of the Son of God”                  106–130


                               CHAPTER VII.

         TREVECCA COLLEGE: VISIT TO SWITZERLAND, ETC. 1768–1770.

 Joseph Easterbrook—Books for Trevecca College—Letter on
   Conversation—Expulsion of six students at Oxford—Letter to
   Whitefield—Opening of Trevecca College—Letters to Mr. and
   Miss Ireland—Rev. John Jones—Mr. John Henderson, B.A.—First
   anniversary of Trevecca College—Rev. Walter
   Sellon—Anti-Popery sermon—Joseph Benson—Letter to Mr.
   Ireland—Visit to Switzerland                                   131–163


                              CHAPTER VIII.

          COMMENCEMENT OF THE CALVINIAN CONTROVERSY. 1770–1771.

 Letter to masters and students of Trevecca College—Fletcher at
   Trevecca College—Letter to Rev. David Simpson—Wesley’s
   Doctrinal Minutes—Second anniversary of Trevecca
   College—Wesley’s sermon on the death of Whitefield—Letter of
   Lady Glenorchy—Joseph Benson dismissed from Trevecca
   College—Fletcher’s unpublished letter to Wesley—Fletcher
   resigns his office at Trevecca—Important unpublished
   manuscript—The storm brewing—Shirley’s Circular
   Letter—Fletcher’s “First Check to Antinomianism”—Shirley’s
   “Narrative”—Fletcher’s Letter to Shirley—Fletcher’s
   Vindication of Wesley’s “Minutes”                              164–205


                               CHAPTER IX.

                  “SECOND CHECK TO ANTINOMIANISM.” 1771.

 Letters in the _Gospel Magazine_—Unpublished letter to Joseph
   Benson—Prevalent Antinomianism—Richard Hill’s pamphlet
   respecting a conversation with a monk                          206–217


                                CHAPTER X.

                  “THIRD CHECK TO ANTINOMIANISM.” 1772.

 Edward Elwall—Unpublished letter to Sellon—Letter to the Dublin
   Methodists—Richard Hill’s _Five Letters_—Fletcher’s reply to
   them—Divine Grace given to all—Good men doing the Devil’s
   work—Advices to Arminians                                      218–233


                               CHAPTER XI.
                  “FOURTH CHECK TO ANTINOMIANISM.” 1772.

 Richard Hill’s “_Review of all the Doctrines taught by the Rev.
   J. Wesley_“—Richard Hill’s “_Six Letters_” to
   Fletcher—Rowland Hill’s “_Friendly Remarks_”—“_Logica
   Genevensis_”—Wesley’s “_Remarks on Mr. Hill’s
   Review_”—Unpublished letter by John Pawson—Fletcher rebukes
   Rowland Hill—Absurdities of Calvinism—Free Will—Unpublished
   letter by Richard Hill to Walter Sellon                        234–253


                               CHAPTER XII.

            “APPEAL TO MATTER OF FACT AND COMMON SENSE.” 1772.

 Manuscript lost—Dedication—Doctrine of Original Sin—Colliers,
   bargemen, and iron-workers—England’s favourite amusements—Ten
   inferences                                                     254–262


                              CHAPTER XIII.
             WESLEY’S DESIGNATED SUCCESSOR, ETC., ETC. 1773.
 Wesley requests Fletcher to be his successor—Fletcher’s
   reply—Wesley respecting Fletcher and Whitefield—Samuel
   Bradburn visits Fletcher—Correspondence in 1773—The penitent
   thief—The earthquake—Fletcher’s sermon on it                   263–278


                               CHAPTER XIV.

                    “THE FINISHING STROKE,” ETC. 1773.

 “_The Finishing Stroke_”—“_The Farrago Double
   Distilled_”—Berridge’s “_Christian World Unmasked_”—Letters
   by Berridge—Richard Hill desiring peace—Richard Hill’s
   “_Three Letters_” to Fletcher—“_Creed for Arminians and
   Perfectionists_”                                               279–293


                               CHAPTER XV.

                  “FIFTH CHECK TO ANTINOMIANISM.” 1774.

 Toplady’s letter to Ambrose Serle—“_Logica Genevensis
   continued_”—Remaining differences—Fletcher answering
   Berridge—Wesley on Fletcher’s “_Checks_”—Lady Huntingdon
   wishes an interview with Fletcher—Fletcher’s reply—Fletcher
   writing and weary                                              294–301


                               CHAPTER XVI.

                      FURTHER PUBLICATIONS IN 1774.

 “_Equal Check to Pharisaism and Antinomianism_”—Doleful
   picture—Letter to Lady Huntingdon—Saving Faith—The Athanasian
   Creed—Letters to J. Benson and C. Wesley                       302–311


                              CHAPTER XVII.

                      PUBLICATIONS IN THE YEAR 1775.

 “_Equal Check to Pharisaism and Antinomianism
   continued_”—“_Scripture Scales_”—“_The Fictitious and the
   Genuine Creed_”—The controversy has done Fletcher good—Rev.
   Thomas Reader visits Fletcher—Christian perfection—Letter to
   J. Benson—Wesley dangerously ill—Charles Wesley writes to
   Fletcher—Fletcher’s reply—“_Checks to
   Antinomianism_”—Reconciliations—Dr. Coke’s Letter to
   Fletcher—Letter to C. Wesley                                   312–333


                              CHAPTER XVIII.

                      PUBLICATIONS IN THE YEAR 1776.

 Toplady—Fletcher’s “_Answer to the Vindication of the
   Decrees_”—Toplady attacks Wesley—Fletcher answers
   Toplady—Review of six years’ work—Rev. Caleb Evans’ letter on
   Wesley’s “_Calm Address_”—Fletcher’s “_Vindication of the
   Calm Address_”—Mr. Evans’ “_Reply_” to Fletcher’s
   “_Vindication_”—Fletcher publishes “_American Patriotism_”—A
   Public Fast—“_The Bible and the Sword_”—The _Monthly Review_
   on Fletcher—Government desires to reward Fletcher              334–353


                               CHAPTER XIX.

                         CORRESPONDENCE IN 1776.

 Fletcher’s labours and abstinence—Again objects to become
   Wesley’s successor—An excursion with Wesley—Fletcher
   discouraged—Unpublished letter by J. Benson—Another work for
   the press—“_Driving_ Methodism and _Still_
   Mysticism”—Fletcher dangerously ill—C. Wesley’s hymn—Michael
   Onions—Letters—Fletcher apparently dying—An impromptu
   hymn—Wesley escorts Fletcher to London—Another excursion with
   Wesley—Second visit to Berridge—Fletcher and Venn at St.
   Neots—Charles Greenwood—Fletcher resides with him—Letter “to
   the parishioners of Madeley”                                   354–375


                               CHAPTER XX.

                 PUBLICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE IN 1777.

 “_The Doctrines of Grace and Justice equally Essential to the
   Pure Gospel_”—Fletcher a millenarian—“_Bible Arminianism and
   Bible Calvinism_”—“_The Plan of Reconciliation_”—Another
   letter to his parishioners—Letter to W. Wase—Letters to Rev.
   V. Perronet and his daughter—Fletcher visited by his
   friends—Fletcher’s letter to his bishop—Charles Perronet
   dies—Fletcher’s sojourn at Stoke Newington—Removes to Mr.
   Ireland’s, at Brislington—Meets Henry Venn—Attends Wesley’s
   Conference—Rev. David Lloyd—James Rogers visits
   Fletcher—Letter to Rev. V. Perronet—Unpublished letter to
   Miss Bosanquet—Lady Mary Fitzgerald—Letters to her and to
   Mrs. Thornton—Preparing to leave England—Farewell letters      376–408


                               CHAPTER XXI.

                      A LONG RETIREMENT. 1778–1781.

 Journey to the south of France—Unpublished letter to Miss
   Bosanquet—Sermon concerning the New Birth—Letters to Rev. Mr.
   Greaves, W. Perronet, the Wesley Brothers, and Dr.
   Conyers—The Perronet estate in Switzerland—Unpublished letter
   to Mr. Power—Fletcher among children—Fletcher and his
   nephew—Messages to Madeley—Preaching at an execution—William
   Perronet joins Fletcher—A perilous journey—Letter to Mr.
   Ireland—Letters to Madeley—Other letters—Trials in
   Switzerland—An attack of rheumatism—Letter to his
   curate—National distress—Methodist meeting house at Madeley
   Wood—W. Perronet’s unpublished letter—In a “miserable
   lodging”—Loss of manuscripts—Religion in Switzerland—Letters
   to Madeley—House of Fletcher’s nativity—Letters to W. Wase,
   J. Owen, and M. Onions—Joins Mr. Ireland at Montpelier—Return
   to England—Thomas Rankin visits Fletcher at
   Brislington—Unpublished letter to Miss Bosanquet               409–450


                              CHAPTER XXII.

                    LITERARY WORK DONE IN RETIREMENT.

 “_La Grace et la Nature_”—“_The Portrait of St. Paul._”          451–459


                              CHAPTER XXIII.

         THE FIRST THREE MONTHS AFTER THE RETURN TO MADELEY. 1781

 Affairs in confusion—Letter to Wesley—Rev. Cornelius
   Bayley—Correspondence with Miss Loxdale—Letters to Wesley and
   T. Rankin—Attends Wesley’s Conference at Leeds—Joseph
   Pescod’s letter—Fletcher the guest of Miss Bosanquet—A
   remarkable meeting at Leeds—Sanctification—Visits Sheffield    460–472


                              CHAPTER XXIV.

                        FLETCHER’S MARRIAGE. 1781.

 Letters to Miss Perronet and to Lady Mary Fitzgerald—History of
   Miss Bosanquet—Her Orphanage at Leyton—Her fortune and her
   debts—Her removal to Yorkshire—She turns farmer and
   maltster—Debts and difficulties—Fletcher proposes to marry
   her—Fletcher on celibacy—Unpublished love-letter—Unpublished
   letters to Miss Bosanquet’s uncle and her brother—Further
   correspondence—Settling affairs in Yorkshire—The wedding and
   letters respecting it                                          473–500


                               CHAPTER XXV.

             TWO YEARS OF MARRIED LIFE AT MADELEY. 1782–1783.

 How Fletcher began the year 1782—Husband and wife go to
   Madeley—Wesley visits them—William Tranter—Dr. Jobson and L.
   Tyerman at Madeley—Letter to author of “The Fool of
   Quality”—The Methodists of Dublin invite Fletcher and his
   wife to visit them—Mrs. Fletcher’s letter to Wesley—Fletcher
   has an accident which disables him—Letter to Charles Wesley—A
   new poem—Nathaniel Gilbert and Melville Horne—Letters to Mrs.
   Thornton and to John Valton—Fletcher and his wife visit the
   Dublin Methodists—Their successful labours—Unpublished
   letter, thanking them for their services—Unpublished pamphlet
   by Fletcher—Fletcher begins Sunday schools at Madeley—Rev. H.
   Venn visits Fletcher                                           501–529


                              CHAPTER XXVI.

                      LAST DAYS ON EARTH. 1784–1785.

 Dr. Coke and his friends begin the Methodist Missionary
   Society—Fletcher one of the first subscribers—Unpublished
   letter by Dr. Coke—Fletcher’s unpublished letter to Rev. Mr.
   Bouverot—Dr. Priestley—Fletcher’s “_Rational Vindication of
   the Catholic Faith_”—Fletcher’s “_Socinianism
   Unscriptural_”—Fletcher’s Millenarianism—Unpublished letters
   to Mrs. Smyth and to Lady Mary Fitzgerald—Fletcher at
   Wesley’s Conference at Leeds—Sermons preached—Fletcher a
   peacemaker—Remarkable scene—Fletcher objected to—Enoch Wood
   and Fletcher’s discourse on Wesley’s bust—Fletcher in his
   “Sentry Box”—Letter to his god-son—Rev. Charles Simeon visits
   Fletcher—Modified millenarianism—Letters to Rev. Peard
   Dickenson and Rev. Melville Horne—Mrs. Fletcher ill of
   fever—Letter to Lady Mary Fitzgerald—Fletcher ill of
   fever—Mrs. Fletcher’s account of him—Last service in Madeley
   Church—Dying—Death and burial—Mrs. Fletcher’s letter to C.
   Wesley—Wesley preaches Fletcher’s funeral sermon—Testimonies
   concerning Fletcher—Inscription on his tombstone—Inscription
   on the tablet in City Road Chapel                              530–575




                            _INTRODUCTION._


EIGHTEEN years before his death, Wesley wrote the following letter to
Fletcher, Vicar of Madeley—

                                                   “_January, 1773._

  “DEAR SIR,—What an amazing work has God wrought in these kingdoms, in
  less than forty years! And it not only continues, but increases,
  throughout England, Scotland, and Ireland; nay, it has lately spread
  into New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Maryland, and Carolina. But the
  wise men of the world say, ‘When Mr. Wesley drops, then all this is at
  an end!’ And so it surely will, unless, before God calls him hence,
  one is found to stand in his place. For, ουκ αγαθον πολυκοιρανιη. Εις
  κοιρανος εστω. I see more and more, unless there be one προεστως, the
  work can never be carried on. The body of the preachers are not
  united: nor will any part of them submit to the rest; so that either
  there must be one to preside over all, or the work will indeed come to
  an end.

  “But who is sufficient for these things? Qualified to preside both
  over the preachers and people? He must be a man of faith and love, and
  one that has a single eye to the advancement of the kingdom of God. He
  must have a clear understanding; a knowledge of men and things,
  particularly of the Methodist doctrine and discipline; a ready
  utterance; diligence and activity, with a tolerable share of health.
  There must be added to these favour with the people, with the
  Methodists in general. For, unless God turns their eyes and their
  hearts towards him, he will be quite incapable of the work. He must
  likewise have some degree of learning, because there are many
  adversaries, learned as well as unlearned, whose mouths must be
  stopped. But this cannot be done unless he be able to meet them on
  their own ground.

  “But has God provided one so qualified? Who is he? Thou art the man!
  God has given you a measure of loving faith, and a single eye to His
  glory. He has given you some knowledge of men and things, particularly
  of the old plan of Methodism. You are blessed with some health,
  activity, and diligence, together with a degree of learning. And to
  these He has lately added, by a way none could have foreseen, favour
  both with the preachers and the whole people. Come out in the name of
  God! Come to the help of the Lord against the mighty! Come while I am
  alive and capable of labour!

           ‘_Dum superest Lachesi quod torqueat, et pedibus me
           Porto meis, nullo dextram subeunte bacillo._’

  Come while I am able, God assisting, to build you up in faith, to
  ripen your gifts, and to introduce you to the people. _Nil tanti._
  What possible employment can you have, which is of so great
  importance?

  “But you will naturally say, ‘I am not equal to the task; I have
  neither grace nor gifts for such an employment.’ You say true; it is
  certain you have not. And who has? But do you not know Him who is able
  to give them? perhaps not at once, but rather day by day: as each is,
  so shall your strength be. ‘But this implies,’ you may say, ‘a
  thousand crosses, such as I feel I am not able to bear.’ You are not
  able to bear them _now_, and they are not now come. Whenever they do
  come, will He not send them in due number, weight, and measure? And
  will they not all be for your profit, that you may be a partaker of
  His holiness?

  “Without conferring, therefore, with flesh and blood, come and
  strengthen the hands, comfort the heart, and share the labour of

                     “Your affectionate friend and brother,
                                                   “JOHN WESLEY.”[1]

Footnote 1:

  Dr. Whitehead’s “Life of Wesley,” vol. ii., p. 355.

In all respects, Wesley’s letter is remarkable. He wished Methodism to
be perpetuated; but he was convinced that this could not be done unless
the ruling and administrative power could be confided, not to the
Conference, or to a committee of the Conference, but to a single person.
His description of the necessary qualifications of such a ruler is
worthy of being studied. Especially ought Methodist preachers and the
Methodist people all over the world, and in all generations, to notice
the fact that Wesley’s first and pre-eminent qualification was that he
who “presided both over the preachers and people must be a man of faith
and love, and one who had a single eye to the advancement of the kingdom
of God.” For thirty-eight years, since he left the Oxford University,
Wesley’s labours had been herculean and incessant. His health had begun
to fail; so much so, that, only a few months before he wrote to
Fletcher, his friends in London had become alarmed by signs of age and
debility, and had contributed to provide him a carriage in which to
pursue those extensive and laborious journeys, which hitherto he had
made on horseback. In Edinburgh, he had undergone a medical examination
by Dr. Monro, Dr. Gregory, and Dr. Hamilton, after which he wrote:
“1772, May 18. They satisfied me what my disorder was; and told me there
was but one method of cure. Perhaps but one natural one; but I think God
has more than one method of healing either the soul or the body.”

Under such circumstances, it is not surprising that Wesley wished to
have in training his successor; and he seems to have had no difficulty
in nominating him. His brother Charles was living, and, among his
itinerant preachers, there was a small band of remarkable men, including
Alexander Mather, Thomas Olivers, George Shadford, John Pawson, Thomas
Hanby, William Thompson, Thomas Taylor, John Nelson, Thomas Rankin,
Christopher Hopper, Joseph Benson, George Story, Thomas Rutherford,
Richard Whatcoat, Joseph Pilmore, Francis Asbury, and others; but all
these were passed over, and the man he desired and nominated to be his
successor was the saintly Swiss, John William de la Flechère, Vicar of
Madeley.

The character and the life of such a man must be worthy of attention.
Wesley, a keen judge of men, thought him qualified to be the “προεστως”
of the Methodists. His reply to Wesley’s proposal need not be inserted
here. The position was the highest Wesley could offer him. Was he worthy
of it? Let the reader of the following pages form his own opinion.
Enough has been said to justify the present attempt to delineate the
man.




                               CHAPTER I.
                  _FROM FLETCHER’S BIRTH TO HIS COMING
                              TO ENGLAND_
                                IN 1752.


JEAN GUILLAUME DE LA FLECHÈRE was a descendant of one of the most
respectable families in Switzerland; a family, in fact, which was a
branch of an earldom of Savoy. After his marriage, Fletcher’s wife found
in his desk a seal. “Is this yours?” she asked. “Yes,” replied the poor
country parson; “but I have not used it for many years.” “Why?” “Because
it bears a coronet, nearly such as is the insignia of your English
dukes. Were I to use that seal, it might lead to frivolous inquiries
about my family, and subject me to the censure of valuing myself on such
distinctions.”[2]

Footnote 2:

  Cox’s “Life of Fletcher,” p. 140.

For some time the father of John Fletcher was a general officer in the
French army, but, on his marriage, he retired from the service. Later in
life, he accepted a colonelcy in the militia of Switzerland.

John, his father’s youngest son, was born at Nyon, on September 12th,
1729. His birthplace was a fine old mansion, that had withstood the
storms of centuries, and, like many of the ancient houses in
Switzerland, was entered by a spiral stone staircase, which opened into
a spacious hall. “The house where I was born,” said Fletcher, “has one
of the finest prospects in the world. We have a shady wood, near the
lake, where I can ride in the cool all the day, and enjoy the singing of
a multitude of birds.” From one of the windows of Fletcher’s ancestral
home, there was a magnificent view of hill and dale, vineyards and
pastures, stretching right away to the distant Jura mountains. At a few
paces from the château, there was a terrace overlooking Lake Leman, with
its clear blue waters and its gracefully-curved and richly-wooded bays.
On the right hand, at a distance of fifteen miles, was Geneva, the
cradle of the Reformation; on the left, Lausanne and the celebrated
castle of Chillon. High up in the heavens were Alpine peaks, embosoming
scenes the most beautiful; and, not far away, was Mont Blanc, robed in
perpetual and unsullied snow.

Not much is known of the early life of Fletcher. A few anecdotes
concerning him have been preserved by his biographers, and these shall
be given in as brief a form as possible.

Wesley relates that Fletcher, “in his early childhood, had much of the
fear of God, and great tenderness of conscience.” One day, when he was
about seven years of age, his nurse, who had occasion to reprove him,
said, “You are a naughty boy. Do you not know that the devil is to take
away all naughty children?” The maid’s remark troubled him. He fell upon
his knees and began to pray, and did not cease till he believed God had
forgiven him.

His filial obedience was exemplary, but, on one occasion, he,
undesignedly, offended his mother, whom he dearly loved. The good lady
was speaking in too warm a manner to one of the family. Young Fletcher
turned a reproving eye upon her. She was much displeased with what she
conceived to be unfilial forwardness, and punished him. With a look of
tender affection, he meekly replied, “When I am smitten on one cheek,
and especially by a hand I love so well, I am taught to turn the other
also.” The mother’s indignation was instantly turned into admiration of
her boy.[3]

Footnote 3:

  Gilpin’s “Account of Fletcher.”

While yet a youth, he had several near escapes from an untimely death.
Once, when walking upon a high wall enclosing his father’s garden, his
foot slipped, and he must have been killed had he not fallen into “a
large quantity of fresh-made mortar.”

At another time, when swimming by himself in deep water, a strong
ribbon, which bound his hair, became loose, twisted about his leg, and
tied him “as it were neck and heels.” “I strove,” said he, “with all my
strength to disengage myself, but to no purpose. No person being within
call, I gave myself up for lost; but when I had ceased struggling, the
ribbon loosed itself.”

On another occasion, he and four other young gentlemen agreed to swim to
a rocky island, five miles from the shore. Young Fletcher and one of his
adventurous friends succeeded in reaching the island, but the cliff was
so steep and smooth that they found it impossible to scale its heights.
After swimming round the islet again and again, they concluded that
their being drowned was inevitable. Immediately after, however, they
discovered a place of safety; and, in due time, a boat arrived and took
them home. The other three, when only half way to the island, were
rescued by a boat just as they were sinking.

A still more remarkable deliverance from a watery grave was the
following: Fletcher was a practised swimmer, and once plunged into a
river broader than the Thames at London Bridge, and very rapid. “The
water was extremely rough, and poured along like a galloping horse.” He
endeavoured to swim against it, but in vain, and was hurried far from
home. When almost exhausted, he looked for a resting-place, feeling he
must either escape from the water or sink. With great difficulty, he
approached the shore, but found it “so ragged and sharp that he saw, if
he attempted to land there, he would be torn to pieces.” In his direful
plight, he recommenced swimming. “At last,” says he, “despairing of
life, I was cheered by the sight of a fine smooth creek, into which I
was swiftly carried by a violent stream. A building stood directly
across it, which I then did not know to be a powder-mill. The last thing
I can remember was the striking of my breast against one of the piles
whereon it stood. I then lost my senses, and knew nothing more till I
rose on the other side of the mill. When I came to myself, I was in a
calm, safe place, perfectly well, without any soreness or weariness at
all. Nothing was amiss but the distance of my clothes, the stream having
driven me five miles from the place where I left them. Many persons
gladly welcomed me on shore; one gentleman in particular, who said, ‘I
looked at my watch when you went under the mill, and again when you rose
on the other side, and the time of your being immerged among the piles
was exactly twenty minutes.’”

Fletcher passed the early part of his life at Nyon, where he began his
education. With his two brothers, he was then removed to the university
of Geneva, where he was distinguished equally by his superior abilities
and his uncommon diligence. The two first prizes for which he stood a
candidate he carried away from a number of competitors, several of whom
were nearly related to the professors. He allowed himself but little
time either for recreation, refreshment, or sleep. After confining
himself closely to his studies all day, he would frequently consume the
greater part of the night in making notes of what he had found in the
course of his reading worthy of observation.

After quitting Geneva, he was sent by his father to Lentzburg, in the
canton of Berne, where, besides pursuing his other studies, he acquired
the German language. On his return to Nyon, he studied Hebrew, and
improved his knowledge of mathematics.

From early childhood, Fletcher loved and served his Maker. He himself
relates: “I think it was when I was seven years of age, that I first
began to feel the love of God shed abroad in my heart, and that I
resolved to give myself up to Him, and to the service of His Church, if
ever I should be fit for it; but the corruption which is in the world,
and that which was in my own heart, soon weakened, if not erased, those
first characters which grace had written upon it.”

“From a child thou hast known the holy Scriptures,” wrote St. Paul to
Timothy. The same might have been said to Fletcher. His early
acquaintance with inspired truth guarded him, on the one hand, from the
snares of infidelity, and preserved him, on the other, from many of the
vices peculiar to youth. It also qualified and emboldened him to reprove
sin, and, with becoming modesty, to remonstrate with sinners. To
illustrate this, his biographers relate an incident which occurred when
he was only fourteen years of age. A lady and her three sons visited his
sister, Madame de Botens. The sons quarrelled, and the mother uttered a
hasty imprecation. Young Fletcher was shocked, and, instantly starting
from his chair, began to expound and enforce the apostolic admonition,
“Provoke not your children to wrath,” etc.; and then reminded his
astonished auditress that her imprecation might be realized; a
vaticination that soon became a fact; for, on the same day, the lady
embarked upon the lake, was overtaken with a tremendous storm, and was
brought to the point of perishing; and, soon after, two of her sons were
drowned; and the third was crushed to death at one of the gates of
Geneva.

Fletcher had wished to be a Christian minister, and his parents had
wished the same concerning him; but, soon after the occurrence just
related, his plans of life were entirely altered. He writes: “I went
through my studies with a design of entering into orders; but,
afterwards, upon serious reflection, feeling I was unequal to so great a
burden, and disgusted by the necessity I should be under to subscribe
the doctrine of predestination, I yielded to the desire of my friends,
who would have me go into the army.”[4]

Footnote 4:

  _Arminian Magazine_, 1794, p. 219.

The friends here mentioned did not include his parents, for they were
strongly opposed to his turning soldier; but now, nearly at the age of
twenty, his theological reading gave place to the studying of the works
of Cohorn and Vauban, the great military engineers. At this time,
Portugal was sending troops to Brazil, to defend its interests there.
Against the remonstrances of his parents, Fletcher went to Lisbon, there
gathered a company of his own countrymen, accepted a captain’s
commission, and engaged to serve the Portuguese on board a man-of-war,
which was preparing with all speed to sail to the Brazilian coasts.
Meanwhile, he wrote to his parents for a considerable sum of money, by
means of which he expected to make a small fortune in the country he was
about to visit. “They refused him roughly: unmoved by this, he
determined to go without the cash.” Whilst waiting, however, for the
ship to sail, the maid, attending him at breakfast, let the tea-kettle
fall upon his leg, and so scalded him, that he had to keep his bed.
“During that time,” says Wesley, “the ship sailed for Brazil; but it was
observed that the ship was heard of no more.”

Wesley continues: “How is this reconcileable with the account which has
been given of his piety when he was a child? Very easily: it only shows
that his piety declined while he was at the university. And this is too
often the case of other youths in our own universities.”

Fletcher returned to Nyon, but his military ardour was not abated; and,
being informed that his uncle, then a colonel in the Dutch service, had
procured a commission for him, he joyfully set out for Flanders. Here,
however, he was again defeated in his purpose to become a soldier. Peace
was concluded; his uncle died; his hopes were blasted; and the military
profession was abandoned.

This, in substance, is all that is known of Fletcher, until he came to
England, as Wesley says, in 1752.




                              CHAPTER II.
                   _FROM HIS COMING TO ENGLAND TO HIS
                              ORDINATION._
                             1752 to 1757.


AFTER the frustration of his hopes in Flanders, Fletcher, accompanied by
other young gentlemen, embarked for England, for the purpose of
acquiring the English language. At the Custom House in London they were
treated with the utmost surliness. Of course their portmanteaus were
examined,—never a pleasant operation, but sometimes less politely done
than at others. In addition to this, their letters of recommendation
were taken from them, on the alleged ground that “all letters must be
sent by post.” They went to an inn, where they encountered another
difficulty. Unable to speak English, they were at a loss how to exchange
their foreign into English money. Fletcher, going to the door, heard a
well-dressed Jew talking French. The difficulty was explained; and the
Jew replied, “Give me your money, and I will get it changed.” Fletcher,
without the least suspicion, handed the gentleman his purse, containing
£90. Telling his friends what he had done, they exclaimed, “Your money’s
gone.” His friends were wrong. Before breakfast was ended the honest Jew
returned, and gave to Fletcher the full amount in English coin.

To assist him in the acquisition of the English language, Fletcher had
been recommended to a Mr. Burchell, who kept a boarding-school at South
Mimms, a village about four miles from Hatfield, in Hertfordshire. He
was admitted into this establishment. Soon after, it was removed to
Hatfield, whither he also went. Here he remained with Mr. Burchell about
eighteen months, and pursued his studies with great diligence. He
frequently visited some of the first families in Hatfield; and, by his
easy and genteel behaviour, and his sweetness of temper, he gained the
affectionate esteem of all who knew him.

On leaving Mr. Burchell’s academy, Fletcher was recommended by Mr.
Dechamps, a French minister, to Thomas Hill, Esq., of Tern Hall, in
Shropshire, as tutor to his two sons.[5] It was whilst in the service of
this gentleman that Fletcher was converted. The following is an extract
from one of his letters to his brother Henry, at Nyon:—

  “The news of your promotion has given me great pleasure. I feel a
  sincere satisfaction in the diligence with which you devote yourself
  to the good of society, and that you prefer a life of labour to one of
  indolent and useless inactivity. We may be instruments of some good in
  any condition of human life, if we faithfully fulfil its duties; and
  the more difficult our station may prove to be, the more of
  satisfaction is likely to result from acquitting ourselves well in it.
  The ambition which springs from this principle has nothing censurable
  in it, provided that a view to the glory of God be its motive. I
  delight to think that the advancement of the Divine glory is your
  principal end; in which case, as your influence extends over the whole
  city, the good you do may be very great. You will find a thousand
  opportunities of glorifying God by your diligence, integrity, and
  disinterestedness. Endeavour to find or make occasions of this sort;
  seize on them eagerly, and shrink not from entering into the minutest
  details, when the object is to do good to the bodies or souls of your
  neighbours. Imitate, as far as circumstances will admit, the charity
  of Christ; who went about doing good, and disdained not to converse
  with the most wretched. I dwell on this the more particularly, because
  the vanity and pride which reign in our native town appear to me
  directly opposed to the spirit of charity. If you rise above these,
  you will conduct yourself as a Christian, whose sole object is to
  advance the glory of God; and who thinks little of the esteem of man,
  except as it may place him in a position to do more good in the world.

  “Your recreations, of which you have given me a brief sketch, are
  doubtless innocent, especially if they occupy no more of your time
  than a due attention to health, and the wants of our nature demand.
  Although you have often reproached me with being too austere, I am far
  from thinking that religion forbids the use of innocent recreations;
  because, being indifferent in themselves, they become useful when they
  are necessary for the relaxation of the body or the mind. I am not at
  all shocked at the tradition which informs us that St. John sometimes
  amused himself with a partridge which he had tamed. Happy are they
  who, as far as they are able, endeavour to turn their own recreations
  to the advantage of others, which may certainly, if not always, yet
  sometimes, be done. I sometimes polish shells with Mr. Hill, out of
  compliance with his wishes. This used formerly to put me in a bad
  humour, on account of the loss of time it occasioned. But I begin to
  find that pious thoughts may sanctify an occupation as insignificant
  as even this, and that a renouncing of one’s own will from compliance
  with that of others is not without its utility.

  “I am now going to reply to that part of your letter in which you
  testify your surprise at the change which has taken place in my manner
  of thinking, a change which appears to have struck you in the last
  letters which I wrote to my father. You cry out against the severity
  of the principles which I have laid down; and add that, without being
  a prophet, you boldly predict my giving way before long to enthusiasm
  and all manner of bodily austerities, led on by the principles I have
  assumed.

  “I am the less astonished, my dear brother, that you should thus
  speak, because it is the language of ninety-nine Christians of the
  present day out of every hundred, and because I myself for a long time
  thought like you on this point. In a certain sense, indeed, I always
  thought highly of religion, though at the bottom no one perhaps had
  less of it than I. My infancy was vicious, and my youth still more so.
  At eighteen I fell into what may properly be termed ‘enthusiasm;’ for
  though I lived in many habitual sins, yet because I was regularly
  present at public worship, not only on the Sunday, but during the
  week, I imagined myself religious. I made long prayers morning and
  evening, as well as frequently during the day. I devoted to the study
  of the prophecies, and to books of a religious character, all the time
  I could spare from my other studies.

  “My feelings were easily excited, but my heart was rarely affected,
  and I was destitute of a sincere love to God, and consequently to my
  neighbour. All my hopes of salvation rested on my prayers, devotions,
  and a certain habit of saying, ‘Lord, I am a great sinner; pardon me
  for the sake of Jesus Christ.’ In the meantime I was ignorant of the
  fall and ruin in which every man is involved, the necessity of a
  Redeemer, and the way by which we may be rescued from the fall by
  receiving Christ with a living faith. I should have been quite
  confounded if any one had asked me the following questions: ‘Do you
  know that you are dead in Adam? Do you live to yourself? Do you live
  in Christ and for Christ? Does God rule in your heart? Do you
  experience that peace of God which passeth all understanding? Is the
  love of God shed abroad in your heart by the Holy Spirit?’ I repeat
  it, my dear brother, these questions would have astonished and
  confounded me, as they must every one who relies on the form of
  religion, and neglects its power and influence.

  “My religion, alas! having a different foundation from that which is
  in Christ, was built merely on the sand; and no sooner did the winds
  and floods arise, than it tottered and fell to ruins. I formed an
  acquaintance with some Deists, at first with the design of converting
  them, and afterwards with the pretence of thoroughly examining their
  sentiments. But my heart, like that of Balaam, was not right with God.
  He abandoned me, and I enrolled myself in their party. A considerable
  change took place in my deportment. _Before_ I had a form of religion,
  and _now_ I lost it; but as to the state of my heart, it was precisely
  the same. I did not remain many weeks in this state; the Good Shepherd
  sought after me, a wandering sheep. Again I became professedly a
  Christian; that is, I resumed a regular attendance at church and the
  communion, and offered up frequent prayers in the name of Jesus
  Christ. There were also in my heart some sparks of true love to God,
  and some germs of genuine faith; but a connection with worldly
  characters, and an undue anxiety to promote my secular interests,
  prevented the growth of these Christian graces. Had I now been asked
  on what I founded my hopes of salvation, I should have replied, that I
  was not without some religion; that, so far from doing harm to any
  one, I wished well to all the world; that I resisted my passions; that
  I abstained from pleasures in which I had once indulged; and that if I
  was not so religious as some others, it was because such a degree of
  religion was unnecessary; that heaven might be obtained on easier
  terms; and that if I perished, the destruction of the generality of
  Christians was inevitable, which I could not believe was consistent
  with the mercy of God.

  “I was in this state of mind when a dream, which I could not but
  consider as a warning from God, aroused me from my security.”

Footnote 5:

  The elder of these sons died on coming of age; the younger became M.P.
  for Shrewsbury, and afterwards for Shropshire. In 1784, he took his
  seat in the House of Lords, as Baron Berwick. The title still exists.
  The old Tern Hall has long been called Attingham House.—Debrett’s
  “Peerage” and Wesley’s and Benson’s “Lives” of Fletcher.

At great length Fletcher here relates his dream respecting the final
judgment, and then continues:—

  “For some days, I was so dejected and harassed in mind as to be unable
  to apply myself to anything. While in this state, I attempted to copy
  some music, when a servant entered my chamber. Having noticed my
  employment, he said, ‘I am surprised, Sir, that you, who know so many
  things, should forget what day this is, and that you should not be
  aware that the Lord’s day should be sanctified in a very different
  manner.’

  “The sterling character of the man, his deep humility, his zeal for
  the glory of God, his love to his neighbours, and especially his
  patience, which enabled him to receive with joy the insults he met
  with from the whole family for Christ’s sake, and, above all, the
  secret energy which accompanied his words, deeply affected me, and
  convinced me more than ever of my real state. I was convinced, as it
  had been told me in my dream, that I was not renewed in the spirit of
  my mind, that I was not conformed to the image of God, and that
  without this the death of Christ would be of no avail for my
  salvation.”[6]

Footnote 6:

  The long letter from which the foregoing is extracted was first
  published in 1826, in a “Life of Fletcher” in the French language, and
  printed at Lausanne. In the same year, Mr. Benson printed it as an
  appendix to the ninth edition of his “Life of Fletcher.” In 1839, it
  was inserted in the _Wesleyan Methodist Magazine_. The extract is
  partly taken from Benson’s translation and partly from that in the
  magazine.

About this period of his history, Fletcher seems to have become
acquainted with the Methodists. Wesley says:—

  “I have heard two very different accounts of the manner wherein he had
  the first notice of the people called Methodists; but I think it
  reasonable to prefer to any other that which I received from his own
  mouth. This was as follows:—

  “When Mr. Hill went up to London to attend the Parliament, he took his
  family and Mr. Fletcher with him. While they stopped at St. Albans, he
  walked out into the town, and did not return till they were set out
  for London. A horse being left for him, he rode after, and overtook
  them in the evening. Mr. Hill asking him why he stayed behind, he
  said, ‘As I was walking, I met with a poor old woman, who talked so
  sweetly of Jesus Christ that I knew not how the time passed away.’ ‘I
  shall wonder,’ said Mrs. Hill, ‘if our tutor does not turn Methodist
  by-and-by.’ ‘Methodist, Madame!’ said he, ‘pray, what is that?’ She
  replied, ‘Why, the Methodists are a people that do nothing but pray;
  they are praying all day and all night.’ ‘Are they?’ said he; ‘then,
  by the help of God, I will find them out.’ He did find them out not
  long after, and was admitted into the society; and from this time,
  whenever he was in town, he met in Mr. Richard Edwards’s class. This
  he found so profitable to his soul that he lost no opportunity of
  meeting; and he retained a peculiar regard for Mr. Edwards till the
  day of his death.”[7]

Footnote 7:

  Wesley’s “Life of Fletcher,” p. 17.

It was not, however, in Mr. Edwards’s class that Fletcher found peace
with God. A few months after his decease, a 12 mo. pamphlet of
sixty-four pages was published by his widow, entitled “A Letter to Mons.
H. L. de la Fléchère, Assessor Ballival of Nyon, in the Canton of Berne,
Switzerland, on the Death of his Brother, the Reverend John William de
la Fléchère, Twenty-five Years Vicar of Madeley, Shropshire.” In that
letter it is stated, that, “from the time he heard the Methodists, he
became more and more conscious that some inward change was necessary to
make him happy. He now began to ‘strive with the utmost diligence
according to his light, hoping by _much doing_ to render himself
acceptable to God.’ But, one day, hearing a sermon preached by a
clergyman, whose name was Green, he was convinced he did not understand
the nature of _saving faith_. ‘Is it possible,’ said he, ‘that I who
have always been accounted so religious, who have made divinity my
study, and received the premium of piety (so called) from the university
for my writings on divine subjects,—is it possible that I am yet so
ignorant as not to know what faith is?’ But the more he examined, the
more he was convinced of the momentous truth. He now became sensible of
inbred sin, and sought, by the most rigorous austerities, to conquer an
evil nature; but the more he strove, the more he saw and felt that all
his soul was sin.”

Mrs. Fletcher continues the narrative of his conversion by giving the
following extract from his diary:—

  “1755. January 12.—I received the sacrament, though my heart was as
  hard as a flint. The following day, I felt the tyranny of sin more
  than ever, and an uncommon coldness in my religious duties. I felt the
  burden of my corruptions heavier than ever. The more I prayed for
  conquest over sin, the more I was conquered. The thoughts which
  engrossed my mind were generally these: I am undone. I have wandered
  from God. I have trampled under foot the frequent convictions God has
  been pleased to work upon my heart. Instead of going straight to
  Christ, I have lost my time in fighting against sin with the dim light
  of reason, and the use of the means of grace. I fear my notions of
  Christ are only speculative, and do not reach the heart. I _never had
  faith_, and without faith it is impossible to please God. Then every
  thought, word, and work of mine have only been sin and wickedness
  before God, though ever so specious before men. All my righteousness
  is as filthy rags. I am a very devil, though of an inferior sort, and
  if I am not renewed before I go hence, hell will be my portion to all
  eternity.

  “When I saw that all my endeavours availed nothing towards my
  conquering sin, I almost resolved to sin on, and to go at last to
  hell. But, I remember, there was a sort of sweetness even in the midst
  of this abominable thought. If I go to hell, said I, I will still love
  God there; and since I cannot be an instance of His mercy in heaven, I
  will be an instance of His justice among the devils; and if I put
  forth His glory one way or the other, I am content.

  “But I soon recovered the ground I had lost. Christ died for _all_,
  thought I; then He died for _me_; and, as I sincerely desire to be
  His, He will surely take me to Himself. He will surely let me know
  before I die that He died for me. But then, I thought, this may only
  be in my dying hour, and that is a long time to wait. But I answered
  thus: My Saviour was above thirty-three years working out my
  salvation; let me wait for Him as long, and then I may talk of
  impatience. Does God owe me anything? Is He bound to time and place?
  Do I deserve anything at His hands but damnation?

  “So I went on, sinning and repenting, and sinning again; but still
  calling on God’s mercy through Christ. I was now beat out of all my
  strongholds of pride. I felt my helplessness, and lay at the foot of
  the throne of grace. I cried, though _coldly_, yet I believe
  _sincerely_, ‘Lord, save me! Give me justifying faith in Thy blood!
  Cleanse me from my sins!’ I seldom went to private prayer, but I
  thought, ‘Perhaps this is the happy hour when I shall prevail with
  God;’ but still I was disappointed.

  “On Sunday, January 19, 1755, I heard an excellent sermon on, ‘Being
  justified by faith, we have peace with God, through our Lord Jesus
  Christ.’ I heard it attentively, but my heart was not moved. I was
  only more convinced that I was an unbeliever—that I was not justified
  by faith—and that I should never till then have peace with God. The
  hymn after the sermon suited the subject that had been treated of, but
  I could not join in singing it. I sat mourning, whilst others rejoiced
  in the Lord their Saviour.

  “The following day, I begged of God to show me all the wickedness of
  my heart, and to fit me for His mercy. I besought Him to increase my
  convictions, for I was afraid I did not _mourn_ enough for my sins.
  But I found relief in Mr. Wesley’s Journal, where I learned that we
  should not build on what we feel; but that we should go to Christ with
  all our sins and all our hardness of heart.

  “On January 21, I began to write a confession of my sins, misery, and
  helplessness, together with a resolution to seek Christ even unto
  death; but, my business calling me away, I had no heart to go on with
  it. In the evening, I read the Scriptures, and found a sort of
  pleasure in seeing a picture of my wickedness so exactly drawn in the
  third chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, and that of my condition
  in the seventh; and now I felt some hope that God would finish in me
  the work He had begun.

  “On Thursday, January 23, my fast-day, Satan beset me hard. I sinned
  grievously, and almost gave up all hope; I mourned deeply, but with a
  heart as hard as ever. I was on the brink of despair, and yet
  continued to fall into sin. In the evening, I went to my friend, Mr.
  B——, and told him something of my state. He strove to administer
  comfort, but it did not suit my light. When we parted, he gave me some
  advice which suited me better. ‘God,’ said he, ‘loves you, and if He
  denies you anything, it is for your good. You deserve nothing at His
  hands; wait then patiently for Him, and never give up your hope.’ I
  went home resolved to follow this advice, though I should stay till
  death.

  “I had proposed to meet the Lord the following Sunday at His table,
  and therefore looked out a sacramental hymn. I learned it by heart,
  and prayed it over many times, and then went to bed, commending myself
  to God with rather more hope and peace than I had felt for some time.
  But Satan waked while I slept. I thought I committed that night in my
  sleep grievous and abominable sins. I awoke amazed and confounded, and
  rising with a detestation of the corruption of my senses and
  imagination, I fell upon my knees, and prayed with more faith and less
  wanderings than usual, and afterwards set about my business with an
  uncommon cheerfulness. It was not long before I was tempted to fall
  into my besetting sin, but I found myself a new creature. My soul was
  not even ruffled. Having withstood two or three temptations, and
  feeling peace in my soul through the whole of them, I began to think
  it was the Lord’s doing. Afterwards it was suggested to me that it was
  great presumption for such a sinner to hope for such a mercy. I prayed
  I might not be permitted to fall into a delusion; but the more I
  prayed, the more I saw it was real; for though sin stirred all the day
  long, I always overcame it in the name of the Lord.

  “In the evening I read some of the experiences of God’s children, and
  found my case agreed with theirs, and suited the sermon I had heard on
  Justifying Faith. I called on the Lord for perseverance and an
  increase of faith, for still I felt some fear lest this should be all
  delusion. Having continued my supplication till near one in the
  morning, I then opened my Bible, and fell on these words, ‘Cast thy
  burden on the Lord, and He shall sustain thee. He will not suffer the
  righteous to be moved.’ Filled with joy, I fell again on my knees to
  beg of God that I might always cast my burden upon Him. I took up my
  Bible again, and fell on these words, ‘I will be with thee; I will not
  fail thee, neither forsake thee; fear not, neither be dismayed.’ My
  hope was now greatly increased, and I thought I saw myself conqueror
  over sin, hell, and all manner of affliction.

  “With this beautiful promise I shut my Bible, and as I shut it I cast
  my eye on the words, ‘Whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, I will do
  it.’ So having asked perseverance and grace to serve God till death, I
  went cheerfully to take my rest.”

Such is Fletcher’s own account of his conversion. His widow added the
following:—

  “I subjoin what I have heard him speak concerning this time. He still
  pleaded with the Lord to take a fuller possession of his heart, and to
  give a fuller manifestation of His love, till one day, when in earnest
  prayer, and lying prostrate on his face, he saw, with the eye of
  faith, our Saviour on the cross, and at the same time these words were
  spoken with power to his heart:—

                “‘Seiz’d by the rage of sinful men,
                I see Christ bound and bruis’d and slain;
                  ’Tis done, the Martyr dies!
                His life to ransom ours is given,
                And lo! the fiercest fire of heaven
                  Consumes the sacrifice.

                “‘He suffers both from men and God;
                He bears the universal load
                  Of guilt and misery!
                _He suffers to reverse our doom,
                And lo! my Lord is here become
                  The bread of life to me._’

  “Now all his bonds were broken. His freed soul began to breathe a
  purer air. Sin was beneath his feet. He could triumph in the Lord.
  From this time, he walked in the ways of God, and, thinking he had not
  leisure enough in the day, he made it a constant rule to sit up two
  whole nights in the week for reading, prayer, and meditation. At the
  same time, he lived on nothing but vegetables, and on bread with milk
  and water. One end of his doing this was to avoid dining in company.
  Besides sitting up two entire nights every week, his custom was never
  to sleep so long as he could keep awake, and he always took a candle
  and book with him to bed. One night, being overcome with sleep before
  he had put out his candle, he dreamed that his curtain, pillow, and
  cap were on fire, but went out without doing him any harm. And truly
  so it was, for in the morning his curtain was found burnt, also a
  corner of his pillow, and a part of his cap, but not a hair of his
  head was singed.

  “Some time after this, he was favoured with a further manifestation of
  the love of God, so powerful, that, he said, it appeared to him as if
  his body and soul would be separated. Now all his desires centred in
  one, that of devoting himself to the service of his precious Master,
  which he thought he could best do by entering into holy orders.”[8]

Footnote 8:

  Letter to Mons. H. L. de la Fléchère, 1786, p. 13.

To complete the accounts of Fletcher’s conversion, in 1755, an extract
from another letter must be added. In that year, writing to his brother,
he insisted on the vanity of earthly pursuits, and then gave the
following description of the change that had taken place in himself:—

  “I speak from experience. I have been successively deluded by all
  those desires, and sometimes I have been the sport of them all at
  once. This will appear incredible, except to those who have discovered
  that the heart of unregenerate man is nothing more than a chaos of
  obscurity and a mass of contradictions. If you have any acquaintance
  with yourself, you will readily subscribe to this description of the
  human heart. Every unconverted man must necessarily be either a
  _voluptuary_, a _worldly-minded person_, or a _pharisaical
  philosopher_: or, perhaps, like myself, he may be all of these at the
  same time; and, what is still more extraordinary, he may be so not
  only without _believing_, but even without once _suspecting_ it;
  indeed, nothing is more common among men than an entire blindness to
  their own real characters. How often have I placed my happiness in
  mere chimeras! How often have I grounded my vain hope upon imaginary
  foundations! I have been constantly employed in framing designs for my
  own felicity; but my disappointments have been as frequent and various
  as my projects.

  “If, hitherto, my dear brother, you have beguiled yourself with
  prospects of the same visionary nature, never expect to be more
  successful in your future pursuits. One labour will only succeed
  another, making way for continual discontent and chagrin. Open your
  heart, and there you will discover the source of that painful
  inquietude to which, by your own confession, you have been long a
  prey. Examine its secret recesses, and you will discover there
  sufficient proof of the following truths: ‘_The heart is deceitful
  above all things, and desperately wicked_;’ ‘_All have sinned, and
  come short of the glory of God_;’ ‘_The thoughts of man’s heart are
  only evil, and that continually_;’ ‘_The natural man understandeth not
  the things of the Spirit of God_.’ On the discovery of these and other
  important truths, you will be convinced that man is an apostate being,
  composed of a sensual, rebellious body, and a soul immersed in pride,
  self-love, and ignorance; nay more, you will perceive it a physical
  impossibility that man should ever become truly happy till he is cast,
  as it were, into a new mould, and created a second time.

  “For my own part, when I first began to know myself, I saw, I _felt_
  that man is an undefinable animal, partly of a bestial and partly of
  an infernal nature. The discovery shocked my self-love, and filled me
  with the utmost horror. I endeavoured for some time to throw a
  palliating disguise over the wretchedness of my condition, but the
  impression it had already made upon my heart was too deep to be
  erased. It was to no purpose that I reminded myself of the morality of
  my conduct; it was in vain that I recollected the many encomiums that
  had been passed upon my early piety and virtue; and it was to little
  avail that I sought to cast a mist before my eyes by reasonings like
  these: ‘If conversion implies a total change, who has been converted
  in these days? Why dost thou imagine thyself worse than thou really
  art? Thou art a believer in God and in Christ; thou art a Christian;
  thou hast injured no person; thou art neither a drunkard nor an
  adulterer; thou hast discharged thy duties not only in a general way,
  but with more than ordinary exactness; thou art a strict attendant at
  church; thou art accustomed to pray more regularly than others, and
  frequently with a good degree of fervour; make thyself perfectly easy;
  moreover, Jesus Christ has suffered for thy sins, and His merit will
  supply everything lacking on thy part.’

  “It was by reasonings of this nature that I endeavoured to conceal
  from myself the deplorable state of my heart; and I am ashamed, my
  dear brother, that I suffered myself so long to be deluded by the
  artifices of Satan. God Himself has invited me; a cloud of apostles,
  prophets, and martyrs have exhorted me; and my own conscience,
  animated by those sparks of grace which are latent in every heart, has
  urged me to enter in at the strait gate; but, notwithstanding all
  this, a subtle temper, a deluding world, and a deceived heart have
  constantly turned the balance, for above these twenty years, in favour
  of the broad way. I have passed the most lovely part of my life in the
  service of these tyrannical masters, and am ready to declare in the
  face of the universe that all my reward has consisted in disquietude
  and remorse. Happy had I listened to the earliest invitations of
  grace, and broken the iron yoke from off my neck.”[9]

Footnote 9:

  Gilpin’s Translation of “The Portrait of St. Paul.”

These extracts are long, but they are important. They contain all the
known facts connected with Fletcher’s conversion.

In writing to his brother, Fletcher remarked,—“At eighteen years of age,
I devoted as much time as I could spare to read the prophecies of the
Holy Bible;” and it is a curious fact that, in the year of his
conversion, he wrote a long letter to Wesley, in which he gave a
synopsis of the writings of “a great divine abroad,” who had “spent
fifty years in making himself perfectly master of the Oriental
languages, and in comparing and explaining the various predictions
scattered in the Old and New Testaments.” Fletcher was well acquainted
with this gentleman, and had many times conversed with him on the
subjects of his lifelong study. Substantially, the young man had adopted
the aged man’s views; and now, in a condensed form (filling, however,
nineteen octavo printed pages), he presented them to Wesley. At the
time, terrific wars were being waged, and, a month before the date of
Fletcher’s letter, the great earthquake at Lisbon had occurred. At such
seasons, devout men almost instinctively begin to study prophecies, and
hence no wonder that Fletcher now felt more than ordinarily interested
in what, “for some years, had often been the subject of his
meditations.” He believed that “the grand catastrophe of God’s drama
drew near apace,” and gave his reasons for such belief by referring
first to Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, “which is a rough sketch of the world’s
four universal revolutions;” secondly, to Daniel’s vision of the four
beasts; and thirdly, to Daniel’s vision of the ram and he-goat, and the
two thousand and three hundred days, at the end of which the “sanctuary”
was to “be cleansed.” Fletcher, by elaborate calculations, shows that
this cleansing was to take place between the years 1750 and 1770, and
the following extract will indicate what, in his opinion, the cleansing
meant:—

  “God is now working such a work as has not been seen since the
  Apostles’ days. He has sent some chosen servants of His, both in these
  kingdoms and abroad, who, by the manifest assistance of the Holy
  Spirit, have removed the filthy doctrine of justification by works,
  and the outward Christless performance of moral duties, which pollute
  the sanctuary and make it an abomination to the Lord. The Holy Ghost
  is given, and the love of God is shed abroad in the hearts of
  believers as in the days of old. I own that the cleansing is but
  begun; but this revolution[10] may, in all probability, be the
  forerunner of a greater. God has called; a few have obeyed His call.
  The generality still shut their eyes and ears against the tender
  invitations of their Lord, and continue to pollute the sanctuary and
  to look on the blood of the Lamb as an unholy thing. Shall not God
  carry on His work? Shall the creature still resist the Creator? and
  the arm of flesh be stronger than the living God? Not so. He will not
  always strive with obdurate hearts. What the gentle breathings of His
  Spirit cannot perform, He will do by war, sword and fire, plague and
  famine, tribulation and anguish. He is going to gird on His sword, and
  His right hand shall teach Him terrible things. Nations refuse the
  sceptre of His mercy; what remains, then, but to rule them with an
  iron sceptre, and break them in pieces like a potter’s vessel?”

Footnote 10:

  Meaning the war then raging.

Fletcher concludes by arguing in favour of the doctrine, that, long
before the general judgment Christ will appear on earth a second time to
work out His great redeeming purposes.

  “Give me leave, Rev. Sir,” says he, “to propose to you a thing that
  many will look upon as a great paradox, but has yet sufficient ground
  in Scripture to raise the expectation of every Christian who sincerely
  looks for the coming of our Lord; I mean the great probability that,
  in the midst of this grand revolution, our Lord Jesus will suddenly
  come down from heaven, and go Himself conquering and to conquer; for
  what but the greatest prejudice can induce Christians to think that
  the coming of our Lord, spoken of in so plain terms by three
  evangelists, is His last coming before the universal judgment and the
  end of the world?”[11]

Footnote 11:

  _Arminian Magazine_, 1793, p. 411.

There cannot be a doubt that, at this period of his life, Fletcher was
what is commonly called a Millenarian. Whether his views were right or
wrong, the reader must determine for himself.

When resident at Tern Hall, Fletcher attended the parish church at
Atcham, a small village about five miles from Shrewsbury. Here the Rev.
Mr. Cartwright was the officiating minister,[12] and was accustomed to
catechise in public the children of his parishioners. On one occasion,
he invited the adults who needed instruction to appear in the ranks of
the catechumens, and told them that to do so would be no disgrace to
them. All, however, except Fletcher, either thought that to stand among
the young people would disgrace them, or that further instruction in
their case was not needed. The accomplished young scholar from
Switzerland, the tutor of the two sons of their county member, had a
lower opinion of his excellences than the village peasants had of
theirs; for, leaving his seat with an air of unaffected modesty, he took
his place among the children, and became a catechumen of the village
pastor.[13]

Footnote 12:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher,” 2nd edit., p. 366.

Footnote 13:

  Gilpin’s note, in “Portrait of St. Paul.”

At Atcham, Fletcher became acquainted with Mr. Vaughan, an excise
officer, who gave to Wesley the following account of his deeply-revered
friend:—

  “It was our ordinary custom, when the church service was over, to
  retire into the most lonely fields or meadows, where we frequently
  either kneeled down, or prostrated ourselves on the ground. At those
  happy seasons, I was a witness of such pleadings and wrestlings with
  God, such exercises of faith and love, as I have not known in any one
  ever since. The consolations, which we then received from God, induced
  us to appoint two or three nights in a week, when we duly met, after
  his pupils were asleep. We met also constantly on Sunday, between four
  and five in the morning. Sometimes I stepped into his study on other
  days. I rarely saw any book before him, besides the _Bible_ and the
  _Christian Pattern_.”

  “Our interviews for singing and conversation were seldom concluded
  without prayer, in which we were frequently joined by her who is now
  my wife (then a servant in the family), and by a poor widow in the
  village, who had known the power of God unto salvation, and who died
  some years ago, praising God with her latest breath. These were the
  only persons in the village whom he chose for his familiar friends;
  but he sometimes walked to Shrewsbury, to see Mrs. Glynne or Mr.
  Appleton. He also visited the poor in the neighbourhood who were sick;
  and, when no other person could be procured, performed even the
  meanest offices for them.”

Besides the godly friends mentioned in this interesting statement,
Fletcher had another acquaintance at Atcham, whom he visited to be
instructed in singing. This gentleman supplied Wesley with what
follows:—

  “I remember but little of that man of God, Mr. Fletcher, it being
  above nine-and-twenty years since I last saw him; but this I well
  remember, his conversation with me was always sweet and savoury. He
  was too wise to suffer any of his precious moments to be trifled away.
  When company dined at Mr. Hill’s, he frequently retired into the
  garden, and contentedly dined on a piece of bread and a few bunches of
  currants. Indeed, in his whole manner of living he was a pattern of
  abstemiousness. Meantime, how great was his sweetness of temper and
  heavenly-mindedness! I never saw it equalled in any one. How often,
  when I parted with him at Tern Hall, have his eyes and hands been
  lifted up to heaven, to implore a blessing upon me, with fervour and
  devoutness unequalled by any I ever witnessed. I firmly believe he has
  not left in this land, or perhaps in any other, one luminary like
  himself.”[14]

Footnote 14:

  Wesley’s “Life of Fletcher.”

These glimpses of Fletcher, at this early period of his life, are too
valuable and important to be omitted.

It is impossible to determine the exact date when he joined the
Methodist Society in London, but there can be no doubt that it was as
early as the year 1756, and probably a year or two earlier. Hence the
following extract from a letter addressed to Mr. Richard Edwards, the
leader of the London class in which Fletcher had been enrolled a
member:—

                                          “TERN, _October 19, 1756_.

  “DEAREST BROTHER,—This is to let you know that I am very well in body
  and pretty well in soul; but I have very few friends here, and God has
  been pleased to take away the chief of those few by a most comfortable
  death. My aged father also is gone the way of all flesh. For some
  years, I have written to him with as much freedom as I could have done
  to a son, though not with so much effect as I wished. But, last
  spring, God visited him with a severe illness, which brought him to a
  sense of himself; and, after a deep repentance, he died about a month
  ago, in the full assurance of faith.”[15]

Footnote 15:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

Fletcher, at Geneva, had refused to enter the Christian ministry; now he
entertained the most serious thoughts of devoting himself to it; but
before doing so he wrote to Wesley, with whom he had become acquainted.

                                         “TERN, _November 24, 1756_.

  “REV. SIR,—As I look on you as my spiritual guide, and cannot doubt of
  your patience to hear, and your experience to answer, a serious
  question proposed by any of your people, I freely lay my case before
  you.

  “Since the first time I began to feel the love of God shed abroad in
  my heart, which was, I think, when seven years of age, I resolved to
  give myself up to Him and the service of His Church, if ever I was fit
  for it; but the corruption which is in the world, and that which was
  in my heart, soon weakened, if not erased, those first characters that
  grace had wrote upon it. However, I went through my studies with a
  design of going into Orders; but afterwards, upon serious reflection,
  feeling I was unequal for so great a burden, and disgusted by the
  necessity I should be under to subscribe to the doctrine of
  predestination, I yielded to the desire of my friends, who would have
  me go into the army. But just before I was quite engaged in a military
  employment, I met with such disappointments as occasioned my coming to
  England. Here I was called outwardly three times to go into Orders;
  but, upon praying to God that if those calls were not from Him they
  might come to nothing, something always blasted the designs of my
  friends; and in this I have often admired the goodness of God, who
  prevented me rushing into that important employment, as the horse does
  into the battle. I never was more thankful for this favour than since
  I heard the Gospel preached in its purity. Before, I had been afraid;
  but then I trembled to meddle with holy things, and resolved to work
  out my salvation privately, without engaging in a way of life which
  required so much more grace and gifts than I possessed. Yet, from time
  to time, I felt warm and strong desires to cast myself and all my
  inability upon the Lord, if I should be called again, knowing that He
  could help me, and show His strength in my weakness; and these desires
  were increased by some little success that attended my exhortations
  and letters to my friends.

  “I think it necessary to let you know, Sir, that my patron often
  desired me to take Orders, and said he would soon help me to a living;
  to which I coldly answered, I was not fit, and that besides I did not
  know how to get a title. The thing was in that state when, about six
  weeks ago, a gentleman I hardly knew offered me a living, which, in
  all probability, will be vacant very soon; and a clergyman, that I
  never spoke to, gave me, of his own accord, the title of curate to one
  of his livings. Now, Sir, the question which I beg you to decide is,
  whether I must and can make use of that title to get into Orders? For
  with respect to the living, were it vacant, I have no mind to it,
  because I think I could preach with more fruit in my own country and
  in my own tongue.

  “I am in suspense; on one side, my heart tells me I must try, and it
  tells me so whenever I feel any degree of the love of God and man;
  but, on the other, when I examine whether I am fit for it, I so
  plainly see my want of gifts, and especially of that _soul_ of all the
  labours of a minister of the Gospel—_love_, _continual, universal,
  flaming love_, that my confidence disappears; I accuse myself of pride
  to dare to entertain the desire of supporting the ark of the Lord, and
  conclude that an extraordinary punishment will sooner or later
  overtake my rashness. As I am in both these frames successively, I
  must own, Sir, I do not see plainly which of the two ways before me I
  can take with safety, and I shall be glad to be ruled by you, because
  I trust God will direct you in giving me the advice you think will
  best conduce to His glory, the _only_ thing I would have in view in
  this affair. I know how precious is your time; I desire no long
  answer;—_persist_ or _forbear_ will satisfy and influence, Sir, your
  unworthy servant,

                                                  “J. FLETCHER.”[16]

Footnote 16:

  “Thirteen Original Letters, written by the late Rev. John Fletcher.
  Bath, 1791,” 12mo, p. 3.

Wesley’s answer to this important letter has not been preserved. Perhaps
no letter was written. Wesley was now in London. Parliament met eight
days after Fletcher wrote to him. Public affairs were in a critical
condition, and, no doubt, Mr. Hill would feel it a duty to be present at
the opening of the session. When he came to London to fulfil his
parliamentary duties, it was his custom to bring his sons and their
tutor with him. That Fletcher was now in London is evident from the
following letter, addressed to Wesley within three weeks after the date
of his former one. Of course, he would have an interview with Wesley as
early as possible, and in all likelihood Wesley, at this interview, not
only advised him to be ordained, but likewise dissuaded him from his
purpose to return to Switzerland. There is no reference in the letter to
Fletcher’s proposed ordination, for, doubtless, that was a matter
already settled. Fletcher had been attending sacramental services in
Wesley’s London chapels; and it had occurred to him that these services
might be much improved, and Wesley himself considerably relieved. To say
the least, the letter is full of interest, and contains a hint which, in
large societies, might be profitably adopted.

                                               “_December 13, 1756._

  “SIR,—When I have received the sacrament in your chapels, though I
  admired the order and decency with which that awful part of the divine
  worship was performed, I thought there was something wanting, which
  might make it still more profitable and solemn.

  “As the number of communicants is generally very great, the time spent
  in receiving is long enough for many, I am afraid, to feel their
  devotion languish, and their desires grow cold, for want of outward
  fuel. In order to prevent this, you interrupt, from time to time, the
  service of the table, to put up a short prayer, or to sing a verse or
  two of a hymn; and I do not doubt but many have found the benefit of
  that method. But, as you can spare very little time, you are obliged
  to be satisfied with scattering those few drops, instead of a
  continual rain. Would not that want be easily supplied, Sir, if you
  were to appoint the preachers who may be present to do what you cannot
  possibly do yourself, to pray and sing without interruption, as at a
  watchnight?

  “This would have several good effects: 1. Experience, as well as the
  nature of the thing itself, shows every sincere seeker that, as it is
  the fittest time to ask, and the most ordinary to receive grace, every
  moment ought to be improved to the best advantage. 2. Continual
  praying and singing would prevent the wanderings of many, who are not
  convinced of sin deeply enough, or influenced by grace strongly
  enough, to mourn and pray without interruption, if they are left to
  themselves. 3. It would increase the earnestness of believers; for
  though every one wrestles probably in his own heart both for himself
  and the congregation, yet their prayers would certainly have more
  power if united, and the general fire would increase the warmth of
  their affections. 4. In praying frequently for universal love, as the
  remembrance of Christ’s bleeding love naturally directs us to do, you
  would add for many the benefit and comfort of a lovefeast to the
  advantages that attend the Holy Eucharist. 5. If the prayers were
  especially calculated for those that receive, is it not probable, Sir,
  that they would be extremely encouraged to act faith, to touch the hem
  of Christ’s garment, to cast their burden upon Him, and to lay hold of
  eternal life, if they heard their weak petitions supported by the
  fervent prayers of their brethren, at the same time that they feed, or
  are going to feed, on the blessed signs of Christ’s body and blood?

  “It may be objected:—1. That some may prefer to pour out their souls
  before God according to their different frames, whether it be
  deadness, desertion, joy, overflowings of humility, repentance, love,
  etc. And so they might; but I do not see how general prayer and
  singing would rob them of that liberty, if they thought it more
  acceptable to God and beneficial to themselves; and their praying in
  private would not hinder the bulk of the congregation from uniting
  with joy in the public service. 2. That this method might bring in a
  confusion greater than the advantages it seems to be attended with.
  But could not prudence obviate this? I am sure it could; for I have
  seen that, or something like it, performed in a congregation of a
  thousand communicants without the least confusion, and to the great
  edification and comfort of many.

  “But you are the best judge, Sir; and if I take the liberty of giving
  you this hint, to make of it what use you think fit, it is because you
  said lately in the Society that you heard willingly the observations
  of your people, and were ready to follow or improve them if they were
  just and reasonable.

                              “I am, Sir, your unworthy servant,
                                                “JOHN FLETCHER.”[17]

Footnote 17:

  _Methodist Magazine_, 1798, p. 93.

Within three months after this, Fletcher was ordained. On Sunday, March
6, 1757, he received deacon’s orders from the Bishop of Hereford; and
priest’s orders on the Sunday following from the Bishop of Bangor, in
the Chapel Royal at St. James’s.[18]

Footnote 18:

  Gilpin’s “Portrait of St. Paul.”

On the day he was ordained priest, he hastened to Snowsfields Chapel, to
assist Wesley in one of those heavy sacramental services referred to in
the foregoing letter. Wesley writes:—

  “1757, Sunday, March 13. Finding myself weak at Snowsfields, I prayed
  (if He saw good) that God would send me help at the chapel, and I had
  it. As soon as I had done preaching, Mr. Fletcher came, who had just
  been ordained priest, and hastened to the chapel on purpose to assist
  me in the administration of the Lord’s supper, as he supposed me to be
  alone.

  “Sunday, March 20. Mr. Fletcher helped me again. How wonderful are the
  ways of God! When my bodily strength failed, and none in England were
  able and willing to assist me, He sent me help from the mountains of
  Switzerland, and an helpmeet for me in every respect; where could I
  have found such another?”[19]

Footnote 19:

  Wesley’s “Works,” vol. ii., p. 376; and vol. vii., p. 415.

Thus did Fletcher begin his remarkable ministerial life in a Methodist
meeting-house.




                              CHAPTER III.
                 _FROM HIS ORDINATION TO HIS SETTLEMENT
                              AT MADELEY._

                             1757 TO 1760.


FOR three years after his ordination, Fletcher was without a Church
appointment. How did he spend this interval? Wesley says:—

  “He was now doubly diligent in preaching, not only in the chapels at
  West Street and Spitalfields, but wherever the providence of God
  opened a door to proclaim the everlasting Gospel. This he did
  frequently in French (as well as in English), of which all judges
  allowed him to be a complete master.”[20]

Footnote 20:

  Wesley’s “Works,” vol. vii., p. 415.

As might be expected, Fletcher soon became a great favourite among the
first Methodists. Almost at once, he was the highly esteemed friend of
Miss Bosanquet (his future wife), Ann Tripp, Sarah Crosby, Sarah
Ryan,[21] Thomas Walsh, and others, whose Methodistic fame will never
perish. After his death, in 1785, Mrs. Crosby wrote:—

  “It is now eight or nine and twenty years since I was first favoured
  with Mr. Fletcher’s heavenly conversation, in company with Mr. Walsh
  and a few other friends, most of whom are now in the world of spirits.
  At these seasons, how frequently did we feel—

                ‘The o’erwhelming power of saving grace!’

  How frequently were we silenced thereby, while tears of love our souls
  o’erflowed! It affects me while I recollect the humility, fervour of
  spirit, and strength of faith with which dear Mr. Fletcher so often
  poured out his soul before the Great Three One, at whose feet we have
  lain in holy shame and silence, till earth seemed turned to heaven. I
  heard this heavenly-minded servant of the Lord preach his first sermon
  in West Street chapel. I think his text was, ‘_Repent, for the kingdom
  of heaven is at hand._’ His spirit appeared in his whole attitude and
  action. He could not well find words in the English language to
  express himself; but he supplied that defect by offering up prayers,
  tears, and sighs. Nearly about this time he saw Miss Bosanquet, and
  began his acquaintance with her; but, although they highly esteemed
  each other, they had no correspondence for above twenty years.”[22]

Footnote 21:

  Tyerman’s “Life of Wesley,” vol. ii., pp. 286, 289.

Footnote 22:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher,” 2 edit., p. 320.

Fletcher still continued to be the tutor of the sons of Mr. Hill. During
the sitting of Parliament, he was in London; the remainder of the year
was chiefly spent at Tern Hall.[23] Whilst at the latter place, he
preached, on June 19, 1757, for the first time in the church at Atcham,
taking as his text, “_Ye adulterers and adultresses, know ye not that
the friendship of the world is enmity against God?_” “A very bold
beginning,” wrote his friend Mr. Vaughan. “The congregation stood
amazed, and gazed upon him as if he had been a monster; but to me he
appeared as a messenger sent from heaven. It was not soon that he was
invited again to preach in Atcham church, but he was invited to preach
in others; first in Wroxeter, and afterwards at the Abbey Church in
Shrewsbury;[24] but I doubt whether he preached more than six times in
the six months he stayed in the country. On my saying I wished he had
more opportunities of preaching, he answered, ‘The will of God be done;
I am in His hands. If He does not call me to so much public duty, I have
the more time for study, prayer, and praise.’”[25]

Footnote 23:

  Wesley’s “Life of Fletcher.”

Footnote 24:

  Benson says, “He also preached twice in St. Alkmond’s Church in
  Shrewsbury.”

Footnote 25:

  Wesley’s “Life of Fletcher.”

In the month of May, 1757, Wesley was in the north of England and
Fletcher was in London. The following letter to Wesley needs no further
introduction:—

                                            “LONDON, _May 26, 1757_.

  “REV. SIR,—If I did not write to you before Mrs. Wesley had asked me,
  it was not that I wanted a remembrancer within, but rather an
  encourager without. There is generally upon my heart such a sense of
  my unworthiness, that sometimes I dare hardly open my mouth before a
  child of God, and think it an unspeakable honour to stand before one
  who has recovered something of the image of God, or sincerely seeks
  after it. Is it possible that such a sinful worm as I should have the
  privilege to converse with one whose soul is besprinkled with the
  blood of my Lord? The thought amazes, confounds me, and fills my eyes
  with tears of humble joy. Judge, then, at what distance I must see
  myself from you if I am so much below the least of your children; and
  whether a remembrancer within suffices to make me presume to write to
  you, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear.

  “I rejoice that you find everywhere an increase of praying souls. I
  doubt not that the prayer of the just has great power with God, but I
  cannot believe that it should hinder the fulfilling of Christ’s
  gracious promises to His Church. He must, and certainly will, come at
  the time appointed, for He is not slack, as some men count slackness;
  and, although He would have all come to repentance, He has not
  forgotten to be true and just. Only He will come with more mercy, and
  will increase the light that shall be at eventide, according to His
  promise in Zech. xiv. 7. I should rather think that the visions are
  not yet plainly disclosed, and that the day and year in which the Lord
  will begin to make bare His arm openly, are still concealed from us.

  “I must say concerning Mr. Walsh,[26] as he once said to me concerning
  God, ‘I wish I could attend him everywhere, as Elisha attended
  Elijah.’ But since the will of God calls me from him, I must submit,
  and drink the cup prepared for me. I have not seen him, unless for a
  few moments three or four times before divine service. We must meet at
  the throne of grace, or meet but seldom. Oh when will the communion of
  saints be complete? Lord, hasten the time, and let me have a place
  among them who love Thee, and love one another in sincerity!

  “I set out in two days for the country. Oh may I be faithful;
  harmless, like a dove; wise, like a serpent; and bold, as a lion, for
  the common cause! O Lord, do not forsake me! Stand by the weakest of
  Thy servants, and enable Thy children to bear with me and to wrestle
  with Thee on my behalf!

  “Oh bear with me, dear Sir, and give me your blessing every day, and
  the Lord will return to you sevenfold.

           “I am, Rev. Sir, your unworthy servant, J. FLETCHER.”[27]

Footnote 26:

  Thomas Walsh, one of the most remarkable of Wesley’s Itinerants. To
  say nothing of his piety and usefulness, Wesley declared him to be the
  best Hebrew scholar he had ever met. He died two years after the date
  of Fletcher’s letter.

Footnote 27:

  “Thirteen Original Letters, written by the Rev. J. Fletcher, 1791,” p.
  8.

There is no need to dwell on Fletcher’s humbleness, as displayed in this
letter, for that was _one_ of his chief characteristics to the end of
life. It may be added, however, that the letter furnishes fresh proof
that Fletcher was one of the godly few who were expecting the speedy
appearance of the incarnate and glorified Redeemer. It is probable that
his letter to Wesley on prophecy had led Wesley to advert to the same
subject, and that this was Fletcher’s answer to one of Wesley’s
critiques.

Three weeks after the date of this letter, Fletcher preached his first
sermon in _a church_. This was at Atcham, on June 19, as already stated.
As in the case of Wesley, churches, however, were soon closed against
him. To his friend and class-leader, Mr. Edwards, of London, he wrote:—

  “I thank you for your encouraging observations. I want them, and use
  them by the grace of God. When I received yours, I had not had one
  opportunity of preaching; so incensed were all the clergy against me.
  One, however, let me have the use of his church—the Abbey Church at
  Shrewsbury. I preached in the forenoon with some degree of the
  demonstration of the Spirit. The congregation was very numerous, and I
  believe one half, at least, desired to hear me again. But the minister
  would not let me have the pulpit any more. The next Sunday, the
  minister of a neighbouring parish lying a-dying, I was sent for to
  officiate for him. He died a few days after, and the chief man in the
  parish offered to make interest that I might succeed him; but I could
  not consent. The next Sunday I preached at Shrewsbury again, but in
  another church. The next day I set out for Bristol, and was much
  refreshed among the brethren. As I returned, I called at New
  Kingswood, about sixteen miles from Bristol. The minister offering me
  his church, I preached to a numerous congregation, gathered on half an
  hour’s notice. I think the seed then sown will not be lost.”[28]

Footnote 28:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher,” 2nd edit., p. 38.

Early in the year 1758, Wesley introduced Fletcher to the Countess of
Huntingdon. Her ladyship wrote:—

  “1758, March 19. I have seen Mr. Fletcher, and was both pleased and
  refreshed by the interview. He was accompanied by Mr. Wesley, who had
  frequently mentioned him in terms of high commendation, as had Mr.
  Whitefield, Mr. Charles Wesley, and others, so that I was anxious to
  become acquainted with one so devoted, and who appears to glory in
  nothing, save in the cross of our Divine Lord and Master. Hearing that
  he preached in French, his native language, I mentioned the case of
  the French prisoners at Tunbridge. May the Lord of the harvest bless
  his word, and send forth many such faithful ambassadors!”[29]

Footnote 29:

  “Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon,” vol. i., p. 231.

Fletcher was becoming famous. Already, in his twenty-ninth year, he had
gained the love and admiration of the Wesley brothers, of Whitefield,
and of the Methodist great “elect lady.” At her request, Fletcher hied
away to Tunbridge, and preached to a congregation of prisoners on their
parole, who were so deeply affected by the truth, which many of them had
not heard before, that they earnestly requested he would preach to them
every Sunday. They proceeded even further, for they signed and sent a
petition to Sherlock, Bishop of London, begging him to allow Fletcher to
officiate as their weekly chaplain. Strangely enough, notwithstanding
Sherlock’s high repute for piety, he peremptorily rejected the
prisoners’ petition. Wesley says: “If I had known this at the time, King
George should have known it, and I believe he would have given the
Bishop little thanks.”[30]

Footnote 30:

  Wesley’s “Life of Fletcher.”

Fletcher, as usual, continued in London with his pupils until the
prorogation of Parliament, when Mr. Hill and his family returned to
their country home. The journey to Shropshire was made in the family
coach; but, unfortunately, Mr. Hill commenced it on the Sabbath-day.[31]
This was a trial to Fletcher. Hence the following letter to Charles
Wesley:—

                                              “TERN, _June 6, 1758_.

  “REV. AND DEAR SIR,—Before I took my leave of you, the Sunday I set
  out, and indeed almost all the time I was at the communion table, I
  felt some degree of condemnation, as if, by setting out on that day, I
  profaned the Sabbath, and the Lord’s supper; whereupon those words
  came strongly to my mind, ‘Therefore many among you are sick and weak,
  and some are dead.’ I immediately found myself out of order, and had
  much ado to reach home after the service was over. Till the horses
  were at the door, I thought I should not be able to go; but found
  myself then a little strengthened. The next day, I was much worse, and
  they were obliged to make room for me in the coach. The day after, I
  was still worse, and really thought it would be my last. About noon,
  while the family was at dinner, I collected what little strength I had
  left; and, falling prostrate before the Lord, I besought Him not to
  cut me off among heathens, but to grant me the favour of comforting
  and being comforted by some Christian at my death. This request, so
  contrary to true resignation, I think reached the ear of the Lord. He
  rebuked the rage of the fever, and sensibly filled my soul with all
  peace in believing; so that I saw I was yet for the land of the
  living. Nay, a few hours after, I found myself as well as ever; and so
  I continue now by God’s grace.

  “What have I to do but to make good use of the health and leisure I
  have in this retreat? I see my duty, and I form resolutions; but,
  alas! I carry with me a wicked heart, which enters not into these
  projects; and Satan is never more assiduous and eager to injure us
  than in retirement. I feel, however, by the grace of God, determined
  to sustain all the attacks of the flesh and of the devil, and to seize
  the kingdom of heaven by force. The Lord has been particularly
  gracious to me, in putting it into my heart to pray for the brethren.
  I have experienced more power and more pleasure in this duty of
  intercession than I have ever done. You will rightly judge that you
  are not forgotten in these poor prayers; and I hope that you also
  sometimes remember me.

  “I hope you have overcome the scruple which prevented you from giving
  Mr. Maxfield full liberty to labour for the Lord among us.[32] The
  interest of the brethren, and no other motive, makes me desire it.

  “I shall not see you in Bristol;[33] the journey of my pupils not
  taking place at the time expected. May the Lord be with you more and
  more in your labours and in your devotions! Farewell!

                                                “JOHN FLETCHER.”[34]

Footnote 31:

  Wesley himself not infrequently set out on his long journey to the
  north on Sunday.

Footnote 32:

  It is difficult to determine what is meant by this; most likely
  Fletcher wished Thomas Maxfield to preach in the neighbourhood of Tern
  Hall. Five years afterwards, Maxfield left Wesley, and became an
  ordained clergyman of the Church of England.

Footnote 33:

  Wesley’s Annual Conference was held in Bristol, in August, 1758.

Footnote 34:

  Fletcher’s “Works,” vol. viii., p. 154.

At this period, Sarah Ryan, with whom Fletcher had become acquainted,
was acting as the housekeeper in Wesley’s “New Room” at Bristol.[35] To
her Fletcher addressed the following hitherto unpublished letter:—

                                          “TERN, _October 12, 1758_.

  “MY SISTER,—Where shall I begin the sad account I must give you of my
  numberless infidelities from the time I left you? That very day,
  having been called to preach in a church on our way, the freedom with
  which the Lord enabled me to do it puffed me up in some measure. The
  clear sight of the prize of my high calling was clouded, and so it
  remained till I got home, when it pleased God to revive my hope full
  of immortality, and to enable me to hunger and thirst after the
  everlasting righteousness that shall be brought into the souls of
  those in whom faith shall have its perfect work. During a few days, I
  rejoiced because of the power I had over the sin that most easily
  beset me,—I mean drowsiness; but, alas! my triumph was but short; for,
  if the enemy did not come in at this door, another, no less effectual,
  was opened to him. Just as I was going to resume my daily course of
  business, I was called to preach in a church at Salop, and was obliged
  to compose a sermon in the moments I should have spent in prayer.
  Hurry and the want of a single eye again drew a veil between the prize
  and my soul. In the meantime, Sunday came, and God rejected my impure
  service, and abhorred the labour of my polluted soul; and, while
  others imputed my not preaching to the fear of the minister who had
  invited me to his pulpit, and to the threatenings of a mob, I saw the
  wisdom and holiness of God, and rejoiced in that providence which does
  all without the assistance of hurrying Uzzah.

  “In general, I find I am surrounded with thousands of temptations, so
  much the more dangerous because they are disguised under the
  appearance of duties. I find, at times, such an alienation to
  religious duties as makes me almost question whether I have a grain of
  living faith. I think God has, this morning, shown me, in a clearer
  light than ever, that I must begin to hang upon frames no more, but
  learn to stand by a naked faith.

                                          “Your unworthy brother,
                                                       “J. FLETCHER.

  “P.S.—Direct to John Fletcher, under cover to Thomas Hill, Esq., M.P.,
  at Tern, near Shrewsbury.

            “To Mrs. Ryan,
  “At the New Room in the Horse Fair,
              “Bristol.”

Footnote 35:

  Previous to becoming Wesley’s housekeeper, Sarah Ryan, Mary Clarke,
  and Sarah Crosby lived together, in a small house in Christopher
  Alley, Moorfields. It was here that Miss Bosanquet (afterwards
  Fletcher’s wife) formed an acquaintance with Sarah Ryan, in 1757. (See
  “Life of Mrs. Fletcher,” by Henry Moore, pp. 17–20.)

Thus did these earnest first Methodists watch over themselves with a
godly jealousy; and thus, in addition to the Christian fellowship in
their weekly class-meetings, did they tell their religious experience to
each other in epistolary correspondence. To this fact, pre-eminently,
Methodism is indebted for its rich biographies.

Immediately after the date of the above letter, Fletcher must have set
out for Bristol, for Wesley writes:—

  “In the following week” (the third week in October), “I met Mr.
  Fletcher, and the other preachers that were in the house at Bristol,
  and spent a considerable time in close conversation on the head of
  Christian Perfection. I afterwards wrote down the general propositions
  wherein we all agreed.”[36]

Footnote 36:

  Wesley’s Journal.

No doubt, these propositions were substantially the same as those which
Wesley, two months before, had presented to his Annual Conference, and
which were:—

1. That Christian Perfection does not “exclude all infirmities,
ignorance, and mistake.”

2. That those who think they have attained Christian Perfection, in
speaking their own experience, should “speak with great wariness, and
with the deepest humility and self-abasement before God.”

3. That young preachers, especially, should “speak of Perfection in
public, not too minutely or circumstantially, but rather in general and
scriptural terms.”

4. That Christian Perfection “implies the loving God with all the heart,
so that every evil temper is destroyed, and every thought, and word, and
work springs from, and is conducted to the end by, the pure love of God
and our neighbour.”[37]

Footnote 37:

  “Minutes of Conference” (edition 1862), vol. i., p. 711.

At the close of the year, Fletcher, as usual, was, with the family of
Mr. Hill, in London, where he wrote the following to Charles Wesley.
There can be no doubt that the “humiliation before he left Tern” was the
imputations cast upon him on account of his failing to preach in the
church at Salop, mentioned in the foregoing letter to Sarah Ryan.

                                       “LONDON, _December 12, 1758_.

  “MY DEAR SIR,—Before I left Tern, the Lord gave me a medicine to
  prepare me to suffer what awaited me here. This humiliation prepared
  me so well that I was not surprised to learn a person in London had
  spread abroad many false and scandalous things of me during my
  absence; and that the minds of many were prejudiced against me. In one
  sense, I took a pleasure in thinking that I was going to be rejected
  by the children of God, and that my Saviour would become more dear
  under the idea that, as in heaven, so now on earth, I should have none
  but Him. The first time I appeared in the chapel many were so offended
  that it was with difficulty they could forbear interrupting me in
  prayer, to tell me, ‘_Physician, heal thyself._’ I was on the point of
  declining to officiate, fearing I should only give fresh offence;
  indeed, I should have done so had it not been for my friend Bernon,
  who pressed me to stand firm, representing the triumph my silence
  would give my enemies. His reasons appeared to me so cogent, that, as
  your brother did not reject my assistance, I read prayers, and engaged
  to preach sometimes of a morning; which I have accordingly continued
  to do.”[38]

Footnote 38:

  Letters, 1791.

This is an unpleasant but amusing episode, and presents these first
Methodists in a frame of heart and mind far from commendable. Of course,
Fletcher was not faultless. Perhaps he was blameable in the sermon
affair at Salop; but, as Wesley still permitted him to read prayers and
to preach in the West Street chapel, London, it may be taken for granted
that his offence, if an offence had been committed, was a very venial
one. Some of the early Methodists had more zeal than charity.

Fletcher continued to officiate in West Street chapel, and, whilst doing
so, a proposal was made which occasioned him considerable anxiety.
Nathaniel Gilbert inherited an estate in Antigua. For some years, he had
been the Speaker in the House of Assembly of that island. In 1758, he
was in England, and resided at Wandsworth. Wesley, on January 17, 1758,
preached in his house, and met two of his negro servants and a mulatto,
who appeared to be much awakened. In the month of November following,
Wesley baptized the two negroes. Mr. Gilbert returned to Antigua in the
autumn of 1759, and, having become acquainted with Fletcher, was
desirous that he should go with him to the West Indian Islands, and
preach to the planters and their slaves the “glorious Gospel of the
blessed God.” Hence the following letter to Charles Wesley:—

                                          “LONDON, _March 22, 1759_.

  “MY DEAR SIR,—Since your departure, I have lived more than ever like a
  hermit. It seems to me that I am an unprofitable weight upon the
  earth. I want to hide myself from all. I tremble when the Lord favours
  me with a sight of myself; I tremble to think of preaching only to
  dishonour God. To-morrow, I preach at West Street, with all the
  feelings of Jonah. Would to God I might be attended with his success!

  “A proposal has lately been made to me to accompany Mr. Nathaniel
  Gilbert to the West Indies. I have weighed the matter, but, on one
  hand I feel that I have neither sufficient zeal, nor grace, nor
  talents to expose myself to the temptations and labours of a mission
  in the West Indies; and, on the other, I believe that if God calls me
  thither, the time is not yet come. I wish to be certain that I am
  converted myself before I leave my converted brethren to convert
  heathen. Pray let me know what you think of this business. If you
  condemn me to put the sea between us, the command would be a hard one,
  but I might possibly prevail on myself to give you that proof of the
  deference I pay to your judicious advice.

  “I have taken possession of my little hired chamber. There I have
  _outward_ peace, and I wait for that which is within. I was this
  morning with Lady Huntingdon, who salutes you. Our conversation was
  deep, and full of the energy of faith on the part of the Countess; as
  to me, I sat like Saul at the feet of Gamaliel.”[39]

Footnote 39:

  Letters, 1791, p. 83.

Charles Wesley evidently was one of Fletcher’s confidential advisers,
and had great influence over him. Fortunately, that influence was not
used to induce him to go to the West Indies. Had he gone, in all
probability his “Checks to Antinomianism” would never have been written,
and his incalculable services to Wesley and to Methodism would not have
been rendered.

From the concluding part of Fletcher’s letter, it would seem that he was
not now resident in Mr. Hill’s London mansion, but had “a little hired
chamber” of his own. The probability is, that, during the Easter
holidays of Parliament, Mr. Hill had returned to Shropshire, and that
Fletcher had remained in London to officiate for the two Wesleys in West
Street chapel; and, perhaps, in the Foundery, and in the chapel at
Spitalfields. Twelve months previously, the Methodist Societies
connected with these three places of worship had been blessed with the
unspeakably precious ministry of the never-to-be-forgotten Thomas Walsh.
“Lord,” said he, when leaving them on February 19, 1758, “Lord, Thou
hast given me much favour in the eyes of this people. They show it by
words and deeds; their prayers and tears. Reward them a thousandfold!”
Seventeen days after the date of Fletcher’s foregoing letter, Thomas
Walsh departed this life in Dublin, in the twenty-eighth year of his
age. During his last days on earth, he was pre-eminently “in heaviness,”
_great, distressing_ “heaviness, through manifold temptations.” At
length, Satan was defeated, victory came, Walsh rapturously exclaimed,
“He is come! He is come! My Beloved is mine, and I am His! His for
ever!” And, uttering these words, he triumphantly expired.[40] Fletcher
had become acquainted with Walsh by attending his ministry in Wesley’s
London chapels. On hearing of his death, he wrote the following
impassioned letter to Charles Wesley:—

                                            “LONDON, _April—, 1759_.

  “MY DEAR SIR,—With a heart bowed down with grief, and eyes bathed with
  tears, occasioned by our late heavy loss—I mean the death of Mr.
  Walsh—I take my pen to pray you to intercede for me. What! that
  _sincere_, _laborious_, and _zealous_ servant of God! Was he saved
  only as ‘_by fire_,’ and his prayer not heard till the twelfth hour
  was just expiring? Oh where shall I appear! I, who am an unprofitable
  servant! Would to God my eyes were fountains of waters to weep for my
  sins! Would to God I might pass the rest of my days in crying, ‘_Lord,
  have mercy upon me!_’ ‘_All is vanity_’—grace, talents, labours,—if we
  compare them with the mighty stride we have to take from time into
  eternity! Lord, remember me, _now_ that Thou art in Thy kingdom!

  “I have preached and administered the sacrament at West Street
  sometimes in the holidays. May God water the poor seed I have sown,
  and give it fruitfulness, though it be only in one soul! But I have
  seen so much weakness in my heart, both as a minister and a Christian,
  that I know not which is most to be pitied—the man, the believer, or
  the preacher. Could I at last be _truly_ humbled, and _continue so
  always_, I should esteem myself happy in making this discovery. I
  preach _merely_ to keep the chapel open until God shall send a workman
  _after His own heart_. ‘_Nos numeri sumus_,’—this is almost all I can
  say of myself. If I did not know myself a little better than I did
  formerly, I should tell you that I had ceased altogether from placing
  any confidence in my repentances; but I see my heart is so full of
  deceit that I cannot depend on my knowledge of myself.

  “You are not well! Are you, then, going to leave us, like poor Walsh?
  Ah! stay, and permit me to go first; that, when my soul leaves the
  body, you may commend it to the mercy of my Saviour. The day Mr. Walsh
  died, the Lord gave our brethren the spirit of supplication; and many
  unutterable groans were offered up for him at Spitalfields, where I
  was. Who shall render us the same kind offices? Is not our hour near?
  O, my God, when Thou comest, prepare us, and we shall be ready! You
  owe your children an elegy on Mr. Walsh’s death, and you cannot employ
  your poetic talents on a better subject.”[41]

Footnote 40:

  Morgan’s “Life of Walsh.”

Footnote 41:

  Letters, 1791, p. 85.

In this interesting letter, Fletcher prayed for success at West Street
Chapel, even if the success was limited to “only one soul.” His prayer
was answered. At this period, there lived, in the neighbourhood of
Covent Garden, Owen and Alice Price, natives of Dolgelly, in North
Wales. One of their four children was named Mary, and was now fifteen
years of age. In 1750, when an earthquake alarmed all London, little
Mary was at school. The house in which the school was kept undulated;
several windows were broken; the children were thrown down on their
faces; and a hoarse rumbling noise was heard for nearly a minute. Mary
resolved, henceforth, to serve her Maker. She read the Bible; she
prayed; but she was not happy. Some one recommended her to attend the
preaching of the Methodists; but she hesitated to do this, because the
Methodists were despised, and her parents were opposed to enthusiasts.
At length, Mary went to the chapel in West Street, Seven Dials. It was
on a Sunday morning; and in those days Methodist meeting-houses were
crowded on Sunday mornings, _at nine o’clock_. Mary made her way down
the aisle; the minister, who was reading the prayers, she had never seen
before; but his manner, his tones, and the glancing of his eyes, were
irresistibly affecting. The minister was Fletcher, and there and then
Mary resolved to be a Methodist. The preaching and praying of Fletcher
were greatly blessed to her soul’s profit; and, after a severe struggle,
she took courage to stay, at the close of the public service, to receive
the sacrament. At that period in the history of Methodism, no one was
allowed to remain who had not a society ticket, or a note from the
officiating minister; and, accordingly, the faithful steward told the
Welsh maiden she must either go to the vestry for a note, or quit the
chapel. She went, and, with fear and trembling, asked Fletcher’s
permission to remain. “Come,” cried he, “come, my dear young friend,
come, and receive the memorials of your dying Lord. If sin is your
burden, behold the Crucified. Partake of His broken body and shed blood,
and sink into the bottomless ocean of His love.” Of course, Mary stayed.
For three months afterwards, she sought the Lord diligently in the means
of grace; and then, under a sermon preached by Thomas Maxfield, found
peace with God, through faith in Jesus Christ. In 1782, Mary Price
married Peter Kruse; Wesley appointed her to be the leader of a class at
City Road, where she and her husband worshipped; and, after being a
godly Methodist for fifty-nine years, she peacefully expired, Joseph
Benson preaching her funeral sermon, and her corpse being interred in
the burial-ground behind the City Road Chapel.[42]

Footnote 42:

  _Methodist Magazine_, 1818, pp. 360–367.

Another convert may be mentioned here. Richard Hill (afterwards Sir
Richard) was the eldest son of Sir Rowland Hill, the first baronet of a
distinguished and ancient family. Richard was now twenty-seven years of
age. From childhood, he had been blest with the strivings of God’s Holy
Spirit, and of late had been unutterably anxious about his soul. He
writes:—

  “About October, 1757, I set myself to work with all the earnestness of
  a poor perishing mariner, who is every moment in expectation of
  shipwreck. I fasted, prayed, and meditated. I read the Scriptures,
  communicated, and gave much alms. But these things brought no peace to
  my soul; on the contrary, I saw, what I had never seen before, that
  all my works were mixed with sin and imperfection. My terrors
  increased, insomuch that I could neither eat nor sleep, and did not
  think it possible for me to live a week. Everybody observed how ill I
  looked, and I had much ado to conceal the straits I was in from all
  about me. After having suffered in this manner a short time, I made my
  case known to a clergyman; but all he said to me—which indeed was not
  much to the purpose—had little or no effect. What to do I knew not.
  Alas! I had no acquaintance with any one who seemed to have the least
  experience in such a case as mine. Those about me showed the greatest
  concern for my situation, and offered their remedies for my relief,
  such as company, physic, and exercise, which, in order to oblige them,
  I complied with; but my disorder was not to be removed by these carnal
  quackeries. What I wanted was a skilful physician for my soul; but
  where to find such an one I knew not.

  “I recollected, however, that once, if not oftener, the Rev. Mr.
  Fletcher, then tutor to two neighbouring young gentlemen, had, in my
  hearing, been spoken of in a very disrespectful manner, for things
  which seemed to me to savour of a truly Christian spirit. I,
  therefore, determined to make my case known to him, and, accordingly,
  wrote him a letter, without mentioning my name, giving him some
  account of my situation, and begging him, for God’s sake, to meet me
  that very night at an inn at Salop, in which place I then was. Though
  Mr. Fletcher had four or five miles to walk, yet he came punctually to
  the appointment, spoke to me in a very comfortable manner, and gave me
  to understand that he had very different thoughts of my state from
  what I had myself. After our discourse, he went to prayer with me,
  and, among the other petitions that he put up in my behalf, he prayed
  that I might not trust in my own righteousness; an expression the
  import of which I scarcely knew.

  “After my conversation with Mr. Fletcher, I was rather easier; but
  this decrease of my terrors was of short duration. I allowed that the
  promises he would have me apply to myself belonged to the generality
  of sinners, but I thought they were not intended for me. I, therefore,
  wrote again to Mr. Fletcher, telling him that, however others might
  take comfort from the Scripture promises, I feared none of them
  belonged to me. I told him also, that I found my heart to be exceeding
  hard and wicked; and that, as all my duties proceeded from a dread of
  punishment, and not from the principles of faith and love, and were
  withal so very defective, I thought it was impossible God should ever
  accept them. In answer to this, the kind and sympathising Mr. Fletcher
  immediately wrote me a sweet and comfortable letter, telling me that
  the perusal of the account I had given him had caused him to shed
  tears of joy, because he saw the Lord had convinced me of the
  insufficiency of all my own doings to justify me before God, and of
  the necessity of a saving faith in the blood of Jesus. He also sent me
  ‘The Life and Death of Mr. Thomas Halyburton,’ which book I read with
  greatest eagerness.”

After this, Sir Richard Hill proceeds to relate how he found peace with
God on February 18, 1758; then how he relapsed into doubts and fears,
and lost all his comfort; and then how he wrote to Fletcher in April,
1759, and said:—

  “My soul is again bowed down under the sense of the wrath of God. The
  broken law, with all its thunderings and lightnings, again stares me
  in the face. My hope seems to be giving up the ghost, and I see
  nothing before me but blackness and darkness for ever.”

Of course Fletcher replied to this letter. Before long, Sir Richard
regained his lost faith and peace, and ever afterwards went on his way
rejoicing.[43]

Footnote 43:

  Sidney’s “Life of Sir Richard Hill,” pp. 21–32.

Thus, to an important extent, was Fletcher used in the conversion of the
distinguished man, who, a few years later, became one of his sturdiest
opponents in the great Calvinian controversy.

In the middle of June, 1759, Mr. Hill, M.P., and his family left London
for Shropshire, and, of course, Fletcher went with them. Up to the time
of his departure, Fletcher continued to preach in Wesley’s London
chapels; but, in writing to Charles Wesley, under the date of June 1, he
remarks, with his characteristic humbleness: “I am here _umbra pro
corpore_. I preach as your substitute; come, and fill worthily an office
of which I am unworthy.”[44]

Footnote 44:

  Letters, 1791, p. 86.

At Tern Hall, Fletcher again enjoyed his beloved retirement, and gave
himself up to study, meditation, and prayer. Indeed, his whole life was
now a life of prayer. “Wherever we met,” says Mr. Vaughan, “if we were
alone, his first salute was, ‘Do I meet you praying?’ And, if we were
conversing on any point of Divinity, he would often break off abruptly,
and ask, ‘Where are our hearts now’”[45] Solitude, however, is often
invaded by Satan. It was in the garden, where were only two human
beings, that the devil gained his first victory on earth; and it was in
“the _wilderness_” that man’s Redeemer was pre-eminently tempted by the
same accursed enemy. The following, addressed to Charles Wesley, is a
strange, but honest and instructive production.

Footnote 45:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

                                             “TERN, _July 19, 1759_.

  “MY DEAR SIR,—Instead of apologizing for my silence, I will tell you
  that I have twenty times endeavoured to break it, but without effect.
  I will simply state the cause of it.

  “This is the fourth summer that I have been brought hither, in a
  peculiar manner, to be tempted of the devil in a wilderness; and I
  have improved so little by my past exercises, that I have not defended
  myself better than in the first year. Being arrived here, I began to
  spend my time as I had determined; one part in prayer, and the other
  in meditation on the Holy Scriptures. The Lord blessed my devotions,
  and I advanced from conquering to conquer, leading every thought
  captive to the obedience of Jesus Christ, when it pleased God to show
  me some of the folds of my heart. As I looked for nothing less than
  such a discovery, I was extremely surprised; so much so as to forget
  Christ. You may judge what was the consequence. A spiritual languor
  seized on all the powers of my soul, and I suffered myself to be
  carried away quietly by a current, with the rapidity of which I was
  unacquainted.

  “Neither doubt nor despair troubled me for a moment; my temptation
  took another course. It appeared to me that God would be much more
  glorified by my damnation than by my salvation. It seemed altogether
  incompatible with the holiness, the justice, and the veracity of the
  Supreme Being to admit so stubborn an offender into His presence. I
  could do nothing but be astonished at the patience of God; and I would
  willingly have sung those verses of Desbaraux if I had had strength:—

        ‘Tonne, frappe, il est temps, rend moi guerre pour guerre,
        J’adore, en perrissant, la raison qui t’aigrit.’[46]

Footnote 46:

           “Thunder! strike! it is time; render me war for war!
           In perishing, I adore the reason which incenses Thee.”

  “Do not imagine, however, that I was in a state of evangelical
  repentance. No: a man who repents desires to be saved; but I desired
  it not. I was even impatient to go to my own place; and secretly
  wished that God would for a moment give me the exercise of His iron
  sceptre to break myself to pieces as a vessel to dishonour. A bitter
  and cruel zeal against myself, and all the sinners who were with me,
  filled all my thoughts and all my desires. The devil, who well knew
  how to improve the opportunity, blew, without ceasing, the sparks of
  some corruptions, which I thought were extinguished, or at the point
  of being so, till at last the fire began to appear without. This
  opened my eyes, and I felt it was time to implore succour.

  “It is now eight days since I endeavoured to pray, but almost without
  success. Yesterday, however, as I sang one of your hymns, the Lord
  lifted up my head, and commanded me to face my enemies. By His grace I
  am already a conqueror; and I doubt not that I shall soon be more than
  conqueror.

  “Although I deserve it not, nevertheless hold up my hands till all
  these Amalekites be put to flight.

                                          “I am, etc.,
                                                   J. FLETCHER.”[47]

Footnote 47:

  Letters, 1791, p. 88.

Certainly this was strange, perhaps unparalleled experience. Paul wrote,
“I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ _for my brethren, my
kinsmen according to the flesh_.” John Fletcher seemed to wish for this,
that _God might be glorified_. “A fit of melancholy,” says the reader;
“almost insanity.” That, however, is sooner said than proved. Fletcher
had a great work to do, and, as in the case of his Divine Master,
temptations helped to prepare him for it. Weeks after the date of the
foregoing letter, he continued to write bitter things against himself.
The following letter has not before been published; it was addressed “to
Mrs. Ryan, at the Room in the Horse-Fair, Bristol:”—

                                         “TERN, _September 5, 1759_.

  “MY SISTER,—I have often been with you in spirit, desiring to follow
  you as you follow Christ; and I trust you have put up some petitions
  for me, that I may not run in vain, but may at last apprehend that for
  which I am apprehended.

  “I have been taught many lessons—by man, self, and Satan—since I saw
  you, but doubt I am not much nearer wisdom, unless it is in this
  point—that I am more foolish in my own eyes. I groan to be so often
  diverted from the pursuit of the one thing needful; but
  unfaithfulness, levity, unbelief, taint those groans, and make me
  question their sincerity and mine. Will you try once more to spur me
  out of my haltings? Send me an account of the struggles you went
  through before you found rest. What degree of joy, fear, hope, sorrow,
  doubting, fervency or coldness of desire in soul and body—waking,
  working, and sleeping?

  “Remember me to Miss Furley.[48] Were I less averse to writing, I
  would have written to her, to beg her not to faint at any time, but be
  a zealous follower of those who through faith and patience inherit the
  promises; but I trust she does not want the advice as often as I do.
  Let me know how she does in the Lord and in the flesh, and desire her
  to remember me at the throne of grace. Adieu.

                                                    “JOHN FLETCHER.”

Footnote 48:

  Dorothy Furley, the youngest daughter of John Furley, a Dutch and
  Turkey merchant, was born at West Ham in 1730. She was converted in
  early life, and became acquainted with the Countess of Huntingdon,
  Miss Bosanquet, the Wesley brothers, Miss Johnson, Mrs. Ryan, and many
  others of the first Methodists, by whom she was held in high esteem.
  In 1764, she was married to Mr. Downs, one of Wesley’s local preachers
  in London. After her husband’s death, she removed to Leeds, and died
  July 28, 1807. The written directions respecting her funeral concluded
  with these words: “Glory, glory, glory be to my gracious God and
  Saviour! I live in the full assurance of faith and hope that I shall
  see my Saviour’s face, and behold that glory which He had with the
  Father before all worlds, but which He left for my sake. To Him I owe
  all my salvation, here and to all eternity. To Him, with the Father
  and the Holy Ghost, be all honour, dominion, and majesty, now and
  through all ages! Amen. Hallelujah! Amen.”—_Methodist Magazine_, 1818,
  p. 222.

Charles Wesley proposed that, during the ensuing Parliamentary session,
Fletcher should be paid for his services in the London chapels. In the
same spirit of self-abasement as is displayed in the foregoing letters,
Fletcher replied as follows:—

                                              “_September 14, 1759._

  “MY DEAR SIR,—A few days ago, the Lord gave me two or three lessons on
  poverty of spirit, but, alas! how have I forgotten them! I saw, I
  felt, that I was entirely void of wisdom and virtue. I was ashamed of
  myself; and I could say, with a degree of feeling which I cannot
  describe, ‘_Nil ago; nil habeo; sum nil; in pulvero serpo._’ I could
  _then_ say what Gregory Lopez was enabled to say at all times, ‘There
  is no man of whom I have not a better opinion than of myself.’ I could
  have placed myself under the feet of the most atrocious sinner, and
  have acknowledged him for a saint in comparison of myself. If ever I
  am humble and patient, if ever I enjoy solid peace of mind, it must be
  _in this very spirit_. Ah! why do I not find these virtues? Because I
  am filled with _self-sufficiency_, which blinds me and hinders me from
  doing justice to my own demerits. O pray that the spirit of Jesus may
  remove these scales from my eyes _for ever_, and compel me to retire
  into my own nothingness.

  “To what a _monstrous_ idea had you well-nigh given birth. What! the
  labours of _my_ ministry under you deserve a salary! I, who have done
  nothing but dishonour God hitherto, and am not in a condition to do
  anything else for the future! If, then, I am permitted to stand in the
  courts of the Lord’s house, is it not for me to make an
  acknowledgment, rather than to receive one? If I ever receive anything
  of the Methodist Church, it shall be only as an indigent mendicant
  receives alms, without which he would perish. Such were some of the
  thoughts which passed through my mind with regard to the proposal you
  made to me in London; and I doubt whether my own vanity, or your
  goodness, will be able to efface the impressions they have left.

  “I have great need of your advice relative to the letters which I
  receive from my relations, who unite in their invitations to me to
  return to my own country. One says, to settle my affairs there;
  another, to preach there; a third, to assist him to die. They press me
  to declare whether I renounce my family, and the demands I have upon
  it. My mother, in the strongest terms, commands me at least to go and
  see her. What answer shall I make? If she thought _as you do_, I
  should write to her, ‘_Ubi Christiani, ibi patria_;’ ‘my mother, my
  brethren, my sisters, are those who do the will of my heavenly
  Father;’ but she is not in a state of mind to digest such an answer. I
  have no inclination to yield to their desires, which appear to me
  merely _natural_, for I should lose precious time and incur expense.
  My presence is not _absolutely_ necessary to my concerns; and it is
  more probable that my relations will pervert me to vanity and
  interest, than that I shall convert them to genuine Christianity.
  Lastly, I should have no opportunity to exercise my ministry. Our
  Swiss ministers, who preach only once a week, would not look upon me
  with a more favourable eye than the ministers here, and would only
  cause me either to be laid in prison or to be immediately banished
  from the country.

  “Permit me to thank you for the sentence from Kempis, with which you
  close your letter, by returning you another. ‘You run no risk in
  considering yourself as the wickedest of men, but you are in _danger_
  if you prefer yourself to any one.’”[49]

Footnote 49:

  Letters, 1791, p. 91.

A fortnight later, Fletcher wrote again to Charles Wesley as follows:—

                                        “TERN, _September 29, 1759_.

  “What you say about reducing a mother to despair has made me
  recollect, what I have often thought, that the particular fault of the
  Swiss is to be _without natural affection_. With respect to that
  preference which my mother shows me above her other children, I see
  clearly I am indebted for almost all the affection she expresses for
  me in her letters to my absence from her, which hinders her from
  seeing my faults. Nevertheless, I reproach myself severely, that I
  cannot interest myself in her welfare as much as I did in that of my
  deceased father. I am astonished at the difference. I believe the time
  is not yet come when my presence may be of service to her; and I
  flatter myself she will not be shocked at my refusal, which I have
  softened as much as I could.

  “I fear you did not rightly understand what I wrote about the proposal
  you made me at London. So far from making conditions, I feel myself
  unworthy of receiving them. I trouble myself with no temporal things;
  my only fear is that of having too much, rather than too little, of
  the necessaries of life. I am weary of abundance. I could wish myself
  to be poor with my Saviour. Those whom He hath chosen to be rich in
  faith, appear to me objects of envy in the midst of their wants.”[50]

Footnote 50:

  Letters, 1791, p. 95.

Fletcher wanted no salary for preaching in Methodist chapels; and, for
the present, he refused to return to Switzerland. His reason for the
latter might have been more filially expressed; but no one will doubt
his sincerity, or that his motives were not pure. The next letter,
written two days later, was addressed to Sarah Ryan, Wesley’s
housekeeper at Bristol, and to her friend, Dorothy Furley. It is too
full of eloquent piety to be abridged.

                                                 “_October 1, 1759._

  “DEAR SISTERS,—I have been putting off writing to you, lest the action
  of writing should divert my soul from the awful and delightful worship
  it is engaged in. But I now conclude I shall be no loser, if I invite
  you to love Him my soul loveth; to dread Him my soul dreadeth; to
  adore Him my soul adoreth.

  “Sink with me before the throne of grace; and, while the cherubim veil
  their faces, and cry out in tender fear and exquisite trembling,
  ‘Holy! Holy! Holy!’ let us put our mouths in the dust, and echo back
  the solemn sound, ‘Holy! Holy! Holy!’ Let us plunge ourselves in that
  ocean of purity. Let us try to fathom the depths of Divine mercy; and,
  convinced of the impossibility of such an attempt, let us lose
  ourselves in them. Let us be comprehended by God, if we cannot
  comprehend Him. Let us be supremely happy in God. Let the intenseness
  of our happiness border upon misery, because we can make Him no
  return. Let our head become waters, and our eyes a fountain of
  tears,—_tears_ of humble repentance, of solemn joy, of silent
  admiration, of exalted adoration, of raptured desires, of inflamed
  transports, of speechless awe. My God and my all! Your God and your
  all! Our God and our all! Praise Him! With our souls blended into one
  by Divine love, let us with one mouth glorify the Father of our Lord
  Jesus Christ; our Father, who is over all, through all, and in us all.

  “I charge you before the Lord Jesus, who giveth life and more abundant
  life; I entreat you by all the actings of faith, the stretchings of
  hope, the flames of love you have ever felt, sink to greater depths of
  self-abasing repentance; rise to greater heights of Christ-exalting
  joy. And let Him, who is able to do exceeding abundantly above all
  that you can ask or think, carry on, and fulfil in you the work of
  faith with power; with that power whereby He subdueth all things unto
  Himself. Be steadfast in hope, immovable in patience and love, always
  abounding in the outward and inward labour of love; and receive the
  end of your faith, the salvation of your souls.

                   “I am, dear sisters, your well-wisher,
                                                “JOHN FLETCHER.”[51]

Footnote 51:

  “Thirteen Original Letters,” by Rev. John Fletcher, 1791, p. 9.

Mr. Benson inclines to think that it was at this period that Fletcher
first preached at Madeley. The Rev. Mr. Chambers was the vicar, and
frequently desired the tutor of Mr. Hill’s sons to assist him in his
ministerial duties. Tern Hall was ten miles from Madeley, and one of Mr.
Hill’s grooms was ordered to have a horse ready for Fletcher’s use every
Sunday morning. So great, however, was his aversion to giving trouble to
any one, that, if the groom did not awake at the proper time, he seldom
would suffer him to be called; but prepared the horse for himself.[52]

Footnote 52:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

Parliament was opened on November 13, when, as usual, Mr. Hill and his
family repaired to London. Two days afterwards, Fletcher wrote the
following to Charles Wesley:—

                                       “LONDON, _November 15, 1759_.

  “MY DEAR SIR,—Your letter was not put into my hands till eight days
  after my arrival in London. I carried the enclosed to its address, and
  passed three hours with a modern prodigy,—_an humble and pious
  countess_. I went with trembling, and in obedience to your orders; but
  I soon perceived a little of what the disciples felt when Christ said
  to them, ‘_It is I, be not afraid._’

  “Her ladyship proposed to me something of what you hinted to me in
  your garden,—namely, to celebrate the communion sometimes at her house
  of a morning, and to preach when occasion offered,—in such a manner,
  however, as not to restrain my liberty, nor to prevent me assisting
  you, or preaching to the French refugees; and that only till
  Providence should clearly point out the path in which I should go.
  Charity, politeness, and reason accompanied her offer; and I confess,
  in spite of the resolution, which I had almost _absolutely_ formed, to
  fly the houses of the great, without even the exception of the
  Countess’s, I found myself so greatly changed, that I should have
  accepted, on the spot, her ladyship’s proposal; but my engagement with
  you withheld me; and, after thanking her, I said, when I had reflected
  on her obliging offer, I would do myself the honour of waiting upon
  her again.

  “Nevertheless, two difficulties stand in my way. Will it be consistent
  with the poverty of spirit, which I seek? Can I accept an office for
  which I have such small talents? And shall I not dishonour the cause
  of God, by stammering out the mysteries of the Gospel in a place where
  the most approved ministers of the Lord have preached with so much
  power, and so much success? What think you?

  “I give myself up to your judicious counsels. I feel myself unworthy
  of them; much more still of the appellation of _friend_, with which
  you honour me. You are an _indulgent father_ to me, and the name of
  _son_ suits me better than that of _brother_.”[53]

Footnote 53:

  Letters, 1791, p. 98.

It hardly need be added, that the “modern prodigy,” the “humble and
pious Countess,” was Lady Huntingdon, to whom Wesley had introduced
Fletcher nearly two years before. Her ladyship’s proposal really
amounted to this, that, without at all interfering with his preaching
for the Wesley brothers, and with his labours among the French prisoners
and refugees, Fletcher should act as one of her domestic chaplains.
Charles Wesley’s reply to Fletcher’s inquiries has not been preserved;
but there can be no doubt it was favourable, for such was Fletcher’s
profound respect for Methodism’s poet, that, if he had, in the least,
disapproved of the Countess’s offer, it would most certainly have been
declined. “I am so assured of your salvation,” wrote Fletcher, in the
letter from which the foregoing is extracted, “that I ask no other place
in heaven, than that I may have at your feet. I doubt even if Paradise
would be Paradise to me, unless it were shared with you.” This language
was extravagant; but it shows the high admiration in which Fletcher, at
this time, held one who might be justly called his dearest and most
confidential friend. The proposal of the Countess of Huntingdon was
accepted; and Fletcher opened his commission to the great and honourable
in her ladyship’s drawing-room, in the lowly spirit of St. Paul, “Unto
me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that
I should preach the unsearchable riches of Christ.” During the ensuing
winter, he preached in Wesley’s London chapels, as usual; and,
alternately with the Wesley brothers and other clergymen, he preached in
the houses of Lady Huntingdon, Lady Gertrude Hotham, and Lady Frances
Shirley, generally once, and frequently twice, in every week.[54]

Footnote 54:

  “Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon,” vol. i., p. 233.

The French prisoners and refugees have been mentioned. Unfortunately,
there are no details preserved of the extent and success of Fletcher’s
labours among those pitiable sojourners; but there can be no doubt that
it was for their instruction and benefit, that Fletcher, in 1759,
published a sermon in the French language, entitled, “Discours sur la
Regeneration. Imprime à Londre l’an 1759.”  12mo, 48 pp.  His sermon is
founded upon John iii. 3, “Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily,
verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the
kingdom of God.” At the end of the discourse are two short poems, in
French, with the titles, “Sentiments d’une Ame que la Grace régénère;”
and “Le Bonheur de l’homme Régénère.” The subject and substance of the
whole may be gathered from the brief preface, of which the following is
a translation:—

  “Some prejudiced persons having caused it to be reported that I preach
  a dangerous doctrine, you will be able to judge as to that, with a
  knowledge of the case, by reading this discourse on Regeneration.

  “I beg you to read, in addition, some short pamphlets which have just
  appeared, and which are entitled, ‘The Nature and Design of
  Christianity;’[55] ‘Salvation by Faith;’[56] and ‘Awake thou that
  sleepest.’[57] I recommend these three works for your examination,
  because, although I am not the author of them, they contain the
  sentiments which I wish to see engraven in our hearts, as they were in
  the heart of St. Paul.

  “If you find here the religion of Christ, give the glory to God, and
  let it be found in the depths of your own souls; but, if you find
  anything contrary to the Holy Scriptures and the purity of
  Christianity, I pray you, in the name of the Lord, to point it out to
  me. Conduct so kind will sensibly oblige your servant in Christ,

                                                “J. DE LA FLECHERE.”

Footnote 55:

  An extract from Law’s “Christian Perfection,” first published by
  Wesley in 1740; the sixth edition appeared in 1759.

Footnote 56:

  Wesley’s “Sermon on Salvation by Faith,” first published in 1738; and
  a tenth edition in 1756.

Footnote 57:

  Charles Wesley’s well-known sermon, preached before the University of
  Oxford, on April 4, 1742.

With the exception of a tract, entitled “A Christmas Box for Journeymen
and Apprentices,” which, Wesley says, was printed and circulated in
1758, this “Discours sur la Regeneration” was Fletcher’s earliest
publication.

During the first three months of 1760, Fletcher enjoyed sweet
intercourse with his beloved and confidential friend, Charles Wesley.
The latter relates that he forgot his birthday till Fletcher’s prayer
put him in mind of it. He and Fletcher had conversations respecting the
doctrine of assurance, which they both held, but which they thought had
not been sufficiently guarded. In a letter, dated March 16, 1760,
Charles observes,—“God has remarkably owned the Word since Mr. Fletcher
and I changed our manner of preaching it.”[58]

Footnote 58:

  C. Wesley’s Journal, vol. ii., p. 227.

At this period, the Methodists of London took a profound interest in the
fate of Earl Ferrars, brother of the Rev. Walter Shirley, and cousin of
the Countess of Huntingdon. This profligate nobleman had murdered his
steward, and was now awaiting his trial by the Peers of England. The
unhappy culprit was executed on the 5th of May. Many were the prayers
offered for his conversion. A day of fasting was kept at the Foundery.

  “Yesterday,” wrote Charles Wesley, on April 4, “many met me in the
  chapel (West-street), to join in prayer for the murderer. Till 4 p.m.
  we continued looking upon Him whom we had pierced. I never remember a
  more solemn season. I carried Mr. Shirley and his sister to Mrs.
  Herritage’s, where Mr. Fletcher helped us to pray for poor Barabbas,
  as he calls him. Again the spirit made intercession for him with
  groans unutterable. Our watch-night lasted from seven to half-past
  ten. My text was, ‘Is it nothing to you, all ye that pass by? Behold,
  and see if there be any sorrow like unto my sorrow,’ etc.
  (Lamentations of Jeremiah i. 12). The Word was sent, I believe, to
  many hearts. Mr. Fletcher seconded it. We both prayed _after_ God,
  particularly for the criminal. The chapel was excessively crowded, and
  therefore very hot. Miss Shirley carried me to my lodgings. It was
  past eleven before John Fletcher and I got to rest.”[59]

Footnote 59:

  _Ibid._, vol. ii., p. 231.

The last words of this extract almost indicate that Charles Wesley and
Fletcher were living together, in the same house; but, be that as it
may, there cannot be a doubt of the warm friendship that existed between
them.

Besides preaching in Wesley’s London chapels, Fletcher occasionally
preached for the Countess of Huntingdon, at Brighton.[60] He also
visited Berridge at Everton. Hence the following, addressed to Charles
Wesley:—

                                        “DUNSTABLE, _March 1, 1760_.

  “MY DEAR SIR,—I have had a pleasant journey as to my body, but an
  unhappy one for my soul. Everything required that I should cry without
  ceasing, ‘_Lord, be merciful to me a sinner!_’ but, alas! I have not
  done so. The fine weather invites me to execute a design, I had half
  formed, of making a forced march to spend next Sunday at Everton, Mr.
  Berridge’s parish. May the voice of the Lord there be heard by a poor
  child of Adam, who, like him, is still behind the trees of his
  stupidity and impenitence!

  “If I do not lose myself across the fields before I get there, and if
  the Lord is pleased to grant me the spirit of supplication, I will
  pray for you, until I can again pray with you. Don’t forget me, I
  beseech you. I would fain be with you on those solemn occasions, when
  a thousand voices are raised to heaven to obtain those graces which I
  have not; but God’s will be done!

  “Don’t forget to present my respects to the Countess. If I continue
  any time at Everton, I shall take the liberty of giving her some
  account of the work of God in these parts; if not, I will give it her
  in person. Adieu.

                                                “JOHN FLETCHER.”[61]

Footnote 60:

  “Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon,” vol. i., p. 233.

Footnote 61:

  Letters, 1791, p. 100.

Strange scenes had recently been witnessed at Everton and in the
surrounding country; and it is not surprising that Fletcher was desirous
of seeing what the hand of God had wrought. His visit was a memorable
one. On arriving, he introduced himself to Berridge “as a new convert,
who had taken the liberty to wait upon him for the benefit of his
instruction and advice.” Berridge, perceiving he was a foreigner, asked
what countryman he was.

“A Swiss, from the canton of Berne,” was the reply.

“From Berne! then probably you can give me some account of a young
countryman of yours, John Fletcher, who has lately preached a few times
for the Messrs. Wesley, and of whose talents, learning, and piety, they
both speak in terms of high eulogy. Do you know him?”

“Yes, sir, I know him intimately; and did those gentlemen know him as
well they would not speak so highly of him. He is more obliged to their
partial friendship than to his own merits.”

“You surprise me,” said Berridge.

“I have the best reason for speaking of John Fletcher as I do. I am John
Fletcher.”

“If you be John Fletcher,” replied Berridge, “you must take my pulpit
to-morrow.”[62]

Footnote 62:

  Cox’s “Life of Fletcher,” p. 25

Thus began Fletcher’s acquaintance with Berridge. No doubt he preached
at Everton, for strong-willed Berridge was wont to have his way. It is
probable that Fletcher communicated what he had seen and heard to the
Countess of Huntingdon. At all events, it is said, her ladyship,
accompanied by Martin Madan and Henry Venn, hastened to join him there.
On the morning after their arrival, at seven o’clock, Berridge preached
to an enormous congregation, assembled in a field near his church. At
eleven, in the church, Mr. Hicks read prayers, and Venn explained the
“joy that is in heaven over one sinner that repenteth.” In the
afternoon, to an amazing multitude gathered from all parts of the
surrounding country, Martin Madan cried, in the open air, “If any man
thirst, let him come unto me and drink.” Next day, in the morning,
Fletcher read prayers, and Madan preached from “Ye must be born again,”
the church being crowded to excess, and the windows filled within and
without. In the afternoon, the prayers were read by Berridge, and Venn
enforced the words, “This is life eternal, to know Thee, the only true
God, and Jesus Christ, whom Thou hast sent.” Large numbers being unable
to gain admission to the church, Berridge addressed those outside from,
“Seek the Lord while He may be found; call upon Him while He is near.”
The third day’s services were even more remarkable than the previous
ones. It was calculated that, in the small village of Everton, ten
thousand persons were assembled to hear the Word of God, and to join in
His holy services. The number is almost incredible; and picturesque must
have been the travelling tribes as they journeyed to this “hill of
Zion.” Venn preached, of course, in the open air, from the text, “The
harvest is past, the summer is ended, and we are not saved.” The huge
congregation was deeply affected, and several persons, both men and
women, fell to the ground and wept bitterly. The afternoon congregation
was even greater than that in the morning. At night, Berridge was the
preacher, and selected as his text, “Behold the Lamb of God, who taketh
away the sin of the world.” Towards the close of his sermon, five
persons “sunk down as dead;” and others cried with a loud and bitter
cry, “What must we do to be saved?” Berridge concluded his discourse;
and these memorable three days’ services were finished by the assembled
thousands, the Countess, and the five clergymen, all joining in singing
Wesley’s noble hymn,—

            “Arm of the Lord, awake, awake!
              Thine own immortal strength put on!
            With terror clothed, hell’s kingdom shake,
              And cast Thy foes with fury down!

            “As in the ancient days appear!
              The sacred annals speak Thy fame:
            Be now omnipotently near,
              To endless ages still the same.

            “Thy arm, Lord, is not shortened now,
              It wants not now the power to save;
            Still present with Thy people, Thou
              Bear’st them through life’s disparted wave.

            “By death and hell pursued in vain,
              To Thee the ransomed seed shall come,
            Shouting their heavenly Sion gain,
              And pass through death triumphant home.

            “The pain of life shall there be o’er,
              The anguish and distracting care,
            There sighing grief shall weep no more,
              And sin shall never enter there.

            “Where pure, essential joy is found,
              The Lord’s redeemed their heads shall raise,
            With everlasting gladness crowned,
              And filled with love, and lost in praise.”[63]

Footnote 63:

  “Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon,” vol. i., p. 400.

What pen can adequately describe this grand outburst of scriptural faith
and Christian exultation? It was a scene that has not oft been equalled;
and, no doubt, helped to increasingly qualify Fletcher for the great
work that awaited him.

Fletcher’s duties as a tutor were now ended. The two sons of Mr. Hill
had become undergraduates at Cambridge. Fletcher seems to have returned
to Tern Hall; but, as a new Parliament was about to be elected, Mr. Hill
objected to the ordained tutor preaching in the neighbourhood of the
Hall, because his well-known Methodist proclivities might raise a
stumbling-block at the polling-booths. Hence the following extract from
a letter addressed to the Countess of Huntingdon:—

                                         “TERN, _September 6, 1760_.

  “The fear Mr. Hill has, that I should lessen his interest at
  Shrewsbury at the next election,—the shyness of the neighbouring
  clergy,—and the want I feel of an ordination from the great Shepherd
  and Bishop of my soul, will probably prevent my preaching at all in
  the country. O may the Spirit of God preach the Gospel to my heart!

  “Generous as you are, Madam, I believe you would have saved me the
  shame of receiving the present you made me at Paddington, had you
  foreseen the uneasy thoughts it raised in my heart. ‘Is not this
  making godliness a gain? Can I in conscience receive what is devoted
  to the poor when I am not in actual want?’ I am not ashamed of living
  upon charity, but to receive it, without being an immediate object of
  charity, gives me more uneasiness than want could possibly do. And now
  I am deprived, for many months, of the unspeakable advantage of living
  upon Providence, and must live upon a stock, as well as the rich of
  this world! Is not this a lesson? And does not your generosity, Madam,
  bid me look to Jesus for _poverty of spirit_, without which all
  outward acts are nothing but pride, sin, misery, and lies?

  “I am, with gratitude and shame, your ladyship’s unworthy servant,

                                                  “J. FLETCHER.”[64]

Footnote 64:

  “Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon,” vol. i., p. 234.

Fletcher was without employment. What was the best course to take? He
might have permanently united himself to the Wesley brothers; or he
might have devoted himself to the congregations of the Countess of
Huntingdon. But another path was marked out for him by an unerring
Providence. He had been of great service to the sons of Mr. Hill; and
Mr. Hill was desirous of promoting his preferment. The living of Dunham,
in Cheshire, was now vacant, and Mr. Hill informed Fletcher that it was
at his service. “The parish,” said he, “is small, the duty light, the
income good (£400 per annum), and it is situated in a fine, healthy,
sporting country.” “Alas!” replied Fletcher, “alas, Sir, Dunham will not
suit me; there is too much money, and too little labour.” “Few clergymen
make such objections,” rejoined Mr. Hill. “It is a pity to decline such
a living, especially as I know not that I can find you another. What
shall we do? Would you like Madeley?” “That, Sir,” said Fletcher, “would
be the very place for me.” “My object,” answered Mr. Hill, “is to make
you comfortable in your own way. If you prefer Madeley, I shall find no
difficulty in persuading Mr. Chambers to exchange it for Dunham, which
is worth more than twice as much as Madeley.”[65]

Footnote 65:

  Cox’s “Life of Fletcher,” p. 32.

An arrangement was soon made. Mr. Hill’s nephew was the patron of the
Madeley living; and Mr. Hill himself the patron of that of Dunham. The
uncle and nephew met at Shrewsbury races, and there, on a _racecourse_,
of all places in the world, it was settled that the Madeley living
should be offered to Fletcher. The presentation was made; but Fletcher,
at the last moment, hesitated to accept it, and wrote to his friend
Charles Wesley as follows:—

                                        “TERN, _September 26, 1760_.

  “A fortnight ago, the minister of this parish, with whom I have had no
  connection for these two years, sent me word (I know not why) that his
  pulpit should be at my service at any time.

  “Some days after, I ventured a visit of civility to the vicar of a
  neighbouring parish, who fell out with me, three years ago, for
  preaching faith in his church. He received me with the greatest
  kindness, and said often, he would have me take the care of souls
  somewhere or other.

  “Last Sunday, the vicar of Madeley, to whom I was formally curate,
  coming to pay a visit here, expressed great regard for me; seemed to
  be quite reconciled: and assured me, that he would do all he could to
  serve me; of which he yesterday gave me a proof, by sending me a
  testimonial unasked.

  “He was no sooner gone, than news was brought that the old clergyman”
  (at Dunham) “died suddenly the day before; and that same day, before I
  heard it, Mr. Hill, meeting, at the races, his nephew, who is patron
  of Madeley, told him, if he would present me to Madeley, he would give
  the vicar of that parish the living vacated by the old clergyman’s
  death. This was immediately agreed to, as Mr. Hill himself informed me
  in the evening, wishing me joy.

  “You have repeatedly advised me not to resist Providence, but to
  follow its leadings. I am, however, inwardly in suspense. My heart
  revolts at the idea of being here alone, opposed by my superiors,
  hated by my neighbours, and despised by all the world. Without piety,
  without talents, without resolution, how shall I repel the assaults,
  and surmount the obstacles which I foresee, if I discharge my duty at
  Madeley with fidelity? On the other hand, to reject this presentation,
  to burn this certificate, and to leave in the desert the sheep whom
  the Lord has evidently brought me into the world to feed, appears to
  me nothing but obstinacy and refined self-love. I will hold a middle
  course between these extremes: I will be wholly _passive_ in the steps
  I must take; and _active_ in praying the Lord to deliver me from the
  evil one, and to conduct me in the way He would have me to go.

  “If you see anything better, inform me of it speedily; and, at the
  same time, remember me in all your prayers, that, if this matter be
  not of the Lord, the enmity of the Bishop of Lichfield, who must
  countersign my testimonials; the threats of the chaplain of the Bishop
  of Hereford, who was a witness to my preaching at West Street; the
  objections drawn from my not being naturalized; or some other
  obstacle, may prevent the kind intentions of Mr. Hill.”[66]

Footnote 66:

  Letters, 1791, p. 106.

Within a week after the date of this communication, several of
Fletcher’s anticipated obstacles were gone. Hence the following, from a
letter addressed to the Countess of Huntingdon, who was visiting the
Rev. Benjamin and Lady Margaret Ingham, in Yorkshire:—

  “1760, October 3.—Were I to have my choice, I would prefer waiting at
  the pool under your roof, or that of those who think like you, to any
  other way of life; and I will own to your ladyship, that the thought
  of giving this up is one of the chief difficulties I have now to
  encounter. But I seem to be a prisoner of Providence, who is going, in
  all probability, to cast my lot among the colliers and forge-men of
  Madeley. The two thousand souls of that parish, for whom I was called
  into the ministry, are many sheep in the wilderness, which I cannot
  sacrifice to my own private choice.

  “When I was suffered to attend them, for a few days, some began to
  return to the Shepherd of their souls, and I found it then in my heart
  to spend and be spent for them. It is true, when I was sent away from
  them, that zeal cooled to such a degree, that I have wished a thousand
  times they might never be committed to my care; but the impression of
  the tears of those who, when I left them, ran after me crying, ‘Who
  will now show us the way to heaven?’ never quite wore off, and, upon
  second thoughts, I always concluded that, if the Lord made my way
  plain to their church, I could not run away from it without disobeying
  the order of Providence.

  “That time is come. The church is vacated; the presentation to it
  brought, unasked for, into my hands; the difficulty of getting proper
  testimonials, which I looked upon as insurmountable, vanishes at once;
  the three clergymen that had opposed me with the most bitterness,
  signed them; the Bishop of Lichfield countersigns them without the
  least objection; the lord of the manor, my great opposer, leaves the
  parish; and the very man (the vicar), who told me I should never
  preach in that church, now recommends me to it, and tells me he will
  induct me himself.

  “Are not these intimations of the will of God? It seems so to me. What
  does your ladyship think? I long to go and consult you in Yorkshire,
  but cannot do it now, without giving up the point on which I want your
  advice.”[67]

Footnote 67:

  “Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon,” vol. i., p. 237.

There is, or, at least, there used to be, in the parish vestry at
Madeley, a book containing the following inscription:—“John Fletcher,
clerk, was inducted to the vicarage of Madeley, the 17th of October,
1760. John Fletcher, vicar.”

The deed was done. Wesley had strongly opposed his acceptance of the
Madeley living, telling him that to take a living was not his calling.
Charles Wesley’s advice is unknown; but, probably, it was the reverse of
his brother’s. John desired and greatly needed the help of an ordained
clergyman, not only to preach, but to administer the sacraments to the
multiplying Methodists. He tried to retain Fletcher, a minister to his
own heart’s content; but he failed. It was well he did. In the
itinerancy, Fletcher’s time for reading and study would have been
extremely limited. At Madeley, he had abundance of leisure for both,
and, during the next ten years, acquired that theological wealth, which,
in the hour of need, enabled him to be of the greatest service to
Wesley, by the writing of his unanswerable “Checks to Antinomianism.”

Wesley’s opposition is mentioned in the following extracts from two
letters addressed to the Countess of Huntingdon:—

  ”1760, October 28. All the little circumstances of my institution and
  induction have taken such an easy turn, that I question whether any
  clergyman ever got over them with less trouble. I preached last
  Sunday, for the first time, in my church, and shall continue to do so,
  though I propose staying with Mr. Hill till he leaves the country,
  which will be, I suppose, in a fortnight, partly to comply with him to
  the last, and partly to avoid falling out with my predecessor, who is
  still at Madeley, but who will remove about the same time.

  ”Among many little providences, I shall mention one to your ladyship.
  The Bishop having unexpectedly sent me word to go to him for
  institution without delay, if I wished not to be at the trouble of
  following him to London, I set out in haste for Hereford, where I
  arrived the day before his lordship’s departure. As I went along, I
  thought that if my going to Madeley was from the Lord, it was
  providential that I should thus be called to be instituted in the
  country, for were it to be in London, Sir Peter Rivers, the Bishop’s
  chaplain, who examined me for orders, and who made so much noise last
  summer in West Street Chapel, where he found me preaching, would
  infallibly defeat the end of my journey, according to his
  threatenings. Thus did worldly wisdom work in my heart; but no
  divination can stand against the God of Jacob, who is a jealous God,
  and does not give His glory to another. A clergyman, named Sir Dutton
  Colt, came to see the Bishop just as I entered the palace, and the
  secretary, coming to him, said in my hearing, ‘Sir Peter is just come
  from London to take possession of a prebend, which the Bishop has
  given him; he is now in the palace; how do you rank with him?’ My
  surprise was great, for a moment, and my first thought was to ride
  away without institution; but, having gone too far to retreat, I had
  an instant strength from on high to be still and see the salvation of
  the Lord. My second thought was to thank God for sending this man from
  London in that point of time to defeat Mr. Hill’s design; and, easily
  throwing up Madeley, I cried for strength to make a good confession
  before the high priest and the scribe; and I felt I had it, but I was
  not called to use it, for the Bishop was alone, the ceremony was over
  in ten minutes, and Sir Peter did not come in till after. I met him at
  the door of the Bishop’s room, and a wig I had on that day prevented
  his recollecting who I was. Your ladyship cannot conceive how thankful
  I was for this little incident, not because I was not disappointed of
  a living, but because I saw and felt, that, had I been disappointed,
  it would have been no disappointment to me.

  ”If I know anything of myself, I shall be much more ready to resign my
  benefice, when I have had a fair trial of my unprofitableness to the
  people committed to my care, than I was to accept it. Mr. John Wesley
  bids me do it without a trial. He will have me ‘see the devil’s snare,
  and fly from it at the peril of my soul.’ I answer, I cannot see it in
  that light. He adds, ‘Others may do well in a living; you cannot; it
  is not your calling.’ I tell him, I readily own that I am not fit to
  plant or water any part of the Lord’s vineyard; but that _if_ I am
  called at all, I am called to preach at Madeley, where I was first
  sent into the ministry, and where a chain of providences, I could not
  break, has again fastened me; and that, though I may be as
  unsuccessful as Noah, yet I am determined to try to be there a
  preacher of Christ’s righteousness; and that, notwithstanding my
  inability, I am not without hopes, that He who reproved a prophet’s
  madness by the mouth of an ass, may reprove a collier’s profaneness
  even by my mouth.

  ”I reserve for another letter an account of my own soul, and of what
  begins to be as dear to me as my own soul—_my parish_.”[68]

Footnote 68:

  “Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon,” vol. i., p. 238.

The other letter, here promised, was written three weeks later. The
following is an extract from it:—

                                         “TERN, _November 19, 1760_.

  “I have hitherto written my sermons, but I am carried so far beyond my
  notes when in the pulpit, that I propose preaching with only my
  sermon-case in my hand next Friday, when I shall venture on an evening
  lecture for the first time. I question whether I shall have above
  half-a-dozen hearers; but I am resolved to try.

  “The weather and the roads are so bad, that the way to the church is
  almost impracticable; nevertheless all the seats were full last
  Sunday. Some begin to come from adjacent parishes, and some more (as
  they say) _threaten_ to come when the season permits.

  “I cannot yet discern any deep work, or indeed anything but what will
  always attend the crying down of man’s righteousness, and the
  insisting upon Christ’s—I mean a general liking among the poor; and
  offence, ridicule, and opposition among the ‘reputable’ and ‘wise’
  people. Should the Lord vouchsafe to plant the Gospel in this county,
  my parish seems to be the best spot for the centre of such a work, as
  it lies among the most populous, profane, and ignorant.

  “But it is well if, after all, there is _any_ work in my parish. I
  despair even of this, when I look at myself, and quite fall in with
  Mr. John Wesley’s opinion about me; though I sometimes hope the Lord
  has not sent me here for nothing. I am, however, fully determined to
  resign my living, if the Lord does not think me worthy to be His
  instrument. I abhor the title of a living for a living’s sake; it is
  death to me.

  “There are three meetings in my parish—a Papist, Quaker, and Baptist,
  and they begin to call the fourth _the Methodist_ one—I mean the
  Church. But the bulk of the inhabitants are stupid heathens, who seem
  past all curiosity, as well as all sense of godliness. I am ready to
  run after them into their pits and forges, and I only wait for
  Providence to show me the way. I am often reduced to great perplexity;
  but the end of it is sweet. I am driven to the Lord, and He comforts,
  encourages, and teaches me. I sometimes feel that zeal which forced
  Paul to wish to be accursed for his brethren’s sake; but I want to
  feel it without interruption. The devil, my friends, and my heart have
  pushed at me to make me fall into worldly cares and creature
  snares,—first, by the thoughts of marrying; then, by the offers of
  several boarders, one of whom, a Christian youth, offered me £60 a
  year; but I have been enabled to cry, ‘_Nothing but Jesus, and the
  service of His people_;’ and I trust the Lord will keep me in the same
  mind.”[69]

Footnote 69:

  “Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon,” vol. i., p. 239.

In such a way and spirit did Fletcher begin his ministry of twenty-five
years’ duration at Madeley. Comment on his simple and honest letters is
unnecessary; it would be uninstructive meddling, which would try the
reader’s patience.




                              CHAPTER IV.
                     _FIRST TWO YEARS AT MADELEY._

              FROM OCTOBER 17, 1760, TO NOVEMBER 22, 1762.

ALMOST of necessity, the life of a clergyman in a small country town is
an uneventful and quiet one; and, therefore, the first ten years that
Fletcher spent at Madeley were unmarked by stirring incidents, such as
were perpetually occurring in the lives of his friends Wesley and
Whitefield.

Madeley is a market town in the county of Salop. It is beautifully
situated in a winding glen, through which the river Severn flows. In
1800, fifteen years after Fletcher’s death, it contained, according to
the parliamentary returns, 291 houses, and 4,758 inhabitants. The church
is dedicated to St. Michael; and the parish includes Coalbrook Dale and
Madeley Wood, noted for their coal mines and their iron-works. Colliers
and iron-workers at Madeley, in the days of Fletcher, were quite as
ignorant and brutal as they were elsewhere. His mission was a trying
one; and its burdensomeness was not lessened by the fact that there was
not a single clergyman in the county of Salop who approved of his
Methodist doctrines, or sympathized with his Methodist endeavours.
Further, he was without parochial experience. He had preached for the
Wesleys and for the Countess of Huntingdon; and, on a few rare
occasions, he had been permitted to occupy the pulpits of the
Established Church; but, notwithstanding the temporary assistance he had
rendered to his Madeley predecessor, he had never held a curacy. In
parish work he was a novice; but he was not dismayed. A few months
before his induction, he had been with Berridge, who, with the exception
of Mr. Hicks at Wrestlingworth, was as much without clerical sympathy
and help in Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire, and Huntingdonshire, as
Fletcher himself was now in Salop. Berridge had seen marvellous results
of his denounced ministry, and why should not Fletcher see the same?
Hence, on January 6, 1761, he wrote as follows to the Countess of
Huntingdon:—

  “I had a secret expectation to be the instrument of a work in this
  part of our Church; and I did not despair of being soon a _little
  Berridge_. Thus warmed with sparks of my own kindling, I looked out to
  see the rocks broken, and the waters flowing out; but, to the great
  disappointment of my hopes, I am now forced to look within, and see
  the need I have of being broken myself. If my being stationed in this
  howling wilderness is to answer no public end as to the Gospel of
  Christ, I will not give up the hope that it may answer a private end
  as to myself, in humbling me under a sense of unprofitableness.

  “As to my parish, all that I see in it, hitherto, is nothing but what
  one may expect from speaking plainly, and with some degree of
  earnestness; a crying out, ‘He is a Methodist—a downright Methodist!’
  While some of the poorer say, ‘Nay, but he speaketh the truth!’ Some
  of the best farmers, and most of the respectable tradesmen, talk about
  turning me out of my living as a Methodist or a Baptist. My Friday
  lecture took better than I expected, and I propose to continue it till
  the congregation desert me. The number of hearers at that time is
  generally larger than that which my predecessor had on Sunday. The
  number of communicants is increased from thirty to above a hundred;
  and a few seem to seek grace in the means. I thank your ladyship for
  mentioning Mr. Jones as a curate. There is little probability of my
  ever wanting one. My oath obliges me to residence, and, when I am
  here, I can easily manage all the business, and only wait for
  opportunities of oftener bearing witness to the truth.”[70]

Footnote 70:

  “Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon,” vol. i., p. 240.

Fletcher’s troubles were various. He was dissatisfied with himself; a
visionary convert caused him anxiety; and many of his parishioners
maligned him. Writing to Charles Wesley on March 10, 1761, he remarked:—

  “I feel more and more that I neither _abide_ in Christ, nor Christ in
  me; nevertheless, I do not _so_ feel it, as to seek Him without
  intermission. ‘_Oh wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from_’
  this heart of unbelief? Blessed be God, who has promised me this
  deliverance, through our Lord Jesus Christ!

  “My new convert has, with great difficulty, escaped the wiles of the
  devil; who, by fifty visions, had set her on the pinnacle of the
  temple. Thanks be to God, she has come down without being cast
  headlong. I have had more trouble with her visions than with her
  unbelief. Two other persons profess that they have received the
  consolations of Divine love: I wait for their _fruits_.

  “A few days ago, I was violently tempted to quit Madeley. The spirit
  of Jonah had so seized upon my heart that I had the insolence to
  murmur against the Lord; but the storm is now happily calmed, at least
  for a season. Alas! what stubbornness there is in the will of man; and
  with what strength does it combat the will of God under the _mask of
  piety_, when it can no longer do so with the uncovered, shameless face
  of vice! ‘_If a man bridleth not his tongue_,’ all his _outward
  ‘religion is vain.’_ May we not add to this, if a man bridleth not his
  will, which is the language of his desires, his _inward religion is
  vain_ also? The Lord does not, however, leave me altogether; and I
  have often a secret hope that He will one day touch my heart and lips
  with a live coal from the altar; and that then His word shall consume
  the stubble, and break to pieces the stone.

  “The question, which you mean to repeat at the end of the winter, is,
  I hope, whether you shall be welcome at Madeley? My answer is, you
  shall be welcome; for I have already lost almost all my reputation,
  and the little that remains does not deserve a competition with the
  pleasure I shall have in seeing you.”[71]

Footnote 71:

  Letters, 1791, p. 107.

Notwithstanding his dejection, and the opposition he had to encounter,
Fletcher continued to labour with unflagging diligence. To his Friday
night lecture he now added the catechising of children on Sunday
afternoons, but relieved himself of the toil of preparing a second
Sunday sermon, by reading the sermons of other men. He also began to see
a prospect of commencing services at Madeley Wood and at Coalbrook Dale.
Hence, in another letter to Charles Wesley he wrote as follows:—

                                         “MADELEY, _April 27, 1761_.

  “When I first came to Madeley, I was greatly mortified and discouraged
  by the smallness of my congregations; and I thought if some of our
  friends in London had seen my little company they would have triumphed
  in their own wisdom. But now, thank God, things are altered in that
  respect. Last Sunday, I had the pleasure of seeing some in the
  churchyard who could not get into the church.

  “I began a few Sundays ago to preach in the afternoon, after
  catechising the children; but I do not preach my own sermons. Twice I
  read a sermon of Archbishop Usher’s; and last Sunday one of the
  Homilies, taking the liberty of making some observations on such
  passages as confirmed what I had advanced in the morning; and, by this
  means, I stopped the mouths of many adversaries.

  “I have frequently had a desire to exhort in Madeley Wood and
  Coalbrook Dale, two villages of my parish; but I have not dared to run
  before I saw an _open door_. It now, I think, begins to open. Two
  small Societies of about twenty persons have formed of themselves in
  those places, although the devil seems determined to overturn all. A
  young person, the daughter of one of my rich parishioners, has been
  thrown into despair, so that everybody thought her insane, and,
  indeed, I thought so too. Judge how our adversaries rejoiced; and, for
  my part, I was tempted to forsake my ministry, and take to my heels; I
  never suffered such affliction. Last Saturday, I humbled myself before
  the Lord on her account, by fasting and prayer; and I hope the Lord
  heard my prayer. Yesterday, she found herself well enough to come to
  church.

  “You will do well to engage your colliers at Kingswood to pray for
  their poor brethren at Madeley. May those at Madeley, one day, equal
  them _in faith_, as they _now do_ in that _wickedness_, for which they
  (the Kingswood colliers) were famous before you went among them.

  “Mr. Hill has written me a very obliging letter, to engage me to
  accompany the elder of my pupils to Switzerland; and if I had any
  other country than the place where I am, I should, perhaps, have been
  tempted to go. At present, however, I have no temptation that way, and
  I have declined the offer as politely as I could.”[72]

Footnote 72:

  Letters, 1791, p. 109.

The case of the young woman just mentioned was to Fletcher a great
trial. In a letter written to Lady Huntingdon[73] on the same day as the
foregoing letter to Charles Wesley, he states, that, previous to this,
reports had been spread that he drove the people mad, and he had borne
such scandals “patiently enough,” but this “glaring instance,” which
seemed to confirm the rumours circulated against him, had thrown him
into “agonies of soul.” To a great extent, Fletcher had yet to learn a
lesson which the Wesleys and Whitefield had long ago been taught: “If ye
be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye; for the spirit of
glory and of God resteth upon you” (1 Peter iv. 14).

Footnote 73:

  “Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon,” vol. i., p. 241.

The scandals were continued; and even the pulpit was used in lampooning
the Madeley preacher. Hence the following, addressed to Charles Wesley:—

                                        “MADELEY, _August 19, 1761_.

  “I know not whether I mentioned to you a sermon preached at the
  Archdeacon’s Visitation. It was almost all levelled at the points
  which are called the doctrines of Methodism, and, as the preacher is
  minister of a parish near mine, it is probable he had me in his eye.
  After the sermon, another clergyman addressed me with an air of
  triumph, and demanded what answer I could make. As several of my
  parishioners were present, besides the churchwardens, I thought it my
  duty to take the matter up; and I have done so by writing a long
  letter to the preacher, in which I have touched the principal mistakes
  of his discourse, with as much politeness and freedom as I was able;
  but I have had no answer. I could have wished for your advice before I
  sealed my letter; but, as I could not have it, I have been very
  cautious, entrenching myself behind the ramparts of Scripture, as well
  as those of our Homilies and Articles.

  “I know not what to say to you of the state of my soul. I daily
  struggle in the Slough of Despond, and I endeavour every day to climb
  the Hill Difficulty. I need wisdom, mildness, and courage; and no man
  has less of them than I.

  “As to the state of my parish, the prospect is yet discouraging. New
  scandals succeed those that wear away; but ‘_offences must come_.’
  Happy shall I be if the offence cometh not by me. My churchwardens
  speak of hindering strangers from coming to the church, and of
  repelling them from the Lord’s table; but on these points I am
  determined to make head against them. A club of eighty working men, in
  a neighbouring parish, being offended at their minister, determined to
  come in procession to my church, and requested me to preach a sermon
  for them; but I thought proper to decline doing so, and have thereby a
  little regained the good graces of the minister, at least for a
  time.”[74]

Footnote 74:

  Letters, 1791, p. 111.

The preacher, at the Archdeacon’s visitation, was the Rev. Mr.
Prothero;[75] and the “long letter” to him may be found in Fletcher’s
collected works (vol. viii.), where it fills twenty-eight octavo pages,
and is entitled a “Defence of Experimental Religion.” It is dated
“Madeley, July 25, 1761.”

Footnote 75:

  _Methodist Magazine_, 1821, p. 17.

Mr. Prothero’s “elegant sermon,” as Fletcher terms it, seems to have
consisted of two parts: a defence of revealed religion against Deists
and Infidels; and a warning against religious superstition and
enthusiasm. The first part gave Fletcher “exceeding great satisfaction,”
and the _design_ of the second part was good, for, as Fletcher remarks,
“It is the duty of a preacher to keep the sacred truths committed to
him, as well from being perverted by enthusiasts, as from being crushed
by infidels. Boasting of communion with God, and peculiar favours from
heaven, is hurtful to the cause of Christ, when people’s lives show them
to be actuated by a spirit of delusion; and setting up impulses in the
room of repentance, faith, hope, charity, obedience, has done no small
mischief in the Church of God.”

But, while Fletcher praises Mr. Prothero for “the goodness of his
design,” he passes strictures upon the execution of it. He condemns Mr.
Prothero for “representing, in general, that virtue, benevolence,
good-nature, and morality, are the _way_ to salvation;” and shows, that
according “to the Word of God and the teaching of our Church,” sinners
are saved by the exercise of faith in Christ. He objected to Mr.
Prothero’s doctrine, that, by nature, and without the assistance of
Divine grace, man “has the same power to enter the paths of virtue as to
walk across a room.” He censured the way in which the preacher
discountenanced the doctrine of the necessity of the new birth; and he
maintained, at great length, that to “set aside all feelings in
religion, and to rank them with unaccountable impulses,” is not
consistent with the teachings of the Bible, and with the Liturgy,
Articles, and Homilies of the English Church.

Soon after this, Fletcher was in another trouble. Hence the following
letter written to Charles Wesley:—

                                       “MADELEY, _October 12, 1761_.

  “MY DEAR SIR,—You have always the goodness to encourage me, and your
  encouragements are not unseasonable; for discouragements follow one
  after another with very little intermission. Those which are of an
  inward nature are sufficiently known to you; but some others are
  peculiar to myself, especially those I have had for eight days past,
  during Madeley wake.

  “Seeing that I could not suppress these bacchanals, I did all in my
  power to moderate their madness; but my endeavours have had little or
  no effect. You cannot well imagine how much the animosity of my
  parishioners is heightened, and with what boldness it discovers itself
  against me, because I preached against drunkenness, shows, and
  bull-baiting. The publicans and maltmen will not forgive me. They
  think that to preach against drunkenness, and to cut their purse, is
  the same thing.

  “My church begins not to be so well filled as it has been, and I
  account for it thus: the curiosity of some of my hearers is satisfied,
  and others are offended by the word; the roads are worse; and if it
  shall ever please the Lord to pour His Spirit upon us, the time is not
  yet come. The people, instead of saying, ‘Let us go up to the house of
  the Lord,’ exclaim, ‘Why should we go and hear a Methodist?’

  “I should lose all patience with my flock if I had not more reason to
  be satisfied with them than with myself. My own barrenness furnishes
  me with excuses for theirs; and I wait the time when God shall give
  seed to the sower and increase to the seed sown. In waiting that time,
  I learn the meaning of this prayer, ‘Thy will be done.’

               “Believe me your sincere, though unworthy, friend,
                                                  “J. FLETCHER.”[76]

Footnote 76:

  Letters, 1791, p. 112.

Fletcher’s faithful preaching offended the publicans, and, judging of
his sermons in general by the following specimens, it is not surprising
that his preaching offended others. The extracts are taken from a sermon
delivered in the month of December 1761, and first published in the
Dublin edition of the _Methodist Magazine_ for 1821 (pp. 249–258).[77]
The text was, “Thou shalt speak My words to them, whether they will hear
or whether they will forbear, for they are most rebellious” (Ezek. ii.
7). After challenging his congregation to assert their innocence,
Fletcher proceeded:—

  “Supposing you never allowed yourself to dishonour the name of God by
  customary swearing, or grossly to violate His Sabbaths, or commonly to
  neglect the solemnities of His public worship; supposing, again, that
  you have not injured your neighbours in their lives, their chastity,
  their character, or their property, either by violence or by fraud; or
  that you never scandalously debased your rational nature by that vile
  intemperance which sinks a man below the worst kind of brutes;
  supposing all this, can you pretend that you have not in smaller
  instances violated the rules of piety, of temperance, and of chastity?
  Does not your own heart prove you guilty of pride, of passion, of
  sensuality, of an excessive fondness for the world and its enjoyments;
  of murmuring, or at least secretly repining, against God under the
  strokes of an afflictive Providence; of misspending a great deal of
  your time; of abusing the gifts of God’s bounty to vain, and, in some
  instances, to pernicious purposes; of mocking Him when you have
  pretended to engage in His worship, drawing near to Him with your lips
  while your heart has been far from Him? Does not your conscience
  condemn you of some one breach of the law at least? and by one breach
  of it, does not the Holy Ghost bear witness (James ii. 10) that you
  are become guilty of all, and are as incapable of being justified
  before God by any obedience of your own, as if you had committed ten
  thousand offences? But, in reality, there are ten thousand and more to
  be charged to your account. When you come to reflect on all your sins
  of negligence, as well as on your voluntary transgressions; on all the
  instances in which you have failed to do good when it was in your
  power to do it; on all the instances in which acts of devotion have
  been omitted, especially in secret; and on all those cases in which
  you have shown a stupid disregard to the honour of God, and to the
  temporal and eternal happiness of your fellow-creatures; when all
  these, I say, are reviewed, the number will swell beyond all
  possibility of account, and force you to cry out, ‘I am rebellious,
  most rebellious; mine iniquities are more than the hairs of my head!’
  They will appear in such a light before you that your own heart will
  charge you with countless multitudes; and how much more then that God,
  ‘who is greater than your heart, and knoweth all things’?”

Footnote 77:

  Fletcher seldom wrote his sermons, and more rarely read them. More
  than one hundred and forty sermons of Wesley’s have been published,
  and at least sixty of Whitefield’s; but of Fletcher’s, who had much
  more leisure than either Wesley or Whitefield, only about a dozen. All
  the rest are mere outlines. The following are copied from Fletcher’s
  MSS., and have not before been published. They may be taken as fair
  specimens of Fletcher’s pulpit preparations and pulpit helps. They are
  skeletons of two sermons, preached from Matt. xxii. 36–39:— W “I. Why
  we must love God.

  “II. How we must love Him.

  “III. What we must do in order to love Him.

  “He is our Creator, Preserver, Redeemer, Sanctifier. He commands us to
  love Him. Out of His love there is no happiness. Love of God contains
  all. He loved us first.

  “With all our soul, heart, and strength. Above all things. More than
  our life, wives, children, estate, honour, ourselves.

  “Be convinced we do not love Him. Abhor ourselves for our rebellion.
  Confess, repent, and believe. Keep a sense of our forgiveness. Pray to
  Him. Praise Him. Walk with Him. Seek but Him. Refuse all comfort
  unless we feel His love. Keep a constant communion with Him by seeing
  His glory in the face of Jesus Christ.

  “How have we fulfilled this great duty? Try yourselves. Pray an hour
  by yourselves. If you do not love, you hate. What fury to hate all
  that is good, great, and lovely! What madness to set our love on
  creatures! It must fall with them. Love God in Christ. Look to Christ.
  Believe in Christ, to love God. If you do not love Him, you are in
  your lives in the devil’s state. You can no more go to heaven than the
  devil. Choose which you will love. The world calls. Let us give all
  for all.“

  “Love thy _neighbour_. All men; though never so distant in place,
  different in opinions, interests. Because made by the same hand;
  partakers of the same nature; bought with the same blood; capable of
  the same happiness.

  “As _ourselves_. Not judging; not thinking evil; not speaking evil;
  not defrauding; not coveting; doing them good; praying for them;
  honouring them

  “Because all made in image of God. None but in something better than
  ourselves; none but is a child of God, or may become so.

  “Put the best construction on words or actions, much more upon
  thoughts. Relieve necessities. This is imitating God. What we give is
  lent to God.

  “Love universally, constantly, impartially, sincerely; from a sense of
  Christ’s love.”

This was plain speaking, but very characteristic of the preaching of the
Church of England Methodists. Space will permit only one other extract
from this sermon.

  “And now, sinner, think seriously with yourself what defence you will
  make to all this? Will you fly in the face of God and that of your
  conscience so openly as to deny one of the charges of rebellion, yea,
  of aggravated rebellion, I have advanced against you? Have you not
  lifted yourself up against the Lord of heaven? Have you not sided with
  His sworn enemies—the world and the flesh? What part of your body,
  what faculty of your soul, have you not employed as an instrument of
  unrighteousness? When did you live one day before God with the
  dependence of a creature, the gratitude of a redeemed creature, the
  heavenly frame of a sanctified creature? Nay, when did you live one
  hour without violating God’s known law, either in word, or thought, or
  action? Have not you done it almost continually by the vanity of your
  mind and the hardness of your heart, if not by the open immorality of
  your life? And, what infinitely aggravates your guilt, have you not
  despised and abused God’s numberless mercies? Have you not affronted
  conscience, His deputy in your breast? Have you not resisted and
  grieved His Spirit? Yea, have you not trifled with Him in all your
  pretended submissions or solemn engagements? Thousands are, no doubt,
  already in hell whose guilt never equalled yours; and yet God has
  spared you to see almost the end of another year, and to hear now this
  plain representation of your case. And will you not yet consider?
  Shall nothing move you to shake off that amazing carelessness and
  stupid disregard of your salvation? Will you never begin to ‘work it
  out with fear and trembling’? Will you slumber in impenitency till
  eternal woes crush you into destruction? Is death, is judgment, is the
  bottomless pit so distant that you dare put off from week to week the
  day of your conversion? You have read in God’s Word that there is
  mercy with Him that He may be feared; but where did you read that
  there is mercy with Him for those who fear Him not? Show me such a
  place; I shall not say anywhere in the Bible, but in any book written
  by a moral heathen. And yet you hope you can be saved in this way.

  “Sinner, despise me _here_ if thou wilt; call me _here_ an enthusiast,
  and laugh at the concern I feel for thy perishing soul; but
  _hereafter_ thou wilt do me justice, clear me before the Lord Jesus,
  and acknowledge that thy blood is upon thine own head, that thou art
  undone because thou wouldst be undone, because thou wouldst take
  neither warning nor reproof.”

To give the reader a further idea of the faithfulness and searching
character of Fletcher’s preaching at this early period of his Madeley
ministry, the subjoined extracts are given from sermons preached during
the first three months of 1762.

In January, 1762,[78] he delivered a discourse upon the words, “Ye will
not come unto Me, that ye might have life;” in which he described “four
classes of sinners who will not come to Christ that they might have
life;” and proved “that unbelief, or not coming to Christ for life, is
the most abominable and damning of all sins.” One brief extract on the
latter point must suffice:—

  “Unbelief is a sin of so deep a dye that the devils in hell cannot
  commit the like. Our Saviour never prayed, wept, bled, and died for
  devils. He never said to them, ‘Ye will not come unto Me, that ye
  might have life.’ They can never be so madly ungrateful as to slight a
  Saviour. Mercy never wooed their stubborn, proud hearts as it does
  ours. They have abused grace, it is true, but they never trampled
  mercy underfoot. This more than diabolical sin is reserved for thee,
  careless sinner. Now thou hearest Christ compassionately say in the
  text, ‘Ye will not come unto Me,’ and thou remainest unmoved; but the
  time cometh when Jesus, who meekly entreats, shall sternly curse; when
  He who in tender patience says, ‘Ye will not come unto Me,’ shall
  thunder in righteous vengeance, ‘Depart from Me, ye cursed; depart
  unto the second death,—the fire prepared for the devil and his
  angels.’ In vain wilt thou plead then as thou dost now, ‘Lord, I am no
  adulterer; I am no extortioner; I used to eat at Thy table; I was
  baptized in Thy name; I was a true churchman; there are many worse
  than I am.’ This will not admit thee into the kingdom of Christ. His
  answer will be, ‘I know you not; you never came to Me for life.’”

Footnote 78:

  _Methodist Magazine_, 1821, p. 651.

Plain preaching such as this was not likely to please the easy-going
Pharisees of the age in which Fletcher lived, any more than it is likely
to be popular among the same class of people at the present day. To
utter such truths required courage then; and it requires courage now.
Fletcher, one of the gentlest of human beings, possessed this courage.

No doubt there were many occasions when his sermons were full of the
richest comfort to those who had truly repented, and unfeignedly
believed Christ’s holy Gospel; but he never failed faithfully to fulfil
an Old Testament commission, binding upon the ministers of God
throughout all time: “Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a
trumpet, and show My people their transgression, and the house of Jacob
their sins” (Isa. lviii. 1).

At the risk of wearying the reader, further extracts must be given,
exemplifying Fletcher’s fearless fidelity.

On January 4, 1762, England declared war against Spain; and, a few days
after, proclamations were issued for a general fast to be observed in
England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland, in the month of March.[79]
Fletcher, as a loyal Churchman, preached on this occasion;[80] his text
was Ezek. xxxiii. 7–9. After a few preliminary remarks respecting the
king’s “pious proclamation,” he proceeds to say,—

  “We must attack, unmask, and overthrow vice with holy violence, and
  strike at the heart of sin with the boldness of John the Baptist, and
  in the spirit of Elijah. Without any apology for my plainness, I shall
  endeavour to convince the wicked man both of his wickedness and
  danger.”

Footnote 79:

  _London Magazine_, 1762, p. 48.

Footnote 80:

  _Wesleyan Methodist Magazine_, 1822, p. 153.

Fletcher begins with “practical atheists”

  “Thousands there are, who, by gross ignorance, shameful neglect of
  instruction, and abominable contempt of godliness, are in the front of
  the battle, and next to the prince of darkness. Their heart is
  darkened by the mists of pride and the clouds of presumption, and they
  are such utter strangers to their want of spiritual light and divine
  grace, that they seldom or never call upon God for help with any
  solemnity. The unhappy heathenish families who are of that stamp meet
  regularly every day to eat, drink, and make provision for the flesh;
  but how seldom do they meet to read and pray. You will find almost as
  much godliness among the wild Indians as among these practical
  atheists. But why should I call them _atheists_? They have many gods.
  The world is their god; pleasure is their god; vanity is their god;
  money is their god; their belly is their god; to some or other of
  these idols, they sacrifice their hearts and their time. As for the
  God of heaven, the great and eternal Jehovah, they put Him off with a
  careless attendance on His public worship on Sunday morning, if the
  weather suits them; and it is well if to this they add sometimes the
  babbling over of the Lord’s Prayer and the Creed, which, after all, in
  the manner in which they do it, is no better than a solemn mockery of
  the Saviour, whom they constantly crucify afresh. Do you belong to
  such a heathenish, prayerless family? If you do, suffer me to deliver
  my soul by telling you, that you are the very first person to whom I
  am bound to say, ‘Thou shalt surely die.’ Read your sentence in Psalm
  lxxix. 6. What! shall the indignation of the Lord fall upon prayerless
  families among the heathen, and shall it pass by the nominally
  Christian, but prayerless family to which you belong? No, no; the
  Judge of all the earth will do right; He will repay you to your face.”

  “The wicked is often known, to others and to himself, by his
  injustice, oppression, cruelty, deceit, and unfair dealing. Did you
  ever make a prey of the poor and helpless? Are you like the
  horse-leech, crying, ‘Give, give,’ still wanting more profit, and
  never thinking you have enough? Do you take more care to lay up
  treasures on earth than in heaven? Have you got the unhappy secret of
  distilling silver out of the poor man’s brow, and gold out of the
  tears of helpless widows and friendless orphans? Or, which is rather
  worse, do you, directly or indirectly, live by poisoning others, by
  encouraging the immoderate use of those refreshments, which, taken to
  excess, disorder the reason, ruin the soul, and prove no better than
  slow poison to the body? If your business calls you to buy or sell, do
  you use falsehood? do you equivocate? do you exaggerate or conceal the
  truth, in order to impose upon your neighbour, and make a profit of
  his necessity or credulity? If any of these marks be upon you, God’s
  word singles you out, and drags you to the bar of Divine justice to
  hear your doom in the text, ‘The wicked shall surely die.’ O, see your
  danger; repent, and make restitution! Why should you meet the unjust
  steward in hell, when you may yet follow Zaccheus into heaven?”

  “There is another fearful sin, which has in it no profit, no pleasure,
  no, not sensual sweetness enough to bait the hook of temptation. The
  only enticement to it is the diabolical disposition of the wicked man,
  and the horrid pride he takes in _cutting a figure_ among the children
  of Belial. I speak of oaths and curses,—those arrows shot from the
  string of a hellish heart, and the bow of a Luciferian tongue, against
  heaven itself; these are some of the sparks of hell-fire, which, now
  and then, come out of the throat of a wicked man. Do they ever come
  out of thine? A year ago, I laid before you the horror of that sin,
  and besought you to leave it to Satan and his angels, and to act no
  more the part of an _incarnate devil_. Have you strictly complied with
  that request? Has not heaven been pierced with another fiery dart?
  Have not good men, or good angels (if any attend you still) shuddered
  at those imprecations, which you have used, perhaps without remorse?”

  “But, perhaps, your conscience bears you witness that you are not a
  swearing Christian, or rather a swearing infidel. Well; but are you
  clear in the point of adultery, fornication, or uncleanness? Does not
  the guilt of some vile sin, which you have wickedly indulged in time
  past, and perhaps are still indulging, mark you for the member of a
  harlot, and not the member of Christ? Do you not kindle the wrath of
  heaven against yourself and your country, as the men and women of
  Gomorrah did against themselves and the other cities of the plain? If
  you cherish the sparks of wantonness, as they did, how can you but be
  made with them to suffer the vengeance of eternal fire? Do not flatter
  yourselves with the vain hope, that your sin is not so heinous as
  theirs. If it be less in degree, is it not infinitely greater in its
  aggravating circumstances? Were these poor Canaanites _Christians_?
  Had they Bibles and ministers? Had they sermons and sacraments? Did
  they ever vow, as you have done, to renounce the devil, and all the
  sinful lusts of the flesh? Did they ever hear of the Son of God
  sweating great drops of blood, in an agony of prayer, to quench the
  fire of human corruption? O acknowledge your guilt and danger, and, by
  deep repentance, prevent infallible destruction.

  “I cannot pass in silence the detestable, though fashionable, sin,
  which has brought down the curse of heaven, and poured desolation and
  ruin upon the most flourishing kingdoms,—I mean pride in apparel. Even
  in this place, where poverty, hard labour, and drudgery would, one
  should think, prevent a sin which Christianity cannot tolerate even in
  kings’ houses, there are not wanting foolish virgins, who draw
  iniquity with cords of vanity, and betray the levity of their hearts
  by that of their dress. Yea, some women, who should be mothers in
  Israel, and adorn themselves with good works as holy and godly
  matrons, openly affect the opposite character. You may see them offer
  themselves first to the idol of vanity, and then sacrifice their
  children upon the same altar. As some sons of Belial teach their
  little ones to curse, before they can well speak, so these daughters
  of Jezebel drag their unhappy offspring, before they can walk, to the
  haunts of vanity and pride. They complain of evening lectures, but run
  to midnight dancings. O that such persons would let the prophet’s
  words sink into their frothy minds, and fasten upon their careless
  hearts: ‘Because the daughters of Sion are haughty, and walk with
  stretched-forth necks and wanton eyes, the Lord will smite with a sore
  the crown of their head, and discover their shame: instead of well-set
  hair, there shall be baldness, and burning instead of beauty.’”

These abbreviated extracts of Fletcher’s descriptions of “the wicked”
are followed by his _directions_ to humble themselves before Almighty
God; to confess their sins with deep sorrow, and to return to the Lord
with prayer and fasting; to meditate on the universality, commonness,
and boldness of the nation’s wickedness; to begin a visible and thorough
reformation; and to seek personal salvation in Christ. The bold preacher
cries:—

  “From the gilded palace to the thatched cottage, our guilt calls for
  vengeance. Wickedness is become so fashionable, that he who refuses to
  run with others into vanity, intemperance, or profaneness, is in
  danger of losing his character, on one hand; while, on the other, the
  son of Belial prides himself in excesses, glories in diabolical
  practices, and scoffs with impunity at religion and virtue. O England!
  England! happy, yet ungrateful island! Dost thou repay fruitfulness by
  profaneness,—plenty by vanity,—liberty by impiety,—and the light of
  Christianity by excesses of immorality?

  “As you regard the prosperity of the king, the good of our Church, and
  the welfare of our country;—as you would not bring a private curse
  upon yourself, your house, and your dearest friends;—as you value the
  honour of Almighty God, and dread His awakened wrath;—as you would not
  force Him to make our land a field of blood, or to break the staff of
  our bread, and send famine, pestilence, popery, or some other fearful
  judgment among us;—I pray you, I beseech, I entreat each of you, my
  dear brethren! as upon my bended knees,—in the name of our Lord Jesus,
  and by those bowels of Divine mercy against which we have madly kicked
  in times past, and which, nevertheless, still yearn over us,—I entreat
  you not to rest in outward humiliation and reformation. Christians
  must go one step beyond the Ninevites. O seek then, with all true
  Christians, a righteousness superior to that of the Scribes and
  Pharisees. Seek it in Christ. Never rest, till you are sure of your
  interest in Him; till you feel the virtue of His blood applied to your
  hearts by the power of His Spirit. Without this, all the rest will
  stand you in little stead.”[81]

Footnote 81:

  _Wesleyan Methodist Magazine_, 1822, p. 222.

This, in truth, was thunder and lightning preaching,—no doubt greatly
needed then, as, indeed, it is greatly needed now; preaching likely to
give offence, but the faithfulness of which God always honours, and
crowns with marked success. It raised up against Fletcher bitter
enemies; but it was the means of converting not a few of his godless
parishioners.

One of these was Mary Matthews, who, listening to the reproaches cast
upon Fletcher, was greatly prejudiced against him. At length, she went
to hear him. Mary thought herself very good, but Fletcher showed she was
very vile. For two years, she was an earnest penitent, and then, by
faith in Christ, found peace with God. Mary was brought before
magistrates for opening her little house, in Madeley Wood, for
preaching, but she continued faithful; and, in 1788, passed away to
heaven, her last words being, “I am almost at home. Farewell! God bless
you! God for ever bless you!”

Another was Mary Barnard, who lived to the age of ninety, was very lame,
but always crawled to Madeley church when the weather would permit.
Totally without education herself, she had a son who became a Methodist
local preacher. Her death occurred in 1797, and her last message to
Fletcher’s widow was,—“The covenant is signed and sealed between my Lord
and me. I am His by a marriage bond; and He is mine. And now I set to my
seal, that the blood of Jesus cleanses from all sin.”[82]

Footnote 82:

  _Methodist Magazine_, 1800, pp. 219–223.

Such conversions were among Fletcher’s encouragements; and he greatly
needed them. His preaching saved some, but offended others. In one of
his unpublished manuscripts, dated “Madeley, February 28, 1762,” he
notes a somewhat remarkable occurrence:—

  “Last Sunday, only one objection was made against the doctrine I
  preached in this church, and that, I think, was a poor one, as it was
  supported by no argument and no Scripture. The sum of it was this, ‘It
  is hard to say that one breach of the law brings a man under the
  curse, and exposes one out of Christ to the damnation of hell.’ To
  this I answer by four arguments.

  “The first is taken from matters of fact in the Word of God. By one
  sin, and by the offence of one, condemnation came upon all men, namely
  by the one sin of Adam’s eating the forbidden fruit. And a more awful
  example you have in the sudden destruction of Ananias and Sapphira his
  wife _for having told one single lie_.

  “The second argument is taken from common sense, which tells us that
  one leak in a ship unstopped will sink it in time, as certainly as a
  hundred; one piece broken out of a glass makes it a useless glass, as
  much as if it was dashed into twenty pieces; one stab of a dagger
  through the heart kills a man as much as a hundred would. And so one
  sin uncancelled by Christ’s blood will as surely destroy an
  unconverted man as a hundred, though his destruction will not be so
  terrible as that of him who has committed a hundred.

  “The third argument is taken from the exactness of human laws and the
  practice of earthly judges. They all condemn a man for one single
  offence. If one can be proved it is enough. Let a murderer kill one
  man, he is to be hanged as well as if he had killed a hundred. Let a
  highwayman take one pound from one single person, the law condemns him
  for a felon, and sends him to the gallows, as well as if he had taken
  a thousand pounds from a thousand different travellers. The law of the
  land, to the breach of which the penalty is annexed, is as effectually
  broken by one act of felony as by a hundred; and the law of God is as
  much, though not so heinously, broken, by one sin as by a hundred:
  consequently the law of God curses and damns for one sin as well as
  for a hundred.

  “The fourth argument is taken from Deuteronomy xxvii. 26, ‘Cursed be
  he that confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them.’ Also,
  Galatians iii. 10, ‘Cursed is every one that continueth not in all
  things which are written in the book of the law, to do them.’ And
  James ii. 10, ‘Whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in
  one point, he is guilty of all.’ He violates the law, despises the
  law, incurs the punishment threatened.”

Passing by Fletcher’s arguments and logic, this fugitive manuscript is
of some importance, as intimating not only that objections were made to
Fletcher’s doctrines, but also that he was accustomed publicly to notice
and answer them in his parish church.

Fletcher had other troubles besides those arising from objections to his
teaching. In his Fast-day sermon, preached on March 12, 1762, he had
cried:—

  “‘Because of swearing the land mourneth.’ If the prophet of old had
  lived in our degenerate days, he would have added, ‘Because of perjury
  the land groaneth.’ To go no farther than the place we inhabit, how
  many of us, who have been entrusted with public offices, have wilfully
  broken the oaths administered unto us? How many open and notorious
  drunkards, fighters, sabbath-breakers, blasphemers of God’s Word, and
  cursers of men, have escaped deserved censure, I shall not say by the
  accidental neglect, but by the downright perjury of officers?”

This bold accusation stimulated one of Fletcher’s young parishioners to
put the law in force against one of the culpable parish officers; by
which act the young man brought himself into trouble, and also Fletcher,
who protected him.

Further, in the small house of Mary Matthews, built upon the rock in
Madeley Wood, Fletcher had begun to hold preaching services; the
congregation assembling there had been called “the Rock Church;” and
Mary Matthews had been fined £20 for permitting such assemblies in her
humble dwelling. Fletcher refers to these incidents in the following
letter to Charles Wesley:—

                                           “MADELEY, _May 16, 1762_.

  “Since my last, our troubles have increased. A young man having put in
  force the Act, for suppressing swearing, against a parish officer, he
  stirred up all the other half gentlemen to remove him from the parish.
  Here I interposed, and, to do so with effect, I took the young man
  into my service. By God’s grace, I have been enabled to conduct
  myself, in this matter, so as to give them no handle against me; and,
  in spite of all their cabals, I have got the better of them.

  “What has greatly encouraged them is the behaviour of a magistrate,
  who was at the first inclined to favour me, but afterwards turned
  against me with peculiar malevolence, and proceeded so far as to
  threaten me and all my flock of the Rock Church with imprisonment.
  Hitherto, the Lord has stood by me, and my little difficulties are
  nothing to me; but I fear I support them rather like a philosopher
  than a Christian. We were to have been mobbed with a drum last
  Tuesday, at the Rock Church; but their captain, a papist, behaved
  himself so very ill, that they were ashamed of him, and are made
  peaceable for the present.”[83]

Footnote 83:

  Letters, 1791, p. 114

Fletcher wrote to this persecuting papist the following letter, which is
now for the first time published:—

  “SIR,—The indecent and profane manner in which you broke upon those of
  my parishioners who came to me for private exhortations at Mrs.
  Matthews’, lays me under an absolute obligation to present you at
  Ludlow Court as a person notoriously guilty—1, Of drunkenness; 2, of
  cursing; 3, of disturbing me in the discharge of the private labours
  of my ministry; 4, of profane disregard to the Liturgy of the
  Established Church; 5, of want of respect for the Royal Family, openly
  intimated in indecent interruption while I prayed for them, and
  obliging me to get up from my knees and make you go out of the room
  before I could conclude the collect in peace; and 6, of cursing, and
  making game of the Third Person of the Holy Trinity.

  “Though I told you upon the spot, that you should be informed of for
  your profane behaviour, I think it my duty to acquaint you of it more
  particularly, that you may prepare your answers to the above mentioned
  charges.

  “I assure you, Sir, that malice, or any private pique, is entirely out
  of the question. I heartily wish you well, and am ready to do you any
  service but that of sacrificing the interests of religion and virtue
  to open profaneness and immorality.

  “The following considerations weigh much with me to make me insist on
  the churchwardens putting you in their presentment; and they will, I
  hope, convince you that I act only according to the dictates of
  Christian prudence.

  “1. Most of the things laid to your charge were grown into habit
  before they broke out in my presence. It is not the first time that
  you have been seen in liquor, and been heard to use profane
  expressions, and to make sport of the things of God, and turn my
  labours into ridicule.

  “2. So public an offence absolutely demands a public punishment, and
  the officers, whom I have informed of your behaviour, must be perjured
  if they present you not, and an irreparable blow will be given to the
  honour of religion and morality.

  “3. The regard I have for our Church, and the peace of the parish,
  obliges me to resist in you the persecuting spirit of opposition your
  Church is so noted for.

  “4. Part of my business here as a clergyman of the Church of England
  is to withstand the propagation of your dangerous principles, and to
  oppose the increase of the blind persecuting zeal which some seem to
  breathe after you. If you are suffered openly to excite that profane
  zeal with impunity, how will your misled companions be confirmed in
  their errors. If you, who have so many laws to curb you, can offend
  with impunity, how daring will others grow in wickedness.

  “5. A person of note in the parish has lately undergone the severity
  of the law for part of the above-mentioned charges. What intolerable
  partiality would it be in the officers and me to take no notice of you
  who are guilty of the whole.

  “Lastly. If I do not get you presented, I shall for ever deprive
  myself of the liberty of repressing profaneness, immorality, and
  persecution in my parish. Every drunkard, every swearer, every railer,
  etc., etc., will (and not without reason) say to me, ‘You could spare
  Mr. Haughton, who was notoriously guilty of our errors; why should you
  be stricter with Protestants than with Papists?’

  “I flatter myself that these reasons will convince you that I am led
  by Christian prudence and a calm resolution to oppose triumphing
  profaneness, and not at all by any private views or uncharitable
  motives. And, wishing that, if you are convicted, the course of human
  laws may lead you to the harbour of temperance and piety,

                “I remain, Sir, your humble and obedient servant,
                                                      “J. FLETCHER.”

Of course, opinions differ as to the expediency of trying to make men
moral by Acts of Parliament; but there can be no doubt of Fletcher’s
Christian sincerity in the action he took against Mr. Haughton. His
effort, however, was a failure. Writing to Charles Wesley, in the month
of July, 1762, he said:—

  “Your letter arrived some days too late, to prevent my taking a false
  step respecting the papist in question. Three weeks ago, I went to
  Ludlow to the Bishop’s visitation, and I thought the occasion
  favourable for my purpose; but the churchwardens, when we were on the
  spot, refused to support me, and the court has paid no regard to my
  presentation. Thus I have gained some experience, though at my own
  cost. The sermon did not touch the string with which I was whipped at
  the last visitation; and I afterwards had the boldness to go and dine
  with the Bishop.

  “Many of my parishioners are strangely disconcerted at my bringing my
  gown back from Ludlow. With respect to the magistrate I mentioned to
  you in my last, because he acted as judge of the circuit two years
  ago, he now believes himself as able a lawyer as Judge Foster; but,
  for the present, he contents himself with threatenings. I met him the
  other day, and, after he had called me Jesuit, etc., and menaced me
  with his cane, he assured me that he would soon put down our
  assemblies. How ridiculous is this impotent rage!

  “I have attempted to form a Society, and, in spite of much opposition
  and many difficulties, I hope to succeed. I preach, I exhort, I pray;
  but, as yet, I seem to have cast the net on the wrong side of the
  ship. Lord Jesus, come Thyself, and furnish me with a Divine
  commission!

  “For some months past, I have laboured under an insuperable
  drowsiness: I could sleep day and night; and the hours which I ought
  to employ with Christ on the mount, I spend like Peter in the
  garden.”[84]

Footnote 84:

  Letters, 1791, p. 115.

Poor Fletcher’s troubles continued and increased. A month later, he
wrote again to Charles Wesley, as follows:—

  “I have still trials of all sorts. First, spiritual ones. My heart is
  hard; I have not that contrition, that filial fear, that sweet, humble
  melting of heart before the Lord, which I consider essential to
  Christianity.

  “Secondly, the opposition made to my ministry increases. A young
  clergyman, who lives in Madeley Wood, where he has great influence,
  has openly declared war against me, by pasting on the church door a
  paper, in which he charges me with rebellion, schism, and being a
  disturber of the public peace. He puts himself at the head of the
  gentlemen of the parish (as they term themselves), and, supported by
  the Recorder of Wenlock, he is determined to put in force the
  Conventicle Act against me. A few weeks ago, the widow who lives in
  the Rock Church, and a young man, who read and prayed in my absence,
  were taken up. I attended them before the magistrate, and the young
  clergyman with his troop were present. They called me Jesuit, etc.;
  and the magistrate tried to frighten me, by saying that he would put
  the Act in force, though we should assemble only in my own house. I
  pleaded my cause as well as I could; but, seeing he was determined to
  hear no reason, I told him he must do as he pleased, and that, if the
  Act in question concerned us, we were ready to suffer all its rigours.
  In his rage, he went the next day to Wenlock, and proposed to grant a
  warrant to have me apprehended; but, as the other magistrates were of
  opinion that the business did not come under their cognizance, but
  belonged to the Spiritual Court, he was obliged to swallow his spittle
  alone.

  “Mr. Madan,[85] whom I have consulted, tells me the Act may be
  enforced against the mistress of the house, the young man, and all who
  were present. The churchwardens talk of putting me in the Spiritual
  Court for meeting in houses, etc.; but what is worst of all, three
  false witnesses offer to prove upon oath that I am a liar; and some of
  _my followers_ (as they are called) have dishonoured their profession,
  to the great joy of our adversaries.

  “In the midst of these difficulties I have reason to bless the Lord,
  that my heart is not troubled. Forget me not in your prayers.”[86]

Footnote 85:

  The Rev. Martin Madan, who, before he became a clergyman, was a
  barrister-at-law.

Footnote 86:

  Letters, 1791, p. 117.

All this braggart persecution seems to have ended in threats. Fletcher
wrote again to Charles Wesley, on November 22, 1762:—

  “The debates about the illegality of exhorting in houses (although
  only in my own parish) grew some time ago to such a height, that I was
  obliged to lay my reasons before the Bishop; but his lordship very
  prudently sends me no answer. I think he knows not how to disapprove,
  and yet dares not approve this methodistical way of procedure.”[87]

Footnote 87:

  Letters, 1791, p. 124.

Such is a bird’s-eye view of Fletcher’s ministry and ministerial trials
during the first two years after his appointment to the living of
Madeley in 1760. As an earnest evangelical clergyman of the Church of
England, he almost stood alone. Shropshire had produced one like-minded
minister; but he, the Rev. Mr. Hatton, was now in the Isle of Man. To
this gentleman, Fletcher, in his solitude, wrote as follows:—

                                         “MADELEY, _August 4, 1762_.

  “REV. SIR,—There are so few of our profession in this county who are
  not ashamed of the cross of Christ, and of the Homilies and Articles
  of our Church, that it gave me no small pleasure to hear you are not
  led away with the generality into dry empty notions of morality and
  formality,—the two legs on which fashionable religion stalks through
  this so-called Christian land. May the Lord Jesus convince us daily
  more and more, by His Spirit, of sin in ourselves, and of
  righteousness in Him! May we, in the strength of our dying Samson,
  pull down the buildings of self-righteousness, though the consequence
  should be to see all our hopes of preferment and esteem buried in the
  ruins! May we never be led to preach another Gospel than that of
  Christ! ‘He that believeth shall be saved; he that believeth not shall
  be damned’ (Mark xvi. 16).

  “I hope, Sir, you will not be discouraged. Regard not the wind, but
  sow your seed early and late; and the Lord of the harvest will give
  the increase, as seemeth best to His heavenly wisdom. I meet with many
  trials in my parish, but our faithful Lord opens always a door for me
  to escape; and so He will for you.

  “I should be thankful to Providence, if your way should be made plain
  into this neighbourhood. You owe yourself to Shropshire in particular;
  and no county needs hands for the spiritual harvest more than this
  does. I pray that the Lord of the harvest may thrust you among us.

  “I bespeak a sermon when you come to Salop; trusting that you will not
  be ashamed to bear witness to the truth as it is in Jesus, from so
  despised a pulpit as that of, dear Sir, your affectionate and weak
  fellow servant in the Gospel,

                                                  “J. FLETCHER.”[88]

Footnote 88:

  _Wesleyan Methodist Magazine_, 1829, p. 175.

Fletcher longed for clerical sympathy and co-operation; but he had to
wait for them. In all respects his position was a trying one. The Rev.
Mr. Gilpin, who afterwards was well acquainted with him, writes:—

  “Celebrated for the extensive ironworks carried on within its limits,
  Madeley was remarkable for little else than the ignorance and
  profaneness of its inhabitants, among whom respect to man was as
  rarely to be observed as piety towards God. In this benighted place,
  the Sabbath was openly profaned, and the most holy things
  contemptuously trampled under foot; even the restraints of decency
  were violently broken through, and the external form of religion held
  up as a subject of ridicule.

  “Immediately upon his settling in this populous village, Mr. Fletcher
  entered upon the duties of his vocation with an extraordinary degree
  of earnestness and zeal. He saw the difficulties of his situation, and
  the reproaches to which he should be exposed by a conscientious
  discharge of the pastoral office; but, as a steward of the manifold
  grace of God, he faithfully dispensed the word of life, according as
  every man had need; instructing the ignorant, reasoning with
  gainsayers, exhorting the immoral, and rebuking the obstinate. Not
  content with discharging the stated duties of the Sabbath, he counted
  every day as lost in which he was not actually employed in the service
  of the Church. As often as a small congregation could be collected, he
  joyfully proclaimed to them the acceptable year of the Lord, whether
  it were in the church, in a private house, or in the open air.”

  “It was a common thing, in his parish, for young persons of both sexes
  to meet together for what was called recreation; and that recreation
  usually continued from evening to morning, consisting chiefly in
  dancing, revelling, drunkenness, and obscenity. These licentious
  assemblies he considered a disgrace to the Christian name, and
  determined to exert his ministerial authority for their total
  suppression. Frequently he burst in upon them with a holy indignation,
  making war upon Satan in places peculiarly appropriated to his
  service.”

  “His enemies wrested his words, misrepresented his actions, and cast
  out his name as evil; but whether he was insulted in his person, or
  injured in his property; whether he was attacked with open abuse, or
  pursued by secret calumny, he walked amid the most violent assaults of
  his enemies, as a man invulnerable; and while his firmness discovered
  that he was unhurt, his forbearance testified that he was unoffended.”

  “Had he aimed at celebrity as a public speaker, furnished as he was
  with the united powers of learning, genius, and taste, he might have
  succeeded beyond many; but his design was to _convert_ and not to
  _captivate_ his hearers; to secure their eternal interests, and not to
  obtain their momentary applause. Hence his ‘_speech and his preaching
  were not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of
  the Spirit and of power_.’ He spake as in the presence of God, and
  taught as one having Divine authority. There was an energy in his
  preaching that was irresistible. His subjects, his language, his
  gestures, the tone of his voice, and the turn of his countenance, all
  conspired to fix the attention and affect the heart. Without aiming at
  sublimity, he was truly sublime; and uncommonly eloquent without
  affecting the orator.”[89]

Footnote 89:

  “The Portrait of St. Paul.”

Such is the testimony of a gentleman who, for a season, lived in
Fletcher’s house, and for many years lived in the neighbourhood of
Fletcher’s parish. It would be worse than foolish to add anything to it,
except the remarks of Fletcher’s friend and first biographer, John
Wesley:—

  “Mr. Fletcher settled at Madeley in the year 1760, and from the
  beginning he was a laborious workman in his Lord’s vineyard. At his
  first settling there, the hearts of several were unaccountably set
  against him, insomuch that he was constrained to warn some of these
  that if they did not repent God would speedily cut them off. And the
  truth of these predictions was shown over and over by the signal
  accomplishment of them.[90] But no opposition could hinder him from
  going on his Master’s work, and suppressing vice in every possible
  manner. Those sinners who endeavoured to hide themselves from him he
  pursued to every corner of his parish by all sorts of means, public
  and private, early and late, in season and out of season, entreating
  and warning them to flee from the wrath to come. Some made it an
  excuse for not attending church that they could not awake early enough
  to get their families ready. He provided for this also. Taking a bell
  in his hand, he set out every Sunday at five in the morning, and went
  round the most distant parts of the parish, inviting all the
  inhabitants to the house of God.

  “Yet, notwithstanding all the pains he took, he saw for some time
  little fruit of his labour; insomuch that he was more than once in
  doubt whether he had not mistaken his place; whether God had indeed
  called him to confine himself to one town, or to labour more at large
  in His vineyard. He was not free from this doubt when a multitude of
  people flocked together at a funeral. He seldom let these awful
  opportunities slip without giving a solemn exhortation. At the close
  of the exhortation which was then given, one man was so grievously
  offended that he could not refrain from breaking out into scurrilous,
  yea, menacing language. But, notwithstanding all his struggling
  against it, the Word fastened upon his heart. At first, indeed, he
  roared like a lion; but he soon wept like a child. Not long after, he
  came to Mr. Fletcher in the most humble manner, asking pardon for his
  outrageous behaviour, and begging an interest in his prayers. This was
  such a refreshment as he stood in need of. In a short time, this poor
  broken-hearted sinner was filled with joy unspeakable. He then spared
  no pains in exhorting his fellow-sinners to flee from the wrath to
  come.

  “It was not long after, when, one Sunday evening, Mr. Fletcher, after
  performing the usual duty at Madeley, was about to set out for Madeley
  Wood, to preach and catechise as usual. But just then notice was
  brought (which should have been given before) that a child was to be
  buried. His waiting till the child was brought prevented his going to
  the wood; and herein the providence of God appeared. For at this very
  time, many of the colliers, who neither feared God nor regarded men,
  were baiting a bull just by the meeting-house; and, having had plenty
  to drink, they had all agreed, as soon as he came, _to bait the
  parson_. Part of them were appointed to pull him off his horse, and
  the rest to set the dogs upon him. One of these very men afterwards
  confessed that he was with them when this agreement was made; and that
  afterwards, while they were in the most horrid manner cursing and
  swearing at their disappointment, a large china punch-bowl, which held
  above a gallon, without any apparent cause (for it was not touched by
  any person or thing) fell all to shivers. This so alarmed him that he
  forsook all his companions, and determined to save his own soul.”[91]

Footnote 90:

  Jonathan Crowther, President of the Methodist Conference in 1819,
  relates, in his unpublished autobiography, the following anecdote:
  “Mrs. Fletcher told me that one Sunday, after the forenoon service,
  Mr. Preston, a gentleman farmer near Madeley, very grossly insulted
  Mr. Fletcher in the churchyard, and evinced great enmity against his
  faithful ministry. In his sermon in the afternoon, Mr. Fletcher said,
  he had a powerful impression that before the next Sabbath God would
  give a signal mark of His displeasure against the enemies of His cause
  and truth. The week was drawing to a close; nothing remarkable had
  happened; but on Saturday night, Mr. Preston, when returning home from
  market in a state of intoxication, fell from his horse and died on the
  spot.”

Footnote 91:

  Wesley’s “Life of Fletcher.”




                               CHAPTER V.
                    _THREE QUIET, SUCCESSFUL YEARS._

                               1762–1765.


IN the autumn of 1762 Methodism in London was in perilous confusion. Two
years before, Wesley had appointed Thomas Maxfield, one of his first
preachers, to meet a select band, who professed to be entirely
sanctified. Some of the members of this band soon had dreams, visions
and impressions, as they thought, from God; and Maxfield, instead of
repressing their whimsies, encouraged them, so that their vagaries were
soon regarded as proofs of the highest state of grace. Some of the
preachers rebuked these visionaries. This excited resentment, and they
refused to hear their rebukers preach. They became the avowed followers
of Maxfield, who told them they were not to be taught by man, and
especially by those who had less grace than themselves. George Bell,
converted in 1758, and sanctified in 1761, joined them, and became
wilder than the wildest of them. The result was, when Wesley returned to
London in October, 1762, he found the Society there in a disgraceful
uproar, and the followers of Maxfield and Bell formed into a sort of
detached connexion.[92] They called themselves “the witnesses.” Wesley
and his brother were in great distress. The latter wrote to Fletcher,
and received the following reply:—

                                     “MADELEY, _September 20, 1762_.

  “‘_Crede quod habes, et habes_,’ is not very different from those
  words of Christ, ‘_What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe
  that ye receive them, and ye shall have them_.’ The humble reason of
  the believer, and the irrational presumption of the enthusiast, draw
  this doctrine to the right hand or the left; but to split the
  hair—here lies the difficulty. I have told you that _I am no party
  man_; I am neither for nor against the witness for Christian
  perfection _without examination_. I complain of those who deceive
  themselves; I honour those who do honour to their profession; and I
  wish we could find out the right way of reconciling the most profound
  humility with the most lively hopes of grace. I think you insist on
  the one and Maxfield on the other; and I believe you both sincere in
  your views. God bless you both; and if either of you goes too far, may
  the Lord bring him back!”[93]

Footnote 92:

  For a fuller account of this unhappy schism, see Tyerman’s “Life and
  Times of Wesley,” vol. ii., pp. 432–444.

Footnote 93:

  Letters, 1791, p. 121.

                                      “MADELEY, _November 22, 1762_.

  “Brother Ley[94] arrived here yesterday, and confirms the melancholy
  news of many of our brethren overshooting sober and steady
  Christianity in London. I feel a great deal for you and the Church in
  these critical circumstances. Oh that I could stand in the gap! Oh
  that I could, by sacrificing myself, shut this immense abyss of
  enthusiasm which opens its mouth among us!

  “The corruption of the best things is always the worst of corruptions.
  Going into an extreme of this nature, or only winking at it, will give
  an eternal sanction to the vile aspersions cast on all sides on the
  purest doctrines of Christianity; and we shall sadly overthrow,
  overthrow in the _worst manner_, what we have endeavoured to build for
  many years.

  “I have a particular regard for Maxfield and Bell—both of them are my
  correspondents. I am strongly prejudiced in favour of the witnesses,
  and do not willingly receive what is said against them; but allowing
  that what is reported is one-half mere exaggeration, the tenth part of
  the rest shows that spiritual pride, presumption, arrogance,
  stubbornness, party spirit, uncharitableness, prophetic mistakes, in
  short, _every sinew_ of enthusiasm is now at work in many of that
  body. I do not credit any one’s bare word, but I ground my sentiments
  on Bell’s own letters.

  “May I presume to lay before you my mite of observation? Would it be
  wrong in me calmly to sit down, with some unprejudiced friends and
  lovers of both parties, and to fix with them the marks and symptoms of
  enthusiasm; and then insist, at first in love, and afterwards, if
  necessary, with all the weight of my authority, upon those who _have
  them_ or _plead for them_, either to stand to the sober rule of
  Christianity, or _openly_ to depart from us?

  “Fear not, dear Sir, the Lord will take care of the ark. Have faith in
  the Word, and leave the rest to Providence. ‘_The Lord will provide_’
  is a comfortable motto for a believer.”[95]

Footnote 94:

  One of Wesley’s Itinerant Preachers.

Footnote 95:

  Letters, 1791, p. 126.

Thus by proposing to act as mediator between the Wesleys and their
distracted followers in London did Fletcher end the eventful year of
1762. In the middle of the year he told Charles Wesley that he had
“attempted to form a Society,” and hoped to succeed. He drew up rules
for this Society.[96] First of all, he described “the nature of a
Religious Society,” and quoted Malachi iii. 16, Psalm lxvi. 16; Luke
viii. 1–3; Acts i. 15, ii. 42–47; Heb. iii. 12, 13, x. 25; Col. iii. 16;
1 Cor. xiv. 29–31; 1 Thess. v. 11–14; James v. 16; and Jude i. 18–21.
“Encouraged by these texts,” said he, “a few of us design to unite in a
Religious Society to support and animate each other in the ways of
godliness.” He proceeds:—

  “In order to be admitted into the Society, one only condition is
  previously required, namely, a sincere desire to flee from the wrath
  to come, and to seek salvation from the servitude of sin according to
  the Gospel, and the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England,
  especially the ninth, tenth, eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth, which
  are earnestly recommended to the perusal of every person who would be
  a member.

  “It is, however, expected that the sincerity of such a desire be
  evinced by putting on the form of godliness, which we apprehend to
  consist in three things: 1. Doing no harm, Isa. i. 16; Rom. xii. 9. 2.
  Doing good, Isa. i. 17; Rom. xii. 9. 3. Using the means of grace, Luke
  i. 16, Isa. lv. 6.”

Footnote 96:

  He also drew up the following rules of daily self-examination for
  himself:—

  “1. Did I awake spiritual, and was I watchful in keeping my mind from
  wandering this morning when I was rising?

  “2. Have I this day got nearer to God in times of prayer, or have I
  given way to a lazy, idle spirit?

  “3. Has my faith been weakened by unwatchfulness, or quickened by
  diligence this day?

  “4. Have I this day walked by faith and eyed God in all things?

  “5. Have I denied myself in all unkind words and thoughts; have I
  delighted in seeing others preferred before me?

  “6. Have I made the most of my precious time, as far as I had light,
  strength, and opportunity?

  “7. Have I kept the issues of my heart in the means of grace, so as to
  profit by them?

  “8. What have I done this day for the souls and bodies of God’s dear
  saints?

  “9. Have I laid out anything to please myself when I might have saved
  the money for the cause of God?

  “10. Have I governed well my tongue this day, remembering that ‘in a
  multitude of words there wanteth not sin’?

  “11. In how many instances have I denied myself this day?

  “12. Do my life and conversation adorn the Gospel of Jesus
  Christ?”[97]

Footnote 97:

  “Thirteen Original Letters, by the Rev. John Fletcher. Bath: 1791,” p.
  38.

Under the first of these rules Fletcher mentions “taking the Lord’s name
in vain, either by profane cursing, swearing, or trivial exclamations;”
sabbath-breaking; uncleanness; drunkenness, or tippling, or going into a
public house, or staying without necessity; fighting; quarrelling;
brawling; railing, uncharitable conversation; filthy talking; jesting;
evil speaking; attendance at balls, plays, races, cock-fightings and
bull-baitings; gaming; song-singing; reading unprofitable books;
softness; needless indulgence; putting on gaudy and costly apparel;
smuggling; taking advantage of a neighbour, etc.

Under the second, he includes doing good to the bodies of men; doing
good to the souls of men; discountenancing profaneness and immorality;
diligence in business; taking up the cross daily, etc.

Under the third, he names, the public worship of God in the church; the
ministry of the Word either read or expounded; the Lord’s Supper; family
prayer; private prayer; Scripture reading; fasting; and singing hymns
and psalms.

It is needless to tell _Methodist_ readers that Fletcher’s _rules_ are
_substantially_ the same as the rules which Wesley drew up and published
for the Methodists in 1743, and which, excepting two or three trivial
alterations, introduced in 1744, are the same now as they were then.
Fletcher, however, attached an “Appendix” to his rules, to the following
effect:—

  1. That any one practising the Rules “is to give in his or her name to
  the Director of the Society and the major part of the members; and
  they shall be joyfully admitted, be they high or low, old or young,
  learned or unlearned.”

  2. If any member fell into sin, he must be expelled.

  3. If the expelled member wished to be re-admitted, he must
  acknowledge his error, and if, after a trial of three months, he
  appeared to be reformed, his re-admission should take place.

  4. The members were to meet together one evening every week between
  seven and eight o’clock.

  5. They were to watch over each other in love.

  6. They were not to be angry with those who spoke against the Society.

The probability is that Fletcher did not print his Rules, as Wesley had
done. Indeed, there was no need for this, as his Societies were few in
number, and existed within a comparatively small area. It was an easy
thing for Fletcher to read the rules to each Society as occasion
required, and, perhaps, they were inscribed in the registers of
attendance. Three years after Fletcher’s death, the Rev. Melville Horne,
his successor at Madeley, printed and published them, and stated, in a
Preface, that Fletcher drew them up soon after his settlement at
Madeley, and revised and corrected them about the year 1777.

In another production, entitled “Heads of Examination for Adult
Christians,” Fletcher set up a higher standard than his “Rules”
contained. The following is an abridgment of the questions he wished his
people to propose to themselves:—

  “Do I feel any pride? Am I dead to all desire of praise? If any
  despise me, do I like them the worse for it? Or if they love and
  approve me, do I love them more on that account? Is Christ the life of
  all my affections and designs, as my soul is the life of my body? Have
  I always the presence of God? Does no cloud come between God and the
  eye of my faith? Am I saved from the fear of man? Do I speak plainly
  to all, neither fearing their frowns, nor seeking their favours? Am I
  always ready to confess Christ, to suffer with His people, and to die
  for His sake? Do I deny myself at all times, and take up my cross? Am
  I willing to give up my ease and convenience to oblige others, or do I
  expect them to conform to my hours, ways, and customs? Are my bodily
  senses and outward things all sanctified to me? Am I poor in spirit?
  Have I no false shame in approaching God? Do I not lean to my own
  understanding? Do I esteem every one better than myself? Do I never
  take that glory to myself which belongs to Christ? Does meekness bear
  rule over all my tempers, affections, and desires? Do I possess
  resignation, seeing God does, and will do, all for my good? Am I
  temperate, using the world, and not abusing it? Am I courteous, not
  severe; suiting myself to all with sweetness; striving to give no one
  pain, but to gain and win all for their good? Am I vigilant, redeeming
  time, and taking every opportunity of doing good? Do I perform the
  most servile offices, such as require labour and humiliation, with
  cheerfulness? Do I love God with all my heart? Do I constantly present
  myself, my time, my substance, talents, and all I have, a living
  sacrifice? Is every thought brought into subjection to Christ? Do I
  love my neighbour as myself? Do I think no evil, listen to no
  groundless surmises, nor judge from appearances? How am I in my sleep?
  If Satan presents any evil imagination, does my will immediately
  resist or give way to it? Do I bear the infirmities of age or sickness
  without seeking to repair the decays of nature by strong liquors? Or
  do I make Christ my sole support, casting the burden of a feeble body
  into the arms of His mercy?”[98]

Footnote 98:

  Letters, 1791, p. 434.

This was the life Fletcher himself strove to live; and this was the life
he urged his Methodists to live.

Fletcher’s Methodist Society at _Madeley_ was formed as early as the
year 1762; and one of its members soon involved him in trouble. Hence
the following, taken from a letter addressed to Charles Wesley:—

                                        “MADELEY, _January 5, 1763_.

  “As to my parish, we are just where we were. We look for our
  Pentecost, but we do not pray sufficiently to obtain it. We are left
  in tolerable quiet by all but the sergeant, who sent a constable to
  make enquiry concerning the life of His Majesty’s subjects, upon
  information that the cry of murder had been heard in my house on
  Christmas Day.

  “This report originated in the cries of a young woman, who is of our
  Society, and whom Satan has bound for some months. It seems to me as
  if that old murderer proposed to ruin the success of my ministry at
  Madeley, as he did in London, in the French Church, by means of Miss
  A——d.

  “The young woman here emaciates her body by fastings; falls into
  convulsions, sometimes in the church, and sometimes in our private
  assemblies; and is perpetually tempted to suicide. Her constitution is
  considerably weakened, as well as her understanding. What to do in
  this case I know not; for those who are tempted in this manner pay as
  little regard to reason as the miserable people in Bedlam. Prayer and
  fasting are our only resources. We propose to represent her case to
  the Lord on Tuesday next, and on all the following Tuesdays. Aid the
  weakness of our prayers with all the power of yours.”[99]

Footnote 99:

  _Ibid._, 1791, p. 127.

This was a greater trial to Fletcher than, at first sight, appears. It
seems to have led him to entertain the thought of resigning his living.
More than six months afterwards, in another letter to Charles Wesley, he
wrote:—

                                          “MADELEY, _July 26, 1763_.

  “Everything here is pretty quiet now. Many of our offences die away;
  though, not long ago, I had trials in abundance. One of them might
  have made me quit Madeley; but the young person I mentioned as being
  sorely tempted of the devil, is happily delivered.”[100]

Footnote 100:

  _Ibid._, p. 133.

Fletcher’s life at Madeley, during the year 1763, seems to have been a
quiet one. Maxfield’s quarrel with Wesley still continued, and Fletcher
took an interest in it. Wesley’s annoyance was great, and his
forbearance with the London fanatics exposed him to the censure of his
friends. John Downes, in a letter to Joseph Cownley, wrote:—

  “I consider the follies and extravagance of the witnesses as the
  devices of Satan, to cast a blemish upon a real work of God. The more
  I converse with the solid ones, the more I long to experience what
  they do. It is a state worthy of a Christian. As to the follies of the
  enthusiasts, Mr. Charles hears every week less or more. He threatens,
  but cannot find in his heart to put in execution. The consequence is,
  the talk of all the town, and entertainment for the newspapers.”

On February 1, 1763, Charles Wesley wrote:—

  “Satan has made sad havoc of the flock. Four years ago, I gave warning
  of the flood of enthusiasm which has now overflowed us.”

A week later John Wesley remarked:—

  “The mask is thrown off. George Bell, John Dixon, etc., have quitted
  the Society. I wrote to Thomas Maxfield, but was not favoured with an
  answer. This morning I wrote a second time, and received an answer
  indeed! The substance is, ‘You take too much upon you.’”[101]

Footnote 101:

  Tyerman’s “Life and Times of Wesley,” vol. ii., p. 462.

These brief extracts are given to indicate the great commotion that at
this time existed. The excitement was not confined to London. It was
shared by Mr. Samuel Hatton and Miss Hatton, both of them Fletcher’s
friends and correspondents, and who seem to have resided at the ancient
town of Wem, about twenty miles from Madeley.[102] In a letter to Miss
Hatton, Fletcher expressed his views, as follows:—

                                         “MADELEY, _March 14, 1763_.

  “Mr. Maxfield’s reply to Mr. Wesley seems to me just in _some_ points,
  and in _others_ too severe. Mr. Wesley is, perhaps, too tenacious of
  some expressions, and too prone to credit what he wishes concerning
  some mistaken witnesses of the state of fathers in Christ. Mr.
  Maxfield, perhaps, esteems too little the inestimable privilege of
  being perfected in that love which casts out fear. But, in general, I
  conceive that it would be better for babes, or young men in Christ, to
  cry for a growth in grace, than to dispute whether fathers in Christ
  enjoy such privileges.”[103]

Footnote 102:

  Letters, 1791, p. 182.

Footnote 103:

  Letters, 1791, p. 130.

A few weeks later, in a letter to Mr. Samuel Hatton, Fletcher wrote:—

                                         “MADELEY, _April 22, 1763_.

  “I am quite of your opinion about the mischief that some professors do
  in the Church of Christ under the mask of sanctity; but my Master bids
  me bear with the tares until the harvest, lest, in rooting them up, I
  should promiscuously pull up the wheat also. As to Mr. Wesley’s system
  of perfection, it tends rather to promote humility than pride, if I
  may credit his description of it in the lines following:—

                  “‘Now let me gain perfection’s height,
                  Now let me into _nothing_ fall,
                  Be _less than nothing_ in Thy sight,
                  And feel that Christ is _all in all_!’

  “More than this I do not desire, and I hope that, short of this,
  nothing will satisfy either my dear friend or me.”[104]

Footnote 104:

  _Ibid._, p. 132.

The following letter, to Charles Wesley, refers to the same disturbance;
but it also mentions another matter of great interest. Six years ago,
Fletcher had become acquainted with Miss Bosanquet. During the present
year, he had commenced a correspondence, in the highest degree
religious, with Miss Hatton. He was a lone man, living among colliers.
He had lately been with Charles Wesley. Charles was an eminently social
man, and had suggested to Fletcher that he would do well to marry.
Fletcher replied as follows:—

                                      “MADELEY, _September 9, 1763_.

  “MY DEAR SIR,—I see that we ought to learn continually to cast our
  burdens upon the Lord, who alone can bear them without fatigue and
  pain. If Maxfield returns, the Lord may correct his errors, and give
  him so to insist on the fruits of faith as to prevent antinomianism. I
  believe him sincere; and, though obstinate and suspicious, I am
  persuaded he has a true desire to know the will and live the life of
  God. I reply in the same words you quoted to me in one of your
  letters,—‘Don’t be afraid of a wreck, for Jesus is in the ship.’ After
  the most violent storm, the Lord will, perhaps, all at once, bring our
  ship into the desired haven.

  “You ask me a very singular question with respect to women; I shall,
  however, answer it with a smile, as I suppose you asked it. You might
  have remarked that, for some days before I set off for Madeley, I
  considered matrimony with a different eye to what I had done; and the
  person who then presented herself to my imagination was Miss
  Bosanquet. Her image pursued me for some hours the last day, and that
  so warmly, that I should, perhaps, have lost my peace if a suspicion
  of the truth of Juvenal’s proverb, ‘_Veniunt a dote sagittae_,’ had
  not made me blush, fight, and fly to Jesus, who delivered me at the
  same moment from her image and the idea of marriage. Since that time,
  I have been more than ever on my guard against admitting the idea of
  matrimony, sometimes by the consideration of the love of Jesus, which
  ought to be my whole felicity; and, at others, by the following
  reflections.

  “It is true that the Scripture says that a good wife is the gift of
  the Lord; and it is also true that there may be one in a thousand; but
  who would put in a lottery where are nine hundred and ninety-nine
  blanks to one prize? And, suppose I could find this Phœnix, this woman
  of a thousand, what should I gain by it? A distressing refusal. How
  could she choose such a man as I? If, notwithstanding all my
  self-love, I am compelled cordially to despise myself, could I be so
  wanting in generosity as to expect another to do that for me, which I
  cannot do for myself—to engage to love, to esteem, and to honour me?

  “I will throw on my paper some reflections which the last paragraphs
  of your letter gave rise to, and I beg you will weigh them with me in
  the balances of the sanctuary.

                   “Reasons for and against matrimony.

  “1. A tender friendship is, after the love of Christ, the greatest
  felicity of life; and a happy marriage is nothing but such a
  friendship between two persons of different sexes.

  “2. A wife might deliver me from the difficulties of housekeeping,
  etc.

  “3. Some objections and scandals may be avoided by marriage.

  “4. A pious and zealous wife might be as useful as myself; nay, she
  might be much more so among my female parishioners, who greatly want
  an inspectress.

  “1. Death will shortly end all particular friendships. The happier the
  state of marriage, the more afflicting is the widowhood; besides, we
  may try a friend and reject him after trial; but we cannot know a wife
  till it is too late to part with her.

  “2. Marriage brings after it a hundred cares and expenses; children, a
  family, etc.

  “3. If matrimony is not happy, it is the most fertile source of
  scandal.

  “4. I have a thousand to one to fear that a wife, instead of being a
  help, may be indolent, and consequently useless; or humoursome,
  haughty, capricious, and consequently a heavy curse.

                                       “Farewell! Yours,
                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[105]

Footnote 105:

  Letters, 1791, p. 144.

This is a curious letter. Eighteen years after the time when it was
written, Fletcher married Miss Bosanquet. Probably the “reasons _for_
matrimony” had been, in substance, suggested by Charles Wesley.
Fletcher’s “reasons _against_ matrimony” were undoubtedly sincere, but
they were unintentionally selfish, and were unworthy of him. Experience
taught him wisdom.

Before proceeding further, a remarkable occurrence must be noted. The
church at Madeley is dedicated to St. Michael, whose feast-day is
September 29. On that day, in 1763, Fletcher preached from Dan. iii. 14,
and concluded his discourse in words like these:—

  “From the dedication of our church, from days set apart to be kept
  holy, Satan takes occasion to enforce the worship of his threefold
  image, profit, honour, pleasure. Now remember the duty of God’s
  people, and quit yourselves like men. Some petty Nebuchadnezzars have
  sent to gather together, not princes, but drunken men; and have set
  up, not a golden image, no, nor a golden calf, but a living bull.[106]
  O ye that fear God, be not afraid of their terror; be not allured by
  their music; confess the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. ‘No
  other God can deliver after this sort,’ said the heathen; and give me
  leave to add, ‘No other God can punish after this sort.’ The burning
  furnace of His indignation is heated; and eternity is the duration of
  its torments.”[107]

Footnote 106:

  The reference obviously is to a bull-baiting.

Footnote 107:

  Fletcher’s Works, vol. viii., p. 76.

The way in which Fletcher was led to preach this sermon on “the
Wake-Sunday” was told by himself, and the story, after his death, was
published in a small tract, entitled, “The Furious Butcher Humbled: a
true and remarkable story, as related by the late Rev. Mr. Fletcher,
Vicar of Madeley.” The substance of it was also inserted in the
_Evangelical Magazine_ for the year 1798. From that account, the
following is taken.

  “One Sunday,” said Mr. Fletcher, “when I had done reading prayers at
  Madeley, I went up into the pulpit, intending to preach a sermon,
  which I had prepared for that purpose; but my mind was so confused,
  that I could not recollect either my text or any part of my sermon. I
  was afraid I should be obliged to come down without saying anything.
  But, having recollected myself a little, I thought I would say
  something on the First Lesson, which was the third chapter of the book
  of Daniel, containing the account of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego
  being cast into the fiery furnace. I found, in doing this, such
  extraordinary assistance from God, and such a peculiar enlargement of
  heart, that I supposed there must be some peculiar cause of it. I
  therefore desired, if any of the congregation found anything
  particular, they would acquaint me with it in the ensuing week.

  “In consequence of this, the Wednesday after, a woman came and gave me
  the following account:—

  “‘I have been for some time much concerned about my soul. I have
  attended the church at all opportunities, and have spent much time in
  private prayer. At this, my husband (who is a butcher) has been
  exceedingly enraged, and has threatened me severely as to what he
  would do to me if I did not leave off going to John Fletcher’s church;
  yea, if I dared to go again to any religious meetings whatever. When I
  told him I could not in conscience refrain from going, at least, to
  the parish church, he became outrageous, and swore dreadfully, and
  said, if I went again, he would cut my throat as soon as I came back.
  This made me cry to God that He would support me; and, though I did
  not feel any great degree of comfort, yet, having a sure confidence in
  God, I determined to do my duty, and leave the event to Him. Last
  Sunday, after many struggles with the devil and my own heart, I came
  downstairs ready for church. My husband said he should not cut my
  throat, as he had intended, but he would heat the oven, and throw me
  into it, the moment I came home. Notwithstanding this threat, which he
  enforced with many bitter oaths, I went to church, praying all the way
  that God would strengthen me to suffer whatever might befall me. While
  you were speaking of the three children whom Nebuchadnezzar cast into
  the burning fiery furnace, I found all you said belonged to _me_. God
  applied every word to my heart; and, when the sermon was ended, I
  thought, if I had a thousand lives, I could lay them all down for Him.
  I felt so filled with His love that I hastened home, fully determined
  to give myself to whatsoever God pleased; nothing doubting that He
  either would take me to heaven, if He suffered me to be burnt to
  death; or that He would in some way deliver me, as He did His three
  servants that trusted in Him. When I got to my own door, I saw flames
  issuing from the oven, and I expected to be thrown into it
  immediately. I felt my heart rejoice, that, if it were so, the will of
  the Lord would be done. I opened the door, and, to my utter
  astonishment, saw my husband upon his knees, praying for the
  forgiveness of his sins. He caught me in his arms; earnestly begged my
  pardon; and has continued diligently seeking God ever since.’”

Such was the poor woman’s story. After listening to it, Fletcher cried,
“Now I know why my sermon was taken from me, namely, that God might thus
magnify His mercy.”

Nothing need be added, except that to attribute these strange
occurrences to anything less than the direct interference of Him who has
supreme authority over all human minds and hearts would be infidelity of
the most impious kind.

Nothing is known of Fletcher’s life during the year 1764. It is a
singular fact, that only three of his letters, belonging to this period,
have been published, and these were all addressed to his friend, at Wem,
Miss Hatton. They are entirely devoid of incident; but are full of
piety. The following are extracts:—

  “Madeley, March 5, 1764. Your dulness in private prayer arises from
  the want of familiar friendship with Jesus. To obviate it, go to your
  closet, as if you were going to meet your dearest friend; cast
  yourself at His feet; bemoan your coldness; extol His love to you; and
  let your heart break with a desire to love Him. Get _recollection_,—a
  dwelling within ourselves,—a being abstracted from the creature, and
  turned towards God. For want of such a frame, our times of prayer are
  frequently dry and useless; imagination prevails, and the heart
  wanders; whereas we pass easily from recollection to delightful
  prayer.”[108]

  “Madeley, September 3, 1764. With respect to the hindrances your
  worldly business lays in your way, the following means, in due
  subordination to faith in Jesus, may be of service to you you:—

  “1. Get up early and save time, before you go to business, to put on
  the _whole armour of God_, by close meditation and earnest prayer.

  “2. Consider the temptation that most easily besets you, whether it be
  hurry, or vanity, or lightness, or want of recollection to do what you
  do as unto God.

  “3. When your mind has been drawn aside, do not fret, or let yourself
  go down the stream of nature, as if it were vain to attempt to swim
  against it; but confess your fault, and calmly resume your former
  endeavour, but with more humility and watchfulness.

  “4. Steal from business now and then, though for two or three minutes
  only, and, in the corner where you can be least observed, pour out
  your soul in confession; or utter a short ejaculation for power to
  watch, and to believe that Jesus can keep you watching.”[109]

  “Madeley, _December, 1764_. I am sensible how I want advice in a
  thousand particulars, and how incapable I am to direct anyone; but the
  following observations came to my mind on the reading of your letter,
  and I venture to send them.

  “You cannot expect to attain to such a carriage as will please all you
  converse with. The Son of God, the _original_ of all human perfection,
  was blamed, sometimes for His silence, and sometimes for His speaking;
  and shall the handmaid be above her Master?

  “There is no sin in wearing such things as you have by you, if they
  are necessary for _your station_, and characterize your _rank_.

  “There is no sin in _looking cheerful_. ‘_Rejoice evermore_:’ and, if
  it is our duty always to be _filled with joy_, it is our duty to
  _appear_ what we are in reality. I hope, however, your friends know
  how to distinguish between _cheerfulness_ and _levity_.

  “Beware of stiff singularity in things _barely indifferent_: it is
  _self_ in disguise; and it is so much the more dangerous when it comes
  recommended by a serious, self-denying, religious appearance.

  “I hope the short-comings of some about you will not prevent you
  eyeing the prize of a glorious conformity to our blessed Head. It is
  to be feared that not a few of those who profess to have attained it,
  have mistaken the way. They are still _something_; whereas I apprehend
  that an important step towards that conformity is to become _nothing_;
  or rather, with St. Paul,—to become in our own eyes the _chief of
  sinners_, and the _least of saints_.”[110]

Footnote 108:

  Letters, 1791, p. 147.

Footnote 109:

  _Ibid._, 1791, p. 151.

Footnote 110:

  Letters, 1791, p. 153.

These fragmentary extracts are of some importance, because they indicate
the matters respecting which Fletcher was consulted, and also exhibit
his own habitual frame of mind.

Before leaving the year 1764, one incident must be mentioned, far too
interesting to be omitted. So far as there is evidence to show, there
had been no interview, and, indeed, no correspondence, between Fletcher
and Wesley since the year 1760, when Fletcher, contrary to the advice of
Wesley, accepted the living of Madeley. There is not the slightest proof
of any estrangement of affection having taken place; but Fletcher had
been too much occupied to visit Wesley in London; and Wesley,
considering the opposition Fletcher had to encounter, had, hitherto, not
deemed it expedient to visit Fletcher at Madeley. As to epistolary
correspondence, Charles Wesley was Fletcher’s chosen adviser; and that,
for the present, was quite enough. The Madeley persecutions had now
subsided; and, hence, in the month of July, 1764, the _Arch-Methodist_
ventured to invade the parish of the Madeley vicar. He wrote:—

  “1764, Saturday, July 21. I rode to Bilbrook, near Wolverhampton, and
  preached at between two and three. Thence we went on to Madeley, an
  exceedingly pleasant village, encompassed with trees and hills. It was
  a great comfort to me to converse once more with a Methodist of the
  _old type_, denying himself, taking up his cross, and resolved to
  be”.bn 117.png

  “Sunday, July 22. At ten, Mr. Fletcher read prayers, and I preached on
  those words in the Gospel,”The church would nothing near contain the
  congregation; but a window near the pulpit being taken down, those who
  could not come in stood in the churchyard, and I believe all could
  hear. The congregation, they said, used to be much smaller in the
  afternoon than in the morning; but I could not discern the least
  difference, either in number or seriousness. I found employment enough
  for the intermediate hours in praying with various companies who hung
  about the house, insatiably hungering and thirsting after the good
  word. Mr. Grimshaw, at his first coming to Haworth, had not such a
  prospect as this. There are many adversaries indeed; but yet they
  cannot shut the open and effectual door.

  “Monday, July 23. The church was pretty well filled even at five, and
  many stood in the churchyard. In the evening, I preached at
  Shrewsbury, to a large congregation, among whom were several men of
  fortune. I trust, though hitherto we seem to have been ploughing on
  the sand, there will at last be some fruit.”[111]

Footnote 111:

  Wesley’s Journal.

Wesley’s first visit to Madeley was, to himself, eminently satisfactory;
and his report of it shows that, notwithstanding the “many adversaries,”
Fletcher’s labours had been crowned with great success.

Truly might Wesley designate Fletcher “a Methodist of the old type,
_denying himself_, and taking up his cross.” The following letter,
addressed “to Mr. Henry Perronet, at Mr. Wright’s, at the Boot, in Old
Street, St. Luke’s Parish, London,” will partly illustrate Wesley’s
meaning.

                                       “MADELEY, _November 6, 1765_.

  “SIR,—I have received both your letter and Mr. Charles Wesley’s, and
  shall be exceeding glad of an opportunity to oblige or serve you in
  anything in my power.

  “As you seem to me a stranger to the situation of the country, I would
  have you come down first, and choose for yourself a spot that may suit
  your taste. I live here in a little market-town, three or four miles
  from the foot of the Wrekin, at the south-east of that hill; so that
  you may easily take a walk or ride with me to some of the spots or
  villages where you may prefer to fix your abode, if this does not
  please you. I live alone in my house, having neither wife, child, nor
  servant. I can, therefore, without inconveniency, spare you a room in
  the meantime. If you choose to provide your food, you shall have
  conveniences for it; if you choose to table with a neighbour, as I do,
  you may.

  “You seem to be cut out for contemplation and retirement, Sir; I hope
  you have made choice of Jesus for the chief subject of your
  meditations. May you find much of His presence everywhere!

  “If you choose to venture into Shropshire, you may take the Shrewsbury
  coach at the Swan, in Lad Lane, somewhere in the city, and in two days
  and a half you will be at Shiffnal, eighteen miles short of
  Shrewsbury, and three from Madeley. If you send me word when you are
  to set out, I will send my mare to meet you at the Red Lion, in
  Shiffnal, the day that the coach passes through the town.

  “That the Lord may direct and prosper you in all things is the wish
  of, Sir, your affectionate servant in Christ,

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[112]

Footnote 112:

  _Wesleyan Methodist Magazine_, 1825, p. 744.

As a farther illustration of Fletcher’s simplicity of living, and of his
habitual piety, an incident may be introduced, belonging to _about_ this
period, and published in a sermon preached on the occasion of the death
of Fletcher’s widow, in 1816, by the Rev. John Hodson. Mr. Hodson says:—

  “A few days ago, I was in company with a pious female, who, for many
  years, was intimately acquainted with Mr. Fletcher. She said Mr.
  Fletcher sometimes visited a boarding-school at Madeley. One morning
  he came in just as she and the other girls had sat down to breakfast.
  He said but little while the meal lasted, but when it was finished he
  spoke to each girl separately, and concluded by saying to the whole,
  ‘I have waited some time on you this morning, that I might see you eat
  your breakfast; and I hope you will visit me to-morrow morning, and
  see how I eat mine.’ He told them his breakfast hour was seven
  o’clock, and obtained a promise that they would visit him. Next
  morning, they went at the time appointed, and seated themselves in the
  kitchen. Mr. Fletcher came in, quite rejoiced to see them. On the
  table stood a small basin of milk and sops of bread. Mr. Fletcher took
  the basin across the kitchen, and sat down on an old bench. He then
  took out his watch, laid it before him, and said, ‘My dear girls,
  yesterday morning I waited on you a full hour, while you were at
  breakfast. I shall take as much time this morning in eating my
  breakfast as I usually do, if not rather more. Look at my watch!’ and
  he immediately began to eat, and continued in conversation with them.
  When he had finished, he asked them how long he had been at breakfast.
  They said, ‘Just a minute and a half, Sir.’ ‘Now, my dear girls,’ said
  he, ‘we have fifty-eight minutes of the hour left;’ and he then began
  to sing,—

               ‘Our life is a dream!
                 Our time as a stream
                 Glides swiftly away,
                 And the fugitive moment refuses to stay.’

  After this, he gave them a lecture on the value of time, and the worth
  of the soul. They then all knelt down in prayer, after which he
  dismissed them with impressions on the mind the narrator never ceased
  to remember.”

At Wesley’s yearly Conference of 1765, Alexander Mather was appointed to
“Salop” circuit, with William Minethorpe as his colleague. Mr. Mather
was now in the thirty-third year of his age. During the last eight
years, he had been an itinerant preacher, and had passed through strange
and painful vicissitudes. In 1760 his circuit had been “Staffordshire;”
in which circuit he had “built a preaching-house at Darlaston, and hired
a large building at Birmingham.” He had extended his labours as far as
Shrewsbury, Coventry, Stroud, and Painswick; and, by Wesley’s
directions, had visited the “Societies” in Wales. At Birmingham, Mather
and the poor Methodists had been repeatedly in danger of being murdered
by persecuting crowds; and at Wolverhampton the mob had pulled down the
newly-built meeting-house; and had threatened to do the same at Dudley,
Darlaston, and Wednesbury. He had also preached at several places in
Shropshire, and now, in 1765, the county was made a Methodist circuit,
in which he was appointed to act as Wesley’s “Assistant.” Fletcher had
already formed two or three Societies, which, without being so
designated, were, _ipso facto_, Methodist Societies. He warmly welcomed
Mather, and was more than willing to be a Methodist co-worker. Hence the
following letter addressed to the brave itinerant:—

  “MY DEAR BROTHER,—I thank you for your last favour. If I answered not
  your former letter it was because I was in expectation of seeing
  you—not from the least disregard. I am glad you enjoy peace at
  Wellington; and I hope you will do so at the Trench when you go there.
  My reasons for stopping there were not to seize upon the spot _first_,
  but to fulfil a promise I made to the people, of visiting them. I
  _desire_ you will call there as often as you have opportunity. An
  occasional exhortation from you or your companion,[113] at the
  Bank,[114] Dale,[115] etc., will be esteemed a favour; and I hope that
  my going, as Providence directs, to any of your places (leaving to you
  the management of the Societies), will be deemed no encroachment. In
  short, we need not make _two parties_; I know but _one_ heaven below,
  and that is Jesus’s love. Let us both go and abide in it; and when we
  have gathered as many as we can to go with us, too many will still
  stay behind.

  “I find there are in the ministry, as in the common experience of
  Christians, times which may be compared to winter. No great stir is
  made in the world of grace beside that of storms and offences, and the
  growth of the trees of the Lord are not showy; but when the tender
  buds of brotherly and redeeming love begin to fill, spring is at hand.
  The Lord give us harvest after seed time! Let us wait for fruit, as
  the husbandman; and remember, that he who believes does not make
  haste. The love of Christ be with us all. Pray for

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[116]

Footnote 113:

  William Minethorpe, Mather’s colleague.

Footnote 114:

  A place about five miles from Madeley, where Fletcher had gathered a
  small Society.

Footnote 115:

  Coalbrook Dale.

Footnote 116:

  Letters, 1791, p. 163.

Thus began Methodism in the county of Salop, which circuit, in 1766,
contained 587 members. It is only right to say, however, that, in the
Minutes of Conference, the name of the circuit was, in that year,
changed to “Staffordshire,”—a name which it retained till 1782, though
it embraced a number of towns and villages in the county where the
Madeley vicar lived and laboured.

In 1765 Fletcher made two evangelistic visits. The first of these was to
Breedon, in Leicestershire. Walter Sellon had been one of the first
masters of Wesley’s Kingswood school, had acted as one of Wesley’s
preachers, and, by the influence of the Countess of Huntingdon, had
received episcopal ordination. At this period, he held two curacies, one
at Smisby and the other at Breedon-on-the-Hill. His churches were
generally crowded, and his ministry was attended with uncommon power. He
lived in the house of Mr. Hall, of Tonge, the leader of Methodist
Society classes at Breedon, Worthington, and Diseworth, and who, after
living all his life in the house where he was born, peacefully fell
asleep in Jesus in the year 1813, at the age of eighty-one.[117] Of
course Fletcher’s reputation was well known by Sellon; and now, in 1765,
for a brief season, they exchanged pulpits. Immense crowds assembled;
and exceedingly picturesque must have been the sight of long processions
of pious people climbing the lofty hill on the top of which Breedon
church was built, and singing as they went their sweet songs of Zion.
The church was crammed when Fletcher preached; numbers stood outside;
and as many as could clambered to the windows to look at the seraphic
minister to whom they wished to listen.[118] Mr. Benson, in his “Life of
Fletcher,” relates an incident which must not be omitted here. Human
nature is the same all the world over, and throughout all generations.

Footnote 117:

  _Methodist Magazine_, 1818, pp. 49–57.

Footnote 118:

  _Wesleyan Methodist Magazine_, 1856, pp. 36–38.

We are told the clerk of Breedon church was offended because the crowds
attending it increased his labour in cleaning it. Turning his
worldly-wisdom to practical account, he began to charge persons, from
other parishes, a penny each for admission, and stood at the church door
to collect the money. Whilst he was doing this, Fletcher was prayerfully
ascending the steep hill, and reverentially contemplating the solemn
service upon which he was about to enter. One of the congregation went
to meet him, and told him of the clerk’s worldliness. Fletcher was
shocked at the behaviour of his ecclesiastical subordinate, and
hastening up the steep ascent, exclaimed, “I’ll stop his proceeding.”
The clerk, however, was more nimble than the priest. Before Fletcher
could reach the money-gate the clerk was in his desk, ready to read
responses and perform all the other duties pertaining to his office.
Perhaps he thought he had cleverly escaped detection and reproof, but
the sordid creature was mistaken. Fletcher went through the service, and
then remarked, “For sixteen years I have not been so moved as I have
been to-day. I am told that the clerk beneath me has demanded, and has
actually received, money from strangers before he would suffer them to
enter the church. I desire all who have paid the money to come to me,
and I will return what they have paid; and as to this iniquitous clerk,
his money perish with him!”

This interesting story is not without its use, for it exhibits
Fletcher’s almost stern fidelity, and also the spirit of parish clerks
more than a hundred years ago. It would be unfair, however, to ostracize
the Breedon official as one whose worldly wickedness is without a
parallel; for there is little room to doubt that even at the present day
largess is often levied upon congregations, if not by responding clerks,
by doorkeepers and other officials belonging to the ecclesiastical
edifices of an age which thinks itself greatly in advance of its
predecessors.

Fletcher made another and more important Gospel tour during the year
1765. For the first time, he visited Bath and Bristol. In the former
city, Lady Huntingdon had erected a chapel, and had summoned six
clergymen of the Church of England to assist at the opening; namely,
Whitefield, Romaine, Venn, Madan, Shirley, and Townsend. This took place
on October 6, 1765.[119] Fletcher came after them, and preached to the
aristocratic congregations in her ladyship’s meeting-house with
extraordinary zeal and earnestness. The Countess wrote:—

  “Deep and awful are the impressions made on every hand. Dear Mr.
  Fletcher’s preaching is truly apostolic. The Divine blessing
  accompanies his word in a very remarkable manner. He is ever at his
  work, is amazingly followed, and is singularly owned of God.”[120]

Footnote 119:

  See “Life of Whitefield,” vol. ii., p. 489.

Footnote 120:

  “Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon,” vol. i., p. 469.

During his stay at Bath, Fletcher wrote his _first pastoral letter_,
which was addressed, “To those who love the Lord Jesus Christ in or
about Madeley. Peace be multiplied to you from God the Father, and from
our Lord Jesus Christ, through the operations of the Holy Ghost. Amen.”
The letter was dated “Bath, October 30, 1765,” and the following is the
substance of it:—

  “By the help of Divine Providence, and the assistance of your prayers,
  I came safe hither last Saturday se’nnight. I was and am still a good
  deal weighed down under the sense of my insufficiency to preach the
  unspeakable riches of Christ to poor dying souls. This place is the
  seat of Satan’s gaudy throne; but the Lord hath nevertheless a few
  names here that are not ashamed of Him, both among the poor and among
  the rich. There are not many of the latter, but blessed be God for any
  one! It is a great miracle if one camel passes through the eye of a
  needle; or, in other words, if one rich person enters the kingdom of
  God. I thank God that none of you are rich in the things of this
  world. You are freed from a dreadful snare, even from Dives’ portion
  in this world. May you know the happiness of your state! It is a mercy
  to be driven to the throne of grace even by bodily want, and to live
  in dependence on Divine mercy even for a morsel of bread.

  “I have been sowing the seed, that the Lord hath given, both in Bath
  and Bristol; and, though I have not been able to discharge my office
  as I would, the Lord has in some measure stood by me, and overruled my
  foolishness and helplessness. I am much supported by the thought that
  ‘you pray for me.’ With regard to the state of my soul, I find,
  blessed be God! that as my day is, so is my strength to travel on,
  without minding much either good or bad report.

  “My absence from you answers two good ends in regard of me. I feel
  more my insufficiency, and the need of being daily ordained of Christ
  to preach His Gospel; and I shall value the more the worth of my
  privilege with you if I return safely to you. I had yesterday a most
  advantageous offer made me of going free of cost to my own country, to
  see my mother, brothers, and sisters in the flesh, whom I have not
  seen for near eighteen years; but I find my relations in the spirit
  are nearer and dearer to me than my relations in the flesh. I have
  therefore refused the kind offer, that I might return to you, and be
  comforted by the mutual faith of you and me.

  “I hope, my dear brethren, that you improve much under the ministry of
  that faithful servant of God, Mr. Brown,[121] whom Providence blesses
  you with. Make haste to gather the honey of knowledge and grace as it
  drops from his lips; and may I find the hive of your heart so full of
  it at my return, that I may share with you in the heavenly store!

  “In order to this, entreat the Lord to stir up your hunger and thirst
  after the flesh and blood of Jesus, and to increase your desire for
  the sincere milk of the Word. When people are hungry they will find
  time to go to their meals; and a good appetite does not think a meal a
  day too much. Be not satisfied with knowing the way to heaven, but
  walk in it constantly and joyfully. Be thoroughly in earnest. You may
  impose upon your brethren by a formal attendance on the means of
  grace, but you cannot deceive the Searcher of hearts. Let Him then see
  your heart struggling towards Him; and if you fall through heaviness,
  sloth, or unbelief, do not make a bad matter worse by continuing
  hopeless in the ditch of sin and guilt. Up and away to the blood of
  Jesus! It will not only wash away the guilt of past sins, but
  strengthen you to trample all iniquity under foot in the time to come.
  Never forget that the soul of the diligent shall be made fat; and that
  the Lord will spue the lukewarm out of His mouth. Get, therefore, that
  love which makes you diligent in business, fervent in spirit, serving
  the Lord.

  “I beg you will not neglect the assembling of yourselves together,
  and, when you meet in Society, be neither backward nor forward to
  speak. Let every one esteem himself the meanest in the company, and be
  glad to sit at the feet of the lowest. If you are tempted against any
  one, yield not to the temptation; and pray for much of that love which
  hopeth all things, and puts the best constructions even upon the worst
  of things. I beg, for Christ’s sake, I may find no division and no
  offence among you at my return. ‘If there be any consolation in
  Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if
  any bowels of mercy, fulfil ye my joy, that ye be like-minded, having
  the same love, being of one accord, of one mind. Let nothing be done
  through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem
  the others better than himself.’

  “I earnestly beg the continuance of your prayers for me, that the Lord
  may keep me from hurting His cause in these parts, and that when
  Providence shall bring me back among you (which I hope will be this
  day fortnight), I may be thoroughly furnished for every good word and
  work. That the blessing of God may crown all your hearts and your
  meetings, is the earnest prayer of, my very dear brethren,

  “Your unworthy servant in the Gospel of our common Lord,

                                                     “JOHN FLETCHER.

  “P.S.—I had not time to finish this letter yesterday, being called
  upon to preach in a market town in the neighbourhood. The dragon
  showed some of his spite and venom to little purpose. A gentleman
  churchwarden would hinder my getting into the pulpit, and, in order to
  this, cursed and swore, and took another gentleman by the collar in
  the middle of the church. Notwithstanding his rage, I preached. May
  the Lord raise in power what was sown in weakness!”[122]

Footnote 121:

  A clergyman whom James Ireland, Esq., of Brislington, near Bristol,
  had obtained to supply Fletcher’s pulpit at Madeley. See a subsequent
  letter, dated April 27, 1767.

Footnote 122:

  “Thirteen Original Letters.” By the Rev. J. Fletcher. Bath: 1791, p.
  10.

From this interesting letter, it appears that Fletcher spent four
Sundays at Bath and Bristol. No doubt, he was the guest of the Countess
of Huntingdon; but, at the same time, he formed an acquaintance with the
excellent James Ireland, Esq., of Brislington, with whom he commenced a
correspondence two or three months afterwards, which was continued to
the end of life. There can hardly be a doubt that Mr. Ireland was the
gentleman who offered to take Fletcher to Switzerland, free of cost. At
this time, Mr. Ireland’s daughter was out of health, and for many years
afterwards he was accustomed to go to the south of France for the
benefit of himself and his family.

Eighteen years had elapsed since Fletcher had seen his mother, his
brothers, and his sisters, and of course he wished to visit them; but
there was his work at Madeley, and that was enough to make him forego
what, under other circumstances, must have been an unspeakable pleasure.
Some will accuse him of the want of natural affection, and will say he
owed duties to his distant and long unseen relatives, as well as to his
parishioners. Probably, in answer to such a charge, he would have quoted
the words of his supreme Master: “Who is my mother? and who are my
brethren? Whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven,
the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.”

It is evident, from Fletcher’s pastoral epistle, that his preaching in
the west of England was not confined to Bath and Bristol; but, except
the disgraceful incident of the profane churchwarden swearing and almost
fighting to keep him out of the pulpit of a church in some neighbouring
market town, no details of his tour have been preserved. The letters and
journals of Wesley and Whitefield abound with facts and adventures, full
of interest and instruction: the letters of Fletcher were of another
character. They are rich in truth and piety; but not always in materials
for biography. His habitual self-abnegation kept in the shade thousands
of facts which the curiosity of the Christian world would like to know.

The first two years he spent at Madeley were rough and stormy. He worked
with all his might, but with small results. The next three years were
comparatively calm and prosperous. Opposition gradually died. His
labours were attended with success. He formed several Societies of
converted people; and his friend Wesley made the county of Salop a
Methodist circuit. For nearly five years he had confined his
evangelistic efforts to his own immediate neighbourhood; after this, to
a considerable extent, he became an itinerant. Let us follow him.




                              CHAPTER VI.
                           _TWO YEARS MORE._

                             1766 AND 1767.


FLETCHER began the year 1766 in mournfulness, and yet full of love and
loyalty to Christ. In a letter to Miss Hatton, he wrote:—

                                       “MADELEY, _January 13, 1766_.

  “MADAM,—This evening I have buried one of the warmest opposers of my
  ministry—a stout, strong young man, aged twenty-four years. About
  three months ago, he came to the churchyard with a corpse, but refused
  to come into the church. When the burial was over, I went to him, and
  mildly expostulated with him. His constant answer was, that he had
  bound himself never to come to church while I was there; adding, that
  he would take the consequences. Seeing I got nothing, I left him,
  saying, with uncommon warmth, though, as far as I can remember,
  without the least touch of resentment, ‘I am clear of your blood;
  henceforth it is upon your own head; you will not come to church upon
  your legs, prepare to come upon your _neighbours’ shoulders_!’ He
  wasted from that time, and, to my great surprise, has been buried on
  the spot where we were when the conversation passed between us. When I
  visited him in his sickness, he seemed _tame_, as a wolf in a trap. O
  may God have turned him into a sheep in his last hours!

  “This last year has been the worst I have had here,—barren in
  convictions, fruitful in backslidings.

  “I have filled my page, but not with the name of Jesus. Let your heart
  contain what my letter wants,—_Jesus and His precious blood_,—_Jesus
  and His free, glorious salvation_. Live to Him; breathe for Him; buy,
  sell, eat, drink, read, write for Him. Receive Him as _yours_
  altogether, and give Him your _whole_ self. Take us, Lord, into Thy
  gracious favour; stamp us with Thy glorious image, and conduct us to
  Thy eternal kingdom!”[123]

Footnote 123:

  Letters, 1791, p. 165.

Fletcher was depressed. His labours at Madeley, during the past year,
had not been fruitful; and concerning his success even at Bath he was
doubtful. Mr. Brown, his temporary curate, however, seems to have been
useful; and so also were Wesley’s itinerant evangelists; on account of
which he thankfully rejoiced. In another letter to Miss Hatton, he
wrote:—

                                           “MADELEY, _May 27, 1766_.

  “The coming of Mr. Wesley’s preachers into my parish gives me no
  uneasiness. As I am sensible that everybody does better, and is more
  acceptable than myself, I should be sorry to deprive any one of a
  blessing; and I rejoice that the work of God goes on, by _any
  instrument_, or in _any place_. How far it might have been expedient
  to have postponed preaching regularly in my parish, till the minister
  of —— had been reconciled to the invasion of his; and how far this
  might have made my way smoother, I do not pretend to determine: time
  will show it, and in the meanwhile I find it good to have faith in
  Providence.

  “I fear I have left as great a stink at Bath as Mr. Brown a sweet
  savour here. Everything is good to me that shows me my
  unprofitableness; but I desire to grieve, that the good of my private
  humiliation is so much overbalanced by the loss of many about
  me.”[124]

Footnote 124:

  Letters, 1791, p. 169.

Thus did Fletcher depreciate himself. The truth is, he was in feeble
health, and hardly knew it. At this time, also, two of his dear friends
were dying—Miss Hatton, of Wem, and Miss Ireland, the only daughter of
James Ireland, Esq., of Brislington, Bristol. Miss Hatton had been at
Madeley, and Miss Ireland was about to migrate to the south of France.
To these ladies, he wrote as follows:—

                                          “MADELEY, _June 21, 1766_.

  “MY DEAR FRIEND,—I am much concerned to hear, by Mrs. Tower, that you
  are so weak; but my concern has greatly increased, since I was told
  that the foundation of your illness was laid at Madeley; and, I am
  afraid, by my imprudence in taking you to the woman with whom we
  received the sacrament. I ask God’s pardon and yours for it; and I
  hope it will be the means of humbling me, and of making me more tender
  of my friends.

  “The advice you give me about my health is seasonable. I hope to
  follow it. I am not conscious of having neglected it; but I will
  endeavour that there be not so much as the shadow of a call for
  repeating it.

  “If the air at Wem does not agree with you, could you not come to
  Madeley? Though I am no nurse, and though I have been the contrary of
  one to you, I hope we should wait upon you with more tenderness than
  when you were here last. Mrs. Power would nurse you, and I would talk
  to you of the love of Jesus as well as I could. You know I perceived
  your bodily weakness when you were here, and charged you with a
  neglect of your body. If I was right, I hope you will follow the
  advice you give me.

  “Offer yourself to God for life or death, for ease or pain, for
  strength or weakness. Let Him choose or refuse for you; only do you
  choose Him for your present and eternal portion.”[125]

Footnote 125:

  Letters, 1791, p. 170.

Seven months after this, Miss Hatton peacefully expired.[126] Miss
Ireland lived more than two years longer. To her, he wrote the
following:—

                                           “MADELEY, _July —, 1766_.

  “MY VERY DEAR FRIEND,—The poor account your father has brought us of
  your health, and his apprehensions of not seeing you any more, before
  that solemn day when all people, nations, and tongues shall stand
  together at the bar of God, make me venture to send you a few lines.

  “First, then, my dear friend, let me beseech you not to flatter
  yourself with the hopes of living long here on earth. These hopes fill
  us with worldly thoughts, and make us backward to prepare for our
  change. I would not, for the world, entertain such thoughts about
  myself. I have now, in my parish, a young man who has been two years
  under the surgeon’s hands. Since he was given up, about two months
  ago, he has fled to the Lord, and has found in Him that saving health,
  which a thousand times surpasses that with which the surgeon flattered
  him; and he now longs to be with Christ, which is far better.

  “Secondly. Consider, my dear, how good the Lord is to call you to be
  transplanted into a better world, before you have taken deeper root in
  this sinful world. If it is hard to nature to die _now_, how much
  harder would it be if you lived to be the mother of a family, and to
  cleave to earth by the ties of new relations, schemes of gain, or
  prospects of success!

  “Thirdly. Reflect that, by your illness, the Lord, who forecasts for
  us, intimates that long life would not be for His glory, nor your
  happiness. I believe He takes many young people from the evil to come,
  and out of the way of those temptations, or misfortunes, which would
  have made them miserable in time and in eternity.

  “Fourthly. Your earthly father loves you much: witness the hundreds of
  miles he has gone for the benefit of your health; but your heavenly
  Father loves you a thousand times better; and He is all wisdom, as
  well as all goodness. Allow, then, such a loving, gracious Father to
  chose for you; and, if He chooses death, acquiesce, and say, ‘Good is
  the will of the Lord! His choice must be best!’

  “Fifthly. Weigh the sinfulness of sin, both original and actual, and
  firmly believe the wages of sin is death. This will make you patiently
  accept the punishment; especially if you consider that Jesus Christ,
  by dying for us, has taken away the sting of death, and turned the
  grave into a passage to a blessed eternity.

  “Sixthly. Try to get nearer to the dear Redeemer. He offers rest to
  the heavy laden, pardon to the guilty, strength to the feeble, and
  life to the dead.

  “Seventhly. When you have considered your lost state, as a sinner,
  together with the greatness, the freeness, and the suitableness of
  Christ’s salvation, believe in Him. Be not afraid to venture upon and
  trust in Him. Cast yourself on Him by frequent acts of reliance, and
  stay your soul on Him by means of His promises. Pray much for faith,
  and be not afraid of accepting, using, and thanking God for _a
  little_.

  “Eighthly. Beware of impatience, repining, and peevishness, which are
  the sins of sick people. Be gentle, easy to be pleased, and resigned
  as the bleeding Lamb of God. Wrong tempers indulged, grieve, if they
  do not quench, the Spirit.

  “Ninthly. Do not repine at being in a strange country, far from your
  friends; and, if your going to France does not answer the end proposed
  for your body, it will answer a spiritual end to your soul.

  “Tenthly. In praying, reading, hearing any person read, and
  meditating, do not consult feeble, fainting, weary flesh and blood;
  for, at this rate, death may find you idle, and supine, instead of
  striving to enter in at the strait gate; and, when your strength and
  vigour fail, remember that the Lord is the strength of your life and
  your portion for ever.”[127]

Footnote 126:

  _Ibid_, p. 190.

Footnote 127:

  Letters, 1791, p. 174.

Not many even faithful ministers of Christ would have written in such a
strain as this to a young lady, the daughter of a wealthy merchant,
leaving her native land, and apparently dying; but Fletcher, like all
the first Methodists, was intensely in earnest, and never thought of
sacrificing fidelity for the sake of seeming courtesy.

The young lady’s father had given Fletcher a hamper of wine, and a
parcel of broadcloth to be made into a suit of clothes, kindly
requesting him not to send his coat again to be patched. In
acknowledging this generous present, the needy and somewhat seedy Vicar
wrote as follows:—

                                           “MADELEY, _July —, 1766_.

  “MY VERY DEAR FRIEND,—You should have a little mercy on your friends,
  in not loading them with such burdens of beneficence. How would you
  like to be loaded with kindnesses you could not return? Were it not
  for a little of that grace which makes us not only willing, but happy
  to be nothing, to be obliged and dependent, your present would make me
  quite miserable. I submit to be clothed and nourished by you, as your
  servants are, without the happiness of serving you. To yield to this
  is as hard to friendship as it is to submit to be saved by free grace,
  without one scrap of our own righteousness. However, we are allowed,
  both in religion and friendship, to ease ourselves by thanks and
  prayers, till we have an opportunity of doing it by actions. I thank
  you then, my dear friend, and pray to God that you may receive His
  benefits as I do yours.

  “Your broadcloth can lap me round two or three times; but the mantle
  of Divine love, the precious fine robe of Jesus’s righteousness, can
  cover your soul a thousand times. The cloth, fine and good as it is,
  will not keep out a hard shower; but that garment of salvation will
  keep out even a shower of brimstone and fire. Your cloth will wear
  out; but that fine linen, the righteousness of saints, will appear
  with a finer lustre the more it is worn. The moth may fret your
  present, or the tailor may spoil it in cutting it; but the present,
  which Jesus has made you, is out of the reach of the spoiler, and
  ready for present wear. Let me beseech you, my dear friend, to accept
  of this heavenly present, as I accept of your earthly one. I did not
  send you one farthing to purchase it: it came unsought, unasked,
  unexpected, as the seed of the woman came. It came just as I was
  sending a tailor to buy me cloth for a new coat, and I hope when you
  next see me, it will be in your present; now let Jesus see you in His.
  Accept it freely. Wear no more the old rusty coat of nature and
  self-righteousness. Send no more to have it _patched_. Make your boast
  of an unbought suit, and love to wear the livery of Jesus.

  “You will then love His work. It will be your meat and drink to do it;
  and, that you may be vigorous in doing it, as I shall take a little of
  your wine for my stomach’s sake, take you a good deal of the wine of
  the kingdom for your soul’s sake. Every promise of the Gospel is a
  bottle, a cask that has a spring within, and can never be exhausted.
  Draw the cork of unbelief, and drink abundantly. Be not afraid of
  intoxication; and if an inflammation follows, it will only be that of
  Divine love. Be more free with the heavenly wine, than I have been
  with the earthly, which you sent me. I have not tasted it yet, but
  whose fault is it? Not yours certainly, but mine. If you do not drink
  daily out of the cup of salvation, whose fault is it? Not Jesus’s, but
  yours. Jesus gives you His righteousness to cover your nakedness, and
  the consolations of His Spirit to cheer and invigorate your soul.
  Accept and use. Wear, drink, and live to God.”[128]

Footnote 128:

  Letters, 1791, p. 178.

Fletcher was religious in everything, and all his faculties were
sanctified. He could not even acknowledge the kindness of his friend
without introducing religion; but, to do this gracefully, he exercises,
not his manly understanding, but his sportive fancy. “Fancy,” said
fanciful Thomas Fuller, “can adorn whatever it touches, can invest naked
fact and dry reasoning with unlooked-for beauty, make flowerets bloom
even on the brow of a precipice, and, when nothing better can be had,
can turn the very substance of the rock itself into moss and lichens.”
Few men have possessed a finer fancy than Fletcher did; but his was
rarely used except for religious purposes. He might have been an
accomplished allegorist; but he preferred to be a scriptural reasoner.
His creed was founded, not upon fancies, but upon facts. Hence, in the
same month that he wrote the foregoing letter to Mr. Ireland, he wrote
as follows to Miss Hatton:—

                                          “MADELEY, _July 17, 1766_.

  “Let your faith be _rational_ as well as affectionate. God is good. He
  does not want us to take His word without proof. What expectations of
  the Messiah from the beginning of the world! What amazing miracles and
  wonders were wrought in favour of that people and family, from which
  He was to come! What prophecies fulfilled, that we might rationally
  believe! What displays of the Godhead in that heavenly man, Christ
  Jesus! _In Him dwelt_, of a truth, _the fulness of the Godhead
  bodily_. You see the power of God in His miracles; the goodness of God
  in His character; the justice and mercy of God in His death; the
  truth, and faithfulness, and glory of God in His resurrection, in the
  coming of His Spirit, and in the preaching of His everlasting Gospel.
  O, my friend, we may believe _rationally_. We may, with calm
  attention, view the emptiness of all other religions, and the fulness
  of assurance that ours affords.”[129]

Footnote 129:

  Letters, 1791, p. 180.

Soon after the date of this letter, Fletcher proceeded to London, to
Brighton, and to Oathall, where he had sweet intercourse with the
Countess of Huntingdon, Romaine, Venn, Sir Charles Hotham, and with a
gentleman and lady from his own country, who were visiting the Countess,
and Mr. and Mrs. Powys of Berwick, in Shropshire, Mr. Powys being a
gentleman of high connections and of large fortune, and who had, about
this period, become conspicuous, in conjunction with Sir Richard Hill
and Mr. Lee, of Cotery, for zeal in the cause of God and truth.[130]

Footnote 130:

  “Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon,” vol. i., p. 375.

While staying with Lady Huntingdon at Oathall, Fletcher wrote another
pastoral letter, which could not have been more faithful, but might,
perhaps with advantage, have been more gentle.

                             “OATHALL, SUSSEX, _September 23, 1766_.

  “To those who love or fear the Lord Jesus at Madeley, grace, peace,
  and love be multiplied unto you, from our God and Saviour Jesus
  Christ!

  “Providence, my dear brethren, called me so suddenly from among you,
  that I had no time to take my leave of you, and recommend myself to
  your prayers. But I hope the good Spirit of our God, who is the Spirit
  of love and supplication, has brought me to your remembrance, as the
  poorest and weakest of Christ’s ministers, whose hands stand most in
  need of being strengthened and lifted up by your prayers. Pray on
  then, for yourselves, for one another, and for him whose glory it is
  to minister to you in spiritual things, and whose sorrow it is not to
  do it in a manner more suitable to the majesty of the Gospel, and more
  profitable to your souls. My heart is with you, nevertheless I bear
  patiently this bodily separation for three reasons.

  “1. The variety of more faithful and able ministers, which you have
  during my absence, is more likely to be serviceable to you than my
  presence among you, and I would always prefer your profit to my own
  satisfaction.

  “2. I hope Providence will give me those opportunities of conversing
  and praying with a greater variety of experienced Christians, which
  will tend to my own improvement, and, I trust, in the end, to yours.

  “3. I flatter myself that, after some weeks’ absence, my ministry will
  be recommended by the advantage of novelty, which (the more the pity)
  goes farther with some than the Word itself. In the meantime, I shall
  give you some advice, which, it may be, will prove both suitable and
  serviceable to you.

  “Endeavour to improve daily under the ministry that Providence blesses
  you with. Be careful to attend it with diligence, faith, and prayer.
  Would it not be a great shame if, when ministers come thirty or forty
  miles to offer you peace and pardon, strength and comfort, in the name
  of God, any of you should slight the glorious message, or hear it as
  if it was nothing to you, and as if you heard it not? See then that
  you never come from a sermon without being more deeply convinced of
  sin and righteousness. In order to this,—

  “Use much prayer before you go to church. Consider that your next
  appearance there may be in a coffin, and entreat the Lord to give you
  now so to hunger and thirst after righteousness that you may be filled
  therewith. Hungry people never go fasting from a feast. Call to mind
  the text I preached from the last Sunday but one before I left
  you,—‘Wherefore, laying aside all malice, and all guile, and
  hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil speakings, as new born babes
  desire the sincere milk of the Word, that ye may grow thereby’ (1
  Peter ii. 1, 2).

  “When you are under the Word, beware of sitting as judges, and not
  like criminals. Many judge of the manner, matter, voice, or person of
  the preacher. You, perhaps, judge all the congregation when you should
  judge yourselves guilty of eternal death and yet worthy of eternal
  life, through the worthiness of Him who stood and was condemned at
  Pilate’s bar for you. The moment you have done crying to God as
  guilty, or thanking Christ as reprieved, criminals, you have reason to
  believe that this advice is levelled at you.

  “When you have been at a means of grace and do not find yourselves
  sensibly quickened, let it be matter of deep humiliation to you. For
  want of repenting of their unbelief and hardness of heart, some get
  into a habit of deadness and indolence, so that they come to be as
  insensible and as little ashamed of themselves as stones.

  “Beware of the inconsistent behaviour of those who complain that they
  are full of wandering in the evening under the Word when they have
  suffered their minds to wander from Christ all the day long. Oh! get
  acquainted with Him, that you may walk in Him and with Him. Whatsoever
  you do or say, especially in the things of God, do or say it as if
  Christ was before, behind, and on each side of you. Indeed, He is so,
  whether you consider it or not; for when He visibly appeared on earth,
  He called Himself ‘the Son of Man which is in heaven;’ how much more
  then is He present on earth now that He makes His immediate appearance
  in heaven? Make conscience then to maintain a sense of His blessed
  presence all the day long, and all the day long you will have a
  continual feast. For, can you conceive anything more delightful than
  to be always at the fountain of love, peace, beauty, and joy,—at the
  spring of power, wisdom, goodness, and truth? Can there be a purer and
  more melting happiness than to be with the best of fathers, the
  kindest of brothers, the most generous of benefactors, and the
  tenderest of husbands? Now Jesus is all this and much more to the
  believing soul. Oh! believe, my friends, believe in Jesus now, through
  a continual now; and until you can thus believe, mourn over your
  unbelieving heart; drag it to Him as you can; think of the efficacy of
  His blood shed for the ungodly; and wait for the Spirit of faith from
  on high.

  “Some of you wonder why you cannot believe, why you cannot see Jesus
  with the eye of your mind, and delight in Him with the affections of
  your heart. I apprehend the reason to be one of these, or perhaps
  altogether.

  “1. You are not poor, lost, undone, helpless, despairing sinners in
  yourselves. You indulge spiritual and refined self-righteousness; you
  are not yet dead to the law, and quite slain by the commandment. Now
  the kingdom of heaven belongs to none but the poor in spirit. Jesus
  came to save none but the lost. What wonder then, if Jesus is little
  to you, and if you do not live in His kingdom of peace, righteousness,
  and joy in the Holy Ghost?

  “2. Perhaps you spend your time in curious reasonings, instead of
  casting yourselves as forlorn sinners at the feet of Christ, leaving
  it to Him to bless you when and in the manner He pleases. Know that He
  is the wise and sovereign God, and that it is your duty to lie before
  Him as clay, as fools, as sinful nothings.

  “3. Perhaps, also, some of you wilfully keep idols of one kind or
  another; you indulge some sin against light and knowledge, and it is
  neither matter of humiliation, nor of confession to you. The love of
  praise, that of the world, that of money, and that of sensual
  gratifications, when not lamented, are as implacable enemies to Christ
  as Judas and Herod were. How can ye believe, seeing ye seek the honour
  that cometh from men? Hew then your Agags in pieces before the Lord.
  Run from your Delilahs to Jesus resolutely. Cut off the right hand and
  pluck out the right eye that offends you. ‘Come out from among them,
  and be separate, saith the Lord, and I will receive you.’
  Nevertheless, when you strive, take care not to make yourself a
  righteousness of your own striving. Remember that justifying
  righteousness is finished and brought in, and that your goodness can
  no more add to it than your sins diminish it. Shout then, ‘_the Lord
  your Righteousness_!’ And, if you are undone sinners, humbly and yet
  boldly say, ‘In the Lord have I righteousness and strength.’

  “When I was in London, I endeavoured to make the best of my time; that
  is to say, to hear, receive, and practise the Word. Accordingly, I
  went to Mr. Whitefield’s Tabernacle, and heard him give his Society a
  most sweet exhortation upon love. He began by observing that when the
  Apostle St. John was old and past walking and preaching, he would not
  forsake the assembling himself with his brethren, as the manner of too
  many is, upon little or no pretence at all. On the contrary, he got
  himself carried to their meeting, and, with his last thread of voice,
  preached to them his final sermon made up of this one sentence, ‘My
  little children, love one another.’ I wish, I pray, I earnestly
  beseech you to follow that evangelical, apostolical advice; and till
  God makes you all little children, little in your own eyes, and simple
  as little children, give me leave to say, dear brethren, love one
  another, and, of course, judge not, provoke not, be not shy of one
  another, but bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of
  Christ. Yea, bear with one another’s infirmities, and do not easily
  cast off any one, no not for sin, except it be obstinately persisted
  in.

  “My sheet is full, and so is my heart of good wishes for and strong
  longing after you all. I have just room to tell you I hope to be with
  you in three or four weeks’ time. Oh! let me have the comfort of
  finding you all believing and loving. Farewell, my dear brethren! The
  blessing of God be with you all! This is the earnest desire of

                                “Your unworthy minister,
                                               “JOHN FLETCHER.”[131]

Footnote 131:

  “Thirteen Original Letters,” by Fletcher, published at Bath in 1791,
  p. 20.

This is a long but valuable letter—valuable for the sentiments and
advice it contains, and also as showing Fletcher’s loving and faithful
passion to save the souls of his parishioners. Comment upon it would be
easy, but is unnecessary. When he wrote it, on September 23, he intended
to return to Madeley in “three or four weeks’ time,” but at the
beginning of November he was still in London. In a letter to Mr. Powys,
dated the first of that month, Whitefield remarked, “Dear Mr. Fletcher
is become a scandalous Tottenham Court preacher.”[132] How long he
continued to officiate in Whitefield’s far-famed chapel it is impossible
to tell; but at the beginning of 1767 he was at Madeley, and wrote to
Miss Hatton as follows:—

                                        “MADELEY, _January 9, 1767_.

  “MY DEAR FRIEND,—The dream of life will soon be over; the morning of
  eternity will soon succeed. Away then with all the shadows of time!
  Away from them to the _Eternal Substance—to Jesus, the First and the
  Last, by whom, and for whom, all things consist_. If you take Jesus to
  be your head, by the mystery of faith, you will be united to the
  resurrection and the life. The bitterness of death is past, my dear
  friend. _Only_ look to Jesus. He died for you—died in your place—died
  under the frowns of heaven, that we might die under its smiles. Regard
  neither unbelief nor doubt. Fear neither sin nor hell. Choose neither
  life nor death. All these are swallowed up in the immensity of Christ,
  and are triumphed over in His cross. Fight the good fight of faith.
  Hold fast your confidence in the atoning, sanctifying blood of the
  Lamb of God. Confer no more with flesh and blood. Go, meet the
  bridegroom. Behold He cometh! Trim your lamp. Quit yourself like a
  soldier of Jesus. I _entreat_ you, as a companion in tribulation; I
  _charge_ you, as a minister, go, at every breath you draw, to Him, who
  says, ‘Him that cometh unto me, I will in no wise cast out:’ and ‘He
  that believeth in Me, though he were dead, yet shall he live.’
  Joyfully sing the believer’s song, ‘O death, where is thy sting? O
  grave, where is thy victory? Thanks be to God, who giveth us the
  victory, through our Lord Jesus Christ!’ Let your surviving friends
  triumph over you, as one faithful unto death,—as one triumphing in
  death itself.”[133]

Footnote 132:

  Whitefield’s Works, vol. iii., p. 339.

Footnote 133:

  Letters, 1791, p. 189.

Three weeks after this, the Christian lady thus addressed was dead.[134]
Fletcher, in a letter to Mr. Ireland, wrote:—

  “Poor Miss Hatton died full of serenity, faith, and love. The four
  last hours of her life were better than all her sickness. When the
  pangs of death were upon her, the comforts of the Almighty bore her
  triumphantly through, and some of her last words were: ‘Grieve not at
  my happiness. This world is no more to me than a bit of burnt paper.
  Grace! Grace! A sinner saved! I wish I could tell you half of what I
  feel and see. I am going to keep an everlasting Sabbath. O death,
  where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? Thanks be to God,
  who giveth me the victory, through my Lord Jesus Christ!’ It is very
  remarkable that she had hardly any joy in her illness; but God made
  her ample amends in her extremity. He keeps His strongest cordial for
  the time of need. Blessed, for ever blessed, be His holy name!”[135]

Footnote 134:

  _Ibid_, p. 190.

Footnote 135:

  Letters, 1791, p. 192.

As already stated, Fletcher, when in London, had preached in Tottenham
Court Road Chapel. Whitefield wrote a letter, thanking him for his
services. Fletcher’s highly characteristic reply was as follows:—

  “REV. AND DEAR SIR,—I am confounded when I receive a letter from you.
  Present and eternal contempt from Christ and all His members is what I
  deserve. A sentence of death is my due; but, instead of it, I am
  favoured with lines of love. Your mentioning my poor ministrations
  among your congregation opens again a wound of shame, that was but
  half healed. I feel the need of asking God, you, and your hearers to
  pardon me, for weakening the glorious matter of the Gospel by my
  wretched broken manner, and for spoiling the heavenly power of it by
  the uncleanness of my heart and lips.

  “I should be glad to be your curate some time this year; but I see no
  opening, nor the least prospect of any. What between the dead and
  living, a parish ties one down more than a wife. If I could go
  anywhere this year, it should be to Yorkshire, to accompany Lady
  Huntingdon, according to a design that I had half formed last year;
  but I fear I shall be debarred even from this. I set out, God willing,
  to-morrow morning for Trevecca, to meet her ladyship there, and to
  show her the way to Madeley, where she proposes to stay three or four
  days, on her way to Derbyshire.

  “Last Sunday seven-night, Captain Scott preached to my congregation a
  sermon, which was more blessed, though preached only upon my
  horse-block, than a hundred of those I preach in the pulpit. I invited
  him to come and treat her ladyship next Sunday with another, now the
  place is consecrated. If you should ever favour Shropshire with your
  presence, you shall have the captain’s, or the parson’s, pulpit at
  your option. Many ask me, whether you will not come to have some fruit
  here also. What must I answer them? I, and many more, complain of a
  stagnation of the work. What must we do? Everything buds and blossoms
  about us, yet our winter is not over.

  “Present my Christian respects to Mrs. Whitefield, Mr. Hardy, Mr.
  Keen, Mr. Joyce, Mr. Croom, and Mr. Wright. Tell Mr. Keen I am a
  letter in his debt, and postpone writing it till I have had such a
  sight of Christ as to breathe His love through every line.

  “I am, rev. and dear Sir, with sincere affection and respect, your
  willing, though halting and unworthy servant,

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[136]

Footnote 136:

  _Evangelical Magazine_, 1802, p. 346.

Captain Scott, the martial evangelist, mentioned in this letter, was a
Shropshire man, and belonged to an ancient and respectable family. He
had begun his military life as a cornet, and had been promoted to the
rank of captain in the 7th regiment of dragoons. A short time before his
first visit to Madeley, Fletcher, in a letter to the Countess of
Huntingdon, remarked:—

  “I went last Monday to meet Captain Scott, one of the fruits that have
  grown for the Lord at Oathall,—a captain of a truth—a bold soldier of
  Christ. God has thrown down before him the middle wall of bigotry, and
  he boldly launches into an irregular usefulness. For some months, he
  has exhorted his dragoons daily; and, for some weeks, he has preached
  publicly in the Methodist Meeting House, in his regimentals, to
  numerous congregations, with good success. The stiff regular ones
  pursue him with hue and cry; but, I believe, he is quite beyond their
  reach. God keep him zealous and simple! I believe this _red coat_ will
  shame many a _black one_. I am sure he shames me.”[137]

Footnote 137:

  “Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon,” vol. i., pp. 317, 318.

In the year 1767, the Countess of Huntingdon was much occupied in making
preparations for the opening of her college at Trevecca, in Wales. From
the commencement of this important project, Fletcher was one of her
ladyship’s chosen advisers. In the month of April, he met her at
Trevecca, and escorted her to Madeley, where she spent several days on
her way to Yorkshire. The visit was a memorable one. Her ladyship was
accompanied by Lady Anne Erskine and Miss Orton. The rich Christian
communion of these three noble ladies with the poor vicar may be
imagined, but cannot be described. It was, probably, at this period that
the Countess was led to think of Fletcher as the future president of her
college. At all events, in the following year, he was appointed to that
important office.[138]

Footnote 138:

  _Ibid_, vol. i., p. 288; ii., p. iv.

Captain Scott also was at Madeley, and though Fletcher, of course, could
not allow him the use of the pulpit of the parish church, he had him
mounted upon the horse-block of the parish parsonage, where he preached
twice, on Sunday, to large congregations; and on the day following, in
Madeley Wood, an immense concourse of people assembled to hear him, many
of whom were drawn thither by curiosity, to see the famous Countess and
the preaching soldier.

Up to the time of the Countess’s visit, Fletcher was in doubt whether he
would be able to attend her in Yorkshire, but, before she left Madeley
Vicarage, it was arranged that he should follow her immediately after
Whit-Sunday. Mr. Ireland wished him to visit Bristol, and certainly he
had some claim upon him; for, to say nothing of the valuable presents he
had sent, for the use of Fletcher and the poor of Madeley, he had
secured for them a most acceptable curate, to serve the parish during
Fletcher’s absence. Fletcher, for the present, was obliged to decline
his friend’s invitation. Hence the following letter to him:—

                                         “MADELEY, _April 27, 1767_.

  “MY VERY DEAR FRIEND,—I have just received your letter, upon my
  arrival from Wales with dear Lady Huntingdon, who is, of a truth, a
  _tried stone_, built upon the _corner stone_, and such as you have
  seen her, such, I am persuaded, you will find her to the last,—a soul
  devoted to Jesus, living by faith, going to Christ Himself by the
  Scriptures, instead of resting in the letter of the Gospel promises,
  as too many professors do.

  “I thank you for your care to procure not only a supply for my church,
  but such an agreeable, acceptable, and profitable one as Mr. Brown. I
  know no one that should be more welcome than he. Tell him, with a
  thousand thanks for his condescension, that I deliver my charge over
  to him fully, and give him a _carte blanche_, to do or not to do, as
  the Lord will direct him. I have settled it, that I shall endeavour to
  overtake my lady at Kippax, in Yorkshire, against the Sunday after
  Whitsuntide.

  “With regard to the Bristol journey, I must first come from the north,
  before I dream of going to the south. God help us to steer immovably
  to the grand point of our salvation,—_Jesus_, the _Crucified_! To Him
  I recommend myself, and you, and my noble guests. Love Him,—praise
  Him,—serve Him, who hath loved you, bought you, and died for
  you.”[139]

Footnote 139:

  Letters, 1791, p. 196.

In the year 1767, Whit-Sunday occurred on June 7, and, during the week
following, Fletcher joined the Countess of Huntingdon at Huddersfield,
where her ladyship was staying, for a few days, with Venn, at the
vicarage. On Sunday, the 14th, he preached twice in Venn’s church, to
large and deeply attentive congregations. He then accompanied the
Countess to Aberford, on a visit to Benjamin Ingham, who had married her
niece, Lady Margaret Hastings. Whilst there, accompanied by the Rev.
Joseph Townsend, Rector of Pewsey, in Wiltshire, who had preached at the
opening of Lady Huntingdon’s chapel at Bath, in 1765, the whole family
party at Aberford made an excursion to Haworth. Grimshaw, the
brave-hearted incumbent, to whom Yorkshire Methodism owes so much, had
died four years before, and had been succeeded by the Rev. Mr.
Richardson, a good man, and evangelical in his principles, but averse to
open-air preaching, in which his predecessor had delighted. The intended
visit to Haworth having become known, and it being understood that
Fletcher and Mr. Townsend would preach, an immense multitude of people
assembled to hear them. Application was made for the use of what was
called “Mr. Whitefield’s pulpit,” that is, a scaffold erected by the
side of Haworth church, and from which Whitefield was wont to thunder
his overwhelming sermons. Mr. Richardson refused the request. Lady
Huntingdon remonstrated; and, though it is not stated that the scaffold
was brought out, it is known that both Fletcher and Townsend preached in
the churchyard.

On leaving Aberford, the Countess and her friends proceeded to Kippax,
on a visit to her niece, Mrs. Medhurst. Here, at the beginning of July,
they were joined by the Rev. Martin Madan; and now the village of Kippax
became the centre of some of the most remarkable evangelistic efforts
recorded in Methodistic annals. For some weeks, Fletcher, of Madeley;
Madan, from London; Venn, Vicar of Huddersfield; Conyers, Rector of
Helmsley; Burnet, Vicar of Elland; Ryland, Curate of Huddersfield;
Bentley, Vicar of Kippax; and Powley, Vicar of Dewsbury, made frequent
excursions not only in the immediate neighbourhood of Kippax, but to
distant parts of the county, affectionately inviting the multitudes who
flocked to hear them to flee from the wrath to come.[140] Unfortunately,
the details of these missionary labours seem to be irrecoverably lost;
and it can only be added that, in consequence of being seized with a
rather alarming illness, the Countess of Huntingdon was not able to take
part in many of the services. After Fletcher’s return to Madeley, he
wrote to her ladyship as follows:—

  “MY VERY DEAR AND HONOURED LADY,—The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,
  who tried Israel, and led them through many a wandering to the good
  land—this faithful God has met with you; a _rod_ is in His hand, but
  that hand bears so _deep_ a print of love, that the design of His
  visitation cannot be mistaken. Nor does He come without the supporting
  _staff_. He kills to make alive. He wounds to heal. He afflicts to
  comfort, and to do it more deeply and effectually. My hearty prayer
  for your ladyship is, that you may drink the cup the Lord holds out to
  you as a new token of His unchangeable love. I call it unchangeable,
  because it is really so in its nature, though the appearances of it
  greatly vary for the trial of faith. ‘I am God,’ says He; ‘I change
  not, therefore Israel is not consumed,’ and Shadrach is kept in the
  burning fiery furnace.

  “I have often heard your ladyship speak admirably upon knowing Christ,
  and the power of His resurrection, and _the fellowship of His
  sufferings_. The Lord will have you improve in that heavenly
  knowledge; therefore He gives you so long a lesson at this time. The
  lesson is hard, I grant; but the Master is _so loving_, the science so
  noble, and the scholar so used to severe exercises, that it is no
  wonder you are placed on the highest form. No cross—no crown! The
  heavier the cross, the brighter the crown!

  “Till I received Lady Anne’s letter, I often wanted to persuade myself
  that your ladyship had got quite well soon after I left Kippax. I beg
  my best respects and warmest thanks to Mr. and Mrs. Medhurst, Miss
  Medhurst, and the dear company of your ladyship. Their kindness and
  patience towards me while at Kippax have laid me under a heavy burden
  of obligations, which I desire gratefully to acknowledge.

  “Through a mistake of our good friend Ireland, dear Mr. Glascott came
  here the day after I arrived from Yorkshire. He stayed only one day.
  This stripling will throw down Goliath. I blessed that cross and
  accident which brought me acquainted with a young soldier that made me
  so ashamed of myself. Mr. Hill[141] is gone to Brighton, where I hope
  he will be as useful as he is in Shropshire. Captain Scott set out
  last Monday for York, after making a great stir for good in
  Shrewsbury.

  “I am loth to trouble Lady Anne with a request of a line, to know how
  your ladyship does, yet I know not well how to give up the hope that
  she will once more steal two minutes for it.

  “I am, with peculiar thanks to Lady Anne for her letter, and to your
  ladyship for numberless favours, my lady, your most indebted and
  obliged servant,

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[142]

Footnote 140:

  “Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon,” vol. i., pp. 290, 291.

Footnote 141:

  Afterwards Sir Richard Hill, Bart., one of Fletcher’s antagonists in
  the Calvinian controversy.

Footnote 142:

  “Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon,” vol. i., p. 296.

No further reference to the illness of the Countess of Huntingdon is
needed; but a few lines may be added concerning Mr. Glascott, whom Mr.
Ireland had sent to Madeley to officiate during Fletcher’s supposed
absence. This young clergyman had been ordained at Oxford in 1765. For
two years, he had served the curacy of Cheveley, in Berkshire, and had
been recently dismissed. He was now introduced to Lady Huntingdon,
became her assistant chaplain, and laboured in her connexion till 1781.
Mr. Ireland then presented him to the vicarage of Hatherleigh, in
Devonshire. Here he prayed and preached for nearly fifty years; and here
he died, in the full triumph of the faith of Christ, on the 18th of
August, 1830.[143]

Footnote 143:

  _Ibid_, vol. ii., p. 464.

For years past, Fletcher and Whitefield had been sympathizing and
warm-hearted friends, but, up to the present, Whitefield had not been to
Madeley. After Fletcher’s departure from Yorkshire, Whitefield succeeded
him in that county, and glorious were the seasons which Lady Huntingdon
and the great evangelist enjoyed at Kippax, Huddersfield, Leeds, and
other places. Fletcher urged Whitefield to call at Madeley on his way to
what he called his “winter quarters” in London; but Whitefield found it
impracticable to comply with his friend’s request.[144] Thus was lost an
opportunity that did not recur. Whitefield never preached in Madeley
church. He died in 1770.

Footnote 144:

  _Ibid_, vol. i., p. 299.

The Countess of Huntingdon spent the winter of 1767 chiefly at Bath, and
was in constant correspondence with Fletcher concerning her college at
Trevecca. Her proposal was to admit no young men except such as were
truly converted to God, and resolved to dedicate themselves to His
service. All admitted might stay three years, and be clothed, boarded,
lodged, and educated gratuitously. Afterwards, those who desired it
might enter the Christian ministry, either in the Church of England or
among Protestants of any other denomination. The scheme was generous,
and as free from bigotry as it could be. Her ladyship had to select
first of all a president, and her choice fell upon Fletcher. He accepted
her invitation. It was impossible that he should be generally resident
at Trevecca, much less constantly; his duty to his Madeley parishioners
would not admit of this; but he promised to attend as often as he
conveniently could; to give advice respecting the appointment of masters
and the admission of students; to revise the studies and conduct of the
latter, and to assist their piety, and judge of their qualifications for
the work of the ministry. All this was to be done without any fee or
reward whatever.

The plan for the examination of candidates for admission was drawn up by
her ladyship. It was then submitted to Romaine, Venn, Wesley, and
others, and received their approval. The Countess finally sent it to her
president elect, who returned the following answer:—

                                      “MADELEY, _November 24, 1767_.

  “MY DEAR LADY,—I received the proposals which your ladyship has drawn
  up for the examination of the young men who may appear proper
  candidates for the Trevecca academy; and I gratefully acknowledge your
  kindness in allowing me to propose suitable young men resident in my
  parish.

  “Our Israel is small, my lady, and if among six hundred thousand only
  two faithful men were found of old, the Joshuas and Calebs cannot be
  numerous among us. After having perused the articles, and looked round
  about me, I designed to answer your ladyship, ‘_Out of this Galilee
  ariseth no prophet_.’ With this resolution I went to bed, but, in my
  sleep, was much taken up with the thought and remembrance of one of my
  young colliers, who told me, some months ago, that for four years he
  had been inwardly persuaded he should be called to speak for God. I
  looked upon the unusual impression of my dream as a call to speak to
  the young man, and at waking desired to do so at the first
  opportunity. To my great surprise, he came to Madeley that very
  morning, and I found upon enquiry that he had been as much drawn to
  come as I to speak to him. This encouraged me to speak of your
  ladyship’s design, and I was satisfied by his conversation that I
  might venture to propose him to your ladyship for further examination.

  “His name is _James Glazebrook_, collier and getter of ironstone in
  Madeley wood. He is now twenty-three—by look nineteen. He has been
  awakened seven years. He has been steady from the beginning of his
  profession, at least so far as to be kept outwardly unblameable, but
  has seemed to me to walk mostly in heaviness. What I told him was as
  oil put into a glimmering lamp, and he seems to revive upon hearing of
  the little outward call. Notwithstanding his strong desire to exhort,
  he has not yet attempted to do so; and his not being forward to run of
  himself, makes me have the better hope his call is from God. He has no
  mean gift in singing and prayer. His judgment and sense are superior
  to his station, and he does not seem to be discouraged by the severest
  part of your ladyship’s proposals. One difficulty stood in the way. He
  maintains by his labour his aged mother; but this is made easy by his
  mother’s leave, and the promise of an elder son to maintain her if he
  can have his brother’s place in the pit.

  “With regard to the superintendency of the college, or the examination
  of the candidates, I know myself too well to dream about it;
  nevertheless, so far as my present calling and poor abilities will
  allow, I am ready to throw my mite into the treasury.

  “Some of our conversations upon the manifestations of the Son of Man
  to the heart have led me into many an hour’s consideration. The Holy
  Ghost alone can clear up the points to pursue. Nevertheless, I have
  found both comfort and profit in setting upon paper the reflections I
  have been enabled to make upon the mysterious subject; and they have,
  through mercy, set my soul more than ever against the rampant errors
  of Sandemanianism. Should Providence ever favour me with an
  opportunity, I would bespeak an hour of your ladyship’s time to ratify
  my views of the point, under God.

  “I am happily provided with a schoolmaster to my mind, and my ministry
  is the last under which I would advise any one intended for a preacher
  to sit. Nevertheless, if the young candidate, (Mr. Eastwood) mentioned
  in the letter, wants retirement and a prophet’s room at my house he
  may have it, if he can cook for himself or find a table in the
  neighbourhood.”[145]

Footnote 145:

  “Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon,” vol. ii., p. 82.

There is only one other incident, in the life of Fletcher, deserving
attention and belonging to the year 1767; and as it can be summarily
dispatched, it may be best to mention it at once, before returning to
two matters in his letter to the Countess of Huntingdon, which will
require more extended notice.

On December 1, the tenth Earl of Buchan died at Bath, and was succeeded
by his son, who appointed Fletcher, Venn, and Berridge to be his
chaplains. In a letter to Lady Huntingdon, referring to the appointment,
Fletcher wrote:—

  “I have just received a letter from Lord Buchan, in which he says,
  ‘Pray for me, that I also may be found faithful when our Master calls
  for me, and that I may live a martyr to redeeming love, and die a
  trophy and a monument of the reality of the despised influences of the
  Holy Ghost.’ It is a singular honour to belong to so excellent a
  nobleman. Oh! how far below his grace is his nobility! I feel a strong
  desire to pray that he may be kept from the fickleness of youth[146]
  and the baits of ambition. I share in the happiness of Lady Buchan and
  Lady Anne Erskine upon the occasion. May God make them, together with
  your ladyship, a fourfold cord to draw sinners unto Jesus.”[147]

Footnote 146:

  The new earl was only twenty-four years of age.

Footnote 147:

  “Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon,” vol. ii., p. 19.

Fletcher evidently was pleased with his appointment. The emoluments of
his new office probably were small, perhaps _nil_; but, by means of it,
he became associated with one of the most pious and exemplary noblemen
of the day.

To recur to Fletcher’s former letter to the Countess of Huntingdon.

He nominated James Glazebrook as a fitting candidate to be examined for
admission into Lady Huntingdon’s intended college. As already stated,
Glazebrook was a poor, hardworking collier. He was without money and
without learning; but he had two of the three things by which Wesley
tested the Divine call of his itinerants to preach; namely, “_grace_”
and “_gifts_;” and Fletcher had no doubt that when the opportunity
arrived, he would have the third—“_fruit_.” Wesley’s own definitions of
these three words were:—

  “_Grace_: a knowledge of God as a pardoning God; the love of God
  abiding in them; desiring and seeking nothing but God; and the being
  holy in all manner of conversation. _Gifts_: in some tolerable degree
  a clear, sound understanding; a right judgment in the things of God; a
  just conception of salvation by faith; and a degree of utterance so as
  to be able to speak justly, readily, clearly. _Fruit_: are any truly
  convinced of sin and converted to God by their preaching? As long as
  these three marks concur in any, we believe he is called of God to
  preach.”

Whether Fletcher adopted Wesley’s threefold test, and applied it to
James Glazebrook, it is impossible to ascertain; but that his opinion of
the young man was correct, subsequent events fully proved. Glazebrook
was one of Fletcher’s converts. He was one of the first students at
Trevecca college, if not _the very first_. There he distinguished
himself equally by his superior abilities and his uncommon diligence. He
allowed himself but little time for refreshment, rest, or recreation.
His piety was as remarkable as his gifts and diligence. He was soon sent
forth to preach, and his labours were attended with considerable
success. For three years, he was thus employed in various parts of
England. He then tired of the itinerant life, and desired the Countess
of Huntingdon to procure him orders in the Established Church. With the
assistance of Fletcher a title was obtained, and Glazebrook was ordained
deacon by the Bishop of Lichfield, in December 1771. Soon after his
ordination, he entered on the curacy of Smisby, in Derbyshire; after
which he served the curacies of Rowley Regis, near Birmingham; Shawbury,
Shropshire; Ravenstone, in Derbyshire; and Hugglescote, in
Leicestershire. In 1777, he was ordained priest by Dr. Hurd, Bishop of
Worcester. Two years later, he married the eldest daughter of Thomas
Kirkland, Esq., M.D., of Ashby-de-la-Zouch, an intimate friend of the
Countess of Huntingdon; and, soon after his marriage, became minister of
St. James’s, Warrington. Ultimately, Lord Moira presented him to the
vicarage of Belton, a village in Leicestershire, whose living even now
is not worth more than about £180 a year. Here he continued till the
time of his decease; and here, as well as at Warrington and other
places, he was made the honoured instrument of “turning many to
righteousness.” Besides his ministerial labours, he wrote and published
a “Treatise on Extemporary Preaching,” “Letters on Infant Baptism,” an
“Answer to Gilbert Wakefield’s Treatise on Baptism,” and, after his
death, his family published a volume of his sermons, which was well
received by the public. Such, in brief, was the history of Fletcher’s
convert and _protegé_. Further particulars concerning him may be found
in the _Evangelical Register_ for 1836.

The other matter, requiring attention, in Fletcher’s letter to Lady
Huntingdon, under the date of November 24, 1767, is his reference to the
conversations he had had with her ladyship upon the “Manifestations of
the Son of Man to the heart,” and the fact that he had devoutly studied
this mysterious subject for “many hours,” and had put his thoughts “upon
paper.” This important manuscript was not published until after
Fletcher’s death. The editor of his collected works, in a brief preface,
says:—

  “For the Letters on the Manifestation of Christ, the reader is obliged
  to Mrs. Fletcher. When they were written, or to whom they are
  addressed, is uncertain; but, from the beginning of the first letter,
  the decayed state of the manuscript, and the extreme smallness of the
  character, which could scarcely have been legible to the author in his
  latter years, they are supposed to have been the first essay of a
  genius afterwards so much admired. The reader is requested to remember
  that the pious author wrote only for himself and his friends; that
  these sheets want his perfecting hand; and that the editor thought
  himself entitled to take no liberties.”

From this preface, it is evident that the editor was not acquainted with
the foregoing letter to the Countess of Huntingdon; and it may be added,
that there is no need for the apology, that the “sheets want” Fletcher’s
“perfecting hand.”

The Letters are six in number, and fill fifty-three octavo pages in
Fletcher’s collected works.[148] It is extremely difficult to give, in a
brief form, the substance of these important papers; and yet the task
must be attempted, because the subject is one of great interest and
because the Letters seem to have been among the earliest of his
compositions, that were afterwards published.

Footnote 148:

  They were first published by the Rev. Melville Horne, in 1791, with
  the title, “Six Letters on the Spiritual Manifestation of the Son of
  God.”

His object is clearly stated in his opening paragraph:—

  “When I had the pleasure of seeing you last, you seemed surprised to
  hear me say, that the Son of God, for purposes worthy of His wisdom,
  manifests Himself, sooner or later, to all His sincere followers, in a
  spiritual manner, which the world knows not of. The assertion appeared
  to you unscriptural, enthusiastical, and dangerous. What I then
  advanced to prove that it was scriptural, rational, and of the
  greatest importance, made you desire I would write you on the
  mysterious subject. I declined it, as being unequal to the task; but,
  having since considered that a mistake here may endanger your soul or
  mine, I sit down to comply with your request; and the end I propose by
  it is, either to give you a fair opportunity of pointing out my error,
  if I am wrong, or to engage you, if I am right, to seek what I esteem
  the most invaluable of all blessings,—revelations of Christ to your
  own soul, productive of the experimental knowledge of Him, and the
  present enjoyment of His salvation.”

  “I shall not be able to establish the doctrine I maintain unless you
  allow me the existence of the proper senses, to which our Lord
  manifests Himself. The manifestation I contend for being of a
  spiritual nature, must be made to spiritual senses; and that such
  senses exist, and are opened in, and exercised by, regenerate souls,
  is what I design to prove in this letter” (the first), “by the joint
  testimony of Scripture, our Church, and reason.”

In his second letter, Fletcher defines what he means, and does not mean,
by the manifestations of the Son of God to the soul of man. In the third
and fourth, he dwells on the uses of such manifestations. The fifth
contains a summary of the numerous appearances of the Son of God during
the Old Testament dispensation, and concludes with answers to the
objection that these appearances proved “only, that God favoured the
patriarchs and Jews with immediate revelations of Himself, because they
had neither the Gospel nor the Scriptures.” Fletcher’s fourth answer to
this objection is so characteristic that it must be quoted:—

  “If, because we have the letter of Scripture, we must be deprived of
  all immediate manifestations of Christ and His spirit, we are great
  losers by that blessed book, and we might reasonably say, ‘Lord, bring
  us back to the dispensation of Moses! Thy Jewish servants could
  formerly converse with Thee face to face; but now we can know nothing
  of Thee, but by their writings. They viewed Thy glory in various
  wonderful appearances; but we are indulged only with black lines
  telling us of Thy glory. They had the bright Shekinah, and we have
  only obscure descriptions of it. They were blessed with lively
  oracles; and we only with a dead letter. The ark of Thy covenant went
  before them, and struck terror into all their adversaries; but a book,
  of which our enemies make daily sport, is the only revelation of Thy
  power among us. They made their boast of Urim and Thummim, and
  received particular, immediate answers from between the cherubim; but
  we have only general ones, by means of Hebrew and Greek writings,
  which many do not understand. They conversed familiarly with Moses
  their mediator, with Aaron their high priest, and with Samuel their
  prophet; these holy men gave them unerring directions in doubtful
  cases; but, alas! the apostles and inspired men are all dead; and
  Thou, Jesus, our Mediator, Priest, and Prophet, canst not be consulted
  to any purpose, for Thou manifestest Thyself no more. As for Thy
  sacred book, Thou knowest that sometimes the want of money to purchase
  it, the want of learning to consult the original, the want of wisdom
  to understand the translation, the want of skill or sight to read it,
  prevent our improving it to the best advantage, and keep some from
  reaping any benefit from it at all. O Lord! if, because we have this
  blessed picture of Thee, we must have no discovery of the glorious
  original, have compassion on us, take back Thy precious book, and
  impart Thy more precious Self to us, as Thou didst to Thy ancient
  people!”

In his sixth and last Letter, Fletcher proves “that the New Testament,
as well as the Old, abounds with accounts of particular revelations of
the Son of God;” and he concludes thus:—

  “Having thus led you from Genesis to Revelation, I conclude by two
  inferences, which appear to me undeniable. The first, that it is
  evident our Lord, before His incarnation, during His stay on earth,
  and after His ascension into heaven, hath been pleased, in a variety
  of manners, to manifest Himself to the children of men, both for the
  benefit of the Church in general, and for the conversion of sinners
  and the establishment of saints in particular. Secondly, that the
  doctrine, which I maintain, is as old as Adam, as modern as St. John,
  the last of the inspired writers, and as scriptural as the Old and New
  Testaments, which is what I wanted to demonstrate.”

This is an imperfect outline of Fletcher’s production, but want of space
prevents enlargement. Some, with a scornful jeer, will brand Fletcher as
a mystic; and others, sincerely in search of truth, but who have not
experienced that of which he speaks, will ask his meaning. Leaving the
former to their own infidel or pharisaic wisdom, it may be said in reply
to the latter, Fletcher meant nothing more than what Christ Himself
meant in His sixth beatitude, “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they
shall _see God_;” and again, in one of His latest utterances, “He that
hath My commandments and keepeth them, he it is that loveth Me; and he
that loveth Me shall be loved of My Father, and I will love him, and
will _manifest Myself to him_.” Or, again, Fletcher meant what St. Paul
meant in texts like the following:—“The natural man receiveth not the
things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness unto him; neither
can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.” “God, who
commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts,
to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of
Jesus Christ.” “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the
evidence of things not seen.”

If it be asked, again, what is the meaning of these and such like texts?
it may be answered, substantially,—the meaning is the same as what is
meant by stanzas like the following, written by John or Charles Wesley,
and selected from their Hymn Book, almost at random:—

               “Spirit of faith, come down,
                 Reveal the things of God;
               And make to us the Godhead known,
                 And witness with the blood.
               O that the world might know
                 The all-atoning Lamb!
               Spirit of faith! descend and show
                 The virtue of His name.”

               “Come, Holy Ghost, (for moved by Thee
                 The prophets wrote and spoke),
               Unlock the truth, Thyself the key,
                 Unseal the sacred Book.
               Expand Thy wings, celestial Dove,
                 Brood o’er our nature’s night;
               Oh, our disordered spirits move,
                 And let there now be light.
               God, through Himself, we then shall know,
                 If Thou within us shine;
               And sound, with all Thy saints below,
                 The depths of love divine.”

               “Author of faith, eternal word,
                 Whose spirit breathes the active flame;
               Faith, like its finisher and Lord,
                 To-day, as yesterday, the same:
               To Thee our humble hearts aspire,
                 And ask the gift unspeakable:
               Increase in us the kindled fire,
                 In us the work of faith fulfil.
               The things unknown to feeble sense,
                 Unseen by reason’s glimmering ray,
               With strong, commanding evidence,
                 Their heavenly origin display.
               Faith lends its realizing light,
                 The clouds disperse, the shadows fly;
               The Invisible appears in sight,
                 And God is seen by mortal eye.”

               “O disclose Thy lovely face,
                 Quicken all my drooping powers;
               Gasps my fainting soul for grace,
                 As a thirsty land for showers;
               Haste, my Lord, no more delay!
                 Come, my Saviour, come away!
               Dark and cheerless is the morn,
                 Unaccompanied by Thee;
               Joyless is the day’s return,
                 Till Thy mercy’s beams I see;
               Till Thou inward light impart,
                 Glad my eyes and warm my heart.
               Visit, then, this soul of mine,
                 Pierce the gloom of sin and grief;
               Fill me, Radiancy Divine,
                 Scatter all my unbelief;
               More and more Thyself display,
                 Shining to the perfect day.”

If it be asked, again, what means all this? let the enquirer carefully
and devoutly read Fletcher’s Six Letters. He will be wiser and better
for his exercise; and will ascertain that Fletcher and Wesley were not,
in the vulgar sense of the expression, bewildered and bewildering
mystics, but spiritually enlightened, sober, scriptural divines, who,
with reverential and joyous hearts, could sing:—

                  “What we have felt and seen,
                    With confidence we tell;
                  And publish to the sons of men
                    The signs infallible.
                  We by His Spirit prove
                    And know the things of God,
                  The things, which freely of His love
                    He hath on us bestow’d.
                  His glory our design,
                    We live our God to please;
                  And rise, with filial fear divine
                    To perfect holiness.”




                              CHAPTER VII.
             _TREVECCA COLLEGE: VISIT TO SWITZERLAND, ETC._

                  FROM JANUARY 3, 1768, TO JULY 1770.


IN Fletcher’s letter to Lady Huntingdon, dated November 24, 1767, it is
intimated that the Countess had suggested to Fletcher that a certain
“Mr. Eastwood” could serve him as his village schoolmaster, and was
anxious to do so, in order to have the benefit of Fletcher’s ministry.
There can be no doubt that the name “Eastwood” is a mistake, and that
“Easterbrook” was meant.

Joseph Easterbrook was a son of the bell-man of Bristol, and had been
educated at Wesley’s Kingswood School.[149] He was now about seventeen
years of age, and came to reside at Madeley.[150] Afterwards he obtained
episcopal ordination, and became Vicar of the Temple Church, Bristol,
and Ordinary of Newgate Prison in that city. He continued faithful to
Wesley and to Methodism; and, it is said, he preached a sermon in every
house in his large parish. He died in 1791, in the fortieth year of his
age. This is not the place to give further details of his history; but
it is hoped that those now related will add to the interest of what
Fletcher writes concerning him in the following letter to the Countess
of Huntingdon, in reply to one she had addressed to him respecting
suitable books for the students of her intended college:—

                                        “MADELEY, _January 3, 1768_.

  “MY LADY,—I thank your ladyship for having recommended to me
  Easterbrook. I hope he will be the captain of the school, and a great
  help to the master, as well as a spur to the students. He has good
  parts, a most happy memory, and a zeal that would gladden your
  ladyship’s heart. He has preached no less than four times to-day; and
  seems, indeed, in his own element when he is seeking after the lost
  sheep of the house of Israel. He is employed every evening in the work
  of the Lord; and I give him the more opportunity to exercise his
  talent, as it appears he does it far better than I. I beg two things
  for him: first, that it may hold; secondly, that he may be kept
  humble. He would at first live upon potatoes and water; but, finding
  it may impair his health, I have got him to table with me, and shall
  gladly pay his board. He works for me, and the workman is worthy of
  his hire.

  “Our young collier” (Glazebrook) “seems a little discouraged with
  regard to the hope of his being admitted one of your students. He
  thinks he stands no chance, if all must be qualified as he”
  (Easterbrook) “is.

  “With regard to books, I am in doubt what to write your ladyship.
  Having studied abroad, and used rather foreign than English books with
  my pupils” (Mr. Hill’s sons), “I am not well enough acquainted with
  the books Great Britain affords to select the _best_ and most
  _concise_. Besides, a plan of studies must be fixed upon first, before
  proper books can be chosen. Grammar, logic, rhetoric, ecclesiastical
  history, and a little natural philosophy and geography, with a great
  deal of practical divinity, will be sufficient for those who do not
  care to dive into languages. Mr. Townsend and Charles Wesley might, by
  spending an hour or two together, make a proper choice; and I would
  recommend them not to forget Watt’s ‘Logic,’ and his ‘History of the
  Bible, by Questions and Answers,’ which seem to me excellent books of
  the kind for clearness and order. Mr. Wesley’s ‘Natural Philosophy’
  contains as much as is wanted, or more. Mason’s ‘Essay on
  Pronunciation’ will be worth their attention. ‘Henry and Gill on the
  Bible,’ with the four volumes of Baxter’s ‘Practical Works,’ Keach’s
  ‘Metaphors,’ ‘Taylor on the Types,’ Gurnal’s ‘Christian Armour,’
  ‘Edwards on Preaching,’ Johnson’s English Dictionary, and Mr. Wesley’s
  ‘Christian Library,’ may make part of the little library. The book of
  Baxter, I mention, I shall take care to send to Trevecca, as a mite
  towards the collection, together with Usher’s ‘Body of Divinity,’
  Scapula’s Greek Lexicon, and Littleton’s Latin Dictionary.

  “With regard to those who propose to learn Latin and Greek, the master
  your ladyship will appoint may choose to follow his particular method.
  Mr. Wesley’s books, printed for the use of Christian youths, seem to
  me short and proper, and their expense less, which, I suppose, should
  be consulted. Two or three dictionaries of Bailey or Dyke for those
  who learn English, with two or three Coles’s Dictionaries,
  Shrevelins’s, and Pasor’s, for those who will learn Latin and Greek,
  may be a sufficient stock at first.

  “Mr. Edward Stillingfleet[151] is presented, by Mr. Hill, to the
  living of Shawbury, eight miles from Shrewsbury, and twenty from here.
  I thank the Lord for this fellow-helper.

                      “I am, your ladyship’s unworthy servant,
                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[152]

Footnote 149:

  “Unpublished Letter by John Pawson.”

Footnote 150:

  Misled by the author of the “Life and Times of the Countess of
  Huntingdon,” I have stated in my “Life and Times of Wesley,” that, at
  the opening of Trevecca College, Easterbrook was appointed to the
  office of master. This is a mistake. The master, as will be seen in
  succeeding pages, was a wonderful child, twelve years old! Perhaps,
  however, Easterbrook rendered some assistance.—L. T.

Footnote 151:

  A great-grandson of the celebrated bishop of that name. He proved
  himself to be a faithful friend to Venn, and the other evangelical
  clergymen of the age.

Footnote 152:

  _Methodist Magazine_, 1821, p. 437.

The reader may learn two facts from Fletcher’s letter. First, what were
the books in divinity he most loved and prized. It is to be feared that
such books are no longer popular. In the case of many theological
students, they have given place to the flimsy and even sceptical
productions of a later period. The more the pity. No wonder that so many
pulpits are spiritless, and that so many pews are starved.

Secondly: It is also evident that Fletcher had already formed a sort of
circuit of preaching places, otherwise a youth like Easterbrook could
hardly have found the opportunity to preach every evening in the week,
and four times on Sunday. It is now impossible to ascertain what the
places were; but Wesley’s testimony may here be appropriately
introduced.

  “From the beginning, Mr. Fletcher did not confine his labours to his
  own parish. For many years, he regularly preached at places, eight,
  ten, or sixteen miles off, returning the same night, though he seldom
  got home before one or two in the morning. At a little Society which
  he had gathered about six miles from Madeley, he preached two or three
  times a week, beginning at five in the morning.”[153]

Footnote 153:

  Wesley’s “Life of Fletcher.”

Of course, all this was ecclesiastically irregular, and a repetition of
it would not be permitted now; but, fortunately for the people who “sat
in darkness,” it was, except in a few instances, only a peccadillo a
hundred years ago, at which bishops, priests, and deacons found it a
convenience to themselves to wink.

It was at this time that Wesley wrote to Fletcher his unusually long and
well-known letter on conversation. The following are brief extracts from
it:—

                                      “BIRMINGHAM, _March 20, 1768_.

  “DEAR SIR,—Mr. Easterbrook told me yesterday that you are sick of the
  conversation even of them who profess religion,—that you find it quite
  unprofitable, if not hurtful, to converse with them three or four
  hours together, and are sometimes almost determined to shut yourself
  up, as the less evil of the two.

  “I do not wonder at it at all, especially considering with whom you
  have chiefly conversed for some time past, namely, the hearers of Mr.
  Madan, or Mr. Bourian, perhaps I might add, of Mr. Whitefield. The
  conversing with these I have rarely found to be profitable to my soul.
  Rather it has damped my designs; it has cooled my resolutions; and I
  have consciously left them with a dry, dissipated spirit.

  “Again; you have, for some time, conversed a good deal with the
  genteel Methodists. Now it matters not a straw what doctrine they
  hear,—whether they frequent the Lock or West Street,—they are, almost
  all, salt which has lost its savour, if ever they had any. They are
  thoroughly conformed to the maxims, the spirit, the fashions, and
  customs of the world.

  “But were these or those of ever so excellent a spirit, you conversed
  with them too long. One had need to be an angel, not a man, to
  converse three or four hours at once, to any purpose.

  “But have you not a remedy for all this in your hands? In order to
  truly profitable conversation, may you not select persons clear of
  both Calvinism and Antinomianism? not fond of that luscious way of
  talking, but standing in awe of Him they love; who are vigorously
  working out their salvation, and are athirst for full redemption, and
  every moment expecting it, if not already enjoying it?”[154]

Footnote 154:

  Tyerman’s “Life and Times of Wesley,” vol. iii., p. 4.

Apart from the subject of this letter, it is of importance, as showing
that the maelstrom of the Calvinian controversy was already stirring,
and that Wesley was afraid of Fletcher being drawn into it. This would
be much more apparent could the letter be quoted here _in extenso_.
Suffice it to add, that Fletcher was preserved from the spreading evils,
and that it is difficult to tell how much he was indebted to Wesley’s
long warning letter for his escape from danger.

So far as Fletcher was concerned, the great event of the year 1768 was
the opening of Lady Huntingdon’s College at Trevecca. Wesley seemed to
disapprove of her ladyship’s design. In a letter to his brother Charles,
he wrote:—

  “Edinburgh, May 14, 1768.—I am glad Mr. Fletcher has been with you.
  But, if the tutor fails, what will become of our College at Trevecca?
  Did you ever see anything more queer than their plan of institution?
  Pray, who penned it, man or woman? I am afraid the Visitor” (Fletcher)
  “too will fail.”[155]

Footnote 155:

  Wesley’s Works, vol. xii., p. 126.

Meanwhile, however, an occurrence had taken place, which appeared to
make the opening of Trevecca College increasingly desirable and
important. On the 12th of March, six students belonging to Edmund Hall,
Oxford, were expelled the University, really and truly on the ground
that they were charged with being Methodists. The event, as may easily
be imagined, created a national sensation. Numbers of tracts and
pamphlets, _pro et con_, were published; and, among others, one by
Whitefield, entitled, “A Letter to the Reverend Dr. Durell,
Vice-Chancellor of the University of Oxford; occasioned by a late
Expulsion of Six Students from Edmund Hall.” Whitefield’s letter was
dated April 12, 1768, exactly a month after the expulsions took place.
Fletcher read it with approbation, and wrote to Whitefield, thanking him
for the service he had rendered to the cause of truth; and also
referring to a recent visit to Bristol, to the Rev. Cradock Glascott,
who had supplied for him at Madeley; and to the prospect there was of
obtaining a suitable master, from Suffolk, for the College at Trevecca.
Fletcher’s letter was as follows:—

                                           “MADELEY, _May 28, 1768_.

  “REVEREND AND DEAR SIR,—I thank you, though late, for the kind leave
  you gave me of trying to pipe where you trumpet the name of our dear
  Redeemer, in Bristol. I ask you, and my hearers there, and, above all,
  our gracious Lord, to pardon me for the wretched manner in which I
  performed, or rather spoiled, the glorious work.

  “I thank you, also, for your letter to the Vice-Chancellor. Mr.
  Talbot[156] treated us with the reading of it at our meeting of the
  clergy at Birmingham; and I saw applause and satisfaction sitting upon
  every brow.

  “Lady Huntingdon, in a few lines I had lately, mentions that
  Providence raises a master for her school from Suffolk, who promises
  well. She desires he may be secured, if approved of. Perhaps you know
  him; and you are the best judge whether he is likely to answer. For my
  part, I am willing to put my smoking flax to the tapers of my brethren
  and fathers, when they endeavour to throw some light and order upon
  her ladyship’s design; but I feel my place should be among the
  scholars, rather than among the Directors.

  “Mr. Glascott quitted himself as a faithful and able minister, during
  his stay here. Thousands attended him in the next parish, where he
  nobly took the field. Nevertheless, I see a curse of barrenness upon
  this neighbourhood, which makes me groan for a day of Pentecost. God
  hasten it in His time! You will please to remember that you are a
  debtor to our barbarians, as well as to the Greeks in London. When you
  come, my pulpit will be honoured, greatly honoured, to hold you, if my
  church cannot hold your congregation.”[157]

Footnote 156:

  No doubt, the Rev. William Talbot, LL.D., Vicar of Kineton, in
  Warwickshire.

Footnote 157:

  Fletcher’s Works, vol. viii., p. 255.

Who “the master from Suffolk” was, has never yet been stated. The matter
is of little consequence. In the month of July, Wesley visited Fletcher,
and, no doubt, they conversed concerning the College at Trevecca; but
Wesley’s account of his visit is so brief as to be almost significant
that there was something in their interview that he would rather
suppress than publish. He simply writes: “1768, Sunday, July 31. I
preached for Mr. Fletcher in the morning; and in the evening at
Shrewsbury.”[158] Within a month after this, the college was opened;
but, instead of being at Trevecca, Wesley was in Cornwall.

Footnote 158:

  Wesley’s Journal.

The opening took place on Wednesday, August 24, the anniversary of the
birthday of Lady Huntingdon. In all likelihood, Fletcher, the president,
was present; but no positive evidence of this has been published.
Indeed, considering the importance of the event, the account of it is
remarkably brief. The best, in fact, so far as I know, the only one ever
given to the public, is an extract from Whitefield’s Memorandum Book, as
follows:—

  “August 24, 1768. Opened good Lady Huntingdon’s Chapel and College, in
  the parish of Talgarth, Brecknockshire, South Wales. Preached from
  Exodus xx. 24: ‘In all places where I record My name, I will come unto
  thee, and I will bless thee.’ August 25.—Gave an exhortation to the
  Students, in the College-chapel, from Luke i. 15: ‘He shall be great
  in the sight of the Lord.’ Sunday, August 28.—Preached in the court
  before the College (the congregation consisting of some thousands),
  from 1 Cor. iii. 11: ‘Other foundation can no man lay, than that is
  laid, which is Jesus Christ.’”[159]

Footnote 159:

  Gillies’ “Life of Whitefield.”

To this must be added a single sentence, from a letter which Whitefield
wrote to Mr. Keene, on August 30: “What we have seen and felt at the
College is unspeakable.”[160]

Footnote 160:

  Trevecca College was supported at the sole expense of the Countess of
  Huntingdon till her death, on June 17, 1791. “Had her ability been
  equal to her desire for its continuance, she would have endowed it,
  and thereby have provided for its perpetuity.” About four years before
  her decease, and with her full approval, provision was made for the
  future. Seven trustees were appointed to take care of the College
  after her ladyship’s death; and a subscription was begun for its
  maintenance. This accumulated fund, in 1791, amounted to £585, 3 per
  cent. Consols. The lease of the Trevecca property had expired, and it
  was now determined to remove the college to Cheshunt, near London.
  Accordingly, the Trevecca house was given up at Lady-day, 1792; the
  furniture, the library, and the communion plate were taken to
  Cheshunt, where the new establishment was formally opened on August
  24, the anniversary of the commencement of the abandoned one at
  Trevecca. A religious service, of nearly three hours and a-half’s
  duration, was held; Lady Anne Agnes Erskine, executrix of the Countess
  of Huntingdon, presided; and seven or eight hundred persons were
  present. (“The Order observed at the opening of the Countess of
  Huntingdon’s College at Cheshunt, London, 1792,” 8vo., 86 pp.)

That is all. Is there an instance of any other Methodist Institution so
important as this, the published details of whose opening services are
so pitiably meagre?

It has been said, there is no _positive_ proof that Fletcher was at the
opening of Trevecca College; but there is _incidental_ evidence that he
was, and that his friend James Ireland, Esq., was with him. This will be
found in the _second_ of the following letters addressed to Mr. Ireland
and his dying daughter.

                                          “MADELEY, _July 30, 1768_.

  “MY DEAR FRIEND,—Uncertain as I am whether your daughter is yet alive,
  I know not what to say, but this,—our Heavenly Father appoints all
  things for the best. If her days of suffering are prolonged, it is to
  honour her with a conformity to the crucified Jesus. If they are
  shortened, she will have drunk all her cup of affliction, and found,
  at the bottom of it, not the bitterness of her sins, but the
  consolations of our Saviour’s Spirit.

  “I had lately some views of death, and it appeared to me in the most
  brilliant colours. What is it to die, but to open our eyes after the
  disagreeable dream of life? It is to break the prison of corruptible
  flesh and blood, into which sin has cast us. It is to draw aside the
  curtain which prevents us seeing the Supreme Beauty and Goodness face
  to face. O my dear friend, how lovely is death, when we look at it in
  Jesus Christ! To die is one of the greatest privileges of the
  Christian.

  “If Miss Ireland is still living, tell her, a thousand times, that
  Jesus is the resurrection and the life; that He has vanquished and
  disarmed death; that He has brought life and immortality to light; and
  that all things are ours, whether life or death, eternity or time.
  These are great truths upon which she ought to repose her soul with
  full assurance. Everything is shadow, in comparison of the reality of
  the Gospel. If your daughter be dead, believe in Jesus, and you shall
  find her again in Him, who fills all in all, who encircles the
  material and spiritual world in His arms—in the immense bosom of His
  Divinity.

                             “Adieu, my dear friend. Yours,
                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[161]

Footnote 161:

  Letters, 1791, p. 198.

                                       “MADELEY, _October 14, 1768_.

  “MY VERY DEAR FRIEND,—I think I told you at Trevecca,[162] that we had
  no farmers at Madeley who feared God and loved Jesus. This generation
  among us are buried in the furrows of their ploughs, or under the
  heaps of corn which fill their granaries. Now that I am on the spot, I
  do not see one who makes it necessary for me to change my opinion.
  Your bailiff cannot come from this Nazareth.

  “If the last efforts of the physicians fail with respect to Miss
  Ireland, it will be a consolation to you to know that they have been
  tried. Every thing dies. Things visible are all transitory; but
  invisible ones abide for ever. If Christ is our life and our
  resurrection, it is of little importance whether we die now, or thirty
  years hence.

  “Present my respects to your son, and tell him, that last week I
  buried three young persons who had died of a malignant fever; and who,
  on the second day of their illness, were deprived of their speech and
  senses, and, on the fifth, of their lives. Of what avail are youth and
  vigour when the Lord lifts His finger? And shall we sin against the
  eternal power, the infinite love, the inexorable justice, and the
  immense goodness of this God, who gives us, from moment to moment, the
  breath which is in our nostrils? No—we will employ the precious gift
  in praising and blessing this good God, who is our Father in Jesus
  Christ.

  “I hope you learn, as well as I, and better than I, to know Jesus in
  the Spirit. I have known Him after the flesh, and after the letter; I
  strive to know Him in the power of His Spirit. Under the Divine
  character of a quickening Spirit, He is everywhere. All that live,
  live in Him, and they who are spiritually alive have a double life.
  The Lord give us this second life more abundantly. Yours,

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[163]

Footnote 162:

  In all probability at the opening of the College on August 24.

Footnote 163:

  Letters, 1791, p. 199.

The next is an extract from a long letter, addressed to dying Miss
Ireland.

                                       “MADELEY, _December 5, 1768_.

  “MY DEAR AFFLICTED FRIEND,—I hear you are returned from the last
  journey you took in search of health. Your Heavenly Father sees fit to
  deny it you, not because He hateth you (_for whom the Lord loveth He
  chasteneth_), but because life and health might be fatal snares to
  your soul, out of which you could not escape, but by tedious illness,
  and an early death.

  “Your father has crossed the sea for you; Jesus has done more. He has
  crossed the abyss that lies between heaven and earth—between the
  Creator and the creature. He has waded through the sea of His tears,
  blood, and agonies, not to take you to the physician at Montpelier,
  but to become your physician and Saviour Himself. Oh, my friend, delay
  not cheerfully to surrender yourself to Him. Look not at your sins
  without beholding His blood and righteousness. Eye not death but to
  behold your gracious Saviour, saying, ‘_Fear not, O thou of little
  faith: wherefore dost thou doubt?_’ Consider not eternity but as the
  palace where you are going to enter with the Bridegroom of souls, and
  rest from all your sins and miseries. View not the condemning law of
  God but as made honourable by Him, who was made a curse for you. If
  you have no comfort, distrust not Jesus on that account; on the
  contrary, take advantage from it to give greater glory to God, by
  believing, as Abraham did, ‘in hope against hope.’ In this simple,
  Gospel way, wait the Lord’s leisure, and He will comfort your heart.

  “I hope you take care to have little or nothing else mentioned to you
  but His praises and promises. Your tongue and ears are going to be
  silent in the grave. Now, or never, you must use them to hear and
  speak good of His name. Comfort your weeping friends. Reprove the
  backsliders. Encourage seekers. Remember the praying, believing,
  preaching, though dying thief. Be not afraid to drop a word for Him
  who opens a fountain of blood for you. Suffer, live, die at His feet;
  and you will soon revive, sing, and reign in His bosom for evermore.
  Farewell, in the Conqueror of Death and Prince of Life.

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[164]

Footnote 164:

  _Ibid_, 1791, p. 204.

Within three months after the date of this letter, Miss Ireland had left
a world of sin and suffering, and had entered into that rest which
remains for the people of God.[165] Hence the following, addressed to
her father:—

                                         “MADELEY, _March 26, 1769_.

  “MY DEAR FRIEND,—The Lord is desirous of making you a true disciple of
  His dear Son, the ‘_Man of Sorrows_,’ by sending you affliction upon
  affliction. A sister and a wife who appear to hasten to the grave in
  which you have so lately laid your only daughter, places you in
  circumstances of uncommon sorrow. But in this see the finger of Him
  who works all in all, and who commands us to forsake all to follow
  Him. Believe in Him. Believe that He does all for the best; and that
  all shall work for good to those who love Him. His goodness to your
  daughter ought to encourage your faith and confidence for Mrs.
  Ireland. Offer her upon the altar, and you shall see that, if it be
  best for her and you, His grace will suspend the blow which threatens
  you.

  “Your rich present of meal came last week, and shall be distributed to
  the pious poor agreeably to your orders. We are happy to receive your
  bounty, but you are more happy in bestowing it upon us. Witness the
  words of Jesus, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’
  Nevertheless, receive, by faith, the presents of the Lord, the gifts
  of His Spirit, and reject not the bread which cometh down from heaven,
  because the Lord gives it you with so much love.

  “I shall be obliged to go to Switzerland this year or the next, if I
  live and the Lord permits. I have there a brother, a worthy man, who
  threatens to leave his wife and children to come and pay me a visit if
  I do not go and see him myself. It is some time since our gracious God
  convinced him of sin, and I have some of his letters which give me
  great pleasure. This circumstance has more weight with me than the
  settlement of my affairs.”[166]

Footnote 165:

  Letters, 1791, p. 205.

Footnote 166:

  _Ibid_, p. 206.

Mr. Ireland was a frequent benefactor to Fletcher and the poor of
Madeley. Hence, in another letter to the same friend in need, Fletcher
wrote:—

  “I think I wrote my last letter two days before I received your
  bounty—a large hogshead of rice and two cheeses. Accept the thanks of
  your poor and mine. I distributed your gifts on Shrove Tuesday; and
  preached to a numerous congregation on ‘Seek ye first the kingdom of
  God and His righteousness, and all other things shall be added unto
  you.’ We prayed for our benefactor, that God would give him a
  hundredfold in this life, and eternal life, where life eternal will be
  no burden.”[167]

Footnote 167:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

Help, like Mr. Ireland’s, was always welcome. Many of Fletcher’s
parishioners were extremely poor, and to the utmost of his ability he
contributed to their necessities. One who knew him writes:—

  “The profusion of his charity toward the poor and needy is scarcely
  credible. It constantly exhausted his purse; it frequently unfurnished
  his home; and sometimes left him destitute of the common necessaries
  of life. That he might feed the hungry, he led a life of abstinence
  and self-denial; and that he might cover the naked, he clothed himself
  in the most homely attire.”[168]

Footnote 168:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

Fletcher was President, or, as Wesley chose to call him more correctly,
_Visitor_ of Trevecca College. The office brought upon him considerable
anxiety and labour. In the summer of 1769, John Jones made application
to be appointed head master. Mr. Jones, from 1746 to 1767, had been one
of Wesley’s itinerant preachers. He was one of the first classical
masters of Kingswood School, and wrote the Latin Grammar which was used
in that academy.[169] He was highly esteemed by Wesley, and after he
left Kingswood was generally stationed in Wesley’s two most important
circuits, London and Bristol. In 1754, when there was great excitement
respecting a possible separation of the Methodists from the Church of
England, Charles Wesley wished what he called “_the sound preachers_” to
be “_qualified for orders_,” and wrote to his brother, saying, “I know
none fitter for training up the young men in learning than yourself or
J. Jones.” Nine years after this, when Erasmus, a bishop of the Greek
Church, visited London, he, at Wesley’s request, ordained Jones to
assist the Arch-Methodist in administering the sacraments to his
Societies. Charles Wesley would not admit the validity of this
ordination, and consequently would not allow Mr. Jones to officiate as a
clergyman. This was a severe trial to the newly-ordained preacher, and
led him to leave the Methodists. He afterwards procured ordination from
the Bishop of London, and was presented to the living of Harwich, where
he continued to preach for many years, and where he ended his days in
peace.[170] He never lost his love for Wesley. In 1775, when Wesley was
dangerously ill in Ireland, he wrote to him from Harwich:—

  “I cannot express what I felt when I was informed you were both
  senseless and speechless; and it was like life from the dead when I
  heard you were out of danger and able to sit up. Time was when you
  would have taken my advice, at least in some things. Let me entreat,
  let me beseech you, to preach less frequently, and that only at the
  principal places,” etc.[171]

Footnote 169:

  Myles’s “Chronological History of the Methodists.”

Footnote 170:

  Atmore’s “Methodist Memorial.”

Footnote 171:

  _Arminian Magazine_, 1787, p. 444.

Such was John Jones, Wesley’s friend, and at one time held in high
esteem by Wesley’s brother Charles. His ambition to be employed in Lady
Huntingdon’s college at Trevecca was not inordinate. Fifteen years
before, Charles Wesley had thought him qualified to train young men for
the ministry, and from one of his letters, written in 1777, and
published in the _Wesleyan Methodist Magazine_ for 1837, it is evident
that Charles Wesley’s opinion was well founded. The letter was addressed
to a gentleman of Magdalene College, Cambridge, who was about to be
ordained, and wished Mr. Jones’s advice respecting the composition of
sermons and preaching them.

  “Prayer,” said he, “should always precede the composing of a
  discourse. In general, the explication of the text or context, if they
  need it, should not be too short. The propositions or doctrines should
  not be too long nor too many, and the clearer they are the better. The
  illustrations should be proper and lively; the proofs close and home;
  the motives strong and cogent; the inferences and application natural,
  and not laboured. For if we cannot persuade the passions, we shall go
  but a little way with most of our hearers. This was George
  Whitefield’s peculiar talent; but I do not mean to persuade you to
  bawl as loud as he did, and yet I would advise you to raise your voice
  in the application of your discourse. Eight-and-thirty years ago I
  thought it an easy matter to prove most points in divinity. I have
  been learning the contrary ever since, and I find it now very
  difficult, by Scriptures properly understood and applied, to prove
  many things which I once thought quite clear. I find it necessary to
  understand the Scripture I bring in as a proof before I use it as
  such. I will add one thing more. You will find it very difficult to
  use such plain language as will be understood in most congregations.
  Avoid long periods as much as possible. Imitate Cæsar rather than
  Cicero; leave the latter to Dr. Middleton and Samuel Furley. It is far
  better to be understood by our hearers than to be admired by getting
  out of their depth. To do all the good we can is our one business in
  life.”

Mr. Jones was a man of sense, and piety, and experience; and yet
Fletcher hesitated in recommending him to be appointed a tutor in
Trevecca College. Did Fletcher sympathize with his friend Charles Wesley
in the repugnance which the latter felt to Mr. Jones’s ordination by
Erasmus, the bishop of the Greek Church? Perhaps so; at all events, the
following letter to the Countess of Huntingdon was cautious, if not
cold:—

                                           “MADELEY, _July 1, 1769_.

  “MY LADY,—Mr. Jones’s letter puzzled me a little. I did not know what
  answer to make to it. I have, however, sat down, and, after an
  introduction, I say to him—

  “‘The first and grand point to be kept in view at Lady Huntingdon’s
  College is to maintain and grow in the spirit of faith and power that
  breathes through the Acts of the Apostles, and was exemplified in the
  lives of the primitive Christians. The first and grand qualification
  required in a person called to be at the head of such a college is,
  then, a degree of faith and power from above, with an entire
  devotedness to God and His cause.

  “‘The master, who is there at present, seems, on account of his youth,
  to be deficient in point of experience. Nor is he a proper master of
  the Greek, nor even of the harder classics; so that he can hardly
  maintain his superiority over those who read Cicero and Horace.
  Whether this inconveniency, Sir, would be avoided, supposing you were
  appointed to succeed him, I cannot judge by your letter. He is also
  unacquainted with divinity and the sciences, of which it is proper he
  should give the students some idea; and how far you may excel him in
  these points, Sir, is not in my power to determine. He has twenty-five
  guineas a year, with his board, room, and washing. I dare say the
  generous foundress would not hesitate to raise the salary of a master
  of superior merit, though she hopes none would undertake that office
  for the sake of money.’

  “After giving Mr. Jones a little account of the business of the
  College, I add—

  “‘The variety of classes in it demands great assiduity and diligence
  in the master. I would not, therefore, advise anyone to engage without
  a proper trial. I have begged of Lady Huntingdon not to fix upon a
  master till she had allowed him to look about him, and see how he
  liked the place, people, and business; and, as you very properly
  observe, Sir, it would be improper _to engage, and then to repent of
  the undertaking_. I think that, if, upon consulting with the Lord in
  prayer, and with Mr. Maxfield in conversation, you find your heart
  free to embrace so peculiar an opportunity of being useful to your
  generation, it might be best to come and see how you like the
  business, and how it agrees with you; and should not matters prove
  agreeable on either side, I dare say Lady Huntingdon will pay your
  travelling expenses to Talgarth,[172] and back again.’

  “In a letter to Mr. Maxfield,[173] I desired him to inform your
  ladyship how Mr. Jones’s mind stands after reflecting on the contents
  of my letter to him, and whether he would go to make a trial. I add,
  that so much depends upon the aptness to teach, Christian experience,
  solidity, liveliness, and devotedness of a master, that no one can
  presume to judge of these things by a letter, or even by a day’s
  conversation.

  “If your ladyship does not approve of this step, a line to Mr.
  Maxfield will rectify what you think amiss, and will oblige, my lady,
  your unworthy servant,

                                                       “J. FLETCHER.

  “P.S.—If your ladyship is so good as to spare a minister for three
  weeks, I shall be glad to wait upon the dear young men and their
  patroness at the College.”[174]

Footnote 172:

  Trevecca College was in the parish of Talgarth, South Wales. It was
  supposed to be part of an old castle erected in the reign of Henry the
  Second. The date over the entrance was 1176.

Footnote 173:

  Thomas Maxfield, who had seceded from Wesley’s Connexion in 1763, and
  had received episcopal ordination from the Bishop of Derry.

Footnote 174:

  “Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon,” vol. ii., p. 98.

This is an important letter, not only as exhibiting the views of
Fletcher, but as containing a curious chapter in the earliest history of
Trevecca College. The College, as it was ostentatiously called, had been
opened ten months. It had one master; and the author of the “Life and
Times of the Countess of Huntingdon” says Joseph Easterbrook was the
person who occupied this position; but adduces no proof in support of
his assertion. Another, and a far greater authority, attests that the
master of the College was a child. Who was he?

In 1788, there was printed “A Sermon, occasioned by the Death of the
celebrated Mr. J. Henderson, B.A., of Pembroke College, Oxford: Preached
at St. George’s, Kingswood, November 23; and at Temple Church, Bristol,
November 30, 1788. By the Rev. William Agutter, M.A., of St. Mary
Magdalen College, Oxford. Published at the request of the Congregations.
Bristol. 1788.”  8vo, pp. 32. The text of the sermon is, “Moses was
learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians.” Mr. Agutter’s eulogy of
Henderson cannot here be quoted at full length: the following are brief
extracts from it:—

  “Mr. Henderson was born, as it were, a thinking being; and was never
  known to cry, or to express any infantine peevishness. The questions
  he asked, as soon as he was able to speak, astonished all who heard
  him.”

  “His memory was so strong that he retained all he read; and his
  judgment so solid that he arranged, examined, and digested all that he
  remembered, and thus made it his own.”

  “At a time that other children were employed in the drudgery of
  learning words, he was occupied in obtaining the knowledge of things.
  _While but a boy, he was engaged to teach the learned languages. At
  twelve years of age, he taught Greek and Latin in the College of
  Trevecca. The Governor of the College at that time was the Rev. Mr.
  Fletcher, late Vicar of Madeley._”[175]

Footnote 175:

  The _Arminian Magazine_, for 1793, confirms this statement.

Mr. Agutter proceeds to say, that, when Fletcher was dismissed from
Trevecca, Henderson was dismissed with him.

This, then, was the master—the only master of Trevecca College during
the first year of its existence—a child, a wonderful child, twelve years
old! A further account of this prodigy, or, as the _Monthly Review_, of
1789, called him, “a second Baratier,”[176] may interest the reader.

Footnote 176:

  Baratier was a German, born in 1721, and is said to have understood
  the German, French, Greek, and Latin languages when he was five years
  old. At the age of nine, he could not only translate the Hebrew
  Scriptures into Latin or French, but also re-translate these versions
  into Hebrew. Before he had completed his tenth year, he composed a
  Hebrew Lexicon of rare and difficult words, with curious critical
  remarks. In his thirteenth year he translated from the Hebrew “Rabbi
  Benjamin’s Travels in Europe, Asia, and Africa,” and published them in
  two volumes, “with historical and critical notes and dissertations.”
  He also, with remarkable success, applied himself to the study of
  philosophy, mathematics, ecclesiastical history, law, etc. He died in
  his twentieth year.

His father was a native of Ireland, and, from 1759 to 1771, was one of
Wesley’s best itinerant preachers,—a man of deep piety, great talent,
and amiable disposition; but naturally of a timid and melancholy mind.
On relinquishing the itinerancy, he commenced a boarding-school at
Hannam, near Bristol; but two of his pupils having been drowned while
bathing, his mind was so affected, that he abandoned his school, and
opened, at the same place, an asylum for the insane, which Wesley
pronounced the best of the kind in the three kingdoms.

John Henderson, his only child, was born at Bellgaran, near Limerick, in
1757, and, as early as possible, was sent to Wesley’s School, at
Kingswood. At the age of eight, he had made such proficiency in the
Latin language, as to be able to teach it in the school. In his twelfth
year, as already stated, he became the Master in Trevecca College. When
about fourteen years of age, he left Trevecca, and, probably, spent the
next ten years with his father at Hannam. At twenty-four, he entered
Pembroke College, Oxford; and, in due time, took the degree of Bachelor
of Arts. His thirst after knowledge was unbounded; and his amiable
temper and remarkable talents secured him the respect of all who knew
him. His learning was deep and multifarious. He was skilled in grammar,
rhetoric, history, logic, ethics, metaphysics, and scholastic theology.
He studied medicine with great attention, and practised it among the
poor, wherever he had a chance, gratuitously. He was well versed in
geometry, astronomy, and every branch of natural and experimental
philosophy, and also in civil and canon laws. Besides several of the
modern languages, he was master of the Greek and Latin tongues; and was
intimately acquainted with Persic and Arabic. Scarcely a book could be
mentioned, but he could give some account of it; nor any subject
started, but he could engage in the discussion of it. His talents for
conversation were so attractive, various, and multiform, that he was a
companion equally acceptable to the philosopher and the man of the
world, to the gay, the learned, and illiterate, the young and the old of
both sexes. He attracted the notice of Dr. Johnson, was intimate with
Sir William Jones, Miss Hannah More, and other celebrities; and Mr.
Wilberforce offered him his patronage and a living, if he would reside
in London.

Like most geniuses, John Henderson was eccentric. When he first went to
Oxford, his clothes were made in a fashion peculiar to himself; he had
no stock or neckcloth; and he wore his hair like that of a boy at
school. His mode of life was singular. He generally went to bed at
daybreak, and rose in the afternoon, except when he was obliged to
attend the morning service of the college chapel. Before he retired to
rest, he frequently stripped himself naked to the waist, took his
station at a pump near his rooms, sluiced his head and the upper part of
his body, pumped water over his shirt, and then, putting it on, went to
bed. This he jocularly called “an excellent cold bath.” He became an
ardent admirer of the nonsense of Jacob Behmen’s wild philosophical
divinity; studied Lavater’s “Physiognomy;” and attained to a
considerable knowledge of magic and astrology; and declared the
possibility of holding correspondence with the spirits of the dead, upon
the strength of his own experience.

He died at Oxford, on November 2, 1788, and was buried at St. George’s,
Kingswood. His father was so painfully affected by the loss of his
affectionate and only child, that he caused the corpse to be taken up
again, several days after the interment, to satisfy himself that his son
was really dead.[177]

Footnote 177:

  _Arminian Magazine_, 1793, pp. 140–144.

Wesley had great love and respect for poor Henderson’s father, and, a
few months after the young man’s untimely death, he wrote:—

  “1789, March 13.—I spent some time with poor Richard Henderson, deeply
  affected with the loss of his only son; who, with as great talents as
  most men in England, had lived two-and-thirty years, and done just
  nothing.”[178]

Footnote 178:

  Wesley’s Journal.

This, however, was scarcely true. Henry Moore, in his “Life of
Wesley,”[179] relates an anecdote which is worth preserving, and which
must conclude this lengthened notice of the child professor at the
Countess of Huntingdon’s College at Trevecca. In reference to Wesley’s
entry in his Journal, Mr. Moore remarks:—

  “Not a vestige of Mr. Henderson’s writings remains. This is owing to
  what some would call a cross providence. He used to visit his father
  at Hannam, near Bristol, in the summer vacation. He there studied
  intensely, and wrote largely. His MSS. he stored in a large trunk
  without a lock. Returning home, some time before his last illness, he
  flew to his treasure, but found the trunk empty. He enquired of Mrs.
  Henderson, who called up the servant, and asked for the papers in the
  trunk. The girl, who had been hired that year, replied with great
  simplicity, ‘La! ma’am, I thought they were good for nothing, and so I
  lighted the fire with them during the winter.’ Mr. Henderson looked at
  his excellent mother-in-law for some time, but spoke not a word. He
  then went into his study, and was never known to mention the subject
  more.”

Footnote 179:

  Vol. ii., p. 360.

“Oh! Diamond, Diamond! thou little knowest the mischief thou hast done!”
said Sir Isaac Newton to his favourite little dog, who, by upsetting a
taper on his desk, had set fire to the papers which contained the whole
of his unpublished experiments, and thus reduced to ashes the labours of
many years. Poor Henderson, in his misfortune, “spoke not a word.”
Newton lived thirty years after his great loss, but made no important
addition to his scientific discoveries; Henderson died soon after his
sad calamity; and hence Wesley’s disparaging remark concerning him:
“With as great talents as most men in England, he lived two-and-thirty
years, and did just nothing.” Wesley must have been ignorant of the fact
related by Mr. Moore; for, on no other ground can an apology be framed
for his unfair remark.

It is time to return to Fletcher. Wesley was not present at the opening
of Trevecca College, in 1768, but he took part in the religious services
held at the first anniversary in 1769. Whitefield was unavoidably
absent, for he was preaching farewell sermons, and administering
farewell sacraments, to his London congregations, and, a week
afterwards, set out on his final visit to America. But, even without
him, the Methodist gathering at Trevecca was _one_ of the most
remarkable recorded in old Methodist history. Besides Wesley and
Fletcher, there were present Howell Harris, the founder of the Welsh
Methodists; the Rev. Daniel Rowlands, rector of Llangeitho, with a
salary of £10 a year, a preacher whose eloquence was overwhelming, and
whose meetings among the Welsh mountains can never be forgotten; the
Rev. William Williams, curate of Lanwithid, a brave-hearted man who had
met violent persecution without flinching, and a member of the first
Conference of the Calvinistic Methodists in Wales, in 1743; Howell
Davies, rector of Prendergast, an intimate friend of Whitefield, a
preacher whom thousands upon thousands flocked to hear, in fields, and
on commons and mountains, and the attendance at whose monthly sacraments
was so great that his church had to be emptied several times over to
make room for the remaining communicants waiting out of doors; the Rev.
Peter Williams, another itinerant clergyman of the Established Church,
who joined the Methodists as early as the year 1741; and the Hon. and
Rev. Walter Shirley, brother of the notorious Earl Ferrers, first cousin
of the Countess of Huntingdon, converted under the ministry of Venn, and
now an earnest minister of Christ; to whom must be added Lady
Huntingdon, the Countess of Buchan, Lady Anne Erskine, and Miss Orton,
and also the first students of Trevecca, headed by their juvenile
master, John Henderson.

The services were held daily for a whole week, from the 19th to the 25th
of August inclusive. Fletcher, Rowlands, and William Williams arrived at
the College on Friday, the 18th, and next morning Rowlands preached in
the chapel to a crowded congregation, from the words, “Lord, are there
few that be saved?” In the afternoon, the Lord’s Supper was
administered, Fletcher addressing the communicants and spectators, and
Williams giving out a hymn, which was sung with great enthusiasm. At
night, Howell Harris preached to a large congregation assembled in the
court from the text, “The time is come that judgment must begin at the
house of God.” During the day, Walter Shirley and several lay preachers
arrived at Trevecca.

On Sunday, August 20, at ten in the morning, Fletcher read the Liturgy
in the court, and Shirley preached on, “Acquaint thyself now with Him,
and be at peace.” At one, the Lord’s Supper was administered in the
chapel, and Rowlands, Fletcher, and Williams gave addresses. During the
afternoon, Fletcher preached in the court to an immense congregation,
from, “I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ.” When his sermon was
ended, Rowlands, in the Welsh language, addressed the crowd from, “It is
appointed unto men once to die.”

On Monday and Tuesday the clergymen preached, and Howell Harris and
several of the lay preachers joined in the services.

On Wednesday, August 23rd, Wesley came, accompanied by Howell Davies and
Peter Williams.[180] Wesley writes:—

  “Wednesday, August 23rd. I went on to Trevecca. Here we found a
  concourse of people from all parts, come to celebrate the Countess of
  Huntingdon’s birthday, and the anniversary of her school, which was
  opened on the twenty-fourth of August, last year. I preached in the
  evening to as many as her chapel could well contain; which is
  extremely neat, or rather, elegant; as is the dining-room, the school,
  and all the house. About nine, Howell Harris desired me to give a
  short exhortation to his family. I did so; and then went back to my
  lady’s, and laid me down in peace.

  “Thursday, August 24th. I administered the Lord’s Supper to the
  family.[181] At ten, the public service began. Mr. Fletcher preached
  an exceeding lively sermon in the court, the chapel being far too
  small. After him, Mr. William Williams preached in Welsh till between
  one and two o’clock. At two we dined. Meantime, a large number of
  people had baskets of bread and meat carried to them in the court. At
  three, I took my turn there; then Mr. Fletcher; and about five, the
  congregation was dismissed. Between seven and eight, the lovefeast
  began, at which, I believe, many were comforted. In the evening,
  several of us retired into the neighbouring wood, which is exceeding
  pleasantly laid out in walks, one of which leads to a little mount
  raised in the midst of a meadow that commands a delightful prospect.
  This is Howell Harris’s work, who has likewise greatly enlarged and
  beautified his house; so that, with the gardens, orchards, walks, and
  pieces of water that surround it, it is a kind of little
  paradise.”[182]

Footnote 180:

  “Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon,” vol. ii., pp. 98, 99.

Footnote 181:

  The author of the “Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon” says,
  “Shirley assisted Wesley,” and adds, “The sacrament was first
  administered to the clergyman, then to the students, and then to Lady
  Huntingdon, the Countess of Buchan, Lady Anne Erskine, Miss Orton, and
  the other members of the family.”

Footnote 182:

  Wesley’s Journal.

This is not the place to enlarge upon Howell Harris’s establishment,
which adjoined Trevecca College. Suffice it to say, that here he had
gathered together a family of more than a hundred persons, “all
diligent, all constantly employed, all fearing God and working
righteousness.”[183]

Footnote 183:

  _Ibid._

The lovefeast mentioned by Wesley was the concluding service on the
_first anniversary day_, strictly speaking, of Trevecca College. At that
lovefeast, Walter Shirley, Howell Davies, and Daniel Rowlands gave short
exhortations, and Peter Williams and Howell Harris offered prayers. Lady
Huntingdon observes:—

  “Truly our God was in the midst of us, and many felt Him eminently
  nigh. The gracious influence of His Spirit seemed to rest on every
  one. Words fail to describe the holy triumph with which the great
  congregation sang—

                 ‘Captain of Thine enlisted host,
                 Display thy glorious banner high,’ etc.

  It was a season of refreshing from the presence of the Lord—a time
  never to be forgotten.”

Next morning, Wesley set off for Bristol; but the services were
continued. In the afternoon, Shirley took his stand on the scaffold in
the court, and addressed the multitude from the words, “Wherefore He is
able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by Him,
seeing He ever liveth to make intercession for them.”

  “From that time,” wrote Lady Huntingdon, “we had public preaching
  every day at four o’clock, whilst Mr. Shirley and Mr. Fletcher
  remained. Copious showers of Divine blessing have been felt on every
  side. Truly God is good to Israel. Continue Thy goodness, and in much
  greater abundance! O that I may be more and more useful to the souls
  of my fellow-creatures! I want to be, every moment, all life, all
  zeal, all activity for God, and ever on the stretch for closer
  communion with Him. My soul pants to live more to Him; and to be more
  holy in heart and life, that all my nature may show the glories of the
  Lamb.”[184]

Footnote 184:

  “Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon,” vol. ii., pp. 98–101.

Alas! that these glorious scenes among the Welsh mountains should so
soon be followed by scenes of discord and of disputes. The great storm
of the Calvinian controversy was already brewing.

Walter Sellon occupies a rather unique position in Methodistic annals.
He died in 1792, at the age of seventy-seven; and yet of the first
thirty, and the last twenty-two years of his life, hardly anything is
known. Dr. Abel Stevens, in his “History of Methodism,” says Sellon was
originally a baker; but I know of no authority for this, except
Toplady’s, whose hatred and abuse of Sellon were such as to justify a
hesitancy in believing a statement concerning his stout antagonist,
which he intended to be injurious to his fame. Sellon was born in the
year 1715; but up to the year 1745 he had not been introduced to Wesley.
In a letter to Wesley, dated December 31, 1744, he states, that, until
recently, he had condemned him as “an innovator,” and had “pitied those
who followed” him. But, having heard Wesley preach, and having read his
sermon on “Scriptural Christianity,” delivered before the Oxford
University on August 24, 1744, his opinions concerning him and his
followers were entirely changed; and he now requested Wesley, when he
had an opportunity, to preach at Maidenhead, “where drunkenness,
adultery, profaneness, gaming, and almost every abominable vice, were
not only committed with greediness, but gloried in, and boasted
of.”[185] Whether Wesley went to Maidenhead, which seems to have been
Sellon’s place of residence, is not known; but, three years and a half
afterwards, when he opened his famous Kingswood School, Walter Sellon
was appointed the Headmaster “for the Classics.”[186] About the year
1754, Sellon received episcopal ordination, and became curate of the
churches of Smisby, near Ashby-de-la-Zouch, and of Breedon, where vast
multitudes flocked to hear him, “not only from adjacent towns and
villages, but frequently from places ten, fifteen, and twenty miles
distant.” “He was a real Methodist,” wrote Jonathan Edmondson, “and
hundreds were turned to God through his instrumentality.”[187] Sellon
enjoyed the confidential friendship of Wesley, and especially of
Wesley’s brother Charles; and, about the time of his appointment to his
curacies, stood faithfully by them in their contentions with the most
able and prominent of their itinerant preachers, concerning the
separation of the Methodists from the Established Church. All his
publications were controversial; and all, except his first, were written
specially in defence of the anti-Calvinian doctrines Wesley taught. This
is not the place to review Walter Sellon as an author. Suffice it to
say, that he was always powerful, rather than polite; and that, after
his first publication, in 1765, which was levelled at Socinianism, he
prepared a second in 1768, which was entitled, “Arguments against the
Doctrine of General Redemption considered.” Without noticing, at
present, the subsequent writings of Sellon, it is enough to add, that,
about the year 1770, he was presented by the Earl of Huntingdon to the
Vicarage of Ledsham, in Yorkshire, where he lived and laboured until his
death, on June 13, 1792.[188] In an unpublished manuscript, John Pawson
says:—

  “I do not believe Mr. Sellon was made the instrument of awakening a
  single soul after he came to Ledsham. He was tutor to young Mr.
  Medhurst, of Kippax, who lately murdered his wife, and would have
  murdered his mother some years ago, if my brother Tarboton had not
  rescued her at the hazard of his own life. While in that family, Mr.
  Sellon seemed to lose all spirit and life, and, as far as I could
  learn, had very little savour of godliness about him. He took not the
  least notice of the Methodists, no more than if he had never known
  them.”

Footnote 185:

  _Arminian Magazine_, 1778, p. 327.

Footnote 186:

  Myles’ “Chronological History of the Methodists.”

Footnote 187:

  _Wesleyan Methodist Magazine_, 1856, p. 38.

Footnote 188:

  _Wesleyan Methodist Magazine_, 1856, p. 41.

John Pawson was one of Wesley’s most honest and hardworking itinerants;
but he sometimes was more severe in his strictures than was desirable.
His remark, however, concerning Sellon’s abandonment of the Methodists
was probably correct; for Wesley, in a letter dated June 10, 1784, wrote
to him: “You used to meet me when I came near you; but you seem, of
late, to have forgotten your old friend and brother.”[189]

Footnote 189:

  Wesley’s Works, vol. xiii., p. 43.

To return to Fletcher. He and Sellon were well known to each other. Four
years ago, they had exchanged pulpits for a season, Sellon preaching at
Madeley, and Fletcher at Smisby and Breedon-on-the-Hill. Now Sellon was
entering the arena of controversy. The expulsion of the Methodist
students from Oxford University, in 1768, had been the means,
incidentally, of bringing some of the chief doctrines of Calvinism into
public notice. Sir Richard Hill, in defending the students, had warmly
advocated Calvinistic predestination. Dr. Nowell, in answering Sir
Richard, had clearly shown that this predestination was not the doctrine
of the Church of England. Toplady had rushed to the rescue of his
favourite dogma, and had published his translation of “Zauchius,” and
also his “Letter to Dr. Nowell.” Sellon was the first of Wesley’s
friends who entered the lists, by preparing and publishing his
“Arguments against the Doctrine of General Redemption considered.
London, 1769.”  12mo. 178 pp.  Wesley encouraged him, and so did
Fletcher. The former wrote as follows:—

                                         “WAKEFIELD, _July 9, 1768_.

  “MY DEAR BROTHER,—I am glad you have undertaken the ‘Redemption
  Redeemed;’ but you must in no wise forget Dr. Owen’s answer to it:
  otherwise you will leave a loop-hole for all the Calvinists to creep
  out. The Doctor’s evasions you must needs cut in pieces, either
  interweaving your answers with the body of the work, under each head,
  or adding them in marginal notes.

                               “Your ever affectionate brother,
                                                   “J. WESLEY.”[190]

Footnote 190:

  Wesley’s Works, vol. xiii. p. 41.

After the book was published, Fletcher wrote to Sellon the following
letter, plainly showing that the great Calvinian controversy, though as
yet in its incipient state, was causing considerable commotion:—

                                        “MADELEY, _October 7, 1769_.

  “MY DEAR BROTHER,—I thank you for your letter and books. They came
  safe to hand, and I shall give you the amount at the first
  opportunity. I have inquired what the Calvinists think; but they
  choose to be silent,—a sign that they have not any great thing to
  object. Mr. R——[191] looked at your book here in my house, and
  objected to Ελεησω ον αν ελεω, Rom. ix. 15. He says, ελεω is, ‘I have
  mercy,’ not ‘I should have mercy.’ I observed to Mr. Glascott, ‘It is
  the subjunctive mood, and may take the sign should, would, or could,
  according to the analogy of faith.’

  “I long to see Coles[192] answered. My request to you is, that you
  would answer him in the cool manner you have the Synod;[193] and my
  prayer to God is, that you may be assisted for that important work.

  “I know two strong Calvinist believers, who lately took their leave of
  this world with, ‘I shall be damned.’ O, what did all their
  professions of perseverance do for them? They left them in the lurch.
  May we have the power of God in our souls, and we shall readily leave
  unknown decrees to others.

  “The Lord give you patience with your brethren! The best way to
  confound them is, to preach that kingdom of God which they cast away,
  with real righteousness, and present peace and joy in believing; that
  is poison to the synodical kingdom.

  “I despair of seeing you before I have seen Switzerland, which I
  design to visit next winter. Mr. Ireland takes me as far as Lyons in
  my way.

  “There are some disputes in Lady Huntingdon’s College; but when the
  power of God comes, they drop them. The Calvinists are three to one.
  Your book I have sent them as a hard nut for them to crack.

  “May the Lord spare you, and make you a free, joyful soldier of the
  Lord Jesus; as tough against sin and unbelief as you are against
  Calvin and the Synod! The Lord has overruled your leaving Smisby for
  good. Let us trust in Him, and all will be well. Farewell.

                                               “JOHN FLETCHER.”[194]

Footnote 191:

  Probably Romaine, who was at Berwick, near Shrewsbury, on September 9,
  1769, and wrote a letter full of his strongest Calvinism. (See
  Romaine’s Works, vol. vi., p. 330. Edition 1813.)

Footnote 192:

  Elisha Coles, a clerk to the East India Company, who died in 1688. His
  “Practical Discourse of God’s Sovereignty,” here referred to, was
  answered by Sellon a year or two afterwards.

Footnote 193:

  The Synod of Dort, held at Dort in 1618 and 1619, and consisting of
  thirty-eight Dutch and Walloon divines, five professors of the Dutch
  Universities, and twenty-one Lay-elders; besides twenty-eight foreign
  divines, from England and other countries. At this celebrated Synod,
  the five points of difference between the Calvinists and Arminians
  were decided in favour of the former. Sellon, in his able book,
  controverts this decision, at all events so far as the doctrine of
  predestination is concerned.

Footnote 194:

  Fletcher’s Works, vol. viii., p. 205.

This episode respecting Walter Sellon is not irrelevant, and is of
considerable importance, inasmuch as it relates, in part, to the rise of
the great Calvinian controversy of the last century, in which Fletcher
became one of the chief actors. Sellon’s book, in favour of the doctrine
of “General Redemption,” was the first published by Wesley’s adherents,
and is exceedingly able; but this is not the place to analyse and give
an account of it.

Seventeen years had elapsed since Fletcher left his father’s house in
Switzerland. He had now decided to pay a visit to the place of his
nativity, and to travel as far as the south of France with his generous
friend, Mr. Ireland, of Brislington, Bristol. The following letter to
Mr. Ireland refers to this contemplated visit, and to another matter,
which must be noticed:—

                                      “MADELEY, _December 30, 1769_.

  “MY DEAR FRIEND,—Last night, I received your obliging letter, and am
  ready to accompany you to Montpelier, provided you will go with me to
  Nyon. I shall raise about twenty guineas, and, with that sum, a
  gracious Providence, and your purse, I hope we shall want for nothing.
  If the Lord sends me, I should want nothing, though I had nothing, and
  though my fellow-traveller were no richer than myself.

  “I hope to be at Bristol soon, to offer you my services to pack up.
  You desired to have a Swiss servant, and I offer myself to you in that
  capacity; for I shall be no more ashamed of serving you, as far as I
  am capable of doing, than I am of wearing your livery.

  “Two reasons (to say nothing of the pleasure of your company) engage
  me to go with you to Montpelier,—a desire to visit some poor Huguenots
  in the south of France, and the need I have to recover a little French
  before I go to converse with my compatriots.

  “The priest at Madeley is going to open his mass-house, and I declared
  war on that account last Sunday, and propose to strip the whore of
  Babylon and expose her nakedness to-morrow. All the papists are in a
  great ferment, and have held meetings to consult on the occasion. One
  of their bloody bullies came ‘to pick up a quarrel’ with me, as he
  said, and what would have been the consequence had I not had company
  with me I know not. How far more rage may be kindled to-morrow I don’t
  know; but I question whether it will be right for me to leave the
  field in these circumstances. I forgot to mention that two of our poor
  ignorant Churchmen are about to join the mass-house, which also is the
  cause of my having taken up arms.”[195]

Footnote 195:

  Letters, 1791, p. 208.

Fletcher preached his anti-popery sermon as he intended, taking as his
text 1 Tim. iv. 1–3: “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly that, in the
latter times, some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing
spirits and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy; having
their conscience seared with a hot iron; forbidding to marry, and
commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received
with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.” An outline
of the sermon may be found in Fletcher’s Collected Works, vol. vii., p.
490. As the people were leaving the church, a man, who acted as the
spokesman of the papists present, cried, “There was not a word of truth
in the whole sermon;” and then, turning to Fletcher, assured him that he
would shortly produce a gentleman who would refute all that he had said.
The threat was not fulfilled;[196] and Benson, in his “Life of
Fletcher,” first published in 1804, remarks:—

  “By Mr. Fletcher’s bold and prudent stand the designs of the papists
  were in a great measure frustrated, and they were prevented making any
  progress worth mentioning in Madeley. It is true there is even now a
  mass-house and a priest at Madeley, but I find, upon inquiry, there
  are not a dozen Popish families in the parish.”

Footnote 196:

  Fletcher’s Works, vol. vii., p. 494.

Fletcher’s intended visit to Switzerland was, for a little while,
deferred; because he deemed it his duty to await the threatened
refutation of his anti-popish sermon. Hence, early in January 1770, he
went to Trevecca; probably for the purpose of meeting Joseph Benson, who
was about to become head master of the college.

Joseph Benson was now nearly twenty-two years of age, and for the last
four years had been the classical master of Wesley’s school at
Kingswood, and was at present keeping terms at Oxford. His acquaintance
with Fletcher was slight, but his admiration of him great. He writes:—

  “I had only had two or three interviews with Mr. Fletcher, which were,
  I think, in the year 1768, when I was classical master at Kingswood
  school. As he occasionally made an excursion from Madeley to Bristol
  and Bath, in one of these excursions we invited him to preach at
  Kingswood. He came, and took as his text, ‘Him that cometh unto Me I
  will in no wise cast out.’ The people were exceedingly affected;
  indeed quite melted down. The tears streamed so fast from the eyes of
  the poor colliers that their black faces were washed by them. As to
  himself, he was carried out so far beyond his strength that, when he
  concluded, he put off his shirt, which was as wet as if it had been
  dipped in water. But this was nothing strange; whenever he preached it
  was generally the case. From this time, I conceived a particular
  esteem for him, chiefly on account of his piety; and wished much for a
  further acquaintance with him, a blessing which I soon after obtained;
  for through his means, and in consequence of Mr. Wesley’s
  recommendation to the Countess of Huntingdon, I was made head master
  of the academy, or, as it was commonly called, the college, at
  Trevecca, though I could ill be spared from Kingswood, where I had
  acted in that capacity about four years. Being greatly wanted at
  Kingswood, and having likewise a term to keep at Oxford, I could only
  pay them a short visit for the present, which was in January 1770; but
  in the spring following, I went to reside there, and for some time was
  well satisfied with my situation.”[197]

Footnote 197:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

No record exists of what transpired between Fletcher and Benson at
Trevecca; but the following letter, written there, and addressed to Mr.
Ireland, deserves insertion:—

                                      “TREVECCA, _January 13, 1770_.

  “MY DEAR FRIEND,—I know not what to think of our journey. My heart
  frequently recoils. I have lost all hope of being able to preach in
  French, and I think if I could they would not permit me. I become more
  stupid every day; my memory fails me in a surprising manner. I am good
  for nothing, but to go and bury myself in my parish. I have those
  touches of misanthropy which make solitude my element. Judge, then,
  whether I am fit to go into the world. On the other hand, I fear that
  your journey is undertaken partly from complaisance to me, and in
  consequence of the engagement we made to go together. I acquit you of
  your promise; and, if your business does not really demand your
  presence in France, I beg you will not think of going there on my
  account. The bare idea of giving you trouble would make the journey
  ten times more disagreeable to me than the season of the year.

  “The day after I wrote to you I preached the sermons against popery,
  which I had promised to my people; and Mr. S—t—r called out several
  times in the churchyard, as the people went out of church, that ‘there
  was not one word of truth in the whole of my discourse, and that he
  would prove it.’ He also told me that he would produce a gentleman who
  should answer my sermon and the pamphlet I had distributed. I was,
  therefore, obliged to declare in the church that I should not quit
  England, and was only going into Wales, from whence I would return
  soon to reply to the answer of Mr. S—t—r and the priest, if they
  should offer any. I am thus obliged to return to Madeley by my word so
  publicly pledged, as well as to raise a little money for my journey.
  Were it not for these circumstances, I believe I should pay you a
  visit at Bristol, notwithstanding my misanthropy.

  “The hamper which you mention, and for which I thank you, provided it
  be the last, arrived three days before my departure, but not knowing
  what it was, nor for whom it was intended, I put it into my cellar
  without opening it. I want the _living water_ rather than cider, and
  righteousness more than clothes. I fear, however, lest my unbelief
  should make me set aside the fountain whence it flows, as I did your
  hamper. Be that as it may, it is high time to open the treasures of
  Divine mercy, and to seek in the heart of Jesus for the springs of
  love, righteousness, and life. The Lord give us grace so to seek that
  we may find, and be enabled to say with the woman in the Gospel, ‘I
  have found the piece of silver which I had lost.’

  “If your affairs do not really call you to France I will wait until
  Providence and grace shall open a way to me to the mountains of
  Switzerland, if I am ever to see them again. Adieu! Give yourself
  _wholly_ to God. A divided heart, like a divided kingdom, falls
  naturally by its own gravity either into darkness or into sin. My
  heart’s desire is that the love of Jesus may fill your soul, and that
  of your unworthy and greatly obliged servant,

                                               “JOHN FLETCHER.”[198]

Footnote 198:

  Letters, 1791, p. 210.

The journey to Switzerland was deferred, but took place; though no one
seems to know the exact date when it was begun or when it ended. In the
month of July, however, Fletcher was again in England. Strangely enough,
there is no letter of his that refers to the extensive tour made by him
and his friend Ireland; but the latter sent the following account to Mr.
Benson:—

  “I was with Mr. Fletcher, day and night, nearly five months,
  travelling all over Italy and France. At that time, a popish priest
  resided in his parish, who attempted to mislead the poor people. Mr.
  Fletcher, therefore, throughout this journey, attended the sermons of
  the Roman Catholic clergy, visited their convents and monasteries, and
  conversed with all the most serious among them whom he met with, in
  order that he might know their sentiments concerning spiritual
  religion. He was so very particular in making observations respecting
  the gross and absurd practices of the priests and other clergy,
  especially while we were in Italy, that we were frequently in no small
  danger of our lives. He wished to attend the Pope’s chapel at Rome,
  but I would not consent to accompany him till I had obtained a promise
  from him that he would forbear to speak by way of censure or reproof
  of what he saw or heard. He met with many men of science and learning,
  with whom he conversed freely on Gospel truths, which most of them
  opposed with violence. A few listened and were edified. His whole
  life, as you well know, was a sermon; all his conversations were
  sermons. Even his disputations with infidels were full of instruction.
  We met with a gentleman of fortune, an excellent classical scholar,
  with whom we continued near a fortnight at an hotel. He said he had
  travelled all over Europe, and had passed through all the Societies in
  England to find a person whose life corresponded with the Gospels and
  with Paul’s Epistles. He asked me (for it was with me he first began
  to converse) if I knew any clergyman or dissenting minister in
  England, possessed of a stipend of £100 a year for the cure of souls,
  who would not leave them all if he were offered double that amount. I
  replied in the affirmative, and pointed to my friend Fletcher; when
  disputations commenced, which continued for many days.”[199]

Footnote 199:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

Mr. Gilpin, in Fletcher’s “Portrait of St. Paul,” adds to this account.
He says:—

  “This debate was continued, by adjournment, for the space of a week.
  Whatever had been said upon the subject by the most celebrated writers
  was brought forward, and thoroughly discussed. Mr. Fletcher repeatedly
  overcame his antagonist, who regularly lost his temper and his cause
  together. Mr. Fletcher took a view of the Christian’s enviable life,
  his consolation in trouble, and his tranquillity in danger; together
  with his superiority to all the evils of life and the horrors of
  death; interspersing his remarks with affectionate admonitions and
  powerful persuasives to a rational dependence upon the truths of the
  Gospel. At the conclusion of this memorable debate, the unsuccessful
  disputant conceived so exalted an idea of his opponent’s character,
  that he never afterwards mentioned his name but with peculiar
  veneration and regard; and when they met again, eight years later, in
  Provence, where the gentleman lived in affluence, he showed Mr.
  Fletcher every possible civility, entertained him at his house in the
  most hospitable manner, and listened to his conversation on spiritual
  subjects with all imaginable attention and respect.”

Mr. Gilpin mentions another incident of the same kind. Fletcher, in his
travels, met a young gentleman from Genoa, who had imbibed the infidel
notions of the day. They had a debate, which lasted several days, from
morning till night. The sceptic was vanquished, and was so struck with
the masterly skill of Fletcher, and his more than parental concern,
that, before they parted, he looked up to his instructor with reverence,
listened to him with admiration, and desired to be present at morning
and evening prayer.[200]

Footnote 200:

  “Portrait of St. Paul.”

While at Marseilles, Mr. Ireland procured for Fletcher the use of a
Protestant church in that neighbourhood; but the engagement to preach in
it caused Fletcher great anxiety, probably because he had lost his
facility in speaking the French language. He prayed about it earnestly
all the week; and when Sunday morning came, he entreated Mr. Ireland to
inform the minister of the church that he was unable to fulfil his
engagement. Mr. Ireland refused; and Fletcher was compelled to ascend
the pulpit, where he preached with such effect, that the whole
congregation, among whom were many ministers, were in tears.[201]

He determined, while in the south of France, to visit the Protestants in
the Cevennes mountains, whose fathers had suffered so severely in the
cause of Christ; “the heretics of the Cevennes, those accursed
remainders of the old Albigenses,” as the Bull of Clement XI., dated
1703, designated them. The journey was long and difficult, but no
argument could prevail with him to abandon his resolution of attempting
it on foot. “Shall I,” said he to his friend Ireland, “make a visit on
horseback and at ease, to those poor cottagers, whose fathers were
hunted along the rocks, like partridges upon the mountains? No: I will
visit them under the plainest appearance, with my staff in my hand.”
Accordingly, he set out alone, and, after travelling till it was nearly
dark, he entered a small house, and begged the favour of being allowed
to sit in a chair till morning. The master of the cottage, after some
hesitation, consented. Conversation followed; the host and hostess were
charmed; the best provisions in their humble dwelling were given to the
traveller; and, before they retired to rest, prayer was proposed and
offered. Early on the morrow, the strange visitant renewed his
conversation and his prayers; father, mother, and children were melted
into tears; and the poor man himself told his neighbours that he had
nearly refused to admit a stranger into his house, who was more an angel
than a man. The family were papists.

Continuing his journey, Fletcher reached a small town, where he was
entertained by a pious minister, to whom he had been recommended. The
Protestants received him with open arms. He conversed with their elders;
admonished their youth; visited their sick; and preached with freedom
and success. Many among them were comforted, and many built up in their
most holy faith.

Footnote 201:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

As he travelled over the mountains, he, one day, put up in a small
dwelling, whose master could hardly speak without uttering an oath. Of
course, Fletcher, in his own peculiar way, reproved the swearer; and,
with such effect, that the man confessed his sin; and ever afterwards,
when in danger of falling into his old habit, nothing more was necessary
to restrain him than to remember the saintly stranger who had once
obtained a lodging beneath his humble roof.[202]

Footnote 202:

  Gilpin’s “Notes to Portrait of St. Paul.”

Fletcher and Mr. Ireland proceeded from France to Italy, and traversed
the celebrated Appian Way. As they approached it, Fletcher directed the
driver to stop; for, said he to Mr. Ireland, “I cannot _ride_ over
ground where the Apostle Paul once _walked_, chained to a soldier.” As
soon as he set his foot upon the old Roman road, he took off his hat;
and, walking on with his eyes lifted up to heaven, he gave God thanks
for the glorious truths which Paul preached. He rejoiced that, in
England, these truths were still published; and prayed that they might
be revived in Italy. He reviewed the life, the travels, the labours, and
the sufferings of the great Apostle, his remarks being intermixed with
prayer and praise, and the man himself resembling an incarnation of
devotion.[203]

Footnote 203:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

On arriving in Switzerland, he was at once solicited by the clergy at
Nyon to occupy their pulpits. He complied with their requests; and,
wherever he was announced to preach, multitudes from all quarters
flocked to hear him. Even deists listened to him with admiration, and
the crowds seemed to think him more than human. Despisers of revelation
were overawed and confounded; formalists were roused; and careless
sinners startled. One of his converts betook himself to sacred studies,
and became a Protestant minister at Lyons. When the time for Fletcher’s
departure came, a good old minister, of more than threescore years and
ten, besought him, with indescribable earnestness, to stay a little
longer, even were it only for a single week; and, when he found that
this was impracticable, the old gentleman burst into tears, and,
addressing Mr. Ireland, cried, “Oh, Sir, how unfortunate for my country!
During my lifetime, it has produced but one angel of a man, and now it
is our lot to lose him!” At length the carriage, that was to bear away
the travellers, appeared; multitudes crowded round about it, anxious to
receive a last word or look; and not a few followed it for above two
miles, before they could summon sufficient resolution to bid farewell to
their saintly compatriot whom they had learned to love so much.[204]

Footnote 204:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

Fletcher reached England about the time of midsummer 1770. His tour had
done him good, and had prepared him for the more than ordinary trials
that awaited him.




                             CHAPTER VIII.
                     _COMMENCEMENT OF THE CALVINIAN
                             CONTROVERSY._

                             1770 AND 1771.


DURING his absence from England, Fletcher wrote several letters to the
masters and students of the Countess of Huntingdon’s College at
Trevecca;[205] but none of these have been published, and, probably,
none of them now exist. Immediately after his return, and before he had
an opportunity of visiting the College, he indited the following
remarkable epistle:—

                                          “MADELEY, _July 23, 1770_.

  “To the masters and students of Lady Huntingdon’s College.

  “Grace, mercy, and peace attend you, my dear brethren, from God our
  Father, and from our Lord and Brother Jesus Christ!

  “_Brother_, do I say? Should I not rather have written _All_? Is not
  He _all and in all_? _All_ to believers, for He is their God, as the
  λογος (_the Word_), and their Friend, Brother, Father, Spouse, etc.,
  etc., etc., as He is λογος γενομενος σαρξ (_the Word made flesh_).
  From Him, through Him, and in Him, I salute you in the Spirit. I
  believe He is here with me, and in me. I believe He is yonder with
  you, and in you; for ‘in Him we live, move, and have,’ not only our
  animal, but rational and spiritual, ‘being.’ May the powerful grain of
  faith remove the mountain of remaining unbelief, that you and I may
  see things as God sees them! When this is the case, we shall discover
  that the Creator is _All_ indeed, and that creatures, which we are
  wont to put in His place, are mere nothings, passing clouds that our
  Sun of Righteousness has thought fit to clothe Himself with, and paint
  some of His glories upon. In an instant, He could scatter them into
  their original nothing, or resorb them for ever, and stand without
  competitor, יחוה, the _Being_.

  “But suppose that all creatures should stand for ever, little
  signatures of God, what are they even in their most glorious estate,
  but as tapers kindled by His light, as well as formed by His power?
  Now conceive a Sun, a spiritual Sun, whose centre is everywhere, whose
  circumference can be found nowhere; a Sun whose lustre as much
  surpasses the brightness of the luminary that rules the day, as the
  Creator surpasses the creature; and say, What are the twinkling tapers
  of good men on earth,—what is the smoking flax of wicked
  creatures,—what the glittering stars of saints in heaven? Why, they
  are all lost in His transcendent glory, and if any one of these would
  set himself up as an object of esteem, regard, or admiration, he must
  indeed be mad with _self_ and _pride_. He must be, as dear Mr. Howell
  Harris has often told us, a foolish apostate, a devil.

  “Understand this, believe this, and you will sink to unknown depths of
  self-horror, for having aspired at being _somebody_, self-humiliation
  at seeing yourself _nobody_, or what is worse an _evil-body_.

  “But I would not have you dwell even upon this evil, so as to lose
  sight of your Sun, unless it be to see Him covered, on this account,
  with our flesh and blood, and wrapt in the cloud of our nature. Then
  you will cry out with St. Paul, ‘O the depth!’ Then, finding the
  manhood is again resorbed into the Godhead, you will gladly renounce
  all selfish, separate existence in Adam and from Adam. You will take
  Christ to be your life; you will become His members by eating His
  flesh and drinking His blood; you will consider His flesh as your
  flesh, His bone as your bone, His Spirit as your spirit, His
  righteousness as your righteousness, His cross as your cross, and His
  crown (whether of thorns or glory) as your crown. You will reckon
  yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God, through
  this dear Redeemer. You will renounce propriety; you will heartily and
  gladly say, ‘Not I, not I, but Christ liveth; and only _because He
  lives_, I do, and shall live also.’

  “When it is so with us, then we are creatures in our Creator, and
  redeemed creatures in our Redeemer. Then we understand and feel what
  He says, ‘Without Me the Creator, ye are nothing; without Me the
  Saviour, ye can do nothing.’ ‘The moment I consider Christ and myself
  as two, I am gone,’ says Luther; and I say so too. I am gone into
  self, and into Antichrist; for that which will be _something_, will
  not let Christ be _all_; and that which will not let Christ be all,
  must certainly be Antichrist. What a poor, jejune, dry thing is
  doctrinal Christianity, compared with the clear and _heartfelt assent_
  that the believer gives to these fundamental truths! What life, what
  strength, what comfort flow out from them! O my friends, let us
  believe, and we shall see, taste, and handle the Word of Life. When I
  stand in unbelief, I am like a drop of muddy water drying up in the
  sun of temptation. I can neither comfort, nor help, nor preserve
  myself. When I do believe and close in with Christ, I am like that
  same drop losing itself in a boundless, bottomless sea of purity,
  light, life, power, and love. There _my good_ and _my evil_ are
  equally nothing; equally swallowed up; and grace reigns through
  righteousness unto eternal life.

  “There I wish you all to be. There I beg you and I may meet with all
  God’s children. I long to see you that I may impart unto you (should
  God make use of such a worm) some spiritual gift, and that I may be
  comforted by the mutual faith of you and me, and by your growth in
  grace, and in divine as well as human wisdom, during my long absence.
  I hope matters will be so contrived that I may be with you, to behold
  your order, before the anniversary. Meanwhile, I remain your
  affectionate fellow-labourer and servant in the Gospel of Christ,

                                               “JOHN FLETCHER.”[206]

Footnote 205:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.“

Footnote 206:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.“

No wonder that the visits of a man breathing such a spirit were
welcomed. Mr. Benson, the head master of the College, writes:—

  “He was received as an angel of God. It is not possible for me to
  describe the veneration in which we all held him. Like Elijah, in the
  schools of the prophets, he was revered; he was loved; he was almost
  adored; not only by every student, but by every member of the family.

  “And indeed he was worthy. The reader will pardon me, if he thinks I
  exceed. My heart kindles while I write. Here it was that I saw, shall
  I say, an angel in human flesh? I should not far exceed the truth if I
  said so. But here I saw a descendant of fallen Adam, so fully raised
  above the ruins of the fall, that, though by the body he was tied down
  to earth, his _whole conversation was in heaven_. His _life_, from day
  to day, was _hid with Christ in God_. Prayer, praise, love, and zeal,
  all ardent, elevated above what one would think attainable in this
  state of frailty, were the element in which he continually lived. As
  to others, his one employment was, to call, entreat, and urge them, to
  ascend with him to the glorious source of being and blessedness. He
  had leisure, comparatively, for nothing else. Languages, arts,
  sciences, grammar, rhetoric, logic, even divinity itself, were all
  laid aside, when he appeared in the schoolroom among the students. His
  full heart would not suffer him to be silent. He _must_ speak, and
  they were readier to hearken to this servant and minister of Jesus
  Christ, than to attend to Sallust, Virgil, Cicero, or any Latin or
  Greek historian, poet, or philosopher they had been engaged in
  reading. And they seldom hearkened long, before they were all in
  tears, and every heart catched fire from the flame that burned in his
  soul.

  “These seasons generally terminated in this. Being convinced that to
  be ‘filled with the Holy Ghost’ was a better qualification for the
  ministry of the Gospel than any classical learning (though that too
  may be useful in its place), after speaking awhile in the schoolroom,
  he used frequently to say, ‘As many of you as are athirst for the
  fulness of the Spirit, follow me into my room.’ On this, many of us
  instantly followed him, and there continued till noon, _for two or
  three hours_, praying for one another, till we could bear to kneel no
  longer. This was done, not once or twice, but many times; and I have
  sometimes seen him, on these occasions—once in particular—so filled
  with the love of God, that he cried out, ‘O my God, withhold Thy hand,
  or the vessel will burst!’ But he afterwards told me, he was afraid he
  had grieved the Spirit of God, and that he ought to have prayed that
  the Lord would have enlarged the vessel, or have suffered it to break,
  that the soul might have had no further bar to its enjoyment of the
  Supreme Good.

  “Such was the ordinary employment of this man of God, while he
  remained at Trevecca. He preached the word of life to the students and
  family, and to as many of the neighbours as desired to be present. He
  was always employed, either in illustrating some important truth, or
  exhorting to some neglected duty, or administering some needful
  comfort, or relating some useful anecdote, or making some profitable
  remark. His devout soul, always burning with love and zeal, led him to
  intermingle prayer with all he uttered. His manner was so solemn and,
  at the same time, so mild and insinuating, that it was hardly possible
  for any one to be in his company without being struck with awe and
  charmed with love, as if in the presence of an angel or departed
  spirit. Indeed, I frequently thought, while attending to his heavenly
  discourse, that he was so different from the generality of mankind as
  to look more like Moses or Elijah, or some prophet or apostle come
  again from the dead, than a mortal man dwelling in a house of
  clay.”[207]

Footnote 207:

  Wesley’s “Life of Fletcher.“

This, to some, may appear excessive eulogy; and, therefore, the reader
is reminded that Joseph Benson, who wrote it, was not a weak-minded
fanatic, but a man of robust understanding, a classical scholar of no
mean attainments, an able commentator on the Old and New Testaments, one
of the most powerful and successful preachers of his times, and twice
President of the Wesleyan Methodist Conference. Such a man was not
likely to write random words. He knew Fletcher, and, to the best of his
power, described him accurately. And, further, it must be remembered
that Benson’s testimony was endorsed by Wesley, who inserted it verbatim
in his “Life of Fletcher.“

Such was Fletcher; and yet this half-angelic man had soon to leave
Trevecca! The reasons for this must now be given. The subject will be
far from pleasant; but, in a Life of Fletcher, it cannot be evaded. For
some time past, the storm of the Calvinian controversy had been brewing;
now the crisis came, and the storm burst with terrific violence.

Before proceeding, however, with the history of the controversy, there
is a letter belonging to this period too interesting to be omitted.
David Simpson, who had belonged to Rowland Hill’s Methodist Society, at
Cambridge, had recently received episcopal ordination, and begun his
famous ministry. Like Wesley, Whitefield, Berridge, Rowland Hill, and
others, he was inclined to become, to some extent, an itinerant
preacher, and, therefore, _irregular_. He was only twenty-four years of
age, without experience, and in need of counsel. Accordingly, he wrote
to Fletcher, who returned the following answer:—

                                         “MADELEY, _August 4, 1770_.

  “REVEREND AND DEAR SIR,—I have sometimes preached in licensed places,
  but have never been censured for it. Perhaps it is because my
  superiors in the Church think me not worth their notice, and despair
  of shackling me with their unevangelical regularity. If the Bishop
  were to take me to task about this piece of irregularity, I would
  observe,—

  “1. That the canons of men cannot overthrow the canons of God. ‘Preach
  the word. Be instant in season and out of season.’ ‘The time cometh,
  and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship,’ particularly and
  exclusively of all other places, neither upon mount Gerizim, nor upon
  mount Zion; but they shall worship everywhere in spirit and in truth.
  The contrary canons are Jewish, and subversive of the liberty
  wherewith Christ hath made us free; yea, contrary to the right of
  Churchmen, which must, at least, include the privilege of dissenters.

  “2. Before the Bishop shackled me with canons, he charged me to ‘look
  for Christ’s lost sheep that are dispersed abroad, and for His
  children who are in the midst of this wicked world;’ and these sheep,
  etc., I will try to gather whenever I meet them. We have a general
  canon:—‘While we have time, let us do good to all men, and especially
  to them who are of the household of faith.’ ‘Go into all the world,
  and preach the Gospel to every creature’ willing to hear it.

  “A Justice of the Peace would once prosecute me upon the Conventicle
  Act; but, when it came to the point, he durst not do it. Some of my
  parishioners went and complained to the Bishop about my conventicles.
  I wrote to the Registrar that I hoped his Lordship, who had given me
  the above-mentioned charge at my ordination, would not be against my
  following it; that I thought it hard the tipplers should have twenty
  or thirty tippling-houses, the papists one meeting-house, and the
  dissenters three or four, in my parish, undisturbed, and that I should
  be disturbed, because I would not have God’s Word confined to one
  house; and that, with respect to the canons, it would be absurd to put
  them in force against preaching clergymen, when they were set aside
  with respect to catechising, tippling, gaming, and carding clergymen;
  that I did not desire his Lordship to patronize me, in an especial
  manner, in the use of my Christian liberty; but that I hoped he would
  connive at it.

  “Whether they received my letter or not, I do not know; but they never
  attempted to molest me.

  “Be modestly and steadily bold for God, and your enemies will be more
  afraid of you than you of them; or if God will honour you with the
  badge of persecution, He will comfort and bless you the more for it.
  May the God of all grace and power be with you more and more! Ask it,
  dear Sir, for your brother and servant in Christ,

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[208]

Footnote 208:

  Fletcher’s Works, vol. viii., p. 257.

Fletcher had been only a few weeks at home, when Wesley opened the
Annual Conference of his Itinerant Preachers. This took place in London,
on August 7, 1770. The twenty-eighth question of that Conference was,
“What can be done to revive the work of God where it is decayed?” In
answering this, it was resolved, 1. That there must be more visitation
from house to house; 2. That the books Wesley had printed should be more
widely dispersed; 3. That there should be more field-preaching; 4. That
there should be preaching at five o’clock in the morning wherever twenty
hearers could be obtained; 5. That evils in congregational singing
should be corrected; 6. That four fast-days should be observed every
year; 7. That the Methodists must be taught to seek and expect, not only
_gradual_, but “instantaneous sanctification”; 8. That every Itinerant
Preacher, “in every large town, should spend an hour with the children”
of the Methodists every week; 9. That no itinerant preacher should be so
appointed to preach on Sundays, as to keep him “from church above two
Sundays in four.”

The last answer to the question is the only one that concerns the Life
of Fletcher, and must be given verbatim. Continuing to instruct and
direct his preachers, Wesley observed, lastly,—

  “Take heed to your doctrine.

  “We said, in 1744, ‘We have leaned too much toward Calvinism.’
  Wherein?

  “1. With regard to _man’s faithfulness_. Our Lord Himself taught us to
  use the expression, and we ought never to be ashamed of it. We ought
  steadily to assert, on His authority, that if a man is not ‘faithful
  in the unrighteous mammon,’ God will not give him ‘_the true riches_.’

  “2. With regard to _working for life_. This also our Lord has
  expressly commanded us. ‘Labour,’ εργαζεσθε, literally, ‘work for the
  meat that endureth to everlasting life.’ And, in fact, every believer,
  till he comes to glory, works for as well as _from_ life.

  “3. We have received it as a maxim, that ‘a man is to do nothing in
  order to justification.’ Nothing can be more false. Whoever desires to
  find favour with God should ‘cease from evil, and learn to do well.’
  Whoever repents should do ‘works meet for repentance.’ And if this is
  not _in order_ to find favour, what does he do them for?

  “Review the whole affair.

  “1. Who of us is _now_ accepted of God?

  “He that now believes in Christ with a loving and obedient heart.

  “2. But who among those who never heard of Christ?

  “He that feareth God, and worketh righteousness according to the light
  he has.

  “3. Is this the same with ‘he that is sincere’?

  “Nearly, if not quite.

  “4. Is not this ‘salvation by works’?

  “Not by the _merit_ of works, but by works as a _condition_.

  “5. What have we then been disputing about for these thirty years?

  “I am afraid, _about words_.

  “6. As to _merit_ itself, of which we have been so dreadfully afraid:
  we are rewarded ‘according to our works,’ yea, ‘because of our works.’
  How does this differ from _for the sake of our works_? And how differs
  this from _secundum merita operum_? As our works _deserve_. Can you
  split this hair? I doubt I cannot.

  “7. The grand objection to one of the preceding propositions is drawn
  from a matter of fact. God does in fact justify those who, by their
  own confession, neither feared God nor wrought righteousness. Is this
  an exception to the general rule?

  “It is a doubt, God makes any exception at all. But how are we sure
  that the person in question never did fear God and work righteousness?
  His own saying so is not proof; for we know how all that are convinced
  of sin undervalue themselves in every respect.

  “8. Does not talking of a justified or a sanctified _state_ tend to
  mislead men, almost naturally leading them to trust in what was done
  in one moment? Whereas we are every hour and every moment pleasing or
  displeasing to God, ‘according to our works.’ According to the whole
  of our inward tempers, and our outward behaviour.”[209]

Footnote 209:

  “Minutes of the Methodist Conferences,” vol. i., p. 97.

For the next five years (1770–1775), Fletcher made it his duty to
explain and defend these theological theses; and a review of this
quinquennial controversy—as concise as possible—must now be attempted.

Eight days after the close of Wesley’s Conference, Lady Huntingdon, with
the Rev. Walter Shirley and the Rev. Henry Venn, arrived at Mr.
Ireland’s residence at Brislington, on their way to Trevecca to attend
the services in connection with the anniversary of the College. Wesley
had been at the anniversary a year ago, and had been invited to be at
the present one. Accordingly, he remained in Bristol with the
expectation of accompanying her ladyship to Wales, but, horrified by the
doctrinal minutes of his late Conference, she wrote to him saying that,
until he renounced such doctrines, she must exclude him from all her
pulpits. Wesley returned no reply to this communication, but, next day,
calmly and quietly set out for Cornwall.[210]

Footnote 210:

  It is said that when Shirley sent her ladyship a copy of Wesley’s
  Doctrinal Minutes, she burnt it. (Bogue and Bennett’s “History of
  Dissenters.“)

The day after this, the Countess, accompanied by Shirley and Venn, Lady
Anne Erskine, Miss Orton, Mr. Ireland, and Mr. Lloyd, started for
Trevecca, where Fletcher, the President of the College, was ready to
receive them. Here, also, were assembled three of the Methodist
clergymen in Wales, William Williams, Peter Williams, and Daniel
Rowlands; likewise Howell Harris, and several other lay preachers and
exhorters. On Wednesday, August 23, at nine in the morning, Shirley
administered the Lord’s Supper; at ten, Fletcher preached; at two in the
afternoon, Venn addressed the students; and at four, Howell Harris
addressed a large congregation in the court of the College. On Thursday
morning, August 24, Venn administered the sacrament; at ten, Daniel
Rowlands and William Williams preached in the court; at two, Shirley
examined the students, and gave an exhortation; at four, Peter Williams
discoursed in the chapel, and some of the lay preachers in the court. In
the evening Berridge arrived at the College.

On Friday, August 24, the anniversary day of the opening, a public
prayer-meeting was held in the chapel, at six o’clock in the morning,
when Rowlands, Williams, Harris, and Berridge offered prayer; after
which Fletcher, as President of the College, administered the Lord’s
Supper, first to ten clergymen, then to the students, then to Lady
Huntingdon and her household, and then to the congregation in general.
Public service began at ten. A scaffold was erected in the court, on
which sat all the clergy, dissenting ministers, lay preachers, and
students. Fletcher read the liturgy of the Church of England, Peter
Williams offered extemporary prayer, the vast congregation sang most
lustily the glorious hymn of heretical Wesley, beginning with the line,

                    “Arm of the Lord, awake, awake!“

Shirley preached from the words, “For after that, in the wisdom of God,
it pleased God, by the foolishness of preaching, to save them that
believe.” Then William Williams followed with a sermon in Welsh. At two,
her ladyship’s guests all dined, the people in the chapel and in the
court continuing to sing and pray. At three, Berridge discoursed from,
“They went forth and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them,
and confirming the word with signs following.” After him, Daniel
Rowlands, in his own eloquent and powerful manner, addressed the
multitude in Welsh, taking as his text, “We preach Christ crucified.” In
the evening, Venn delivered a sort of charge to the ministers, students,
and lay preachers, from the text, “Preach the word; be instant in
season, out of season;” and Fletcher concluded the services of the
anniversary by offering prayer.

The next morning, however, at seven o’clock, these godly and earnest
people held another prayer-meeting in the chapel, in which Shirley,
Venn, Berridge, and Fletcher took part. On the day following, Sunday,
August 26, Venn and Berridge preached, and then this memorable
assemblage dispersed, Lady Huntingdon proceeding, by way of Berwick and
Worcester, to Bristol, where she met Charles Wesley, and, despite the
heresy of his brother and the itinerants at the late Conference, took
him to Bath to preach several times in her chapel in that city.[211]

Footnote 211:

  “Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon,” vol. ii., pp. 106–109.

Truly, these were glorious days; but, mournful to relate, they were soon
followed by days of strife and bitterness. Wesley was accused of having
renounced the doctrines of the Reformation. He was traduced as a
Pelagian, a Pharisee, a Papist, an Antichrist.[212] All this was unjust
and untrue. In less than four months after the memorable Conference of
1770, Wesley preached his “Sermon on the Death of Whitefield,” in which
he said:—

  “The fundamental point of Mr. Whitefield was, give God all the glory
  of whatever is good in man; and, in the business of salvation, set
  Christ as high, and man as low as possible. With this point, he and
  his friends at Oxford, the original Methodists (so-called) set out.
  Their grand principle was, there is no _power_ (by nature) and _no
  merit_ in man. They insisted, all power to think, speak, or act right,
  is in and from the Spirit of Christ; and all merit is (not in man, how
  high soever in grace, but merely) in the blood of Christ. So he and
  they taught: There is no power in man, till it is given him from
  above, to do one good work, to speak one good word, or to form one
  good desire. For it is not enough to say, all are _sick of sin_: no,
  we are all _dead in trespasses and sins_. It follows that all the
  children of men are _by nature children of wrath_. We are all _guilty
  before God_, liable to death temporal and eternal.

  “And we are all helpless, both with regard to the power and to the
  guilt of sin. For _who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean_?
  None less than the Almighty. Who can raise those that are _dead_,
  spiritually dead in sin? None but He who raised us from the dust of
  the earth. But on what consideration will He do this? _Not for works
  of righteousness that we have done. The dead cannot praise Thee, O
  Lord!_ nor do anything for the sake of which they should be raised to
  life. Whatever therefore God does, He does it merely for the sake of
  His well-beloved Son: _He was wounded for our transgressions, He was
  bruised for our iniquities. He Himself bore all our sin in His own
  body upon the tree. He was delivered for our offences, and rose again
  for our justification._ Here then is the sole _meritorious cause_ of
  every blessing we do or can enjoy: in particular of our pardon and
  acceptance with God, of our free and full justification. But by what
  means do we become interested in what Christ has done and suffered?
  _Not by works, lest any man should boast_; but by faith alone. _We
  conclude_, says the Apostle, _that a man is justified by faith,
  without the works of the law_. And _to as many as_ thus _receive Him,
  giveth He power to become the sons of God: even to those that believe
  in His name, who are born, not of the will of man, but of God_.

  “And _except a man be thus born again, he cannot see the kingdom of
  God._ But all who are thus _born of the Spirit_, have _the kingdom of
  God within_ them. Christ sets up His kingdom in their
  hearts—_righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost_. That _mind
  is in them, which was in Christ Jesus_, enabling them to _walk as
  Christ also walked_. His indwelling Spirit makes them both holy in
  heart, and _holy in all manner of conversation_. But still, seeing all
  this is a free gift, through the righteousness and blood of Christ,
  there is eternally the same reason to remember, _He that glorieth, let
  him glory in the Lord_.

  “You are not ignorant, that these are the fundamental doctrines which
  he (Mr. Whitefield) everywhere insisted on. And may they not be summed
  up, as it were, in two words, _The new birth, and justification by
  faith_. These let us insist upon, with all boldness, at all times, and
  in all places. In public (those of us who are called thereto), and, at
  all opportunities, in private. Keep close to these good old
  unfashionable doctrines, how many soever contradict and blaspheme. Go
  on, my brethren, in the _name of the Lord, and in the power of His
  might_. With all care and diligence, _keep that safe which is
  committed to your trust_: knowing that _heaven and earth shall pass
  away_; but this truth _shall not pass away_.”[213]

Footnote 212:

  Fletcher’s Works, vol. i., p. 209.

Footnote 213:

  Wesley’s “Sermon on the Death of Whitefield,” p. 26.

Thus did Wesley address the crowds of Calvinists, in Whitefield’s two
London chapels, on Sunday, November 18, 1770. There can be no doubt that
he meant this to be an answer to the misrepresentations and calumnies
launched against him, on account of the doctrinal minutes of his recent
Conference. It ought to have been sufficient to silence his adversaries,
but it was not. Passion is more easily excited than appeased. In a
letter to the Countess of Huntingdon, Lady Glenorchy[214] wrote:—

                                     “EDINBURGH, _January 10, 1771_.

  “Your ladyship’s account of what occurred at Mr. Wesley’s last
  Conference does not surprise me. I have since seen the Minutes, and
  must bear my feeble testimony against the sentiments contained in
  them. May the Lord God of Israel be with you, and enable you to make a
  firm stand in defence of a free-grace Gospel! Lady Anne’s letter has
  told me all you have been doing in this momentous affair. When you
  next write to dear Mr. Shirley, give my kindest regards to him, and
  also to Mr. Venn, Mr. Fletcher, and Mr. Romaine. From what Lady Anne
  says, I fear very much for Mr. Fletcher that he will be carried off by
  Mr. Wesley’s influence. What will be the end of this business I know
  not. I know Mr. Wesley is greatly displeased with me, though I have
  always countenanced his preachers; but now I find this cannot be done
  by me any longer. Nevertheless, I respect him highly, and pray that he
  may be led in the way of truth.”[215]

Footnote 214:

  Lady Glenorchy opened a number of chapels, both in Scotland and
  England, and did her utmost to supply them with evangelical ministers.
  She was, in fact, the Lady Huntingdon of Scotland.

Footnote 215:

  “Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon,” vol. i., p. 111.

Lady Glenorchy executed her conscientious threat. Lady Huntingdon had
already done the same. Further action was taken. Joseph Benson was
dismissed from Trevecca College, because he adhered to the doctrines of
Wesley. The good Countess, however, gave him the following certificate:—

  “This is to certify that Mr. Joseph Benson was master for the
  languages in my College at Talgarth for nine months, and that, during
  that time, from his capacity, sobriety, and diligence, he acquitted
  himself properly in that character; and I am ready at any time to
  testify this on his behalf whenever required.

           “College, _January 17, 1771_.
                                                S. HUNTINGDON.”[216]

Footnote 216:

  Macdonald’s “Life of Benson.”

Benson was unexceptionable as a classical master; but, in her ladyship’s
opinion, he was a heretic in theological dogmas, because he did not
believe the doctrine of absolute predestination.[217] Fletcher, the
president of the college, was dissatisfied with her ladyship’s dismissal
of the master, and wrote to her as follows:—

                                                 “_January 7, 1771._

  “Mr. Benson made a very just defence when he said, he held with me the
  possibility of salvation for all men; that mercy is offered to all;
  and yet may be received or rejected. If this be what your ladyship
  calls Mr. Wesley’s opinion, free-will, and Arminianism, and if ‘every
  Arminian must quit the College,’ I am actually discharged also; for,
  in my present view of things, I must hold that sentiment, if I believe
  that the Bible is true, and that God is love.

  “For my part, I am no party-man. In the Lord, I am your servant, and
  that of your every student; but I cannot give up the honour of being
  connected with my old friends, who, notwithstanding their failings,
  are entitled to my respect, gratitude, and assistance, could I
  occasionally give them any. Mr. Wesley shall always be welcome to my
  pulpit, and I shall gladly bear my testimony in his, as well as in Mr.
  Whitefield’s. But if your ladyship forbid your students to preach for
  the one, and offer them to preach for the other at every turn; and if
  a master is discarded for believing that Christ died for all; then
  prejudice reigns, charity is cruelly wounded, and party spirit shouts,
  prevails, and triumphs.”

Footnote 217:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

On the same day, Fletcher wrote to the dismissed Benson the following:—

                                                 “_January 7, 1771._

  “DEAR SIR,—The same post brought me yours, and two from my lady, and
  one from Mr. Williams.[218] Their letters contained no charges, but
  general ones, which with me go for nothing. If the procedure you
  mention be fact, and your letter be a fair account of the transactions
  and words relative to your discharge, a false step has been taken. I
  write by this post to her ladyship on the affair, with all possible
  plainness. If the plan of the college be overthrown, I have nothing
  more to say to it. I will keep to my tent for one; the confined tool
  of any one party I never was, and never will be. If the blow that
  should have been struck at _the dead spirit_, is struck at _dead_
  Arminius, or _absent_ Mr. Wesley,—if a master is turned away without
  any fault, it is time for me to stand up with firmness, or to
  withdraw.

  “Take care, my dear Sir, not to make matters worse than they are; and
  cast a mantle of forgiving love over the circumstances that might
  injure the cause of God, so far as it is put into the hands of that
  eminent lady, who has so well deserved of the Church of Christ. Rather
  suffer in silence, than make a noise to cause the Philistines to
  triumph. Do not let go your expectation of a baptism from above. May
  you be supported in this and every other trial! Farewell!

                                                      “J. FLETCHER.”

Footnote 218:

  A clergyman, who, professing to be under serious impressions, had been
  permitted by her ladyship to stay a few weeks at the college; but was
  neither master nor student. Fletcher termed him “a bird of passage.”

Two days later, Fletcher wrote again to Benson as follows:—

                                                 “_January 9, 1771._

  “I am determined to stand or fall with the liberty of the College. As
  I entered it a free place, I must quit it the moment it is a harbour
  for party spirit.

  “As I am resolved to clear up this matter or quit my province, I beg
  you will help me to as many _facts_ and _words_, _truly done_, and
  _really spoken_, as you can; whereby I may show that false reports,
  groundless suspicions, party spirit against Mr. Wesley, arbitrary
  proceedings, and unscriptural impulses, hold the reins and manage
  affairs in the College; as also that the balance of opinions is not
  maintained, and Mr. Wesley’s opinions are dreaded, and struck at, more
  than deadness of heart, and a wrong conduct.

  “So far as we can, let us keep this matter to ourselves. When you
  speak of it to others, rather endeavour to palliate than aggravate
  what has been wrong in your opposers. Remember that great lady has
  been an instrument of great good, and that there are great
  inconsistencies attending the greatest and best of men. Possess your
  soul in patience. See the salvation of God; and believe, though
  against hope, that light will spring out of darkness.

              “I am, with concern for you and that poor College,
                                                  “Yours, in Jesus,
                                                      “J. FLETCHER.”

On February 20, Fletcher set out for the College;[219] and, on his
return to Madeley, he wrote to Wesley the following hitherto unpublished
letter:—

                                         “MADELEY, _March 18, 1771_.

  “REV. AND DEAR SIR,—I was sorry not to have had it in my power to meet
  you in Shropshire,[220] and give you, by word of mouth, an account of
  what passed at Lady Huntingdon’s College respecting you, at my last
  visit there.

  “The hasty admitting of subjects that did not appear to me proper; the
  sanguine hopes they would turn out against probability, the divisions
  at Brecknock and the Hay, and some things that I did not approve in
  Mr. Benson’s dismission, gave me a disgust to the College.
  Nevertheless, I went to try to make the best of the matter; but I
  found at my arrival that the students had been armed by Mr. Shirley
  against the point I had, with some success, maintained when I was
  there before, namely, internal conversion by the power of the Holy
  Ghost dwelling in the heart by faith. He called it _perfection_, and
  as such baited it out of the place.

  “I saw the College was no longer my place, as I was not likely to do
  or receive any good there, especially as Calvinism strongly prevailed.
  Under these circumstances, and humbling views of my insufficiency, I
  told my lady and all around me, I resigned the place of
  superintendent; nevertheless, I would stay awhile to supply the want
  of a master.

  “In the meantime, an extract of your last Minutes was sent to my lady,
  who wept much over it, through an honest fear that you had fairly and
  fully given up the grand point of the Methodists, free justification,
  _articulum stantis vel cadentis ecclesiæ_. The heresy appeared
  horrible, worth being publicly opposed, and such as a true believer
  ought to be ready to burn against. I tried to soften matters, but in
  vain. The students were commanded to write their sentiments upon your
  doctrine of salvation by works, working for life, the merit of works,
  etc.; and whoever did not fully disavow it, was to quit the College. I
  wrote among the rest, and showed the absurdity of inferring from these
  Minutes that you had renounced the Protestant doctrine and the
  atonement. I defended your sentiments, by explaining them as I have
  heard you do, and only blamed the unguarded and not sufficiently
  explicit manner in which they were worded. I concluded by saying,
  that, as, after Lady Huntingdon’s declaration, I could no longer stay
  in the College, but as an intruder, I _absolutely_ resigned my place,
  as I must appear to all around as great a heretic as yourself.

  “This step had a better effect than I expected. My lady weighed with
  candour what I had advanced, though she thought it too bad to be laid
  before the students. In short, I retired in peace and as peacemaker,
  the servant and no more the principal of the College. I advised Lady
  Huntingdon to choose a moderate Calvinist in my place, and recommended
  Mr. Rowland Hill. The College will take quite a Calvinist turn, and an
  itinerant ministry will go out of it to feed the Church of God of that
  sentimental denomination. I strongly recommended them to set fire to
  the harvest of the Philistines, and not to that of their fellow
  Israelites who cannot pronounce Shibboleth in their way. My lady
  seemed quite disposed for peace last Friday;[221] and she will write
  to you to beg you will explain yourself upon the Minutes, that she and
  the College may see you are not _an enemy to grace_, and may be
  friends at a distance, instead of open adversaries.

  “And now, my dear Sir, I beseech you to put on all the bowels of mercy
  and condescension that are in Christ, to hope the College and its
  foundress mean well; and give them all the satisfaction you can. I
  need not bring to your remembrance the words of the Apostle, ‘As much
  as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.’ I trust they are graven
  on your heart, and that, should war ensue, your moderation will still
  appear to all men. The points that will most stop the mouth of our
  friend are the total fall of man, and his utter inability to do any
  good of himself; the absolute necessity of the grace and Spirit of God
  to raise even a good thought or desire in the heart; the Lord
  rewarding no work, or accepting of none, but so far as they proceed
  from His preventing, convincing, and converting grace; the blood and
  righteousness of Christ being the sole meritorious cause of our
  salvation, and the only spring of all acceptable works, whether we do
  them spontaneously from life or for more abundant life.

  “I look upon Lady Huntingdon as an eminent servant of God, an honest,
  gracious person, but not above the reach of prejudice; and where
  prejudice misleads her, her warm heart makes her go rather too fast.
  It is in your power greatly to break, if not altogether to remove, the
  prejudice she has conceived against you, and to become all things to
  her, that you may not cause her to stumble in the greatness of her
  zeal for the Lord. The best way to get the Calvinists to allow us
  _something_, is to grant them _all_ we possibly can.

  “As your enemies will particularly watch your writings and sermons,
  and Satan your heart to find an occasion against you by
  self-righteousness and dependence upon your great works, my prayer is
  that you may fully disappoint them, by guarding the Gospel truth in
  your own heart and life and doctrine, as much from the legal as the
  antinomian extreme, between which it invariably lies.

  “With respect to me, I am not yet a Christian in the full sense of the
  word; but I follow after, if so be I may apprehend that for which I am
  apprehended of Christ. Take no notice of my scrawl. Pray for, and
  direct, Rev. and dear Sir, your affectionate friend and unworthy
  servant in Christ,

                                                       “J. FLETCHER.

  “To
    “The Rev. Mr. John Wesley,
        “At the Octagone,
           “Chester.” (Salop postmark.)

Footnote 219:

  “Life and Times of Wesley,” vol. iii., p. 88.

Footnote 220:

  Wesley was at Wem only three days before this letter was written.

Footnote 221:

  The day Wesley was at Wem, namely, March 15.

Four days after the date of this letter, Fletcher wrote to Benson,
giving him some of the particulars just recited; but also mentioning
other facts, too interesting and important to be omitted here.

                                                  “_March 22, 1771._

  “MY DEAR FRIEND.—On my arrival at the College, I found all very quiet,
  I fear through the enemy keeping his goods in peace. While I preached
  the next day, I found myself as much shackled as ever I was in my
  life; and, after private prayer, I concluded I was not in my place.
  The same day[222] I resigned my office to my lady; and, on Wednesday,
  to the students and the Lord. Nevertheless, I went on as usual, only I
  had no heart to give little charges to the students, as before. I
  should possibly have got over it as a temptation, if several
  circumstances had not confirmed me in my design. Two I shall mention.
  When Mr. Shirley was at the College, what you had written upon the
  ‘baptism of the Holy Ghost’ was taken to pieces. Mr. Shirley
  maintained that the prophecy of Joel (Acts ii.) had its complete
  fulfilment on the day of Pentecost; and thus he turned the stream of
  living waters into imperceptible dews, _nemine contradicente_, except
  two, who made one or two feeble objections; so that the point was, in
  my judgment, turned out of the College after you, and was abused under
  the name of ‘Perfection.’ This showed I was not likely to receive or
  do any good there.

  “Some days after my arrival, however, I preached the good old doctrine
  before my Lady and Mr. H——. The latter also talked of imperceptible
  influences, and the former thanked me; but, in my apprehension,
  spoiled all by going to the College the next day, to give a charge
  partly against _Perfection_, in my absence.

  “Last Friday, I left them all in peace, the _servant_, but no more the
  _president of the College_. My lady behaved with great candour and
  condescension towards me in the affair. As for you, you are still out
  of her books, and are likely so to continue. Your last letters have
  only thrown oil on the fire. All was seen in the same light in which
  Mr. Wesley’s letter appeared. You were accused of having alienated my
  heart from the College, but I have cleared you.

  “I rejoice that your desires after a larger measure of the Holy Spirit
  increase. Part rather with your heart’s blood than with them. Let me
  meet you at the throne of grace; and send me word how you dispose of
  yourself. If you are at a loss for a prophet’s room, remember I have
  one here.

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[223]

Footnote 222:

  Wesley says he “_spent the day_ in fasting and prayer.” (Wesley’s
  Works, vol. vii., p. 416.)

Footnote 223:

  Benson’s Life, by Macdonald.

To these letters must be added a verbatim copy of an important document,
altogether in Fletcher’s own handwriting, and never published until now.

“An account of John Fletcher’s case, with the reasons that have induced
    him to resign the superintendency of the Countess of Huntingdon’s
    College in Wales.

  “I was first connected with Mr. Wesley, under whom, for love and
  gratitude’s sake, I occasionally laboured some years.

  “By Mr. C. Wesley I had the honour of being presented to Lady
  Huntingdon, who kindly admitted me to the office of a private
  chaplain, and granted me full leave to assist my old friends as often
  as I would.

  “By means of her ladyship I was afterwards introduced to Mr.
  Whitefield, and had the honour of assisting him also both in London
  and Bristol, and found myself peculiarly happy in showing, by my equal
  readiness to throw my mite of assistance where it was accepted, that
  though I was the Lord’s free man I delighted to be the common servant
  of all. I was glad also to have from time to time an opportunity of
  bearing a kind of practical testimony against the spirit of party and
  division, which, to my great grief, crumbled the Church of Christ
  around me.

  “After taking a dangerous turn into the doctrines of election and
  reprobation, my sentiments settled at last into the anti-Calvinist
  way, in which Mr. Wesley was rooted. Notwithstanding this, it became a
  steady, invariable point with me never to be so attached to his, or
  any one party, as to be shy of, much less break with another.

  “I had soon an opportunity of being closely tried in my spirit of
  catholic love. Mr. Maxfield separated from his and my old friend Mr.
  Wesley. I thought him rather in the wrong, and Mr. Wesley was my
  oldest acquaintance. Notwithstanding, I ventured upon the loss of his
  friendship, and of my connection with him, by publicly assisting Mr.
  Maxfield when the breach between them was widest, and the press
  groaned under the unkind productions of their unhappy division.[224]
  Though I touched Mr. Wesley’s friendship in the tenderest part, he
  bore with me, and his patience increased my regard for him; nor is it
  at all abated now, though I have had little opportunity to show it
  him, having hardly exchanged one or two letters with him these many
  years.

  “Soon after Lady Huntingdon founded her College, and partly by her
  unmerited esteem, partly by Providence, and partly by my desire to be
  a Gibeonite to God’s people and hew wood if I could not draw water, I
  was brought to have a principal share in the management of it. The
  free spirit that breathed in the noble foundress’s proposals, and the
  general terms of admittance, suited my catholic taste, and the liberty
  of sentiment granted to all that firmly maintained our total fall in
  Adam, attached me no less to the institution than its excellence and
  the prospect of its usefulness.

  “Scruples nevertheless rose in my mind. The first was a fear lest
  improper subjects, persons destitute either of grace or gifts, perhaps
  of both, were admitted with the greatest readiness, and kept upon the
  foundation with the most sanguine hopes that a day of Pentecost would
  make them what they did not appear to me to be as yet—Christians and
  preachers. Flattering myself that it would be so, after some modest
  expostulations I submitted my judgment to that of the noble foundress,
  whose light I think in general as superior to mine as is her rank and
  grace.

  “The Brecknock division[225] broke out. I suddenly tried to prevent
  it, but it took place, and secretly wounded my catholic spirit.
  Nevertheless, hopes that the Lord might overrule it for good soon
  healed the wound. This brought on a rupture between my two dear and
  honoured friends, the foundress of the college and Mr. Wesley. An
  unkind, though I hope well-meant letter, was wrote on the occasion by
  one, and was unkindly received, yea, looked upon as highly insulting,
  by the other. I saw the advantage of the enemy. I blamed, and yet I
  loved them both. Where I could not soften matters I remained neuter.
  Hence, however, arose a difficulty how I should be faithful to my lady
  without being unfaithful to Mr. Wesley. Meantime, the prejudice seemed
  to me to rise, and somewhat sowed the seeds of the Hay division. Mr.
  Benson’s dismission followed, and though I hope it was from the Lord,
  yet I could not help blaming the manner in which it was conducted.

  “Lady Huntingdon said on the occasion, nobody that held Mr. Wesley’s
  opinions should stay in the College; every Arminian should quit the
  place. This wounded again my catholic spirit, and appeared to me a
  breach of the privilege most solemnly granted to the members of the
  College at the opening of it. I thought that my lady had no right to
  impose such a law—a law so contrary to her first proposals—till it had
  received a proper sanction by a majority of the votes both of masters
  and students, and till leave had been granted to those who could not
  in conscience come into it to withdraw quietly, without the odium of
  an expulsion. I observed that if this was the case, I looked upon
  myself as discharged, because I for one could no more believe that
  Christ did not taste death for every man, than I could believe God was
  not truth and love; and because all the sentiments of Mr. Wesley
  obnoxious to the Calvinist, except perfection, are inseparably
  connected with general redemption.

  “With regard to perfection itself, I believe that when Mr. Wesley is
  altogether consistent upon that subject, he means absolutely nothing
  by it but the full cluster of Gospel blessings, which Lady Huntingdon
  so warmly presses the students to pursue; namely, Gospel faith, the
  immediate revelation of Christ, the baptism of the Holy Ghost, the
  Spirit of adoption, the kingdom that cannot be moved, the element of
  forgiving love, deep and uninterrupted poverty of spirit, and, in a
  word, a standing upon Mount Sion and enjoying its great and glorious
  privileges. And I am fully persuaded that, in this respect, there is
  more misunderstanding between my lady and Mr. Wesley about words and
  modes of expression than about things and essential principles. All
  the difference between them seems to _me_ to consist in this: my lady
  is more for looking to the misery and depth of the fall; Mr. Wesley
  more for considering the power and effects of the recovery. My lady
  speaks glorious things of free grace; and Mr. Wesley inculcates the
  glorious use we ought to make of it. Both appear to me to maintain one
  and the same truth, and to guard it; my lady against the Legalists,
  Mr. Wesley against the Antinomians. If, therefore, they do not
  understand one another, and fall out by the way, I shall think it is a
  great pity, and shall continue to be, at least in my heart, the loving
  servant of both; though both will possibly think me prejudiced for not
  seeing just as they do.

  “I was also grieved that my lady should have received for truth so
  absurd an imagination as that of Mr. Wesley being willing to give £100
  a-year to a rigid Calvinist in bondage, who just read prayers with a
  Welsh accent, and that wise Benson made the foolish proposal to him,
  when Benson, to my certain knowledge, feared his head was at times a
  little affected. And I began to fear lest my lady should, upon the
  most improbable assertions, receive unfavourable impressions against
  me, as she had done against her old friend Mr. Wesley, especially as
  my particular regard for him was still the same.

  “Be that as it will, my regard for Lady Huntingdon and the students
  made me send her ladyship my sentimental creed, that, if she did not
  disapprove of it, I might come to the College; and I came, to my
  thinking and feeling, as free and as happy as ever, and was quite free
  on the Saturday evening and the next morning till noon, when the
  little commission and authority I had to exhort the students was quite
  taken away from me. As I preached in the chapel, an uncommon weight
  came upon me on a sudden, and it was not without much difficulty that
  I struggled under it through the rest of my sermon. As soon as the
  service was over, I retired to my room in very great heaviness and
  distress. I saw in the clearest light that I was not in my place, and
  must no longer preside in the College. From that time, I had no heart
  to speak to the students on the things of God. So clear and strong was
  my conviction that I mentioned it directly to Mr. Howell Harris, and
  that very evening to my lady, and to all the students on the next
  Wednesday; and as I concluded our morning meeting with prayer, I was
  led solemnly upon my knees to resign my charge to God, and to pray for
  a proper person to preside in my place.

  “Nevertheless my high regard for my lady, and my love for the
  students, prevented me from being faithful to my conviction, and I
  would have quenched it, if I had been able. But several things
  happened which gave me courage to be faithful.

  “Lady Huntingdon showed me a letter to Hook, which she had read to the
  students; and, though I admired the honesty and impartiality that
  appeared in it, I afterwards thought hard of that expression, that
  every one who held eternal justification must quit the College. This
  appeared to me as severe upon consistent Calvinists, as the like
  expression before upon consistent Arminians, as, I believe, every
  Predestinarian, who will not contradict himself, must hold himself
  eternally justified in God’s sight.

  “I had reason to fear Mr. Shirley, that great minister whom I honour
  much in the Lord, had said he would oppose through the world the
  doctrine of the baptism of the Holy Ghost, which I am bound in
  conscience to maintain among all professors, especially in the
  College. From these different views of things, I saw difficulties
  would perpetually arise to her ladyship, the College, and myself.

  “I was also grieved that when he tried his well-meant zeal (though it
  was not, in my judgment, zeal according to knowledge) to explode the
  baptism of the Holy Ghost, and laugh it out of the College, after
  having dressed it in a fool’s coat and called it Perfection, most of
  the students had tamely allowed him that Joel’s prophecy was entirely
  fulfilled upon the hundred and twenty disciples on the day of
  Pentecost, that believers are to grow in grace by imperceptible dews,
  and that we can do very well without a remarkable shower of grace and
  Divine effusion of power, opening in us the well of living water that
  is to flow to everlasting life.

  “As it appeared to me they had, in a good degree, given up their
  little expectation of this Gospel blessing, and renounced the grand
  point which I apprehended was to be firmly maintained and vigorously
  pursued in the College, I did not feel the same liberty with them in
  prayer, and found that, as matters were and appeared likely to
  continue, my convictions and desires would rather be damped than
  cherished among them.

  “Nor, indeed, did I see, upon this new plan, any advantage this
  College was to have more than the academy at Abergavenny, itinerancy
  excepted; so that I feared many would get into the habit of preaching
  by rote, and of talking of the power without heartily waiting for it,
  which made me give up my hopes that those who have not gifts should
  ever be useful preachers, as a day of Pentecost and power from on high
  can alone supply the want of them.

  “My lady, likewise, appeared to me so excessively afraid of
  Perfection, that she seemed to take umbrage at a harmless expression I
  had used in a letter hastily written to a friend, ‘_The fiery baptism
  will burn up self_,’—an expression which I had caught from Mr. Harris,
  who frequently uses it, though no one will accuse him of befriending
  Mr. Wesley’s doctrine of Perfection. Whatsoever he means by it, I mean
  nothing but to convey the idea of a power that enables us to say, with
  a tolerable degree of propriety, as St. Paul, ‘I live not, but Christ
  lives in me;’ and I saw that, if I was faithful to my light,
  misapprehensions of the like kind, and well or ill grounded fears,
  would perpetually arise.

  “But what weighed most with me, next to what passed in my heart, the
  third Sunday in Lent, was the strong light in which I saw the great
  difficulty arising from the difference of sentiments between the
  students and myself. I had frequently observed that, if I tried to
  stir up those who appeared to be carnally secure, or spiritually
  asleep on their soft doctrinal pillows, they directly fancied I aimed
  at robbing them of one of their jewels, the doctrine of perseverance,
  though the Searcher of hearts knows I had not the least thought about
  it. By the same stratagem of the enemy, when I exhorted loiterers to
  leave the things that are behind, and press toward the mark for the
  prize of our high calling in Christ, they imagined I wanted to drive
  them to the brink of some horrible precipice, or into the jaws of some
  monster called Perfection, in which notion they were possibly
  confirmed not only by Mr. Shirley’s positive assertions, but by
  frequent hints thrown out by her ladyship herself upon the danger of
  that imaginary bugbear. Alas! how needless it is to give charges
  against sinless Perfection to young men who believe no such thing is
  to be attained, and who live mostly under the power of the carnal
  mind. What must be the consequence if grace does not interpose? What,
  but a settling upon the lees of nature and formality, and a singing of
  a soft requiem to the drowsy hearts of those who are not really alive
  to God? What makes me think so, is the frequent opportunities I have
  had to observe that a word which may too indirectly countenance sin,
  by the craft and power of Satan and the prevalence of natural
  corruption, goes farther than twenty directly and powerfully thundered
  against it.

  “Again. The light of most Calvinists is such that they cannot believe
  a man knows anything of free grace who does not enter into all their
  sentiments. Of this, a moderate one gave me lately a particular
  instance, by telling me point blank, I was in a damnable heresy, and
  never knew anything of myself or of true grace, because I had said,
  sinners perish for resisting and quenching the Spirit of grace. Hence,
  I conclude, and not without a premise, that it would be as ridiculous
  in me to expect the majority of students to follow my directions, as
  it would be to hope that young men who have good eyes should follow a
  person whom they believe almost if not altogether blind.

  “Things appeared to me in this light, when the uneasiness of my lady
  occasioned by Mr. Wesley’s Minutes showed itself. I admired her zeal
  for the grand truths of the Gospel. Appearances were for her, and I
  could not excuse Mr. Wesley’s unguarded expressions, any more than my
  lady’s great warmth against them; her ladyship having mentioned again
  and again that they were horrible and abominable, and that she must
  burn against them, and at last added, that, whosoever in the College
  did not fully and without any evasion disavow them should not stay in
  her College, etc. Accordingly, an order came for the students and
  masters to write their sentiments upon them. I thought I would not lay
  that burden upon others without touching it myself, and, following the
  light in which I could see and trace Mr. Wesley’s doctrines from a
  long acquaintance with his sentiments, I blamed the unguarded and not
  sufficiently explicit manner in which they were worded, but approving
  the doctrines themselves as agreeable to what appears to me the
  analogy of faith. All the College, I suppose, rose with one voice
  against them, which must make me appear strangely heterodox, if not
  altogether a heretic worse than Mr. Wesley. This consideration,
  together with my lady’s repeated declaration that every student who
  did not disavow them should quit the College, gave me at last courage
  to do absolutely what I had done in a partial manner near a fortnight
  before, namely, to resign the office of Principal of the College,
  which I saw I could no longer discharge with honour, with a good
  conscience, or any probability of success.

  “If I know anything of my own heart, I can truly say, I have not taken
  this step from pique or chagrin, nor from any supposed unkindness in
  her ladyship or the students, whose undeserved regard and peculiar
  respect for me have made me feel the greatest reluctance to comply
  with what I esteem the order of the Lord and the explicit dictate of
  my own conscience, confirmed by the train of circumstances which I
  have mentioned.

  “My high esteem for her ladyship is not at all abated. My love to the
  students, and regard for the College are the same. Nay, I can truly
  say, my regard for them goads me away, as I see nothing but a scene of
  confusion, distraction, and jealousy if I stay. The whole of this
  affair appears to me to be from the Lord, and it is my sentiment,
  that, as the College has naturally been filled with Calvinists, is
  providentially founded near a Calvinist academy in Wales, a Calvinist
  country, an itinerant ministry is to go forth from it to feed chiefly
  the Church of God of that sentimental denomination. In order to this,
  a moderate, lively Calvinist must superintend, under the noble
  foundress, and, as a token that her ladyship is not dissatisfied with
  my conduct, I humbly beg she would give me leave to recommend my
  successor to her.

  “Mr. Whitefield is dead; some of his forlorn congregation have already
  been blessed under the ministry of the students; who is more proper to
  head them than he whom the religious world begins to call the young
  Whitefield, Mr. Rowland Hill? His remarkable sufferings for Christ’s
  sake, entitle him to the honour of presiding over this work; and I
  hope the Lord will make him willing to accept an office for which he
  seems to be so well fitted by his popularity and success.

  “If it be objected that he is young, I reply, he is older than Mr.
  Whitefield was when he set out upon his great errand, and that the
  warmth of his heart, the ripeness of his zeal, and the amazing
  steadiness of his conduct for years, under the greatest difficulty
  both at home and abroad, together with the many seals God has already
  given to His ministry in various parts of the kingdom, ought greatly
  to turn the scale in his favour. And, indeed, what is an old Saul to a
  young David? And who deserves most the name and honour of a father?
  He, or myself? Without hesitating, I answer Mr. Rowland Hill, who has
  perhaps begotten more children to God in one discourse than I have in
  all my poor labour these fourteen years.”

Footnote 224:

  After many unhappy contentions, and much forbearance on Wesley’s part,
  Thomas Maxfield seceded from Wesley in 1763. Maxfield has been far
  more highly honoured in Methodist histories and biographies than his
  merits warranted.

Footnote 225:

  I have failed in my endeavour to ascertain what is meant by the
  “Brecknock division.” There can be no doubt, however, that Wesley met
  with great annoyance in that part of Wales. Previous to the opening of
  Trevecca College, he wrote:—

  “1767. September 2.—I found the work of God in Pembrokeshire had been
  exceedingly hindered, chiefly by Mr. Davies’s preachers, who had
  continually inveighed against ours, and thereby frightened abundance
  of people from hearing or coming near them. This had sometimes
  provoked them to retort, which always made a bad matter worse. The
  advice, therefore, which I gave them was:—1. Let all the people
  sacredly abstain from backbiting, tale-bearing, evil-speaking. 2. Let
  all our preachers abstain from returning railing for railing, either
  in public or in private, as well as from disputing. 3. Let them never
  preach controversy, but plain, practical, and experimental religion.”

  A year and a half after Fletcher left Trevecca, Wesley wrote again in
  his journal:—

  “1772. August 14.—About noon, at the request of my old friend Howell
  Harris, I preached at Trevecca, on the strait gate, and we found our
  hearts knit together as at the beginning. He said, ‘I have borne with
  these pert, ignorant young men, vulgarly called students, till I
  cannot in conscience bear any longer. They preach barefaced
  reprobation, and so broad antinomianism, that I have been constrained
  to oppose them to the face, even in the public congregation.’ It is no
  wonder they should preach thus. What better can be expected from raw
  lads of little understanding, little learning, and no experience?”

This long document is endorsed “Letter to Lady Huntingdon.” It would be
easy to make it the text for a long sermon; but want of space forbids
the attempt to do this. Besides, intelligent readers are quite competent
to form just opinions respecting it. Suffice it to say, that it is of
high importance, as containing, by far, the fullest account ever
published of the reasons why Fletcher took a step which led to great
events he never contemplated. Had he continued to be the Superintendent
of the Trevecca College, it is probable that the Calvinian controversy
would not have grown to such wide dimensions. That, however, is not a
proof of imprudence on Fletcher’s part; for, as every one who knows the
history of that controversy is well aware, it was impossible for the
great religious movement of the last century to proceed without the
doctrines in Wesley’s Minutes being thoroughly examined, discussed, and
settled.

Wesley preached his sermon on the death of Whitefield on November 18,
1770. Six weeks afterwards, it was respectfully attacked in the January
number of the Calvinists’ periodical, the _Gospel Magazine_. Two months
later, the same magazine made a furious assault on Walter Sellon’s
“Defence of God’s Sovereignty,” stigmatizing it as “A mite of reprobate
silver, cast into the _Foundery_, and coming out thence, bearing the
impress of that pride, self-righteousness, and self-sufficiency, natural
to men in their fallen unrenewed state.” “This performance,” continues
the reviewer, “is extolled to the very skies by the Arminians. It is
calculated for their meridian, and well establishes the haughty system
of their own works and faithfulness, in opposition to the grace of the
Gospel, and the faithfulness of a covenant God, in the finished
salvation of sinners by Jesus Christ.”

In May, the same periodical printed Wesley’s “Minutes,” and branded them
as “the very doctrines of Popery, yea, of Popery unmasked.” The number
for the month of June contained an article of twelve pages, entitled, “A
Comment or Paraphrase on the Extract from the Minutes of the Rev. Mr.
Wesley, etc.” The temper and the unfairness of the article may be judged
by the paraphrase on the first Minute, “_Take heed to your doctrine_.”
That is, remarks the commentator,—

  “Beware, in your preaching, of ascribing the whole and sole glory of
  salvation, from first to last, to the free unmerited grace of God in
  Christ Jesus. Be cautious how you sink man below his dignity, rob him
  of his excellency, strip him of the power of His free-will and
  abilities to perform his part in the work of salvation, and so deprive
  him of all trust in himself, hope from himself, and boasting of
  himself; for hence will be an end of self-seeking, self-righteousness,
  and self-soothing. Then would he sink into self-despair. Take heed to
  this.”

Meanwhile, Fletcher wrote to Wesley as follows:—

                                     “MADELEY, _June 24, 1771_.[226]

  “DEAR SIR,—When I left Wales, where I had stood in the gap for peace,
  I thought my poor endeavours were not altogether vain. Lady Huntingdon
  said she would write civilly to you, and desire you to explain
  yourself about your ‘Minutes.’ I suppose you have not heard from her,
  for she wrote me word, since then, that she believed she must not
  meddle in the affair. At least, that is what I made of her letter.
  Upon receiving yours from Chester, I cut off that part of it where you
  expressed your belief of what is eminently called by us the doctrine
  of free grace, and sent it to the College, with a desire it might be
  sent to Lady Huntingdon. She has returned it to me, with a letter, in
  which she expresses the greatest disapprobation of it. The purport of
  her letter is, to charge you with tergiversation, and me with being
  the dupe of your impositions. She has also written in stronger terms
  to her College.

  “Things I hoped would have remained there; but how am I surprised and
  grieved to see zeal borrowing the horn of discord, and sounding an
  alarm throughout the religious world against you. Mr. Hatton called
  upon me last night, and showed me a printed circular, which, I
  suppose, is, or will be, sent to the serious clergy and laity
  throughout the land. I have received none, as I have lost, I suppose,
  my reputation of being a ‘_real Protestant_,’ by what I wrote upon
  your ‘Minutes’ in Wales.

  “This is an exact copy of the printed letter—

  “‘SIR,—Whereas Mr. Wesley’s Conference is to be held at Bristol, on
  Tuesday, the 6th of August next, it is proposed by Lady Huntingdon and
  many other Christian friends (real Protestants), to have a meeting at
  Bristol at the same time, of such principal persons, both clergy and
  laity, who disapprove of the underwritten ‘Minutes;’ and, as the same
  are thought injurious to the very _fundamental_ principles of
  Christianity, it is further proposed that they go in a body to the
  said Conference, and insist upon a formal recantation of the said
  Minutes; and, in case of a refusal, that they sign and publish their
  protest against them. Your presence, Sir, on this occasion, is
  particularly requested; but, if it should not suit your convenience to
  be there, it is desired that you will transmit your sentiments on the
  subject to such persons as you think proper to produce them. It is
  submitted to you, whether it would not be right, in the opposition to
  be made to such a _dreadful heresy_, to recommend it to as many of
  your Christian friends, as well of the dissenters as of the
  Established Church, as you can prevail on to be there, the cause being
  of so public a nature.

                 “‘I am, Sir, your obedient servant,—WALTER SHIRLEY.

  “‘P.S.—Your answer is desired, directed to the Countess of Huntingdon;
  or the Rev. Mr. Shirley; or John Lloyd, Esq., in Bath; or Mr. James
  Ireland, merchant, Bristol; or to Thomas Powis, Esq., at Berwick, near
  Shrewsbury; or to Richard Hill, Esq., at Hawkstone, near Whitchurch,
  Shropshire. Lodgings will be provided. Inquire at Mr. Ireland’s,
  Bristol.’

  “I think it my duty, dear Sir, to give you the earliest intelligence
  of this bold onset, and to assure you that, upon the evangelical
  principles mentioned in your last letter to me, I, for one, shall be
  glad to stand by you and your doctrine to the last, hoping that you
  will gladly remove stumbling-blocks out of the way of the weak, and
  alter such expressions as may create prejudice in the hearts of those
  who are inclined to admit it.

  “I write to Mr. Shirley to expostulate with him, and to request him to
  call in his circular letter. He is the last man that should attack
  you. His sermons contain propositions much more heretical and
  anti-Calvinistical than your ‘Minutes.’ If my letters have not the
  desired effect, I shall probably, if you approve of them and correct
  them, make them public for your justification.

  “I find Mr. Ireland is to write to make you _tamely recant_ without
  measuring swords, or breaking a pike with our _real Protestants_. I
  wrote to him also.

             “I am, dear Sir, your unworthy servant in the Gospel,
                                                     “JOHN FLETCHER.

  “To the Rev. Mr. John Wesley,
    “At his Preaching House in Dublin,
       “Ireland.”

Footnote 226:

  This letter is inserted in the “Life and Times of Wesley,” where it
  was published for the _first_ time. It is reproduced here, because
  Fletcher’s life would not be complete without it.—L. T.

Lady Huntingdon did not write to Wesley, but he wrote a long and
faithful letter to her, dated June 19, 1771, in which he insisted that
the doctrines he preached now were the same as he had preached for above
thirty years.[227]

Shirley did not “call in his circular letter.” It would have been more
to the honour of himself and his friends had he done so; for, when
Wesley’s Conference assembled on August 6, the response to it was
ridiculous. Of all “the serious clergy and laity throughout the land,”
only Shirley himself, and the Rev. Cradock Glascott, and the Rev. Mr.
Owen, ministers officiating in the Countess of Huntingdon’s chapels,
together with Messrs. Lloyd, Ireland, and Winter, and two students (!)
from Trevecca College attended. After what had taken place, Wesley,
without arrogance, might have disdained these insignificant self-elected
deputies; but he graciously allowed them to enter his Conference. First
of all, Wesley prayed; then Shirley asked if the letters[228] of himself
and the Countess of Huntingdon had been read to the Conference; and,
being answered in the negative, he asked leave to read them himself,
which was granted. A long conversation followed, and then Shirley
produced a written declaration which he wished the Conference to sign.
Wesley examined it, and made some alterations, which Shirley says were
“not very material;” and then Wesley and fifty-three of his itinerant
preachers appended to it their signatures. The declaration was as
follows:—

  “Whereas the doctrinal points in the Minutes of a Conference, held in
  London, August 7, 1770, have been understood to favour justification
  by works; now the Rev. John Wesley and others assembled in Conference,
  do declare that we had no such meaning, and that we abhor the doctrine
  of Justification by Works as a most perilous and abominable doctrine:
  and, as the said Minutes are not sufficiently guarded in the way they
  are expressed, we hereby solemnly declare, in the sight of God, that
  we have no trust or confidence but in the alone merits of our Lord and
  Saviour Jesus Christ, for Justification or Salvation, either in life,
  death, or the day of judgment: and, though no one is a real Christian
  believer, (and consequently cannot be saved) who doth not good works,
  where there is time and opportunity, yet our works have no part in
  meriting or purchasing our salvation from first to last, either in
  whole or in part.”

Footnote 227:

  “Life and Times of Wesley,” vol. iii., p. 93.

Footnote 228:

  The letter of the Countess, dated “August 2, 1771,” in substance was
  an apology for the apparently presumptuous way in which she and her
  friends had proposed to invade Wesley’s Conference; accompanied with
  an excuse founded on the fact that they regarded Wesley’s “Minutes,”
  of 1770, as “repugnant to Scripture, the whole plan of man’s salvation
  under the new covenant of grace, and also to the clear meaning of our
  Established Church, as well as to that of all other Protestant
  Churches.” Shirley’s letter was to the same effect. (See Shirley’s
  “Narrative of the Principal Circumstances relative to the Rev Mr.
  Wesley’s late Conference, held in Bristol, August 6, 1771.”)

This declaration being signed by Wesley and all the Itinerant Preachers
present (except Thomas Olivers), Shirley was required “to make some
public acknowledgment that he had mistaken the meaning of the
‘Minutes,’” At first he hesitated, but, “a few days afterwards, sent
Wesley the following message, with which,” says Shirley, “he was very
well pleased”:—

  “Mr. Shirley’s Christian respects wait on Mr. Wesley. The declaration
  agreed to in Conference August 8, 1771, has convinced Mr. Shirley he
  had mistaken the meaning of the doctrinal points in the Minutes of the
  Conference, held in London August 7, 1770; and he hereby wishes to
  testify the full satisfaction he has in the said declaration, and his
  hearty concurrence and agreement with the same.”

It might have been thought that here the fracas would have ended; and
so, perhaps, it would, had it not been for an incident which must now be
mentioned.

Fletcher had already written his “First Check to Antinomianism.” It was
finished on July 29,[229] and Wesley immediately put it into the hands
of his printer, William Pine, of Bristol, to be printed and published;
and the manuscript was being set up in type at the very time that
Shirley and his friends were at Wesley’s Conference. The Conference
began on Tuesday, August 6. Wesley writes:—

  “We had more preachers than usual at the Conference, in consequence of
  Mr. Shirley’s circular letter. At ten on _Thursday_ morning, he came
  with nine or ten of his friends. We conversed freely for about two
  hours, and I believe they were satisfied that we were not so ‘dreadful
  heretics’ as they imagined, but were tolerably sound in the
  faith.”[230]

Footnote 229:

  It is a notable fact that Wesley had spent the three previous days
  with Fletcher. Hence the following from Wesley’s Journal:—

  “1771. _Friday_, July 26. I went on to Shrewsbury, where Mr. Fletcher
  met me.—_Sunday_, 28. I preached at Madeley, morning and afternoon.
  The church would not near contain the congregation; but the window
  near the pulpit being open, those without could hear as well as those
  within.—_Monday_, 29. I went on to Worcester.”

  Probably Wesley took Fletcher’s manuscript away with him.

Footnote 230:

  Wesley’s Journal.

The next day, Friday, August 9, Shirley was informed that Fletcher’s
manuscript was being printed. He and his friends appealed to Wesley to
stop the press. Mr. Ireland, in particular, who had already written to
Fletcher an account of the preceding day’s amicable proceedings,
entreated Wesley to wait till he (Ireland) could receive an answer to
his letter. He ventured to assure Wesley that if Fletcher were upon the
spot he would suppress the publication; and he himself offered to defray
all the expense that had been incurred. Wesley answered, “I will
consider it;” and, at the same time, he told his visitors that “he had
corrected all the _tart_ expressions in” the manuscript.[231]

Footnote 231:

  Shirley’s “Narrative.”

Wesley spent Saturday and Sunday in Bristol; and then, on Monday, August
12, he “set out for Wales.” Three days afterwards, Mr. Ireland received
a letter from Fletcher, who wrote:—

  “I feel for poor dear Mr. Shirley, whom I have (considering the
  present circumstances) treated too severely in my ‘Vindication of the
  Minutes.’ My dear Sir, what must be done? I am ready to defray, by
  selling to my last shirt, the expense of the printing of my
  Vindication, and suppress it. Direct me, dear Sir. Consult with Mr.
  Shirley and Mr. Wesley about the matter. Be persuaded I am ready to do
  everything that will be brotherly in this unhappy affair.”[232]

Footnote 232:

  Shirley’s “Narrative.”

Wesley having departed from Bristol, Mr. Ireland at once went to Mr.
Pine, the printer, and showed him Fletcher’s letter; and the same
evening Mr. Pine communicated its contents to the Bristol preachers. The
next morning, Friday, August 16, Mr. Ireland sent to the preachers a
_copy_ of Fletcher’s letter; and, in a letter from himself, told them
that Fletcher “supposed the book was out; but, even in that case, he
wished it to be suppressed.” Mr. Ireland entreated them to defer the
publication till they had further authority from Fletcher and Wesley,
“and engaged to be accountable for every consequence.”[233]

Footnote 233:

  _Ibid._

While Mr. Ireland was making these strenuous efforts to suppress the
publication, Wesley wrote to the Countess of Huntingdon as follows:—

  “1771. August 14.—When I received your ladyship’s letter of the 2nd
  inst., I immediately saw that it required an answer, only I waited
  till the hurry of Conference was over, that I might do nothing rashly.
  I know your ladyship would not servilely ‘deny the truth;’ neither
  would I; especially that great truth, justification by faith, for
  which I have given up all my worldly hopes, my friends, my reputation;
  yea, for which I have so often hazarded my life, and by the grace of
  God will do again. The principles established in the ‘_Minutes_’ I
  apprehend to be no way contrary to this; or to that faith which was
  once delivered to the saints. I believe whoever calmly considers Mr.
  Fletcher’s letters will be convinced of this. I fear, therefore, ‘zeal
  against those principles’ is no less than zeal against the truth, and
  against the _honour_ of our Lord. The preservation of His honour
  appears so sacred to me, and has done for above these forty years,
  that I have counted, and do count, all things loss in comparison of
  it. But till Mr. Fletcher’s printed letters are answered, I must think
  everything spoken against those ‘_Minutes_’ is totally destructive of
  _His honour_, and a palpable affront to Him both as our Prophet and
  Priest, but more especially as our King. Those letters, therefore,
  which could not be suppressed without betraying the honour of our
  Lord, largely prove that the ‘_Minutes_’ lay no other foundation than
  that which is laid in Scripture, and which I have been laying, and
  teaching others to lay, for between thirty and forty years. Indeed, it
  would be amazing that God should at this day prosper my labours, as
  much if not more than ever, by convincing as well as converting
  sinners, if I was ‘_establishing another foundation, repugnant to the
  whole plan of man’s salvation under the covenant of grace, as well as
  the clear meaning of our Established Church and all other Protestant
  Churches_.’ This is a charge indeed! But I plead, not guilty; and till
  it is proved upon me, I must subscribe myself, my dear lady, your
  ladyship’s affectionate but much injured servant,

                                                 “JOHN WESLEY.”[234]

Footnote 234:

  Whitehead’s “Life of Wesley,” vol. ii., p. 350.

Thus, by Wesley’s firmness, Fletcher’s manuscript, without any delay,
was printed and published. Its title was, “A Vindication of the Rev. Mr.
Wesley’s Last Minutes: Occasioned by a circular printed Letter, inviting
principal Persons, both Clergy and Laity, as well of the Dissenters as
of the Established Church, who disapprove of those Minutes, to oppose
them in a Body, as a dreadful Heresy: And designed to remove Prejudice,
check Rashness, promote Forbearance, defend the Character of an eminent
Minister of Christ, and prevent some important Scriptural Truths from
being hastily branded as heretical. In Five Letters, to the Hon. and
Rev. Author of the Circular Letter. By a Lover of Quietness and Liberty
of Conscience. Bristol: Printed by W. Pine, in Wine Street, 1771.” 12
mo., 98 pp.

The publication roused again the Hon. and Rev. Walter Shirley, who
immediately prepared and published “A Narrative of the principal
Circumstances relative to the Rev. Mr. Wesley’s late Conference, held in
Bristol, August the 6th, 1771, at which the Rev. Mr. Shirley, and
others, his Friends, were present. With a Declaration then agreed to by
Mr. Wesley, and Fifty-three of the Preachers in Connection with him. In
a Letter to a Friend. By the Rev. Mr. Shirley. Bath: 1771.”  12mo., 24
pp.

Upon the whole, Mr. Shirley’s “Narrative” was truthful, fair, and
respectful.[235] It is dated “Bath, September 12, 1771.” He apprised
Fletcher of its contents, and of his intention to publish it; and
Fletcher, in reply, wrote the following letter, which completes the
history of the commencement of the great Calvinistical controversy:—

                                     “MADELEY, _September 11, 1771_.

  “REV. AND DEAR SIR,—It is extremely proper, nay, it is highly
  necessary, that the public should be informed how much like a minister
  of the Prince of Peace, and a meek, humble, loving brother in the
  Gospel of Christ, you behaved at the Conference. Had I been there, I
  would gladly have taken upon me to proclaim these tidings of joy to
  the lovers of Zion’s peace. Your conduct at that time of love is
  certainly the best excuse for the hasty step you had taken; as my
  desire of stopping my ‘_Vindication_,’ upon hearing of it, is the best
  apology I can make for my severity to you.

  “I am not averse at all, Sir, to your publishing the passages you
  mention out of my letters to Mr. Ireland. They show my peculiar love
  and respect for you, which I shall at all times think an honour; and,
  at this juncture, shall feel a peculiar pleasure to see proclaimed to
  the world. They apologize for my calling myself ‘_a lover of
  quietness_,’ when I unfortunately prove _a son of contention_; and
  they demonstrate that I am not altogether void of the fear that
  becomes an awkward, inexperienced surgeon, when he ventures to open a
  vein in the arm of a person for whom he has the highest regard. How
  natural is it for him to tremble, lest by missing the intended vein,
  and pricking an unseen artery, he should have done irreparable
  mischief instead of an useful operation!

  “But while you do me the kindness of publishing those passages, permit
  me, Sir, to do Mr. Wesley the justice of informing him, I had also
  written to Mr. Ireland, that, ‘whether my _Letters_ were suppressed or
  not, the ‘_Minutes_’ _must_ be vindicated,—that Mr. Wesley owed it to
  the Church, to the _real Protestants_, to all his Societies, and to
  his own aspersed character,—and that, after all, the controversy did
  not seem to me to be so much whether the ‘_Minutes_’ should stand, as
  whether the Antinomian Gospel of Dr. Crisp[236] should prevail over
  the practical Gospel of Jesus Christ.

  “I must also, Sir, beg leave to let my vindicated friend know, that,
  in the very letter where I so earnestly entreated Mr. Ireland to stop
  the publication of my Letters to you, and offered to take the whole
  expense of the impression upon myself, though I should be obliged to
  sell my last shirt to defray it, I added that, ‘If they were
  published, I must look upon it as a _necessary evil_, or
  _misfortune_.’ Which of the two words I used I do not justly
  recollect: a _misfortune_ for you and me, who must appear inconsistent
  to the world;—you, Sir, with your Sermons,[237] and I with my
  Title-page; and nevertheless _necessary_ to vindicate misrepresented
  truth, defend an eminent minister of Christ, and stem the torrent of
  Antinomianism.

  “It may not be improper, also, to observe to you, Sir, that when I
  presented Mr. Wesley with my ‘Vindication,’ I begged he would correct
  it, and take away whatever might be unkind or too sharp: urging that
  though I meant no unkindness, I was not a proper judge of what I had
  written under peculiarly delicate and trying circumstances, as well as
  in a great hurry; and did not, therefore, dare to trust either my pen,
  my head, or my heart. He was no sooner gone” (from Bristol) “than I
  sent a letter after him to repeat and urge the same request; and he
  wrote me word, that he had ‘expunged every tart expression.’ _If he
  has_ (for I have not yet seen what alterations his friendly pen has
  made) I am reconciled to the publication; and _that he has_, I have
  reason to hope from the letters of two judicious London friends, who
  calmed my fears, lest I should have treated you with unkindness.

  “One of them says, ’I reverence Mr. Shirley for his candid
  acknowledgment of his hastiness in judging. I commend the Calvinists
  at the Conference for their justice to Mr. Wesley, and their
  acquiescence in the Declaration of the Preachers in connexion with
  him. But is that Declaration, however dispersed, a remedy adequate to
  the evil done, not only to Mr. Wesley, but to the cause and work of
  God? Several Calvinists, in eagerness of malice, had dispersed their
  calumnies through the three kingdoms. A truly excellent person
  herself,[238] in her mistaken zeal, had represented him as _a papist
  unmasked, a heretic, an apostate_. A clergyman of the first reputation
  informs me _a Poem on his Apostacy_ is just coming out.[239] Letters
  have been sent to every serious Churchman and Dissenter through the
  land, together with the _Gospel Magazine_. Great are the shoutings,
  “_And now that he lieth let him rise up no more_.” This is all the
  cry. His dearest friends and children are staggered, and scarce know
  what to think. You, in your corner, cannot conceive the mischief that
  has been done, and is still doing. But your letters, in the hand of
  Providence, may answer the good ends you proposed by writing them. You
  have not been too severe to dear Mr. Shirley, moderate Calvinists
  themselves being judges, but very kind and friendly to set a good
  mistaken man right, and probably to preserve him from the like
  rashness as long as he lives. Be not troubled, therefore, but cast
  your care upon the Lord.’

  “My other friend says, ‘Considering what harm the Circular Letter has
  done, and what a useless satisfaction Mr. Shirley has given by his
  vague acknowledgment, it is no more than just and equitable that your
  Letters should be published.’

  “Now, Sir, as I never saw that _acknowledgment_, nor the _softening
  corrections_ made by Mr. Wesley in my ‘Vindication;’ as I was not
  informed of some of the above-mentioned particulars when I was so
  eager to prevent the publication of my Letters; and as I have reason
  to think that, through the desire of an immediate peace, the festering
  wound was rather skinned over than probed to the bottom,—all I can say
  about this publication is, what I wrote to our common friend, namely,
  that ‘I must look upon it as a _necessary evil_.’

  “I am glad, Sir, you do not direct your letter to Mr. Olivers,[240]
  who was so busy in publishing my ‘Vindication;’ for, by a letter I
  have just received from Bristol, I am informed he did not hear how
  desirous I was to call it in, till he had actually given out, before a
  whole congregation, it would be sold. Besides, he would have pleaded
  with smartness that he never approved of a patched-up peace,—that he
  bore his testimony against it at the time it was made,—and that he had
  a personal right to produce _my_ arguments, since both parties refused
  to hear _his_ at the Conference.

  “If your Letter is friendly, Sir, and you print it in the same size as
  my ‘Vindication,’ I shall gladly buy £10 worth of the copies, and
  order them to be stitched with my ‘Vindication,’ and given gratis to
  the purchasers of it; as well to do you justice, as to convince the
  world that we make a loving war; and also to demonstrate how much I
  regard your respectable character, and honour your dear person. Mr.
  Wesley’s heart is, I am persuaded, too full of brotherly love to deny
  me the pleasure of thus showing you how sincerely I am, Rev. and dear
  Sir, your obedient servant,

                                                    “JOHN FLETCHER.”

Footnote 235:

  That there might be no misunderstanding between them, Fletcher, on the
  same day, sent Wesley “the substance, and almost the very words,” of
  this letter to Shirley.

Footnote 236:

  The Rev. Tobias Crisp, D.D., a divine of the Church of England, born
  in London in 1600, and who died in 1643. He was educated at Eton,
  thence he removed to Cambridge, and afterwards to Oriel College,
  Oxford. At the age of twenty-seven, he was appointed Rector of
  Brinkworth, in Wiltshire. Early in life, he was a favourer of the
  doctrines of Arminianism; afterwards, he became the champion of
  Antinomianism. His sermons, in three volumes, were printed after his
  death. It is said that, though the tenets he embraced seem to be a
  plea for licentiousness, he himself was remarkable for the purity and
  modesty of his manners.

Footnote 237:

  A few years ago, Shirley had published “Twelve Sermons, preached on
  several occasions,”  12mo., 189 pp.

Footnote 238:

  Lady Huntingdon.

Footnote 239:

  This was published in the _Gospel Magazine_, in the same month as
  Wesley’s Conference was held. It was signed “Cleon,” and dated
  “London, June 17, 1771.” Speaking of Wesley, “Cleon” says,—

             “Pride prompts him on, and Satan now has gained
             A conquest o’er perverted truth retained;
             At best perverted, glaring now appears,
             The pride of Rome, the lie of num’rous years.”

Footnote 240:

  Thomas Olivers, who for several years, corrected proof sheets for
  Wesley.

The reader has now as full an account as can be given of the way in
which the long and angry war between _Wesleyan_ Methodism and
_Calvinian_ Methodism was begun. It is difficult to say, decidedly, who
was to blame for it. Wesley had a perfect right—in fact, under existing
circumstances, he was almost bound by duty—to publish his theological
theses; but it was unfortunate that, to use the words of himself and his
fifty-three preachers, “_they were not sufficiently guarded_ in the way
they were expressed.”

The Countess of Huntingdon and her nephew, the Hon. and Rev. Walter
Shirley, had a perfect right to take counsel with their Calvinian
friends respecting Wesley’s “Minutes;” but it was offensive arrogance to
propose to “_go in a body to_ Wesley’s _Conference, and insist upon a
formal recantation of the said Minutes_.” Wesley was under no obligation
to either Lady Huntingdon or Walter Shirley; and their issuing of the
“Circular Letter” was pure impertinence, though, no doubt, they thought
it a Christian duty.

Fletcher had a perfect right to explain and vindicate Wesley’s
‘Minutes,’ and to send Wesley his manuscript to be printed and
published; and Wesley had a perfect right to avail himself of this
permission.

Mr. Ireland had a perfect right to entreat Wesley’s printer to delay the
publication till he (Ireland) received an answer to the letter he had
sent to Fletcher; and Fletcher, though, perhaps, showing too much
flexibility of purpose, displayed Christian kindness of the highest
order in his reply; but that reply arrived in Bristol too late, for
Wesley had already left for Wales, and Wesley’s editor had publicly
announced that the “Vindication” would be published. Besides, Fletcher
himself, within five weeks after the time when Wesley’s Conference was
held, changed his opinion, told Mr. Ireland that “the ‘Minutes’ _must_
be vindicated,” and informed Shirley himself that he was “reconciled to
the publication” of his manuscript.

Nothing more need be said. Indeed, all, in substance, is said that can
be said; and it only remains to notice the 12mo pamphlet of 98 pages,
that gave such huge offence, and led to such serious consequences.
Fletcher presents:—

  “I. A general view of the Rev. Mr. Wesley’s doctrines.

  “II. An account of the commendable design of his ‘Minutes.’

  “III. A vindication of the propositions which they contain, by
  arguments taken from Scripture, reason, and experience; and by
  quotations from eminent Calvinist divines, who have said the same
  things in different words.”

On the first of these points, he writes:—

  “Mr. Wesley is accused of dreadful heresy; and may not I, an old
  friend and acquaintance of his, be permitted to speak a word in his
  favour? This step, I fear, will cost me my reputation (if I have any),
  and involve me in the same condemnation with him, whose cause,
  together with that of truth, I design to plead: but when humanity
  prompts, gratitude calls, and friendship excites; when reason invites,
  justice demands, truth requires, and conscience summons; he does not
  deserve the name of a Christian friend, who, for any consideration,
  hesitates to vindicate what he esteems truth, and to stand by an
  aggrieved friend, brother, and father.

  “1. For above these sixteen years, I have heard him frequently in his
  chapels, and sometimes in my church; and I have familiarly conversed
  and corresponded with him, and have often perused his numerous works
  in verse and prose; and I can truly say, that, during all that time, I
  have heard him, upon every proper occasion, steadily maintain the
  total fall of man in Adam, and his utter inability to recover himself,
  or take one step towards his recovery, ‘_without the grace of God
  preventing him, that he may have a good will, and working with him
  when he has that good will_.’

  “2. I must likewise testify that he faithfully points out Christ as
  the only way of salvation; and strongly recommends faith as the only
  means of receiving Him, and all the benefits of His righteous life and
  meritorious death; and truth obliges me to declare, that he frequently
  expresses his detestation of the errors of modern Pharisees, who laugh
  at original sin, set up the power of fallen man, cry down the
  operations of God’s Spirit, deny the absolute necessity of the blood
  and righteousness of Christ, and refuse Him the glory of all the good
  that may be found in Jew or Gentile. You will not without difficulty
  find in England, and perhaps in all the world, a minister who has
  borne more frequent testimonies, either from the pulpit or the press,
  against those dangerous errors.

  “3. The next fundamental doctrine of Christianity is that of holiness
  of heart and life; and no one can here accuse Mr. Wesley of leaning to
  the Antinomian delusion, which ‘_makes void the law through_’ a
  speculative and barren ‘_faith_’: on the contrary, he appears to be
  peculiarly set for the defence of practical religion; for, instead of
  representing Christ as the minister of sin, he sets Him forth as a
  complete ‘Saviour from sin.’ Not satisfied to preach holiness begun,
  he preaches finished holiness, and calls believers to such a degree of
  heart-purifying faith, as may enable them continually to ‘_triumph in
  Christ_,’ as being ‘_made to them sanctification_,’ as well as
  ‘_righteousness_.’ This he sometimes calls ‘full sanctification,’ the
  state of _fathers_ in Christ, or ‘_the glorious liberty of the
  children of God_:’ sometimes, a being ‘_strengthened, stablished, and
  settled_;’ or ‘_being rooted and grounded in love_:’ but most commonly
  he calls it, ‘Christian _Perfection_;’ a word which, though used by
  the Apostles in the same sense, cannot be used by him without raising
  the pity or indignation of one half of the religious world: some make
  it the subject of their pious sneers and godly lampoons; while others
  tell you roundly they ‘abhor it above everything in the creation.’

  “4. But this is not all: he holds also general redemption, and its
  necessary consequences, which some account ‘_dreadful heresies_.’ He
  asserts, with St. Paul, that ‘_Christ, by the grace of God, tasted
  death for every man_;’ and this _grace_ he calls ‘_free_,’ as
  extending itself _freely_ to all. Nor can he help expressing his
  surprise at those pious ministers, who maintain that the Saviour keeps
  His grace, as they suppose He kept His blood, from the greatest part
  of mankind, and yet engross to themselves the title of ‘_preachers of
  free grace_.’

  “5. As a consequence of the doctrine of general redemption, Mr. Wesley
  lays down two axioms, of which he never loses sight in his preaching.
  The first is, that ‘_All our salvation is of God in Christ_,’ and
  therefore _of grace_: all opportunities, invitations, inclination, and
  power to believe being bestowed upon us of mere grace,—grace most
  absolutely free. But he proceeds farther; for, secondly, he asserts,
  with equal confidence, that, according to the Gospel dispensation,
  ‘_All our damnation is of ourselves_,’ by our obstinate unbelief and
  avoidable unfaithfulness. He is persuaded the most complete system of
  divinity is that in which neither of those two axioms is superseded:
  it is bold and unscriptural to set up the one at the expense of the
  other.”

These _extracts_ from Fletcher’s first letter are important, as showing
what Fletcher conceived to be Wesley’s fundamental doctrines; and it
must be borne in mind, that, Wesley having read and revised Fletcher’s
manuscript, Fletcher’s conception is stamped with Wesley’s own
authority.

Fletcher proceeds to explain and to defend Wesley’s “Minutes,” and to
show they were greatly needed. He says:—

  “Mr. Wesley’s _design_ was to guard his preachers and their hearers
  against Antinomian principles and practices, which spread like
  wild-fire in some of his Societies; where persons, who spoke in the
  most glorious manner of Christ, and their interest in His complete
  salvation, have been found living in the greatest immoralities, or
  indulging in the most unchristian tempers. Nor need I go far for a
  proof of this sad assertion. In one of his Societies, not many miles
  from my parish, a married man, who professed being in _a state of
  justification and sanctification_, growing wise above what is written,
  despised his brethren as legalists, and his teachers as persons not
  clear in the Gospel. He instilled his principles into a serious young
  woman; and what was the consequence? Why, they talked about ‘finished
  salvation in Christ,’ and ‘the absurdity of perfection in the flesh,’
  till a perfect child was conceived and born; and, to save appearances,
  the woman swore it to a travelling man that cannot be heard of. Thus,
  to avoid legality, they plunged into hypocrisy, fornication, adultery,
  perjury, and the depth of ranterism. Is it not hard that a minister
  should be traduced as guilty of _dreadful heresy_ for trying to put a
  stop to such dreadful practices? And is it not high time that he
  should cry to all that regard his warnings, ‘_Take heed to your
  doctrine_’?”

Fletcher then proceeds to give a deplorable picture of many of the
professing Christians of the age, which, it is to be hoped, was too
darkly drawn, though it is difficult to prove it was. The following
extract shows that many of the Methodists were not better than their
neighbours, and that it was of paramount importance that Wesley’s
preachers should _take heed to their doctrine_:—

  “Mr. Wesley has many persons in his Societies, (and would to God there
  were none in ours!) who profess they were justified or sanctified in a
  moment; but, instead of trusting in the living God, so _trust in what
  was done in that moment_, as to give over taking up their cross
  _daily_, and _watching unto prayer with all perseverance_. The
  consequences are deplorable: they slide back into the spirit of the
  world; and their tempers are no more regulated by the meek, gentle,
  humble love of Jesus. Some inquire with the heathens, _What shall we
  eat, and what shall we drink_ to please ourselves? Others evidently
  _love the world; lay up treasures on earth_; or ask, _Wherewith shall
  we be fashionably clothed?_ Therefore, _the love of the Father is not
  in them_. And not a few are _led captive by the devil at his will_:
  influenced by his unhappy suggestions, they harbour bitterness,
  malice, and revenge: none is in the right but themselves, and ‘wisdom
  shall die with them.’

  “Now, Sir, Mr. Wesley cannot but fear it is not well with persons who
  are in any of these cases: though everybody should join to extol them
  as ‘dear children of God,’ he is persuaded that _Satan has beguiled
  them, as he did Eve_; and he addresses them, as our Lord did the angel
  of the church of Sardis,—‘I know thy works, that thou _hast a name,
  that thou livest; and art dead_,’ or dying: ‘_Repent, therefore, and
  strengthen the things which remain, that are ready to die; for I have
  not found thy works perfect before God._’”

When it is remembered that Fletcher’s manuscript was read and revised by
Wesley, before it was printed, the foregoing description of “_many
persons_” in Wesley’s Societies is possessed of more than ordinary
interest. Only ten years had elapsed since the great revival of
Christian perfection in those Societies, and yet such was the judgment
pronounced by Fletcher, and which Wesley sanctioned!

After explaining and defending all the doctrines contained in Wesley’s
“Minutes,” Fletcher concludes his fourth letter as follows:—

  “Thus, Sir, have I looked out for the _heresy_, the _dreadful heresy_
  of Mr. Wesley’s ‘Minutes,’ by bringing all the propositions they
  contain to the touchstone of Scripture and common sense; but, instead
  of finding it, I have found the very marrow of the Gospel of Christ. I
  have showed that the ‘Minutes’ contain nothing but what is truly
  scriptural; and nothing but what the best Calvinist divines have
  themselves, directly or indirectly, asserted; except, perhaps, the
  sixth proposition concerning the merit of works; and, with respect to
  this, I hope I have demonstrated, upon rational and evangelical
  principles, that Mr. Wesley, far from _bringing in a damnable heresy_,
  has done the Gospel justice, and Protestantism service, by candidly
  giving up an old prejudice, equally contrary to Scripture and good
  sense,—a piece of bigotry which has long hardened the papists against
  the doctrine of salvation by the merit of Christ, and has added
  inconceivable strength to the Antinomian delusion among us.

  “One difficulty remains, and that is, to account for your attacking
  Mr. Wesley, though you could not wound him without stabbing yourself.
  Reserving my reflections upon this amazing step for another letter,

  “I remain your astonished servant in the bonds of a peaceful Gospel,

                                                      “J. FLETCHER.”

As here indicated, the fifth and last letter contained that which most
offended Shirley. In his “Narrative,” Shirley remarks:—

  “Mr. Wesley assured us he had corrected all the _tart_ expressions in
  them” (that is, in Fletcher’s Letters). “Alas! _Qualia verba, quæ
  facta!_ Whether there are _no tart_ expressions in the Letters, let
  every one that hath seen them judge. But, perhaps, this learned
  gentleman distinguishes between the _tart_ and the _bitter_. If all
  the _tart_ expressions are corrected, I am sure there are enough of
  the _bitter_ left.

  “As to the Letters themselves, I shall have ‘the author’s’ pardon for
  noticing two particular charges against me.

  “1. I am supposed to want candour; as if I had put a forced
  construction on the ‘Minutes,’ in order to bring Mr. Wesley in guilty.
  Mr. Fletcher has attempted a ‘vindication’ of them; and, by breaking
  them into sentences and half-sentences, and refining upon each of
  these detached particles, he has done more than I could have expected,
  even from his great abilities, in giving a new turn to the whole. But,
  after reading his learned and elaborate ‘Vindication,’ when I cast my
  eye over the ‘Minutes,’ and consider the whole as it stands in
  context, I must own, I am just where I was: nothing _but the
  ‘Declaration’_ could ever convince me that justification by works was
  not maintained and supported by the ‘Minutes.’

  “2. The charge of _inconsistency_ is supported by quotations from my
  sermons. To this, I beg leave to observe, that the passages quoted are
  not altogether in point; neither do they maintain justification by
  works in such direct and express terms as the ‘Minutes’ appear to do.
  I must, however, own that they savour too strongly of mysticism and
  free-will; and all I can say, on my behalf in this respect, is, that
  they were written many years ago, at a time when I had more zeal than
  light; that my present ministry, as well as my present way of
  thinking, is very different; and that I have frequently expressed my
  disapprobation of those sermons, nay wished they had been burnt.”

Shirley was nettled; and, after the imperious arrogance displayed in his
“Circular Letter,” he deserved to be. Fletcher’s fifth and last letter
is caustical; but not more so than the occasion justified. The following
is extracted from it:—

  “HON. AND REV. SIR,—Having vindicated both some important doctrines of
  the Gospel, and an eminent servant of Christ from the charge of
  _dreadful heresy_, I will now take the liberty of a friend to
  expostulate a little with _you_.

  “When Brutus, among other senators, rushed upon Cæsar, the venerable
  general said, ‘Art thou also among them? Even thou, my son?’ May not
  Mr. Wesley address you, Sir, in the same words, and add, ‘If a body of
  men must be raised to attack me, let some zealous follower of Dr.
  Crisp, some hot-headed vindicator of reprobation and eternal
  justification blow the trumpet, and put himself at their head; but let
  it not be _you_, who believe with me that we are moral agents; that
  God is love; that Jesus tasted death for every man; and that the Holy
  Spirit shall not always strive with sinners. If you do not regard my
  reputation, consider at least your own, and expose me not as a heretic
  for advancing propositions, the substance of which you have avowed
  before the sun.’

  “But had those propositions, at length, appeared to you unsound, yea,
  and had you never maintained them yourself, should you not, as a
  Christian and a brother, have wrote to Mr. Wesley, acquainted him with
  your objections, and desired him to solve them and explain himself, or
  you should be obliged publicly to expose him?

  “Was this condescension more than was due from you, Sir, and our other
  friends, to a grey-headed minister of Christ, an old general in the
  armies of Emmanuel, a father who has children capable of instructing
  even masters in Israel, and one whom God made the first and principal
  instrument of the late revival of internal religion in our Church?

  “Instead of this friendly method, as if you were a Barak, _commanded
  by the Lord God of Israel_, you call _together the children of
  Naphthali and Zebulun_: you convene, from England and Wales, clergy
  and laity, Churchmen and Dissenters, to meet you at Bristol, where
  they are, it seems, to be entertained in good and free quarters. And
  for what grand expedition? Why, on a day appointed, you are to march
  up _in a body_, not to attack Sisera and his iron chariots, but an old
  Caleb, who, without meddling with you, quietly goes on to the conquest
  of Canaan; not to desire, in a friendly manner, after a fair debate of
  every proposition that appears dangerous, and, upon previous
  conviction, that what is exceptionable may be given up; but to do what
  I think was never done by nominal, much less by _real Protestants_. O
  let it not be told in Rome, lest the sons of the Inquisition rejoice!
  This mixed, this formidable body is to _insist upon_ Mr. Wesley and
  the preachers in his connexion, _formally recanting_ their ‘Minutes,’
  as _appearing injurious to the very fundamental principles of
  Christianity_, and being _dreadfully heretical_. And this,
  astonishing! without the least inquiry made into their meaning and
  design, without a shadow of authority from our superiors in Church or
  State, without an appeal _to the law and to the testimony_, without
  form of process, without judge or jury, without so much as allowing
  the poor heretics (who are condemned six weeks before they can
  possibly be heard) to answer for themselves!

  “How could you suppose, Sir, that Mr. Wesley and the preachers who
  assemble with him are such weak men, as tamely to acknowledge
  themselves heretics upon your _ipse dixit_? Suppose Mr. Wesley took it
  in his head to convene all the divines that disapprove the extract of
  Zanchius,[241] to go with him in a body to Mr. Toplady’s chapel, and
  demand a formal recantation of that performance as heretical; yea, to
  insist upon it, before they had ‘measured swords or broken a pike
  together,’ would not the translator of Zanchius laugh at him, and ask
  whether he thought to frighten him by his protests, or bully him into
  orthodoxy?

  “O, Sir, have we not fightings enough without, to employ all our time
  and strength? Must we also declare war and promote fightings within?
  Must we catch at every opportunity to stab one another, because the
  livery of truth which we wear is not turned up in the same manner?
  What can be more cruel than this? What can be more cutting to an old
  minister of Christ, than to be traduced as a dreadful heretic, in
  printed letters sent to the best men in the land, yea, through all
  England and Scotland, and signed by a person of your rank and piety?
  To have things that he knows not, that he never meant, laid to his
  charge, and dispersed far and near? While he is gone to a neighbouring
  kingdom,[242] to preach Jesus Christ, to have his friends prejudiced,
  his foes elevated, and the fruit of his extensive ministry at the
  point of being blasted? Put yourself in his place, Sir, and you will
  see that the wound is deep and reaches the very heart.

  “Our Elijah[243] has lately been translated to heaven. Grey-headed
  Elisha is yet awhile continued upon earth. And shall we make a hurry
  and noise, to bring in railing accusations against him with more
  success? Shall the sons of prophets, shall even _children_ in grace
  and knowledge, openly traduce the venerable seer and his abundant
  labours? When they see him run upon his Lord’s errands, shall they
  cry, not, ‘_Go up, thou bald head_,’ but, ‘_Go up, thou heretic_’? O
  Jesus of Nazareth, Thou rejected of men, Thou Who wast once called a
  deceiver of the people, suffer it not; lest the raging bear of
  persecution come suddenly out of the wood upon those sons of discord,
  and tear them in pieces.”

Footnote 241:

  In 1769, Toplady published “The Doctrine of Absolute Predestination
  Stated and Asserted. Translated, in great measure, from the Latin of
  Jerome Zanchius; with some Account of his Life prefixed.” 8vo. 134 pp.
  An impious production, in the garb of piety.

Footnote 242:

  Wesley was in Ireland from March 24 to July 22, 1771. It was during
  this period that Shirley sent forth his offensive “Circular Letter.”

Footnote 243:

  Whitefield, who died September 30, 1770.

Remembering the confidential and warm friendship that had existed
between Fletcher and the Countess of Huntingdon and her nephew, Walter
Shirley, it must be admitted that these “expostulations” were pungent;
but they were provoked by the arrogance of the offenders. It is true, as
already stated, that, on the evening before Wesley’s Conference
assembled, her ladyship and Shirley wrote letters to Wesley containing
half-hearted apologies for their “arbitrary way of proceeding” in the
“Circular Letter.” “It must be acknowledged,” said Shirley, “that, upon
the whole, the Circular Letter was too hastily drawn up and improperly
expressed; and, therefore, for the _offensive expressions_ in it, we
desire we may be hereby understood to make every suitable submission to
you, Sir, and to the gentlemen of the Conference.”[244] The apology was
proper; but it was not sufficient. The “Circular Letter,” branding
Wesley as a dreadful heretic, had been sent to a large number of
“principal persons, both clergy and laity,” throughout the three
kingdoms; whereas the letters of the Countess and her nephew were
private ones, addressed only to Wesley and his preachers. Moreover, the
apology was accompanied with a threat.

Footnote 244:

  Shirley’s “Narrative.”

  “I cannot but wish,” wrote Shirley, “that the recantation of the
  Circular Letter may prevail as an example for the recantation of the
  ‘Minutes.’ If I should be unhappily disappointed in this respect, I
  shall feel myself bound in conscience to yield my public testimony
  against such doctrines as these, which appear to me subversive of the
  _fundamentals_ of Christianity.”[245]

Footnote 245:

  Shirley’s “Narrative.”

And, once more, the apology, such as it was, was sent too late, for
Fletcher had already written his “Vindication” of Wesley’s “Minutes;”
the manuscript had been sent to Wesley, and Wesley had revised it, and
committed it to the press.

The war was begun, and we must follow it to its termination, _so far as
Fletcher is concerned_; for it is impossible, in a work like this, to
notice _all_ the pamphlets that were published. Those who wish for
further information may turn to the “Life and Times of Wesley.”




                              CHAPTER IX.
                    _SECOND CHECK TO ANTINOMIANISM_

                                 1771.


WESLEY’S “Minutes” and Shirley’s “Circular Letter” created a commotion.
The Rev. Walter Sellon had recently published his “Church of England
Vindicated from the Charge of Absolute Predestination; as it is stated
and asserted by the Translator of Jerome Zanchius” [Toplady] “in his
Letter to the Rev. Dr. Nowell. Together with some Animadversions on his
Translation of Zanchius, his Letter to the Rev. Mr. John Wesley, and his
Sermon on 1 Tim. i. 10.” This not over-courteous publication was
reviewed in the August number of the _Gospel Magazine_ for 1771; and, no
doubt, the review had been read by the gentlemen who proposed to invade
Wesley’s Conference. It began as follows:—

  “A composition of low scurrility and illiberal abuse, for which this
  author and his coadjutors are remarkable. Not one Calvinist who comes
  in his way escapes. He is so much given up to slander and defamation,
  that he can no more refrain from defaming even the dead than from
  slandering the living.”

Its last paragraph was the following; and these two citations will
enable the reader to form an opinion of the whole:—

  “When we meet with erroneous systems set up in opposition to the Word
  of God, we speak our mind freely of them, and aim to show the
  dangerous tendency of them. But no sooner do we touch the cobweb
  system of self-righteous Pharisees, but they cry out, with their
  brethren of old to our Lord, ‘Thou reproachest us also.’ We cannot aim
  to dissect and expose their opinions, but they cry out of slandering
  their persons, and ‘Oh, you have no love to Mr. John!’ God bless Mr.
  John! But who is Mr. John? Is he the standard of truth, the pinnacle
  of orthodoxy, the touchstone by which truth is to be tried and known?
  What is Mr. John? What is Mr. Walter? Men, frail men, and miserable
  sinners like ourselves. All that we say of them is, As men, we love
  them; as miserable sinners, we wish their salvation; as
  fellow-creatures, we would not hurt a hair of their heads; whatever is
  in our power to do them good, we would cheerfully minister unto them.”

In the September number of the same periodical, there was a letter,
signed “Simplex,” and dated “August 3, 1771, From the Neighbourhood of
the Foundery,” as follows:—

  “SIR,—I have just read your last number, and am amazed at the
  Declaration in it, as made by Mr. Wesley and his friends, at the late
  Conference at Bristol. I am amazed at the wisdom of that great man
  that he should devise a Declaration[246] couched in terms so ambiguous
  as to satisfy his opponents, whilst, in reality, it denies not one
  tittle clearly asserted in the ‘Minutes;’ and I am amazed at
  gentlemen, who might have been acquainted with the unfathomable policy
  of that dubious divine, not being more upon their guard than to have
  been put off by such an unmeaning confession.

  “Since the Conference, and, of course, since the making of this
  Declaration, Mr. Fletcher has published a very warm, and not
  ill-written ‘Vindication of the Minutes,’ which, from his intimacy
  with Mr. Wesley, evidently shows that the gentleman in question never
  meant to recant what he had declared in the ‘Minutes’ when he signed
  the Declaration.[247]

  “What can we think of this? You ask, What can we say to this? Why,
  gentlemen, you may say that the fox has had sagacity enough to elude
  his hunters. Or, in other words, that Mr. Wesley is, what I always
  took him to be, a very wise man.

  “Does this tend to clear up the affair? Yes. Taken in its connection
  with Fletcher’s ‘Vindication of the Minutes,’ it very plainly clears
  it up to every man; and shows that however these gentlemen may abhor
  the doctrine of justification by the _merit_ of works, as most
  perilous and abominable, they are determined to abide by the doctrine
  of justification by works as a condition, which is all that is clearly
  expressed in the ‘Minutes.’ If Cranmer and his brethren had drunk half
  as deep into the spirit of Ignatius,” [Loyala!] “they had never been
  brought to the stake for their doctrine; but might even have outwitted
  the eagle-eyed Bishops of London and Winchester.”

Footnote 246:

  This is a calumny. The Declaration was not drawn up by Wesley, but by
  Shirley. “Wesley,” says Shirley, “made some, _not very material_,
  alterations in it.”

Footnote 247:

  Another misrepresentation; for Fletcher’s manuscript was committed to
  the press before the Declaration was signed.

Another communication by “Simplex” must be noticed. Like his former
letter, it was printed in the _Gospel Magazine_. It was dated “From the
Neighbourhood of the Foundery, October 9, 1771,” and was addressed “To
the Rev. Mr. Wesley, Mr. Sellon, Mr. Fletcher, and Mr. Olivers.” The
following are extracts from it:—

  “Mr. Wesley is now an old man, and, according to the course of nature,
  must in a little time have done with a lying world. Let him, like an
  honest man, a Christian, that has heaven in his eye, and a sense of
  the Divine presence upon his heart, tell us plainly whether he really
  thinks that his continuance in the love of God, and the exercise of
  faith, is owing to his own good management, or to the sovereignty and
  freeness of the love of God and agency of the Holy Ghost?”

The _temper_ of this production is painfully displayed in its concluding
paragraph:—

  “Should any reply be made to this letter, and might I be indulged with
  liberty to choose my correspondent, I would most earnestly deprecate
  having anything to do with the Reverend Mr. Walter Sellon, as I am no
  adept in scolding, and am sorry to see the name of a Christian
  minister prefaced to such foul and futile productions as those, of Mr.
  Sellon’s pen. Mr. Fletcher’s pen is indeed more cleanly, but every
  whit as unfair; and him I object to because he is apt to exclaim
  against his opponents as enemies to Christian peace, even when he
  himself does what he can to stab their reputation to the heart. He is
  very apt grievously to complain of ill-usage from others, when, at the
  same time, like a madman, he himself keeps flinging abroad firebrands,
  arrows, and death amongst those who differ from him. Mr. Olivers
  should be my man, if in future he will guard against shocking common
  decency, as he has done in his letter to Mr. Toplady, where he is
  pleased to call Mr. Hervey’s admirable letters to Mr. Wesley
  _scurrilous_: which _indecency_, although borrowed indeed from _Mr.
  Walter Sellon_, must needs have an influence fatal to Master Thomas
  Olivers’ credit as a writer. As to the Rev. Mr. Wesley himself, I do
  not expect that he can spare so much time as to give a satisfactory
  answer to my querulous epistle, as it will require his being more
  explicit than he has hitherto accustomed himself to be.”

Enough has been said to show the bitterness of feeling which had already
sprung up against Fletcher (to say nothing of Wesley, Sellon, and
Olivers), and that it was not surprising he was induced to defend
himself against such infamous attacks as those of “Simplex” and his
Calvinian friends.

Meanwhile, Shirley was passing through the press his “Narrative of the
Principal Circumstances relating to the Rev. Mr. Wesley’s late
Conference, held in Bristol August the 6th, 1771” (8 vo., 24 pp.)
Fletcher refers to this in the following extract from an unpublished
letter addressed to Joseph Benson, and kindly lent by Mr. G. J.
Stevenson:—

                                        “MADELEY, _August 24, 1771_.

  “MY DEAR FRIEND,—How much water may rush out of a little opening! What
  are our dear lady’s jealousies come to? Ah, poor College! They are
  without a master, but not without a mistress. Their conduct and
  charges of heresy stirred me up to write in defence of the ‘Minutes.’
  The pamphlet is gone abroad _unseasonably_ in its present dress. The
  _toga_ would now suit it, but it wears the _chlamys_. By this means,
  the voice of the arguments will be lost in the cry of treachery.

  “I received this morning a most kind letter from Mr. Shirley, whom I
  now pity much. He will pass by me; but I fear Mr. Olivers will have
  some cutting lashes. Mr. Shirley is gone to Wales, probably to consult
  what to do in the present case. What a world! Methinks I dream when I
  reflect that I have written on controversy; the last subject I thought
  I should have meddled with. I expect to be smartly taken in hand and
  soundly drubbed for it. Lord, prepare me for it, and for everything
  that may make me cease from man, and above all from your unworthy
  friend,

                                                       “J. FLETCHER.

  “P.S. My kindest love to Mr. Mather.[248] I hope you are happy in each
  other’s company. May you be both blessed, as being one heart, and one
  soul, and colleagues in Jesus!”

Footnote 248:

  Mr. Mather and Mr. Benson were now stationed in Wesley’s London
  Circuit.

Instead of inflicting on Thomas Olivers what Fletcher calls “some
cutting lashes,” Shirley treated the sturdy Welshman with forbearance;
and if he used severity at all, not Wesley’s itinerant, but the Vicar of
Madeley was his victim.

Fletcher immediately prepared a reply to Shirley’s “Narrative;” and,
before the year was ended, published it, with the title, “A Second Check
to Antinomianism; occasioned by a Late Narrative, in Three Letters to
the Hon. and Rev. Author. By the Vindicator of the Reverend Mr. Wesley’s
Minutes.”  12mo, 120 pp. This “Second Check,” like the former one, was
revised by Wesley,[249] and, therefore, was issued with his approval.

Footnote 249:

  See “The Second Part of the Fifth Check to Antinomianism,” p. 11,
  First Edition.

Fletcher’s first letter to Shirley begins as follows:—

  “In my last private communication, I observed, Rev. Sir, that, if your
  ‘Narrative’ was kind, I would buy a number of copies, and give them
  gratis to the purchasers of my book, that they might see all you can
  possibly produce in your own defence, and do you all the justice your
  proper behaviour at the Conference deserves. But, as it appears to me
  there are some important mistakes in that performance, I neither dare
  recommend it _absolutely_ to my friends, nor wish it, in the religious
  world, the _full_ success you desire.

  “I do not complain of its severity; on the contrary, considering the
  sharpness of my fifth letter, I gratefully acknowledge it is _kinder_
  than I had reason to expect. But permit me to tell you, Sir, I look
  for _justice_ to the scriptural arguments I advance in defence of
  truth, before I look for _kindness_ to my insignificant person, and
  could be much sooner satisfied with the _former_, than with the
  _latter_ alone. As I do not admire the fashionable method of advancing
  general charges without supporting them by particular proofs, I shall
  take the liberty of pointing out some mistakes in your ‘Narrative,’
  and, by that means, endeavour to do justice to Mr. Wesley’s
  ‘Declaration,’ your own ‘Sermons,’ my ‘Vindication,’ and, above all,
  to the cause of practical religion.”

Fletcher then proceeds to quote numerous texts of Scripture in support
of the doctrine of a second justification by works, and argues that it
“will rouse Antinomians out of their carnal security, stir up believers
to follow hard after holiness, and reconcile fatal differences among
Christians, and seeming contradictions in the Scripture.”

In sundry passages he treats the Antinomians with deserved severity;
but, in a long foot-note, observes:—

  “I beg I may not be understood to level the following paragraphs, or
  any part of these letters, at my pious _Calvinist_ brethren. God knows
  how deeply I reverence many, who are immovably fixed in, what some
  call, _the doctrines of grace_; how gladly (as conscious of their
  genuine conversion and eminent usefulness) I would lie in the dust at
  their feet to honour our Lord in His dear members; and how often I
  have thought it a peculiar infelicity to dissent from such excellent
  men, with whom I wanted both to live and die, and with whom I hope
  soon to reign for ever.

  “As these _real_ children of God lament the bad use Antinomians make
  of their principles, I hope they will not be offended if I bear my
  testimony against a growing evil, which they have frequently opposed
  themselves. While the _Calvinists_ guard the _foundation_ against
  _Pharisees_, they will, I hope, allow the _Remonstrants_ to guard the
  _superstructure_ against _Antinomians_. If in doing these good offices
  to the Church, we find ourselves obliged to bear a little hard upon
  the peculiar sentiments of our opposite friends, let us do it in such
  a manner as not to break the bonds of peace and brotherly kindness; so
  shall our honest reproof become matter of useful exercise to that
  _love_ which _thinketh no evil_, _hopeth all things_, _rejoiceth_ even
  _in the_ galling _truth_, and is neither _quenched by many waters_,
  nor damped by any opposition.”

In his second letter, Fletcher protests against Shirley recanting the
doctrines contained in his published sermons, and concludes as follows:—

  “I assure you, Sir, I do not love the warlike dress of the Vindicator,
  any more than David did the heavy armour of Saul. With gladness,
  therefore, I cast it aside to throw myself at your feet, and protest
  to you, that, though I thought it my _duty_ to write to you with the
  utmost _plainness_, _frankness_, and _honesty_, the design of doing it
  with _bitterness_ never entered my heart. However, for every ‘_bitter
  expression_’ that may have dropped from my sharp, vindicating pen, I
  ask you pardon; but it must be _in general_, for neither friends nor
  foes have yet _particularly_ pointed out to me _one_ such expression.

  “You condescend, Rev. Sir, to call me your ‘learned friend.’
  _Learning_ is an accomplishment I never pretended to; but your
  _friendship_ is an honour I shall always highly esteem, and do at this
  time value above my own brother’s love. Appearances are a little
  against me: I feel I am a thorn in your flesh; but I am persuaded it
  is a _necessary_ one, and this persuasion reconciles me to the
  thankless and disagreeable part I act. I can assure you, my dear Sir,
  I love and honour you, as truly as I dislike the rashness of your
  well-meant zeal. The motto I thought myself obliged to follow was, ‘_E
  bello pax_;’ but that which I delight in is, ‘_In bello pax_.’ May we
  make them harmonize till we learn war and polemic divinity no more!

  “If in the meantime we offend our weak brethren, let us do something
  to lessen the offence till it is removed. Let us show them we make war
  without so much as shyness. Should you ever come to the next county,
  as you did last summer, honour me with a line, and I shall gladly wait
  upon you, and show you (if you permit me) the way to my pulpit, where
  I shall think myself highly favoured to see you ‘secure the
  foundation,’ and hear you enforce the doctrine of _justification by
  faith_, which you fear we attack. And should I ever be within thirty
  miles of the city where you reside, I shall go to submit myself to
  you, and beg leave to assist you in reading prayers for you, or giving
  the cup with you. Thus shall we convince the world how controversy may
  be conscientiously carried on without interruption of brotherly love;
  and I shall have the peculiar pleasure of testifying to you in person
  how sincerely I am,

                        “Honoured and dear Sir,
    “Your submissive and obedient servant, in the bond of a
       _practical_
  Gospel,
                                           “J. FLETCHER.”

The third letter, to a large extent, is historical, and shows, with
terrific faithfulness, that not a few of the so-called evangelical
ministers and churches of a hundred years ago were far from what they
should have been, and that Wesley’s “Minutes” and Fletcher’s “Checks”
were greatly needed. Fletcher writes:—

  “For some years, I have suspected there is more imaginary than
  _unfeigned faith_ in most of those who pass for believers. With a
  mixture of indignation and grief, have I seen them carelessly follow
  the stream of corrupt nature, against which they should have manfully
  wrestled. When they should have exclaimed against their
  _Antinomianism_, I have heard them cry out against the _legality_ of
  their wicked hearts; which, they said, still suggested they were to
  _do something_ in order to salvation. Glad was I, therefore, when I
  had attentively considered Mr. Wesley’s ‘Minutes,’ to find they were
  levelled at the very errors, which gave rise to an evil I had long
  lamented in secret, but had wanted courage to resist and attack.”

  “Do not imagine, Rev. Sir, I cry up God’s law, to drown the late cries
  of _heresy_ and _apostacy_. I appeal to matter of fact and to your own
  observations. Consider the religious world, and say if ‘Antinomianism’
  is not, in general, a motto better adapted to the state of professing
  congregations, societies, families, and individuals, than ‘_Holiness
  unto the Lord_.’

  “Begin with _congregations_, and cast your eyes upon the _hearers_. In
  general, they have curious ‘_itching ears_,’ and ‘_will not endure
  sound doctrine_.’ They say they ‘will have nothing but Christ;’ and
  who could blame them if they would have Christ in all His offices?
  Christ, with all His parables and sermons, cautions and precepts,
  reproofs and expostulations, exhortations and threatenings? Who would
  find fault with them, if they would have Christ with His poverty and
  self-denial, His reproach and cross, His spirit and graces, His
  prophets and apostles, His plain apparel and mean followers? But,
  alas! it is not so. They will have _what_ they please of Christ, and
  that too _as_ they please. They admire Him in one chapter, and know
  not what to make of Him in another. If He asserts His authority as a
  Lawgiver, they are ready to treat Him with as little ceremony as they
  do Moses. If He says, ‘_Keep my commandments, I am a King_;’ like the
  Jews of old, they rise against the awful declaration; or they _crown
  Him_ as a _surety_, the better to ‘_set Him at nought_’ as a
  _monarch_. If He adds to His ministers, ‘Go, and teach all nations _to
  observe all things_ whatsoever I have _commanded_ you;’ they complain,
  ‘This is _the law_; give us _the gospel_, we can relish nothing but
  the gospel.’”

  “Hence it is that some preachers must choose comfortable subjects to
  please their hearers; just as those, who make an entertainment for
  nice persons, are obliged to study what will suit their difficult
  taste. A multitude of important Scriptures can be produced, on which
  no minister, who is unwilling to lose his reputation as an evangelical
  preacher, must dare to speak in some pulpits, unless it is to explain
  away or enervate their meaning.”

  “Whence springs this almost general Antinomianism of our
  congregations? Shall I conceal the sore because it festers in my own
  breast? Shall I be partial? No! In the name of Him who is no respecter
  of persons, I will confess my sin, and that of many of my brethren.
  Though I am the least and the most unworthy of them all, I will follow
  the dictates of my conscience, and use the authority of a minister of
  Christ.

  “Is not the Antinomianism of hearers fomented by that of preachers?
  Does it not become us to take the greatest part of the blame upon
  ourselves, according to the old adage, ‘Like priest, like people’? Is
  it surprising that some of us should have an Antinomian audience? Do
  we not make or keep it so? When did we preach such a practical sermon
  as that of our Lord on the mount, or write such close letters as the
  epistles of St. John? Alas! I doubt it is but seldom. Not living so
  near to God ourselves as we should, we are afraid to come near the
  consciences of our people. Some prefer popularity to plain-dealing. We
  love to see a crowd of worldly-minded hearers, rather than a ‘_little
  flock_,’ ‘_a peculiar people, zealous of good works_.’ Luther’s advice
  to Melancthon, ‘So preach that those who do not fall out of love with
  their sins, may fall out with thee,’ is more and more unfashionable.
  Under pretence of drawing our hearers by love, some of us softly rock
  the cradle of carnal security in which they sleep. The old Puritans
  strongly insisted upon _personal holiness_, and the first Methodists
  upon the _new birth_; but these doctrines seem to grow out of date.
  The Gospel is cast into another mould. People, it seems, may now be
  ‘_in Christ_’ without being ‘_new creatures_,’ or new creatures
  without casting ‘_old things_’ away. They may be God’s children
  without God’s image; and be ‘_born of the Spirit_’ without ‘_the
  fruits of the Spirit_.’ If our unregenerate hearers get orthodox ideas
  about the way of salvation in their heads, evangelical phrases
  concerning Jesus’ love in their mouths, and a warm zeal for our party
  and favourite forms in their hearts, without any more ado, we help
  them to rank themselves among the children of God. But, alas! this
  self-adoption into the family of Christ will no more pass in heaven,
  than self-imputation of Christ’s righteousness.”

  “How few of our celebrated pulpits are there where more has not been
  said, _at times_, for sin than against it! With what an air of
  positiveness and assurance has that Barabbas, that murderer of Christ
  and souls, been pleaded for! ‘It will humble us, make us watchful,
  stir up our diligence, quicken our graces, endear Christ.’ That is, in
  plain English, pride will beget humility, sloth will spur us on to
  diligence, rust will brighten our armour, and unbelief, the very soul
  of every sinful temper, is to do the work of faith! Jesus, who
  cleansed the lepers with a word or a touch, cannot, with all the force
  of His Spirit, and virtue of His blood, expel the leprosy of sin; it
  is too inveterate. Death, that foul monster, the offspring of sin,
  shall have the important honour of killing his father. This is
  confidently asserted by those who cry, ‘Nothing but Christ!’ They
  allow Him to lop off the branches; but Death, the great Saviour Death,
  is to destroy the root of sin. In the meantime, _the temple of God_
  shall _have agreement with idols_, and _Christ concord with Belial:
  the Lamb of God shall lie down with the roaring Lion in our heart_.”

  “To speak the melancholy truth, how few individuals are free from
  practical Antinomianism! Setting aside their attendance on the
  ministry of the Word, where is the material difference between several
  of our genteel believers and other people? Do not we see the sumptuous
  furniture in their apartments, and fashionable elegance in their
  dress? What sums of money do they frequently lay out in costly
  superfluities to adorn their persons, houses, and gardens! In our
  fashionable churches and chapels, you may find people professing to
  believe the Bible, who so conform to this present world as to wear
  gold, pearls, and precious stones, when no distinction of office or
  state obliges them to it, in direct opposition to the words of two
  Apostles, St. Peter and St. Paul. Multitudes of professors, far from
  being convinced of their sin in this respect, ridicule Mr. Wesley for
  bearing his testimony against it. The opposition he dares to make to
  that growing branch of vanity affords matter of pious mirth to a
  thousand Antinomians. Isaiah could openly reprove the _haughty
  daughters of Zion_, who _walked with stretched forth necks, wanton
  eyes, and tinkling feet_: he could expose _the bravery of their
  fashionable ornaments, their round tires like the moon, their chains,
  bracelets, head-bands, rings and ear-rings_; but some of our humble
  Christian ladies will not bear a reproof from Mr. Wesley on the head
  of dress. They even laugh at him as a _pitiful legalist_, and yet, oh,
  the inconsistency of the Antinomian spirit! they call Isaiah the
  _evangelical prophet_!

  “Finery is often attended with an expensive table, at least with such
  delicacies as our purse can reach. St. Paul _kept his body under_, and
  was _in fastings often_; and our Lord gives us directions about the
  proper manner of _fasting_. But the apostle did not _know_ the easy
  way to heaven taught by Dr. Crisp; and our Lord did not _approve_ of
  it, or He would have saved Himself the trouble of His directions. In
  general, we look upon fasting much as we do upon penitential
  flagellation. Both equally raise our pity; we leave them both to
  popish devotees. Some of our good old Church people will yet fast on
  Good Friday: but our fashionable believers begin to cast away that
  last scrap of self-denial. Their faith, which should produce, animate,
  and regulate works of mortification, goes a shorter way to work; it
  explodes them all.”

Fletcher continues to write in the same strain, through many succeeding
pages; but one more extract must suffice.

  “If _these shall go into eternal punishment_; if such will be the end
  of all the impenitent Nicolaitans; if our churches and chapels swarm
  with them; if they crowd our communion tables; if they are found in
  most of our houses, and too many of our pulpits; if the seeds of their
  fatal disorder are in all our breasts; if they produce Antinomianism
  around us in all its forms; if we see bold Antinomians in _principle_,
  bare-faced Antinomians in _practice_, and sly _pharisaical
  Antinomians_,[250] who speak well of the law, to break it with greater
  advantage,—should not every one _examine himself whether he is in the
  faith_, and whether he has a _holy Christ_ in his heart, as well as a
  _sweet Jesus_ upon his tongue; lest he should one day swell the tribe
  of Antinomian reprobates? Does it not become every minister of Christ
  to drop his prejudices, and consider whether he ought not to imitate
  the old watchman, who, fifteen months ago, gave a _legal alarm_ to all
  the watchmen that are in connexion with him? And should we not do the
  Church excellent service, if, agreeing to lift up our voices against
  the common enemy, we gave God no rest in prayer, and our hearers in
  preaching, till we all _did our first works_, and _our latter end_,
  like Job’s, _exceeded our beginning_?

  “Near forty years ago, some of the ministers of Christ, in our Church,
  were called out of the extreme of self-righteousness. Flying from it,
  we have run into the opposite, with equal violence. Now that we have
  learned wisdom by what we have suffered in going beyond the limits of
  truth both ways, let us return to a just scriptural medium. Let us
  equally maintain the two evangelical axioms on which the Gospel is
  founded: 1. ‘All our salvation is of God, by free grace, through the
  alone merits of Christ.’ And, 2. ‘All our damnation is of ourselves,
  through our avoidable unfaithfulness.’”

Footnote 250:

  It may be well to say, once for all, that all these quotations, with
  their _differences of type_, are taken from the _first editions_ of
  Fletcher’s publications. The differences are not preserved in recent
  editions.

Fletcher’s pictures are dark: I incline to _think_ a little too dark,
though I cannot _prove_ they are. At all events, were existing facts
such as he states them to have been, it was high time to sound an alarm
in Zion.

In a postscript to his “Three Letters,” Fletcher refers to a pamphlet
published by Richard Hill, Esq., respecting a conversation which he and
others had held with a monk in Paris.[251] Having quoted Mr. Hill’s
remark, that, according to the monk, “Popery is about the mid-way
between Protestantism and Mr. J. Wesley,” Fletcher proceeds to say:—

  “We desire to be confronted with all the pious Protestant divines.
  But, who would believe it? the suffrage of a papist is brought against
  us! Astonishing! that our opposers should think it worth their while
  to raise one recruit against us in the immense city of Paris, where
  fifty thousand might be raised against the Bible itself!

  “So long as Christ, the prophets, and apostles are for us, together
  with the multitude of the Puritan divines of the last century, we
  shall smile at an army of Popish friars. The knotted whips, that hang
  by their side, will no more frighten us from our Bibles, than the
  _ipse dixit_ of a Benedictine monk will make us explode, as heretical,
  propositions which are demonstrated to be scriptural.

  “I hope the gentlemen concerned in the ‘Conversation,’ lately
  published, will excuse the liberty of this postscript. I reverence
  their piety, rejoice in their labours, and honour their warm zeal for
  the Protestant cause; but that very zeal, if not accompanied with a
  close attention to every part of the Gospel truth, may betray them
  into mistakes, which may spread as far as their respectable names. I
  think it therefore my duty to publish these strictures, lest any of my
  readers should pay more regard to the good-natured friar, who has been
  pressed into the service of Dr. Crisp, than to St. John, St. Paul, St.
  James, and Jesus Christ, on whose plain declarations I have shown that
  the ‘Minutes’” (of Mr. Wesley) “are founded.”

Footnote 251:

  Its title was “A Conversation between Richard Hill, Esq., the Rev. Mr.
  Madan, and Father Walsh, Superior of a Convent of Benedictine Monks at
  Paris, held at the same Convent, July 13, 1771, in the presence of
  Thomas Powis, Esq., and others, relative to some Doctrinal Minutes
  advanced by the Rev. Mr. John Wesley and others, at a Conference held
  in London, August 7, 1770. To which are added some Remarks by the
  Editor.” Fletcher’s name is not mentioned in the pamphlet; but because
  he chose to refer to it in his “Second Check to Antinomianism,” it is
  here introduced to the reader’s notice. Hereafter, in order to avoid,
  as far as possible, a repetition of the history of the Calvinian
  controversy, as published in the “Life and Times of Wesley,” no
  publications on the subject will be discussed, except those in which
  Fletcher was attacked, or which he answered.—L. T.

So ends all that need be said here concerning Fletcher’s “Second Check
to Antinomianism.” To appreciate its style, its temper, and its
arguments, the reader must peruse it for himself; and, by doing so, his
mind will be enriched, and his soul profited.

An extract from one of Fletcher’s letters may fitly close this section
of his biography. The letter was addressed to the Rev. Joseph Benson,
and was dated “December 5, 1771.”

  “There is undoubtedly such a thing as the _full assurance of faith_.
  Be not discouraged on account of thousands, who stop short of it. It
  is our own fault if we do not attain it. God would give us ample
  satisfaction if we did but deeply feel our wants. Both you and I want
  a deeper awakening, which will produce a death to outward things and
  speculative knowledge. Let us shut our eyes to the gilded clouds
  without us: let us draw inward, and search after God, if haply we may
  find Him. Let us hold fast our confidence, though we are often
  constrained against hope, to believe in hope. But let us not rest in
  our confidence, as thousands do; let it help us to struggle and wait,
  till He come. Let us habituate ourselves to live inwardly. This will
  solemnize us, and prevent our trifling with the things of God. We may
  be thankful for what we have without resting in it. We may strive, and
  yet not trust in our striving; but expect all from Divine grace.”[252]

Footnote 252:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

In such a frame of mind and heart Fletcher carried on his polemic
warfare.




                               CHAPTER X.
                   “_THIRD CHECK TO ANTINOMIANISM._”

                                 1772.


WHEN Fletcher finished his “Second Check to Antinomianism,” in “Three
Letters” to Walter Shirley, he began a “Vindication of the Doctrine of
Christian Perfection.” This, however, for a time, was laid aside; but
was afterwards completed, and embodied in his “Last Check to
Antinomianism.” The reason for this postponement was a somewhat sudden
determination to write upon the Unitarian Controversy, which was now as
prominent as the Calvinian one. A brief biographical episode will
explain the matter more fully.

Edward Elwall was born at Sedgley, in Staffordshire. He settled in
business at Wolverhampton, where he acquired the reputation of great
integrity in his dealings. He had not enjoyed the advantages of a
learned education, but he possessed a serious and inquisitive turn of
mind, and had good natural abilities. One of his first publications was
intended to prove that the fourth commandment, appointing the _seventh_
day of the week to be observed as the Sabbath, was binding on all
generations. As long as he continued in business, he constantly shut up
his shop on that day, and as regularly opened it on the succeeding one.
For this he was called a Jew. About the year 1714, he became
distinguished as an Unitarian, and published, “A true Testimony for God
and His sacred Law, being a Defence of the first Commandment of God,
against all Trinitarians under Heaven.” This drew on him the resentment
of the neighbouring clergy, who procured an indictment against him for
heresy and blasphemy, on which he was tried at Stafford Assizes. He
pleaded his own cause, and was acquitted. After this, he removed to
London, and became a member of the Seventh-day Baptist Church at
Mill-yard, Goodman’s Fields. Towards the end of life, he attended the
meetings of the Quakers, and was sometimes permitted to speak at them.
He died in London, at an advanced age, about the year 1745.

Elwall’s work “against all Trinitarians under Heaven” had recently been
re-published, and Fletcher was requested to answer it. Hence the
following, hitherto unpublished, letter, addressed to “the Rev. Walter
Sellon, at Ledsham, near Ferry-Bridge, Yorkshire.”

                                        “MADELEY, _January 7, 1772_.

  “MY DEAR FRIEND,—I thank you for yours. I hope Glazebrook[253] will be
  more moderate, on account of some rubs which his new Calvinistic zeal
  has procured him.

  “My reason for troubling you soon with an answer is to make a request.
  I have laid by my Third ——[254], which is a vindication of the
  doctrine of Christian perfection. A pamphlet (the third edition) has
  lately been published at Birmingham, and meets with great success. The
  author is E. Elwall, a Socinian Quaker, who was tried for blasphemy at
  Stafford, and came off with flying colours, after fully denying the
  Godhead of Christ, and His atonement.

  “Some serious people have desired me to answer the book. As I suppose
  your _Dr. Preese_[255]” (sic) “is one of his stamp, I want to see by
  your candle as well as my own. Could you send me, by the post, what
  you have published against him? By cutting the margin close, you might
  bring it to a tolerable size for a packet; and I should not grudge
  paying the postage. If you cannot do this, send me, at least, your
  best answer to the objection taken from John xvii. 3, and to the words
  ‘_only God_,’ which seem to exclude Jesus Christ.

  “We must fight the Antinomians while the Calvinists put weapons into
  their hands against the truth. Mr. Hill has taken Mr. Wesley in hand
  very roughly. I have been with him. His answer to my ‘Vindication’ is
  expected every day, and is out, I suppose, in London. God give us
  wisdom! Set your razor against Mason, for what we mean as keenness
  (which is allowable) is directly construed as bitterness.

  “When you send the packet, put upon the direction, ‘_Not by London,
  but by + Post Bag, Manchester and Salop_,’ or else they will make me
  pay double.

  “I preach much, and see little fruit. The Holy Ghost is not given
  among us. These are hard times. God help us to more gospel and life,
  but not my lady’s gospel!

                                       “I am yours in a hurry,
                                                      “J. FLETCHER.”

Footnote 253:

  The poor collier whom Fletcher so greatly befriended at Madeley, and
  who was one of the first students at Trevecca, in 1768.

Footnote 254:

  The words are illegible, but, no doubt, his “Third Check to
  Antinomianism” is meant.

Footnote 255:

  Probably meant for the celebrated Dr. Price, of whom more will have to
  be said anon.

Not to mention other matters referred to in this letter, there can be no
doubt that Fletcher now began to write his Anti-Socinian Treatises; but,
as will be seen hereafter, he never finished them. Other things, even
more pressing, claimed his attention, and he was obliged to postpone his
attack on the citadel of _religious infidelity_.

“I long to be out of controversy,” said Fletcher to Joseph Benson, in a
letter dated February 1772,[256] and yet he continued it. He could not
help himself. To say nothing of the duty he owed to Christ and Gospel
truth, it was impossible, at present, to retire from the field of
conflict without exposing himself to the taunt of recreant timidity.
Besides, though his opponents had been vanquished, they would, in that
case, have appeared victorious. No doubt, also, he was encouraged to
proceed by his bespattered but beloved friend Wesley. In a letter to
Lady Maxwell, Wesley wrote:—

                                        “LONDON, _February 8, 1772_.

  “MY DEAR LADY,—I commend you for meddling with points of controversy
  as little as possible. It is abundantly easier to lose our love in
  that rough field, than to find truth. This consideration has made me
  exceedingly thankful to God for giving me a respite from polemical
  labours. I am glad He has given to others both the power and the will
  to answer them that trouble me; so that I may not always be forced to
  hold my weapons in one hand, while I am building with the other. I
  rejoice, likewise, not only in the abilities, but in the temper, of
  Mr. Fletcher. He writes as he lives. I cannot say that I know such
  another clergyman in England or Ireland. He is all fire, but it is the
  fire of love. His writings, like his constant conversation, breathe
  nothing else, to those who read him with an impartial eye. And,
  although Mr. Shirley scruples not to charge him with using subtilty
  and metaphysical distinctions, yet he abundantly clears himself of
  this charge, in the ‘Second Check to Antinomianism.’ Such the last
  letters are styled, and with great propriety; for such they have
  really been. They have given a considerable check to those who were
  everywhere making void the law through faith; setting ‘the
  righteousness of Christ’ in opposition to the law of Christ, and
  teaching that without holiness any man may see the Lord.”[257]

Footnote 256:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

Footnote 257:

  Wesley’s Works, vol. xii., p. 326.

All, however, were not of Wesley’s opinion. In Ireland, Walter Shirley
was a great favourite among the Methodists, for there he had preached
with much success. Fletcher’s first and second “Checks” were addressed
to Shirley; and the Irish Methodists, who, as yet, had neither heard nor
seen their author, were divided in their sentiments respecting them. The
Dublin Society wrote two letters to him, in answer to which he sent them
the following:—

  “To the Methodist Society at Dublin.

                                            “MADELEY, _March, 1772_.

  “MY DEAR BRETHREN,—Mercy and love be multiplied unto you, from Him who
  was and is to come, the Almighty!

  “I should have acknowledged before now the favour of the two letters
  with which you honoured me, if I had not conveyed my thanks to you
  immediately by means of brother Morgan.[258] But thanks at second-hand
  do not satisfy my gratitude; permit me, therefore, to present them, if
  not in person, at least by some grateful lines personally written.

  “I am much obliged to those of you who approve my little attempt to
  vindicate practical religion and the character of an eminent servant
  of Christ, who ministered unto you in holy things, and whom some of
  our mistaken friends in England exposed as the author of dreadful
  heresy. The thanks which some of you unexpectedly bestowed upon me on
  that occasion, I have laid at the feet of Jesus, to whom all praise
  belongs, who is the author of every good gift, and from whom comes all
  the help done upon the earth.

  “When I took up my pen, I aimed at discharging my duty towards God and
  His misapprehended truth; towards my honoured father in Christ, Mr.
  Wesley, and his misunderstood ‘Minutes’; and though all the world
  should have blamed me, they would never have robbed me of the
  satisfaction of having at least attempted to clear my conscience.

  “The manner in which part of you have refused me their thanks, is too
  civil and brotherly not to deserve mine. I wish many of our English
  brethren had been as moderate as you in their disapprobation of my
  letters to the Rev. Mr. Shirley. You will see in a ‘Second Check to
  Antinomianism’ some things that may reconcile you to the first; and I
  have just sent to the press a ‘Third Check,’ to what appears to me the
  favourite delusion of the Church; which I trust will cast more light
  on the delicate subject about which we divide.

  “If we cannot see things in the same light, I hope we never shall, I
  beg we never may, disagree in love.

  “I am glad you agreed to disagree about the giving or refusing me your
  undeserved thanks. Let every little rub of opposition heighten our
  love; every little clashing of sentiment make the heavenly spark show
  itself, and kindle our souls into that charity which hopeth all
  things, endureth all things, thinketh no evil, and is not provoked.

  “If I have been obliged to bear a little hardly upon my dear honoured
  brother, Mr. Shirley, I beg that nothing I have written to him on
  account of his precipitancy, rashness, or hurry, may prevent you from
  looking upon him with the love and respect due to a minister of
  Christ. Recommending him and myself to your prayers, and taking the
  liberty to recommend to you mutual forbearance, a daily increase of
  brotherly love, and a continual growth in the genuine liberty of the
  Gospel, I remain, my dear brethren, your obliged, affectionate, and
  obedient brother and servant,

                                               “JOHN FLETCHER.”[259]

Footnote 258:

  One of Wesley’s itinerant preachers, well-read and popular, but now
  enervated, and settled in Dublin.

Footnote 259:

  “Thirteen Original Letters written by the Rev. J. Fletcher.” Bath,
  1791, p. 22.

It has been already stated that at the commencement of the year 1772,
Fletcher was writing his “Vindication of the Doctrine of Christian
Perfection;” and that this was laid aside for the purpose of writing
against Socinianism. Very soon, however, he had to devote his attention
to another subject. In the foregoing letter, dated “March, 1772,” he
tells the Methodist Society at Dublin that he had sent his “Third Check
to Antinomianism” to the press; and this is confirmed by the following
extract from a letter by Wesley to his brother Charles:—

                                      “BIRMINGHAM, _March 17, 1772_.

  “I am to-day to meet Mr. Fletcher at Billbrook. Part of the ‘Third
  Check’ is printing; the rest I have ready. In this he draws the sword
  and throws away the scabbard. Yet, I doubt not, they will forgive him
  all, if he will but promise to write no more.”[260]

Footnote 260:

  Wesley’s Works, vol. xii., p. 128.

Fletcher’s parochial duties were heavy, and yet he seems to have written
his “Third Check to Antinomianism” in about a month. It must have been a
strain to accomplish this. The work is no flimsy production, but is full
of Scriptural arguments, which could not be framed, arranged, and
adequately expressed without a vast amount of labour; and the book
itself was of no mean size, consisting, as it did, of one hundred and
fourteen small typed and closely printed pages. The following was its
title: “A Third Check to Antinomianism; in a Letter to the Author of
“Pietas Oxoniensis:” By the Vindicator of the Rev. Mr. Wesley’s Minutes.
‘Reprove, rebuke, exhort, with all long-suffering and _Scriptural_
doctrine; for the time will come when they will not endure sound
doctrine,’ 2 Tim. iv. 2, 3. ‘_Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they
may be sound in the faith_; but _let brotherly love continue_,’ Tit. i.
13, Heb. xiii. 1. Bristol: Printed by W. Pine in Wine Street, 1772.”

Why was it written and published? Fletcher had replied to the “Circular
Letter” and the “Narrative” of Shirley, and in doing so had vindicated
Wesley’s “Minutes.” Shirley was now silent, but other antagonists
started up. A small 8vo. pamphlet was published, with the title “A
Letter to the Rev. Mr. Fletcher, of Madeley, on the Differences
subsisting between him and the Hon. and Rev. Mr. Shirley.” The author
subscribed himself “An enemy to no man, but a friend to religion;” and
his letter was dated “Bath, February 3, 1772.” This religious gentleman
alleged that, under the existing circumstances, the publication of
Fletcher’s answer to Shirley’s “Circular Letter” “was highly censurable,
yea, criminal.” He accused Fletcher of “wantonly scattering firebrands,
arrows, and death;” his defence of Wesley’s “Minutes” was “flimsy;” and
he was actuated by “personal envy or enmity more than by a love to
Christ and a godly zeal to promote truth.” Fletcher, properly enough,
declined to notice the virulent and frothy pamphlet of this Bath
religionist; but another publication, issued about the same time,
demanded his attention. Its author was his friend and neighbour, Richard
Hill, Esq., and its title as follows: “Five Letters to the Reverend Mr.
F——r, relative to his Vindication of the Minutes of the Reverend Mr.
John Wesley. Intended chiefly for the comfort of mourning backsliders,
and such as may have been distressed and perplexed by reading Mr.
Wesley’s Minutes, or the Vindication of them. By a Friend.  London:
1772.” 8vo., 40 pp.[261]

Footnote 261:

  A second edition, “revised and much enlarged,” was published about the
  same time as Fletcher’s “Third Check.” The first edition consisted of
  forty pages, the second of fifty-two. There is nothing of importance,
  however, in the second issue which is not in the first, except a few
  acrid references to Wesley. The following may be taken as a specimen:
  “I shall make no remarks upon the poor, loose, flimsy manner in which
  the ‘Minutes’ are worded; but I cannot help observing that it seems
  almost impossible for Mr. Wesley to write a page without contradicting
  himself” (p. 50).

Mr. Hill’s first letter is dated “December 2, 1771.”[262] His pamphlet
is remarkable for two things—_only two_:—First, the highest Christian
urbanity towards Fletcher; and secondly, the writer’s curious theology.
A few extracts from Mr. Hill’s letters will suffice to show that
Fletcher’s task of answering his courteous opponent was not a difficult
undertaking.

Footnote 262:

  In the second edition it is dated “Feb., 1772.”

  “God alone knows the sorrow of heart wherewith I address you; and how
  much the fear of casting stumbling-blocks before some who are really
  sincere, and the apprehensions of giving malicious joy to others who
  desire no greater satisfaction than to see the children of the Prince
  of Peace divided among themselves, had well-nigh prevailed upon me to
  pour out my soul in silence instead of publicly taking up the pen
  against you. But when I perceived the solicitude with which Mr.
  Wesley’s preachers recommended your letters to Mr. Shirley in their
  respective congregations, and, above all, how many of God’s people had
  been perplexed and distressed by reading them,—I say, when I perceived
  this to be the case, and had prayed to the Giver of all wisdom for
  direction, I could not but esteem it my indispensable duty to send out
  a few observations on your book, especially as no other person, that I
  know of, had made any reply to the doctrinal parts of it from the time
  of its publication. With regard to the ‘_Circular Letter_,’ I shall
  studiously avoid the very mention of it; as whether the sending of it
  were in itself a wrong step or a right one, is of no consequence in
  the matter of salvation. Neither shall I follow you page by page, but
  taking the ’Minutes’ in the order they stand, shall dwell upon them,
  more or less, as appears necessary.”

The plan here propounded is carried out, but want of space renders it
impossible to give an outline of Mr. Hill’s theology. The following
quotations must be taken as specimens of others which might be given:—

  “Your argument is this; that, ‘_believing is previous to
  justification_.’ But, dear Sir, this is begging the question; and,
  permit me to say, that I deny the assertion. Waving all disputes
  concerning eternal justification, or justification in the mind and
  purpose of God, I maintain, that, believing cannot possibly be
  previous to justification; and you must yourself maintain the same,
  unless you will adopt the phrase of _an unjustified believer_; whereas
  the Holy Ghost teaches that _all who believe are justified_. We may as
  well suppose that a man eats before he takes any food, and that he
  sees before he receives the light of the sun, as that he believes
  before he is justified: for believing, and feeding upon Christ, are
  not more inseparably connected than eating and taking bodily food, or
  than seeing and receiving light are inseparably connected. Yea, true
  faith can no more subsist without its object Christ, than there can be
  a marriage without a husband. From hence, I conclude, that the
  doctrine of believing before justification, and thereby making the
  grace of faith a conditional work, is not less contrary to reason than
  it is to Scripture itself.”

  “I most sincerely abhor the Minute, ‘that we are every hour and every
  moment pleasing or displeasing to God, according to our works;
  according to the whole of our inward tempers, and our outward
  behaviour;’ and, yet, I equally abhor the assertion, ‘that David did
  not _displease_ God more when he committed adultery with Bathsheba,
  and imbrued his hands in her husband’s blood, than when he danced
  before the ark.’ I know, from Scripture authority, that when David
  committed the sin you allude to, the thing which he had done
  _displeased the Lord_. But, though I believe that David’s _sin_
  displeased the Lord, must I therefore believe that David’s _person_
  came under the curse of the law? and that, because he was ungrateful,
  God, whose gifts and callings are without repentance, was unfaithful?
  Surely no. David was still a son, though a perverse one. Like
  backsliding Ephraim, he was still a pleasant child, though he went on
  frowardly.”

  “Either Christ has fulfilled the whole law, and borne the curse, or He
  has not. If He has not, no soul can ever be saved; if He has, then all
  debts and claims against His people, be they more or be they less, be
  they small or be they great, be they before or be they after
  conversion, are for ever and for ever cancelled. All trespasses are
  forgiven them. They are justified from all things. They already have
  everlasting life. They are now (virtually) sat down in heavenly places
  with Christ their Forerunner; and as soon shall Satan pluck His crown
  from His head, as His purchase from His hand.”

Such were some of the absurd and pernicious doctrines propounded by Mr.
Hill, and which Fletcher felt it his duty to refute. Towards Wesley,
there is, in Mr. Hill’s pamphlet, an occasional stroke of bitterness,
as, for instance, where he asserts that “there is a much nearer
resemblance between the doctrines of Mr. John Wesley and mother Church”,
(Popery) “than the popish Superior chose to acknowledge;”[263] but
towards Fletcher, Mr. Hill, throughout, displays the most respectful
kindness, and concludes his fifth and last letter thus:—

  “And now, dear Sir, I cannot conclude these letters without expressing
  my earnest desire that the contents of them may never cause any
  decrease of love and Christian fellowship between us. Pardon then, my
  dear Sir, I ardently beseech you, O pardon all that you have found
  amiss in the unworthy author of these epistles; and much, I am sure,
  your charity will have to overlook. If we cannot see things alike now,
  I hope the time is not far off when we shall be thoroughly united in
  sentiment, as well as in heart, and each of us, casting our crowns
  before the throne, shall join our voices in that one harmonious song
  of praise, with which the regions of bliss shall echo without
  intermission, and without end, ‘Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to
  receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and
  glory, and blessing.’ ‘Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be
  unto Him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb, for ever and
  ever.’

  “In the meanwhile, let me acknowledge before the world that there is
  not a man living to whom I am more indebted for repeated instances of
  affection, and labours of love, than I am to dear Mr. Fletcher; and,
  therefore, notwithstanding all differences of judgment between us, I
  trust he will always give me leave to subscribe myself his most
  affectionate friend and brother, in the bonds of the Gospel of peace,

                                “The Author of _Pietas Oxoniensis_.”

Footnote 263:

  The reference here is to Father Walsh, the Benedictine monk at Paris;
  and, it may be added, that, in a foot-note, Mr. Hill acknowledges
  himself to have been the author of the “Conversation” with that
  gentleman, recently published.

This was worthy of Mr. Hill, who, eleven years afterwards, succeeded to
the title and estates of his father, and became Sir Richard Hill, Bart.

Though Mr. Hill’s _first_ letter to Fletcher was dated as recently as
December 2, 1771, the whole _five_ were published, and Fletcher’s answer
to them committed to the press as early as the month of March,[264]
1772. Fletcher begins his “Third Check to Antinomianism” as follows:—

  “HONOURED AND DEAR SIR,—Accept my sincere thanks for the Christian
  courtesy with which you treat me in your five letters.

  “Some of our friends will undoubtedly blame us for not yet dropping
  the contest; but others will candidly consider that controversy,
  though not desirable in itself, yet properly managed, has, a hundred
  times, rescued truth, groaning under the lash of triumphant error. We
  are indebted to our Lord’s controversies with the Pharisees and
  Scribes for a considerable part of the four Gospels; and, to the end
  of the world, the Church will bless God for the spirited manner in
  which St. Paul, in his Epistles to the Romans and Galatians, defended
  the controverted point of a believer’s present justification by faith;
  as well as for the steadiness with which St. James, St. John, St.
  Peter, and St. Jude carried on their important controversy with the
  Nicolaitans, who abased St. Paul’s doctrine to Antinomian purposes.

  “Had it not been for controversy, Romish priests would, to this day,
  feed us with Latin masses and a wafer-god. Some bold propositions,
  advanced by Luther against the doctrine of indulgences, unexpectedly
  brought on the Reformation. They were so irrationally attacked by the
  infatuated papists, and so scripturally defended by the resolute
  Protestants, that these kingdoms opened their eyes, and saw thousands
  of images and errors fall before the ark of evangelical truth.

  “From what I have advanced in my _Second Check_, it appears, if I am
  not mistaken, that we stand now as much in need of a reformation from
  Antinomianism, as our ancestors did of a reformation from Popery; and
  I am not without hope that the extraordinary attack which has been
  made upon Mr. Wesley’s anti-Crispian propositions, and the manner in
  which they are defended, will open the eyes of many, and check the
  rapid progress of so enchanting and pernicious an evil. This hope
  inspires me with fresh courage; and, turning from the Hon. and Rev.
  Mr. Shirley, I presume to face (I trust in the spirit of love and
  meekness) my new respectable opponent.”

Footnote 264:

  The date, at the end of the Third Check, is “Madeley, February 3,
  1772.”

Fletcher’s first purpose, in this important controversy, was to attack
Antinomianism; now he was obliged to attack Calvinism, which, though the
parent of Antinomianism, did not in the present instance approve of it.
It is needless to recapitulate Fletcher’s arguments in favour of the two
doctrines, that all mankind are redeemed by the infinite sacrifice of
the incarnate Son of God, and that, through the same sacrifice, “_the_
manifestation of the Spirit is given to _every man_ to profit withal” (1
Cor. xii. 7). A few brief extracts, however, will help to illustrate his
spirit, and his style of writing.

  “The grace of God is as _the wind_, which _bloweth where it listeth_;
  and _it listeth_ to blow, with more or less force successively, all
  over the earth. You can as soon meet with a man that never felt the
  wind, or _heard the sound thereof_, as with one that never felt the
  Divine breathings, or heard _the still small voice_, which we call the
  grace of God. To suppose the Lord gives us a thousand tokens of _His
  eternal power and Godhead_, without giving us a capacity to consider,
  and grace to improve them, is not less absurd than to imagine that
  when He bestowed upon Adam all the trees of paradise for food, He gave
  him no eyes to see, no hands to gather, and no mouth to eat their
  delicious fruits.”

  “Waiving the case of infants, idiots, and those who have _sinned the
  sin unto death_, was there ever a sinner under no obligation to repent
  and to believe in a merciful God? Oh, ye opposers of _free grace_,
  search the universe with Calvin’s candle, and among your reprobated
  millions, find out the person who never had a merciful God; and show
  us the unfortunate creature, whom a sovereign God bound over to
  absolute despair of His mercy from the womb. If there is no such
  person in the world; if all men are bound to repent and to believe in
  a merciful God, there is an end of Calvinism. An unprejudiced man can
  require no stronger proof that all are redeemed from the curse of the
  Adamic law, which admitted of no repentance; and that the covenant of
  grace, which admits of, and makes provision for it, freely extends to
  all mankind.

  “_Out of Christ’s fulness all have received grace_, a _little leaven_
  of saving power, an inward monitor, a divine reprover, a ray of _true_
  heavenly _light_, which manifests first moral, and then spiritual good
  and evil. St. John _bears witness of that light_, and declares _it
  was_ the spiritual _life of man_, the true light _which enlighteneth_
  not only _every man_ that comes into the Church, but _every man that
  comes into the world_—without excepting those who are yet _in
  darkness. For the light shineth in darkness_, even when _the darkness
  comprehends it not_. The Baptist also bore _witness of that light,
  that all men through it_, not through him, _might believe_; φως,
  _light_, being the last antecedent, and agreeing perfectly with δι’
  αυτου.”

The reader has already seen Mr. Hill’s strange and pernicious doctrine
respecting eternal justification. Fletcher treats this Calvinistic dream
with terrible though polite severity. Without attempting to condense his
arguments, the following extract will serve to show his perfect victory
over his respected opponent:—

  “You go on, ‘If Christ fulfilled the whole law and bore the curse,
  then all debts and claims against His people, be they more or be they
  less, be they small or be they great, be they before or be they after
  conversion, are for ever and for ever cancelled.’

  “Your doctrine drags after it all the absurdities of eternal, absolute
  justification. It sets aside the use of repentance and faith, in order
  to pardon and acceptance. It represents the sins of the elect as
  forgiven not only before they are confessed, but even before they are
  committed. It supposes that all the penitents who have believed that
  they were once _children of wrath_, and that God was displeased at
  them when they lived in sin, have believed a lie. It makes the
  preaching of the Gospel one of the most absurd, wicked, and barbarous
  things in the world. For what can be more absurd than to say, ‘Repent
  ye, and believe the Gospel;’ ‘He that believeth not shall be damned;’
  if a certain number can _never repent or believe_, and a certain
  number can _never_ be damned?”

In concluding his Treatise, Fletcher remarks:—

  “If I have addressed my _Three Checks_ to the Rev. Mr. Shirley and
  yourself” (Mr. Richard Hill), “God is my witness it was not to reflect
  upon two of the most eminent characters in the circle of my religious
  acquaintance. Forcible circumstances have over-ruled my inclinations.
  _Decipimur specie recti._ Thinking to attack error, you have attacked
  the very truth which Providence calls me to defend: and the attack
  appears to me so much the more dangerous as your laborious zeal and
  eminent piety are more worthy of public regard, than the boisterous
  rant and loose insinuations of twenty _practical_ Antinomians. The
  tempter is not so great a novice in anti-Christian politics as to
  engage only _such_ to plead for _doctrinal_ Antinomianism. This would
  soon spoil the trade. It is his masterpiece of wisdom to get _good
  men_ to do him that eminent service. He knows that their _good_ lives
  will make way for their _bad_ principles. Nor does he ever deceive
  with more decency and success than under the respectable cloak of
  their genuine piety.

  “If a wicked man pleads for sin, _foenun habet in cornu_, he carries
  the mark on his forehead; we stand upon our guard. But when a good man
  gives us to understand that _there are no lengths God’s people may not
  run, nor any depths they may not fall into_, without losing _the
  character of men after God’s own heart_, that _many will praise God
  for_ our _denial of Christ_, that _sin and corruption work for good_,
  that _a fall into adultery will drive us nearer to Christ_, and _make
  us sing louder to the praise of free grace_; when he quotes Scripture
  too, in order to support these assertions, calling them the pure
  Gospel, and representing the opposite doctrine as the Pelagian heresy,
  worse than popery itself,—he _casts the_ Antinomian _net on the right
  side of the ship_, and is likely to enclose a great multitude of
  unwary men; especially if some of the _best_ hands in the kingdom
  drive the frighted shoal into the net, and help to drag it to shore.

  “This is, honoured Sir, what you have done, not designedly, but
  thinking to do God service. Hence the steadiness with which I have
  looked in the face a man of God, whose feet I should be glad to wash
  at any time, under a lively sense of my great inferiority. I beg you
  not to consider the unceremonious plainness of a Swiss mountaineer as
  the sarcastic insolence of an incorrigible Arminian.

  “By a mistake, fashionable among religious people, you have unhappily
  paid more regard to Dr. Crisp than to St. James. And, as you have
  pleaded the dangerous cause of the impenitent monarch, I have
  addressed you with the honest boldness of the expostulating prophet. I
  have said to my honoured opponent, ‘_Thou art the man!_’

  “I owe much respect to you, but more to truth, to conscience, and to
  God. If, in trying to discharge my duty towards them, I have
  inadvertently betrayed any want of respect to you, I humbly ask your
  pardon; and I can assure you, in the face of the whole world, that
  notwithstanding your strong attachment to the peculiarities of Dr.
  Crisp, as there is no family in the world to which I am under greater
  obligations than yours, so there are few gentlemen for whom I have so
  peculiar an esteem, as for the respectable author of _Pietas
  Oxoniensis_.”

  “Before I lay down my pen,” says Fletcher, in a “Postscript,” “I beg
  leave to address, a moment, the _true_ believers who espouse Calvin’s
  sentiments. Think not, honoured brethren, that I have no eyes to see
  the eminent services which many of you render to the Church of Christ;
  no heart to bless God for the Christian graces which shine in your
  exemplary conduct; no pen to testify, that, by letting your light
  shine before men, you adorn the Gospel of God our Saviour, as many of
  your predecessors have done before you. I am not only persuaded that
  your opinions are consistent with a genuine conversion but I take
  heaven to witness how much I prefer a Calvinist who loves God to a
  Remonstrant who does not. If I have, therefore, taken the liberty of
  exposing your favourite mistakes, do me the justice to believe that it
  was not to pour contempt upon your respectable persons; but to set
  your peculiarities in such a light as might either engage you to
  renounce them, or check the forwardness with which some have lately
  recommended them as the only _doctrines of grace_, and the _pure
  Gospel_ of Jesus Christ; unkindly representing their remonstrant
  brethren as enemies to free grace, and abettors of a dreadful heresy.

  “And you, my remonstrant brethren, permit me to offer you some
  seasonable advices. 1. More than ever, let us confirm our love to our
  Calvinist brethren. If our arguments gall them, let us not envenom the
  sore by maliciously triumphing over them. Nothing is more likely to
  provoke their displeasure, and drive them from what we believe to be
  the truth. 2. Do not rejoice in the _mistakes_ of our opponents, but
  in the _detection_ of error. Desire not that _we_, but that _truth_
  may prevail. Let us not only be willing that our brethren should win
  the day if they have _truth_ on their side; but let us make it matter
  of solemn, earnest, and constant prayer. 3. Let us strictly observe
  the rules of decency and kindness, taking care not to treat any of our
  opponents in the same manner that they have treated Mr. Wesley. The
  men of the world sometimes hint that he is a papist, and a Jesuit; but
  good, mistaken men have gone much farther in the present controversy.
  They have published to the world, that they _verily believe his
  principles are too rotten for even a papist to rest upon_; that he
  _wades through the quagmires of Pelagianism_, deals in
  _inconsistencies, manifest contradictions, and strange
  prevarications_; that if _a contrast were drawn from his various
  assertions upon the doctrine of sinless perfection, a little piece
  might extend into a folio volume_; and that they are _more than ever
  convinced of his prevaricating disposition_. Not satisfied with going
  to a Benedictine monk, in Paris, for help against his _dreadful
  heresy_, they have wittily extracted an argument, _ad hominem_, from
  _the comfortable dish of tea he drinks with Mrs. Wesley_; and, to
  complete the demonstration of their respect for that grey-headed,
  laborious minister of Christ, they have brought him upon the stage of
  controversy in a dress of their own contriving, and made him declare
  to the world, that, _whenever he and fifty-three of his
  fellow-labourers say one thing, they mean quite another_. And what has
  he done to deserve this usage at _their_ hands? Which of _them_ has he
  treated unjustly or unkindly? Even in the course of this controversy,
  has he injured any man? May he not say to this hour, _Tu pugnas; ego
  vapulo tantum_? Let us avoid this warmth, my brethren; remembering
  that personal reflections will never pass for convincing arguments
  with the judicious and humane.

  “I have endeavoured to follow this advice with regard to Dr. Crisp;
  nevertheless, lest you should rank him with _practical_ Antinomians, I
  once more gladly protest my belief that he was a _good_ man; and
  desire that none of you would condemn _all_ his sermons, much less his
  _character_, on account of his unguarded antinomian propositions.

  “4. If you would help us to remove the prejudices of our brethren, not
  only grant with a good grace, but strongly insist upon the great
  truths for which they make so noble a stand. Steadily assert, with
  them, that the scraps of morality and formality, by which Pharisees
  and deists pretend to merit the Divine favour, are only _filthy rags_
  in the sight of a holy God; and that no righteousness is current in
  heaven but the _righteousness which is of God by faith_. If they have
  set their hearts upon calling it _the imputed righteousness of
  Christ_, though the expression is not strictly scriptural, let it
  pass; but give them to understand, that as _Divine_ imputation of
  righteousness is a most glorious _reality_, so human imputation is a
  most delusive _dream_; and that of this sort is undoubtedly the
  _Calvinian imputation_ of righteousness to a man, who actually defiles
  his neighbour’s bed, and betrays innocent blood. A dangerous
  contrivance this! not less subversive of common heathenish morality,
  than of St. James’s _pure and undefiled religion_.

  “Again, our Calvinist brethren excel in setting forth a _part_ of
  Christ’s priestly office; I mean the immaculate purity of His most
  holy life, and the all-atoning, all-meritorious sacrifice of His
  bloody death. Here imitate, and, if possible, surpass them. Shout a
  _finished atonement_ louder than they. If they call this complete
  atonement _finished salvation_, or _the finished work of Christ_,
  indulge them still: for peace’s sake, let those expressions pass;
  nevertheless, at proper times, give them to understand that it is
  absolutely contrary to reason, Scripture, and Christian experience to
  think that _all_ Christ’s mediatorial work is _finished_. Insinuate
  you should be very miserable if He had nothing more to do _for_ you
  and _in_ you. Tell them, as they can bear it, that He works _daily_ as
  a _Prophet_ to enlighten you; as a _Priest_ to make intercession for
  you; as a _King_ to subdue your enemies; as a _Redeemer_ to deliver
  you out of all your troubles; and as a _Saviour_ to help you to work
  out your own salvation; and hint that, in all these respects, Christ’s
  work is no more finished than the working of our own salvation is
  completed.

  “The judicious will understand you; as for bigots, they are proof
  against Scripture and good sense. Nevertheless, mild irony, sharply
  pointing a scriptural argument, may yet pass between the joints of
  their impenetrable armour, and make them feel either some shame, or
  some weariness of contention. But this is a dangerous method, which I
  would recommend to very few. None should dip his pen in the wine of
  irony, till he has dipped it in the oil of love; and even then, he
  should not use it without constant prayer, and as much caution as a
  surgeon lances an impostume. If he goes too deep, he does mischief; if
  not deep enough, he loses his time; the virulent humour is not
  discharged, but irritated by the skin-deep operation. And ‘who is
  sufficient for these things?’ Gracious God of wisdom and love! if Thou
  callest us to this difficult and thankless office, let all our
  sufficiency be of Thee! and should the operation succeed, Thine and
  Thine alone shall be all the glory.”

Such advices were Christian and opportune. No doubt, they were meant for
men like Thomas Olivers and Walter Sellon. Wesley, in a tract of twelve
pages, had, in 1770, attacked Toplady’s “Abridgement of Zanchius on
Predestination.” Toplady, in the same year, had replied to this, in a
most bitter and scurrilous “Letter to the Rev. Mr. John Wesley.” Not
having leisure for this kind of work, Wesley had requested Olivers to
answer Toplady. Olivers, in 1771, had published his “Letter to the
Reverend Mr. Toplady” (12mo, 60 pp.), and had treated Toplady with an
amount of well-deserved tartness, which quite justified Fletcher in
giving the above advice.

Then, again, Walter Sellon, in the same year, 1771, had published his
“Church of England Vindicated from the Charge of Absolute
Predestination, as is stated and asserted by the Translator of Jerome
Zanchius, in his Letter to the Rev. Dr. Nowell. Together with Some
Animadversions on his Translation of Zanchius, his Letter to the Rev.
Mr. John Wesley, and his Sermon on 1 Tim. i. 10.”  12mo, 129 pp. In his
small country parish, Ledsham, in Yorkshire, Sellon had dealt Toplady’s
predestination theory heavy blows; and, it must be added, he had not
been sparing in virulence. He began with telling the abusive vicar of
Broad Hembury, “I shall deal plainly with you; more plainly, perhaps,
than you might _desire_; yet not so plainly as you might _justly
expect_. I would not say a word _barely_ to enrage you; and yet, I doubt
not, but I shall _enrage_ you, because there is no coping with such
writers as you, without speaking a little in your own manner; and I have
always observed, those that are most prone to _give_ offence are also
most prone to _take_ it.” Sellon fulfilled his threatening promise, and
concluded: “Excuse my plainness, Sir, if I tell you farther, you seem
much to stand in need of learning the lesson dictated by Solon of
Athens, ‘_Know thyself_;’ and of praying heartily that prayer prescribed
by our Church, ‘_From all blindness of heart; from pride, vainglory, and
hypocrisy; from envy, hatred, and malice, and all uncharitableness,—Good
Lord, deliver us!_’”

Fletcher, in this irritating controversy, never lost his temper. Some of
his coadjutors and opponents did; and hence the Christian and needed
cautions and advices at the end of his “Third Check to Antinomianism.”




                              CHAPTER XI.
                   “_FOURTH CHECK TO ANTINOMIANISM._”

                                 1772.


THE issue of Fletcher’s “Third Check” was immediately followed by “A
Review of all the Doctrines taught by the Rev. Mr. John Wesley;
containing a full and particular Answer to a Book entitled, ‘A Second
Check to Antinomianism. In Six Letters, to the Author of that Book.
Wherein the Doctrines of a Twofold Justification, Free-Will, Man’s
Merit, Sinless Perfection, Finished Salvation, and Real Antinomianism
are particularly discussed; and the Puritan Divines vindicated from the
Charges brought against them of holding Mr. Wesley’s Doctrines.’ To
which is added ‘A Farrago.’   London, 1772.” 8vo, 151 pp. The letters
are all signed “The Author of P.O.,” meaning, of course, Richard Hill.

Almost at the same time that the book, with this ponderous title, was
published, Mr. Richard Hill committed to the press an 8vo tract of
sixteen pages, entitled, “Some Remarks on a Pamphlet, entitled, A Third
Check to Antinomianism. By the Author of ‘_Pietas Oxoniensis_.’”

Of the second of these publications nothing need be said. Considerable
bitterness towards Wesley is displayed, and a modicum of severity
towards Fletcher; but, perhaps, not more than might be naturally
expected; for men dislike to be vanquished.

His first and much larger pamphlet, containing, besides the “Farrago,”
“Six Letters” addressed to Fletcher, must have more attention. The
“Letters” relate, not to the “_Third_,” but the “Second Check” of
Fletcher, and were published only a few days before the appearance of
the “Remarks” just noticed. Mr. Hill thus commences his first letter:—

  “REVEREND SIR,—After many debates with myself, and much solicitation
  from my friends, you now hear from me again on your _Second Check to
  Antinomianism_. I make no other apology for writing, than that I think
  there is an absolute necessity an answer should be given to it. But,
  whilst I make my animadversions on your letters, may the Divine Author
  of love and meekness preserve me from the unhappy spirit in which they
  are written! Oh, my dear Sir, I never could have supposed that sneer,
  banter, and sarcasm, yea notorious falsehood, calumny, and gross
  perversions, would have appeared before the world under the sanction
  of your venerable name.”

In making such accusations, Mr. Hill ought to have known he was himself
guilty of “notorious falsehood and calumny;” but he was angry, and anger
is always blindfolding.

Mr. Hill next proceeds to denounce Wesley’s “doctrine of _a second
justification by works_;” and asserts that “it has no existence in the
Word of God, nor in any Protestant Church under heaven;” but that, in
this matter, “Mr. Wesley and Mr. Fletcher have the whole Council of
Trent on their side.”

With considerable ability, but with great bitterness and even reviling,
especially so far as Wesley is concerned, Mr. Hill endeavours to refute
Fletcher’s arguments in support of the doctrine just named, and then
remarks:—

  “I intended to have made several other extracts from your first
  letter; but as I really cannot find many lines together free from
  gross misrepresentations and perversions, and hardly one single
  paragraph exempt from cutting sneers and low sarcasms, I confess I
  have not patience to transcribe them; especially when I consider that
  they are addressed to one” (Walter Shirley) “who, notwithstanding your
  former unkind behaviour, hath treated you with all the politeness of a
  gentleman, and the humility of a Christian.”

This was an ebullition of bad temper. The charges are untrue, and the
spirit is unchristian. Fletcher employed irony, but, as all candid
readers of his Checks must acknowledge, it was always polite and
decorous. None but irritated men, like Mr. Hill, can find “low
sarcasms;” and as for “gross misrepresentations and perversions,” they
have no existence.

In his Second Letter, Mr. Hill takes up the doctrine of free-will, and
pronounces Fletcher’s statements, in support of the free agency of man,
to be “as totally void of solid scriptural argument, as they are replete
with calumny, gross perversions, and equivocations.”

In his Third Letter, Mr. Hill discusses what he is pleased to call
_Sinless_ Perfection,—a doctrine which neither Wesley nor Fletcher ever
taught. _Christian_ Perfection[265] they enforced and defended; but
_Sinless_ Perfection, using the word in its strict and literal sense,
was not a dogma of theirs, but a verbal invention, adopted from
Whitefield and others, by Mr. Hill and his angry friends, who desired to
make their opponents the target of ridicule and scorn.

Footnote 265:

  The reader who wishes to know what is meant by this is strongly
  recommended to read Wesley’s invaluable treatise, entitled, “A Plain
  Account of Christian Perfection;” his equally important and scriptural
  sermon on “Christian Perfection,” and his other irrefutable sermons on
  the same subject.

Mr. Hill begins with several revolting anecdotes respecting people who
professed themselves to be _perfect_ Christians,—stories which probably
were true; but stories concerning _perfect_ fanatics whom Wesley and
Fletcher would have condemned as strongly as Mr. Hill. His Letter
terminates with a series of the same sort of nauseous anecdotes. In a
certain sense, it is smart, and Mr. Hill thought it so; for, in
concluding it, he remarks:—

  “Now, my dear Sir, I have given you a little in your own way; but,
  notwithstanding you have set me the example in this manner of writing,
  I shall be glad to set you the example of mutual forgiveness. By
  cutting and slashing, we shall never convince each other of our
  errors; and the end of our controversy will be, that the world will
  laugh at you for taking the sword of banter, the shield of perversion,
  the helmet of prejudice, and the breastplate of acrimony, in order to
  fight for the doctrine of sinless perfection; and I myself shall be
  laughed at, in my turn, for losing so much precious time in answering
  you.”

Mr. Hill’s fourth letter is a brief one, and is devoted to what he calls
Fletcher’s “heavy bombs of bitter sneer and cutting sarcasm,” hurled at
the doctrine of “_the finished salvation of Christ_.”

The fifth and sixth letters, and also the postscript, are not
theological, but simply abusive. Fletcher is said to “have traduced all
the most celebrated ministers of the Gospel” of that day; and to have
“thrown stumbling-blocks into the way of thousands.” A “wretched spirit
of low sarcasm and slanderous banter runs throughout” his whole
writings. Wesley and Fletcher had “adopted a scheme of religion gathered
out of Pelagianism, Semi-Pelagianism, Arminianism, Popery, Mysticism,
and Quakerism.”

The “Farrago of Hot and Cold Medicines, by the Rev. Mr. John Wesley,
extracted from his own Publications,” is, of course, principally
levelled against Wesley. The spirit of it may be gathered from an
extract from Bishop Hall, on the title-page of Mr. Hill’s ill-natured
pamphlet:—

  “I would I knew where to find you; then I could take a direct aim.
  Whereas now I must rove and conjecture. To-day you are in the tents of
  the Romanists; to-morrow, in ours; next day, between both, against
  both. Our adversaries think you ours, we theirs; your conscience finds
  you with both and neither. I flatter you not; this of yours is the
  worst of all tempers. _Will you be a church alone?_ Alas! how full are
  you of contradictions to yourself! How full of contrary purposes! How
  oft do you chide with yourself? How oft do you fight with yourself?”

Of course, all this was provoking. Had Fletcher been of a much less
combative disposition than he really was, it would have been impossible
for him, as a man of honesty and honour, to lay aside his pen. Mr.
Hill’s accusations were serious ones, involving Fletcher’s moral
character; and a reply to them was imperative. But, before Fletcher’s
“Fourth Check to Antinomianism” is introduced to the reader’s notice,
another publication, which preceded it, must be mentioned. This was
entitled “Friendly Remarks occasioned by the Spirit and Doctrines
contained in the Rev. Mr. Fletcher’s Vindication, and more particularly
in his Second Check to Antinomianism, to which is added a postscript,
occasioned by his Third Check. In a letter to the Author, by
***********.   A.M. London: 1772.” 8vo. 71 pp. The letter is dated,
“London, July 4, 1772,” and the asterisks stand for the name of Rowland
Hill, Mr. Richard Hill’s impulsive and eccentric brother, who had taken
his degree at Cambridge, had been refused orders by half-a-dozen
bishops, and was now nearly twenty-seven years of age. Berridge and
Whitefield had been his friends, and even Wesley had approved of his
preaching among his Societies.[266] At present, he was in London,
discoursing to immense congregations in Whitefield’s two Metropolitan
Chapels, and was resident in the Tabernacle House, in Moorfields.[267]
There, no doubt, the pamphlet was written, which must now be noticed.

He begins with a reference to his extensive preaching tours; and states
that he was frequently invited to preach in the meeting-houses of
Wesley’s Societies, and that this occasioned him considerable
perplexity, for to preach against Wesley’s “sentiments in his own
congregations would be unfair.” He continues:—

  “And yet, when I consider how many excellent Christians are contained
  in Mr. Wesley’s Societies, whom I love as my own soul, and to whom I
  have frequently given promises of my assistance and labours, how will
  it grieve me to be constrained to withdraw from them, whom I so much
  honour and respect.”

Rowland Hill proceeds to say, that “hitherto he had declined having the
least share in the late contentions.” He was at Bristol in 1771, when
Mr. Shirley and his friends invaded Wesley’s Conference, but he refused
to join them, and left the city, for, he remarks, “Peace I love, but
controversy I hate.” He continues:—

  “Upon my return to Bristol, I saw your first publication.[268] As I
  dearly loved your character, I read it with great prejudice in your
  favour; but still, the _tartness_ of the style, as well as the bad
  doctrine it contained, concerned me; but, as I plainly perceived your
  intention was to make the ‘_Minutes_’ speak as much Gospel as
  possible, though I was sorry for the performance, I felt a loving pity
  for the author. About the same time, I called upon Mr. Wesley, then in
  Bristol, and, in strong terms, expressed to him my concern about his
  ‘_Minutes_.’ He told me that he looked upon the whole of them as
  truth, and that he should vindicate them as such.

  “Still my determination was to appear in no open separation from Mr.
  Wesley; hoping that time would soften the edge of the dispute, and
  restore calmness and composure among contending parties; but your
  _second_ publication[269] compels me to believe that to be neutral any
  longer will be criminal. You have now done sufficient to darken every
  gleam of hope of future tranquillity, by publishing _such_ doctrine,
  and in _such_ a spirit, as has kindled no small flame in the religious
  world.”

Footnote 266:

  Sidney’s “Life of Rowland Hill,” p. 56.

Footnote 267:

  _Ibid_, p. 70.

Footnote 268:

  The “Vindication” of Wesley’s Minutes.

Footnote 269:

  “Second Check to Antinomianism, in Three Letters,” to Mr. Shirley.

No doubt Rowland Hill was perfectly sincere when he said he hated
controversy, and loved peace; and yet, such is the tendency of polemical
writing, Rowland Hill and his brother Richard became the principal
fomentors of this controversial warfare.

Having given what he calls “a simple narration of facts,” Mr. Rowland
Hill proceeds to say:—

  “I will now make some strictures principally upon your last
  performance. This I pray God I may be enabled to do with meekness and
  judgment. I know there is no _argument_ in _banter_, nor _conclusion_
  in _sarcasm_, nor _divinity_ in a _sneer_: such weapons I wish totally
  to discard; they are _pitiful_ even for the world, but they are
  _scandalous_ when used by a Christian. I hate such feeble aids, and
  will scorn to use them; they would defile my soul, and stab the cause
  I mean to maintain. The meek and dove-like disposition of Christ, I
  humbly hope will teach me, while I write, to _pity_, not to _abuse_,
  the mistaken; and meekly to deliver my sentiments, without having
  recourse to the _low arts_ of _slander_ and _reflection_.”

Rowland Hill had good intentions; but whether he fulfilled them will be
seen in the succeeding extracts.

  “After having first dressed up Mr. Shirley according to your own
  fancy, and branded him with the opprobrious _name_ of _Antinomian_,
  you place him at the head of a set of monsters invented by yourself;
  and, after having thus raised a hideous and unthought-of ghost, you
  remand it to the shades by your own spells and incantations of
  _banter_ and _contempt_.”

  “After having said so much as to place us in a manner even amongst
  _murderers_, on account of our principles of grace, it really shocks
  and almost disheartens me from following you any further. I will,
  therefore, now omit reminding you of the numberless _sneers_,
  _taunts_, and _sarcasms_, which so dreadfully decorate the whole of
  your performance; they are nothing better than the infernal _terms of
  darkness_; it is _hateful_ to transcribe them; _let darkness be their
  doom_.”

  “Consider in what detestable colours you have pictured us before the
  world. There is scarce an abomination but what we are charged with;
  and our enemies triumph at the supposed discovery. You are the man,
  they say, that has been among the _Calvinists_, has found out their
  hypocrisy, and are now publishing against them. Numbers of them, to my
  knowledge, carry about your book in ill-natured triumph, and cast in
  our teeth, as certain truth, the _dreadful slanders_ you have
  _invented_. In short, Sir, you have brought over us such a day of
  _blasphemy_ and _rebuke_ as we never felt before.”

  “Our characters now lie bleeding before you; we smart severely under
  the cruelty of your pen; and complain loudly against your great
  injustice. You have given us up to be trampled upon by the world, who,
  from your _pretended_ discoveries, looks upon us all as hypocrites
  detected under the mask of religion. If you think us in error, for
  Christ’s sake, _sneer_ at us no more; though it may be _sport_ to you,
  it is, in a manner, _death_ to us. Learn the more Christian lesson to
  pity us, and pray for us, and try to set us right in love.”

Rowland Hill, no doubt, intended to avoid in his pamphlet “_the low art
of slander_;” but he failed in carrying out his purpose. Any one who has
read, with candour, Fletcher’s first and second Checks to Antinomianism,
must admit that Mr. Hill’s accusations are unfounded. Where had Fletcher
slandered Rowland Hill, or any of his Calvinistic friends? It is true
that he had treated some of the _doctrines_ of the Calvinists with
“_banter_” and with “_sarcasm_;” but his Calvinian friends, against
whose tenets he had written, had, uniformly, been treated with
respectful affection. Impetuous Rowland improperly applied Fletcher’s
“_banter_” and “_sarcasm_,” not to _doctrines_, as Fletcher had
intended, but to the _men_ who held them, himself and his godly friends
included; a thing from which Fletcher’s loving soul revolted.

The remainder of Rowland Hill’s “Friendly Remarks” chiefly consists of
animadversions, intended to show “the glaring inconsistencies and
palpable mistakes” of Fletcher, in the doctrines he had defended and
enforced. It would be an almost endless task to dwell upon the
theological criticisms of Fletcher and his opponents. As might be
expected, Rowland Hill, in attacking Fletcher’s tenets, is often smart;
and, it must be added, often bitter.

A reply to the pamphlets of Richard Hill and his brother Rowland became
a necessity. Fletcher could not remain silent under such unfounded and
undeserved imputations. Hence, though weary of the warfare, he at once
resumed his pen, and began to prepare his “Fourth Check to
Antinomianism.” The postscript of Rowland Hill’s “Friendly Remarks,”
dated “July 4, 1772,” states that the “Third Check” had just “made its
appearance.” The fourth was published before the year was ended, and
bore the title of “Logica Genevensis; or, a Fourth Check to
Antinomianism, in which St. James’s Pure Religion is defended against
the Charges, and established upon the Concessions of Mr. Richard and Mr.
Rowland Hill. In a Series of Letters to those Gentlemen, by the
Vindicator of the Minutes. Bristol: Printed by William Pine,
1772.”  12mo. 245 pp.  The letters are thirteen in number, and all of
them are addressed to Mr. Richard Hill, except the ninth, which is
addressed “to Mr. Rowland Hill,” and the tenth and eleventh written to
the two brothers conjointly. The thirteenth, and last, is dated,
“Madeley, Nov. 15, 1772.”[270]

Footnote 270:

  The semi-infidel _Monthly Review_, which could hardly exist without
  sneering at evangelical religion, remarked concerning this Fourth
  Check to Antinomianism:—

  “Mr. Fletcher continues to push the Calvinists with unremitting
  vigour. He here encounters two formidable adversaries at once. The
  veteran Wesley, who now, perhaps, thinks it time to retire from the
  well-fought field, is fortunate in having so zealous an auxiliary.”
  (_Monthly Review_, 1773, p. 240.)

Meanwhile, Wesley published “Some Remarks on Mr. Hill’s Review of all
the Doctrines taught by Mr. John Wesley.” This is not the place to
analyse Wesley’s 12mo. pamphlet of 54 pages, but the following extract
from it may be acceptable:—

  “With regard to Mr. Hill’s objections to Mr. Fletcher, I refer all
  candid men to his own writings—his letters, entitled a ‘First, Second,
  and Third Check to Antinomianism;’ the rather, because there are very
  few of his arguments which Mr. Hill even _attempts_ to answer. ’Tis
  true he promises ‘a full and particular answer to Mr. Fletcher’s
  “Second Check to Antinomianism”;’ but it will puzzle any one to find
  where that answer is except in the title-page. And if anything more is
  needful to be done, Mr. Fletcher is still able to answer for himself.
  But if he does, I would recommend to his consideration the advice
  formerly given by a wise man to his friend, ‘See that you humble not
  yourself to that man; it would hurt both him and the cause of God.’
  ’Tis pity but he had considered it sooner, and he might have escaped
  some keen reflections. But he did not. He imagined when he spoke or
  wrote in the simplicity of his heart, that his opponents would have
  received his words in the same spirit wherein they were spoken; but
  they turn them all into poison. He not only _loses his sweet words_,
  but they are turned into bitterness—are interpreted as mere _sneer_
  and _sarcasm_! A good lesson for _me_. I had designed to have
  transcribed Mr. Fletcher’s character of Mr. Hill, and to have added a
  little thereto, in hope of softening his spirit. But I see it is in
  vain; as well might one hope to soften

                   ‘Inexorable Pluto, king of shades.’

  Since he is capable of putting such a construction even upon Mr.
  Fletcher’s gentleness and mildness; since he ascribes even to him ‘a
  pen dipped in gall,’ what will he not ascribe to _me_? I have done
  therefore with humbling myself to these men—to Mr. Hill and his
  associates. I have humbled myself to them for these thirty years, but
  will do it no more. I have done with attempting to soften their
  spirits; it is all lost labour” (pp. 3, 4).

Having come to such a determination, it need not be added that Wesley’s
pamphlet was one of the most trenchant he ever published.

Wesley was in Shropshire in the month of August, and probably had an
interview with Fletcher. It is not unlikely that Fletcher accompanied
Wesley in his journey to Bristol; but if this were not the case, it is
certain that he soon after followed him. Hence the following hitherto
unpublished letter, written by John Pawson, an itinerant preacher of ten
years’ standing:—

                                     “BRISTOL, _September 29, 1772_.

  “MY VERY DEAR FRIEND,—Mr. Wesley came here on Saturday, August 29, and
  has been with us ever since, but intends to leave Bristol next Monday”
  [October 5]. “He seems to be as zealous and active in his Master’s
  service as ever, and quite in good health. We have also had the great
  Mr. Fletcher here, but he is now returned to Madeley. He seems to be
  an eminent saint indeed. I had the satisfaction to hear him twice. He
  is a lively, zealous preacher; the power of God seems to attend his
  word; yet I admire him much more as a writer than as a preacher. Being
  a foreigner, there is a kind of roughness attends his language that is
  not grateful to an English hearer; and the English not being his
  mother-tongue, he sometimes seems to be at a loss for words. Yet he
  certainly is a great and blessed man.

  “We have had very large congregations to hear both Mr. Wesley and Mr.
  Fletcher, especially the latter; and I hope we shall see the fruit of
  their preaching in a little time. I trust that our gracious Lord will
  be with us, and that we shall have a prosperous year; though I
  apprehend it will be attended with greater difficulties than ever to
  keep the people together in Bristol. We have the Tabernacle[273] on
  one hand, and Mr. Janes,[274] who has a meeting in Tucker Street, on
  the other. Mr. Roquet[271] also is disaffected towards us. He has been
  in London for some time with his dear friend Mr. Hill. One night he
  preached in the Foundery, where he gave universal offence by using
  many Calvinistical phrases, and by telling the whole congregation that
  he knew there were whores and bawds even in the Bands[272] in Bristol.
  He said, ‘These eyes have seen it, and this heart has groaned on
  account of it.’ How he will be when he returns I know not; but these
  are the accounts we hear from London. Were it not that so many of our
  people are so exceedingly unstable, we need not fear any of these
  things; but you well know that many of them have got itching ears, and
  will run about, say or do what we will.

  “Mr. Wesley has just published his answer to Mr. Hill. I suppose it
  will make the Calvinists exceeding angry; but I think Mr. Fletcher’s
  ‘Fourth Check,’ which is now in the press, will make them much more
  so, as he does not spare them at all, but endeavours to show, in the
  clearest manner, the horrible consequences of their beloved opinions.
  He is writing something upon Perfection, the former part of which I
  have seen; and I think he will set that doctrine in so Scriptural a
  light, as to stop the mouths of gainsayers.”

Footnote 271:

  Whitefield had a Tabernacle at Kingswood; and Lady Huntingdon, in
  1753, built one in Bristol, which Whitefield opened.

Footnote 272:

  Thomas Janes, who from 1767 to 1770 was one of Wesley’s itinerants.
  His health not being equal to the rough work of a Methodist preacher
  he settled as the pastor of a dissenting congregation in Bristol. He
  died in 1773. He was a man of considerable abilities, and compiled and
  published a volume which he entitled “The Beauties of the Poets.”

Footnote 273:

  One of the first masters of Wesley’s Kingswood School, but now an
  ordained clergyman of the Church of England, and curate of St.
  Werburgh in Bristol. He was an intimate friend of Lady Huntingdon.

Footnote 274:

  The Band-meetings of the Methodists, consisting of persons selected
  from the Methodist classes.

Fletcher dedicated his “Fourth Check to Antinomianism” “to all candid
Calvinists in the Church of England.” An extract from this dedication
may be useful, as giving, in a brief form, some of the doctrines which
Fletcher had defended and enforced, and which had so hugely offended his
Calvinistic friends.

  “They” [his opponents] “will try to frighten you from reading this
  book, by protesting that I throw down the foundation of Christianity
  and help Mr. Wesley to place _works_ and _merit_ on the Redeemer’s
  throne. To this dreadful charge I answer:—1. That I had rather my
  right hand should lose its cunning to all eternity, than use it a
  moment to detract from the Saviour’s _real_ glory. 2. That the
  strongest pleas I produce for holiness and good works are quotations
  from the Homilies of our own Church as well as from the Puritan
  divines, whom I cite preferably to others, because they held what you
  are taught to call the _doctrines of grace_. 3. That what I have said
  of those doctrines recommends itself to every unprejudiced person’s
  reason and conscience. 4. That my capital arguments in favour of
  practical Christianity are founded upon our second justification by
  the evidence of good works in the great day; a doctrine which my
  opponent himself cannot help assenting to. 5. That from first to last,
  when the _meritorious cause_ of our justification is considered, we
  set works aside; praying God _not to enter into judgment with us_, or
  _weigh our merits_, but to _pardon our offences_ for Christ’s sake;
  and gladly ascribing the whole of our salvation to His alone merits,
  as much as Calvin or Dr. Crisp does. 6. That when the word _meriting_,
  _deserving_, or _worthy_, which our Lord uses again and again, is
  applied to good works or good men, we mean absolutely nothing but
  _rewardable_, or qualified for the reception of a _gracious reward_.
  And 7. That even this _improper_ merit or rewardableness of good works
  is entirely derived from Christ’s _proper_ merit, who works what is
  good in us; and from the gracious promise of God, who has freely
  engaged Himself to recompense the fruits of righteousness, which His
  own free grace enables us to produce.”

In the first eight of his letters, Fletcher quotes copiously from the
Liturgy, Articles, and Homilies of the Church of England, and from the
writings of Puritan divines. He also minutely examines Mr. Richard
Hill’s objections to his doctrines and to his Scriptural expositions. Up
to this point there is a comparative absence of his cutting irony; but
there is a great amount of powerful and triumphant writing.

In his ninth letter, addressed to Rowland Hill, he naturally enough lays
aside the restraint he had put upon himself. Richard Hill was now a man
of matured life, forty years of age; his brother Rowland was a young man
of only twenty-seven. The former had not been sparing in the use of
acrimonious epithets; the latter had been lavish. No wonder that
Fletcher spared not his youthful opponent. He wrote:—

  “What reason have you to assert, as you do, that I ‘_have grossly
  misrepresented the Scriptures_,’ and ‘made _universal havoc of every
  truth of the Gospel_’? The first of these charges is heavy, the second
  dreadful. Let us see by what arguments they are supported. After
  throwing away a good part of your book in passing a long, Calvinian,
  juvenile sentence upon my spirit as a writer, you come at last to the
  point, and attempt to explain some of the Scriptures which you suppose
  I have ‘misrepresented.’”

Fletcher proceeds to examine what he calls “the arguments” of Rowland
Hill; and then concludes, as follows:—

  “Having answered your objections to what you justly call ‘the
  principal cause of the controversy among us,’ I may make one or two
  observations upon the _friendliness_ of your ‘_Friendly Remarks_.’

  “Candid reader, if thou hast read my Checks without prejudice, and
  attentively compared them with the Word of God, wouldest thou ever
  think that the following lines contain an extract from the _friendly_
  sentence, which my young opponent passes upon them?—‘Hard names,
  banter, sarcasm, sneer, abuse, bravado, low arts of slander,
  slanderous accusation, opprobrious name, ill-natured satire, odious,
  deformed, detestable colours, unfair and ungenerous treatment, terms
  void of truth, unmerciful condemnations, false humility, irritating
  spirit, provoking, uncharitable style, continual sneers, most odious
  appellations, abusive words, notorious scandalizing, lines too
  dreadful to be transcribed, unworthy of an answer, beneath contempt,
  most indecent ridicule, a wretched conclusion, as bitter as gall,
  _and_ slanders which ought even to make a Turk blush.’

  “If thou canst not yet see, gentle reader, into the nature of Mr.
  Rowland Hill’s ‘_Remarks_,’ peruse the following _friendly_ sentences.
  ‘In regard to the fopperies of religion, you certainly differ from the
  Popish priest of Madeley. You have made universal havoc of every truth
  of the Gospel. You have invented dreadful slanders. You plentifully
  stigmatize many with the most unkindly language. You have blackened
  our principles, and scandalized our practice. You place us in a manner
  among murderers. It shocks me to follow you. Our characters lie
  bleeding under the cruelty of your pen, and complain loudly against
  your great injustice. Blush for the characters you have injured by the
  rashness and bitterness of your pen. You have invented a set of
  monsters, and raised a hideous ghost, by your own spells and
  incantations of banter and contempt. Numberless sneers, taunts, and
  sarcasms dreadfully decorate the whole of your performance: they are
  nothing better than infernal terms of darkness, which it is hateful to
  transcribe.’

  “When I cast my eyes upon this extract, I cannot help crying out, ‘If
  this is my antagonist’s _friendliness_, alas! what will be his
  _displeasure_? And what have I done to deserve these tokens of
  Calvinian benevolence? Why are these flowers of Geneva rhetoric so
  plentifully heaped upon my head?’

  “Sir, I do not intimate that I have done nothing displeasing to you.
  Far from insinuating it, I shall present my readers with a list of the
  manifold, but well-meant provocations, which have procured me your
  public correspondence. I say, _well-meant provocations_; for all I
  want to _provoke_ any one _to_ is _love and good works_.

  “1. I have written my Checks with the _confidence_ with which the
  clear dictates of reason, and the full testimonies of Scripture,
  usually inspire those who love what they esteem truth more than they
  do their dearest friends.

  “2. After speaking most honourably of _many Calvinists_, even of all
  that are _pious_, I have taken the liberty to insinuate, that the
  schemes of _finished salvation_, and _imputed righteousness_, will no
  more save a Calvinist guilty of _practical_ Antinomianism, than the
  doctrine of _general redemption_ will save an ungodly remonstrant.
  Thus I have made no difference between the _backsliding elect_ of the
  Lock,[275] and the _apostates_ of the Foundery, when death overtakes
  them in their sins, and in their blood.

  “3. I have maintained that our Lord did not speak an untruth when He
  said, _In the day of judgment, by thy words shalt thou be justified_;
  and that St. Paul did not propagate heresy when he wrote, _Work out
  your own salvation_.

  “4. I have sprinkled with the salt of irony your favourite doctrine
  (‘Friendly Remarks,’ p. 39), ‘Salvation wholly depends upon the
  purpose of God according to election, without any respect to what may
  be in them,’ _i.e._ _the elect_. Now, Sir, as by the doctrine of
  undeniable consequences, he who receives a guinea with the _king’s
  head_ on the one side cannot but receive the _lions_ on the other
  side; so he that admits the preceding proposition, cannot but admit
  the inseparable counterpart, namely, the following proposition, which
  every attentive and unprejudiced person sees written in blood upon
  that side of Calvin’s standard which is generally kept out of sight,
  ‘Damnation wholly depends upon the purpose of God according to
  reprobation, without respect to what may be in the reprobates.’ Here
  is no ‘inventing a monstrous creed,’ but merely turning the leaf of
  your own, and reading what is written there, namely, _damnation
  finished_, evidently answering to _finished salvation_.”

Footnote 275:

  The Lock Hospital, where Martin Madan was Chaplain.

Fletcher admits that he had used irony in his Checks, not, however,
because he liked it, but because he found it needful. He writes:—

  “If I make use of irony in my Checks, it is not from ‘_spleen_,’ but
  _reason_. It appears to _me_ that the subject requires it, and that
  _ridiculous error_ is to be turned out of the temple of truth, not
  only with scriptural argument, which is _the sword of the Spirit_, but
  also with _mild irony_, which is a proper scourge for a glaring and
  obstinate mistake.”

Holding such a view, he introduces, in one of the two letters addressed
to Richard and Rowland Hill unitedly, an illustration of the absurdities
involved in Calvinism, which, perhaps, is as severe as anything that his
Checks contain. The extract is long, but must be given unabridged.

  “You decry ‘illustrations,’ and I do not wonder at it; for they carry
  light into Babel, where it is not desired. The father of error begets
  _darkness_ and _confusion_. From darkness and confusion springs
  _Calvinism_, who, wrapping himself up in some garments he has stolen
  from the truth, deceives the nations, and gets himself reverenced in a
  dark temple, as if he were the pure and free Gospel.

  “To bring him to a _shameful_ end, we need not stab him with the
  dagger of ‘_calumny_,’ or put him upon the rack of _persecution_. Let
  him only be dragged out of his obscurity, and brought unmasked to open
  light. The silent beams of truth will pierce him through! Light alone
  will torture him to death, as the meridian sun does a bird of night
  that cannot fly from the gentle operation of its beams.

  “May the following _illustration_ dart at least one luminous beam into
  the profound darkness in which your venerable Diana delights to dwell!
  And may it show the Christian world that we do not ‘_slander you_,’
  when we assert, you inadvertently _destroy God’s law_, and cast the
  Redeemer’s _crown to the ground_: and that when you say, ‘_In point of
  justification_’ (and consequently of condemnation) ‘_we have nothing
  to do with the law: we are under the law as a rule of life_,’ but not
  as a rule of judgment, you might as well say, ‘We are under no law,
  and consequently no longer accountable for our actions.’

  “The King, whom I _suppose_ in love with your doctrines of free grace
  and free wrath, by the advice of a predestinarian council and
  parliament, issues out a _Gospel_ proclamation, directed, ‘To all his
  dear subjects, and _elect_ people, the _English_.’ By this evangelical
  manifesto they are informed, ‘That in consideration of the Prince of
  Wales’s meritorious intercession, and perfect obedience to the laws of
  England, all the penalties annexed to the breaking of those laws are
  now abolished with respect to _Englishmen_: That His Majesty freely
  pardons all his subjects, who have been, are, or shall be guilty of
  adultery, murder, or treason: That all their crimes, “past, present,
  and to come, are for ever and for ever cancelled:”’ That,
  nevertheless, his loving subjects, who remain strangers to their
  privileges, shall still be served with sham warrants according to law,
  and frightened out of their wits, till they have learned to plead they
  are _Englishmen_ (_i.e._ elect): And then they shall set at defiance
  all legalists, that is, all those who shall dare to deal with them
  according to law: And that, excepting the case of the above-mentioned
  _false_ prosecution of his chosen people, none of them shall ever be
  molested for the breach of any law.’

  “By the same supreme authority, it is likewise enacted, that all the
  laws shall continue in force against foreigners, (_i.e._ reprobates)
  whom the King and the Prince hate with everlasting hatred, and to whom
  they have agreed never to show mercy: That, accordingly, they shall be
  prosecuted to the utmost rigour of every statute, till they are all
  hanged or burned out of the way: And that, supposing no personal
  offence can be proved against them, it shall be lawful to hang them in
  chains for the crime of one of their forefathers, to set forth the
  King’s wonderful justice, display his glorious sovereignty, and make
  his chosen people relish the better their sweet, distinguishing
  privileges as _Englishmen_.

  “Moreover, His Majesty, who loves order and harmony, charges his
  loving subjects to consider still the statutes of England, which are
  in force against foreigners, as very good _rules of life_ for the
  English, which they will do _well_ to follow, but BETTER to break;
  because every breach of those rules will _work for their good_, and
  _make them sing louder_ the faithfulness of the King, the goodness of
  the Prince, and the sweetness of this Gospel proclamation.

  “Again, as nothing is so displeasing to the King as _legality_, which
  he hates even more than extortion and whoredom; lest any of his dear
  people, who have acted the part of a strumpet, robber, murderer, or
  traitor, should, through the remains of their inbred corruption, and
  ridiculous _legality_, mourn too deeply for breaking some of their
  _rules of life_, our gracious Monarch solemnly assures them, that,
  though he highly disapproves of adultery and murder, yet these
  breaches of _rules_ are not worse, in his sight, than a wandering
  thought in speaking to him, or a moment’s dulness in his service: That
  robbers, therefore, and traitors, adulterers and murderers, who are
  free-born _Englishmen_, need not be at all uneasy about losing his
  royal favour; this being utterly impossible, because they always stand
  complete in the honesty, loyalty, chastity, and charity of the Prince.

  “Moreover, because the King changes not, whatever lengths the
  _English_ go in immorality, he will always look upon them as his
  _pleasant children_, his _dear people_, and men after his own heart;
  and that, on the other hand, whatsoever lengths foreigners go in pious
  morality, his gracious Majesty is determined still to consider them as
  _hypocrites_, _vessels of wrath_, and _cursed children_, for whom is
  reserved the blackness of darkness for ever; because he always views
  them completely guilty, and absolutely condemned in a certain _robe of
  unrighteousness_, woven thousands of years ago by one of their
  ancestors. This dreadful _sanbenito_[276] His Majesty has thought fit
  to put upon them by imputation; and in it, it is his good pleasure
  that they should hang in adamantine chains, or burn in fire
  unquenchable.

  “Finally, as foreigners are dangerous people, and may stir up His
  Majesty’s subjects to rebellion, the _English_ are informed that if
  any one of them, were he to come over from Geneva itself, shall dare
  to insinuate that this most gracious gospel proclamation is not
  according to equity, morality, and godliness, the first Englishman
  that meets him shall have full leave to brand him as a papist, without
  judge or jury, in the forehead or on the back, as he thinks best; and
  that, till he is farther proceeded with according to the utmost
  severity of the law, the chosen nation shall be informed, in the
  _Gospel Magazine_, to beware of him as a man who ‘scatters firebrands,
  arrows, and deaths,’ and _makes universal havoc of every_ article of
  this sweet gospel proclamation.

  “Given at Geneva, and signed by four of His Majesty’s principal
  secretaries of state for the predestination department.

                          “JOHN CALVIN.   THE AUTHOR OF ‘P. O.’[277]
                          DR. CRISP.      ROWLAND HILL.”

Footnote 276:

  A frock, painted with flames and devils, in which heretics were burnt
  by the Inquisition.

Footnote 277:

  Richard Hill, the author of _Pietas Oxoniensis_.

To those not acquainted with the Calvinian controversy, this
“illustration” may appear ungenerous and unfair; but in reality, the
doctrines it burlesques had all been asserted by Calvinists, and the
theological points involved in them had all been exposed and
controverted by Fletcher, in his “Checks to Antinomianism.” No doubt the
exposure was unpleasant, but the author of the Checks was not to be
blamed for this. His work was done with an aching heart in the defence
of truth and righteousness.

Fletcher’s twelfth Letter, addressed to Richard Hill alone, dwells
altogether on the doctrine of Imputed Righteousness, which Fletcher
describes as follows:—

  “Consistent Calvinists believe that if a man is elected, God
  absolutely imputes to him Christ’s personal righteousness, _i.e._, the
  perfect obedience unto death which Christ performed upon earth. This
  is reckoned to him for obedience and righteousness, even while he is
  actually disobedient, and before he has a grain of inherent
  righteousness. They consider this imputation, as an unconditional and
  eternal act of grace, by which, not only a sinner’s past sins, but his
  crimes _present_ and _to come_, be they more or be they less, be they
  small or be they great, are for ever and for ever covered. _He is_
  eternally _justified from all things_. And, therefore, under this
  imputation, he is perfectly righteous before God, even while he
  commits adultery or murder. Or, to use your own expression, whatever
  _lengths he runs_, whatever _depths he falls into_, ‘_he always stands
  absolved, always complete in the everlasting righteousness of the
  Redeemer_.’”

This, to many Calvinists of the present day, will seem to be an
extravagant caricature of one of their favourite dogmas, but it must not
be overlooked that a great part of Fletcher’s descriptive definition is
actually taken from the published writings of Richard Hill. No wonder,
therefore, that Fletcher, with stinging irony, proceeds to say:—

  “In point of justification, it matters not how unrighteous a believer
  actually is in himself; because the robe of Christ’s personal
  righteousness, which, at his peril, he must not attempt to patch up
  with any personal righteousness of his own, is more than sufficient to
  adorn him from head to foot; and he must be sure to appear before God
  in no other. In this rich garment of _finished salvation_, the
  greatest apostates shine brighter than angels, though they are ‘_in
  themselves black_’ as the old murderer, and filthy as the brute that
  wallows in the mire. This ‘best robe,’ as it is called, is
  full-trimmed with such phylacteries as these,—‘Once in grace, always
  in grace;’ ‘Once justified, eternally justified;’ ‘Once washed, always
  fair, undefiled, and without spot.’ And so great are the privileges of
  those who have it on, that they can range through all the bogs of sin,
  wade through all the puddles of iniquity, and roll themselves in the
  thickest mire of wickedness, without contracting the least spot of
  guilt, or speck of defilement.”

Of course, Fletcher found no difficulty in demolishing such luscious and
pernicious nonsense as this.

  “If this doctrine is true,” says he, “the Divine perfections suffer a
  general eclipse; one half of the Bible is erased; St. James’s Epistle
  is made void; defiled religion justly passes for ‘_pure gospel_;’ the
  Calvinian doctrine of perseverance is true; and barefaced
  Antinomianism is properly recommended as ‘_the doctrines of grace_.’”

Fletcher’s last letter, also addressed to “Richard Hill, Esq.” alone,
deals with the doctrine of Free-will. His definition of the Methodist
doctrine deserves quotation.

  “We never supposed that the natural will of fallen man is free _to
  good_, before it is more or less touched and rectified by grace. All
  we assert is, that, whether a man chooses good or evil, his _will_ is
  _free_, or it does not deserve the name of _will_. It is as far from
  us to think that man, unassisted by Divine grace, is sufficient to
  will spiritual good; as to suppose that when he wills it by grace he
  does not will it _freely_. And, therefore, agreeably to our Tenth
  Article, which you quote against us without the least reason, we
  steadily assert that _we have no power to do good works, without the
  grace of God preventing us_, not that we may have a _free_ will, for
  this we always had in the above-mentioned sense, but _that we may have
  a good will_; believing that, as confirmed saints and angels have a
  _free_ will, though they have no _evil_ will, so abandoned reprobates
  and devils have a _free_ will, though they have no _good_ will.”

These may appear to the cursory reader metaphysical niceties of no
practical importance; but, a hundred years ago, they were considered
doctrines of vital interest. The difference between Fletcher and his
Calvinian friends is well stated by himself:—

  “From our mutual concessions, it is evident we agree, 1. That the will
  is always _free_; 2. That the will of man, considered as fallen in
  Adam, and unassisted by the grace of God, is only _free to evil_; and,
  3. That when he is _free to good_, free to choose life, he has this
  from redeeming grace.

  “But, although we agree in those material points, the difference
  between us is still very considerable; for, we assert, that through
  the Mediator promised to all mankind in Adam, God, by His free grace,
  restores to ALL _mankind_ a talent of _free will to good_, by which
  they are put in a capacity of _choosing life or death_, that is, of
  acquitting themselves well or ill, at their option, in their present
  state of trial.

  “This _you_ utterly deny, maintaining that man is not in a state of
  probation; and that as Christ died for none but the elect, none but
  they can ever have any degree of saving grace, that is, _any free will
  to good_. Hence, you conclude that _all_ the elect are in a state of
  _finished salvation_; and _necessarily_, _infallibly_, and
  _irresistibly_ choose life; while _all_ the reprobates are shut up in
  a state of _finished_ damnation; and _necessarily_, _infallibly_, and
  _irresistibly_ choose death.

  “We are obliged to oppose this doctrine, because it appears to us a
  doctrine of _wrath_, rather than a doctrine of _grace_. If we are not
  mistaken, it is opposite to the general tenor of the Scriptures,
  injurious to all the Divine perfections, and subversive of this
  fundamental truth of natural and revealed religion, _God shall judge
  the world in righteousness_. It is calculated to strengthen the carnal
  security of Laodicean professors, raise horrid anxieties in the minds
  of doubting Christians, and give damned spirits just ground to
  blaspheme to all eternity. Again, it withdraws from thinking sinners
  and judicious saints the helps which God has given them, by multitudes
  of conditional promises and threatenings, designed to work upon their
  _hopes_ and _fears_. And, while it unnecessarily stumbles men of sense
  and hardens infidels, it affords wicked men rational excuses to
  continue in their sins, and gives desperate offenders full room to
  charge not only Adam, but God Himself, with all their enormities.”

In this piteous way did the evangelical revivalists of the last century
become divided. It was a mournful scene; but, in the long run, it was
over-ruled for good. Error was crushed, and truth rose triumphant.
Meanwhile, on one side at least, great bitterness was engendered, and
lamentable epithets were used. In the hottest of the fray, however,
Fletcher, the chief combatant, never lost his temper. Hence, in
concluding his “Fourth Check to Antinomianism,” he wrote:—

  “Although we severely expose the mistakes of godly Calvinists, we
  sincerely love their persons, truly reverence their piety, and
  cordially rejoice in the success which attends their evangelical
  labours. And, although we cannot admit their _logic_, while they
  defend a bad cause with bad arguments, we should do them great
  injustice if we did not acknowledge that there have been, and are
  still among them, men eminent for good sense and good learning—men as
  remarkable for their skill in the art of logic, as for their deep
  acquaintance with the oracles of God. We thank them for their pious
  labours; we ask the continuance, or the renewal, of their valuable
  love. We invite them to our pulpits; and assure them that, if they
  admit us into theirs, we shall do by them as we would be done
  by,—avoiding to touch there, or among their own people occasionally
  committed to our charge, upon the points of doctrine debated between
  us; and reserving to ourselves the liberty of bearing our full
  testimony in our own pulpits, and from the press, against
  Antinomianism and Pharisaism in all their shapes.”

There were other combatants in the field whose power over themselves was
not so great and so praiseworthy. Walter Sellon was one of them, to whom
Richard Hill addressed the following, hitherto unpublished, letter, just
about the time when the Fourth Check of Fletcher first appeared:—

                                    “HAWKSTONE, _December 24, 1772_.

  “DEAR SIR,—It will answer no end for you and me to continue our
  disputes, except that of stirring up the old man in us both. I believe
  you have the grace of God, and I am sure you are blest with a good
  understanding, which is well cultivated by acquired knowledge. With
  these endowments and qualifications, I trust it will please God to
  make you abundantly useful in the cause of Christ. I heartily forgive
  whatever has savoured more of Walter Sellon than of Jesus Christ in
  your two letters to me; and I beg the same on behalf of poor Richard
  Hill. Come, my dear Sir, let us pray for each other. If ever I have
  the pleasure of seeing you in the flesh, be assured that I shall
  embrace you in the bonds of brotherly love; if not, I trust we shall
  one day meet in a better place, where there will be no other
  contention between us than who shall sing loudest, ‘Grace, grace unto
  it!’ Without undervaluing myself in any respect, this will certainly
  be the privilege of that amazing monument of mercy who desires always
  to subscribe himself,

  “Very dear Sir, your sincere and affectionate friend, in the best of
  bonds,

                                                      RICHARD HILL.”

  “To the Rev. Mr. Sellon,
      Ledsham, near Ferry Bridge,
          Yorkshire.”

This polemical chapter cannot be more fitly concluded than with these
breathings of Christian love, to which may be added an extract from a
letter which Fletcher wrote to Mr. Charles Perronet, who was suffering
great affliction of body and mind:—

  “1772, September 7.—MY VERY DEAR FRIEND,—No cross, no crown; the
  heavier the cross, the brighter the crown.

                    “‘O for a firm and lasting faith,
                    To credit all the Almighty saith!’

  “Faith, I mean the _evidence of things not seen_, is a powerful
  cordial to support and exhilarate us under the heaviest pressures of
  pain and temptation. By faith, we live upon the _invisible, eternal_
  God; we believe that _in Him_ we live, move, and have our being;
  insensibly we slide from _self_ into _God_, from the visible into the
  invisible, from the carnal into the spiritual, from time into
  eternity. Here our spirits are ever young; they live in and upon the
  very fountain of strength, sprightliness, and joy. Oh! my dear friend,
  let us rest more upon the _truth as it is in Jesus_. Of late, I have
  been brought to feed more upon Jesus as _the truth_. I see more in Him
  in that character than I ever did. I see Christ _the truth_ of my
  life, friends, relations, sense, food, raiment, light, fire,
  resting-place. All out of Him are but shadows. All _in Him_ are
  blessed sacraments; I mean visible signs of the fountain, or vehicles
  to convey the streams of inward grace.”[278]

Footnote 278:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”




                              CHAPTER XII.
                 _“APPEAL TO MATTER OF FACT AND COMMON
                                SENSE.”_

                                 1772.


THE present chapter is a somewhat inconvenient break in the history of
the Calvinian controversy; but in maintaining chronological order, the
inconvenience cannot be avoided.

Fletcher’s “Fourth Check to Antinomianism” was finished on November 15,
1772, and was published before the year was terminated. On a fly-leaf at
the end of the _first_ edition the following advertisement was printed:—

  “In a few days will be published, price two shillings, by the same
  author, ‘An Appeal to Matter of Fact and Common Sense; Or, A Rational
  Demonstration of Man’s corrupt and lost Estate.’”

In some respects, this is Fletcher’s ablest publication, and certainly
it has been his most popular. A “second edition, revised and enlarged,”
was printed a few months after the first, and, since then, it has been
scores of times re-issued. As early as the year 1804, Joseph Benson,
Fletcher’s biographer, remarked concerning it, “I hardly know a treatise
that has been so universally read, or made so eminently useful.” Even
the _Monthly Review_ had nought to say against it. In the number for
March, 1773, the editor’s notice of it was the following:—

  “Although we cannot subscribe to all Mr. Fletcher’s religious
  opinions, we think there are abundance of good things in his writings;
  and we have no doubt that he is warmly animated by a sincere and pious
  regard for the salvation of the souls that are committed to his
  charge, as well as for the spiritual welfare of mankind in general.”

It is worthy of remark that besides being vended at Wesley’s Foundery in
London, the first edition was also “sold at the _workhouse_ in Madeley
Wood, Shropshire, _for the benefit of the poor_.” When the second
edition was published, the _workhouse_, for some unknown reason, was not
advertised. Probably parochial officials had interdicted the sale.

Fletcher seems to have spent more time upon his “Appeal to Matter of
Fact and Common Sense” than he did upon any of his “Checks to
Antinomianism.” Joseph Benson saw it in manuscript, and read most of it,
a year before its publication. Fletcher took it to Bristol and left it
there; but, before it was committed to the press, he requested that it
might be returned to him at Madeley, to be further revised and improved.
For many weeks, the manuscript was unheard of, “but,” says Benson, “he
was quite easy under the apprehended loss, which certainly would not
have been a small one, as any person will judge who considers how much
thought and time such a work must have cost him. It was found, however,
by-and-by, had the finishing hand put to it, and was published to the
conviction and edification of thousands.”[279]

Footnote 279:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

Fletcher’s dedication of his book, highly characteristic, and embodying
biographical facts, deserves attention.

  “To the principal inhabitants of the parish of Madeley, in the county
  of Salop.

  “GENTLEMEN,—You are no less entitled to my private labours than the
  inferior class of my parishioners. As you do not choose to partake
  with them of my evening instructions, I take the liberty to present
  you with some of my morning meditations. May these well-meant
  endeavours of my pen be more acceptable to you than those of my
  tongue! And may you carefully read in your closets what you have
  perhaps inattentively heard in the church! I appeal to the Searcher of
  hearts that I had rather impart truths than receive tithes. You kindly
  bestow the latter upon me; grant me, I pray, the satisfaction of
  seeing you favourably receive the former, from, gentlemen, your
  affectionate minister and obedient servant,

  “Madeley, 1772.

                                                      “J. FLETCHER.”

Fletcher’s principal tithe payers would not attend his evening services,
and yet he was more anxious to teach them “the truth as it is in Jesus,”
than to receive their pelf. He loved their souls, though they were too
high and mighty—that is, too worldly and ignorant—to appreciate his
ministry.

Fletcher rightly regarded the doctrine which he irrefutably establishes
as of the highest importance. By large numbers of men, who considered
themselves good Christians, it was treated with indifference, and in
many instances it was flatly denied. With the exception of his “Notes on
the Old and New Testaments,” the largest as well as the ablest book
Wesley ever wrote was on the same subject. His “Doctrine of Original Sin
according to Scripture, Reason, and Experience,” was first published in
1757; and now, fifteen years later, his friend Fletcher, doubtless with
his approval, used his great talents to the utmost in defending the same
dogma. In both books, to some extent, the same line of argumentation is
followed; but, of course, Fletcher’s style is very different from that
of Wesley. Both of them insisted that the doctrine is essential to the
Christian religion, and that if it is not true, the Christian religion
is not needed. In his preface Wesley wrote:—

  “If we take away this foundation, that man is by nature foolish and
  sinful, ‘fallen short of the glorious image of God,’ the Christian
  system falls at once; nor will it deserve so honourable an appellation
  as that of a ‘cunningly devised fable.’”

Fletcher began his book with the same assertion. His first paragraph is
as follows:—

  “In every religion, there is a principal truth or error, which, like
  the first link of a chain, necessarily draws after it all the parts
  with which it is essentially connected. This leading principle in
  Christianity, distinguished from Deism, is the doctrine of our corrupt
  and lost estate; for if man is not _at variance_ with his Creator,
  what need of a _Mediator_ between God and him? If he is not a
  _depraved, undone_ creature, what necessity of so wonderful a
  _Restorer_ and _Saviour_ as the Son of God? If he is not _enslaved_ to
  sin, why is he _redeemed_ by Jesus Christ? If he is not _polluted_,
  why must he be _washed in the blood of_ that immaculate _Lamb_? If his
  soul is not _disordered_, what occasion is there for such a divine
  _Physician_? If he is not _helpless_ and _miserable_, why is he
  perpetually invited to secure the _assistance_ and _consolations_ of
  the Holy Spirit? And, in a word, if he is not _born in sin_, why is a
  _new birth_ so absolutely necessary, that Christ declares, with the
  most solemn asseverations, _without it no man can see the kingdom of
  God_?

  “This doctrine then being of such importance that genuine Christianity
  stands or falls with it, it may be proper to state it at large; and as
  this cannot be done in stronger and plainer words than those of the
  sacred writers and our pious Reformers, I beg leave to collect them
  and present the reader with a picture of our natural estate, drawn at
  full length by those ancient and masterly hands.”

Fletcher proceeds to do this, and with irrefutable arguments establishes
his doctrine; but in this part of his work there is no need to follow
him. Indeed, his summary of Scripture proofs and his quotations from the
Articles, Homilies, and Liturgy of the Church of England, do not fill
more than about a dozen pages. His “second part” he begins as follows:—

  “As no man is bound to believe what is contrary to common sense, if
  the above-stated doctrine appears irrational, Scriptures, Articles,
  Homilies, and Liturgy are quoted in vain. When men of parts are
  pressed with their authority, they start from it as an imposition on
  their reason, and make as honourable a retreat as they possibly can.

  “Some, to extricate themselves at once, set the Bible aside as full of
  incredible assertions. Others, with more modesty, plead that the
  Scriptures have been frequently misunderstood, and are so in the
  present case. They put grammar, criticism, and common sense to the
  rack, to show that when the inspired writers say the human _heart is
  desperately wicked_, they mean that it is extremely good; or at least
  like blank paper, ready to receive either the characters of virtue or
  of vice. With respect to the testimony of our Reformers, they would
  have you to understand that in this enlightened age we must leave
  their harsh, uncharitable sentiments to the old Puritans and the
  present Methodists.

  “That such objectors may subscribe as a solemn truth what they have
  hitherto rejected as a dangerous error, and that humbled sinners may
  see the propriety of a heart-felt repentance, and the absolute need of
  an Almighty Redeemer, they are here presented with some proofs of our
  depravity, taken from the astonishing severity of God’s dispensations
  towards mankind.”

Limited space renders it impossible to give an outline of Fletcher’s
thirty-six arguments, all founded upon the following axiom:—

  “If we consider the Supreme Being as creating a world for the
  manifestation of His glory, the display of His perfections, and the
  communication of His happiness to an intelligent creature, whom He
  would attach to Himself by the strongest ties of gratitude and love,
  we at once perceive that He never could form this earth and man in
  their present disordered, deplorable condition.”

An extract from the ninth argument will not be out of place, furnishing,
as it does, a doleful picture of a large number of Fletcher’s
parishioners—the colliers, the bargemen, and the iron-workers.

  “To go no farther than this populous parish; with what hardships and
  dangers do our indigent neighbours earn their bread! See those who
  ransack the bowels of the earth to get the black mineral we burn; how
  little is their lot preferable to the Spanish felons who work the
  golden mines?

  “They take their leave of the light of the sun, and, suspended by a
  rope, are let down many fathoms perpendicularly towards the centre of
  the globe; they traverse the rocks through which they have dug their
  horizontal ways. The murderer’s cell is a palace in comparison of the
  black spot to which they repair; the vagrant’s posture in the stocks
  is preferable to that in which they labour.

  “Form, if you can, an idea of the misery of men kneeling, stooping, or
  lying on one side, to toil all day in a confined place, where a child
  could hardly stand; whilst a younger company, with their hands and
  feet on the black dusty ground, and a chain about their body, creep,
  and drag along, like four-footed beasts, heavy loads of the dirty
  mineral, through ways almost impassable to the curious observer.

  “In these low and dreary vaults, all the elements seem combined
  against them. Destructive damps, and clouds of noxious dust, infect
  the air they breathe. Sometimes water incessantly distils on their
  naked bodies; or, bursting upon them in streams, drowns them, and
  deluges their work. At other times, pieces of detached rocks crush
  them to death; or the earth, breaking in upon them, buries them alive.
  And frequently sulphureous vapours, kindled in an instant by the light
  of their candles, form subterraneous thunder and lightning. What a
  dreadful phenomenon! How impetuous is the blast! How fierce the
  rolling flames! How intolerable the noisome smell! How dreadful the
  continued roar! How violent and fatal the explosion!

  “Wonderful providence! Some of the unhappy men have time to prostrate
  themselves; the fiery scourge grazes their backs; the ground shields
  their breasts; they escape. See them wound up out of the blazing
  dungeon, and say if _these are not brands plucked out of the fire_. A
  pestiferous steam and clouds of suffocating smoke pursue them. Half
  dead themselves, they hold their dead or dying companions in their
  trembling arms. Merciful God of Shadrach! Kind Protector of Meshach!
  Mighty Deliverer of Abednego! Patient Preserver of rebellious Jonah!
  Will not _these_ utter a song—a song of praise to Thee? praise ardent
  as the flames they escape—lasting as the life Thou prolongest? Alas,
  they refuse! And some—O tell it not among the heathens, lest they for
  ever abhor the name of _Christian_—some return to the very pits where
  they have been branded with sulphureous fire by the warning hand of
  Providence, and there, sporting themselves again with the most
  infernal wishes, call aloud for a fire that cannot be quenched, and
  challenge the Almighty to cast them into hell, that bottomless pit
  whence there is no return.

  “Leave these black men at their perilous work, and see yonder
  barge-men haling that loaded vessel against wind and stream. Since the
  dawn of day, they have wrestled with the impetuous current; and now
  that it almost overpowers them, how do they exert all their remaining
  strength, and strain their every nerve? How are they bathed in sweat
  and rain? Fastened to their lines as horses to their traces, wherein
  do they differ from the laborious brutes? Not in an erect posture of
  the body, for, in the intenseness of their toil, they bend forward,
  their head is foremost, and their hands upon the ground. If there is
  any difference, it consists in this: horses are indulged with a collar
  to save their breasts; and these, as if theirs were not worth saving,
  draw without one; the beasts tug in patient silence and mutual
  harmony; but the men with loud contention and horrible imprecations. O
  sin, what hast thou done? Is it not enough that these drudges should
  toil like brutes? must they also curse one another like devils?

  “If you have gone beyond the hearing of their impious oaths, stop to
  consider the sons of Vulcan confined to these forges and furnaces. Is
  their lot much preferable? A sultry air and clouds of smoke and dust
  are the elements in which they labour. The confused noise of water
  falling, steam hissing, fire-engines working, wheels turning, files
  creaking, hammers beating, ore bursting, and bellows roaring, form the
  dismal concert that strikes the ears; while a continual eruption of
  flames, ascending from the mouth of their artificial volcanoes, dazzle
  their eyes with a horrible glare. Massy bars of hot iron are the heavy
  tools they handle, cylinders of the first magnitude the enormous
  weights they heave, vessels full of melted metal the dangerous loads
  they carry, streams of the same burning fluid the fiery rivers which
  they conduct into the deep cavities of their subterraneous moulds, and
  millions of flying sparks with a thousand drops of liquid, hissing
  iron, the horrible showers to which they are exposed. See them cast:
  you would think them in a bath and not in a furnace; they bedew the
  burning sand with their streaming sweat; nor are their wet garments
  dried up, either by the fierce fires they attend, or the fiery streams
  which they manage. Certainly, of all men, these have best reason to
  remember the just sentence of an offended God: ‘In the sweat of thy
  face shalt thou eat thy bread all the days of thy life.’”

This long extract is given, not as a specimen of Fletcher’s style of
writing, for it is hardly that, but as a truthful description of a large
number of the poor creatures of whom he had the pastoral oversight. Many
a passage of the highest kind of eloquence might be cited; but the
reader is recommended to buy and peruse the book himself. The following
is presented, solely because it refers to growing evils, alarmingly
prevalent among people who think themselves religious:—

  “But all are not employed in sin and wickedness, for many go through a
  constant round of _innocent diversions_; and these, at least, must be
  _innocent_ and _happy_. Let us then consider the amusements of
  mankind, and see how far _our own_ pleasures demonstrate our
  _innocence_ and _happiness_.

  “How excessively foolish are the plays of children! How full of
  mischief and cruelty the sports of boys! How vain, foppish, and frothy
  the joys of young people! And how much below the dignity of upright,
  pure creatures, the snares that persons of different sexes lay for
  each other! When they are together, is not this their favourite
  amusement, till they are deservedly caught in the net which they
  imprudently spread? But see them asunder.

  “Here a circle of idle women, supping a decoction of Indian herbs,
  talk or laugh all together, like so many chirping birds, or chattering
  monkeys, and, scandal excepted, every way to as good a purpose. And
  there, a club of graver men blow, by the hour, clouds of stinking
  smoke out of their mouths, or wash it down their throats with repeated
  draughts of intoxicating liquors. The strong fumes have already
  reached their heads, and, while some stagger home, others triumphantly
  keep the field of excess; though one is already stamped with the
  heaviness of the ox, another worked up to the fierceness and roar of
  the lion, and a third brought down to the filthiness of the vomiting
  dog.

  “Leave them at their _manly_ sport, to follow those musical sounds,
  mixed with a noise of stamping, and you will find others profusely
  perspiring, and violently fatiguing themselves, in skipping up and
  down a room for a whole night, and ridiculously turning their backs
  and faces to each other a hundred different ways. Would not a man of
  sense prefer running ten miles upon an _useful_ errand, to this
  useless manner of losing his rest, heating his blood, exhausting his
  spirits, unfitting himself for the duties of the following day, and
  laying the foundation of a putrid fever or a consumption, by breathing
  the midnight air corrupted by clouds of dust, by the unwholesome fumes
  of candles, and by the more pernicious steam that issues from the
  bodies of many persons, who use the strong exercise in a confined
  place.

  “In the next room they are more quiet, but are they more rationally
  employed? Why do they so earnestly rattle those ivory cubes; and so
  anxiously study those packs of loose and spotted leaves? Is happiness
  graven upon the one, or stamped upon the other? Answer, ye gamesters,
  who curse your stars, as ye go home with an empty purse and a heart
  full of rage.

  “‘We hope there is no harm in taking an innocent game at cards,’ reply
  a ridiculous party of superannuated ladies; ‘gain is not our aim; we
  only play to kill time.’ You are not then so well employed as the
  foolish heathen emperor, who amused himself in killing troublesome
  flies and wearisome time together. The delight of rational creatures,
  much more of Christians on the brink of the grave, is to redeem,
  improve, and solidly enjoy time; but yours, alas! consists in the bare
  irreparable _loss_ of that invaluable treasure. Oh! what account will
  you give of the souls you neglect, and the talents you bury?

  “And are _public_ diversions better evidence of our innocence and
  happiness?”

Fletcher then proceeds to descant, in the same style, on theatrical
performances, annual wakes, horse-racing, cock-fighting, man-fighting,
and dog-fighting; and then concludes his “Twenty-third Argument,” as
follows:—

  “These are thy favourite amusements, O England, thou centre of the
  civilized world, where reformed Christianity, deep-thinking wisdom,
  and polite learning, with all its refinements, have fixed their abode!
  But, in the name of common sense, how can we clear them from the
  imputation of absurdity, folly, and madness? And by what means can
  they be reconciled, I will not say to the religion of the meek Jesus,
  but to the philosophy of a Plato, or the calm reason of any thinking
  man? How perverted must be the taste, how irrational and cruel the
  diversions of barbarians, in other parts of the globe! And how
  applicable to all the wise man’s observation: ‘Foolishness is bound up
  in the heart of a child, and madness in the breasts of the sons of
  men!’”

Further extensive extracts from Fletcher’s invaluable book need not be
given here. What he calls his “Short Defence of the Oracles of God”
cannot be perused by any candid reader without the conviction being
produced that infidelity, in all its phases, is the most unreasonable
theory in existence. From his thirty-six arguments,—unanswerable
arguments,—he deduces ten inferences, namely:—

  “1. If we are by nature in a corrupt and lost estate, the grand
  business of ministers is to warn us of our imminent danger. 2. If we
  are naturally depraved and condemned creatures, self-righteousness and
  pride are the most absurd and monstrous of all our sins. 3. If the
  corruption of mankind is universal and inveterate, no mere creature
  can deliver them from it. 4. If our guilt is immense, it cannot be
  expiated without a sacrifice of an infinite dignity. 5. If our
  spiritual maladies are both numerous and mortal, we cannot recover the
  spiritual health that we enjoyed in our first parents, but by the
  powerful help of our heavenly Physician, the second Adam. 6. If our
  nature is so completely fallen and totally helpless, that, in
  spiritual things, ‘we are not sufficient of ourselves to think any
  thing’ truly good ‘as of ourselves,’ it is plain we stand in absolute
  need of the Spirit’s assistance to enable us to pray, repent, believe,
  love, and obey aright. 7. If we are really and truly born in sin, our
  regeneration cannot be a mere metaphor, or a vain ceremony, but real
  and positive. 8. If the fall of mankind in Adam does not consist in a
  capricious imputation of his personal guilt, but in a real, present
  participation of his depravity, impotence, and misery, the salvation
  that believers have in Christ is not a capricious imputation of His
  personal righteousness, but a real, present participation of His
  purity, power, and blessedness, together with pardon and acceptance.
  9. If the corrupt nature, which sinners derive from Adam,
  spontaneously produces all the wickedness that overspreads the earth,
  the holy nature which believers receive from Christ is spontaneously
  productive of all the fruits of righteousness described in the oracles
  of God. 10. If corruption and sin work so powerfully and sensibly in
  the hearts of the unregenerate, we may, without deserving the name of
  enthusiasts, affirm that the regenerate are sensible of the powerful
  effects of Divine grace in their souls; or, to use the words of our
  Seventeenth Article, we may say, ‘They feel in themselves the workings
  of the Spirit of Christ.’”

When it is added that the doctrines, from which these inferences are
drawn, are plainly stated, and fully proved, a good general idea of
Fletcher’s book will be given. His “Concluding Address to the Serious
Reader, who inquires, What must I do to be saved?” has been read by
myriads, and cannot be read too much. The last two paragraphs of his
treatise must be quoted:—

  “_This_ book is chiefly recommended to disbelieving moralists, who
  deride the doctrine of salvation by grace _through faith_ in the day
  of conversion, merely because they are not properly acquainted with
  our fallen and lost estate. And the _Checks_ are chiefly designed for
  disbelieving Antinomians, who rise against the doctrine of a
  believer’s salvation by grace _through the works_ of faith in the
  great day, merely because they do not consider the indispensable
  necessity of evangelical obedience, and the nature of the day of
  judgment.

  “In the _Appeal_, the careless, self-conceited sinner is awakened and
  humbled. In the _Address_, the serious, humbled sinner is raised up
  and comforted. And in the _Checks_, the foolish virgin is re-awakened,
  the Laodicean believer reproved, the prodigal son lashed back to his
  father’s house, and the upright believer animated to mend his pace in
  the way of _faith working by love_, and to _perfect holiness in the
  fear of God_.”

Such is Fletcher’s own accurate account of the important works he had
hitherto committed to the press.




                             CHAPTER XIII.
                  _WESLEY’S DESIGNATED SUCCESSOR: THE
                 PENITENT THIEF: A DREADFUL PHENOMENON,
                              ETC., ETC._

                                 1773.


TO preserve chronological order, another chapter must be interjected
before the history of the Calvinian controversy is resumed.

In the month of January, 1773, Wesley sent to Fletcher the remarkable
letter with which the present work commences. He wished Fletcher to
relinquish his vicarage, and to put himself into training to become,
after Wesley’s death, the “ωροεστως” of the Methodists. Wesley’s health,
apparently, was failing. He was full of anxiety. “The body of the
preachers,” he wrote, “are not united: nor will any part of them submit
to the rest; so that either there must be one to preside over all, or
the work will indeed come to an end.” Subsequent events proved Wesley’s
fears to be unfounded; but, for the time being, they were real, and
disquieted him. He wished to train his successor, and to introduce him
to the people. He specified what he considered to be the necessary
qualifications of such a man, and regarded Fletcher as the only one of
his wide acquaintance as possessing them. “Without conferring,
therefore, with flesh and blood,” said he, “come and strengthen the
hands, comfort the heart, and share the labour of your affectionate
friend and brother, John Wesley.”

Fletcher’s reply to Wesley’s most important proposal was as follows:—

                                                           “MADELEY,

  .

  “REV. AND DEAR SIR,—I hope the Lord, who has so wonderfully stood by
  you hitherto, will preserve you to see many of your sheep, and me
  among them, enter into rest. Should Providence call you first, I shall
  do my best, by the Lord’s assistance, to help your brother to gather
  the wreck, and keep together those who are not absolutely bent to
  throw away the Methodist doctrines and discipline, as soon as he that
  now letteth is removed out of the way. Every help will then be
  necessary, and I shall not be backward to throw in my mite.

  “In the meantime, you sometimes need an assistant to serve tables, and
  occasionally to fill up a gap. Providence visibly appointed _me_ to
  that office many years ago. And though it no less evidently called me
  hither, yet I have not been without doubt, especially for some years
  past, whether it would not be expedient that I should resume my office
  as your deacon; not with any view of presiding over the Methodists
  after you; but to ease you in your old age, and to be in the way of
  recovering, and, perhaps, doing more good. I have sometimes thought
  how shameful it was that no clergyman should join you, to keep in the
  Church the work God has enabled you to carry on therein. And, as the
  little estate I have in my own country is sufficient for my
  maintenance, I have thought I would, one day or other, offer you and
  the Methodists my free service. While my love of retirement made me
  linger, I was providentially led to do something in Lady Huntingdon’s
  plan; but, being shut out there, it appears to me I am again called to
  my first work.

  “Nevertheless, I would not leave this place, without a fuller
  persuasion that the time is _quite_ come. Not that God uses me much
  here, but I have not yet sufficiently cleared my conscience from the
  blood of all men. Meantime, I beg the Lord to guide me by His counsel,
  and make me willing to go anywhere, or nowhere, to be anything, or
  nothing.

  “Help by your prayers, till you can bless by word of mouth, Rev. and
  dear Sir, your willing, though unprofitable servant in the Gospel,

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[280]

Footnote 280:

  Wesley’s “Life of Fletcher,” p. 66.

Fletcher did not decline Wesley’s proposal; but he deferred coming to a
decision until “the time was quite come.” Whether the proposal was
afterwards _formally_ renewed, it is difficult to determine; but Dr.
Whitehead, who, from 1764 to 1769, had been one of the itinerant
preachers, and who was well acquainted with both Wesley and his friend
Fletcher, remarks concerning Wesley’s request:—

  “This warm and sincere invitation to a situation not only respected
  but even reverenced by so large a body of people, must have been
  highly flattering to Mr. Fletcher; especially as it came from a person
  he most sincerely loved; whose superior abilities, learning, and
  labours he admired; and to whose success in the ministry he wished to
  give every assistance in his power. But he well knew the
  embarrassments Mr. Wesley met with in the government of the preachers,
  though he alone, under the providence of God, had given existence to
  their present character, influence, and usefulness. He was also well
  acquainted with the mutual jealousies the preachers had of each other,
  and with their jarring interests: and, above all, with the general
  determination which prevailed among them not to be under the control
  of any one man after the death of Mr. Wesley. Under these
  circumstances, he saw nothing before him but darkness, storms, and
  tempests, with the most threatening dangers, especially if he should
  live to be alone in the office. He therefore determined not to launch
  his little bark on so tempestuous an ocean.

  “I cannot, however, but lament that he did not accept Mr. Wesley’s
  invitation, as he would have done much good while he lived, and have
  prevented many of the evils which have since taken place.”[281]

Footnote 281:

  Whitehead’s “Life of Wesley,” vol. ii., p. 356.

The evils which Dr. Whitehead deprecated were the resolutions enacted by
the Methodist Conferences, held after Wesley’s decease, respecting the
preachers being allowed to administer the sacraments to their Societies,
to hold services in Methodist chapels “in church hours,” and other
kindred matters. Of all this, Dr. Whitehead, an able and honest man,
strongly disapproved, and hence his regret that Fletcher, by declining
Wesley’s invitation, had not helped to, at least, postpone such serious
changes.

Wesley foresaw the probability, and indeed the certainty, of such
changes being made, and he also lamented Fletcher’s decision. Thirteen
years afterwards, in commenting upon Fletcher’s letter to himself, he
wrote:—

  “‘Providence,’ says he, ‘visibly appointed me to that office’
  [Wesley’s assistant] ‘many years ago.’ Is it any wonder then that he
  should now be _in doubt_ whether he did right in confining himself to
  one spot? The more I reflect upon it, the more I am convinced he had
  great reason to doubt this. I can never believe it was the will of God
  that such a burning and shining light should be _hid under a bushel_.
  No; instead of being confined to a country village, it ought to have
  shone in every corner of our land. He was full as much called to sound
  an alarm through all the nation as Mr. Whitefield himself. Nay,
  abundantly more so; seeing he was far better qualified for that
  important work. He had a more striking person, equally good breeding,
  an equally winning address, together with a richer flow of fancy, a
  stronger understanding; a far greater treasure of learning, both in
  languages, philosophy, philology, and divinity; and, above all (which
  I can speak with fuller assurance, because I had a thorough knowledge
  both of one and the other), a more deep and constant communion with
  the Father, and with the Son, Jesus Christ.

  “And yet let not any one imagine that I depreciate Mr. Whitefield, or
  undervalue the grace of God and the extraordinary gifts which his
  great Master vouchsafed unto him. I believe he was highly favoured of
  God; yea, that he was one of the most eminent ministers that has
  appeared in England, or perhaps in the world, during the present
  century. Yet I must own I have known many fully equal to Mr.
  Whitefield, both in holy tempers and holiness of conversation; but one
  equal herein to Mr. Fletcher I have not known; no, not in a life of
  fourscore years.”[282]

Footnote 282:

  Wesley’s “Life of Fletcher,” p. 68.

No wonder that Wesley lamented the course taken by his wished-for
successor; but it is rather difficult to say why Wesley should cast upon
him loving blame for confining his light “to a country village.”
Fletcher’s hands were full of literary works, by means of which he had
defended, and continued to defend, the doctrines which it was the object
of Wesley’s life to propagate. Besides, in about a year after Wesley
made his proposal, Fletcher’s health began to fail, and never after that
was his physical vigour such as to enable him to undertake the laborious
itinerancy which Wesley contemplated and desired. Upon the whole, it is
an open question whether Fletcher did not render greater service to
Wesley and the Methodists by continuing his literary defence of their
great and glorious doctrines than he would have done if he had accepted
Wesley’s invitation to go into training to become his successor.

In other ways, however, besides his writings, he rendered great
assistance to his friend. It was just after the time when Wesley wrote
his important letter that an incident occurred which is worth relating.

Samuel Bradburn, a soldier’s son, was born at Gibraltar in 1751. At
twelve years of age he was brought to England; at nineteen became a
Methodist; and at twenty-one began to preach. During his residence at
Gibraltar, he was sent to school at a penny a week; but, on the terms
being raised to three-halfpence, his mother took him away, finding it
inconvenient to be at such an expense for her son’s education. This was
all the schooling that he had; but he was taught to read at home, and
before he was eight years old had committed the histories of Joseph and
Samson to memory. On coming to England, his parents settled at Chester,
and he himself was apprenticed to a shoemaker. In the week preceding
Easter, in 1773, he set off to Madeley to have an interview with
Fletcher, whose “Checks” he had been reading. On approaching the
vicarage, he saw a man working in the garden, who, addressing the young
shoemaker, said, “You see, my brother, a fulfilment of the curse, ‘In
the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread.’” Bradburn, stating who he
was, said he had not been at Madeley before, and wished to be introduced
to Mr. Fletcher. “I am John Fletcher,” replied the amateur gardener.
Bradburn, for the moment, was embarrassed; but on saying that he had
come to consult the vicar of Madeley respecting his being called to
engage in the Christian ministry, Fletcher, with his characteristic
generosity, led him into his house, and requested him to become his
guest. The invitation was gratefully accepted, and during his stay the
young shoemaker was treated with paternal kindness. Bradburn, like his
host, was an early riser, and every morning was employed in finding the
texts of Scripture which Fletcher wished to use in the “Check” he was
then writing, and in listening to Fletcher’s exposition of them. When
two or three hours had thus been spent, the students went into the
garden of the vicarage and had a spell at any kind of work that needed
attention. After this followed the plain gruel breakfast and domestic
devotion. Then several more hours were employed in the vicar’s study;
after which the master and the pupil set out to visit the parishioners.
Every night in the week young Bradburn preached in colliers’ cottages,
or in the Methodist meeting-house, Fletcher standing by his side, and
generally supplementing the sermon with additional remarks, delivered
with delicate tenderness, and always concluded by a prayer. To the end
of life, Bradburn thankfully acknowledged that he greatly owed his
subsequent eminence to this Madeley visit. When he was leaving, the
kind-hearted vicar said, “My little David, go! and if you preach forty
years, and save only a single soul, don’t think your time and labour
have been lost.” Bradburn always spoke of his early friend as “Saint
Fletcher;” and often said, that when he looked at the vicar of Madeley
he was almost ready to think the Lord Jesus Christ stood before him in
the person of His servant; and in hours of depression, when he found it
difficult to pray, he was wont to sigh and cry, “God of Mr. Fletcher,
bless me!”[283]

Footnote 283:

  Miss Bradburn’s MSS., and MS. by Mr. Harrison, of Chester.

The Methodist reader need not be told that Fletcher’s humble pupil rose
to great eminence. Unquestionably he was the greatest pulpit orator that
Wesley ever had. Dr. Adam Clarke, who knew him well, once said to a
young preacher, who wished his opinion concerning Bradburn, “I have
never heard his equal; I can furnish you with no adequate idea of his
powers as an orator; we have not a man among us that will support
anything like a comparison with him. Another Bradburn must be created,
and you must hear him for yourself, before you can receive a
satisfactory answer to your inquiry.”

In 1817, all the sermons that Bradburn had published, whether separately
or in the _Methodist Magazine_, were collected, and published in a 12
mo. volume of 332 pages; but, as Dr. Abel Stevens well observes, “The
eloquence of Bradburn, like that of Whitefield, could not be printed.”

John Fletcher rendered no small service to John Wesley and the
Methodists by his brief training of the young shoemaker in 1773.

While writing his “Checks,” Fletcher seems to have been obliged to
curtail his correspondence with his friends. At all events, his
published letters belonging to this period are few in number. The
following were written in 1773. The first was addressed to his friend
Mr. Vaughan, the officer of Excise at Atcham, with whom he became
acquainted while he had the charge of the sons of Mr. Hill:—

                                                           “MADELEY,

  .

  “MY VERY DEAR FRIEND,—At the beginning of the week I received your
  kind letter, and your kind present at the end of it. For both I
  heartily thank you. Nevertheless, I could wish it were your last
  present, for I find it more blessed to give than to receive; and in
  point of the good things of this life my body does not want much, and
  I can do with what is more common, and cheaper, than the rarities you
  ply me with.

  “Your bounty upon bounty reminds me of the repeated mercies of our
  God. They follow one another as wave does wave at sea; and all to waft
  us to the pleasing shore of confidence and gratitude, where we can not
  only cast anchor near, but calmly stand on the Rock of Ages, and defy
  the rage of tempests. But you complain, you are not _there_; billows
  of temptation drive you from the haven where you would be, and you cry
  out still, ‘_Oh wretched man! who shall deliver me?_’

  “Here I would ask, Are you willing, _really willing_, to be delivered?
  Is your sin, is the prevalence of temptation, a burden too heavy for
  you to bear? If it is, if your complaint is not a kind of religious
  compliment, be of good cheer—only believe. Look up! for your
  redemption draweth near. He is near that delivers, that justifies,
  that sanctifies you. Cast your soul upon Him. An act of faith will
  help you to a lift; but _one_ act of faith will not do. _Faith must be
  our life_; I mean _in conjunction with its grand object_. You cannot
  live by one breath; you must breathe on, and draw the electric, vital
  fire into your lungs together with the air. So you must believe, and
  draw the Divine power, the fire of Jesu’s love, together with the
  truth of the Gospel, which is the blessed element in which believers
  live.

  “My kind Christian love to Mrs. Vaughan. Tell her I am filled with joy
  in thinking that, though we no more serve the same earthly
  master,[284] yet we still serve the same heavenly one; who will, ere
  long, admit us to sit with Abraham himself, if we hold fast our
  confidence to the end.

  “Beware of the world. If you have losses, be not cast down, nor root
  in the earth with more might and main to repair them. If prosperity
  smiles upon you, you are in double danger. Think, my friend, that
  earthly prosperity is like a coloured cloud, which passes away and is
  soon lost in the shades of night and death. Beware of hurry. Martha,
  Martha, one thing is needful! Choose it, stand to your choice, and the
  good part shall not be taken from you by sickness or death. God bless
  you and yours with all that makes for His glory and your peace.

                         “I am, my dear friend, yours, etc.,
                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[285]

Footnote 284:

  From this, it would appear that Mrs. Vaughan, previous to her
  marriage, had been in the employ of Mr. Hill, of Tern Hall.

Footnote 285:

  Letters, 1791, p. 216.

The following extracts are taken from a letter addressed to James
Ireland, Esq., of Brislington, who had suggested to Fletcher the
expediency of publishing in the French language his “Appeal to Matter of
Fact and Common Sense.”

                                     “MADELEY, _September 21, 1773_.

  “MY VERY DEAR FRIEND,—I have considered what you say about the
  translation of my ‘Appeal;’ and I think I might do it some day; nay, I
  tried to turn a paragraph or two the day after I received your letter,
  but found it would be a difficult, if not an impossible work for me. I
  am sure I could not do it abroad. On a journey, I am just like a cask
  of wine—I am good for nothing till I have some time to settle.

  “What you say about Mr. Wesley adds weight to your kind arguments. My
  spiritual circumstances are what I must look at. I tremble lest
  outward things should hurt me. The multiplicity of objects and
  avocations, which attend travelling, is not suited to my case. I
  think, all things considered, I should sin against my conscience in
  going, unless I had a call from _necessity_, or from _clearer_
  providences.

  “My last ‘Check’ will be as much in behalf of free grace as of
  holiness; so I hope, upon that plan, all the candid and moderate will
  be able to shake hands. It will be of a reconciling nature; and I call
  it an ‘Equal Check to Pharisaism and Antinomianism.’

  “I see life so short, and time passes away with such rapidity, that I
  should be very glad to spend it in solemn prayer; but it is necessary
  that a man should have some exterior occupation. The chief thing is to
  employ ourselves profitably. My throat is not formed for the labours
  of preaching. When I have preached three or four times together, it
  inflames and fills up; and the efforts, which I am then obliged to
  make, heat my blood. Thus, I am, by nature, as well as by the
  circumstances I am in, obliged to employ my time in writing a little.
  O that I may be enabled to do it to the glory of God!

  “Let us love this good God, who hath ‘so loved the world, that He gave
  His Only-begotten Son that we might not perish, but have everlasting
  life.’ How sweet is it, on our knees, to receive this Jesus, this
  heavenly gift, and to offer our praises and thanks to our heavenly
  Father! The Lord teaches me four lessons; the first is to be thankful
  that I am not in hell; the second, to become _nothing_ before Him; the
  third, to _receive_ the gift of God; and the fourth is to feel my want
  of the _Spirit_ of Jesus, and to wait for it. These four lessons are
  very deep. O when shall I have learned them! Let us go together to the
  school of Jesus, and learn to be meek and lowly in heart. Adieu!

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[286]

Footnote 286:

  Letters, 1791, p. 218.

The above is the first time that Fletcher complains of his throat. This
affection, in itself, apart from the other reason he mentions, was quite
sufficient to justify his hesitancy in complying with Wesley’s request
to devote himself to the itinerancy, and to train himself to become
Wesley’s successor.

Before returning to the Calvinian controversy, two other incidents,
belonging to the year 1773, must be mentioned.

  “John Wilkes,” says Fletcher, “was born at Darlaston. His father dying
  when he was a child, his mother bound him an apprentice to a collier,
  who delighted in cock-fighting, and who was killed by a quantity of
  coals falling upon him in the pit. The collier’s widow, being unable
  to manage Wilkes, released him from his apprenticeship for a trifling
  sum of money. He began to steal fowls, that he might have the pleasure
  of fighting those that would fight, and eating those that would not.
  Two or three years ago he was committed to Stafford jail, and soon
  after publicly whipped for that offence. From breaking into
  hen-roosts, he proceeded to break into and to rob the dwelling-house
  of a widow at Darlaston; and, going upon the highway, he robbed a man
  of his watch and some money. He was taken, and recommitted to Stafford
  jail. He took his trial at the last assizes; and, being found guilty
  of the above-mentioned robberies, received sentence of death, with
  another young man, who had set fire to some barns, and a stack of
  hay.”

John Wilkes’ eldest sister was Fletcher’s servant, and to her the
convict wrote the following:—

                                   “STAFFORD JAIL, _March 17, 1773_.

  “This informs you of my being a convict under sentence of death. I beg
  you will endeavour to prevail on Mr. Fletcher to grant me his interest
  for a reprieve, by getting me recommended to his majesty’s mercy. And
  I tenderly beg you will come over and see me here in a few days, who
  am your poor unfortunate brother,

                                                      “JOHN WILKES.”

Fletcher declined to interfere, but wrote a long letter to the convict,
dated “Madeley, _March 23, 1773_.” He says:—

  “JOHN WILKES,—Your sister desiring me to make application to some
  person in power, to get you reprieved for transportation, I take this
  first opportunity of informing you that I was once concerned in saving
  a young man from the gallows, because he was condemned for his first
  offence, which was robbing his master of money, and that I had no
  thanks, but many upbraidings for my pains; the poor creature having
  turned out very bad, done much mischief before he left England, and
  being spared, I fear, only to hurt his fellow-creatures, and fill up
  the measure of his iniquities.

  “Besides, you know, John, that your crimes are of the most capital
  nature. You are not only a housebreaker, but a highwayman, and a very
  notorious offender. You know you have committed crimes enough to hang
  two or three men, perhaps half-a-dozen. And so far as I can gather
  from a variety of circumstances, you are the very person that broke
  open my house over the way, and robbed the poor widow who lives in it.
  If you committed that robbery, I desire you to confess it before you
  leave this world; for ‘he that confesseth and forsaketh his sins shall
  obtain mercy;’ while he that tells lies to conceal them, pulls down
  double vengeance upon his guilty head.

  “But whether you committed that robbery or not, I earnestly desire
  that you will submit to your sentence. I neither can nor will meddle
  in that affair; nor have I any probability of success if I did. Apply
  then yourself, night and day, to the King of heaven for grace and
  mercy. If you cry to Him from the bottom of your heart, as a condemned
  dying man, who deserves hell as well as the gallows; if you sincerely
  confess your crimes, and beg the Son of God, the Lord Jesus Christ, to
  intercede for you, it is not too late to get your soul reprieved. He
  will speak for you to God Almighty; He will pardon all your sins; He
  will wash you in His most precious blood; He will stand by you in your
  extremity; He will deliver you out of the hands of the hellish
  executioner; and, though you have lived the life of the wicked, He
  will help you to die the death of the penitent. He can feel for poor
  condemned thieves; for He himself was condemned to be hanged on a
  tree; not indeed for His own sins, for He never transgressed, but for
  your crimes and mine.”

  “On Saturday, March 27,” continues Fletcher in his narrative, “I gave
  a few lines for the keeper of Stafford jail, to Sarah Wilkes, the
  malefactor’s sister, and to Elizabeth Childs, a serious woman, whom
  she had got to bear her company; and, when I had recommended in prayer
  the condemned criminals to the Redeemer’s compassion, and their feeble
  visitors to the protection of Him Who can give wisdom to the simple,
  they set out to see John Wilkes, and administer some spiritual comfort
  to him before he launched into eternity.”

The poor women met with a rough reception at Stafford prison. The
jailer, a fair specimen of officials in other prisons, at that period,
said, “What do you want with John Wilkes? to preach him a sermon, and
sing psalms? I know very well what you are, a parcel of canting
hypocrites.”

Sarah Wilkes and Elizabeth Childs showed themselves to be apt pupils of
the Vicar of Madeley. In the Journal of their nine days’ visit they
wrote:—

  “We were much discouraged at the jailer’s behaviour. So we agreed to
  lay the matter before God in prayer, and beg of Him that He would
  touch the jailer’s heart, and cause him to let us in. The next
  morning, which was Sunday, after begging hard for grace, wisdom, and
  courage, we went to the prison; and, to our great surprise, the
  turnkey opened the door, and, without speaking a word, took us
  straight to the condemned men, and let us be with them as long as we
  thought proper; a liberty which we were allowed twice a day till they
  suffered.”

John Wilkes confessed to the two women that he had robbed the house at
Madeley, in which the poor widow lived. He became a penitent. The nine
days’ Journal of his sister and Elizabeth Childs concludes thus:—

  “Saturday, April 3, the day of his execution, John Wilkes was
  exceeding happy, and employed in breathing out prayers and praises to
  God. In the morning, we spent about two hours with him and his
  fellow-prisoner, praying and praising together in their dungeon, with
  much brokenness of heart, and many tears of joy and sorrow; for we
  were both persuaded that John Wilkes had saving faith, and an unshaken
  well-grounded confidence that God would take him to glory.

  “About two hours before the execution, which was between four and five
  in the afternoon, his sister asked, ‘Dost thou find thyself happy in
  the Lord?’ To which he answered, ‘Yes, I do, I do, more and more.’

  “When they were come to the place of execution, John Wilkes’s
  companion desired the spectators, especially young people, to take
  warning by them; which was the more affecting, as he was supposed to
  be only about twenty years old, and John Wilkes was not above
  nineteen. They sang and prayed some time under the gallows; and the
  last words John Wilkes was heard to speak were, ‘Lord, from this place
  receive me into Thy heavenly kingdom!’”

Some will condemn Fletcher’s action, or rather inaction, in the case of
John Wilkes; but, a hundred years ago, public opinion respecting crimes,
criminals, and criminal punishment was widely different from the public
opinion of the present day. It certainly seems to be a savage thing to
hang a youth of nineteen years of age for thieving; but the law of the
land authorized this; and Fletcher evidently had but little hope of any
good arising from reprievement in a case like that of Wilkes. Perhaps he
was right, or perhaps he was wrong. At all events, Wilkes became a
penitent thief, and, as such, his sister and his sister’s master had
reason to rejoice and to give thanks. Fletcher immediately published a
pamphlet on the occasion with the title, “The Penitent Thief; or, a
Narrative of Two Women, fearing God, who Visited in Prison a Highwayman,
executed at Stafford, April 3, 1773. With a Letter to a Condemned
Malefactor. And a Penitential Office, for either a true Churchman, or a
dying Criminal, extracted from the Scriptures and the Established
Liturgy.”

Nothing more need be said, except that the “Penitential Office” was
compiled “entirely from the Scriptures and the Liturgy of the Church of
England;” that it was suitable for either a living sinner or a dying
thief; and that, to excite, exercise, and increase his own repentance,
Fletcher himself was accustomed to use it in his private devotions.

A few weeks after the execution of John Wilkes another event occurred,
which must be noticed. The following is taken from _Lloyd’s Evening
Post_, of June 11, 1773:—

   “An authentic account of the earthquake at the Birches, about a mile
              above the bottom of Coalbrookdale, Shropshire.

  “In the dead of the night, between Tuesday the 25th and Wednesday the
  26th ult., Samuel Wilcocks’s wife, who lived in a small house at the
  Birches, was sitting up in bed, to take care of one of her children,
  who was ill, when she perceived the bed shake under her, and observed
  some balm tea in a cup to be so agitated that it was spilled.

  “On Thursday morning, the 27th, Samuel Wilcocks and John Roberts (who
  likewise lived in the house at the Birches) got up about four o’clock,
  and, opening their window to see what the weather was, observed a
  crack in the ground four or five inches wide, and a field sown with
  oats heaving and rolling like waves of water. The trees moved as if
  blown with wind, though the air was calm and serene. The Severn (in
  which at that time was a considerable flood) was much agitated, and
  seemed to run upwards. The house shook; and, in a great fright,
  Wilcocks and Roberts roused the rest of the family, and ran out of
  doors. Immediately, about thirty acres of land, with the hedges and
  trees standing, moved with great force and swiftness towards the
  Severn. Near the river was a small wood, in which grew twenty large
  oaks. The wood was pushed with such velocity into the channel of the
  Severn, that it drove the bed of the river on the opposite shore many
  feet above the surface of the water, where it lodged, as did one side
  of the wood. The current of the river was instantly stopped. This
  occasioned a great inundation above, and so sudden a fall below, that
  many fish were left on dry land. The river took its course over a
  large meadow, and in three days wore a navigable channel. A turnpike
  road was moved more than thirty yards. A barn was carried about the
  same distance, and was left as a heap of rubbish in a large chasm. The
  house” (in which Wilcocks lived) “received but little damage; but the
  garden hedge was removed about fifty yards. Several long and deep
  chasms are formed in the upper part of the land from fourteen to
  upwards of thirty yards wide, in which are many pyramids of earth
  standing, with the green turf remaining on the tops of some of them.
  The land on both sides the river is the property of Walter Acton
  Moseley, Esq., who, we hear, has sustained a damage of six or seven
  hundred pounds.

  “On Friday, the 28th, the Rev. Mr. Fletcher, Vicar of Madeley,
  preached a sermon upon the ground, to an audience of more than one
  thousand people. In a most pathetic discourse, he expatiated on the
  works of Divine Providence; recommended his hearers to prepare for the
  last great and awful day; and expressed the hope that the present
  dreadful scene would prove a sufficient warning to them.

                                                    “T. ADDENBROOKE.

  “Coalbrooke Dale,
  June 4, 1773..png
  ”

So long an extract from a newspaper would hardly have been proper in a
“Life of Fletcher,” but for the fact that Fletcher himself immediately
published a bulky pamphlet of 104 pages, on the same event. Its long
title was the following: “A Dreadful Phenomenon described and improved.
Being a Particular Account of the Sudden Stoppage of the River Severn,
and of the Terrible Desolation that happened at the Birches, between
Coalbrook Dale and Buildwas Bridge, in Shropshire, on Thursday morning,
May 27, 1773. And the Substance of a Sermon, preached the next day, on
the ruins, to a vast concourse of spectators. By John Fletcher, Vicar of
Madeley, in Shropshire, and Chaplain to the Right Hon. the Earl of
Buchan. Shrewsbury, 1773. Price, One Shilling.”

Thirty-three pages of Fletcher’s publication are filled with a
description of the “Dreadful Phenomenon.” This is dated “Madeley, July
6, 1773.” No useful purpose would be served by quoting Fletcher’s
account of what he heard and saw; but the following extract will show
how he was led to preach his sermon:—

  “Should the reader desire to know why I preached upon the ruins, I
  will ingenuously tell him. The day the earth opened at the Birches, as
  I considered one of the chasms, several of my parishioners gathered
  around me. I observed to them, that, the sight before us was a
  remarkable confirmation of the first argument of a book called, ‘An
  Appeal to Matter of Fact, or a Rational Demonstration of Man’s Fallen
  and Lost Estate,’ which I had just published, as a last effort to
  awaken to a sense of the fear of God the careless gentlemen of my
  parish, to whom it is dedicated. Having a few copies about me, which I
  was going to present to some of them, I begged leave to read that
  argument.

  “I concluded my reading and remarks by thanksgiving and prayer; and,
  perceiving that seriousness sat upon all faces, I told the people,
  that, if they would come again the next evening to the same place, I
  would endeavour to improve the loud call to repentance, which God had
  given us that day.

  “They readily consented; and when I came, at the time appointed, to my
  great surprise, I found a vast concourse of people, and among them
  several of my parishioners, who had never been at church in all their
  life. After a prayer and thanksgiving suitable to the uncommon
  circumstances, I preached a sermon, of which, so far as I can
  recollect, the reader may find the substance, with some additions, in
  the following pages. May it have a better effect upon him than it had
  upon some of the gentlemen who heard it! Instead of a prayer-book,
  they pulled out their favourite companion, a bottle; and imparted the
  strong contents to each other, as heartily as I did the awful contents
  of my text to the _decent_ part of the congregation. Gentle reader,
  receive them as cordially as they did their stupifying antidote, and I
  ask no more.”

This, certainly, was a disgraceful scene, but not so disgraceful as that
which occurred a few days afterwards, and which Fletcher, in a
foot-note, relates. Among the many thousands, who came to view the
results of the earthquake, were a company from Bridgnorth, headed by a
young clergyman, who “brought music along with them, and set a-dancing
upon the very place where the awful earthquake had happened.”

The text of Fletcher’s almost impromptu sermon was Numb. xvi. 30—34. The
sermon itself occupies seventy pages. Addressing the irreverent
“gentlemen” before him, the bold preacher cried:—

  “O ye Christian Dathans, ye lofty Abirams, ye, who, like those proud
  Israelites, are in your respective parishes ‘_princes of the assembly,
  famous in the congregation, men of renown_,’ the eyes of this populous
  neighbourhood are upon you, especially the eyes of poor illiterate
  colliers, waggoners, and watermen. Do you not consider that they mind
  your _examples_, rather than God’s precepts? Are you not aware that
  they follow you as a bleating flock follows the first wandering sheep?
  Because they cannot read the sacred pages, or even tell the first
  letters of the alphabet, think you they cannot read _secret contempt
  of Almighty God_ on the sleeves, in which they sometimes see you laugh
  at godliness? And suppose ye, they cannot make out _open pollution of
  His Sabbaths_ when they see the remarkable seats, which you so
  frequently leave empty at church? Do you not know that the lessons of
  practical atheism, which you thus give them in the free school of bad
  example, they learn without delay, practise without remorse, and teach
  others with unwearied diligence? Alas! the pattern of indevotion,
  which you set in the house of God, carries, before you are aware, its
  baneful influence through a hundred private houses. Oh! how many are
  now numbered among the dead, who have taken to the ways of destruction
  by following _you_! How many are yet unborn, upon whom a curse will be
  entailed, in consequence of the spreading plague of irreligion, which
  their parents have caught from _you_! And shall not their blood be,
  more or less, required at your hands? ‘Shall not I visit for these
  things, saith the Lord? Shall not my soul be avenged on such a nation
  as this?’”

This was fearless speaking, and not likely to increase Fletcher’s
popularity among his rich, dissolute parishioners. The following extract
is struck upon another key:—

  “Although we cannot all ‘_sing the song of the Lamb_,’ yet, glory be
  to God! we all consider the patience of our offended Creator, who,
  upon these ruins, invites us to repent and live. The earth, in the
  days of Moses, opened her mouth, and dreadfully swallowed up two
  families. The earth yesterday opened her mouth, probably far wider,
  and yet the only two families that lived here were suffered to make
  their escape. Allelujah! Praise the Lord! Multitudes of fishes have
  perished on dry ground, and myriads of land insects in the waters; and
  yet we, sinful insects before God, have neither been drowned in
  yesterday’s flood, nor buried in these chasms: Allelujah! God’s
  tremendous axe has been lifted up; some of yonder green trees have
  been struck; and we, who are dry trees, we, cumberers of the ground,
  are graciously spared; Allelujah! The house of Dathan and Abiram, with
  all that appertained unto them, descended into the pit of destruction;
  and we, who are loaded with mountains of sins, stand yet upon firm
  ground, with all our friends. Allelujah! God, who might have commanded
  the earth to swallow up a thronged play-house, the royal exchange, a
  crowded cathedral, the parliament house, or the king’s palace, has
  graciously commanded an empty barn to sink, and give us the alarm.
  Allelujah! He might have ordered such a tract of land as this, to
  heave, move, and open in the centre of our populous cities; but mercy
  has inclined Him to fix upon this solitary place. Allelujah! He might
  have suffered the road and the river to be overthrown, when cursing
  drivers passed with their horses, and blaspheming watermen with their
  barges; but His compassion made Him strike the warning blow with all
  possible tenderness. ‘O that men would therefore praise the Lord for
  His goodness, and declare the wonders that He does for the children of
  men!’”

These two extracts from the sermon preached on this remarkable occasion
must suffice; but one of Fletcher’s foot-notes may be added:—

  “A woman, thirty-five years of age, passing before a looking-glass the
  day after she heard this sermon, was surprised to see an unusual
  paleness upon her face. She called her husband, told him she was a
  dying woman, and actually died in a quarter of an hour. She heard me
  on the Friday, and I buried her the Monday following. Another
  middle-aged person, who was also among my hearers, was buried the next
  day in the next parish. How soon may we be called to give an account
  of what we speak or hear, write or _read_!”

The anti-evangelical _Monthly Review_ of November, 1773, in noticing
Fletcher’s publication, remarked:—

  “Mr. Fletcher, who is a man of learning and considerable abilities,
  has given us a curious account of this phenomenon, which has been so
  frequently mentioned in our newspapers. He has minutely, but in very
  flowery language, described the awful appearances left by this
  extraordinary convulsion of the earth; and he fairly states the
  different opinions which were formed in regard to the cause of so
  wonderful an event. Mr. Fletcher tells us that he piously chose to
  take advantage of the seriousness stamped, by this alarming
  occurrence, on the minds of the country people, in order to press upon
  them a proper sense of the _first_ or _moral_ cause of so tremendous a
  dispensation; and this he has done in a manner as rational as could be
  well expected from the peculiarity of the occasion and the known
  enthusiastic spirit of the preacher.”




                              CHAPTER XIV.
                _“THE FINISHING STROKE,” “THE CHRISTIAN
                  WORLD UNMASKED,” “MR. RICHARD HILL’S
                            THREE LETTERS.”_

                                 1773.


AFTER this long and awkward interruption, there must now be a return to
the wearisome Calvinian controversy.

Early in the year 1773, Mr. Richard Hill published an 8vo. pamphlet of
57 pages, with the title, “The Finishing Stroke: containing some
Strictures on the Rev. Mr. Fletcher’s Pamphlet, entitled Logica
Genevensis, or a Fourth Check to Antinomianism.”

  “The Finishing Stroke!” remarked the _Monthly Review_ for March, 1773.
  “No—we are afraid not! We shall certainly have _more last words_ from
  Shropshire. Here is a fresh attack on the Vicar of Madeley. Mr. Hill
  does not seem at all inclined to let Mr. Fletcher remain master of the
  field, for want of an opponent, ‘notwithstanding the resolution he had
  formed of being silent.’—_Vide advert._ prefixed to the ‘Finishing
  Stroke.’”

Mr. Hill’s pamphlet is dated January 2, 1773, and addressed to Fletcher.
He begins by saying:—

  “Last Saturday, and not before, I received your _Logica Genevensis_,
  or _Fourth Check to Antinomianism_; and am truly sorry to find that
  neither the spirit of the piece, nor the doctrine it contains, is a
  jot better than what appeared in the former Checks.”

Mr. Richard Hill was angrier than ever. Want of space renders it
impossible to examine his theology; and to quote his calumnious
accusations is unsavoury work; and yet the latter must be done, for the
employment of these slanders was, at least, one of the reasons why the
controversy was continued. Perhaps, Fletcher was not averse to fighting.
He liked an honourable contest, especially if it was likely to repress
evil, or to promote good. To do this had been his chief, almost his only
object during the last two years; but now his own reputation was at
stake, and he was bound to defend himself, as well as to defend the
doctrines he had expounded and enforced.

               “The purest treasure mortal times afford,
               Is spotless reputation; that away,
               Men are but gilded loam, or painted clay.”

On the ninth page of his pamphlet, Richard Hill politely asks poor
Fletcher, “Can you wonder, Sir, that we look upon you as a spiritual
calumniator, and that we accuse you of vile falsehood and gross
perversion?”

On the next page, Mr. Hill remarks:—

  “I know, Sir, that it was a warm attachment to your friend, which
  occasioned you to run the lengths you have done. But dear as that
  friend is to you, truth ought to be dearer still; yet the maxim, which
  you seem all along to pursue, is, that Mr. Wesley _must be
  vindicated_; yea, though all the ministers in the kingdom, yourself
  not excepted, should fall to the ground. But what makes us still more
  sensibly feel the power of your pen is that our tenets are most
  shamefully (would I could say unintentionally) misrepresented, in
  order to prejudice the world against us, and to make them believe we
  hold sentiments which from our inmost souls we most cordially detest;
  particularly with regard to the doctrines of election and
  perseverance, which you have made to stand upon a pillory as high as
  Haman’s gallows, dressed up in a frightful garb of your own invention,
  and then pelted them till all your mud and dirt was exhausted.

  “Mr. Wesley has nothing to do but hold up his finger in order to
  prevent thousands of his followers from ever looking into anything
  that is written against his own faction, and to make them believe that
  the _Four Checks_ (as they are called) contain the _medulla_ of the
  Christian religion. Be this as it will, the unfair quotations you have
  made, and the shocking misrepresentations and calumnies you have been
  guilty of, will, for the future, prevent me from looking into any of
  your books, if you should write a thousand volumes. So here the
  controversy must end; at least it shall end for me.”

  “I cannot, however, conclude without again acknowledging that, in the
  sight of men, your life is exemplary, and your walk outwardly
  blameless” (p. 41).

Mr. Richard Hill added a “Postscript” of ten pages to his long letter,
the postscript chiefly consisting of extracts from one of Fletcher’s
sermons, preached in Madeley Church, eleven years before, and of which
Mr. Hill happened to possess a manuscript copy. The text was Rom. xi. 5,
6. Mr. Hill says he regards this sermon as “the best confutation” of
Wesley’s “Minutes,” and of Fletcher’s “Checks;” and that, because he so
regarded it, he had actually sent it to press; but, doubting the
fairness and uprightness of such a proceeding without obtaining the
preacher’s permission, he had “stopped the publication.” Mr. Hill,
however, now published _extracts_ from the sermon, without Fletcher’s
permission; and this induced Fletcher to _re-preach_ his sermon with
additions and explanations. This was done in Madeley Church, on May 23,
1773, and the sermon, thus revised, was published in the First Part of
Fletcher’s “Equal Check to Pharisaism and Antinomianism,” in 1774.

It would be easy to pick out of Mr. Hill’s “Finishing Stroke” not a few
most shameful opprobriums. Fletcher is accused of “descending to the
poor illiberal arts of forgery and defamation, in order to _blacken_ his
opponents, and to establish his own pernicious principles.” “He had used
high-flown sarcastic declamation, base forgeries, and gross
misrepresentations.”

Such were some of the acerbities of Richard Hill. He was the slanderer;
not Fletcher. The latter was too much a gentleman, to say nothing of his
being a Christian, to indulge in such scurrilous vituperation. The two
men had been engaged in a theological combat; Hill had been utterly
vanquished; and, instead of meekly acknowledging his defeat, he
dishonourably abused his victorious opponent. With respect to his
conversion, he was more indebted to Fletcher than to any other man; but
this was now forgotten. The Vicar of Madeley, whom he had so greatly
loved, had become the object of his scorn.

Immediately after the publication of his “Finishing Stroke,” Mr. Richard
Hill committed to the press another 8vo pamphlet, of 63 pages, entitled,
“Logica Wesleiensis; or, The Farrago Double Distilled. With an Heroic
Poem in Praise of Mr. John Wesley.” Mr. Hill, in addressing Wesley,
says:—

  “I have never seen you above four or five times in my whole life; once
  in the pulpit at West Street Chapel; once at a friend’s house; and
  once or twice, at my request, you were so kind as to drink a
  _forbidden dish of tea_ with me, when I lodged in Vine Street, St.
  James’s, as I wanted to speak to you concerning a poor man in your
  connections.“

By his own confession, it is evident that Mr. Hill’s personal knowledge
of Wesley was very slight, and yet, in his “Logica Wesleiensis,” he
abuses him more ferociously than he had abused Fletcher in his
“Finishing Stroke.” Of the contumely hurled at Wesley, nothing will be
said here, but two or three extracts concerning Fletcher must be
introduced:—

  “Mr. Fletcher affirms that all the Protestant Churches, the old
  Calvinist ministers, and Puritan divines, are on the side of the
  ‘Minutes.’ Mr. Hill makes it appear, as clear as the sun, that this is
  a point-blank falsehood as ever was written” (p. 7).

  “Mr. Wesley revised, corrected, and gave his own _imprimatur_ to all
  Mr. Fletcher’s _Checks_, throughout which, Mr. John is the Alpha and
  the Omega” (p. 53).[287]

  “Since the foregoing pages were finished in manuscript, I have seen
  Mr. Fletcher’s ‘_Logica Genevensis_, or _Fourth Check to
  Antinomianism_.’ Though I fully intended to have been silent, the many
  perversions and misrepresentations which I have detected under the
  cover of much professed candour, will oblige me once more to enter the
  lists with my able antagonist; but, despairing of my own skill, I must
  beg leave to call in the Vicar of Madeley, to be my second; and
  happily for this purpose I have preserved a sermon of his, which was
  preached by him only a few years ago, in his own parish church, from
  Rom. xi. 5, 6. I think it is by far the best refutation of the
  unscriptural doctrine contained in the ‘Minutes,’ and in all the
  ‘Checks,’ which I have yet seen. As this sermon was publicly delivered
  before a very numerous congregation, and copies of it handed about, by
  the preacher’s own permission; and as he tells us that he is
  determined, _God being his helper, to preach the doctrine therein
  contained, till his tongue cleave to the roof of his mouth_,—no
  reasonable person can think that there is the least unfairness in my
  availing myself of so powerful an ally; and I solemnly declare, upon
  the word of a Christian, that, in the few extracts I may make from it,
  I will not alter the least jot or tittle from the manuscript, and only
  make some marginal notes and observations upon it” (p. 59).

Footnote 287:

  This was not true, at all events, so far as the “Fourth Check” was
  concerned. See Wesley’s Works, vol. x., p. 400.

Mr. Richard Hill might think there was nothing unfair in publishing
another man’s manuscript without his permission; but men of honour will
disagree with him. Even if the manuscript had contained doctrines at
variance with some propounded in Fletcher’s “Checks,” what then? Eleven
years had elapsed since the sermon was composed and preached; and surely
Fletcher was not to be blamed and lashed if, during such a lengthened
period, he had modified some of his theological opinions. Fletcher had
no choice left to him but to re-examine his old sermon, and ascertain if
it contained anything contrary to the doctrines advocated in his
“Checks.”

Meanwhile, another opponent had entered the battle-field. Just at this
juncture, honest, and good, though eccentric, John Berridge, Vicar of
Everton, published his well-known book, entitled, “The Christian World
Unmasked. Pray Come and Peep.” 12mo, 229 pp. The doctrines so quaintly
taught by Berridge were the doctrines of Richard Hill and his
Calvinistic friends; but Berridge was too loving a Christian to display
Richard Hill’s acrimonious spirit. The names of Wesley and Fletcher were
not once mentioned in the whole of his performance; though, of course,
their tenets were attacked. No one could find fault with this; but
Fletcher felt it his duty to answer his dear old friend at Everton.
Writing to John Thornton, Esq., on August 18, 1773, Berridge remarked:—

  “In a letter, just received from Mr. Fletcher, he says, ‘What you have
  said about sincere obedience has touched the apple of God’s eye, and
  is the very core of Antinomianism.[288] You have done your best to
  disparage sincere obedience, and, in a pamphlet ready for the press, I
  have freely exposed what you have written.’ Then he cries out, in a
  declamatory style, ‘For God’s sake, let us only speak against
  insincere and Pharisaical obedience.’ Indeed, I thought I had been
  writing against insincere obedience throughout the pamphlet; and that
  every one, who has eyes, must see it clearly; but I suppose Mr.
  Fletcher’s spectacles invert objects, and make people walk with their
  heads downwards.”[289]

Footnote 288:

  In a letter to the Rev. John Newton, of Olney, dated September 20,
  1773, Berridge said, in his own quaint style, “The Vicar of Madeley
  has sent me word that my prattle, in my pamphlet of ‘Sincere
  Obedience,’ ‘is the core of Antinomianism, has exposed St. James, and
  touched the apple of God’s eye,’ and that he intends to put my head in
  the pillory, and my nose in the barnacles for so doing.” (“Works of
  Berridge; and Life by Whittingham,” p. 386.)

Footnote 289:

  “Works of Berridge; and Life by Whittingham,” p. 382.

In another letter to the same gentleman, dated thirteen days afterwards,
Berridge observed:—

  ”I thank you for the friendly admonition you gave me respecting Mr.
  Fletcher. It made me look into my heart, and I found some resentment
  there. What a lurking devil this pride is! How soon he takes fire, and
  yet hides his head so demurely in the embers, that we do not easily
  discover him! I think it is advisable to write to Mr. Fletcher, though
  despairing of success. His pamphlet will certainly be published now it
  is finished. Indeed, I have written to him aforetime more than once,
  and besought him to drop all controversy; but he seems to regard such
  entreaties as flowing rather from a fear of his pen than a desire of
  peace. His heart is somewhat exalted by his writings, and no wonder.
  He is also endowed with great acuteness, which, though much admired by
  the world, is a great obstacle to a quiet childlike spirit. And he is
  at present eagerly seeking after legal perfection, which naturally
  produceth controversial heat. As Gospel and peace, so law and
  controversy go hand in hand together. How can lawyers live without
  strife? In such a situation, I know, from my own former sad
  experience, he will take the Scotch thistle for his motto, _Noli me
  tangere_. But his heart seemeth very upright, and his labours are
  abundant; and I trust the Master will serve him, by-and-by, as he has
  served me,—put him into a pickling tub, and drench him there soundly.
  When he comes out, dripping all over, he will be glad to cry, ‘Grace,
  grace,’ and ‘a little child may lead him.’ We learn nothing truly of
  ourselves, or of grace, but in a furnace.

  “Whatever Mr. Fletcher may write against my pamphlet, I am determined
  to make no reply. I dare not trust my own wicked heart in a
  controversy. If my pamphlet is faulty, let it be overthrown; if sound,
  it will rise above any learned rubbish that is cast upon it. Indeed,
  what signifies my pamphlet, or its author? While it was publishing, I
  was heartily weary of it; and have really been sick of it since, and
  concluded it had done no good because it had met with no
  opposition.”[290]

Footnote 290:

  “Works of Berridge; and Life by Whittingham,” p. 384.

Berridge did write to Fletcher. Hence, in another letter to Mr.
Thornton, he said:—

  “Everton, September 25, 1773. I have written to Mr. Fletcher, and told
  him what was my intention in speaking against sincere obedience, and
  that my intention was manifest enough from the whole drift of my
  pamphlet. I have also acquainted him that I am an enemy to
  controversy, and that if his tract is published, I shall not rise up
  to fight with him, but will be a dead man before he kills me. I
  further told him I was afraid that Mr. Toplady[291] and himself were
  setting the Christian world on fire, and the carnal world in laughter,
  and wished they could both desist from controversy. A letter seemed
  needful, yet I wrote to him without any hope of success, and it
  appears there is not any. Mr. Jones, an expelled Oxonian, has just
  been with him, and called upon me last Saturday. Mr. Fletcher showed
  him what he had written against my pamphlet. It has been revised by
  Mr. Wesley, and is to be published shortly.”[292]

Footnote 291:

  In the preceding year, Toplady had published his scurrilous pamphlet,
  with the title, “More Work for Mr. John Wesley; or, A Vindication of
  the Decrees and Providence of God from the Defamations of a late
  printed paper, entitled, ‘The Consequence Proved.’”

Footnote 292:

  “Works of Berridge; and Life by Whittingham,” p. 387.

Strangely enough, while Berridge was requesting peace from Everton,
Richard Hill was doing the same from Hawkstone. Berridge’s three letters
to Mr. Thornton cover the space between August 13, 1773, and September
25, 1773; and Richard Hill’s three letters to Fletcher, now to be
introduced, cover the space between July 31, 1773, and December 23,
1773. Fletcher answered them privately; but his answers have never been
published. Mr. Hill’s letters, too important to be omitted, were as
follows:—

                                        “HAWKSTONE, _July 31, 1773_.

  “REV. AND DEAR SIR,—I am credibly informed that you wish to have done
  with controversy, and that you are resolved to publish nothing more on
  the subject of the late disputes. Upon the strength of this
  information, as well as to maintain my own desire of promoting peace,
  I shall write to my bookseller in London, to sell no more of any of my
  pamphlets which relate to the ‘Minutes;’ and for whatever may have
  savoured too much of my own spirit, either in my answers to you, or to
  Mr. Wesley, I sincerely crave the forgiveness of you both, and should
  be most heartily glad if no person whatever were to add another word
  to what has been already said on either side.

  ”And permit me to hint, that if some restraint could be laid upon
  several of Mr. Wesley’s preachers, particularly upon one Perronet (of
  whose superlatively abusive and insolent little piece,[293] I believe,
  Mr. Charles Wesley testified his abhorrence from the pulpit), I think,
  under God, it might be a salutary means of preventing the poison of
  vain janglings from spreading any further. But, though it is the
  desire of my soul to live in harmony, love, and friendship with you,
  dear Sir, yet, if God has ever shown me anything of my own heart, or
  of the truths of His Word, I must, and still do think that your
  principles are exceedingly erroneous; and of this, I ever cherish a
  secret hope that God will convince you, in the course of His dealings
  with your soul.

  “Wishing you abundance of grace, mercy, and peace, I beg leave to
  subscribe myself, Rev. and dear Sir, your sincere friend in the Gospel
  of Immanuel,

                                                           “R. HILL.

  “P.S.—I wish, dear Sir, you would make Mr. Wesley acquainted with the
  contents of this letter; and, if I stop the sale of my books, I hope
  that of the four ‘Checks’ will be stopped also.”

Footnote 293:

  Probably Edward Perronet’s “Small Collection in Verse: containing a
  Hymn to the Holy Ghost; an Epigram from the Italian,” etc. Printed in
  1772. 12mo, 16 pp.

This letter of Mr. Richard Hill, at the first reading, seems to be
peaceable and friendly; but there is reason to fear that the principle
that prompted it was cowardice rather than courtesy. Mr. Hill had been
vanquished more than once; and, naturally enough, he now wished to
retire from the arena. This, however, his opponents could not permit,
without sending a shaft after him. In his publications just issued, the
“Finishing Stroke,” and the “Farrago Double-Distilled,” to say nothing
of his previous ones, he had most uncharitably accused Fletcher and
Wesley not only of ignorances and mistakes, but of sins. He had called
Fletcher a “calumniator;” he had charged him with practising “forgery
and defamation,” and “gross misrepresentations,” and “slander.” In the
“Farrago Double Distilled,” he had accused Wesley of using “quirks,
quibbles, evasions, and false quotations;” and had designated him “a
chameleon.” His “Heroic Poem in Praise of Mr. John Wesley” was a
disgraceful production, too coarse and vulgar to be quoted. Was it
reasonable to wish or expect that no answer should be made to such
imputations? Reputation was as dear in the case of John Fletcher and
John Wesley as in that of Richard Hill; and, so far as the work of God
and the interests of the Church of Christ were concerned, vastly more
important. Besides, when Mr. Hill says he was “credibly informed” that
Fletcher was “resolved to publish nothing more on the subject of the
late disputes,” he was the victim of a delusion, for Fletcher was
already preparing his “Fifth Check to Antinomianism.”

Fletcher’s reply to Mr. Hill’s first letter has never been published,
but its import may be gathered from Mr. Hill’s second letter to
Fletcher, which was as follows:—

                                                    “_August, 1773._

  “REV. AND DEAR SIR,—Attendance at the assizes, and multiplicity of
  business in my office as a Justice of the Peace, have prevented my
  returning a more speedy answer to your letter, in which I find you
  complain of my having treated you with severity.

  ”This obliges me to request you to call to mind the four ‘Checks,’ and
  then to say what right the author of them has to complain of severity.
  Read the sneering mock proclamation given by the four secretaries of
  state of the predestinarian department; read the charges brought
  against our celebrated pulpits; and, if you can still justify what you
  have advanced, you may then with better reason accuse me of severity.
  It pains me to bring these things to your remembrance, as I was
  determined, when I wrote last, to avoid every shadow of any accusation
  against you for what had passed; and I think you must acknowledge that
  my letter was friendly; but your introduction of the subject obliges
  me to say what I have. I wish I had any grounds to recall what I have
  said concerning your having laid very great misrepresentations before
  the public, in your quotations from Mr. Wesley’s ‘Minutes,’ and in the
  harmony you would make your readers believe there is between the
  Reformers and Puritans, and Mr. Wesley and yourself; for it is most
  sure that your principles and theirs are as wide as east from west.

  ”How far it may be fair to alter the title of your sermon[294] from
  what it stands in the manuscript, must be left to yourself; I have no
  objection to it as you propose to print it. As to your explanatory
  notes and additions in brackets, you know, Sir, that by these you may
  easily make the sermon itself speak what language you see proper.
  Clarke and Priestly, by explanatory notes and additions in brackets,
  can explain away the divinity of Christ; Socinus, His atonement; and
  Taylor, the corruption of human nature.

  ”As you intend to introduce my worthless name into your next
  publication, I must beg to decline the obliging offer you make of my
  perusing your MSS. I am, Rev. and dear Sir,

                         “Your sincere friend for Christ’s sake,
                                                     “RICHARD HILL.”

Footnote 294:

  The sermon preached in Madeley Church, on May 23, 1773, and afterwards
  published in the “Fifth Check to Antinomianism.”

Mr. Hill’s last letter is the best of the three. It was written soon
after his mother’s death, and a short time before Fletcher’s “First Part
of the Fifth Check to Antinomianism” was published. Fletcher offered to
allow Mr. Hill to read the work in manuscript, but, as Mr. Hill himself
states, the offer was declined.

                                    “HAWKSTONE, _December 23, 1773_.

  “REV. AND DEAR SIR,—I take the liberty of requesting you to distribute
  among the poor of Madeley the enclosed two guineas, in such way and
  manner as you shall judge fit and proper.

  “I sent your last letter to my brother Rowland, who is now at
  Tottenham Court chapel, and suppose he received it. However, I waive
  saying anything of the subject of it, as it is my design to have
  totally done with the controversy, which I am firmly persuaded has not
  done me any good. Excuse me if I say, I wish you to examine closely
  whether it has done you any. For my own part, I desire to be humbled
  before God, as well as to ask your forgiveness and Mr. Wesley’s (to
  whom I purpose making a visit of peace and love when I go to London),
  for everything that has savoured of wrong or of my own spirit, in what
  I have written relative to his ‘Minutes;’ and, though I believe your
  sentiments to be erroneous, yet I esteem and honour you for all you
  have said against sin; and for the stand you have made for practical
  religion in this Laodicean, Antinomian age; and truly concerned should
  I be, if any expressions have dropped from my pen, which might make
  the readers think lightly of sin, under the notion of honouring the
  Saviour from sin. But as God can bear me witness that I had no
  intentions of this sort, so I am certain that whosoever makes Christ
  all his salvation, can never at the same time make Him a minister of
  sin; and I trust the hour will come when, under a deep sense of your
  own sinfulness and nothingness, you will be glad to lay hold of some
  of those comfortable Gospel truths, which now you look upon as
  dangerous poison.

  “In consequence of my former letter to you, I wrote to my bookseller
  in London, and told Mr. Eddowes in Shrewsbury, to stop the sale of all
  my publications concerning the controversy between us; and, unless God
  shows me that it is a matter of duty so to do, I shall not revoke this
  order; it being my earnest desire for the time to come, if it be
  possible, to live peaceably with all men; and, though I cannot approve
  some of Mr. Wesley’s doctrines, because I believe them to be contrary
  to Scripture, and am sure they are contrary to my own experience, yet,
  as I am persuaded that many who are the excellent of the earth are in
  his connexion, I wish to confirm my love towards them on account of
  the grace that is in them; and, whilst I reject their errors, still to
  esteem their persons; and never to say or do anything that may hurt
  that common cause for which we all ought to be contending, or which
  may grieve the weakest or meanest of Christ’s people.

  “These, dear Sir, are my present sentiments and intentions, and you
  have my free permission to declare them upon the house-top.

  “An afflictive breach, which God has lately been pleased to make in
  our family, by depriving me of a most tender and affectionate mother,
  calls upon me to beg your prayers, that the sudden stroke may be
  sanctified to me and to us all. It loudly bids me remember that I am
  but a stranger and pilgrim here below. May the Lord give me a
  pilgrim’s spirit! and may He give us both a right judgment in all
  things!

  “Permit me to subscribe myself, Rev. and dear Sir, your sincere friend
  and servant in Christ,

                                                     “RICHARD HILL.”

The Christian spirit of this letter cannot be excelled. What a contrast
to that of the “Finishing Stroke,” published at the beginning of the
year! Mr. Hill gave Fletcher full permission to make known the facts
that the controversy had done him no good; that he desired to be humbled
before God, and to ask forgiveness of Fletcher and Wesley for everything
that had “savoured of wrong,” or of his “own spirit,” in his writings;
that he had stopped the sale of his publications; and that he regarded
many of Wesley’s people as “the excellent of the earth.”

There can be no doubt that Fletcher availed himself of Mr. Hill’s
permission. The facts did honour to Mr. Hill; but, as is often the case,
in the course of circulation, the facts were perverted. By no fault of
Fletcher, it was reported that Mr. Hill had recanted the _doctrines_ he
had so stoutly maintained. This was utterly untrue; and led Mr. Hill to
send his three letters to the press.[295] No one could have found fault
with this; but, unfortunately, Mr. Hill prefixed a preface to his
letters, and appended an appendix.

Footnote 295:

  The title was, “Three Letters, written by Richard Hill, Esq., to the
  Rev. J. Fletcher, Vicar of Madeley, in the year 1773; setting forth
  Mr. Hill’s Reasons for declining any further controversy relative to
  Mr. Wesley’s Principles. Shrewsbury.” 8vo., 30 pp.

In his preface, he remarks, that when Wesley heard from Fletcher that he
(Mr. Hill) had suppressed the sale of his publications, he wrote Mr.
Hill “a short and civil letter,” in which he said, he himself intended
to write nothing more on the controversy between them, and expressed the
hope that all, in the future, would be love and peace. This
communication gratified Mr. Hill, and soon afterwards, when he went to
London, he had an interview with Wesley at West-street chapel, and
assured him of his intentions to retire from the warfare, and said he
wished that nothing more should be said on the subject by any one.
Wesley took him by the hand; showed a loving, pacific disposition; and,
says Mr. Hill, “we parted very good friends.”

Besides this personal narrative, however, the preface renewed the
slanderous attacks on Fletcher, accusing him of misrepresenting facts,
of using “artifices in his manner of making quotations;” and
“declamation, chicanery, evasion, false glosses, and pious frauds, to
throw dust into the eyes of his readers.” Not content with this, he made
an onslaught on Thomas Olivers, Wesley’s trenchant Itinerant, who (in
1774) had just published a 12mo book of 168 pages, entitled “A Scourge
to Calumny. In Two Parts. Inscribed to Richard Hill, Esq.” He sneeringly
calls him “one Thomas Oliver, alias Olivers, a journeyman cordwainer,
who had written a pamphlet against him (Mr. Hill), which, though in
itself _black in the grain_, was afterwards _lacquered up_, _new soled_,
and _heel-tapped_ by his master before it was exposed for sale.”

  “I shall not,” continues Mr. Hill, “take the least notice of him, or
  read a line of his composition,[296] any more than, if I was
  travelling on the road, I would stop to lash, or even order my footman
  to lash, every impertinent little quadruped in a village, that should
  come out and bark at me; but would willingly let the contemptible
  animal have the satisfaction of thinking he had driven me out of
  sight.”

Footnote 296:

  If Mr. Hill had not read Thomas Oliver’s little book, how is it that
  he can so graphically describe it?

This was despicable bombast; for the Welsh shoemaker, as a controversial
writer, was quite equal to him who, in due time, became a Shropshire
baronet. Mr. Hill proceeds to say that he cannot read any more of
Fletcher’s books, and, therefore, cannot write any more answers to them;
but, because it was now currently reported that he had recanted the
doctrines which he had defended, he had revoked his orders to stop the
sale of his publications, and that his “Five Letters to Fletcher,” his
“Review of Wesley’s Doctrines,” his “Farrago Double Distilled,” his
“Paris Conversation,” and his “Finishing Stroke,” might now be bought as
heretofore.

The Appendix to Mr. Hill’s Three Letters suggests a proposed title to
Fletcher’s works, and sets forth “A Creed for Arminians and
Perfectionists,” as follows:—

                               “ARTICLE I.

  “I believe that Jesus Christ died for the whole human race, and that
  He had no more love towards those who now are, or hereafter shall be,
  in glory, than for those who now are, or hereafter shall be, lifting
  up their eyes in torments; and that the one are no more indebted to
  His grace than the other.

                               “ARTICLE II.

  “I believe that Divine grace is indiscriminately given to all men; and
  that God, foreseeing that by far the greater part of the world would
  reject this grace, doth, nevertheless, bestow it upon them in order to
  heighten their torments and to increase their damnation in hell.

                              “ARTICLE III.

  “I believe it depends wholly on the will of the creature whether he
  shall or shall not receive any benefit from Divine grace.

                               “ARTICLE IV.

  “Though the Scripture tells me that the carnal mind is enmity against
  God, yet I believe there is something in the heart of every natural
  man that can nourish and cherish the grace of God; and that the sole
  reason why this grace is effectual in some and not in others, is
  entirely owing to themselves and to their own faithfulness, and not to
  the distinguishing love and favour of God.

                               “ARTICLE V.

  “I believe that God sincerely wishes for the salvation of many who
  never will be saved; consequently, that it is entirely owing to want
  of ability in God that what He so earnestly willeth is not
  accomplished.

                               “ARTICLE VI.

  “I believe that the Redeemer not only shed His precious blood, but
  prayed for the salvation of many souls who are now in hell;
  consequently, that His blood was shed in vain, and His prayer rejected
  of His Father; and that, therefore, He told a great untruth when He
  said, ‘I know that Thou hearest me always.’

                              “ARTICLE VII.

  “I believe that God, foreseeing some men’s nature will improve the
  grace which is given them, and that they will repent, believe, and be
  very good, elects them unto salvation.

                              “ARTICLE VIII.

  “I believe that the love and favour of Him with whom is no
  variableness and shadow of turning, and whose gifts and callings are
  without repentance, may vary, change, and turn every hour and every
  moment, according to the behaviour of the creature.

                               “ARTICLE IX.

  “I believe that the seed of the Word, by which God’s children are born
  again, is a corruptible seed; and that, so far from enduring for ever
  (as that mistaken apostle Peter rashly affirms), it is frequently
  rooted out of the hearts of those in whom it was sown.

                               “ARTICLE X.

  “I believe that Christ does not always give unto His sheep eternal
  life; but that they often perish, and are, by the power of Satan,
  frequently plucked out of His hand.

                               “ARTICLE XI.

  “Though I have solemnly subscribed to the Thirty-Nine Articles of the
  Church of England, and have affirmed that I believe them from my
  heart, yet I think our Reformers were profoundly ignorant of true
  Christianity, when they declared, in the Ninth Article, that ‘the
  infection of nature doth remain in them which are regenerate;’ and, in
  the Fifteenth, that ‘all we, the rest (Christ only excepted), although
  baptized and born again in Christ, yet offend in many things; and _if
  we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in
  us_.’ This I totally deny, because it cuts up, root and branch, my
  favourite doctrine of _Perfection_; and, therefore, let Peter, Paul,
  James, or John, say what they will; and let reformers and martyrs join
  their syren song, their eyes were at best but half opened, for want of
  a little _Foundery_ eye-salve; therefore, I cannot look upon them as
  adult believers, and fathers in Christ.”

The Eleven Articles were subscribed, “J. F.,” “J. W.,” and “W. S.;”
which may be taken as the initial letters of the names of John Fletcher,
John Wesley, and Walter Sellon.

  “What! more _finishing strokes_!” remarked the _Monthly Review_ of
  January, 1775, in its notice of Mr. Hill’s new pamphlet. “This
  retiring champion, however, like the Parthians of old, is not less
  formidable in his retreat than in a direct attack. He here lets fly at
  the _Arminians_ and _Perfectionists_ one of his sharpest pointed
  arrows. He styles it ‘_their creed_.’ He says he has ‘composed it from
  their sentiments;’ and he adds that he ‘can scarcely read it without
  horror.’ Yet he thinks himself justified in publishing it, as Mr.
  Fletcher still continued the controversy with so much warmth.”

All this is deeply to be regretted. Mr. Hill had declared his
determination to abandon this painful warfare, and yet here he provokes
a continuance of it. It is true that, meanwhile, Fletcher had published
his “Answer to the Finishing Stroke” of Mr. Hill; but Fletcher had done
this, not because he desired the controversy to be prolonged, but
because “The Finishing Stroke” contained so many grave attacks on
Fletcher’s moral character, that Fletcher’s honour could not be
maintained without an “Answer” being written. At this point the war
might have ended; but, by appending the “Creed for Arminians and
Perfectionists” to his Three Letters, Mr. Hill re-opened the sluice, and
“the waters of strife” flowed as fiercely as ever.

From a Calvinian point of view, the “Creed” is drawn up with great
ability; but Mr. Hill was well aware that it was a misrepresentation of
the sentiments of Fletcher and Wesley. Besides, the thing itself was in
bad taste. It must be acknowledged that Fletcher had published his
“Gospel Proclamation: Given at _Geneva_, and signed by four of his
Majesty’s principal Secretaries of State for the Predestinarian
Department!” but there was no need that Mr. Richard Hill should copy
Fletcher’s objectionable example.

It is now time, however, to turn to Fletcher’s masterly replies.




                              CHAPTER XV.
                   “_FIFTH CHECK TO ANTINOMIANISM._”

                                 1774.


IN a characteristic letter addressed to Ambrose Serle, Esq., and dated
“January 11, 1774,” Augustus Toplady observed:—

  “Mr. Fletcher may fire off as soon as he pleases. The weapons of his
  warfare can never wound the truths of God, any more than a handful of
  feathers can batter down my church tower. I shall, however, be glad to
  see his performance when it appears. Mr. Shirley told me, when I was
  last at Bath, that Fletcher is to succeed Pope Wesley, as
  commander-in-chief of the Societies, if he should survive his
  holiness. No wonder, therefore, that the Cardinal of Madeley is such a
  zealous stickler for the cause. One would think that the Swiss were
  universally fated to fight for pay.”[297]

Footnote 297:

  “Complete Works of Toplady.”

Toplady’s mendacious sneer that Fletcher was fighting “for pay” may be
scornfully passed over. This letter might refer to Fletcher’s “Answer to
the Rev. Mr. Toplady’s Vindication of the Decrees,” which Fletcher
finished in the month of October, 1775; or it might refer to the
expected publication of the “Fifth Check to Antinomianism.” The “First
Part” of this was completed at Madeley, September 13, 1773; but was not
published until the beginning of 1774. The following was its title:
“_Logica Genevensis_ continued: or the First Part of the Fifth Check to
Antinomianism, containing an Answer to ‘_The Finishing Stroke_’ of
Richard Hill, Esq. In which some remarks upon _Mr. Fulsome’s_ Antinomian
Creed, published by the Rev. Mr. Berridge, are occasionally introduced.
With an Appendix upon the remaining difference between the Calvinists
and the Anti-Calvinists, with respect to our Lord’s doctrine of
_Justification by words_, and St. James’s doctrine of _Justification by
works, and not by faith only_. London: 1774.”  12mo., 48 pp.

Fletcher’s “Answer” to Richard Hill’s “Finishing Stroke,” and his
“Remarks upon _Mr. Fulsome’s_ Antinomian Creed,” are able, and
characteristic of the writer; but contain no biographical facts worth
mentioning. Two extracts, however, from the “Appendix,” upon the
remaining differences between the Calvinists and the anti-Calvinists,
may be useful; inasmuch as, in a condensed form, they exhibit the point
to which, in Fletcher’s opinion, the controversy had brought both
parties with respect to the principal of Wesley’s “Minutes” of 1770.
Fletcher writes:—

  “On both sides, we agree to maintain, in opposition to Socinians and
  Deists, that the grand, the primary, and properly meritorious cause of
  our justification, from first to last, both in the day of conversion
  and in the day of judgment, is only the precious atonement and the
  infinite merits of our Lord Jesus Christ. We all agree likewise that
  in the day of conversion faith is the _instrumental cause_ of our
  justification before God. Nay, if I mistake not, we come one step
  nearer each other, for we equally hold that, after conversion, the
  works of faith are in this world, and will be in the day of judgment,
  the _evidencing cause_ of our justification; that is, the works of
  faith (under the above-mentioned primary cause of our salvation, and
  in subordination to the faith that gives them birth), are now, and
  will be in the great day, the _evidence_ that shall instrumentally
  _cause_ our justification as believers. Thus Mr. Hill says [_Review_,
  p. 149], ‘Neither Mr. Shirley, nor I, nor any Calvinist that I ever
  heard of, denies that, though a sinner be _justified in the sight of
  God by Christ alone_, he is _declaratively justified by works, both
  here and at the day of judgment_.’ And the Rev. Mr. Madan, in his
  sermon on ‘_justification by works stated, explained, and reconciled
  with justification by faith_,’ says [p. 29], ‘By Christ only are we
  _meritoriously_ justified, and by faith only are we _instrumentally_
  justified _in the sight of God_; but by works, and not by faith only,
  are we _declaratively justified before men and angels_.’ From these
  two quotations, which could easily be multiplied to twenty, it is
  evident that pious Calvinists hold the doctrine of a _justification_
  by the works of faith; or, as Mr. Madan expresses it, after St. James,
  _by works, and not by faith only_.

  “It remains now to show wherein we disagree. At first sight, the
  difference seems trifling; but, upon close examination, it appears
  that the whole antinomian gulf still remains fixed between us. Read
  the preceding quotations, weigh the clauses which I have put in
  capitals, compare them with what the Rev. Mr. Berridge says in his
  ‘_Christian World Unmasked_’ (p. 26), of ‘_an absolute impossibility
  of being justified in any manner_ by our works,’ namely, _before God_;
  and you will see that though pious Calvinists allow we are justified
  by works _before men and angels_, yet they deny our being _ever_
  justified by works _before God_, in whose sight they suppose we are
  for ever justified by _Christ alone_,’ _i.e._, only by Christ’s good
  works and sufferings, absolutely imputed to us from the very first
  moment in which we make a single act of true faith, if not from all
  eternity. Thus works are entirely excluded from having any hand either
  in our intermediate or final justification _before God_; and thus they
  are still represented as _totally needless_ to our _eternal_
  salvation. Now, in direct opposition to the above-mentioned
  distinction, we anti-Calvinists believe that adult persons cannot be
  saved without being justified _by faith_ as _sinners_, according to
  the light of their dispensation; and _by works_ as _believers_,
  according to the time and opportunities they have of working. We
  assert that the _works_ of faith are not less necessary to our
  justification _before God_ as believers, than _faith_ itself is
  necessary to our justification _before Him_ as sinners. And we
  maintain that when faith does not produce good works (much more when
  it produces the worst works, such as adultery, hypocrisy, treachery,
  murder, etc.), it dies, and justifies no more; seeing it is a _living_
  and not a _dead_ faith that justifies us as sinners; even as they are
  _living_ and not dead works that justify us as believers.”

Thus did these good men quarrel. Berridge was a man of eminent piety and
of great wit, but he could scarcely be considered a great theologian;
and it may be fairly doubted whether he ever held the doctrines which
Fletcher, perhaps somewhat hardly, deduces from a few of his unguarded
words.

In his next pamphlet, which was published March 1, 1774,[298] Fletcher
treats poor Berridge with yet greater severity. The whole work was
devoted to an exposure of the objectionable and the weak points in
Berridge’s “Christian World Unmasked.” Its title was “_Logica
Genevensis_ continued. Or the Second Part of the Fifth Check to
Antinomianism; containing a Defence of ‘Jack o’ lanthorn,’ and ‘the
Paper-kite,’ _i.e._, Sincere Obedience;—of the ‘Cobweb,’ _i.e._, The
evangelical law of liberty; and of the ‘Valiant Sergeant I. F.,’ _i.e._,
The conditionality of Perseverance, attacked by the Rev. Mr. Berridge,
M.A., Vicar of Everton, and late Fellow of Clare-hall, Cambridge, in his
book called ‘The Christian World Unmasked.’ London: 1774.” 12 mo., 44
pp.

Footnote 298:

  _Lloyd’s Evening Post_, March 2, 1774.

Berridge was well aware of Fletcher’s intention to attack his book, for
Fletcher himself, seven months before, had told him that what he had
“said about sincere obedience was the very core of Antinomianism,” and
that he must freely expose what he had written. Berridge, in letters to
John Thornton, Esq., and the Rev. John Newton, complained of this, and
said Fletcher had misapprehended his meaning. He also wrote to Fletcher
to the same effect, and told him that, if he published his attack, he
(Berridge) would not answer it. There can be no doubt that Berridge
never _intended_ to “disparage sincere obedience” to the law of God; but
his similes, allegories, figures, and loose language, might be construed
by Antinomian readers in such a sense. Fletcher believed Berridge to be
a sincere, earnest, obedient Christian; but he also believed that
Berridge’s well-meant book might be turned to a bad account by men with
whose Antinomian sentiments Berridge had no sympathy. In the
introduction to his pamphlet, Fletcher writes:—

  “Before I mention Mr. Berridge’s mistakes, I must do justice to his
  person. It is by no means my design to represent him as a divine, who
  either leads a loose life, or _intends_ to hurt the Redeemer’s
  interest. His conduct as a Christian is exemplary; his labours as a
  minister are great; and I am persuaded that the wrong touches which he
  gives to the ark of godliness are not only undesigned, but _intended_
  to do God service.

  “There are so many things commendable in the pious vicar of Everton,
  and so much truth in his ‘Christian World Unmasked,’ that I find it a
  hardship to expose the unguarded parts of that performance. But the
  cause of this hardship is the ground of my apology. Mr. Berridge is a
  good, an excellent man; therefore the Antinomian errors which go
  abroad into the world with his letters of recommendation, speak in his
  evangelical strain, and are armed with the poignancy of his wit,
  cannot be too soon pointed out and too carefully guarded against. I
  flatter myself that this consideration will procure me his pardon for
  taking the liberty of dispatching his ‘valiant sergeant’ with some
  doses of rational and Scriptural antidote for those who have drunk
  into the pleasing mistakes of his book, and want his piety to hinder
  them from carrying speculative into practical Antinomianism.”

It would weary the reader to follow Fletcher in his minute, sometimes
pungent, and always irrefutable criticisms on Berridge’s well-known
book. There is often plain speaking, but there is no acidity. Berridge
is routed, but he is invariably treated as a Christian and a gentleman.
Fletcher’s “Conclusion” is as follows:—

  “Were I to conclude these strictures upon the dangerous tenets,
  inadvertently advanced and happily contradicted, in ‘The Christian
  World Unmasked,’ without professing my brotherly love and sincere
  respect for the ingenious and pious author, I should wrong him,
  myself, and the cause which I defend. I only do him justice when I say
  that few, very few, of our elders equal him in devotedness to Christ,
  zeal, diligence, and ministerial success. His indefatigable labours in
  the word and doctrine entitle him to a double share of honour; and I
  invite all my readers to esteem him highly in love for his Master’s
  and his work’s sake; entreating them not to undervalue his vital piety
  on account of his Antinomian opinions; and beseeching them to consider
  that his errors are so much the more excusable as they do not
  influence his moral conduct, and that he refutes them himself far more
  than his favourite scheme of doctrine allows him to do. Add to this
  that those very errors spring, in a great degree, from the idea that
  he honours Christ by receiving, and does God service by propagating
  them.

  “The desire of catching the attention of his readers has made him
  choose a witty, facetious manner of writing, for which he has a
  peculiar turn; and the necessity I am under of standing his _indirect_
  attack[299] obliges me to meet him upon his own ground, and to
  encounter him with his own weapons. I beg that what passes for
  evangelical humour in him may not be called indecent levity in me. A
  sharp pen may be guided by a kind heart; and such, I am persuaded, is
  that of my much-esteemed antagonist, whom I publicly invite to my
  pulpit; protesting that I should be edified and overjoyed to hear him
  enforce there the _guarded_ substance of his book, which,
  notwithstanding the vein of solifidianism I have taken the liberty to
  open, contains many great and glorious truths.”

Footnote 299:

  As previously stated, Fletcher’s name was not mentioned in Berridge’s
  book, but the book was intended to ridicule and denounce the doctrines
  which Fletcher, in his “_Checks_,” had defended.

In all his publications, Fletcher had not only Wesley’s approval, but
his high commendation. In three several letters, written during the
present year, 1774, Wesley thus expressed his opinion of Fletcher:—

  “March 1, 1774.—He” [James Perfect], “preaches salvation by faith in
  the same manner that my brother and I have done; and as Mr. Fletcher
  (one of the finest writers of the age) has beautifully explained it.
  None of us talk of being accepted for our works; that is the Calvinist
  slander. But we all maintain we are not saved without works; that
  works are a condition (though not the meritorious cause) of final
  salvation. It is by faith in the righteousness and blood of Christ
  that we are enabled to do all good works; and it is for the sake of
  these that all who fear God and work righteousness are accepted of
  Him.”[300]

  “May 2, 1774. Until Mr.” (Richard) “Hill and his associates puzzled
  the cause, it was as plain as plain could be. The Methodists always
  held, and have declared a thousand times, that the death of Christ is
  the meritorious cause of our salvation, that is, of pardon, holiness,
  and glory; loving, obedient faith is the condition of glory. This Mr.
  Fletcher has so illustrated and confirmed, as, I think, scarcely any
  one has done before since the Apostles.”[301]

  “December 28, 1774. If we could once bring all our preachers,
  itinerant and local, uniformly and steadily to insist on those two
  points, ‘Christ dying for us,’ and ‘Christ reigning in us,’ we should
  shake the trembling gates of hell. I think most of them are now
  exceeding clear herein, and the rest come nearer and nearer;
  especially since they have read Mr. Fletcher’s ‘Checks,’ which have
  removed many difficulties out of the way.”[302]

Footnote 300:

  Wesley’s Works, vol xii., p. 372.

Footnote 301:

  _Ibid_, p. 373.

Footnote 302:

  _Ibid_, p. 430.

Such was one of the services which Fletcher, “one of the finest writers
of the age,” had rendered to Wesley’s preachers and people as early as
the year 1774. They had been in danger of departing from the truth, or,
at least, stumbling at it: by Fletcher’s help, they were confirmed in
the Christian faith, and henceforth earnestly contended for it.

As already seen, in 1773 Mr. Richard Hill had extended to Fletcher the
olive branch of peace; and now the Countess of Huntingdon seems to have
done the same. Three years before, she had virtually dismissed him from
her Calvinistic College at Trevecca, because he would not renounce what
were called the “_horrible and abominable_” doctrinal “Minutes” of
Wesley’s Conference in 1770. Since then, he had been incessantly
employed in explaining and defending these “Minutes;” and, in every
instance, had vanquished his opponents. Her ladyship, with her
strong-mindedness, seemed to perceive this, and wished to have an
interview with her disbanded president. She was staying at Bath, and
through James Ireland, Esq., of Bristol, the intimate friend of both,
her wish appears to have been conveyed to Fletcher; who, in reply, wrote
to Mr. Ireland as follows:—

                                       “MADELEY, _February 6, 1774_.

  “MY DEAR FRIEND,—In the present circumstances, it was a great piece of
  condescension in dear Lady Huntingdon to be willing to see me
  privately: but for her to permit me to wait upon her _openly_ denotes
  such generosity, such courage, and a mind so much superior to the
  narrowness that clogs the charity of most professors, that it would
  have amazed me, if everything that is noble and magnanimous were not
  to be expected from her ladyship. It is well for her that spirits are
  imprisoned in flesh and blood, or I might by this time (and it is but
  an hour since I received your letter) have troubled her ten times with
  my apparition, to wish her joy of being above the dangerous snare of
  professors—the smiles and frowns of the religious world; and to thank
  her a thousand times for not being ashamed of her old servant, and for
  cordially forgiving him all that is past, upon the score of the Lord’s
  love, and of my honest meaning.

  “But though, on reading your letter, my mind has travelled so fast to
  Bath, yet an embargo is laid upon my body—‘I must not go yet.’ I am
  the more inclined to take the hint, for two reasons. I will tell you
  all my heart about it. The more I see her ladyship’s generosity, and
  admire the faithfulness of the friendship that she has for many years
  honoured me with, the more I ought to take care not to bring burdens
  upon her. It might lessen her influence with those she is connected
  with; and might grieve some of her friends, who possibly would look
  upon her condescension as an affront to them. This is the first
  reason.

  “The second respects myself. _I must follow my light._ A necessity is
  laid upon me to clear my conscience with respect to the _Antinomian
  world_, and to point out the stumbling-block that keeps many serious
  people from embracing the real doctrines of free grace. I cannot do
  this without advancing some truths, which I know her ladyship receives
  as well as myself, but which, by my manner of unfolding them, will, at
  first sight, appear dreadful touches to the Gospel of the day. I am
  just sending to the press ‘A Scriptural Essay upon the Astonishing
  Rewardableness of the Works of Faith.’ Though it consists only of
  plain Scriptures, and plain arguments, without anything personal, I
  think it will raise more dust of prejudice against me than my
  preceding publications. With respect to myself, I do not mind it; but
  I am bound in love to mind it with respect to her ladyship. My respect
  for her ladyship, therefore, together with the preceding reason,
  determine me to defer paying my respects _personally_ to her, till
  after the publication of my ‘Essay,’ and ‘Scripture Scales;’ and, if
  she does not then revoke the kind leave she gives me, I shall most
  gladly make the best of my way to assure her in person, as I do now by
  this indirect means, that I am, and shall for ever be her dutiful
  servant in what appears to me the plain Gospel of our common Lord.

  “With love to yourself, and dutiful love to our noble friend, I am,
  etc.,

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[303]

Footnote 303:

  Letters, 1791, p. 221.

Nothing need be said respecting Fletcher’s considerate kindness in
declining, for the present, an interview with the Countess of
Huntingdon, lest he should become the means of bringing upon her
undeserved reproach from some of her bigoted and narrow-hearted friends.
It was like the man, and worthy of him.

In another letter to Mr. Ireland, Fletcher further refers to the
returning friendliness of the Countess, and to his controversial and
exhausting labours, of which he was becoming weary:—

                                         “MADELEY, _March 27, 1774_.

  “MY DEAR SIR,—I think I wrote my last two days before I received your
  bounty—a large hogshead of rice and two cheeses. Accept the thanks of
  myself and of my poor flock. I distributed it on Shrove-Tuesday, and
  preached to a numerous congregation on ‘Seek ye first the kingdom of
  God and His righteousness, and all other things shall be added unto
  you.’ We prayed for our benefactor, that God would give him a
  hundredfold in this life, and eternal life, where life eternal will be
  no burden. I saw then, what I have not often seen on such occasions,
  gladness without the appearance of envying or grudging.

  “I get very slowly out of the mire of my controversy, and yet I hope
  to get over it, if God spares my life, in two or three pieces more.
  Since I wrote last, I have added to my ‘Equal Check’ a piece which I
  call ‘An Essay on Truth; or, a Rational Vindication of the Doctrine of
  Salvation by Faith,’ which I have taken the liberty to dedicate to
  Lady Huntingdon, to have an opportunity of clearing her ladyship from
  the charge of Antinomianism. I have taken this step in the simplicity
  of my heart, and as due from me, in my circumstances, to the character
  of her ladyship.

  “I have just spirit enough to enjoy my solitude, and to bless God that
  I am out of the hurry of the world—even the spiritual world. I tarry
  gladly in my Jerusalem, till the kingdom of God comes with power. Till
  then, it matters not where I am: only as my chief call is here, here I
  gladly stay, till God fits me for the pulpit or the _grave_. I still
  spend my mornings in scribbling. Though I grudge so much time in
  writing, yet a man must do something; and I may as well investigate
  truth as do anything else, except solemn praying and visiting my
  flock. I shall be glad to have done with my present avocation, that I
  may give myself up more to those two things.

  “O how life goes! I walked, now I gallop into eternity. The bowl of
  life goes rapidly down the steep hill of time. Let us be wise: embrace
  we Jesus and the resurrection. Let us trim our lamps, and give
  ourselves afresh to Him that bought us, till we can do it without
  reserve. Adieu!

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[304]

Footnote 304:

  Letters, 1791, p 223.


                              CHAPTER XVI.
                   _FURTHER PUBLICATIONS IN THE YEAR_

                                 1774.


IN _Lloyd’s Evening Post_ for March 2, 1774, there appeared the
following advertisement:—

  “_In the Press._ An Equal Check to Pharisaism and Antinomianism; and
  the Scripture Scales to weigh Gospel Truth; both by the Rev. Mr. John
  Fletcher, Vicar of Madeley, Shropshire.”

“_The Scripture Scales_,” however, were published separately, and not
until the year was ending. First of all, Fletcher issued a 12mo. volume
of 264 pages, entitled, “The First Part of an Equal Check to Pharisaism
and Antinomianism, containing, I. An Historical Essay on the Danger of
parting Faith and Works. II. Salvation by the Covenant of Grace, A
Discourse preached in the Parish Church of Madeley, April 18, and May 9,
1773. III. A Scriptural Essay on the astonishing Rewardableness of
Works, according to the Covenant of Grace. IV. An Essay on Truth, or, A
rational Vindication of the Doctrine of Salvation by Faith, with a
dedicatory Epistle to the Right Hon. the Countess of Huntingdon. By the
Author of the Checks to Antinomianism. Shrewsbury: Printed by J.
Eddowes: and sold at the Foundery; and by J. Buckland, in Paternoster
Row, London; by T. Mills in Bath; and S. Aris in Birmingham. 1774.”

Fletcher’s Preface is dated, Madeley, May 21, 1774. The following
extracts from it convey an idea of the scope of his book:—

  “I. The first piece of this Check was designed for a preface to the
  Discourse that follows it; but as it swelled far beyond my intention,
  I present it to the reader under the name of _An Historical Essay_,
  which makes way for the tracts that follow.

  “II. With respect to the Discourse, I must mention what engages me to
  publish it. In 1771, I saw the propositions called the ‘_Minutes_.’
  Their author invited me to ‘_review the whole affair_.’ I did so; and
  soon found that I had ‘leaned too much toward Calvinism,’ which, after
  mature consideration, appeared to me exactly to coincide with
  _speculative_ Antinomianism; and the same year I publicly acknowledged
  my error.[305]

  “When I had thus openly confessed that I was involved in the guilt of
  _many of my brethren_, and that I had so leaned towards _speculative_
  as not to have made a proper stand against _practical_ Antinomianism,
  who could have thought that one of my most formidable opponents[306]
  would have attempted to screen his mistakes behind some passages of a
  manuscript sermon which I preached twelve years ago, and of which, by
  some means or other, he has got a copy?

  “I am very far from recanting that old discourse. I still think the
  doctrine it contains excellent, in the main, and very proper to be
  enforced, though in a more guarded manner, in a congregation of
  hearers violently prejudiced against the first gospel axiom.[307]
  Therefore, out of regard for the grand, leading truth of Christianity,
  and in compliance with Mr. Hill’s _earnest entreaty_ (‘Finishing
  Stroke,’ p. 45), I send my sermon into the world upon the following
  reasonable conditions: 1. That I shall be allowed to publish it, as I
  preached it a year ago in my church, namely, with _additions in
  brackets_, to make it at once a _fuller_ Check to Pharisaism, and a
  _finishing_ Check to Antinomianism. 2. That the largest addition shall
  be in favour of _free grace_. 3. That nobody shall accuse me of
  _forgery_, for thus adding my present light to that which I had
  formerly; and for thus bringing out of my little treasure of
  experience _things new and old_. 4. That the press shall not groan
  with the charge of _disingenuity_, if I throw into Notes some
  unguarded expressions, which I formerly used without scruple, and
  which my more enlightened conscience does not suffer me to use at
  present. 5. That my opponent’s call to print my sermon will procure me
  the pardon of the public, for presenting them with a plain, _blunt_,
  discourse, composed for an audience chiefly made up of colliers and
  rustics. And, lastly, that, as I understand English a little better
  than I did twelve years ago, I shall be permitted to rectify a few
  French idioms, which I find in my old manuscript; and to _connect_ my
  thoughts a little more like an Englishman, where I can do it without
  the least misrepresentation of the sense.

  “III. With regard to the ‘_Scriptural Essay_’ upon the rewardableness
  or evangelical worthiness of works, I shall just observe that it
  attacks the grand mistake of Solifidians countenanced by three or four
  words of my old sermon. I pour a flood of Scriptures upon it; and,
  after receiving the fire of my objector, I return it in a variety of
  scriptural and rational answers, about the solidity of which the
  public must decide.

  “IV. The ‘_Essay on Truth_’ will, I hope, reconcile judicious
  moralists to the doctrine of salvation _by faith_, and considerate
  Solifidians to the doctrine of salvation _by_ the _works_ of faith;
  reason and Scripture concurring to show the constant dependence of
  works upon faith; and the wonderful agreement of the doctrine of
  present salvation by TRUE _faith_, with the doctrine of eternal
  salvation by GOOD _works_.

  “I hope that I do not dissent, in my observations upon _faith_, either
  from our Church, or approved Gospel ministers. In their _highest_
  definitions of that grace, they consider it _only_ according to the
  fulness of the _Christian_ dispensation; but my subject has obliged me
  to consider it also according to the dispensations of John the
  Baptist, Moses, and Noah. Believers under these _inferior_
  dispensations have not always _assurance_, nor is the assurance they
  sometimes have so bright as that of adult Christians, Matt. xi. 11.
  But, undoubtedly, assurance is inseparably connected with the faith of
  the _Christian_ dispensation, which was not _fully_ opened till Christ
  opened _His_ glorious baptism on the Day of Pentecost, and till His
  spiritual kingdom was set up with power in the hearts of His people.
  Nobody, therefore, can truly believe, according to _this_
  dispensation, without being _immediately_ conscious both of the
  forgiveness of sins, and of peace and joy in the Holy Ghost. This is a
  most important truth, derided indeed by fallen Churchmen, and denied
  by Laodicean Dissenters; but, of late years gloriously revived by Mr.
  Wesley and the Ministers connected with him.”

Footnote 305:

  In the “Second Check to Antinomianism.”

Footnote 306:

  Mr. Richard Hill.

Footnote 307:

  Thus defined by Fletcher in his “Doctrines of Grace and Justice:” “Our
  salvation is of God; or, There is free grace in God; which, through
  Christ, freely places all men in a state of temporary redemption,
  justification, or salvation, according to the various Gospel
  dispensations, and crowns those who are faithful unto death with an
  eternal redemption, justification, or salvation.”

  His definition of the second Gospel axiom is, “Our damnation is of
  ourselves: or, There is a free-will in man; by which he may, through
  the grace freely imparted to him in the day of temporary salvation,
  work out his own eternal salvation; or he may, through the natural
  power which angels had to sin in heaven, and our first parents in
  paradise, choose to sin away the day of temporary salvation. And by
  thus working out his damnation, he may provoke just wrath, which is
  the same as despised free grace, to punish him with eternal
  destruction.”

From these extracts, the reader may gather the difficult and important
doctrines discussed by Fletcher in his book of pamphlets. In a work like
this it is impossible to follow him in his careful statements of truth,
in the arguments by which he proves them, and in his answers to
objections raised against them; but a few remarks respecting some of
these publications must be attempted.

In a prelude to his sermon first delivered in 1762, and now amended,
Fletcher gives a doleful picture of what he himself had witnessed during
the interval. He says:—

  “The substance of the following Discourse was committed to paper many
  years ago, to convince the Pharisees and papists of my parish that
  there is no salvation by the faithless works of the law, but by a
  living faith in Jesus Christ. With shame I confess that I did not
  _then_ see the need of guarding the doctrine of _faith_ against the
  despisers of _works_. I was chiefly bent upon pulling up the tares of
  Pharisaism: those of Antinomianism were not yet sprung up in the
  field, which I began to cultivate: or my want of experience hindered
  me from discerning them. But since, what a crop of them have I
  perceived and bewailed!

  “Alas! they have, in a great degree, ruined the success of my
  ministry. I have seen numbers of lazy seekers, enjoying the dull
  pleasure of sloth on the couch of wilful unbelief, under pretence that
  God was to do all in them without them. I have seen some lie flat in
  the mire of sin, absurdly boasting that they could not fall; and
  others make the means of grace means of idle gossiping or sly
  courtship. I have seen some turn their religious profession into a way
  of gratifying covetousness or indolence; and others, their skill in
  church music, their knowledge, and their zeal, into various nets to
  catch esteem, admiration, and praise. Some I have seen making
  _yesterday’s_ faith a reason to laugh at the cross _to-day_; and
  others drawing, from their misapprehensions of the atonement,
  arguments to be less importunate in secret prayer, and more
  conformable to this evil world than once they were. Nay, I have seen
  some professing believers backward to do those works of mercy, which I
  have sometimes found persons, who made no profession of godliness,
  quite ready to perform. And—oh! tell it in Sion, that watchfulness may
  not be neglected by believers, that fearfulness may seize upon
  backsliders, and that trembling may break the bones of hypocrites and
  apostates—I have seen those who had equally shined by their gifts and
  graces strike the moral world with horror by the grossest
  Antinomianism, and disgrace the doctrine of _salvation through faith_
  by the deepest plunges into scandalous sins.”

As already stated, Fletcher’s “Essay on Truth; or, Rational Vindication
of the Doctrine of Salvation by Faith,” was dedicated to his quondam
friend and patroness, the Countess of Huntingdon, who again desired his
friendship, his counsel, and his prayers. In his “Dedicatory Epistle” he
says:—

  “MY LADY,—Because I think it my duty to defend the _works of faith_
  against the triumphant errors of the Solifidians, some of your
  ladyship’s friends conclude that I am an enemy to the doctrine of
  _salvation by faith_, and their conclusion amounts to such
  exclamations as these: ‘How could a lady, so zealous for God’s glory
  and the Redeemer’s grace, commit the superintendency of a seminary of
  pious learning to a man that opposes the _fundamental_ doctrine of
  Protestantism! How could she put her sheep under the care of such a
  wolf in sheep’s clothing!’ This conclusion, my lady, has grieved me
  for your sake; and, to remove the blot that it indirectly fixes upon
  you, as well as to balance my ‘Scriptural Essay on the Rewardableness’
  of the works of faith, I publish, and humbly dedicate to your
  ladyship, this last piece of my ’_Equal Check to Pharisaism and
  Antinomianism_.’ May the kindness which enabled you to bear for years
  with the coarseness of my ministrations incline you favourably to
  receive this little token of my unfeigned attachment to Protestantism,
  and of my lasting respect for your ladyship!

  “Your aversion to all that looks like controversy can never make you
  think that an _Equal Check_ to the two grand delusions, which have
  crept into the Church, is needless in our days. I flatter myself,
  therefore, that though you may blame my _performance_, you will
  approve of my _design_. And indeed what true Christian can be
  absolutely neuter in this controversy? If _God has a controversy_ with
  all _Pharisees_ and _Antinomians_, have not all God’s children a
  controversy with _Pharisaism_ and _Antinomianism_? Have you not, for
  one, my lady? Do you not check in private what I attempt to check in
  public? Does not the religious world know that you abhor, attack, and
  pursue _Pharisaism_ in its most artful disguises? And have I not
  frequently heard you express, in the strongest terms, your detestation
  of _Antinomianism_, and lament the number of sleeping professors, whom
  that Delilah robs of their strength? Nor would you, I am persuaded, my
  lady, have countenanced the opposition which was made against the
  ‘Minutes,’ if your commendable, though (as it appears to me) at that
  time, too precipitate zeal against Pharisaism had not prevented your
  seeing that they contain the Scripture truths, which are fittest to
  stop the rapid progress of Antinomianism.

  “However, if you still think, my lady, that I mistake with respect to
  the importance of those propositions, you know I am not mistaken when
  I declare, before the world, that a _powerful, practical, actually
  saving_ faith is the only faith I ever heard your ladyship recommend,
  as worthy to be contended for. And so long as you plead only for such
  a faith, so long as you abhor the winter-faith that saves the
  Solifidians, in their own conceit, while they commit adultery, murder,
  and incest, if they choose to carry Antinomianism to such a dreadful
  length; so long as you are afraid to maintain, either directly or
  indirectly, that the _evidence_ and _comfort_ of justifying faith may
  be suspended by sin, but that the _righteousness_ of faith, and the
  _justification_ which it instrumentally procures, can never be lost,
  no, not by the most enormous and complicated crimes,—whatever
  diversity there may be between your ladyship’s sentiments and mine, it
  can never be fundamental. I preach salvation by a faith that
  _actually_ works by obedient love, and your ladyship witnesses
  salvation by an _actually_ operative faith; nor can I, to this day,
  see any material difference between those phrases in the present
  controversy. I remain, with my former respect and devotedness, my
  lady, your ladyship’s most obliged and obedient servant in the Gospel,

                                                       “J. FLETCHER.

  “Madeley, _March 12, 1774_.”

Fletcher’s “Essay on Truth” is one of his ablest and most important
works. It is full of his own peculiar genius, and—what cannot be said
concerning all his writings—it is very readable. The following brief
extracts from it may be acceptable and useful:—

  _Saving faith._ “What is _saving_ faith?[308] I dare not say that it
  is ‘believing heartily’ my sins are forgiven me for Christ’s sake;
  for, if I live in sin, that belief is a _destructive_ conceit, and
  not _saving_ faith. Neither dare I say, that ‘saving faith is _only_
  a sure trust and confidence that Christ loved me, and gave Himself
  for me;’[309] for, if I did, I should almost damn all mankind for
  four thousand years. Such definitions of saving faith are, I fear,
  too _narrow_ to be just, and too _unguarded_ to keep out
  Solifidianism.[310] To avoid such mistakes; to contradict no
  Scriptures; to put no black mark of _damnation_ upon any man, that
  in any nation fears God and works of righteousness; to leave no room
  for Solifidianism, and to present the reader with a definition of
  faith adequate to _the everlasting Gospel_, I would choose to say,
  that justifying or saving faith is _believing_ the saving truth
  _with the heart unto_ internal, and (as we have opportunity) _unto_
  external _righteousness_, according to our light and dispensation.
  To St. Paul’s words, Rom. x. 10, I add the epithets _internal_ and
  _external_, in order to exclude, according to 1 John iii. 7, 8, the
  filthy imputation, under which fallen believers may, if we credit
  the Antinomians, commit internal and external adultery, mental and
  bodily murder, without the least reasonable fear of endangering
  their faith, their interest in God’s favour, and their inamissable
  title to a throne of glory.”

  _Faith the gift of God, and the act of man._ “How is faith the gift of
  God? Some persons think that faith is as much out of our power as the
  lightning that shoots from a distant cloud; they suppose that God
  drives sinners to the fountain of Christ’s blood, as irresistibly as
  the infernal _legion_ drove the herd of swine into the sea of
  Galilee.”

Footnote 308:

  As usual, these extracts are made from the _original_ edition, and the
  _italics_ are Fletcher’s own.

Footnote 309:

  In a foot-note, Fletcher remarks, “When the Church of England and Mr.
  Wesley give us particular definitions of faith, it is plain that they
  consider it according to the _Christian_ dispensation; the privileges
  of which must be principally insisted upon among Christians.”

Footnote 310:

  Solifidianism, now a favourite word with Fletcher, is thus defined by
  him, in his “Fifth Check to Antinomianism:”—“Solifidianism is the
  doctrine of Solifidians; and the Solifidians are men who, because
  sinners are justified _sola fide_, ‘by sole faith,’ in the day of
  conversion, infer, as Mr. Berridge, that ‘believing is the total term
  of all salvation,’ and conclude, as Mr. Hill, that the doctrine of
  final justification by the works of faith in the great day is ‘full of
  rottenness and deadly poison.’ It is a softer word for Antinomianism.”

After amply refuting this “_absurd_” idea, Fletcher proceeds:—

  “Having thus exposed the erroneous sense in which some people suppose
  that _faith is the gift of God_, I beg leave to mention in what sense
  it appears to me to be so. _Believing_ is the gift of the _God of
  Grace_, as _breathing_, _moving_, and _eating_ are the gifts of _the
  God of Nature_. He gives me lungs and air, that I may breathe; He
  gives me life and muscles, that I may move; He bestows upon me food
  and a mouth, that I may eat; but He neither _breathes_, _moves_, nor
  _eats_ for me. Nay, when I think proper, I can accelerate my
  breathing, motion, and eating: and, if I please, I may _fast_, _lie
  down_, or _hang myself_, and, by that means, put an end to my
  _eating_, _moving_, and _breathing_. _Faith_ is the gift of God to
  believers, as _sight_ is to you. The parent of good freely gives you
  the light of the sun, and organs proper to receive it. Everything
  around you bids you use your eyes and see; nevertheless, you may not
  only drop your curtains, but close your eyes also. This is exactly the
  case with regard to faith. Free grace removes, in part, the total
  blindness which Adam’s fall brought upon us; free grace gently sends
  us some beams of truth, which is the light of _the sun of
  righteousness_; it disposes the eye of our understanding to see those
  beams; it excites us, in various ways, to welcome them; it blesses us
  with many, perhaps with all the means of faith, such as opportunities
  to hear, read, enquire, and power to consider, assent, consent,
  resolve, and re-resolve to believe the truth. But, after all,
  _believing_ is as much our own act as _seeing_. We may in general do,
  suspend, or omit the _act_ of faith. Nay, we may do by the eye of our
  faith, what some report Democritus did by his bodily eyes. Being tired
  of seeing the follies of mankind, to rid himself of that disagreeable
  sight, he put his eyes out. We may be so averse from _the light, which
  enlightens every man_ that _comes into the world_; we may so dread it
  because our works are evil, as to exemplify, like the Pharisees, such
  awful declarations as these: _Their eyes have they closed, lest they
  should see: wherefore God gave them up to a reprobate mind_, and,
  _they were blinded_.”

It need not be added, that Fletcher abundantly sustains these figurative
arguments by scriptural quotations.

Two extracts more. In his description of “_saving faith_,” Fletcher
refuses to put the “black mark of damnation upon any man, that in any
nation fears God and works righteousness.” In his “Appendix to Prevent
Objections,” he explains his meaning, as follows:—

  “I make no more difference between the faith of a righteous heathen,
  and the faith of a father in Christ, than I do between daybreak and
  meridian light:—That the light of a sincere Jew is as much one with
  the light of a sincere Christian, as the light of the sun in a cold,
  cloudy day in March is one with the light of the sun in a fine day in
  May:—And that the difference between the saving faith peculiar to the
  sincere disciples of Noah, Moses, John the Baptist, and Jesus Christ,
  consists in a variety of _degrees_, and not in a diversity of
  _species_; saving faith, under all the dispensations, agreeing in the
  following essentials: 1. It is begotten by the revelation of some
  saving truth presented by free grace, impressed by the Spirit, and
  received by the believer’s prevented free agency. 2. It has the same
  original cause in all, that is, the mercy of God in Jesus Christ. 3.
  It _actually_ saves all, though in various degrees. 4. It sets all
  upon _working righteousness; some bearing fruit thirty, some sixty,
  and some a hundredfold_. And 5. Through Christ, it will bring all that
  do not make shipwreck of it to one or another of the ‘_many
  mansions_,’ which our Lord is gone to prepare in heaven for His
  _believing_, _obedient_ people.

  “And here honesty obliges me to lay before the public an objection,
  which I had for some time against the _appendages_ of the Athanasian
  Creed. I admire the scriptural manner in which it sets forth the
  Divine Unity in Trinity, and the Divine Trinity in Unity; but I can no
  longer use its damnatory clauses. It abruptly takes us to the very top
  of the _Christian_ dispensation, considered in a doctrinal light. This
  dispensation it calls _the Catholic faith_; and, without mentioning
  the faith of the inferior dispensations, as our other Creeds do, it
  makes us declare, that ‘_except everyone keep that faith_’ (the faith
  of the highest dispensation) ‘_whole_ and _undefiled, he cannot be
  saved; without doubt, he shall perish everlastingly_.’ This dreadful
  denunciation is true with regard to proud, ungodly infidels, who, in
  the midst of all the means of _Christian_ faith, obstinately,
  maliciously, and finally set their hearts against the doctrine of
  Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; equally despising the Son’s atonement,
  and the Spirit’s inspiration. But I will no more invade Christ’s
  tribunal, and pronounce that the fearful punishment of damnation shall
  ‘_without doubt_’ be inflicted upon ‘_every_’ Unitarian, Arian, Jew,
  Turk, and heathen, _that fears God and works righteousness_, though he
  does not _hold the faith_ of the Athanasian Creed _whole_. For, if you
  except the last Article, thousands, yea, millions, are never called to
  hold it _at all_; and therefore shall never perish for not _holding it
  whole_. At all hazards, then, I hope I shall never use again those
  damnatory clauses, without taking the liberty of guarding them
  agreeably to the doctrine of the dispensations. And if Zelotes presses
  me with my subscriptions, I reply beforehand, that the same Church,
  who required me to subscribe to St. Athanasius’s Creed, enjoins me
  also to believe this clause of St. Peter’s Creed, ‘_In every nation,
  he that feareth God and worketh righteousness is accepted of Him_.’
  And, if those two creeds are irreconcilable, I think it more
  reasonable that Athanasius should bow to Peter, warmed by the Spirit
  of love, than that Peter should bow to Athanasius, heated by
  controversial opposition.”

Some will object to Fletcher’s teaching. Be it so: the writer’s business
is neither to defend nor to condemn; but simply to show, as far as
possible, what Fletcher’s opinions were. John Wesley approved them. “Mr.
Fletcher,” says he, in a letter dated January 17, 1775, “has given us a
wonderful view of the different dispensations. I believe that difficult
subject was never placed in so clear a light before. It seems God has
raised him up for this very thing—

               “‘To vindicate eternal Providence,
               And justify the ways of God to man.’”[311]

Footnote 311:

  Wesley’s Works, vol. xiii., p. 52.

Fletcher himself, evidently, felt great interest in his “Essay on
Truth.” In a letter, dated March 20, 1774, and addressed to the Rev.
Joseph Benson, he observed:—

  “I do not repent having engaged in the present controversy, for,
  though I think my little publications cannot reclaim those who are
  given up to believe the lie of the day, yet, they may here and there
  stop one from swallowing it at all, or from swallowing it so deeply as
  otherwise he might have done. In preaching, I do not meddle with the
  points discussed, unless my text leads me to it, and then I think them
  important enough not to be ashamed of them before my people.

  “I am just finishing an ‘Essay on Truth,’ which I dedicate to Lady
  Huntingdon, wherein you will see my latest views of that important
  subject. My apprehensions of things have not changed since I saw you
  last; save that in one thing I have seen my error. An over-eager
  attention to the doctrine of the Spirit has made me, in some degree,
  overlook the medium by which the Spirit works—I mean the _Word of
  Truth_, which is the word by which the heavenly fire warms us. I
  rather expected lightning, than a steady fire by means of fuel. I
  mention my error to you lest you should be involved therein.

  “My controversy weighs upon my hands; but I must go through with it;
  which I hope will be done in two or three pieces more: one of which,
  ‘Scripture Scales to Weigh the Gold of Gospel Truth,’ may be more
  useful than the Checks, as being more literally scriptural.

  “I have exchanged a couple of friendly letters with Lady Huntingdon,
  who gives me leave to see her publicly; but I think it best to
  postpone that honour till I have cleared my mind.”[312]

Footnote 312:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

Charles Wesley read and criticized the “Essay on Truth,” upon which
Fletcher wrote him as follows:—

  “I am glad you did not altogether disapprove my ‘_Essay on Truth_.’
  The letter, I grant, profiteth little, until the Spirit animate it. I
  had, some weeks ago, one of those touches which realize, or rather
  spiritualize the letter; and it convinced me more than ever that what
  I say in that tract, of the _Spirit_ and of _faith_, is _truth_. I am
  also persuaded that the _faith_ and _Spirit_, which belong to
  _perfect_ Christianity, are at a very low ebb, even among believers.
  When the Son of Man cometh to set up His kingdom, shall He find
  _Christian_ faith upon the earth? Yes; but, I fear, as little as He
  found of Jewish faith, when He came in the flesh. I believe you cannot
  rest with the easy Antinomian, or the busy Pharisee. You and I have
  nothing to do but to die to all that is of a sinful nature, and to
  pray for the power of an endless life. God make us faithful to our
  convictions, and keep us from the snares of outward things. You are in
  danger from music, children, poetry; and I from speculation,
  controversy, sloth, etc. Let us _watch_ against the deceitfulness of
  self and sin in all their appearances.

  “What power of the Spirit do you find among the believers in London?
  What openings of the kingdom? Is the well springing up in many hearts?
  Are many souls dissatisfied, and looking for the kingdom of God in
  power? Watchman! what of the night? What of the day? What of the dawn?

  “I feel the force of what you say about the danger of so encouraging
  the inferior dispensations, as to make people rest short of the faith
  which belongs to perfect Christianity. I have tried to obviate it in
  some parts of the ‘_Equal Check_,’ and hope to do it more effectually
  in my reply to Mr. Hill’s _Creed for Perfectionists_. Probably, I
  shall get nothing by my polemic labours, but loss of friends, and
  charges of ‘novel chimeras’ on _both_ sides. I expect a letter from
  you on the subject. Write with openness, and do not fear to discourage
  me by speaking your disapprobation of what you dislike. My aim is to
  be found at the feet of all, bearing and forbearing until truth and
  love bring better days.

  “I am, rev. and dear Sir, your most affectionate brother and son in
  the Gospel,

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[313]

Footnote 313:

  Letters, 1791, p. 224.




                             CHAPTER XVII.
                       _PUBLICATIONS IN THE YEAR_

                                 1775.


ON November 12, 1774, Fletcher wrote:—

  “The author of the ‘_Checks_’ has promised to his readers an answer to
  the Rev. Mr. Toplady’s piece, entitled, ‘_More Work for Mr.
  Wesley_.’[314] His reason for postponing the finishing of _that part_
  of his ‘_Logica Genevensis_’ was the importance of the ‘_Equal
  Check_,’ which closes the controversy with Mr. Hill. He saw life so
  uncertain, that, of two things which he was obliged to do, he thought
  it his duty to set about that which appeared to him the more useful.
  He considered also that it was proper to have quite done with Mr.
  Hill, before he faced so able a writer as Mr. Toplady. And he hoped,
  that, to lay before the judicious a complete system of truth, which,
  like the sun, recommends itself by its own lustre, was perhaps the
  best method to prove that error, which shines only as a meteor, is
  nothing but a mock-sun. However, he fully designs to perform his
  engagement in a short time, if his life is spared.”

Footnote 314:

  This was published in 1772, and will be noticed shortly.

This was prefixed to the _first_ edition of the following work, which,
at that time, was in the press: “Zelotes and Honestus[315] Reconciled;
or, an Equal Check to Pharisaism and Antinomianism Continued: Being the
First Part of the Scripture Scales to weigh the Gold of Gospel Truth,—to
balance a multitude of opposite Scriptures,—to prove the Gospel-Marriage
of _Free-Grace_ and _Free-will_,—and to restore primitive harmony to the
Gospel of the day. With a Preface, containing some Strictures upon the
Three Letters of Richard Hill, Esq.; which have been lately published.”

Footnote 315:

  “Zelotes,” says Fletcher, “represents any zealous Solifidian, who
  looks upon the doctrine of free-will as heretical: Honestus, any
  zealous moralist, who looks upon the doctrine of free grace as
  enthusiastical.”

This was Fletcher’s largest work. It was published in two parts, but it
was continuously paged, the whole making a 12 mo. vol. of 444 pages.

Mr. Hill’s “Three Letters” were published in 1773, just after the
publication of his “Finishing Stroke.” The letters have been given in a
previous chapter. Fletcher had answered them privately; and now, in a
preface to his present work, he replied publicly. After stating that Mr.
Hill’s pamphlet “had been hawked about the parish of Madeley” by the
newsman, he proceeds to say:—

  “Mr. Hill quits the field; but it is like a brave Parthian. He not
  only shoots his own arrows as he retires, but borrows those also of
  two persons, whom he calls ‘_a very eminent minister in the Church of
  England_’ and ‘_a lay gentleman of great learning and abilities_.’ As
  I see neither argument nor Scripture in the performances of those two
  new auxiliaries, I shall take no notice of their ingrafted
  productions.

  “With respect to Mr. Hill’s arguments, they are the same which he
  advanced in his ‘_Finishing Stroke_;’ nor need we wonder at his not
  scrupling to produce them _over again_, just as if they had been
  overlooked by his opponent, for in the first page of his book he says,
  ‘_I have not read a single page which treats on the subject since I
  wrote_ my FINISHING STROKE.’

  “As Mr. Hill’s arguments are the same, so are also his personal
  charges. After passing some compliments upon me as an ‘_able defender_
  of Mr. Wesley’s principles,’ he continues to represent me as
  ‘_prostituting noble endowments to the advancing of a party_.’ He
  affirms, without shadow of proof, that he has ‘_detected many
  misrepresentations of facts throughout_’ my ‘_publications_.’ He
  accuses me of using ‘_unbecoming artifices, much declamation,
  chicanery, and evasion_;’ and says, ‘_upon these accounts I really
  cannot, with any degree of satisfaction, read the works of one who, I
  am in continual suspicion_, is _endeavouring to mislead me by false
  glosses and pious frauds_.’

  “I cannot but still love and honour Mr. Hill on _many_, _very_ many,
  accounts. Though his warm attachment to what _he_ calls ‘the doctrines
  of grace,’ and what _we_ call ‘the doctrines of _limited_ grace and
  _free wrath_,’ robs him from time to time of _part_ of the moderation,
  patience, and meekness of wisdom which adorn the _complete_ Christian
  character, I cannot but consider him as a very valuable person. I do
  not doubt but when the paroxysm of his Calvinistic zeal shall be over,
  he will be as great an ornament to the Church of England in the
  capacity of a gentleman, as he is to civil society in the capacity of
  a magistrate. And justice, as well as love, obliges me to say that in
  the mean time he is, in several respects, a pattern for all gentlemen
  of fortune; few equalling him in devoting a large fortune to the
  relief of the poor, and their leisure hours to the support of what
  they esteem the truth. Happy would it be for him, and for the peace of
  the Church, if to all his good qualities he always added _the ornament
  of a meek and quiet spirit_; and if he so far suspected his orthodoxy
  as to condescend to weigh himself in the ‘_Scripture Scales_.’”

Fletcher’s preface to his “Scripture Scales” is “humbly addressed to the
true Protestants in Great Britain and Ireland.”

  “The Reformers,” says he, “_protested_ three things in general:—1.
  That right reason has an important place in matters of faith. 2. That
  all matters of faith may and must be decided by Scripture, understood
  reasonably and consistently with the context. 3. That antiquity and
  fathers, traditions and councils, canons and the Church, lose their
  authority when they depart from sober reason and plain Scripture.
  These three general _protests_ are the very ground of our religion
  when it is contradistinguished from Popery. They who stand to them
  deserve, in my humble opinion, the title of _true Protestants_.

  “If the preceding account is just, _true_ Protestants are all
  _candid_; Christian candour being nothing but a readiness to hear
  right _reason_ and plain _Scripture_. Of all the tempers which true
  Protestants abhor, none seems to them more detestable than that of
  those _gnostics_, those pretenders to superior illumination, who,
  under the common pretence of _orthodoxy_ or _infallibility_, shut
  their eyes against the light, think plain Scripture beneath their
  notice, enter their protest against reason, and steel their breasts
  against conviction. Alas! how many professors there are who, like St.
  Stephen’s opponents, judges, and executioners, are neither able to
  resist nor willing to admit the truth; who make their defence by
  _stopping their ears, and crying out, ‘The temple of the Lord, the
  temple of the Lord are we!’_ who thrust the supposed heretic out of
  their sanhedrim; who, from the press, the pulpit, or the doctor’s
  chair, send volleys of hard insinuations or soft assertions, in hope
  that they will pass for solid arguments; and who, when they have no
  more stones or snowballs to throw at the supposed Philistine,
  prudently avoid drawing ‘_the sword of the Spirit_,’ retire behind the
  walls of their fancied orthodoxy, raise a rampart of slanderous
  contempt against the truth that besieges them, and obstinately refuse
  either candidly to give up, or manfully contend for, the unscriptural
  tenets which they will impose upon others as pure Gospel.

  “Whether some of my opponents, good men as they are, have not a little
  inclined to the error of those sons of prejudice, I leave the candid
  reader to decide. They have neither answered nor yielded to the
  arguments of my ‘Checks.’ They are shut up in their own city. Strong
  and high are thy walls, O mystical Jericho! Thy battlements reach into
  the clouds, but _truth_, the spiritual ark of God, is stronger, and
  shall prevail. The bearing of it patiently around thy ramparts, and
  the blowing of rams’ horns in the name of the Lord, will yet shake the
  very foundations of thy towers. Oh that I had the honour of
  successfully mixing my feeble voice with the blasts of the champions
  who encompass the devoted city! Oh that the irresistible shout,
  _Reason and Scripture—Christ and the Truth_—were universal! If this
  were the case, how soon would Jericho and Babylon—Antinomianism and
  Pharisaism—fall together.

  “These two anti-Christian fortresses are equally attacked in the
  following pages.

  “The controversy is one of the most important which was ever set on
  foot. The GRAND inquiry, ‘_What shall I do to be saved?_’ is entirely
  suspended on this GREATER question, ‘_Have I anything_ TO DO _to be
  eternally saved?_’ A question this which admits of three answers:—1.
  That of the _mere Solifidian_, who says, If we are _elect_, we have
  nothing to do in order to eternal salvation, unless it be to believe
  that Christ has done all for us, and then to sing _finished
  salvation_; and if we are not _elect_, whether we do nothing, little,
  or much, eternal ruin is our _inevitable_ portion. 2. That of the
  _mere moralist_, who is as great a stranger to the doctrine of _free
  grace_ as to that of free wrath; and tells you that there is no free,
  initial salvation for us, and that we must work ourselves into a state
  of initial salvation by dint of care, diligence, and faithfulness. And
  3. That of their _reconciler_, whom I consider as a rational Bible
  Christian, and who asserts (1) that Christ has done the part of a
  Sacrificing Priest and teaching Prophet upon earth, and does still
  that of an Interceding and Royal Priest in heaven, whence He sends His
  Holy Spirit to act as an enlightener, sanctifier, comforter, and
  helper in our hearts; (2) that _the free gift_ of initial salvation,
  and of one or more talents of saving grace, ‘_is come upon all_’
  through the God-man Christ, who ‘_is the Saviour of all men,
  especially of them that believe_;’ and (3) that our free will,
  assisted by that saving grace imparted to us in the free gift, is
  enabled to work with God in a subordinate manner, so that we may
  freely (_without necessity_) do the part of penitent, obedient, and
  persevering believers, according to the Gospel dispensation we are
  under.

  “This is the plan of this work, in which I equally fight for faith and
  works, for gratuitous mercy and impartial justice; reconciling all
  along Christ our _Saviour_ with Christ our _Judge_, heated Augustin
  with heated Pelagius, free grace with free will, Divine goodness with
  human obedience, the faithfulness of God’s promises with the veracity
  of His threatenings, _first_ with _second_ causes, the original merits
  of Christ with the derived worthiness of His members, and God’s
  foreknowledge with our free agency.

  “The plan, I think, is generous; standing at the utmost distance from
  the extremes of bigots. It is deep and extensive; taking in the most
  interesting subjects, such as the origin of evil, liberty, and
  necessity, the law of Moses and the Gospel of Christ, general and
  particular redemption, the apostacy and perseverance of the saints,
  and the election and reprobation maintained by St. Paul. I entirely
  rest the cause upon _Protestant_ ground; that is, upon _Reason_ and
  _Scripture_. Nevertheless, to show our antagonists that we are not
  afraid to meet them upon any ground, I prove, by sufficient
  testimonies from the fathers and the Reformers, that the most eminent
  divines in the primitive Church and our own, have passed the straits
  which I point out; especially when they weighed the heavy anchor of
  prejudice, had a good gale of Divine wisdom, and steered by the
  Christian mariner’s compass, ‘_the Word of God_,’ more than by the
  _false lights_ hung out by party men.”

It is hoped that these quotations from the preface of Fletcher’s book
will induce the reader to peruse and study the book itself. To analyse
it here is impracticable; and if one extract were given, hundreds ought
to follow. In this frothy age, the book to many will seem dry and
tedious; but to a man sincerely and earnestly in search of sacred truth
it will prove a mine full of invaluable treasures.

At the end of the _first_ edition, the following was printed:—

                             “Advertisement.

  “The key to the controversy, which is designed to be ended by the
  ‘_Scripture Scales_,’ proving too long for this place, the publication
  of it is postponed. It _may_ one day open the way for _An Essay on the
  XVIIth Article_, under the following title: ‘The Doctrines of Grace
  Reconciled to the Doctrines of Justice. Being an Essay on Election and
  Reprobation, in which the defects of _Pelagianism_, _Calvinism_, and
  _Arminianism_ are impartially pointed out, and primitive, scriptural
  harmony is more fully restored to the Gospel of the day.’”

This was not published until the year 1777; but it is mentioned here to
show that, in substance, it was already written, and, thereby, to show
the activity of Fletcher’s mind, and the accumulated labours which soon
broke down his health.

No sooner was the publication of his “Scripture Scales,” or “Equal Check
to Pharisaism and Antinomianism,” completed, than he committed to the
press the following: “The Fictitious and the Genuine Creed: Being ‘A
Creed for Arminians,’ composed by Richard Hill, Esq.; to which is
opposed ‘A Creed for those who believe that _Christ tasted death for
every man_.’ By the author of the ‘Checks to Antinomianism.’ London,
1775.”  12mo, 52 pp.

The reader will remember that, in bad taste, Fletcher, in 1772, had
published, in his “Fourth Check to Antinomianism,” a “sweet gospel
proclamation: Given at Geneva, and signed by four of His Majesty’s
principal Secretaries of State for the Predestination Department—John
Calvin, Dr. Crisp, The Author of P.O.” (Richard Hill), “and Rowland
Hill.” This provoked Richard Hill; and, when he published his “Three
Letters written to the Rev. J. Fletcher, in the year 1773,” he, in
equally bad taste, attached an “Appendix” to his Letters, entitled, “A
Creed for Arminians and Perfectionists.” Now, in 1775, Fletcher felt it
his duty to examine the Creed so ingeniously drawn up by Mr. Hill, and
to expose its fallacies. The following is an extract from Fletcher’s
preface:—

  “With regard to our extensive views of Christ’s redemption by price,
  Mr. Hill calls us _Arminians_: and with respect to our believing that
  there is no perfect faith, no perfect repentance in the grave; that
  the _Christian_ graces of repentance, faith, hope, patience, etc.,
  must be perfected _here_ or never; and with respect to our
  _confidence_ that Christ’s blood, fully applied by His Spirit, and
  apprehended by faith, can cleanse our hearts from all unrighteousness
  before we go into the purgatory of the _Calvinists_, or into that of
  the _papists_, that is, before we go into the valley of the shadow of
  death, or into the suburbs of hell—with respect to this _belief_ and
  _confidence_, I say, Mr. Hill calls us _Perfectionists_; and,
  appearing once more upon the stage of our controversy, he has lately
  presented the public with what he calls, ‘_A Creed for Arminians and
  Perfectionists_’, which he introduces in these words: ‘_The following
  confession of faith, however shocking, not to say blasphemous, it may
  appear to the humble Christian, must inevitably be adopted, if not in
  express words_, yet, _in substance, by every Arminian_ and
  _Perfectionist whatsoever; though the last article of it chiefly
  concerns such as are ordained ministers in the Church of England_.’
  And, as among such ministers, Mr. J. Wesley, Mr. W. Sellon, and myself
  peculiarly oppose Mr. Hill’s Calvinian doctrines of _absolute
  election_ and _reprobation_, and of a _death-purgatory_, he has put
  the initial letters of our names to his Creed; hoping, no doubt, to
  make us peculiarly ashamed of our principles. And, indeed, so should
  we be, if any ‘_blasphemous_’ or ‘_shocking_’ consequence
  ‘_inevitably_’ flowed from them.”

Probably, by this time, the reader is tired of Creeds. He has had
Fletcher’s Creed for an Antinomian; Mr. Richard Hill’s Creed for
Arminians and Perfectionists; and now he has, in “The Fictitious and the
Genuine Creed,” Fletcher’s Creed for Methodists. The last may be dry
reading, but it contains truths of the utmost importance,—truths which
Fletcher spent the greatest part of his literary life in endeavouring to
explain and to defend; and, speaking generally, truths which Wesley
himself endorsed, embraced, and taught. Fletcher concludes his pamphlet
with the following scrap of autobiography:—

  “I shall close this answer to the Creed, which Mr. Hill has composed
  _for Arminians_, by an observation which is not foreign to our
  controversy. In one of the ‘Three Letters’ which introduce the
  Fictitious Creed, Mr. Hill says, ‘_Controversy, I am persuaded, has
  not done me any good_;’ and he exhorts me to examine myself closely
  whether I cannot make the same confession. I own that it would have
  done me harm, if I had blindly contended for my opinions. Nay, if I
  had shut my eyes against the light of truth;—if I had set the plainest
  Scriptures aside, as if they were not worth my notice;—if I had
  overlooked the strongest arguments of my opponents;—if I had advanced
  groundless charges against them;—if I had refused to do justice to
  their good meaning or piety;—and, above all, if I had taken my leave
  of them by injuring their moral character, by publishing over and over
  again arguments, which they have properly answered, without taking the
  least notice of their answers;—if I had made a solemn promise not to
  read one of their books, though they should publish a thousand
  volumes;—if, continuing to write against them, I had fixed upon them
  (as ‘_unavoidable_’ consequences) absurd tenets, which have no more
  necessary connexion with their principles than the doctrine of general
  redemption has with Calvinian reprobation. If I had done this, I say,
  controversy would have wounded my conscience or my reason; and,
  without adding anything to my light, it would have immovably fixed me
  in my prejudices, and perhaps branded me before the world for an
  _Arminian bigot_. But, as matters are, I hope I may make the following
  acknowledgments without betraying the impertinence of proud boasting.

  “Although I have often been sorry that controversy should take up so
  much of the time which I might, with much more satisfaction to myself,
  have employed in devotional exercises; and although I have lamented,
  and do still lament, my low attainments in the _meekness of wisdom_,
  which should constantly guide the pen of every controversial writer;
  yet, I rejoice that I have been enabled to persist in my resolution,
  either to wipe off, or to share the reproach of those who have
  hazarded their reputation in defence of pure and undefiled religion.
  And, if I am not mistaken, my repeated attempts have been attended
  with these happy effects:—

  “In vindicating the _moral_ doctrines of grace, I hope that, as a
  _man_, I have learned to think more closely, and to investigate truth
  more ardently, than I did before.

  “As a _divine_, I see more clearly the gaps and stiles, at which
  mistaken good men have turned out of the narrow way of truth, to the
  right hand and to the left.

  “As a _Protestant_, I hope I have much more esteem for the Scriptures
  in general, and in particular for those practical parts of them, which
  the Calvinists had insensibly taught me to overlook, or despise. And
  this increasing esteem is, I trust, accompanied with a deeper
  conviction of the truth of Christianity, and with a greater readiness
  to defend the Gospel against infidels, Pharisees, and Antinomians.

  “As a _Preacher_, I hope I can now do more justice to a text by
  reconciling it with seemingly contrary Scriptures.

  “As an _Anti-Calvinist_, I have learned to do the Calvinists justice,
  in granting that there is an _election of distinguishing grace_ for
  God’s peculiar people, and a _particular redemption_ for all believers
  who are faithful unto death. I can more easily excuse pious
  Calvinists, who, through prejudice, mistake _that_ Scriptural election
  for _their_ Antinomian election; and who consider _that_ particular
  redemption as the only redemption mentioned in the Scriptures. Nay, I
  can, without scruple, allow Mr. Hill that his doctrines of _finished
  salvation_ and _irresistible_ grace are _true_ with respect to all
  those who die in their infancy.

  “As one who is called an _Arminian_, I have found out some flaws in
  _Arminianism_, and evidenced my impartiality in pointing them out, as
  well as the flaws of Calvinism.

  “As a _Witness_ for the truth of the Gospel, I hope I have learned to
  bear reproach from all sorts of people with more undaunted courage.
  And I humbly trust, that, were I called to seal with my blood the
  truth of the _doctrines of grace_ and _of justice_, against the
  _Pharisees_ and _Antinomians_, I could (Divine grace supporting me to
  the last) do it more rationally, and of consequence with greater
  steadiness.

  “As a _Follower of Christ_, I hope I have learned to disregard my
  dearest friends for my Heavenly Prophet; or, to speak the language of
  our Lord, I hope I have learned to _forsake father, mother, and
  brothers for Christ’s sake, and the Gospel’s_.

  “As a _Disputant_, I have learned that solid arguments, and plain
  Scriptures, make no more impression upon bigotry, than the charmer’s
  voice does upon the deaf adder; and, by that means, I hope, I depend
  less upon the powers of reason, the letter of the Scriptures, and the
  candour of professors, than I formerly did.

  “As a _Believer_, I have been brought to see and feel that the power
  of the Spirit of truth, which teaches men to be _of one heart, and of
  one mind_, and makes them _think and speak the same_, is at a very low
  ebb in the religious world.

  “As a _Member of the Church of England_, I have learned to be pleased
  with our holy Mother, for giving us floods of pure morality to wash
  away the few remaining Calvinian freckles that remain upon her face.

  “As a _Christian_, I hope I have learned, in some degree, to exercise
  that charity, which teaches us boldly to oppose a dangerous error
  without ceasing to honour and love its abettors, so far as they
  resemble our Lord.

  “And, lastly, as a _Writer_, I have learned to feel the truth of
  Solomon’s observation, ‘_Of making many books there is no end, and
  much study is a weariness of the flesh: Let us hear the conclusion of
  the whole matter: Fear God and keep His commandments; for this is the
  whole duty of man_;’ and the sum of the _Anti-Solifidian_ truth, which
  I endeavour to vindicate.

  “I do not say that I have learned any of these lessons as I should
  have done; but I hope I have learned so much of them as to say that,
  in these respects, my controversial toil has not been altogether in
  vain in the Lord.”

The reader must excuse these long extracts; for there seems to be no
better way of giving a correct and full idea of Fletcher’s views and
character.

At the end of the first edition of his pamphlet, Fletcher inserted the
following “Advertisement”:—

  “Mr. Hill’s ‘_Creed for Arminians_’ is followed by his plea for the
  _inbred man of sin_. This indirect and witty plea he calls, ‘_A Creed
  for Perfectionists_.’ But, as that part of his performance has no
  immediate connection with the doctrines vindicated in the preceding
  pages, I design to make my remarks upon it in a separate Tract.”

This “Tract,” as Fletcher calls it, seems to have been already written,
for it was forthwith published, and entitled, “The Last Check to
Antinomianism. A Polemical Essay on the Twin Doctrines of Christian
Imperfection and a Death Purgatory,” By the Author of the Checks.
London: 1775. 12mo., 328 pp.

At this time, the Rev. Thomas Reader, a Dissenting Minister, at Taunton,
held a position similar to that which had been held by Doddridge, at
Northampton. He was the President of a College for training Independent
Ministers, and was a zealous Calvinist. When Fletcher’s new book was
published, Mr. Reader read it, and was so angry with its contents that
he started off to Madeley, a long journey, to rebuke the author for his
heresy. Arriving at his destination, he hastened to the vicarage,
knocked loudly at the door, told the servant who he was, and requested
an interview with the Vicar. Fletcher, knowing him by name, ran from his
study to receive his visitor, and spreading out his hands, exclaimed,
“Come in, come in, thou blessed of the Lord! Am I so honoured as to
receive a visit from so esteemed a servant of my Master? Let us have a
little prayer, while refreshments are getting ready.” Mr. Reader was
puzzled. He remained three days, but was utterly unable to muster
sufficient courage to even intimate the object of his visit. Afterwards
he stated that he never enjoyed three days of such spiritual and
profitable intercourse in all his life.[316]

Footnote 316:

  “Methodism in North Devon,” p. 115.

Fletcher’s books, prayers, conversations, and tempers were a glorious
manifestation of the truths he taught in his elaborate and able treatise
on Christian Perfection,—a treatise never equalled, except by the
treatise and the sermons of Wesley on the same subject. Wesley and
Fletcher are easily understood; modern writers on this all-important
doctrine are too often mystics, or, rather, mystifiers. The former
expounded Scripture, the latter disastrously obscure Scripture by what
they consider to be philosophy. The Methodists need no new exposition of
this old Methodist truth. Never can it be more plainly stated and more
indisputably proved, than it is in the “Plain Account” of Wesley, and
the “Polemical Essay” of his friend Fletcher. Well would it be if the
present race of Methodists would read these, in preference to the
bewildering trash so injuriously read in the stead of them. Truth never
changes! and changes of society can never justify the _new_ settings
forth of truth, nowadays so ignorantly demanded.

A brief analysis of Fletcher’s invaluable book, and a few extracts from
it, must be given.

In reference to the word “Perfection,” which occasioned so much offence,
Fletcher writes:—

  “_Christian Perfection!_ Why should the harmless phrase offend us?
  _Perfection!_ Why should that lovely word frighten us? The word
  _predestinate_ occurs but four times in all the Scriptures; and the
  word _predestination_ not once; and yet Mr. Hill would justly exclaim
  against us, if we showed our wit, by calling out for ‘_a little
  Foundery_’ (or Tabernacle) ‘eye-salve’ to help us to see the word
  _predestination once_ in _all_ the Bible. Not so the word
  _perfection_. It occurs, with its derivatives, as frequently as most
  words in the Scripture; and not seldom in the very same sense in which
  we take it; nevertheless, we do not lay an undue stress upon the
  expression; and, if we thought that our condescension would answer any
  good end, we would give up that harmless and significant word.”

In reply to the unfair and untrue taunt that Wesley and Fletcher taught
the doctrine of _sinless_ perfection, Fletcher makes an admirable
quotation from Wesley:—

  “To explain myself a little farther on this head: 1. Not only SIN,
  _properly so called_, that is, a _voluntary_ transgression of a known
  law, but _sin_ IMPROPERLY so called, that is, an _involuntary_
  transgression of a divine law, known or unknown, needs the atoning
  blood. 2. I believe there is no such perfection in this life, as
  excludes these _involuntary_ transgressions, which I apprehend to be
  naturally consequent on the ignorance and mistakes inseparable from
  mortality. 3. Therefore, SINLESS _perfection_ is a phrase I never use,
  lest I should seem to contradict myself. 4. I believe a person filled
  with the love of God is still liable to these involuntary
  transgressions. 5. Such transgressions you may call _sins_ if you
  please; I do not, for the reasons above-mentioned.”

Fletcher then proceeds to prove that “Pious Calvinists have had, _at
times_, nearly the same views of Christian Perfection” that he and
Wesley had.

  “They dissent from us,” says he, “because they confound the
  anti-evangelical law of innocence and the evangelical law of
  liberty—peccability and sin—Adamic and Christian Perfection; and
  because they do not consider that Christian Perfection, falling
  infinitely short of God’s _absolute_ perfection, admits of a daily
  _growth_.”

The third section of Fletcher’s work is occupied with answers to popular
objections; and the fourth amply proves that the doctrine for which he
is contending is a doctrine taught in the formularies of the Church of
England.

Mr. Hill, in the Eleventh Article of his “Fictitious Creed,” had made
Fletcher, Wesley, and Walter Sellon, not only deny “The Thirty-nine
Articles of the Church of England,” which they had “solemnly
subscribed,” but also the _truthful_ teaching of four Apostolical
writers in the New Testament. With excessively bad taste, he had
represented them as saying, “Let Peter, Paul, James, and John say what
they will, and let the Reformers and Martyrs join their syren-song,
their eyes were at best but half opened, for want of a little Foundery
eye-salve.” Accordingly, the fifth and five following sections of
Fletcher’s book are devoted to a refutation of this scandalous and
almost profane slander. A large number of texts, from the Epistles of
these four inspired writers, are most ably examined and explained,—texts
incontestably proving that the doctrine of Christian Perfection was a
doctrine taught by “Peter, Paul, James, and John.”

In the eleventh section of his book, Fletcher triumphantly answers the
objections, founded upon certain texts in the writings of Solomon,
Isaiah, and Job; and in the twelfth he adduces “a variety of arguments
to prove the _absurdity_ of the twin doctrines of _Christian
Imperfection_ and a _Death-Purgatory_.” In this, he furnishes a
definition of Christian Perfection worthy of being quoted, namely:—

  “_Christian Perfection_ is nothing but the _depth_ of evangelical
  repentance, the _full_ assurance of faith, and the _pure_ love of God
  and man shed abroad in a _faithful_ believer’s heart, by the Holy
  Ghost given unto him, to cleanse him, and to keep him clean, _from all
  filthiness of the flesh and Spirit_; and to enable him to _fulfil the
  law of Christ_ according to the talents he is entrusted with, and the
  circumstances in which he is placed in _this_ world.”

In the next section (the thirteenth) Fletcher dwells upon “the
_mischievousness_ of the doctrines of _Christian Imperfection, and a
Death Purgatory_.” He concludes his scathing arguments on this subject
as follows:—

  “The modish doctrine of Christian imperfection and death-purgatory is
  so contrived that carnal men will always prefer the purgatory of the
  Calvinists to that of the Papists. For the Papists prescribe I know
  not how many cups of divine wrath and dire vengeance, which are to be
  drunk by the souls of believers who die _half_-purged, or _three
  parts_ cleansed. These _half-damned_, or a _quarter-damned_ creatures
  must go through a severe discipline, and fiery salvation in the very
  suburbs of hell, before they can be perfectly purified. But our
  opponents have found out a way to deliver _half-hearted_ believers out
  of all fear in this respect. Such believers need not _utterly abolish
  the body of sin_ in this world. The inbred man of sin not only _may_,
  but he _shall_ live as long as we do. You will possibly ask: ‘What is
  to become of this sinful guest? Shall he take us to hell, or shall we
  take him to heaven? If he cannot die in this world, will Christ
  destroy him in the next?’ No: here Christ is almost left out of the
  question. Our indwelling adversary is not to be destroyed by the
  brightness of the Redeemer’s spiritual appearing, but by the gloom of
  the appearance of death. The king of terrors comes to the assistance
  of Jesus’s sanctifying grace, and instantaneously delivers the carnal
  believer from indwelling pride, unbelief, covetousness, peevishness,
  uncharitableness, love of the world, and inordinate affection. The
  dying sinner’s breath does the capital work of the Spirit of holiness.
  By the most astonishing of all miracles, the faint, infectious, last
  gasp of a sinful believer blows away, in the twinkling of an eye, the
  great mountain of inward corruption, which all the means of grace, all
  the faith, prayers, and sacraments of twenty, perhaps of forty years,
  were never able to remove. If this doctrine is true, how greatly was
  St. Paul mistaken when he said, ‘_The sting of death is sin_.’ Should
  he not have said, _Death is the cure of sin_, instead of saying, ‘_Sin
  is the sting_ of death’? And should not his praises flow
  thus,—‘_Thanks be to God who gives us the victory through death_; our
  great and only deliverer from our greatest and fiercest enemy,
  _indwelling sin_’?”

The fourteenth section of Fletcher’s book is employed in answering the
false and pernicious statements contained in Toplady’s “Caveat against
Unsound Doctrine,” and Martin Madan’s “Essay on Galatians v. 17.” In the
two following sections, Fletcher proves that his doctrine of Christian
perfection “cannot be justly reproached as Popish, and Pelagian; and
shows the distinction which exists” between _sins_ and _innocent
infirmities_. Then he concludes his invaluable book with four Addresses:
1. “To perfect Christian Pharisees; 2. To prejudiced Imperfectionists;
3. To imperfect Perfectionists; and 4. To perfect Christians.” These
addresses will always rank among the most powerful productions of
Fletcher’s pen; but, for want of space, only one extract from them can
be given here; and even that is, to a large extent, an extract from
Wesley’s Sermon on “The Scripture Way of Salvation.” It is, however, of
the highest importance, as containing an answer to the question, How are
we to be “sanctified, saved from sin, and perfected in love?” Fletcher
writes:—

  “I have already pointed out the close connexion there is between an
  act of _faith_ which _fully_ apprehends the sanctifying promise of the
  Father, and the power of the Spirit of Christ which makes an end of
  moral corruption by forcing the lingering man of sin _instantaneously_
  to breathe out his last. Mr. Wesley, in the above quoted sermon,
  touches upon this delicate subject in so clear and concise a manner,
  that, while his discourse is before me, for the sake of those who have
  it not in hand, I shall transcribe the whole passage, and, by this
  means, put the seal of that eminent divine to what I have advanced, in
  the preceding pages, about sanctifying faith, and the quick
  destruction of sin.

  “‘Does God work this great work in the soul _gradually_ or
  _instantaneously_? Perhaps it may be gradually wrought in some, I mean
  in this sense: They do not advert to the particular moment, wherein
  sin ceases to be. But it is infinitely desirable, were it the will of
  God, that it should be done instantaneously; that the Lord should
  destroy sin by the _breath of His mouth_, in a moment, in the
  twinkling of an eye. And so He generally does,—a plain fact, of which
  there is evidence enough to satisfy any unprejudiced person. _Thou_
  therefore look for it every moment. Look for it in the way above
  described;[317] in all those _good works_, whereunto thou art created
  anew in Christ Jesus. There is then no danger; you can be no worse, if
  you are no better for that expectation. For were you to be
  disappointed of your hope, still you lose nothing. But you shall not
  be disappointed of your hope; it will come, and will not tarry. Look
  for it then every day, every hour, every moment. Why not this hour,
  this moment? Certainly you may look for it _now_, if you believe it is
  by faith. And by this token you may surely know whether you seek it by
  faith or works. If by works, you want something to be done _first_,
  _before_ you are sanctified. You think, ‘I must first _be_ or do thus
  or thus.’ Then you are seeking it by works unto this day. If you seek
  it by faith, you may expect it _as you are_; and, if as you are, then
  expect it _now_. It is of importance to observe that there is an
  inseparable connexion between these three points, expect it by
  _faith_, expect it _as you are_, and expect it _now_. To deny one of
  them is to deny them all; to allow one is to allow them all. Do _you_
  believe we are sanctified _by faith_? Be true then to your principle;
  and look for this blessing just as you are, neither better, nor worse;
  as a poor sinner, that has still nothing to pay, nothing to plead,
  but—_Christ died_. And if you look for it _as you are_, then expect it
  _now_. Stay for nothing, why should you? Christ is ready, and He is
  all you want. He is waiting for you; He is at the door! Let your
  inmost soul cry out,—

                 “‘Come in, come in, Thou heavenly guest!
                   Nor hence again remove:
                 But sup with me, and let the feast
                   Be everlasting love.’” (p. 288).

Footnote 317:

  After most ably arguing the matter, Wesley, in the sermon here
  referred to, concludes “that faith is the only condition which is
  _immediately_ and _proximately_ necessary to sanctification;” and that
  the “faith whereby we are sanctified—saved from sin, and perfected in
  love, is a divine evidence and conviction, first, that God hath
  promised it in the Holy Scripture; secondly, that what God hath
  promised, He is able to perform; thirdly, that He is able and willing
  to do it now; and, fourthly, a divine evidence and conviction that He
  doeth it. In that hour,” continues Wesley, “it is done; God says to
  the inmost soul, ‘According to thy faith, be it unto thee!’ Then the
  soul is pure from every spot of sin; it is clean ‘from all
  unrighteousness.’ The believer then experiences the deep meaning of
  those solemn words, ‘If we walk in the light as He is in the light, we
  have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His
  Son cleanseth us from all sin.’”

Well would it be, for the Church and the world, if these views of Wesley
and his friend Fletcher were held by all the Methodists of the present
age, or even by a thousandth part of them. How often are they preached
in Methodist pulpits? Not so often as they ought to be! “Where Christian
perfection is not strongly and explicitly preached,” said Wesley, “there
is seldom any remarkable blessing from God; and, consequently, little
addition to the Society, and little life in the members of it.”[318]

Footnote 318:

  Wesley’s Works, vol. xii., p. 252.

The year 1775 was to Fletcher one of the busiest in his life. He was
steeped in controversy; but he rose in piety. In a letter to his friend
Joseph Benson, he wrote:—

  “I have had two printers at my heels, besides my common business, and
  this is enough to make me trespass upon the patience of my friends. I
  have published the first part of my ‘_Scales_,’ which has gone through
  a second edition in London, before I could get the second part printed
  in Salop, where it will be published in about six weeks. I have also
  published a creed for the Arminians, where you will see that, if I
  have not answered your critical remarks upon my Essay on Truth, I have
  improved by them, yea publicly recanted the two expressions you
  mentioned as improper.

  “I am so tied up here, both by my parish duty and controversial
  writings, that I cannot hope to see you unless you come into these
  parts.[319] In the meantime, let us meet at the throne of grace. In
  Jesus, time and distance are lost. He is an universal, eternal life of
  righteousness, peace, and joy. I am glad you have some encouragement
  in Scotland. The Lord grant you more and more! Use yourself, however,
  to go against wind and tide, as I do; and take care that our wise
  dogmatical friends in the north do not rob you of your childlike
  simplicity. Remember that the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven are
  revealed to babes. You may be afraid of being a fool, without being
  afraid of being a babe. You may be childlike without being childish.
  Simplicity of intention and purity of affection will go through the
  world, through hell itself. In the meantime, let us see that we do not
  so look at our little publications, or to other people, as to forget
  that Christ is our Object, our Sun, our Shield. To His inspiration,
  comfort, and protection, I earnestly recommend your soul; and the
  labours of your _heart_, tongue, and pen to His blessing.”[320]

Footnote 319:

  Joseph Benson was appointed to the Edinburgh Circuit at the Conference
  of 1774; and to the Newcastle Circuit at the Conference of 1775.

Footnote 320:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

At this period, Wesley was dangerously ill in Ireland. Charles Wesley
had no hope of his brother’s recovery. The Methodists throughout the
kingdom were in consternation. In a letter to Joseph Bradford, Wesley’s
faithful companion, Charles Wesley wrote:—

  “Bristol, June 29, 1775. Your letter has cut off all hope of my
  brother’s recovery. The people here, and in London, and every place,
  are swallowed up in sorrow. But sorrow and death will soon be
  swallowed up in life everlasting. You will be careful of my brother’s
  papers, etc., till you see his executors. God shall reward your
  fidelity and love. I seem scarce separated from him whom I shall so
  very soon overtake. We were united in our lives, and in our death not
  divided.”[321]

Footnote 321:

  Tyerman’s “Life and Times of Wesley,” vol. iii. p. 204.

In his deep distress, Charles Wesley wrote to Fletcher, who replied as
follows:—

                                           “MADELEY, _July 2, 1775_.

  “MY VERY DEAR BROTHER,—The same post which brought me yours, brought
  me a letter from Ireland, informing me of the danger of your dear
  brother, my dear father, and of his being very happy in, and resigned
  to, the will of God. What can you and I do? What, but stand still, and
  see the salvation of God? The nations are before Him but as the dust
  that cleaves to a balance; and the greatest instruments have been
  removed. Abraham is dead; the fathers are dead; and if John come first
  to the sepulchre, you and I will soon descend into it. The brightest,
  the most burning and shining lights, like the Baptist, Mr. Whitefield,
  and your brother, were kindled to make the people rejoice in them,
  ‘for a season,’ says our Lord. ‘For a season.’ The expression is worth
  our notice. It is just as if our Lord had said, ‘I give you inferior
  lights, that ye may rejoice in them for a season. But I reserve to
  myself the glory of shining for ever. The most burning lights shall
  fail on earth; but I, your Sun, will shine to all eternity.’

  “Come, my dear brother, let the danger of our lights make us look to
  our Sun more steadily; and should God quench the light of our
  Jerusalem below, let us rejoice that it is to make it burn brighter in
  the Jerusalem which is above; and let us triumph in the
  inextinguishable light of our Sun, in the impenetrable strength of our
  Shield, and in the immovableness of our Rock.

  “Amidst my concern for the Church in general, and for Mr. Wesley’s
  Societies in particular, I cannot but acknowledge the goodness of God
  in so wonderfully keeping him for so many years, and in preserving him
  to undergo such labours as would have killed you and me ten times
  over. The Lord may yet hear prayer and add a span to his useful life.
  But forasmuch as the immortality of the body does not belong to this
  state, and he has fulfilled the ordinary term of human life, in hoping
  the best, we must prepare ourselves for the worst. The God of all
  grace and power will strengthen you on the occasion.

  “Should your brother fail on earth, you are called not only to bear up
  under the loss of so near a relative, but, for the sake of your common
  children in the Lord, you should endeavour to fill up the gap
  according to your strength. The Methodists will not expect from you
  your brother’s labours; but they have, I think, a right to expect that
  you will preside over them while God spares you in the land of the
  living. A committee of the oldest and steadiest preachers may help you
  to bear the burden and to keep up a proper discipline both among the
  people and the rest of the preachers; and if at any time you should
  want my mite of assistance, I hope I shall throw it into the treasury
  with the simplicity and readiness of the poor widow, who cheerfully
  offered her next to nothing. Do not faint. The Lord God of Israel will
  give you additional strength for the day; and His angels, yea, His
  praying people, will bear you up in their hands, that you hurt not
  your foot against a stone; yea, that if need be, you may leap over a
  wall.

  “I am by this time grey-headed as well as you, and some of my
  parishioners tell me that the inroads of time are uncommonly visible
  upon my face. Indeed, I feel as well as see it myself, and learn what
  only time, trials, and experience can teach. Should your brother be
  called to his reward, I would not be free to go to London till you and
  the preachers had settled all matters. My going just at such a time”
  [as this] “would carry the appearance of vanity, which I abhor. It
  would seem as if I wanted to be somebody among the Methodists.

  “We here heartily join the prayers of the brethren for your brother,
  for you, and the Societies. Paper fails, not love. Be careful for
  nothing. Cast your burden upon the Lord, and He will sustain you.
  Farewell in Christ.”[322]

Footnote 322:

  Jackson’s “Life of C. Wesley,” vol. ii., p. 302.

Two and a half years before this dangerous illness, Wesley had requested
Fletcher to be his successor in presiding over the Methodists. Perhaps
Charles Wesley was aware of this. At all events, he appears to have
wished Fletcher to come to London in the great crisis which had now
occurred. Fletcher modestly declined; and, fortunately for both, no
successor of Wesley was needed until several years after both were dead.

Fletcher’s “Checks to Antinomianism” were ended. For four years, he had
taxed his energies to the utmost; but the work he undertook in 1771 was
now nearly concluded. The doctrines of Wesley’s “Minutes” had been
carefully explained, minutely defended, and lovingly enforced.

  “In his ‘Checks to Antinomianism,’” wrote Wesley, “one knows not which
  to admire most—the _purity_ of the language, the _strength_ and
  _clearness_ of the argument, or the _mildness_ and _sweetness_ of the
  spirit that breathes throughout the whole. Insomuch that I nothing
  wonder at a serious clergyman, who being resolved to live and die in
  his own opinion, when he was pressed to read them replied, ‘No, I will
  never read Mr. Fletcher’s “Checks,” for if I did, I should be of his
  mind.’”[323]

Footnote 323:

  Wesley’s “Life of Fletcher.”

Of course, contrary opinions have been expressed. The author of “The
Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon” tells his readers that,—

  “Fletcher dazzled with eloquence instead of reasoning, and substituted
  tropes for arguments. He was too loquacious for a deep reasoner, and
  too impassioned to investigate duly the most profound and awful themes
  which can occupy the human understanding.”

Isaac Taylor, also, in his “Wesley and Methodism,” takes the same
position. He acknowledges that,—

  “In a genuine sense, Fletcher was a saint; a saint such as the Church
  of every age has produced a few samples. Sanctity and purity of
  manners were his distinctive characteristics. He was as unearthly a
  being as could tread the earth at all; and his Methodism was
  Christianity as little lowered by admixture of human infirmity as we
  may hope to find it anywhere on earth.” But while “as a theologian he
  possessed acquaintance enough with doctrinal literature and with the
  Scriptures to give him always a point or two of advantage in relation
  to his antagonists, he was no such reasoner, he was no such master of
  Biblical criticism, as might have made it possible for him to overstep
  the limits of his appointed task, or, as a theological writer, to
  survive his day.”[324]

Footnote 324:

  Robert Southey wrote, “Mr. Fletcher’s manner is diffuse, and the
  florid parts and the unction betray their French origin; but the
  reasoning is acute and clear, the spirit of his writings is beautiful,
  and he was a master of the subject in all its bearings.”

The first of these critics was too much of a Calvinist to do justice to
Fletcher, an Arminian; and it is not rash to say respecting the second,
that it is extremely doubtful whether he had carefully perused the
writings he condemns. At all events, his assertion that “as a
theological writer” Fletcher did not “survive his day,” is utterly
untrue. Fletcher’s “Checks” are as much read today as they were a
hundred years ago. The demand for them increases almost every year, both
in England and in America; and they are found in every land where
Methodism has been founded. At the time when they were first published,
they occasioned exasperation among the Calvinian Methodists, but that
was not the fault of their distinguished author. What was called
“bitterness” in Fletcher was not bitterness of temper, but “of unwelcome
doctrine, set forth with all the advantages of language, confidence, and
argument.” Soon after they were completed, a Dissenting minister at
Bristol called upon Fletcher, when, to all human appearance, he was
dying, and rudely said, “You had better have been confined to your bed
by palsy than have written so many bitter things against the dear
children of God.” “My brother,” replied the invalid, “I hope I have not
been bitter. Certainly I did not mean to be so; but I wanted more love
then, and I feel I want more now.”[325] Fletcher’s soft answer silenced
his sour assailant, and sent him away, it is to be hoped, a wiser and
better man.

Footnote 325:

  _Wesleyan Methodist Magazine_, 1823, p. 107.

It is a pleasant fact to put on record that Fletcher and his opponents
in the Calvinian controversy lived long enough to be affectionately
reconciled to each other. Shirley, the first in the field, had, at
least, one brotherly interview with Fletcher, in Ireland.[326] In the
Methodist Museum at the Centenary Hall, London, there is an
unpublished letter, which Mr. Richard Hill wrote to Fletcher in 1784,
full of Christian affection. Rowland Hill, with admirable candour,
said of his own writings, “A softer style and spirit would better have
become me;” and he also suppressed the sale of one of his severest
publications.[327] Then as it respects dear old Berridge at Everton,
it will be seen, in a succeeding chapter, that he and Fletcher were
more than reconciled to each other. Their meeting at Everton, in the
month of December, 1776, is one of the most charming incidents
recorded in Methodistic annals.

Footnote 326:

  Stevens’s “History of Methodism.”

Footnote 327:

  Sidney’s “Life of Rev. Rowland Hill.”

Another name must be introduced. Dr. Thomas Coke was now twenty-eight
years of age. He had taken his degrees at Oxford, had received episcopal
ordination, and was now curate at South Petherton. As yet, he had not
been introduced to Wesley; but he had read his sermons and journals, and
also the “Checks” of Fletcher,—all kindly lent to him by the Rev. Mr.
Brown, a clergyman residing in the neighbourhood of Taunton. A year
elapsed before Wesley met him, but in the meantime, the young curate
wrote the following letter[328] to Fletcher:—

                         “SOUTH PETHERTON, NEAR CREWKERNE, SOMERSET,
                                     “_August 28, 1775_.

  “REV. SIR,—I take the liberty, though unknown to you, but not
  unacquainted with your admirable publications, of writing you a letter
  of sincerest thanks for the spiritual instruction, as well as
  entertainment, they have afforded me; and for the spirit of candour
  and Christian charity which breathes throughout your writings. The
  charming character which my best of earthly friends (the Rev. Mr.
  Brown, of Kingston, near Taunton), has given me of you, emboldens me
  to hope that, though my situation in life be only that of a poor
  curate of a parish, you will excuse this liberty I have taken of
  addressing you in the fulness of my heart.

  “You are indubitably, Sir, a sincere friend of the Gospel of Jesus
  Christ. I also am an humble admirer of the blessed Jesus, and it is on
  that foundation only I would wish, and it is on that only I am sure I
  can recommend myself to you.

  “Your excellent ‘Checks to Antinomianism’ have riveted me in an
  abhorrence and detestation of the peculiar tenets of Calvin, and the
  monstrous errors into which those great and good men, Bishops Hopkins
  and Beveridge, have run, have frequently filled me with wonder.

  “Your ‘Essay on Truth’ has been more particularly blessed to me. Your
  ‘Scripture Scales’ I am just going to read with great attention. Many
  thanks to you for your treatise on the ‘Fallen State of Man.’ It has
  been of service to me, and of much more, I have reason to think, to
  many of my congregation.

  “O, Sir, I have frequently prayed to my God that He will make you a
  great pillar of His Church. In return, I do humbly beg that you will
  pray for me. I am sure you will grant me the favour when I inform you
  that (as nearly as I can guess) a thousand or more immortal souls come
  to me on every Lord’s Day, in the afternoon, to receive their portion
  of the manna of the Word, the bread of everlasting life.

  “I will so far transgress against the public and your dear flock as to
  request an answer. I am almost afraid to hope for more. May the God
  who loves you, and whom you love, make you a great instrument of His
  glory in this life, and grant you the height of your ambition in the
  next.

  “I am, Rev. Sir, with great respect, your much obliged and very humble
  servant,

                                                      “THOMAS COKE.”

Footnote 328:

  The letter is copied, verbatim, from the _original_, in the Wesleyan
  Mission House collection, Bishopsgate Street, London.

Little, at this time, did the obscure Dr. Coke imagine that, eight years
afterwards, Fletcher would be one of the first twenty-six subscribers to
the Methodist “Society for the Establishment of Missions among the
Heathen,” which Coke and a few of his friends then instituted.

One more fact respecting the “Checks to Antinomianism” must be added.
The Rev. Thomas Jackson, a good authority, remarks:—

  “Mr. Charles Wesley took a lively interest in the rise and progress of
  this” [the Calvinian] “controversy, though his name has rarely been
  connected with it. He corresponded with his friend, the Vicar of
  Madeley, and encouraged him in his arduous undertaking. Mr. Fletcher
  transmitted his manuscripts to him for revision, begging of him to
  expunge every expression that was calculated to give unnecessary pain,
  and to pay especial attention to the grammar and theology of the
  whole. He also confided to Mr. Charles Wesley the task of conducting
  them through the press, the correction of which was inconvenient to
  himself, because of his distance from London. The fact is, that nearly
  everything that Mr. Fletcher published, not even excepting his
  political tracts and his treatise on original sin, passed under the
  eye and hand of Mr. Charles Wesley before it was given to the world.
  Not that the compositions of his friend needed much emendation, but
  his criticisms gave Mr. Fletcher confidence, and were highly valued.
  In 1775, Mr. Fletcher said to him, ‘Nobody helps me but you; and you
  know how little you do it. Deprive me not of that little. Your every
  hint is a blessing to me.’”[329]

Footnote 329:

  Jackson’s “Life of C. Wesley,” vol. ii., p. 294.

A letter to Charles Wesley will fitly close the present chapter.

                                       “MADELEY, _December 4, 1775_.

  “MY VERY DEAR BROTHER,—I see the end of my controversial race, and I
  have such courage to finish it, that I think it my _bounden_ duty to
  run and strike my blow, and fire my gun, before the water of
  discouragement has quite wetted the powder of my activity. This makes
  me seem to neglect my dearest correspondents.

  “Old age comes faster upon me than upon you. I am already so
  grey-headed, that I wrote to my brother to know if I am not fifty-six
  instead of forty-six. The wheel of time moves so rapidly, that I seem
  to be in a new element; and yet, praised be God! my strength is
  preserved far better than I could expect. I came home last night at
  eleven o’clock tolerably well, after reading prayers and preaching
  twice and giving the sacrament in my own church, and preaching again
  and meeting a few people in Society at the next market-town.

  “The Lord is wonderfully gracious to me, and, what is more to me than
  many favours, He helps me to see His mercies in a clearer light. In
  years past, I did not dare to be thankful for mercies, which now make
  me _shout for joy_. I had been taught to call them _common mercies_,
  and I made as little of them as apostates do of the blood of Christ,
  when they call it a _common thing_. But now the veil begins to rend,
  and I invite you and all the world to praise God for His patience,
  truth, and lovingkindness, which have followed me all my days. O how I
  hate the delusion, which has robbed me of so many comforts!

                                 “Farewell! I am, etc.,
                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[330]

Footnote 330:

  Letters, 1791, p. 226.




                             CHAPTER XVIII.
                       _PUBLICATIONS IN THE YEAR_

                                 1776.


EXCEPT his posthumous works, the remainder of Fletcher’s writings were
issued during the next two years, 1776 and 1777. These will be briefly
noticed in the present chapter. During the last four years, his
antagonists had been Walter Shirley, Richard Hill, Rowland Hill, and
John Berridge. Now he encountered three others—Augustus Montague
Toplady, the well-known Vicar of Broad Hembury, in Devonshire; Caleb
Evans, an eminent Baptist minister at Bristol; and, in connection with
Mr. Evans, the celebrated Rev. Richard Price, D.D., an Arian minister,
at Hackney, London.

Methodist readers are so familiar with the life and character of
Toplady, as to render it unnecessary to refer to them in the present
pages. Suffice it to say, that this remarkable and strangely constituted
man seems to have been almost as much prejudiced against Fletcher as he
was against Wesley. “I was lately asked,” said he, “what my opinion is
of Mr. John Fletcher’s writings. My answer was, that, in the very few
pages I had perused, the _serious_ passages were dulness double
condensed; and the _lighter_ passages, impudence double distilled.”[331]

Footnote 331:

  Toplady’s “Posthumous Works,” 1780, p. 234.

In 1770, Wesley published his tract, entitled, “The Doctrine of Absolute
Predestination Stated and Asserted.” This was a faithful abridgment of
Toplady’s translation of Zanchius’s once famous book,[332] and concluded
with the well-known paragraph:—

  “The sum of all is this: one in twenty (suppose) of mankind are
  elected; nineteen in twenty are reprobated. The elect shall be saved,
  do what they will; the reprobate shall be damned, do what they can.
  Reader, believe this, or be damned. Witness my hand,

                                                          “A—— T——.”

Footnote 332:

  Toplady’s Translation was published at the end of the year 1769.

Toplady was terribly enraged, and immediately published “A Letter to the
Rev. Mr. John Wesley: relative to his pretended Abridgment of Zanchius
on Predestination.” In 1771, Wesley replied to this, in his tract
entitled, “The Consequence Proved,”—the object of which was to establish
the paragraph which had occasioned Toplady such huge offence. A year
later, Toplady published his “More Work for Mr. John Wesley; or, A
Vindication of the Decrees and Providence of God from the Defamation of
a late printed paper, entitled, ‘The Consequence Proved.’” Wesley had no
time and no inclination to continue the controversy; but handed over the
angry Vicar of Broad Hembury to the tender mercies of Thomas Olivers and
Fletcher. Olivers’ tart pamphlet need not be further mentioned; but, in
reference to Fletcher, it may be added, that, in a letter to Mr. Richard
Hill, dated “March 12, 1773,” Toplady wrote:—

  “I am told that Mr. Fletcher has it in contemplation to make an attack
  on _me_ too. He is welcome. I am ready for him. Nor shall I, in that
  case, altogether imitate the examples of yourself and your brother;
  unless Mr. Fletcher should treat me with more decency than he has,
  hitherto, observed towards others. Tenderness, ’tis very evident, has
  no effect on Mr. Wesley and his pretended _family of love_. Witness
  the rancour with which Mr. Hervey’s[333] memory and works are treated
  by that lovely family. For my own part, I shall never attempt to hew
  such millstones with a feather. They must be served as nettles; press
  them close, and they cannot sting. Yet have they my prayers and my
  best wishes for their present and future salvation. But not one hair’s
  breadth of the Gospel will I ever offer at their shrine, or sacrifice
  to their idol.”[334]

Footnote 333:

  The well-known Rev. James Hervey.

Footnote 334:

  Toplady’s “Posthumous Works,” 1780, p. 343.

Toplady’s information that Fletcher intended to “attack” him was quite
correct; but, for the present, Fletcher was so occupied with his “Checks
to Antinomianism,” that two years elapsed before he could devote
attention to his new antagonist.

Toplady had no need to tell Mr. Richard Hill, in 1773, that, in any
future replies he might make to the attacks of Wesley, Fletcher, or
their friends, he would not be sparing in the language that he used;
for, in his “Letter” to Wesley in 1770, and his “More Work for Wesley”
in 1772, he had employed abuse which is, perhaps, unparalleled in
religious literature, and for which it is difficult to account. Wesley
was charged, by this young man of thirty years, with using “all the
sophistry of a Jesuit, and the dictatorial authority of a pope.” He had
descended to his “customary resource of false quotations, despicable
invective, and unsupported dogmatisms.” His “phraseology” was “as
pregnant with craft as his conduct” was “destitute of honour.” “By his
deep-laid, but soon detected, cunning,—by his avowed vacuity of candour,
truth, and shame, he has, in the general estimation of all unprejudiced
people, gotten a wound and dishonour and reproach which all his whining
and winding sophistry will never be able to wipe away.” “Perversion and
falsification are essential figures in this man’s rhetoric.” “Unless God
give Mr. Wesley repentance to the acknowledging of the truth, the
unparalleled perverseness with which he labours to blacken some
doctrines of Christianity will be the burden of his soul in the hour of
death and in the day of judgment.”

These are really mild—_very mild_—specimens of Toplady’s unaccountable
abuse of Wesley. How the same man could write, “Rock of ages, cleft for
me,” and other hymns quite as exquisite, it is difficult to conceive.

Fletcher’s long-expected reply was published in 1776, with the following
title-page, “An Answer to the Rev. Mr. Toplady’s ‘Vindication of the
Decrees,’ etc. By the Author of the Checks. London: Printed in the year
1776.” 12mo, 133 pp.

Fletcher disposes of Toplady’s abusive language in his “Introduction.”
He writes:—

  “If Mr. Toplady, in his controversial heat, has forgotten what he owed
  to Mr. Wesley and to himself, this is no reason why I should forget
  the title of my book, which calls me to point out the bad arguments of
  our opponents, and not their ill humour. If I absurdly spent my time
  in passing a censure upon Mr. Toplady’s spirit, he would, with reason,
  say, as he does in the introduction to his ‘Historical Proof,’[335]
  page 35, ‘What has my pride or my humility to do with the argument in
  hand? Whether I am haughty or meek, is of no more consequence either
  to that, or to the public, than whether I am tall or short.’ Besides,
  having, again and again, myself requested our opponents not to
  wiredraw the controversy by personal reflections, but to weigh with
  candour the arguments which are offered, I should be inexcusable if I
  did not set them the example. Should it be said that Mr. Wesley’s
  character, which Mr. Toplady has so severely attacked, is at stake,
  and that I ought purposely to stand up in his defence; I reply, that
  the personal charges which Mr. Toplady interweaves with his arguments
  have been already fully answered by Mr. Olivers;[336] and that these
  charges being chiefly founded upon Mr. Toplady’s logical mistakes,
  they will, of their own accord, fall to the ground, as soon as the
  mistakes on which they rest shall be exposed. May the God of truth and
  love grant, that, if Mr. Toplady has the honour of producing the best
  arguments, I, for one, may have the advantage of yielding to them! To
  be conquered by truth and love, is to prove conqueror over our two
  greatest enemies,—error and sin.”

Footnote 335:

  Toplady’s “Historic Proof of the Doctrinal Calvinism of the Church of
  England;” published, in two volumes, in 1774.

Footnote 336:

  In “A Letter to the Rev. Mr. Toplady, occasioned by his late Letter to
  Mr. Wesley. By Thomas Olivers, 1771.” 12mo, 60 pp.

What a contrast between Fletcher and Toplady! Both were men of genius;
both were scholars; both were clergymen of the Church of England; both
were polemics; but one was meek in heart—the other just the opposite;
one was a gentleman—the other, notwithstanding his ability and
eloquence, was a traducer.

As already stated, the short paragraph which Wesley appended to his
abridgment of Toplady’s translation of Zanchius’s “Doctrine of Absolute
Predestination Stated and Asserted” infuriated the Vicar of Broad
Hembury to an almost incredible degree. Toplady employed, what Fletcher
calls, seventy-three “_arguments_,” but which might more correctly be
called _dogmatisms_, in replying to Wesley’s exposure of Calvinian
predestination. Fletcher, in his “_Answer_,” deals with these, one by
one, seriatim. Toplady was overmatched, and his “arguments” were shown
to be fallacies. Throughout his able book, Fletcher never loses his
temper, and never indulges in vituperation. The strongest language he
uses is found in his concluding paragraphs, as follows:—

  “I humbly hope that I have, in the preceding pages, contended for the
  truth of the Gospel, and the honour of God’s perfections. My
  conscience bears me witness, that I have endeavoured to do it with the
  sincerity of a candid inquirer after truth; and that I have not,
  knowingly, leaped over one material difficulty which Mr. Toplady has
  thrown in the way of the laborious divine whose evangelical principles
  I vindicate. And now, judicious reader, if I have done my part as a
  detecter of the fallacies by which the modern doctrines of grace are
  ‘kept upon their legs,’ let me prevail upon thee to do thy part as a
  judge, and to say if the right leg of Calvinism, that is, the lawless
  election of an unscriptural grace, so draws thy admiration as to make
  thee overlook the deformity of the left leg, that is, the absurd,
  unholy, sin-ensuring, hell-procuring, merciless, and unjust
  reprobation which Mr. Toplady has attempted to vindicate. Shall thy
  reason, thy conscience, thy feelings, thy Bible, and, what is more
  than this, shall all the perfections of thy God, and the veracity of
  thy Saviour, be sacrificed on the altar of a reprobation which none of
  the prophets, apostles, and early fathers ever heard of?—a barbarous
  reprobation which heated Augustine drew from the horrible error of
  Manichean necessity, and clothed with some Scripture expressions
  detached from the context, and wrested from their original meaning?—a
  Pharisaic reprobation, which the Church of Rome took from him, and
  which some of our reformers unhappily brought from that corrupted
  Society into the Protestant Churches?—in a word, a reprobation which
  disgraces Christianity, when that holy religion is considered as a
  system of evangelical doctrine, as much as our most enormous crimes
  disgrace it, when it is considered as a system of pure morality? Shall
  such a reprobation, I say, find a place in thy creed? yea, among thy
  doctrines of grace? God forbid!

  “I hope better things of thy candour, good sense, and piety. If
  prejudice, human authority, and voluntary humility, seduce many good
  men into a profound reverence for that stupendous dogma, be not
  carried away by their number, or biassed by their shouts. Be not
  afraid to ‘be pilloried in a preface, flogged at a pamphlet’s tail,’
  and treated as a knave, a felon, or a blasphemer through the whole of
  the next vindication of the deified[337] decrees, which are commonly
  called ‘Calvinism.’ This may be thy lot, if thou darest to bear thy
  plain testimony against the Antinomian idol of the day.”

Footnote 337:

  “Mr. Toplady calls them ‘the decrees of God;’ and it is an axiom among
  Calvinists, that ‘God’s decrees are God Himself.’”

Fletcher’s conflict with Toplady was continued. Hence the following
“Advertisement,” affixed to the _first edition_ of the book just
dismissed:—

  “Since these sheets have been prepared for the press, I have seen a
  new performance of Mr. Toplady, in defence of the doctrine which is
  exposed in the preceding pages. As there are, in that piece, some
  _new_ arguments, the plausibility of which may puzzle many readers;
  and as I think it my duty _fully_ to vindicate the truth, and
  _completely_ to detect error; I design to answer that book also, in a
  little tract, which will be a supplement to this, and which will
  probably see the light under the following title, ‘A Reply to the
  Principal Arguments by which the Calvinists and the Fatalists Support
  the Spreading Doctrine of _Absolute Necessity_. In some Remarks on the
  Rev. Mr. Toplady’s ‘Scheme of Philosophical Necessity.’”

To understand this, it must be stated, that, in 1774, Wesley published a
12mo pamphlet of 33 pages, entitled, “Thoughts upon Necessity.” This was
one of Wesley’s ablest publications, and, to use Wesley’s own words, in
his address “to the Reader,” it was meant to rebut the teaching of an
“Essay on Liberty and Necessity,”[338] which he had lately read. “I
would fain,” says he, “place mankind in a fairer point of view than that
writer” (the author) “has done: as I cannot believe the noblest creature
in the visible world to be only a fine piece of clock-work.” Toplady was
not once mentioned in Wesley’s tract; but he immediately set to work to
answer it, and, in the following year, his strange production was issued
with the following title: “The Scheme of Christian and Philosophical
Necessity Asserted. In Opposition to Mr. John Wesley’s Tract on that
Subject. With a Dissertation concerning the Sensible Qualitys of Matter:
and the Doctrine of Color in particular. By Augustus Toplady, Vicar of
Broad Hembury. London, 1775.” 8vo, 216 pp.

Footnote 338:

  This Essay had been published, in Edinburgh, some years before.

Wesley, as already stated, had not even named Toplady in his
publication, much less abused him; but the opportunity of again reviling
Wesley was too tempting to be neglected. In his preface, he gives an
extract from a letter, written by a London clergyman, who had sent him
Wesley’s tract:—

  “I went last night to the Foundery, expecting to hear Pope _John_; but
  was disappointed. After hearing a Welshman,[339] for an hour and
  twenty minutes, on Psalm lxxxiv. 11, preach up all the heresies
  (_sic_) of the place, a man, who sat in the pulpit, told him to ‘_Give
  over_:’ for he seemed to bid fair for another half hour, at least. But
  he came to a conclusion, as desired. Then this man, who seemed to be a
  local preacher,[340] stood up with a pamphlet in his hand, and
  addressed the auditory in the following manner:—

  “‘I am desired to publish a pamphlet upon _Necessity_ and
  _Free-Will_,—the best I know of in the English tongue,—by _Mr. John
  Wesley_, price _threepence_. I had purposed to say a _good deal_ upon
  it; but the _time_ is elapsed. But, in this threepenny pamphlet, you
  have _all_ the disputes that have been bandy’d about so lately; and
  you will get your minds more established by _this threepenny_
  pamphlet, than by reading _all_ the books that have been written for
  and against. It is to be had at both doors, as you go out.’”

Footnote 339:

  Query? Thomas Olivers, corrector of the press for Wesley.

Footnote 340:

  Query? John Atlay, the book-steward.

It is not unlikely that this narration is true; for, in those days,
Methodist preachers preached long sermons, and, from the pulpit,
recommended the people to purchase Methodist publications. Toplady takes
occasion to call the occurrence “a droll sort of mountebank scene,” and
pretends to bewail “the unreasonable and unseasonable prolixity of the
long-winded holder-forth, which cruelly, injudiciously, and despitefully
prevented poor _Zany_ from puffing off, with the amplitude he intended,
the multiplex virtues of the doctor’s threepenny free-will powder.” He
continues:—

  “‘_Never do that by delegation_,’ says an old proverb, ‘_which you can
  as well do in propria persona_. Had Doctor John himself got upon the
  stage, and sung—

             ‘Come, buy my fine powders; come buy dem of me;
             Hare be de best powders dat ever you see:’

  who knows, but the threepenny doses might have gone off _at both
  doors_,’ as rapidly as peas from a pop-gun?”

Toplady, in a bantering tone, proceeds to give the “_chief ingredients
of the famous Moorfields powder_,” namely:—

  “An equal portion of gross _Heathenism_, _Mahometism_, _Popery_,
  _Manichaeism_, _Ranterism_, and _Antinomianism_; cull’d, dry’d, and
  pulveriz’d, _secundem artem_: and, above all, mingled with as much
  palpable _Atheism_ as you can possibly scrape together from every
  quarter.” (Preface.)

In Chapter I., Toplady continues this unworthy, dishonourable abuse. He
writes:—

  “_Aliquis in omnibus, nullus in singulis._ The man, who concerns
  himself in everything, bids fair not to make a figure in anything. Mr.
  John Wesley is, precisely, this _aliquis in omnibus_; for, is there a
  single subject in which he has not endeavoured to shine? He is also,
  as precisely, a _nullus in singulis_; for, has he shone in any one
  subject which he ever attempted to handle? Upon what principle can
  these two circumstances be accounted for? Only upon that very
  principle, at which he so dolefully shakes his head, viz., the
  principle of _necessity_. The poor gentleman is, _necessarily_, an
  universal meddler; and, as _necessarily_, an universal miscarryer. Can
  he _avoid_ being either the one or the other? No.” (p. 10.)

In a subsequent page, Toplady asserts:—

  “Mr. Wesley, in one respect, is _as much_, and, in another respect,
  _abundantly more_ a _Manichae_, than either Scythian, Budda, or Manes.
  By a very singular mixture of _Manichaeism_, _Pelagianism_, _Popery_,
  _Socinianism_, _Ranterism_, and _Atheism_, he has, I believe, now got
  to his ultimatum. Probably, he would go still further, if he could.
  But, I really think, he has no farther to go. Happy settlement, after
  forty years’ infinity of shiftings and flittings hither and thither!

              “‘Thus weathercocks, which, for awhile,
              Have turn’d about with every blast,—
              Grown old, and destitute of oil,
              Rust to a point, and fix at last!’” (p. 131.)

Again, on page 168, Toplady’s reader is told that—

  “Mr. Wesley is the lamest, the blindest, and the most
  self-contradictory waster of ink and paper, that ever pretended to the
  name of reasoner. ’Tis almost a disgrace to refute him.”

Again, on p. 172, Toplady writes:—

  “Mr. Wesley’s heat and prophaneness are such, that he dares to scold
  his Maker with as little ceremony, and with as much scurrility, as an
  enraged fish-woman would be-din the ears of a ’prentice wench.”

Was Toplady a _Christian_? It is difficult to answer that question. A
more monstrous combination of opposing qualities has seldom figured on
the stage of human life. He was now thirty-four years of age.[341] Three
years and a-half later he was dead.

Footnote 341:

  Wesley was more than seventy!

It is needless to furnish an outline of Toplady’s bold book. What he
attempted to expound and prove will be found in the following extracts:—

  “I own myself very fond of _definitions_. I therefore præmise[342]
  _what_ the _necessity_ is, whose cause I have undertaken to plead. I
  would define necessity to be _that, by which, whatever comes to pass
  cannot but_ come _to pass_ (all circumstances taken into the account);
  _and can come to pass_ in _no other way or manner_ than it does” (p.
  12).

Footnote 342:

  In this, and in all the foregoing extracts, the spelling of words is
  _literally_ given.—L. T.

Again, on page 157, he writes:—

  “For my own part, I solemnly profess, before God, angels, and men,
  that I am _not conscious_ of my being endued with that
  self-determining power, which Arminianism ascribes to me as an
  individual of the human species. Nay, I am _clearly certain_ that I
  have it not. I am also equally certain that I _do not wish_ to have
  it; and that, were it possible for my Creator to make me an offer of
  transferring the determination of any one event, from His own will to
  mine, it would be both my duty and my wisdom to entreat that the
  sceptre might still remain with Himself, and that I might have nothing
  to do in the direction of a single incident, or of so much as a single
  circumstance.”

The principles wrapped up in the definition and the confession of
Toplady are what he tries to vindicate; and to refute them was the task
Fletcher undertook. Fletcher’s pamphlet was published in 1777, with the
following title: “A Reply to the Principal Arguments by which the
Calvinists and Fatalists support the Doctrine of Absolute Necessity:
being Remarks on the Rev. Mr. Toplady’s ‘Scheme of Christian and
Philosophical Necessity.’ By John Fletcher, Vicar of Madeley, Salop.
London, 1777.” 12mo, 80 pp.

Fletcher, with his talent of quiet cutting irony, might have rebuked the
slang of Toplady; but, like a Christian and a gentleman, he, with
indignant silence, allows it to pass unnoticed. The task of vanquishing
Toplady was not difficult, for seldom has a more absurd theological work
than “The Scheme of Christian and Philosophical Necessity” been
committed to the press. Fletcher’s “reply” was perfectly unanswerable:
poor Toplady was silenced.

It would tire the reader to analyse Fletcher’s work; and two extracts
from it must suffice, the first showing with what ease Fletcher dealt
with the absurdities of Toplady’s philosophy; and the second exhibiting
his desire to live in peace and love with even the rabid Calvinists.

In Chapter III. of his book, Toplady wrote as follows:—

  “It seems most agreeable to the radical simplicity, which God has
  observed in all His works, to suppose, that, _in themselves_, all
  human souls are _equal_. I can easily believe, that the soul of an
  oyster-woman has, naturally, the unexpanded powers of Grotius, or of
  Sir Isaac Newton; and that what conduces to raise the philosopher, the
  poet, the politician, or the linguist, so much above the ignorant and
  stupid of mankind, is, not only the circumstance of intellectual
  cultivation, but, still more than that, his having the happiness to
  occupy a better house, _i.e._ a _body_ more commodiously _organized_
  than they. The soul of a _Monthly Reviewer_, if imprisoned within the
  same mud walls which are tenanted by the soul of _Mr. John Wesley_,
  would, similarly circumstanced, reason and act, I verily think,
  exactly like the Bishop of Moorfields. And I know some very sensible
  people, who even go so far as to suppose, that, were a human soul shut
  up in the skull of a _cat_, puss would, notwithstanding, move prone on
  all fours, purr when stroked, spit when pinched, and birds and mice
  would be her darling objects of pursuit. Though I cannot carry matters
  to so extreme a length as this, yet, I repeat my opinion, very much
  depends on corporeal organization.

  “I just now hinted the conjecture of some that a human spirit,
  incarcerated in the brain of a cat, would, probably, both think and
  behave as that animal now does. But how would the soul of a cat acquit
  itself, if enclosed in the brain of a man? We cannot resolve this
  question with _certainty_, any more than the other. We may, however,
  even on _this_ occasion, address every one of our human brethren in
  the words of that great philosophic necessitarian, St. Paul, and ask,
  _Who maketh thee to differ_ from the lowest of the brute creation? Thy
  _Maker’s_ free will, not thine. _And what_ pre-eminence _hast thou,
  which thou didst_ not _receive_ from Him? Not the least, nor the
  shadow of any.”

  “Admirable divinity!” wrote Fletcher. “So Mr. Toplady leaves the
  orthodox in doubt,—1. Whether, when their souls and the souls of cats
  shall be let out of their respective brains or prisons, the souls of
  cats will not be equal to the souls of men. 2. Whether, supposing the
  soul of a cat had been put in the brain of St. Paul, or of a Monthly
  Reviewer, the soul of puss would not have made as great an Apostle as
  the soul of Saul of Tarsus; as good a critic as the soul of the most
  sensible Reviewer. And, 3. Whether, in case the ‘human spirit’ of
  Isaiah ‘was shut up in the skull of a cat, puss would not,
  notwithstanding, move prone on all fours, purr when stroked, spit when
  pinched, and birds and mice be her darling objects of pursuit.’ Is not
  this a pretty large stride, for the first, towards the doctrine of the
  sameness of the souls of men with the souls of cats and frogs?
  Wretched Calvinism, new-fangled doctrines of grace, where are you
  leading your deluded admirers, your principal vindicators? Is it not
  enough, that you have spoiled the fountain of living waters, by
  turning into it the muddy streams of _Zeno’s_ errors? Are ye also
  going to poison it by the absurdities of _Pythagoras’s_ philosophy?
  What a side-stroke is here inadvertently given to these capital
  doctrines, ‘God breathed into’ Adam ‘the breath of life, and he became
  a living soul;’ a soul made ‘in the image of God,’ and not in the
  image of a cat! ‘The spirit of the beast goeth downward to the earth;
  but the spirit of man goeth upward; it returns to God who gave it,’
  with an intention to judge and reward it according to its moral works.

  “But I must do Mr. Toplady justice; he does not yet recommend this
  doctrine as absolutely certain. However, from his capital doctrine,
  that human souls have no free-will, no inward principle of
  self-determination; and from his avowed opinion, that the soul of one
  man, placed in the body of another man, ‘would, similarly
  circumstanced, reason and act exactly like’ the man in whose _mud
  walls_ it is lodged; it evidently follows, 1. That, had the human soul
  of Christ been placed in the body and circumstances of _Nero_, it
  would have been exactly as wicked and atrocious as the soul of that
  bloody monster was. And 2. That if Nero’s soul had been placed in
  Christ’s body, and in His trying circumstances, it would have been
  exactly as virtuous and immaculate as that of the Redeemer; the
  consequence is undeniable. Thus, the merit of the man Christ did not,
  in the least, spring from His righteous soul, but from His ‘_mud
  walls_’ and from the happiness which His soul had of being lodged in a
  ‘_brain peculiarly modified_.’ Nor did the demerit of Nero flow from
  his free agency and self-perversion, but only from his ‘_mud walls_,’
  and from the infelicity which his necessitated soul had of being
  lodged in ‘_an ill-constructed vehicle_,’ and placed on that throne on
  which Titus soon after deserved to be called ‘the darling of mankind.’
  See, O ye engrossers of orthodoxy, to what absurd lengths your
  aversion to the liberty of the will, and to evangelical worthiness,
  leads your unwary souls! And yet, if we believe Mr. Toplady, your
  scheme, which is big with these inevitable consequences, is ‘Christian
  philosophy,’ and our doctrine of free will is ‘philosophy run mad,’ p.
  30.”

Did cat ever play with mouse more perfectly and amusingly than did the
Vicar of Madeley with the Vicar of Broad Hembury?

The next extract, which is the conclusion of Fletcher’s triumphant
“Reply” to Toplady, shows his intense desire to live in love and peace
with his opponents:—

  “Mr. Wesley and I are ready to testify upon oath, that we humbly
  submit to God’s sovereignty, and joyfully glory in the freeness of
  Gospel grace, which has mercifully distinguished us from countless
  myriads of our fellow-creatures, by gratuitously bestowing upon us
  numberless favours, of a spiritual and temporal nature, which he has
  thought proper absolutely to withhold from our fellow-creatures. To
  meet the Calvinists on their own ground, we go so far as to allow
  there is a partial, gratuitous election and reprobation. By this
  election, Christians are admitted to the enjoyment of privileges far
  superior to those of the Jews; and, according to this reprobation,
  myriads of heathen are absolutely cut off from all the prerogatives
  which accompany God’s covenants of peculiar grace. In a word, we grant
  to the Calvinists everything they contend for, except the doctrine of
  _absolute necessity_; nay, we even grant the necessary, unavoidable
  salvation of all that die in their infancy. And our love of peace
  would make us go farther to meet Mr. Toplady, if we could do it
  without giving up the justice, mercy, truth, and wisdom of God,
  together with the truth of the Scriptures, the equity of God’s
  paradisaical and mediatorial laws, the propriety of the day of
  judgment, and the reasonableness of the sentences of absolution and
  condemnation, which the Righteous Judge will then pronounce. We hope,
  therefore, that the prejudices of our Calvinian brethren will subside;
  and that, instead of accounting us inveterate enemies to truth, they
  will do us the justice to say, that we have done our best to hinder
  them from inadvertently betraying some of the greatest truths of
  Christianity into the hands of the Manichees, Materialists, Infidels,
  and Antinomians of the age. May the Lord hasten the happy day in which
  we shall no more waste our precious time in attacking or defending the
  truths of our holy religion; but bestow every moment in the sweet
  exercises of Divine and brotherly love!”

During the last six years, Fletcher had most laboriously devoted the
whole of the time he could conscientiously spare from the faithful
discharge of his parochial duties, to an earnest and elaborate
explanation and defence of the Anti-Calvinian doctrines, formally
announced by his friend Wesley, at the Conference of 1770. Wesley was
without leisure for this. If he had attempted it, he would have been
obliged to content himself with the publication of brief, sententious
tracts; and this would have been insufficient. Most of the Methodist
clergymen of the day, including Whitefield, Hervey, Romaine, Berridge,
Shirley, Toplady, and many others, had become sincere and laborious
Calvinists. Their publications were widely spread, and their views
extensively embraced. Wesley saw and felt that an antidote was needed;
and especially as the Countess of Huntingdon had recently opened her
college at Trevecca to multiply the number of such ministers. Hence,
the declaration of his “Minutes,” and hence, the fierce controversial
war that immediately followed. Fletcher had been educated at Geneva,
where Calvin had propounded his creed, and his form of Church
government. Fletcher was not, professedly, a theological student at
Geneva; but he was a regular attendant at Divine services, as well as
a diligent reader of the Holy Scriptures, and there can be no doubt
that he was, to a considerable extent, even in his youth, acquainted
with the Calvinian theology. At all events, when the controversy
commenced, in 1770, there was no one, among Wesley’s helpers, so
competent to enter the arena, on his behalf, as his friend Fletcher.
Hitherto, Fletcher had been accustomed to make little evangelistic
tours, to London, to Wales, and to other places; but now, for six
years, he confined himself within his own parish, that he might have
time to defend Wesley. Up to the present, his letters to his friends
had been somewhat numerous; now, to write a letter was one of his rare
exercises. He was committed to a great work; and everything, excepting
the pastoral duties of his parish, must give way to it. Of the style
of his writings, the reader has had numerous specimens. It is always
perspicuous, lively, chaste, though occasionally prolix. Many of his
figures are apt, striking, convincing; but others would have been more
impressive had they been less elaborate. His arguments are fair,
legitimate, and generally unanswerable. His spirit, without exception,
is saintly. He never becomes personal; never deals in invective; never
assails character; never impugns motives. Among the Wesleyan
Methodists, he settled for ever all the questions of the Calvinian
controversy. For many a long year, Methodist preachers—itinerant and
local—drew their arguments and illustrations from his invaluable
“Checks;” and, perhaps, it is not too much to say, that not a few of
the Calvinists themselves were led by his immortal productions to
explain, and modify, and, to some extent, to change their
unwarrantable doctrines. To his memory, the Methodist Churches owe
undying veneration; for he did for Wesley’s theology what no other man
than himself, at that period, could have done. John Wesley travelled,
formed Societies, and governed them. Charles Wesley composed
unequalled hymns for the Methodists to sing; and John Fletcher, a
native of Calvinian Switzerland, explained, elaborated, and defended
the doctrines they heartily believed.

Hitherto, his opponents had been Walter Shirley, Richard Hill and his
brother Rowland, honest Berridge, and clever but censorious Toplady. The
last, for invective, was the worst. Twenty years before, he had heard
James Morris, one of Wesley’s itinerants, preach in a barn at Codymain,
and soon afterwards was converted. Two years later, while a student in
Trinity College, Dublin, he wrote an admirable letter to Wesley,
thanking him for his “kind” cautions and advices. When and why he became
the bitter foe of Wesley it is difficult to determine. He died on August
11, 1778, in the thirty-eighth year of his age, and was buried in a
grave, thirteen feet deep, under the gallery of Whitefield’s chapel, in
Tottenham Court Road.

Fletcher’s next antagonist was the Rev. Caleb Evans, a Baptist minister
at Bristol; a man of good sense, a diligent student, a faithful pastor,
and now thirty-seven years of age. At this period, the English colonists
in America were in rebellion. On May 10, 1775, a Congress of the
thirteen States met at Philadelphia, and appointed George Washington as
their Commander-in-Chief. He took command of the army before Boston,
where the English had ten thousand men. A few days after his arrival,
the terrible battle at Bunker’s Hill was fought; and a bloody war soon
spread over the whole seaboard, and even into Canada, where the American
colonists besieged Quebec. In the year 1775, Wesley abridged Dr.
Johnson’s famous pamphlet, entitled, “Taxation no Tyranny,” and
published it as his own, without the least reference as to its origin.
Mr. Evans warmly sympathized with the colonists, and published “A Letter
to the Rev. John Wesley, occasioned by his ‘Calm Address.’” Wesley’s
reply to this was the republication of his pirated pamphlet, with a
preface prefixed, in which he said, “All the arguments” [of Evans]
“might be contained in a nutshell.” Political as well as theological
controversy is always irritating. Angry tracts and pamphlets, almost
without number, were committed to the press; but all of them, except
those in which Fletcher was concerned, must here be passed in silence.
Fletcher now, strangely enough, turned politician. Early in the year
1776, he published the following: “A Vindication of the Rev. Mr.
Wesley’s ‘Calm Address to our American Colonists:’ In some Letters to
Mr. Caleb Evans: By John Fletcher, Vicar of Madeley, Salop. London:
Printed and sold at the Foundery.” 12mo, 70 pp.[343]

Footnote 343:

  In the same year, another edition was published in “Dublin: Printed
  for W. Whitestone, No. 33, Skinner Row.”

In a letter to Joseph Benson, he said:—

  “I have unaccountably launched into Christian politics; a branch of
  divinity too much neglected by some and too much attended to by
  others. If you have seen my ‘Vindication of Mr. Wesley’s Calm
  Address,’ and can make sense of that badly printed piece, I shall be
  thankful for your very dispraise.”

To James Ireland, Esq., he wrote on February 3, 1776:—

  “My little political piece is published in London. You thank me for it
  beforehand; I believe they are the only thanks I shall have. It is
  well you sent them before you read the book; and yet, whatever
  contempt it brings upon me, I still think I have written the truth. If
  I have been wrong in writing, I hope I shall not be so excessively
  wrong as not to be thankful for any reproof candidly levelled at what
  I have written. I prepare myself to be like my Lord in my little
  measure; I mean, to be ‘_Despised and rejected of men; a man of
  sorrows, and acquainted with griefs_,’—most reviled for what I mean
  best.”

Evidence will soon be adduced that Fletcher’s apprehensions of coming
reproach were realized.

It may fairly be doubted whether Wesley and Fletcher acted wisely in
rushing into the fierce political strife that then existed. Their
motives were pure; and, perhaps, Mr. Benson, living at the time, and a
competent observer of men and things, was correct when he said,—

  “Mr. Fletcher’s publications upon the question which divided Great
  Britain and her Colonies, as well as Mr. Wesley’s ‘Calm Address,’
  certainly were of great use; not indeed to prevent the continuation
  and further progress of the war, and stop the effusion of blood
  abroad, but to allay the spirits of disloyalty and insurrection which
  were beginning to show themselves at home.”

Still, it must be admitted, that the high and holy vocation of Wesley
and Fletcher was not to rebuke and correct political errors, but to
revive, spread, and defend the great Gospel truths which had been so
long neglected and forgotten.

No useful end would be answered by giving an outline of Fletcher’s
arguments in his “Vindication of Wesley’s ‘Calm Address.’” Many of them
may be more easily sneered at than answered. They show the versatility
of Fletcher’s genius; and, remembering the fewness of the newspapers
then published, they create surprise at the extent of Fletcher’s
political information. He often uses strong language, but he is never
ungentlemanly or abusive. He was loyal to the throne and government of
England, but he was not a blind opponent of civil liberty, or that
exemption from the arbitrary will of others which is secured by
equitable and established laws. In concluding his first letter to Mr.
Evans he wrote:—

  “I declare that I am as much in love with _liberty_ as with _loyalty_;
  and that I write a heartfelt truth when I subscribe myself, Rev. Sir,
  your affectionate fellow-labourer in the Gospel, a republican by birth
  and education, and a subject of Great Britain by love of liberty and
  free choice.”

As soon as Fletcher’s pamphlet appeared, Mr. Evans hastened to answer
it, and employed Wesley’s old friend, William Pine, of Bristol, as his
printer and publisher. The title of his new production was “A Reply to
the Rev. Mr. Fletcher’s ‘Vindication’ of Mr. Wesley’s ‘Calm Address to
our American Colonists.’ By Caleb Evans, M.A.” 12mo, 103 pp.

Mr. Evans’s reply was full of bad temper. The first twenty-three pages
were devoted to abusive remarks on the change which had taken place in
Wesley’s political opinions, and to a mistake which Wesley honestly
confessed he had made in denying that he had seen a book on “the
exclusive right of the Colonies to tax themselves.” He acknowledges that
he had seen the book, but adds: “I had so entirely forgotten it, that
even when I saw it again I recollected nothing of it till I had read
several pages.” Mr. Evans, in an angry spirit, uses this lapse of memory
to the utmost in an endeavour to brand Wesley as a liar, and concludes
his first letter to Fletcher thus:—

  “Having thus given you, Sir, a faithful narrative of the rise,
  progress, and conclusion of the dispute betwixt me and Mr. Wesley, you
  are welcome to re-enter on the vindication of _your friend_, as you
  style him, as soon as you please. And should you find yourself unequal
  to the _Herculean_ task, you may call in the assistance of the amazing
  Mr. _Thomas Olivers_, that mirror of Christian meekness and modesty,
  and with his logic and your oratory, aided by scraps of mutilated
  letters, you will perform wonders.”

Mr. Evans begins his second letter by politely telling Fletcher that in
reading his “Vindication of Wesley’s ‘Calm Address’” he had been greatly
disappointed.

  “For,” says he, “instead of argument, I met with nothing but
  declamation; instead of precision, artful colouring; instead of proof,
  presumption; instead of consistency, contradiction; instead of
  reasoning, a string of sophistries. Your letters abound, Sir, as every
  intelligent reader will easily discover, with the _petitio principii_,
  the _fallacia accidentis_, the _non causa pro causa_, and those many
  other pretty inventions by which, as the Schoolmen very well know, a
  question may be embarrassed when it cannot be answered.”

In succeeding pages, Mr. Evans charges Fletcher with using “loose,
inconsistent, vague declamation;” and adds:—

  “This may confound the ignorant and superficial; but you cannot
  yourself suppose it ever can convince the intelligent and impartial.
  Your chief aim seems to be _spargere voces in vulgam ambiguas_, and
  thereby artfully to persuade them that all those who are enemies to
  the measures of the ministry respecting America are Republicans,
  king-haters, Calvinists, Anabaptists, Antinomians, and everything that
  is bad.”

Poor Fletcher! He was indeed realizing the reproach he had apprehended;
and yet he was not satisfied. Hence his publication of the following:
“American Patriotism: Farther confronted with Reason, Scripture, and the
Constitution: Being Observations on the Dangerous Politicks taught by
the Rev. Mr. Evans, M.A., and the Rev. Dr. Price.[344] With a Scriptural
Plea for the Revolted Colonies. By J. Fletcher, Vicar of Madeley.” 1776.
12mo, 138 pp.

Footnote 344:

  Mr. Evans, in his “Reply,” had made several quotations from what he
  calls “Dr. Price’s most excellent pamphlet, just published,” and
  entitled, “Observations on the Nature of Civil Liberty.”

  “The author,” writes Fletcher in his preface, “dares not flatter
  himself to have the knowledge of logic and divinity, which are
  requisite to do his subject the justice it deserves; but, having for
  some years opposed _false orthodoxy_, he may have acquired a little
  skill to oppose _false patriotism_; and, having defended _evangelical
  obedience to God_ against the indirect attacks of some ministers of
  the Church of England, he humbly hopes that he may step forth a second
  time and defend _constiutional obedience to the king_ against some
  ministers who dissent from the Established Church. Those whom he
  encounters in these sheets are the leading ecclesiastical patriots of
  the two greatest cities in the kingdom; Mr. Evans being the champion
  of the minority in Bristol, as Dr. Price is in London.”

Of course, Fletcher’s book is able; but, excepting so far as it teaches
that loyalty is a Christian duty, it is, to a great extent, out of date.

On October 30, 1776, a royal proclamation was issued, ordering “a public
fast and humiliation to be observed throughout England and the kingdom
of Ireland, upon Friday the 13th of December next, for the purpose of
imploring the Almighty speedily to deliver the King’s loyal subjects
within his colonies and provinces in North America, from the violence,
injustice, and tyranny of those daring rebels who had assumed to
themselves the exercise of arbitrary power; to open the eyes of those
who had been deluded, by specious falsehoods, into acts of treason and
rebellion; to turn the hearts of the authors of these calamities; and to
restore his people in those distracted provinces and colonies to the
happy condition of being free subjects in a free state, under which
heretofore they had flourished so long, and prospered so much.”[345]

Footnote 345:

  Annual Register, 1776.

This had Fletcher’s hearty approbation, and he at once wrote and
published a 12mo pamphlet of 22 pages, dated “London, December 6, 1776,”
with the title, “The Bible and the Sword; or, The Appointment of the
General Fast Vindicated: In an Address to the Common People, concerning
the Propriety of Repressing obstinate Licentiousness with the Sword, and
of Fasting when the Sword is drawn for that Purpose. London: Printed by
R. Hawes, and sold at the Foundery, in Moorfields, and at the Rev. Mr.
Wesley’s Preaching Houses in Town and Country. 1776.”[346] One half of
this pamphlet, however, was simply a reprint of extracts from his
“American Patriotism;” the other half is devoted to the task of proving,
from Scripture, that, under certain circumstances, war is lawful.

Footnote 346:

  Almost without exception, all Fletcher’s publications had on their
  title-pages the advertisement, “Sold at the Foundery, in Moorfields,
  and at the Rev. Mr. Wesley’s preaching-houses in town and country.”

As he expected, Fletcher, by his political publications, brought upon
himself political wrath and censure, of which the following extracts,
taken from the _Monthly Review_, are specimens:—

  “Mr. Fletcher has been distinguished in the late theological
  controversies between Mr. Wesley and his followers, on the one part,
  and the Antinomians, or Calvinists, on the other. In these disputes,
  the Shropshire vicar made no inconsiderable figure; and we have freely
  and impartially done justice to his abilities. In _politics_, however,
  we have nothing to say in his favour. We are, indeed, sorry to observe
  that he is a mere Sacheverell; a preacher of those slavish and justly
  exploded Jacobitical doctrines, for which the memory of Sacheverell
  and his abettors will ever be held in equal contempt and abhorrence by
  every true friend to the liberties of mankind.”[347]

  “Mr. Fletcher’s present performance” (_American Patriotism_) “is, like
  his former piece on this subject, wordy, specious, and artful. He
  alternately attacks the champions on the other side of the question,
  Dr. Price and Mr. Evans; and he evidently thinks himself a match for
  them both. We are almost tired of the fruitless contest; but one word
  with Mr. Fletcher before we part. He is a little chagrined at our
  styling him a _mere Sacheverell_; and he takes pains, in this
  publication, to show his equal abhorrence of _regal_ or of _mobbish_
  tyranny. We are glad to find this rev. gentleman thus disclaiming
  those principles, to which many of his positions and arguments
  obviously lead; and we charitably hope that he was not aware of the
  full extent and tendency of their operation. Mr. Fletcher is, by all
  report, a good man; but he will never, we suspect, obtain a _good
  report_ merely for his _politics_, except with those who have already
  embraced the same system; for mankind are too much guided by Swift’s
  rule of pronouncing those _right_ who think as we do, and every one
  _wrong_ who differs from us. Poor encouragement, by the way, for our
  author to expend his ink, and wear out his pens, in order to convert
  those political heretics, the advocates for America.”[348]

Footnote 347:

  _Monthly Review_, 1776, vol. liv., p. 325.

Footnote 348:

  _Ibid_, 1776, vol. lv, p. 155.

The sneers of the Monthly Reviewers were unjust. Fletcher, in reply to
their unmerited taunt, remarked:—

  “I am no more ‘_a mere Sacheverell_’ than I am a _mere Price_. Dr.
  Sacheverell ran as fiercely into the _high monarchical_ extreme as Dr.
  Price does into the _high republican_ extreme. I have endeavoured to
  keep at an equal distance from their opposite mistakes, by contending
  only for the just medium, which the Holy Scriptures and our excellent
  constitution point out. If Dr. Sacheverell were alive, and his
  erroneous, enthusiastical, mobbing politics endangered the public
  tranquillity, as the patriotism of Mr. Evans and Dr. Price does at
  present, I would oppose the _high churchman_ as much as I now do the
  two _high dissenters_.”[349]

Footnote 349:

  “American Patriotism,” p. 130.

Notwithstanding the depreciatory opinions of Mr. Evans, Dr. Price, and
the Monthly Reviewers, the government of King George III. desired to
reward Fletcher for the service he had rendered them. His old friend,
Mr. Vaughan, informed Wesley that he took one of Fletcher’s political
pamphlets to the Earl of Dartmouth, at that time Secretary of State for
the Colonies. Lord Dartmouth carried it to the Lord Chancellor, who
handed it to King George. The result was an official was immediately
commissioned to ask Fletcher whether any preferment in the Church would
be acceptable to him? or whether the Lord Chancellor could do him any
service? Fletcher replied, no doubt to the amazement of all concerned,
“I want nothing, but more grace.”[350]

Footnote 350:

  Wesley’s “Life of Fletcher.”

This was characteristic of the man. “The love of money, the root of all
evil,” was a sin from which Fletcher was entirely exempt.

  “On the 10th of May, 1774,” says Mr. Vaughan, “Mr. Fletcher wrote me
  thus: ‘My brother has sent me the rent of the little place I have
  abroad, £80, which I was to receive from Mr. Chauvet and Co., in
  London. But, instead of sending the draught for the money, I have sent
  it back to Switzerland, with orders to distribute it among the poor.
  As money is rather higher there than here, that mite will go farther
  abroad than it would in my parish.’”[351]

Footnote 351:

  _Ibid._

Mr. Vaughan continues:—

  “In 1776, he deposited with me a bill of £105, being, as I understood,
  the yearly produce of his estate in Switzerland. This was his fund for
  charitable uses; but it lasted only a few months, when he drew upon me
  for the balance, which was £24, to complete the preaching-house in
  Madeley Wood.”[352]

Men, said Cicero, resemble the gods in nothing so much as in doing good
to their fellow-creatures.

Footnote 352:

  _Ibid._




                              CHAPTER XIX.
                       _CORRESPONDENCE IN 1776._


FLETCHER’S health was failing; and no wonder. Wesley writes:—

  “He was more and more abundant in his ministerial labours, both in
  public and private; not contenting himself with preaching, but
  visiting his flock in every corner of his parish. And this work he
  attended to early and late, whether the weather was fair or foul;
  regarding neither heat nor cold, rain nor snow, whether he was on
  horseback or on foot. But this further weakened his constitution;
  which was still more effectually done by his intense and uninterrupted
  studies, in which he frequently continued, without scarce any
  intermission, fourteen, fifteen, or sixteen hours a day. But still he
  did not allow himself such food as was necessary to sustain nature. He
  seldom took any regular meals except he had company; otherwise, twice
  or thrice in four-and-twenty hours he ate some bread and cheese, or
  fruit. Instead of this, he sometimes took a draught of milk, and then
  wrote on again. When one reproved him for not affording himself a
  sufficiency of necessary food, he replied, ‘Not allow myself food! Why
  our food seldom costs my housekeeper and me less than two shillings a
  week.’”[353]

Footnote 353:

  Wesley’s “Life of Fletcher.”

During the Calvinian controversy, Fletcher’s letters to his friends seem
to have been comparatively few. At all events, few have been preserved.
Now he resumed his epistolary correspondence; and the present chapter
will mainly consist of these outpourings of his heart to those whom he
dearly loved.

In a letter, dated January 9, 1776, and published in the “Life and Times
of Wesley,” Fletcher refers to a renewed proposal to become Wesley’s
successor. To prepare him for this, Wesley requested that he would
accompany him in his evangelistic tours, so that he might be commended
to the Methodist Societies they visited. Fletcher replied that he was
willing to accompany Wesley as a travelling assistant; but he strongly
objected to being nominated Wesley’s _successor_. Besides other reasons,
which he adduced, he remarked, that such a nomination would lead people
to suspect, and say, that what he had written, “for truth and
conscience’ sake,” in defence of Wesley’s doctrines, had all been done
for the purpose of becoming, what Toplady had called, “the Bishop of
Moorfields.” There is no need to quote this letter at full length; but
it is an important one, as showing that the proposal which Wesley had
made to Fletcher, three years before, was not a passing whim, but a
fixed idea, on the realization of which he had set his heart.[354]

Footnote 354:

  Others, besides Wesley, had fixed upon Fletcher as Wesley’s successor.
  Joseph Benson, in 1775, shortly after Wesley’s dangerous illness in
  Ireland, wrote to him, saying, “In case of Mr. Wesley’s death, your
  help would be wanted, in the government of the Societies, and in
  conducting the work of God.” To this, Fletcher replied, “God has
  lately shaken Mr. Wesley over the grave; but, I believe, from the
  strength of his constitution and the weakness of mine, he will survive
  me; so that I do not scheme about helping to make up the gap, when
  that great tree shall fall. Sufficient for the day will that trouble
  be; nor will the Divine power be then insufficient to help the people
  in time of need.” (Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”)

It may be added, that Fletcher, in the same letter, informs Wesley,
that, by the last post, he had sent him a manuscript, entitled, “A
Second Check to Civil Antinomianism;” being an extract from the Church
of England Homily on Rebellion; and he expresses the opinion that it
might be well to print and circulate it, not only for the general good,
but, also, “to shame Mr. Roquet,” one of the first masters of Wesley’s
school, at Kingswood, but now a clergyman of the Church of England, who,
in the controversy respecting the American rebellion, had turned against
his old friend Wesley, and had rendered assistance to Wesley’s
dissenting opponent, Caleb Evans. Wesley seems to have had more regard
for Mr. Roquet’s reputation, than even gentle-minded Fletcher had, for
Fletcher’s manuscript was not published.

Fletcher refused to be commended as Wesley’s successor; but he evidently
thought of travelling. Hence, in a letter to his friend James Ireland,
Esq., he wrote:—

  “Madeley, February 3, 1776. Upon the news of your illness, I and many
  more prayed that you might be supported under your pressures, and that
  they might yield the peaceable fruit of righteousness. We shall now
  turn our prayers into praises for your happy recovery, and for the
  support the Lord has granted you under your trial. There are lessons
  which we can never learn but under the cross: we must suffer with
  Christ if we will be glorified with Him. I hope you will take care
  that it may not be said of you, as it was of Hezekiah, ‘He rendered
  not unto the Lord, according to the benefit’ of his recovery. May we
  see the propriety and profit of rendering Him our bodies and our
  souls,—the sacrifices of humble, praising, obedient love,—and warm,
  active, cheerful thanksgiving!

  “A young clergyman offers to assist me: if he does, I may make an
  excursion somewhere this spring; where it will be, I don’t know. It
  may be into _eternity_, for I dare not depend upon to-morrow; but
  should it be your way, I shall inform you of a variety of family
  trials, which the Lord has sent me—all for _good_, to break my will in
  every possible respect.”[355]

Footnote 355:

  Letters, 1791, p. 227.

In reference to this excursion, Wesley writes:—

  “His health being more than ever impaired by a violent cough,
  accompanied with spitting of blood, I told him, nothing was so likely
  to restore his health as a long journey. I, therefore, proposed his
  taking a journey of some months with me, through various parts of
  England and Scotland; telling him, ‘When you are tired, or like it
  best, you may come into my carriage; but, remember, that riding on
  horseback is the best of all exercises for _you_, so far as your
  strength will permit.’ He looked upon this as a call from Providence,
  and very willingly accepted of the proposal. We set out, as I am
  accustomed to do, early in the spring, and travelled by moderate
  journeys, suited to his strength, eleven or twelve hundred miles.[356]
  When we returned to London, in the latter end of the year, he was
  considerably better; and I verily believe, if he had travelled with
  me, partly in the chaise and partly on horseback, only a few months
  longer, he would have quite recovered his health.”[357]

Footnote 356:

  I cannot trace this journey.—L.T.

Footnote 357:

  Wesley’s “Life of Fletcher.”

At this period, the end of 1775, or the beginning of 1776, Joseph Benson
was stationed in the circuit of Newcastle-on-Tyne, and to him Fletcher
wrote as follows:—

  “Though I am pretty well in body, I break fast. I have been put into
  such pinching, grinding circumstances for near a year, by a series of
  providential and domestic trials, as have given me some deadly blows.
  Mr. Wesley kindly invited me some weeks ago to travel with him and
  visit some of his Societies. The controversy is partly over, and I
  feel an inclination to break one of my chains,—parochial
  retirement,—which may be a nest for self. A young minister, in
  deacon’s orders, has offered to be my curate; and, if he can live in
  this wilderness, I shall have some liberty to leave it. I commit the
  matter entirely to the Lord.

  “The few professors I see in these parts are so far from what I could
  wish them and myself to be, that I cannot but cry out, ‘Lord, how long
  wilt Thou give Thine heritage to desolation or barrenness? How long
  shall the heathen say, where is now their indwelling God?’ I hope it
  is better with you in the north. What are your heart, your pen, your
  tongue doing? Are they receiving, sealing, spreading the truth
  everywhere within your sphere? Are you dead to praise or dispraise?
  Could you quietly pass for a mere fool, and have gross nonsense
  fathered upon you without any uneasy reflection of self? The Lord
  bless you! Beware of your grand enemy, earthly wisdom, and unbelieving
  reasonings. You will never overcome but by childlike, loving
  simplicity.”[358]

Footnote 358:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

Wesley set out, on his “_long journey_,” from London, on Sunday evening,
March 3, 1776, and reached Bristol two days afterwards. On Wednesday,
March 6, he went to Taunton, and “opened the new preaching-house.” On
Thursday, he returned to Bristol; and, on the Monday following, started
for the north, visiting his Societies at Stroud, Painswick, Tewkesbury,
Worcester, and other places, until, on March 25, he arrived at
Birmingham.[359] Mr. Benson says Fletcher joined Wesley “at London, or
more probably at Bristol, and accompanied him on his journeys through
Gloucestershire, and Worcestershire, and a part of Warwickshire,
Staffordshire, and Shropshire. He did not, however, proceed further
north with Mr. Wesley, at that time, but stopped at Madeley, for reasons
which he mentioned to me in the following letter, written soon after:—

  “‘MY DEAR BROTHER,—I would have answered your letter before now, had I
  not been overdone with writing. I have just concluded an answer to Mr.
  Evans and Dr. Price; a work which I have undertaken with a desire to
  serve the cause of religion, as well as that of loyalty. This work has
  prevented me from following Mr. Wesley. Besides, as the clergyman who
  is here with me (a student from Edmund Hall[360]), has just accepted a
  place near Manchester, I shall still be without a curate.

  “‘I see so little fruit in these parts that I am almost disheartened,
  both with respect to the power of the Word, and the experience of the
  professors I converse with. I am closely followed with the thought
  that the kingdom in the Holy Ghost is almost lost; and that faith in
  the dispensation of the Spirit is at a very low ebb. But it may be, I
  think so on account of my little experience, and the weakness of the
  faith of those whom I meet. It may be better in all other places. I
  shall be glad to travel a little to see the goodness of the land. God
  deliver us from all extremes, and make and keep us humble, loving,
  disinterested, and zealous! I preached, before Mr. Greaves came, as
  much as my strength could well admit, although to little purpose; but
  I must not complain. If one person receive a good desire in ten years,
  by my instrumentality, it is a greater honour than I deserve—an honour
  for which I could not be too thankful. Let us bless the Lord for all
  things. We have reasons innumerable to do it. Bless Him on my account,
  as well as your own; and the God of peace be with you.’”[361]

Footnote 359:

  Wesley’s Journal.

Footnote 360:

  The College, at Oxford, to which the Countess of Huntingdon had been
  accustomed to send godly young men, to prepare them for Orders, and
  from which six of her students had been expelled, in 1768.

Footnote 361:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

Before proceeding further, it may be added, that Joseph Benson doubted
the propriety of Wesley and Fletcher turning their attention to
politics. In an unpublished letter, dated “Newcastle, May 21, 1776,” he
wrote:—

  “These are ‘perilous times’ indeed, and threaten to be more perilous
  still. You see what a famous politician our friend Fletcher is become.
  Though I exceedingly approve both of the ‘Calm Address’ and its
  ‘Vindication,’ I fear these subjects only detain the authors from more
  valuable and important work. We expected Mr. Fletcher here along with
  Mr. Wesley; but I understand, by a letter from him yesterday, that he
  has been prevented, by his having to answer Dr. Price and Mr. Evans.
  And there is more work for him still. A friend of ours, in London, has
  sent Mr. Cownley and me a pamphlet, which, in some important points,
  takes Mr. Fletcher’s ‘Vindication’ thoroughly to pieces. I fear he
  will find it no easy thing to reply to some of its arguments. As for
  Price, his ideas of liberty are beyond measure extravagant; and Mr.
  Fletcher and Mr. Wesley will find it no very difficult matter to reply
  to _him_. But, the principal thing to be thought, talked, and wrote
  about, is the _baptism of the Spirit_, or the _inward kingdom of God_.
  Oh! my friend, this is but little known among us!”

To his old friend, Mr. Vaughan, Fletcher wrote:—

                                         “MADELEY, _March 21, 1776_.

  “DEAR SIR,—Your barrel of cider came safe to hand. How could you think
  to make me such a present? But I must rather thank you for your love
  and generosity, than scold you for your excessive profusion. You
  should have stayed till cider was ten shillings a hogshead, but in
  such a year as this—! However, the Lord reward you, and return it to
  you, in streams of living water, and plenty of the wine of His
  kingdom!

  “I thought I should soon have done with controversy; but now I give up
  the hope of having done with it before I die. There are three sorts of
  people I must continually attack, or defend myself against—Gallios,
  Pharisees, and Antinomians. I hope I shall die in harness fighting
  against some of them. I do not, however, forget, that the Gallio, the
  Simon, and the Nicholas _within_, are far more dangerous to me than
  those without. In my own heart, that immense field, I must _first_
  fight the Lord’s battles and my own. Help me here; join me in this
  field. All Christians are here militia-men, if they are not professed
  soldiers. O, my friend, I need wisdom—_meekness of wisdom_! A heart
  full of it is better than all your cider vault full of the most
  generous liquors; and it is in Christ for us. O! go and ask for you
  and me; and I shall ask for me and you. May we not be ashamed, nor
  afraid to come, and beg every moment for wine and milk—grace and
  wisdom!

  “Beware, my friend, of the world. Let not its cares, nor the
  deceitfulness of its riches, keep or draw you from Jesus. Before you
  handle the birdlime, be sure you dip your heart and hand in the oil of
  grace. Time flies. Years of plenty and of scarcity, of peace and war,
  disappear before the eternity to which we are all hastening.

  “Remember me kindly to Mrs. Vaughan. That the Lord would abundantly
  bless you both, in your souls, bodies, concerns, and children, is the
  sincere wish of your affectionate friend,

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[362]

Footnote 362:

  Letters, 1791, p. 229.

The following letter, to Charles Wesley, refers, among other things, to
another of Fletcher’s publications, which has yet to be noticed:—

                                           “MADELEY, _May 11, 1776_.

  “MY DEAR BROTHER,—What are you doing in London? Are you ripening as
  fast for the grave as I am? How should we lay out every moment for
  God! For some days, I have had the symptoms of an inward consumptive
  decay—spitting of blood, etc. Thank God! I look at our last enemy with
  great calmness. I hope, however, that the Lord will spare me to
  publish my end of the controversy, which is _A Double Dissertation
  upon the Doctrines of Grace and Justice_. This piece will, I flatter
  myself, reconcile all the _candid_ Calvinists and _candid_ Arminians,
  and be a means of pointing out the way in which peace and harmony may
  be restored to the Church.

  “I still look for an outpouring of the Spirit, inwardly and outwardly.
  Should I die before that great day, I shall have the consolation to
  see it from afar. Thank God! I enjoy uninterrupted peace in the midst
  of my trials, which are, sometimes, not a few. Joy also I possess; but
  I look for joy of a superior nature. I feel myself, in a good degree,
  dead to praise and dispraise: I hope, at least, that it is so; because
  I do not feel that the one lifts me up, or that the other dejects me.
  I want to see a Pentecost Christian Church; and, if it is not to be
  seen at this time upon earth, I am willing to go and see that glorious
  wonder in heaven. How is it with you? Are you ready to seize the crown
  in the name of the Redeemer _reigning_ in your heart? We run a race
  towards the grave. John is likely to outrun you, unless you have a
  swift foot.

  “I had lately a letter from one of the preachers, who finds great
  fault with me, for having published, in my book on Perfection, your
  hymn called _The Last Wish_. He calls it dangerous mysticism. My
  _private_ thoughts are, that the truth lies between _driving_
  Methodism and _still_ mysticism. What think you? Read the addresses
  which I have added to that piece, and tell me your thoughts.

  “Let us pray that God would renew our youth, as that of the eagle,
  that we may bear fruit in our old age. I hope I shall see you _before_
  my death: if not, let us rejoice at the thought of meeting in
  heaven.”[363]

Footnote 363:

  Letters, 1791, p. 231.

The censured hymn was the following—

               “To do, or not to do; to have,
                 Or not to have, I leave to Thee:
               To be, or not to be, I leave:
                 Thy only will be done in me.
               All my requests are lost in one:
               Father, Thy only will be done.

               “Suffice that, for the season past,
                 Myself in things Divine I sought,
               For comforts cried with eager haste,
                 And murmur’d that I found them not:
               I leave it now to Thee alone,
               Father, Thy only will be done.

               “Thy gifts I clamour for no more,
                 Or selfishly Thy grace require,
               An evil heart to varnish o’er;
                 Jesus, the Giver, I desire;
               After the flesh no longer known:
               Father, Thy only will be done.

               “Welcome alike the crown or cross;
                 Trouble I cannot ask, nor peace,
               Nor toil, nor rest, nor gain, nor loss,
                 Nor joy, nor grief, nor pain, nor ease,
               Nor life, nor death; but ever groan,
               Father, Thy only will be done.”

This was what Wesley’s Itinerant Preacher called “_dangerous_
mysticism,” and Fletcher, “_still_ mysticism.” Whether Fletcher himself
experienced this “destruction of self-will,” and “absolute resignation,
which characterises a perfect believer,” it is difficult to determine;
but it may safely be affirmed that he was struggling to attain to such a
state of holiness. “This hymn,” said he, “suits all the believers who
are at the bottom of Mount Sion, and begin to join the spirits of just
men made perfect.” And then, as a specimen of what he calls “_driving_
Methodism,” he adds:—

  “But when the triumphal chariot of perfect love _gloriously_ carries
  you to the top of perfection’s hill;—when you are raised far above the
  _common_ heights of the perfect,—when you are almost translated into
  glory like Elijah, _then_ you may sing another hymn of the same
  Christian poet” (Charles Wesley) “with the Rev. Mr. Madan, and the
  numerous body of imperfectionists who use his collection of Psalms,
  etc.”

This, of course, was a quiet satire on Martin Madan and his Calvinistic
congregation; but, passing that, the “_driving_ hymn was as follows:—

                 “Who in Jesus confide,
                   They are bold to outride
                 The storms of affliction beneath:
                   With the prophet they soar
                   To that heavenly shore,
                 And out-fly all the arrows of death.

                 “By faith _we are come_
                   To our _permanent home_;
                 By hope we _the rapture improve_:
                   By love we _still rise_,
                   And _look down_ on the skies—
                 For the _heaven of heavens is love_!

                 “Who on earth can conceive
                   How happy _we live_
                 In the city of God the great King!
                   What a concert of praise,
                   When our Jesus’s grace
                 The whole heavenly company sing!

                 “What a rapturous song,
                   When the glorified throng
                 In the spirit of harmony join!
                   Join all the glad choirs,
                   Hearts, voices, and lyres,
                 And the burden is mercy divine!”[364]

Footnote 364:

  Fletcher’s “Last Check to Antinomianism,” p. 323.

Why these long quotations? Simply to show that real Christian Perfection
is, according to the “_private_ thoughts” of Fletcher, one of the
holiest of the old Methodists, a something that “lies between” the
“driving Methodism and _still_ mysticism” embodied in the two remarkable
hymns just cited.

Soon after the date of the last letter (May 11, 1776) Fletcher’s health
so entirely failed, that he was compelled to leave his parish and repair
to the hot wells at Bristol. His friend, Charles Wesley, on June 30,
embodied the feelings of his full heart in the following touching hymn:—

              “Jesus, Thy feeble servant see!
              Sick is the man beloved by Thee:
                Thy name to magnify,
              To spread Thy Gospel-truths again,
              His precious soul in life detain,
                Nor suffer him to die.

              “The fervent prayer Thou oft hast heard,
              Thy glorious arm in mercy bared;
                Thy wonder-working power
              Appear’d in all Thy people’s sight,
              And stopp’d the Spirit in its flight,
                Or bade the grave restore.

              “In faith we ask a fresh reprieve:
              Frequent in deaths he still shall live,
                If Thou pronounce the word;
              Shall spend for Thee, his strength renew’d,
              Witness of the all-cleansing blood,
                Forerunner of his Lord.

              “The Spirit that raised Thee from the dead,
              Be in its quick’ning virtue shed,
                His mortal flesh to raise,
              To consecrate Thy human shrine,
              And fill with energy divine
                Thy minister of grace.

              “Body and soul at once revive;
              The prayer of faith in which we strive,
                So shall we all proclaim,
              According to Thy gracious will,
              Omnipotent the sick to heal,
                From age to age the same.”[365]

Footnote 365:

  _Wesleyan Methodist Magazine_, 1835, p. 576.

Fifteen years ago (soon after he came to Madeley), at Christmas time, in
a dark night, Fletcher, on the top of Lincoln-hill woods, was at a loss
which way to take to reach his vicarage at Madeley. Providentially, he
met a working man of Coalbrookdale, Michael Onions by name, who was on
his way to Broseley to fetch a fiddler for a dancing party in Michael’s
house. Fletcher told him he had lost his road to Madeley, and asked him
to put him right. Good-tempered Michael went half-a-mile out of his way
to render the muffled stranger the necessary guidance. Conversation
ensued; Michael explained the object of his journey to Broseley;
Fletcher warned him of his sin and danger; Michael became alarmed, and,
instead of proceeding to Broseley to secure the services of the fiddler,
returned to his dwelling at Coalbrookdale. On his entering, the
assembled dancers asked, “Have you brought the fiddler?” “No,” said
Michael. “Is he not at home?” “I don’t know.” “Have you not been to
Broseley?” “No.” “Why? What’s the matter? You look ill, and are all of a
tremble.” Michael then stated that he had met some one on the top of
Lincoln-hill woods; but whether man or angel he knew not; and, after
relating the conversation between them, added, “I dare not go to
Broseley—I would not for the world.” Next Sunday morning, Michael and
some of his dancing friends went to Madeley church; and there, in the
voice of Fletcher, he recognized the mysterious traveller he had met
with on Lincoln-hill. Michael was converted, and became one of the first
Methodists in Coalbrookdale.[366] To this humble, but faithful Christian
friend, and to his fellow Methodists, Fletcher now wrote as follows:—

                                          “BRISTOL, _July 11, 1776_.

  “MY DEAR BROTHER,—Having just seen, at the Wells, Mr. Darby, who is
  going back to the Dale, I gladly seize the opportunity of letting you
  know what the Lord is doing for my soul and body.

  “With respect to my soul, I feel a degree of righteousness, peace, and
  joy, and wait for the establishment of His internal kingdom in the
  Holy Ghost. The hope of my being rooted and grounded in the love, that
  casts out slavish fear, grows more lively every day. I am not afraid
  of any evil tidings, and my heart stands calm, believing in the Lord,
  and desiring Him to do with me whatsoever He pleaseth.

  “With respect to my body, I know not what to say; but the physician
  says he hopes I shall do well; and so I hope, and believe too, whether
  I recover my strength or not. Health and sickness, life and death, are
  best when the Lord sends them. All things work together for good to
  those that love God.

  “I am forbid preaching; but, blessed be God! I am not forbid, by my
  heavenly Physician, to pray, believe, and love. This is a sweet work,
  which heals, delights, and strengthens.

  “I hope you bear me on your hearts, as I do you on mine. My wish for
  you is that you may be possessors of an inward kingdom of grace; that
  you may so hunger and thirst after righteousness as to be filled. Oh!
  be hearty in the cause of religion. Be _humbly_ zealous for your own
  salvation, and for God’s glory; nor forget to care for the salvation
  of each other. Keep yourselves in the love of God; and keep one
  another by _example_, _reproof_, _exhortation_, _encouragement_,
  _social prayer_, and _a faithful use of all the means of grace_. Use
  yourselves to bow at the feet of Christ. Go to Him continually for the
  holy anointing of His Spirit, who will be a Teacher always near,
  always with you and in you. If you have that _inward_ Instructor, you
  will suffer no material loss when your outward teachers are removed.
  Make the most of dear Mr. Greaves[367] while you have him. While you
  have the light of God’s word, believe in the light, that you may be
  children of the light, fitted for the kingdom of eternal light, where
  I charge you to meet your affectionate brother and minister,

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[368]

Footnote 366:

  _Wesleyan Times_, March 3, 1856, p. 138.

Footnote 367:

  Who had again become Fletcher’s curate.

Footnote 368:

  Letters, 1791, p. 14.

To Charles Perronet, son of the venerable Vicar of Shoreham, Fletcher
wrote:—

                                          “BRISTOL, _July 12, 1776_.

  “MY VERY DEAR BROTHER,—I gladly thank you for your last favour. The
  Lord keeps me hanging by a thread. He weighs me in the balance for
  life and death; I trust Him for the choice. He knows, far better than
  I, what is best; and I leave all to His unerring wisdom. I am calm,
  and wait, with submission, for what the Lord will say concerning me. I
  wait to be baptized into _all His fulness_, and trust the word—_the
  word of His grace_.”[369]

Footnote 369:

  _Ibid_, p. 231.

Exactly a month after the date of this letter, holy Charles Perronet
himself fell asleep in Jesus. “My dear Charles,” wrote his venerable
father, “after wearing out a weakly constitution in the most unwearied
endeavours to bring many to Christ, breathed out his pious soul in the
remarkable words of his dear Lord, ‘Father, into Thy hands I commend my
spirit.’” “I have uninterrupted fellowship with God,” cried the dying
saint; “and Christ is all in all to me.”[370] As soon as Fletcher heard
of the death of this godly man, he wrote to the bereaved father as
follows:—

  “Methinks I see you, right honoured Sir, mounted, as another Moses, on
  the top of Pisgah, and through the telescope of faith descrying the
  promised land; or, rather, in the present instance, I observe you,
  like another Joshua, on the banks of Jordan, viewing all Israel, with
  your son among them, passing over the river to their great
  possessions. Permit me, therefore, in consideration of your years and
  office, to exclaim, in the language of young Elisha to his ancient
  seer, ‘My father! My father! The chariots of Israel and the horsemen
  thereof.’

             “‘There, there they are, and there is your son!
             Whom faith pursues, and eager hope discerns,
             In yon bright chariot, as a cherub borne
             On wings of love, to uncreated realms
             Of deathless joy, and everlasting peace.’”[371]

Footnote 370:

  Atmore’s “Methodist Memorial.”

Footnote 371:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

On the day Charles Perronet died, Wesley was in Bristol, and wrote:—

  “1776. August 12.—I found Mr. Fletcher a little better, and proposed
  his taking a journey with me to Cornwall; nothing being so likely to
  restore his health as a journey of four or five hundred miles. But his
  physician would in no wise consent, so I gave up the point.”[372]

Footnote 372:

  Wesley’s Journal.

Instead of going to Cornwall Fletcher returned to Madeley, where he
wrote two letters to his friend, James Ireland, Esq., from which the
following are extracts:—

  “Madeley, August 18, 1776. My breast is very weak, but, if it please
  God, it will in time recover strength. Mr. Greaves will take all the
  duty upon himself, and I shall continue to take rest, exercise, and
  the food which was recommended to me. The Lord grant me to rest myself
  on Christ, to exercise myself in charity, and to feed upon the bread
  of life, which God has given us in Jesus Christ.

  “I thank you, my dear friend, for all your favours and all your
  attention to me. What returns shall I make? I will drink the cup of
  thanksgiving, and I will bless the name of the Lord. I will thank my
  dear friend and wish him all the temporal blessings he conferred upon
  me, and all those spiritual ones which were not in his power to
  bestow. Live in health; live piously; live content; live in Christ;
  live for eternity; live to make your wife, your children, your
  servants, your neighbours happy. And may the God of all grace give
  back a hundredfold to you and your dear wife all the kindnesses with
  which you have loaded me.”[373]

  “Madeley, August 24, 1776. My dear friend, I have received the news of
  your _loss_, and of the _gain_ of your younger daughter. She has
  entered into port, and has left you on a tempestuous sea. I recommend
  to Mrs. Ireland the resignation of David when he lost his son; and do
  you give her the example. The day of death is preferable to that of
  our birth; with respect to infants, the maxim of Solomon is
  indubitable. 0 what an honour is it to be the father and mother of a
  little cherub who hovers round the throne of God in heavenly glory!

  “Roquet[374] dead and buried! The jolly man who last summer shook his
  head at me as at a dying man! How frail are we! God help us to live
  _to-day_! to-morrow is the fool’s day.

  “I have not, at present, the least idea that I am called to quit my
  post here. I see no probability of being useful in Switzerland. My
  call is here; I am sure of it. If I undertook the journey, it would be
  merely to accompany you. I dare not gratify friendship by taking such
  a step. I have no faith in the prescriptions of your physician; and I
  think if health be better for us than sickness, we may enjoy it as
  well here as in France or Italy. If sickness be best for us, why shun
  it? Everything is good when it comes from God. Nothing but a baptism
  of fire and the most evident openings of Providence can engage me in
  such a journey. If I reject your obliging offer to procure me a
  substitute, attribute it to my fear of taking a false step, of
  quitting my post without command, and of engaging in a warfare to
  which the Lord does not call me.”[375]

Footnote 373:

  Letters, 1791, p. 232.

Footnote 374:

  The Rev. James Roquet, who, in 1775, had turned against his old friend
  Wesley respecting the rebellion in America.

Footnote 375:

  Letters, 1791, p. 234.

A fortnight later, Fletcher wrote again to Mr. Ireland:—

  “Madeley, September 7, 1776. My dear friend, my health is better than
  when I wrote last. I have not yet preached; rather from a sense of
  duty to my friends, and high thoughts of the labours of Mr. Greaves
  (who does the work of an evangelist to better purpose than I), than to
  spare myself; for, if I am not mistaken, I am as able to do my work
  now as I was a year ago.

  “A fortnight ago, I paid a visit to West Bromwich. I ran away from the
  kindness of my parishioners, who oppressed me with tokens of their
  love. To me there is nothing so extremely trying as excessive
  kindness. I am of the king’s mind when the people showed their love to
  him on his journey to Portsmouth: ‘I can bear,’ he said, ‘the hissings
  of a London mob, but these shouts of joy are too much for me.’ You, my
  dear friend, Mrs. Ireland, Mrs. Norman, and all your family, have put
  me to that severe trial, to which all trials caused by the hard words
  that have been spoken against me are nothing.

  “At our age, a recovery can be but a short reprieve. Let us then give
  up ourselves daily to the Lord, as people who have no confidence in
  the flesh, and do not trust to to-morrow. I find my weakness,
  unprofitableness, and wretchedness daily more and more; and the more I
  find them, the more help I have to sink into self-abhorrence. Nor do I
  despair to sink so in it as to die to self and revive in my God.”[376]

Footnote 376:

  Letters, 1791, p. 236.

Fletcher began to hope that he would soon be able to resume his work. To
Charles Wesley he wrote as follows:—

                                     “MADELEY, _September 15, 1776_.

  “MY VERY DEAR BROTHER,—I lately consulted a pious gentleman, near
  Lichfield, famous for his skill in the disorders of the breast. He
  assured me I am in no immediate danger of a consumption of the lungs;
  and that my disorder is upon the nerves, in consequence of too close
  thinking. He permitted me to write and preach in moderation; and gave
  me medicines, which, I think, are of service in taking off my feverish
  heats. My spitting of blood is stopped, and I may yet be spared to
  travel with you as an invalid.

  “If God adds one inch to my span I see my calling. I desire to know
  nothing but Christ, and Him crucified, revealed in the Spirit. I long
  to feel the _utmost power_ of the Spirit’s dispensation, and I will
  endeavour to bear my testimony to the glory of that dispensation both
  with my pen and tongue. Some of our injudicious or inattentive friends
  will probably charge me with _novelty_ for it; but, be that as it
  will, let us meekly stand for the truth as it is in Jesus, and trust
  the Lord for everything. I thank God I feel so dead to popular
  applause that, I trust, I should not be afraid to maintain a truth
  against all the world; and yet I dread to dissent from any child of
  God, and feel ready to condescend to every one. O what depths of
  humble love, and what heights of Gospel truth, do I sometimes see! I
  want to sink into the former and rise into the latter. Help me by your
  example, letters, and prayers.”[377]

Footnote 377:

  _Ibid_, p. 237.

At the same period of time, Fletcher wrote to Joseph Benson, giving him
an account of the state of his health and of his literary projects.

  “MY VERY DEAR BROTHER,—Your kind letter has followed me from Bristol
  to Madeley, where I have been for some weeks. My health is better than
  it was in August, but it is far from being established. Close thinking
  and writing had brought upon me a slow fever, with a cough and
  spitting of blood, which a physician took for symptoms of a
  consumption of the lungs; whereas they were only symptoms of a
  consumption of the nerves and solids. He put me accordingly upon the
  lowest diet, and had me blooded four times, which made much against
  me. I am, however, greatly recovered since I have begun to eat meat
  again. My cough and spitting of blood have left me, but want of sleep
  and a slow fever keep me still very low. If the Lord pleases, He can
  in a moment restore my strength; but He needs not a worm. I thank Him
  for having kept me perfectly resigned to His will, and calm in the
  awful scene which I have passed through.

  “I design to conclude my last controversial piece as I shall be able,
  and hope it will give my friends some satisfaction; because it will
  show the cause of all our doctrinal errors, and will place the
  doctrine of election and reprobation upon its proper basis. I finish
  also my essay on the ‘Dispensation of the Spirit,’[378] which is the
  thing I want most to see your thoughts upon. Pray for light and power,
  truth and love; and impart to me a share of your experiences, to
  quicken my dulness of apprehension and feeling. If God spare me a
  little, it will be to bear my testimony to the doctrine of perfect
  spiritual Christianity. May we be personal witnesses of this glorious
  dispensation, and be so inflamed with love as to kindle all around us.

  “Give my kind love and thanks to all enquiring friends. If I live over
  the winter, I shall, should Providence open the way, visit you all”
  [at Newcastle-on-Tyne], “and assure you that I am in Christ your
  affectionate brother and servant.”[379]

Footnote 378:

  This essay was not published separately, but was probably embodied in
  the “Portrait of St. Paul,” to be noticed anon.

Footnote 379:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

Three weeks after the date of these letters, poor Fletcher’s hope of
recovery was terribly shaken. On October 5, 1776, his disorder
unexpectedly and violently returned, and his friends around him thought
he was about to die. Some one, perhaps his curate, Mr. Greaves,
immediately improvised a beautiful hymn, which was sung, by a distressed
congregation, in Madeley church, on the following day, Friday, October
6. The hymn is too full of affection and piety to be omitted. It was as
follows:—

               “O Thou, before whose gracious throne
               We bow our suppliant spirits down,
               View the sad breast and streaming eye,
               And let our sorrows pierce the sky.

               “Thou know’st the anxious cares we feel,
               And all our trembling lips would tell;
               Thou only canst assuage our grief,
               And yield our woe-fraught hearts relief.

               “Though we have sinned, and justly dread
               The vengeance hovering o’er our head,
               Yet, Power benign! Thy servant spare,
               Nor turn aside Thy people’s prayer.

               “Avert the swift-descending stroke,
               Nor smite the shepherd of the flock;
               Lest o’er the barren waste we stray,
               To prowling wolves an easy prey.

               “Restore him, sinking to the grave;
               Stretch out Thy arm, make haste to save;
               Back to our hopes and wishes give,
               And bid our friend and father live.

               “Bound to each soul with sacred ties,
               In every breast his image lies;
               Thy pitying aid, O God, impart,
               Nor rend him from each bleeding heart.

               “Yet, if our supplications fail,
               And prayers and tears cannot prevail,
               Condemned, on this dark desert coast,
               To mourn our much-loved leader lost,—

               “Be Thou his strength, be Thou his stay,
               Support him through the gloomy way;
               Comfort his soul, surround his bed,
               And guide him through the dreary shade.

               “Around him may Thy angels wait,
               Deck’d with their robes of heavenly state,
               To teach his happy soul to rise,
               And waft him to his native skies.”[380]

Footnote 380:

  _The Local Preacher’s Magazine_, 1852, p. 113.

As soon as possible, Wesley made his way to Madeley, and escorted
Fletcher to London. On November 13, they set out for Norwich, and nine
days afterwards Wesley wrote, “I brought Mr. Fletcher back to London
considerably better than when he set out.” Among other places, they
visited Lowestoft, where Wesley opened the new Preaching-house, and
where Fletcher preached on Wednesday morning, November 20.[381] Whilst
here, he wrote the following to Mr. Benson:—

                                    “LOWESTOFT, _November 21, 1776_.

  “MY DEAR FRIEND,—Mr. Wesley having invited me to travel with him, to
  see if change of air and motion will be a means of restoring me to a
  share of my former health, I have accompanied him through Oxfordshire,
  Northamptonshire, and Norfolk; and I hope I am rather better than
  worse. I find it good to be with this extraordinary servant of God. I
  think his diligence and wisdom are matchless. It is a good school for
  me, only I am too old a scholar to make proficiency. However, let us
  live to God to-day, and trust Him for to-morrow; so that, whether we
  are laid up in a sick bed or a damp grave, or whether we are yet able
  to act, we may be able to say,

                    “‘God is the sea of love,
                      Where all my pleasures roll,
                    The circle where my passions move,
                      And centre of my soul.’”[382]

Footnote 381:

  Wesley’s Journal.

Footnote 382:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

Another characteristic letter must be introduced. Certain good
Methodists at Hull and York having invited him, when able, to visit the
great Methodist county, Fletcher wrote to them as follows:—

  “To Messrs. Hare, Terry, Fox, and Good, at Hull;—and Messrs. Preston,
  Simpson, and Ramsden, at York.

                                       “LONDON, _November 12, 1776_.

  “MY DEAR BRETHREN,—I thank you for your kind letters and invitations
  to visit you, and the brethren about you. I have often found an
  attraction in Yorkshire. My desire was indeed a little selfish; I
  wanted to improve by the conversation of my unknown brethren. If God
  bids me be strong again, I shall be glad to try if He will be pleased
  to comfort us by the mutual faith both of you and me. My desire is,
  that Christ may be glorified both in my life and death. If I have any
  desire to live at any time, it is principally to be a witness, in word
  and deed, of the dispensation of _power from on high_; and to point
  out that kingdom which does not consist in word, but in _power_, even
  in _righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost_, the _Spirit of
  power_. I am writing an Essay upon that important part of the
  Christian doctrine.

  “Should I be spared to visit you, the keep of a horse, and the poor
  rider, will be all the burden I should lay on you; and that will be
  more than my Heavenly Master indulged Himself in. I am just setting
  out for Norwich with Mr. Wesley, whose renewed strength and immense
  labours astonish me. What a pattern for preachers! His redeeming the
  time is, if I mistake not, matchless.

  “Should I never have the pleasure of thanking you in person for your
  brotherly regard, I beg you will endeavour to meet me in the kingdom
  of our Father, where distance of time and place is lost in the fulness
  of Him who is _all in all_. The way ye know,—the penitential way of a
  heart-felt faith working by obedient love.”[383]

Footnote 383:

  _Methodist Magazine_, 1801, p. 43.

Early in the month of December, Fletcher visited Mr. Gorham, at St.
Neots. One of his inducements to undertake this journey was to have an
opportunity of conversing with Berridge, Vicar of Everton, and with
Henry Venn, who, a few years before, had left Huddersfield, and settled
in a small country village, as Rector of Yelling. Mr. Gorham’s son
accompanied Fletcher to Everton. Sixteen years had elapsed since
Fletcher’s former visit there; and, during that interval, Berridge had
published his “Christian World Unmasked;” and Fletcher had severely
handled its Calvinian doctrines in his “Fifth Check to Antinomianism;”
but there was no room for malice in Christian hearts like theirs. The
instant Fletcher entered the parsonage at Everton, Berridge rose up, ran
to meet him, embraced him with folded arms, and cried, “My dear brother,
how could we write against each other, when we both aim at the same
thing—the glory of God, and the good of souls! My book lies quietly on
the shelf,—and there let it lie.” For two hours, the loving polemics had
an unbroken conversation; when Berridge said, “We must not part without
praying.” Down they fell upon their knees. Full of the great truth then
occupying his mind, and which probably had been the chief subject of
conversation with his friend, Fletcher began to pray for an effusion of
the Spirit, and for greater degrees of sanctification and usefulness.
Berridge followed, with a prayer full of love and faith. The two seemed
as if it were impossible to separate; and Fletcher had to be _torn_
away, to keep an appointment, at St. Neots, with the Rector of Yelling.
Venn was charmed with Fletcher, and became so absorbed in the
conversation, that Fletcher had to remind him, playfully, of the meal
before him. A year afterwards, they met again, at Bristol, lodged
together for six weeks in the same house, and Venn, on his return to
Yelling, declared, from his pulpit, that Fletcher was “like an angel on
earth.”

Notwithstanding considerable opposition, Fletcher was permitted to
preach once in St. Neots Church, and took, as his text, “We love Him,
because He first loved us.” Many hung upon the lips of the preacher; but
three or four of his hearers, in great dudgeon, left before his sermon
was ended. “I will not be tedious,” cried Fletcher, as the discontented
were retreating, “but oh that I might persuade you to love Him, who
first loved us!” About thirty of his congregation followed him to his
lodgings, where, at their request, he preached again, most of those that
were present being powerfully affected.

Considering the state of his health, this preaching exercise was hardly
prudent; but Fletcher had less regard for his health than for what he
conceived to be his duty. The season was the depth of winter; but he
maintained his accustomed early rising. One morning, before four
o’clock, Mr. Gorham stole gently into his chamber, and kindled his fire.
The crackling of the wood awoke him; and, instantly, showing the frame
of mind in which he habitually lived, whether awake or asleep, he cried,
“Is it you, my kind host, with your candle and fire? May the Lord light
the candle of faith and the fire of love in our hearts!” When nearly
fifty years had elapsed, Mr. Gorham said, “I have never forgotten this
salutation; and often do I step into the room, and look at the spot
where I received the dear saint’s thanks, and heard his prayer.”[384]

Footnote 384:

  Appendix to Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

At this time, there resided at the suburban village of Stoke Newington a
gentleman who must have a brief notice. His father, James Greenwood, was
one of the earliest members of the Methodist Society, at the Foundery,
London; and he himself was one of the first trustees of Wesley’s chapel,
in City Road. He had a lucrative business, as an upholsterer, in Rood
Lane and Fenchurch Street; and died, at the age of fifty-six, in 1783,
his remains being put into one of the early-dug graves in the burial
ground of City Road Chapel.[385] Wesley’s mention of his death is worth
quoting:—

  “_1783, February 21._—To-day Charles Greenwood went to rest. He had
  been a melancholy man all his days, full of doubts and fears, and
  continually writing bitter things against himself. When he was first
  taken ill, he said he should die, and was miserable through fear of
  death; but, two days before he died, the clouds dispersed, and he was
  unspeakably happy, telling his friends, ‘God has revealed to me things
  which it is impossible for man to utter.’ Just when he died, such
  glory filled the room, that it seemed to be a little heaven; none
  could grieve or shed a tear, but all present appeared to be partakers
  of his joy.”[386]

Footnote 385:

  Stevenson’s “City Road Chapel.”

Footnote 386:

  Wesley’s Journal.

In the necrology of the Methodists, there are but few brighter death-bed
scenes than that of Charles Greenwood, of Stoke Newington.[387]

Footnote 387:

  See an account of it in the _Arminian Magazine_ for 1783.

On his return from St. Neots, on December 16, Fletcher took up his
residence in the house of this worthy man. Wesley disapproved of this,
and wrote:—

  “I verily believe, if Mr. Fletcher had travelled with me, partly in
  the chaise, and partly on horseback, only a few months longer, he
  would quite have recovered his health. But this those about him would
  not permit: so being detained in London by his kind but injudicious
  friends, while I pursued my journeys, his spitting of blood, with all
  the other symptoms, returned, and rapidly increased, till the
  physicians pronounced him to be far advanced in a true, pulmonary
  consumption.”[388]

Footnote 388:

  Wesley’s “Life of Fletcher.”

Fletcher continued to reside with Mr. Greenwood till about the beginning
of the month of May, 1777; but, before proceeding to that year, extracts
must be given from a remarkable letter, which he wrote “to the
parishioners of Madeley.” This was one of his last efforts in the year
1776:—

                                    “NEWINGTON, _December 28, 1776_.

  “MY DEAR PARISHIONERS,—I hoped to have spent the Christmas holidays
  with you, and to have ministered to you in holy things; but the
  weakness of my body confining me here, I humbly submit to the Divine
  dispensation. I ease the trouble of my absence by reflecting on the
  pleasure I have felt, in years past, while singing with you, ‘Unto us
  a child is born, unto us a Son is given.’ This truth is as true now as
  it was then. Let us receive it with all readiness, and it will unite
  us.

  “In order to this, may the eye of your understanding be more and more
  opened to see your need of a Redeemer; and to behold the suitableness,
  freeness, and fulness of the redemption, which was wrought out by the
  Son of God, and which is applied by the Spirit through faith! The wish
  which glows in my soul is so ardent and powerful, that it brings me
  down on my knees, while I write, and, in that supplicating posture, I
  entreat you all to consider and improve the day of your visitation,
  and to prepare, in good earnest, to meet, with joy, your God and your
  unworthy pastor in another world. I beseech you, by all the
  ministerial and providential calls you have had for these seventeen
  years, harden not your hearts. Let the longsuffering of God towards
  us, who survive the hundreds I have buried, lead us all to repentance.
  Dismiss your sins, and embrace Jesus Christ, who wept for you in the
  manger, bled for you in Gethsemane, hung for you on the cross, and now
  pleads for you on His mediatorial throne. By all that is dear to you,
  meet me not on the great day in your sins, enemies to Christ by
  _unbelief_, and to God by _wicked works_.

  “The sum of all I have preached to you is contained in four
  propositions. First, heartily repent of your sins, original and
  actual. Secondly, believe the Gospel of Christ in sincerity and truth.
  Thirdly, in the power which true faith gives, run the way of God’s
  commandments before God and men. Fourthly, by continuing to take up
  your cross, and to receive the pure milk of God’s word, grow in grace,
  and in the knowledge of Jesus Christ.

  “Should God bid me stay on earth a little longer, and should He renew
  my strength to do among you the work of a pastor, I hope I shall prove
  a more humble, zealous, and diligent minister than I have hitherto
  been. Some of you have supposed that I made more ado about eternity
  and your precious souls than they were worth; but how great was your
  mistake. Alas! it is my grief and shame that I have not been, both in
  public and private, a thousand times more earnest and importunate with
  you about your spiritual concerns. Pardon me, my dear friends,—pardon
  me my ignorances and negligences in this respect. And as I most humbly
  ask your forgiveness, so I most heartily forgive any of you, who may,
  at any time, have made no account of my little labours.

  “The more nearly I consider death and the grave, judgment and
  eternity, the more I feel that I have preached to you the truth, and
  that the truth is solid as the rock of ages. Although I hope to see
  much more of the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living than I
  do see, yet, blessed be the Divine mercy! I see enough to keep my mind
  at all times unruffled, and to make me willing calmly to resign my
  soul into the hands of my faithful Creator, my loving Redeemer, and my
  sanctifying Comforter, _this moment_, or _the next_, if He calls for
  it. I desire your public thanks for all the favours He showeth me
  continually, with respect to both my soul and body. Help me to be
  thankful; for it is a _pleasant thing_ to be thankful. Permit me also
  to bespeak an interest in your prayers. Ask that my faith may be
  willing to receive _all_ that God’s grace is willing to bestow. Ask
  that I may _meekly_ suffer, and _zealously_ do all the will of God;
  and that, living or dying, I may say, with the witness of God’s
  Spirit, ‘For me to live is Christ, and to die is gain.’

  “If God calls me from earth, I beg He may appoint a more faithful
  shepherd over you. You need not fear that He will not: you see that,
  for these many months, you have not only had no famine of the word,
  but the richest plenty; and what God has done for months, He can do
  for years; yea, for all the years of your life. Only pray; ‘ask and
  you shall receive.’ Meet me at the throne of grace, and you shall meet
  at the throne of glory your affectionate, obliged, and unworthy
  minister,

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[389]

Footnote 389:

  Letters, 1791, p. 21.




                              CHAPTER XX.
                  _PUBLICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE IN
                                 1777._


IN the year 1777, Fletcher terminated his controversy with the
Calvinists. He wrote:—

  “To the best of my knowledge, I have not fixed one consequence upon
  the principles of my opponents, which does not fairly and necessarily
  flow from their doctrine. And I have endeavoured to do justice to
  their piety, declaring, again and again, my full persuasion that they
  abhor such consequences.”

His publications, in 1777, were the following:—

1. “The Doctrines of Grace and Justice equally essential to the pure
Gospel: Being some Remarks on the mischievous divisions caused among
Christians, by parting those doctrines. Being an Introduction to a Plan
of Reconciliation between the Defenders of the Doctrines of _Partial
Grace_, commonly called _Calvinists_; and the Defenders of the Doctrines
of _Impartial Justice_, commonly called _Arminians_. By John Fletcher,
Vicar of Madeley, Salop. London: Printed by R. Hawes, 1777.” 12mo, 39
pp.

It is needless to furnish an outline of this able pamphlet, inasmuch as
the doctrines it enforces and the doctrines it condemns are
substantially the same as have been repeatedly introduced to the
reader’s notice. There is one statement, however, which Fletcher’s
admirers have generally overlooked, but which proves, beyond
controversy, that Fletcher was, what is now-a-days called, a
Millenarian. After dwelling on what he designates the “four
dispensations,” namely, “Gentilism,” “Judaism,” “the Gospel of John the
Baptist,” and “the perfect Gospel of Christ,” which “is Gentilism,
Judaism, and the Baptism of John, arrived at their full maturity,” he
proceeds to argue that “another Gospel dispensation” is yet to come.
Hence the following:—

  “In the Psalms, Prophets, Acts, Epistles, and especially in the
  Revelation, we have a variety of promises, that, ‘in the day of His’
  displayed ‘power,’ Christ will ‘come in His glory, to judge among the
  heathen, to wound even kings in the day of His wrath, to root up the
  wicked, to fill the places with their dead bodies, to smite in sunder’
  antichrist, and ‘the heads over divers countries,’ and to ‘lift up
  His’ triumphant ‘head’ on this very earth, where He once ‘bowed His’
  wounded ‘head, and gave up the ghost.’ Compare Psalm cx. with Acts i.
  11, 2 Thess. i. 10, Rev. xix., etc. In that great day, another Gospel
  dispensation shall take place. We have it now in prophecy, as the Jews
  had the Gospel of Christ’s first advent; but when Christ shall ‘come
  to destroy the wicked, to be’ actually ‘glorified in His saints, and
  admired in all them that believe,—in that day,’ ministers of the
  Gospel shall no more prophesy, but, speaking a plain historical truth,
  they shall lift up their voices as ‘the voice of many waters and
  mighty thunderings, saying, Allelujah! for the Lord God Omnipotent
  reigneth; the marriage of the Lamb is come; His wife, the church of
  the first-born, has made herself ready; blessed and holy is he that
  hath part in the first resurrection; he reigns with Christ a thousand
  years’ (Rev. xix. 20). ‘Blessed are the meek, for they do inherit the
  earth’ (Matt. x. 5). ‘The times of refreshing are come; and He has
  sent Jesus Christ, who before was preached unto you, whom the heavens
  did receive’ till this solemn season; but now are come ‘the times of
  restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all
  His holy prophets since the world began’ (Acts iii. 19, etc.) May the
  Lord hasten this Gospel dispensation! and, till it take place, may,
  ‘the Spirit and the bride say, Come!’”

It must be granted that this is but remotely related to the Calvinian
controversy; but, in a Life of Fletcher, it is too interesting to be
omitted.

2. Fletcher’s second publication, in 1777, was a composite one, and
embraced, First, “Bible Arminianism and Bible Calvinism: A two-fold
Essay,—Part the First displaying the doctrines of Partial Grace, Part
the Second, those of Impartial Justice.” 12mo., 84 pp. Secondly, “The
Reconciliation; or, an Easy Method to unite the professing People of
God, by placing the Doctrines of Grace and Justice in such a light as to
make candid _Arminians_ Bible-Calvinists; and the candid Calvinists,
Bible-Arminians.” 12mo, 85 pp. Thirdly, to these was appended, “The
_Plan_ of Reconciliation,” the whole making a small 12mo volume of 187
pages. The pamphlets were dedicated to his friend “James Ireland, Esq.,
of Brislington, near Bristol,” as follows:—

  “DEAR SIR,—To whom could a plan of reconciliation between the
  Calvinists and Arminians be more properly dedicated, than to a son of
  peace, whose heart, hand, and house are open to Calvinists, Arminians,
  and neuters? You kindly receive the divines who contend for the
  doctrines of grace; and I want words to describe the Christian
  courtesy which you show me and other ministers who make a stand for
  the doctrines of justice. To you I am indebted for the honour of a
  friendly interview with the author[390] of the ‘Circular Letter,’
  which I thought myself obliged to oppose; and, as you succeeded in
  that labour of love, it is natural for me to hope that by your
  influence, and by the patronage of such candid, generous peacemakers
  as the gentleman” (John Thornton, Esq.) “to whom I have often compared
  you, these reconciling sheets will be perused by some with more
  attention than if they had no name prefixed to them but that of your
  most obliged, affectionate friend and servant,

                                                        J. FLETCHER.

  “NEWINGTON, _April 16, 1777_.”

Footnote 390:

  The Rev. Walter Shirley.

It is a well-known fact that men like Romaine were often the guests of
Mr. Ireland; and that Berridge, Venn, and others of the same way of
thinking were always welcome guests in the mansion of Mr. Thornton.
Both, however, were large-hearted men, and wherever they met with
undoubted piety, whether in a Calvinist or an Arminian brother, they
were thankful and glad.

No record of the “friendly interview” between Fletcher and Walter
Shirley now exists; but, bearing in mind the position which Mr. Shirley
occupied, there cannot be a doubt that the result of their “interview”
would be considerable, and in harmony with the object at which Fletcher
was now strenuously aiming.

The task which Fletcher undertook was arduous, and he knew it. He
writes:—

  “Some persons will urge that truth should never be sacrificed to love
  and peace; that the Calvinists and the Arminians holding doctrines
  diametrically opposite, one party, at least, must be totally in the
  wrong; and, as the other party ought not to be reconciled to error,
  the agreement, I propose, is impossible: it will never take place,
  unless the Calvinists can be prevailed upon to give up unconditional
  election, and their favourite doctrines of partial grace; or the
  Arminians can be persuaded to part with conditional election, and
  their favourite doctrines of impartial justice; and as this is too
  great a sacrifice to be expected from either party, it is in vain to
  attempt bringing about a reconciliation between them.

  “This objection is weighty; but, far from discouraging me, it affords
  me an opportunity of laying before my readers the ground of the hope I
  entertain, to reconcile the Calvinists and the Arminians. I should,
  indeed, utterly despair of effecting it, were I obliged to prove that
  either party is entirely in the wrong; but I expect some success,
  because my grand design is to demonstrate that both parties have an
  important truth on their side.”

Fletcher proceeds to give his own view on the Calvinian side of the
question, as follows:—

  “The partial election and reprobation of free grace is the gracious
  and wise choice which God, as a sovereign and arbitrary Benefactor,
  makes or refuses to make of some persons, churches, cities, and
  nations, to bestow upon them, for His own mercy’s sake, more favours
  than He does upon others. It is the partiality with which He imparts
  His talents of nature, providence, and grace, to His creatures or
  servants; giving five talents to some, two to others, and one to
  others; not only without respect to their works, or acquired
  worthiness of any sort, but frequently in opposition to all personal
  demerit.”

This admirable definition of a sound doctrine is sustained by references
to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, and other Old Testament personages;
also to the cities of Jerusalem, Chorazin, and Bethsaida; to the
countries of Egypt, Judea, Syria, and England, etc.

Then, turning to the Arminian side of the controversy, Fletcher gives
the following equally correct definition:—

  “The impartial election and reprobation of justice is the righteous
  and wise choice which God, as an equitable and unbribed Judge, makes,
  or refuses to make, of some persons, churches, cities, and nations,
  judicially to bestow upon them, for Christ’s sake, gracious rewards,
  according to His evangelical promises; or judicially to inflict upon
  them, for righteousness’ sake, condign punishments, according to His
  reasonable threatenings.”

This definition is also supported by a large number of Scripture
examples, showing Fletcher’s perfect knowledge of the holy books. He
then writes:—

  “Rigid Calvinists and rigid Arminians are both in the wrong; the
  former in obscuring the doctrines of impartial justice, and the latter
  in clouding the doctrines of partial grace. But moderate Calvinists
  and candid Arminians are very near each other, and very near the
  truth; the difference there is between them being more owing to
  confusion, want of proper explanation, and misapprehension of each
  other’s sentiments, than to any real, inimical opposition to the
  truth, or to one another.”

Fletcher next propounds his “Plan of Reconciliation.”

First of all, he adduces the well-known plan of union, which Wesley,
thirteen years before, had ineffectually proposed to the evangelical
clergymen of the Church of England, including Romaine, Shirley, Newton,
Venn, and Berridge; after which he proceeds to observe:—

  “I do not see why such a plan might not be, in some degree, admitted
  by all the ministers of the Gospel, whether they belong to or dissent
  from the Establishment. I would extend my brotherly love to all
  Christians in general, but more particularly to all Protestants, and
  most particularly to all the Protestants of the Established Church;
  but God forbid that I should exclude from my brotherly affection, and
  occasional assistance, any true minister of Christ, because he casts
  the Gospel net among the Presbyterians, the Independents, the Quakers,
  or the Baptists! So far as they cordially aim at the conversion of
  sinners, I will offer them the right hand of fellowship, and
  communicate with them in spirit. Might not good men and sincere
  ministers form themselves into a Society of reconcilers, whatever be
  their denomination and mode of worship? There is a Society for
  promoting religious knowledge among the poor; some of its members are
  Churchmen and others Dissenters; some are Calvinists and others
  Arminians; and yet it flourishes, and the design of it is happily
  answered. Might not such a Society be formed for promoting peace and
  love among professors? Is not charity preferable to knowledge? There
  is another respectable Society for promoting the Christian faith among
  the heathen; and why should there not be a Society for promoting
  unanimity and toleration among Christians? Ought not the welfare of
  our fellow-Christians to lie as near our hearts as that of the
  heathen?

  “Many gentlemen, some laymen and others clergymen, some Churchmen and
  others Dissenters, wanted lately to procure the repeal of our articles
  of religion. Notwithstanding the diversity of their employments,
  principles, and denominations, they united, wrote circular letters,
  drew up petitions, and used all their interest with men in power to
  bring about their design. Again, some warm men thought it proper to
  blow up the fire of discontent in the breasts of our American
  fellow-subjects. How did they go about the dangerous work? With what
  ardour did they speak and write, preach and print, fast and pray,
  publish manifestoes and make them circulate, associate and strengthen
  their associations, and at last venture their fortunes, reputations,
  and lives, in the execution of their warlike project! Go, ye men of
  peace, and do at least half as much to carry on your friendly design.
  Associate, pray, preach, and print for the furtherance of peace.

  “Might not moderate Calvinists send, with success, circular letters to
  their rigid Calvinian brethren; and moderate Arminians to their rigid
  Arminian brethren, to check rashness and recommend meekness,
  moderation, and love? Might not the Calvinist ministers who patronise
  the doctrines of grace display also the doctrines of justice, and open
  their pulpits to those Arminian ministers who do it with caution? And
  might not the Arminian ministers, who patronise the doctrines of
  justice, make more of the doctrines of grace, preach as nearly as they
  can like the judicious Calvinists, admit them into their pulpits, and
  rejoice at every opportunity of showing them their esteem and
  confidence? Might not such moderate Calvinists and Arminians as live
  in the same towns, have from time to time a general sacrament, and
  invite one another to it, to cement brotherly love by publicly
  confessing the same Christ, by jointly taking Him for their common
  head, and by acknowledging one another as fellow-members of His
  mystical body?

  “The sin of the want of union with our pious Calvinian or Arminian
  brethren is attended with peculiar aggravations. We are not only
  fellow-creatures, but fellow-subjects, fellow-Christians,
  fellow-Protestants, and fellow-sufferers, in reputation at least, for
  maintaining the capital doctrines of salvation by faith in Christ, and
  of regeneration by the Spirit of God. How absurd is it for persons,
  who thus share in the reproach, patience, and kingdom of Christ, to
  embitter each other’s comforts, and add to the load of contempt, which
  the men of the world cast upon them! Let Pagans, Mahometans, Jews,
  Papists, and Deists do this work. We may reasonably expect it from
  them. But for such Calvinists and Arminians as the world lumps
  together under the name of Methodists, on account of their peculiar
  profession of godliness,—for such companions in tribulation to ‘bite
  and devour’ each other is highly unreasonable and peculiarly
  scandalous.”

In such a spirit did the Arminian polemic address his Calvinian
opponents. The following is extracted from his concluding remarks:—

  “God is my record how greatly I long after you all in the bowels of
  Jesus Christ, in whom there is neither Greek nor Jew, neither bond nor
  free, neither Calvinist nor Arminian, but Christ is all in all. Grant
  me my humble, perhaps my dying request, reject not my plea for peace.
  If it be not strong, it is earnest; for, considering my bodily
  weakness, I write it at the hazard of my life: _animamque in vulnere
  pono_.

  “But why should I drop a hint about so insignificant a life, when I
  can move you to accept of terms of reconciliation by the life and
  death, by the resurrection and ascension, of our Lord Jesus Christ. I
  recall the frivolous hint; and, by the unknown agonies of Him whom you
  love, by His second coming, and by our gathering together unto Him, I
  beseech you, put on, as the Protestant ‘elect of God, bowels of
  mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering,
  forbearing one another, and forgiving one another; even as Christ
  loved and forgave you, so do ye.’ Instead of absurdly charging one
  another with heresy, embrace one another, and triumph together in
  Christ. Bless God, ye Arminians, for raising such men as the pious
  Calvinists, to make a firm stand against Pharisaic delusions, and to
  maintain, with you, the doctrine of man’s fallen state, and of God’s
  partial grace, which the Pelagians attack with all their might. And,
  ye Calvinists, rejoice that heaven has raised you such allies as the
  godly Arminians, to oppose Manichean delusions, and to contend for the
  doctrines of holiness and justice, which the Antinomians seem sworn to
  destroy. Pharisaism will never yield but to the power of
  Bible-Calvinism and the doctrines of grace. Nor can Antinomianism be
  conquered without the help of Bible-Arminianism and the doctrines of
  justice. When Pharisaism and Antinomianism shall be destroyed, the
  Church will be sanctified, and ready to be presented to Christ a
  glorious Church, ‘not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing.’
  Then shall we sing with truth what we now sing without propriety,—

                  “‘Love, like death, has all destroy’d,
                  Render’d all distinctions void;
                  Names, and sects, and parties fall,
                  Thou, O Christ, art all in all.’”

Nothing more need be said respecting Fletcher’s praiseworthy effort to
put an end to the contentions then so rampant. No doubt, his object, to
some extent, was realized; but, for many a long year afterwards, not a
few of the Calvinists and Arminians bore a striking resemblance to the
ancient Jews and Samaritans. They worshipped the same God, but did not
love each other.

Fletcher spent four months, from December 16, 1776, to April 16, 1777,
in the hospitable home of his Methodist friends, Mr. and Mrs. Charles
Greenwood, at Stoke Newington; and never did he forget their remarkable
kindness to him. Here he wrote a long pastoral letter to his
parishioners on December 28, 1776; and, sixteen days afterwards,
another, from which the following extracts are taken:—

                                     “NEWINGTON, _January 13, 1777_.

  “MY DEAR COMPANIONS IN TRIBULATION,—All the children of God I love;
  but, of all the children of God, none have so great a right to my love
  as you. Your stated or occasional attendance on my poor ministry, as
  well as the bonds of neighbourhood, and the many happy hours I have
  spent with you before the throne of grace, endear you peculiarly to
  me.

  “With tears of grateful joy, I recollect the awful moments when we
  have bound ourselves to stand to our baptismal vow: to renounce all
  sin, to believe all the articles of the Christian faith, and to keep
  God’s commandments to the end of our life. Asking pardon of God for
  not keeping that vow better, I determine, with new courage and
  delight, to love our _Covenant God_,[391] Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,
  with all my mind, heart, and strength; with all the powers of my
  understanding, will, and affections.

  “In my weak state of health, I find much comfort from my relation to
  my _Covenant God_: I mean (1) My clear, explicit knowledge of the
  Father as my Creator and Father; who so loved the world, you and me,
  as to give His only-begotten Son, that we should not perish, but have
  everlasting life. (2) I mean my relation to the adorable Person, who,
  with the strength of His Godhead, and the strength of His pure
  manhood, took away my sin. O how my soul exults in that dear Mediator!
  O the comfort of cleaving to Christ by faith, and of finding Christ is
  our all in all!

  “I sometimes feel a desire of being buried where you are buried, and
  of having my bones lie in a common earthen bed with yours; but I soon
  resign that wish, and exult in thinking that, whatever distance there
  may be between our graves, we can now bury our sins, cares, doubts,
  and fears, in the one grave of our divine Saviour. If I, your poor
  unworthy shepherd, am smitten, be not scattered; but rather be more
  closely gathered unto Christ, and keep near each other in faith and
  love, till you all receive our second Comforter and Advocate, the Holy
  Ghost, the third Person in our _Covenant God_. He is with you; but, if
  you plead the promise of the Father, ‘which,’ says Christ, ‘you have
  heard of me, He will be _in_ you.’ He will fill your souls with His
  light, love, and glory, according to that verse, which we have so
  often sung together,—

                  “‘Refining fire, go through my heart,
                    Illuminate my soul,
                  Scatter thy life through every part,
                    And sanctify the whole.’

  “This indwelling of the Comforter perfects the mystery of
  sanctification in the believer’s soul. This is the highest blessing of
  the Christian covenant on earth. Rejoicing in God our Creator, in God
  our Redeemer, let us look for the full comfort of God our Sanctifier.
  So shall we live and die in the faith, going on from faith to faith,
  from strength to strength, from comfort to comfort, till Christ is all
  in all to us all.

  “I earnestly recommend to you my dear brother Greaves. Show him all
  the love you have shown to me, and, if possible, show him more, who is
  so much more deserving.”[392]

Footnote 391:

  Wesley had held, in London, the usual “Covenant Service,” on
  Wednesday, January 1st. Probably, Fletcher had attended it, and,
  perhaps, taken part in it.

Footnote 392:

  Letters, 1791, p. 30.

The letter from which these extracts are taken was forwarded to the care
of Mr. Wase, who, probably, was a Methodist Local Preacher. Mr. Wase
wished to be employed by the Church of England in America. Fletcher
disapproved of this. Hence the following to Mr. Wase, written on the
same day as the pastoral letter to the parishioners of Madeley. In fact,
the pastoral letter was appended to it.

                                     “NEWINGTON, _January 13, 1777_.

  “MY DEAR BROTHER,—I am two letters in your debt. I would have answered
  them before now, but, venturing to ride out in the frost, the air was
  too sharp for my weak lungs, and opened my wounds, which has thrown me
  back again.

  “I am glad to see, by your last, that you take up your shield again.
  You will never prove a gainer by casting it away. Voluntary humility,
  despondency, or even a defeat, should never make you give up your
  confidence.

  “Take no hasty steps about removing. Your family and estate seem to me
  to tie you where you are, unless you have a very striking call to
  remove. You must not be above being employed in a little way. The
  great Mr. Grimshaw” (of Haworth) “was not above walking some miles to
  preach to seven or eight persons; and what are we when compared to
  him? Our neighbours will want you more when Mr. Greaves and I are
  gone. In the meantime, grow in meek, humble, patient, and resigned
  love; and your temper, person, and labours will be more acceptable to
  all around you. I saw last week a gentleman from America, who said,
  all the church-livings there are in the gift of the Governor; and
  those who get them are brought up at the American Colleges, and come
  over for ordination to the Bishop of London. Supposing the peace were
  made, and missionaries were wanted, you might be employed in America;
  but of the latter I see little prospect; and you need not seek trials
  beyond the seas, seeing yours at home are as much as you can stand
  under.

  “I have many things to say to you about your soul; but you will find
  the substance of them in two of Mr. Wesley’s sermons, the one
  entitled, ‘The Devices of Satan,’ and the other, ‘The Repentance of
  Believers.’ I wish you would read one of them every day, till you have
  reaped all the benefit that can be got from them. Nor eat your morsel
  alone, but let all be benefited by the contents.

  “When you meet with our serious friends at Broseley, Madeley, Madeley
  Wood, the Dale, Dawley-Green, Wheater, Aston, Sheriff-Hales, and the
  two Banks, give my kindest love to them, and read them the following
  scrawl.[393]

  “My kind love to Mrs. Wase, and all your and my friends by name. Thank
  Michael Onions, and I. Owen; I shall answer their letters when I can,
  if God spare me.

                                 “Your affectionate brother,
                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[394]

Footnote 393:

  The Pastoral letter already mentioned. The places here named were,
  probably, Fletcher’s _Methodist_ Circuit, in each of which Methodist
  Societies had been formed.

Footnote 394:

  Letters, 1791, p. 23; and _Wesleyan Methodist Magazine_, 1846, p. 141.

The good “Archbishop of Methodism,” the Rev. Vincent Perronet, Vicar of
Shoreham, Kent, and his noble daughter, invited Fletcher to visit them;
to whom Fletcher replied in the two following letters:—

                                     “NEWINGTON, _January 19, 1777_.

  “DEAR FATHER IN CHRIST,—I beg you to accept my multiplied thanks for
  your repeated favours. You have twice entertained me, a worthless
  stranger; and, not yet tired of the burden, you again kindly invite me
  to share in the comforts of your house and family. Kind Providence
  leaves me no room, at present, to hang a third burden upon you. The
  good air and accommodations here, and the nearness to a variety of
  helps, joined to the kindness of my friends and the weakness of my
  body, forbid me to remove at present. God reward your labour of love
  and fatherly offers! Should the Lord raise me up, I shall be better
  able to reap the benefit of your instructions, a pleasure which I
  promise myself some time, if the Lord pleases.

  “I have of late thought much upon a method of reconciling the
  Calvinists and Arminians. I have seen some Calvinian ministers, who
  seem inclined to a plan of pacification. I wish I had strength enough
  to draw the sketch of it for you. I think the thing is by no means
  impracticable, if we would but look one another in the face, and pull
  together at the feet of Him ‘who makes men to be of one mind in a
  house,’ and who once made all believers to be of one soul in the
  Church. Let us pray, hope, wait, and be ready to promote the blessing
  of reconciliation; in which none could be more glad to second you,
  than, honoured and dear Sir, your affectionate, obliged son in the
  Gospel,

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[395]

Footnote 395:

  Letters, 1791, p. 239.

In another letter, soon to be introduced, it will be seen that, among
the “Calvinian ministers,” whom Fletcher had seen, were the Rev. Walter
Shirley, the Rev. Rowland Hill, and the Rev. Dr. Peckwell.

In his letter to Miss Perronet, Fletcher dwells upon the great truth
which then filled his mind and heart, and which was the chief topic of
his conversation with his friends,—the mission of the Spirit, and His
sanctifying work. It was written on the same day as the letter to her
father:—

                                     “NEWINGTON, _January 19, 1777_.

  “DEAR MADAM,—I thank you for your care and kind nursing of me when at
  Shoreham; and, especially, for the few lines with which you have
  favoured me. They are so much the more agreeable to me, as they treat
  of the one thing needful for the recovery of our souls,—‘the spirit of
  power, of love, and of a sound mind;’ together with our need of it,
  and the grand promise that this need shall be abundantly
  supplied,—supplied by an outpouring of that ‘Spirit of life in Christ
  Jesus, which makes us free from the law of sin and death.’ May we
  hunger and thirst after righteousness in the Holy Ghost, and we shall
  be filled! May we so come to our first Paraclete, Advocate, and
  Comforter, as to receive the Second, as an _indwelling and overflowing
  fountain_ of light, life, and love!

  “I trust my view of this mystery is scriptural. The Father so loved
  the world as to give us the first Advocate, Paraclete, and Comforter,
  whom we love and receive as our Redeemer. The first Advocate has told
  us, it was expedient that He should leave us, because, in that case,
  He would send another Advocate, Paraclete, or Comforter, to _abide
  with us_, and be _in us_ for ever, as our _Sanctifier_, our Urim and
  Thummim, _our lights and perfections_, our oracle and guide. This is
  the grand promise to Christians,—called _the promise of the Father_,
  and brought by the Son. O may it be sealed on our hearts by _the
  Spirit of promise_! May we ever cry—

                 “‘Seal thou our breasts, and let us wear
                 That pledge of love for ever there!’

  “Then shall we be filled with pure, perfect love; for the love of the
  Spirit perfects that of the Father and Son, and accomplishes the
  mystery of God in the believing soul.

  “Come then, let us look for it; this great salvation draws nigh. Let
  us thank God more thankfully, more joyfully, more humbly, more
  penitently, for Christ our first Comforter; and, hanging on His word,
  let us ardently pray for the _fulness_ of His Spirit,—for the
  indwelling of our second Comforter, who will lead us into all truth,
  all love, all power. Let us join the few who _besiege_ the throne of
  grace, and not cease putting the Lord in remembrance, till He has
  again raised Himself a _Pentecostal Church_ in the earth,—I mean a
  church of such believers as are all of one heart and one soul.”[396]

Footnote 396:

  Letters, 1791, p. 240.

Fletcher’s friends were most ardently attached to him; and no wonder
that they were. The man seemed to be an incarnation of humble, loving
piety. All, in his serious illness, were eager to help him. Ten days
after the date of his letters to Mr. and Miss Perronet, he wrote, as
follows, to Mr. Ireland:—

                                     “NEWINGTON, _January 29, 1777_.

  “Thanks be to God, and to my dear friend, for favours upon favours,
  for undeserved love and the most endearing tokens of it!

  “I have received your obliging letters, full of kind offers; and your
  jar, full of excellent grapes. May God open to you the book of life,
  and seal upon your heart all the offers and promises it contains! May
  the treasures of Christ’s love, and all the fruits of the Spirit, be
  open to my dear friend, and unwearied benefactor!

  “Last Sunday, Providence sent me Dr. Turner, who, under God, saved my
  life, twenty-three years ago, in a dangerous illness; and I am
  inclined to try what _his_ method will do. He orders me asses’ milk,
  chicken, etc.; forbids me riding, and recommends the greatest
  quietness. He prohibits the use of Bristol water; advises some water
  of a purgative nature; and tries to promote expectoration by a method
  that so far answers, though I spit by it more blood than before.

  “With respect to my soul, I find it good to be in the balance,—awfully
  weighed every day for life or death. I thank God, the latter has lost
  its sting, and endears to me the Prince of Life. But O! I want Christ,
  my resurrection, to be a thousand times more dear to me; and I doubt
  not He will be so, when I am _filled_ with the Spirit of wisdom and
  revelation in the knowledge of Him. Let us wait for that glory,
  praising God for all we have received, and trusting Him for all we
  have not yet received. Let our faith do justice to His veracity; our
  hope to His goodness; and our love to all His perfections. It is good
  to trust in the Lord; and His saints like well to hope in Him.

  “I am provided here with every necessary and convenient blessing for
  my state. The great have done me the honour of calling,—Mr. Shirley,
  Mr. Rowland Hill, Mr. Peckwell, etc.[397] I exhort them to promote
  peace in the Church, which they take kindly. Lady Huntingdon also has
  written me a kind letter. This world to me is now become a _world of
  love_.”[398]

Footnote 397:

  Berridge, of Everton, also came to Fletcher at Stoke Newington.

  “They met and parted in the spirit of Christian love; and I believe
  saw each other no more in the body.” (The Works of the Rev. John
  Berridge, A.M.; with a Memoir of his Life, by Rev. R. Whittingham, p.
  63.)

  Another, who visited him, was Dr. Price, who, afterwards, said, “I was
  introduced to the company of a man, whose air and countenance bespoke
  him fitted rather for the society of angels, than for the conversation
  of men.” (Cox’s “Life of Fletcher,” p. 114.)

Footnote 398:

  Letters, 1791, p. 242.

Madeley was the centre of a kind of Methodist circuit, which, however,
had no Methodist meeting-house. Services were held in cottages; chapels
did not exist. In the midst of his affliction, Fletcher and his friends
projected the building of one in Madeley Wood.[399] As will be seen in
subsequent letters, the execution of the scheme brought upon him
considerable anxiety. Robert Palmer was the builder, and the entire cost
was £296 17_s._ 5_d._, including £1 4_s._ 2_d._ “paid for drink for the
men with the teams,” and £3 12_s._ paid for “sixteen stones of malt, for
drink for the workmen.”[400] The following letter, addressed to Mr.
Wase, refers to this humble edifice:—

                                    “NEWINGTON, _February 18, 1777_.

  “MY DEAR BROTHER,—My dear friend Ireland brought me, last week, Sir
  John Elliott, who is esteemed the greatest physician in London, in
  consumptive cases. He gave hopes of my recovery, upon using proper
  diet and means. I was bled yesterday for the third time. I calmly
  leave all to God, and use the means without trusting in them. Death
  has lost its sting. I know not what hurry of spirit is, or unbelieving
  fears, under my most terrifying symptoms. Glory be to God, for this
  unspeakable mercy! Help me to praise Him for it.

  “With respect to our intended room, I beg Mr. Palmer, Mr. Lloyd, and
  yourself to consult about it, and that Mr. Palmer would contract for
  the whole. I shall contribute £100, including £10 I have had for it
  from Mr. Ireland, and £10 from Mr. Thornton.”[401]

Footnote 399:

  The chapel was enlarged a short time before Fletcher’s death in 1785.
  On the morning of the day when his friends began to hew the stones for
  the enlargement, he went to the quarry, and said, “First of all, let
  us pray.” The workers knelt upon the rock; Fletcher prayed in a way
  that few besides himself could pray; and then, till duty called him
  elsewhere, assisted in shaping the stones for the extension of the
  building. (Crowther’s “Portraiture of Methodism,” p. 96.)

Footnote 400:

  MS. in Fletcher’s own handwriting.

Footnote 401:

  Letters, 1791, p. 24.

In other ways, Fletcher evinced his profound interest in the welfare of
his Madeley friends. Mr. Greaves occupied his pulpit, and preached, with
great acceptance, to his parishioners; but Mr. Greaves was not a priest,
and, therefore, was not qualified to administer the holy sacraments. To
meet the case, Fletcher wrote as follows to the Bishop of Hereford:—

                                 “STOKE NEWINGTON, _March 22, 1777_.

  “My LORD,—It is near a year since I was taken ill with a cough,
  spitting of blood, and hectic fever. This complication of disorders
  obliged me to go to Bristol last summer, for the benefit of the
  waters; and it now detains me here, where I stay on account of the
  greater mildness of the climate, and the help I can have from the
  London physicians, who, as well as those of Bristol, absolutely forbid
  me doing duty.

  “It is with great difficulty that I have got my church properly
  served. My chief assistant has been Mr. Greaves, a young clergyman of
  the next diocese, who is only in deacon’s orders, and who, considering
  my weak state of health, has kindly left his curacy to oblige and help
  me. I give him a title, and do humbly recommend him to your lordship,
  begging you would admit him to the holy order of priest; without which
  he cannot properly supply my church, my parishioners having always
  been used to a monthly sacrament, and dying people, in so populous a
  part of the diocese, frequently wanting to have the ordinance
  administered to them.

  “I am sorry to be obliged to trouble your lordship on this occasion;
  but hope, my lord, you will not deny me a favour which few clergymen
  in your lordship’s diocese can want as much as your lordship’s dutiful
  son and obedient servant,

                                               “JOHN FLETCHER.”[402]

Footnote 402:

  Unpublished MS.

With this letter, Fletcher sent the following certificate:—

   “To the Right Reverend Father in God, James Lord Bishop of Hereford.

  “These are to certify to your lordship that I, John Fletcher, Vicar of
  Madeley, in the county of Salop and your lordship’s diocese of
  Hereford, do hereby nominate and appoint Alexander Benjamin Greaves,
  late Curate of Glossop, in Derbyshire, to perform the office of a
  Curate in my church of Madeley aforesaid; and do promise to allow him
  the yearly sum of £42 for his maintenance in the same; and to continue
  him to officiate in my said church until he shall be otherwise
  provided of some ecclesiastical preferment, unless, by fault by him
  committed, he shall be lawfully removed from the same. And I hereby
  solemnly declare that I do not fraudulently give this certificate to
  entitle the said Alexander Benjamin Greaves to receive Holy Orders,
  but with a real intention to employ him in my said church, according
  to what is before expressed.

  “Witness my hand this twenty-second day of March, in the year of our
  Lord 1777,

                                               “JOHN FLETCHER.”[403]

Footnote 403:

  _Ibid._

The Perronet family at Shoreham dearly loved poor Fletcher. He had been
their guest, and they had seen his spirit. Damaris Perronet was
occasionally one of his correspondents; and William Perronet was now his
loving medical attendant. The saintly Charles Perronet had died in the
month of August, 1776, but was most tenderly remembered by all who knew
him. To Miss Perronet, Fletcher now wrote as follows:—

                                       “NEWINGTON, _April 21, 1777_.

  “MY DEAR FRIEND,—A thousand thanks to you for your kind, comfortable
  lines. The prospect of going to see Jesus and His glorified members,
  and among them your dear departed brother, my now _everliving friend_,
  is enough to make me quietly and joyfully submit to leave all my
  Shoreham friends, and all the excellent ones of the earth. But why do
  I talk of leaving any of Christ’s members by going to be more
  intimately united to the Head?

                  “‘We all are one who Him receive,
                    And each with each agree;
                  In Him the _One_, the _truth_ we live,
                    Blest _point_ of unity!’

  “A point this which fills heaven and earth, which runs through time
  and eternity. In it sickness is lost in health, and death in life.
  There let us ever meet.

  “I cannot tell you how much I am obliged to your dear brother for all
  his kind brotherly attendance as a physician. He has given me his
  time, his long walks, his remedies. He has brought me Dr. Turner
  several times, and will not allow me to reimburse his expenses. Help
  me to thank him for all his profusion of love, for I cannot
  sufficiently do it myself.

  “My duty to your father; I throw myself in spirit at his feet and ask
  his blessing, and an interest in his prayers. Tell him that the Lord
  is gracious to me; does not suffer the enemy to disturb my peace; and
  gives me, in prospect, the victory over death. _Absolute resignation_
  to the Divine will baffles a thousand temptations, and _confidence_ in
  our Saviour carries us sweetly through a thousand trials.”[404]

Footnote 404:

  Letters, 1791, p. 246.

The time of Fletcher’s happy sojourn with Mr. and Mrs. Greenwood at
Stoke Newington was now ended. One of the family wrote:—

  “When he first came, he was, by Dr. Fothergill’s advice, under the
  strictest observance of two things—rest and silence. These, together
  with a milk diet, were supposed to be the only probable means of his
  recovery. In consequence of these directions, he spoke exceeding
  little. If ever he spoke more than usual, it did not fail to increase
  his spitting of blood, of which indeed he was seldom quite clear,
  although it was not violent. Therefore, a great part of his time was
  spent in being read to; but it was not possible to restrain him
  altogether from speaking. His natural vivacity, with his intense love
  of Jesus, impelled him to speak; but on being reminded of his rule,
  with a cheerful smile he was all submission, consenting by signs only
  to stir up those about him to pray and praise. Those who had the
  privilege of observing his spirit and conduct, will not scruple to say
  that he was a living comment on his own account of Christian
  perfection. When he was able to converse, his favourite subject was,
  _the promise of the Father, the gift of the Holy Ghost_, including the
  rich peculiar blessing of union with the Father and the Son, mentioned
  in the prayer of our Lord, recorded in John xvii. ‘We must not be
  content,’ said he, ‘to be only cleansed from sin; we must be filled
  with the Spirit.’ One asking him, What was to be experienced in the
  full accomplishment of _the promise_ of the Father? ‘O,’ said he,
  ‘what shall I say? All the sweetness of the drawings of the Father,
  all the love of the Son, all the rich effusions of peace and joy in
  the Holy Ghost, more than ever can be expressed are comprehended here!
  To attain it, the Spirit maketh intercession in the soul, like a God
  wrestling with a God.’

  “In some of these favoured moments of converse, he mentioned several
  circumstances, which, as none knew them but himself, would otherwise
  have been buried in oblivion. ‘In the beginning,’ said he, ‘of my
  spiritual course, I heard the voice of God in an articulate, but
  inexpressibly awful sound, go through my soul in those words, _If any
  man will be My disciple, let him deny himself._ At a later date, I was
  favoured, like Moses, with a supernatural discovery of the glory of
  God, in an ineffable converse with Him, face to face; so that whether
  I was then in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell.’

  “On another occasion he said, ‘About the time of my entering into the
  ministry, I one evening wandered into a wood, musing on the importance
  of the office I was going to undertake. I then began to pour out my
  soul in prayer; when such a sense of the justice of God fell upon me,
  and such a sense of His displeasure at sin, as absorbed all my powers,
  and filled me with the agony of prayer for poor lost sinners. I
  continued therein till the dawn of day; and I considered this as
  designed of God, to impress upon me more deeply the meaning of those
  solemn words, _Therefore, knowing the terrors of the Lord, we persuade
  men._’

  “One end of his retiring to Newington was that he might hide himself
  from company; but this design was in nowise answered, for company came
  from every side. He was continually visited by high and low, and by
  persons of various denominations; one of whom being asked, when he
  went away, what he thought of Mr. Fletcher, said, ‘I went to see a man
  who had one foot in the grave; but I found a man who had one foot in
  heaven.’ Among them who now visited him were several of his beloved
  and honoured opponents, to whom he confirmed his love by the most
  respectful and affectionate behaviour; but he did not give up any part
  of the truth for which he had publicly contended; although some, from
  whom one would have expected better things, did not scruple to affirm
  the contrary.

  “It was not without some difficulty that Mr. Ireland prevailed upon
  him to sit for his picture. While the limner was drawing the outlines
  of it he was exhorting both him and all that were in the room not only
  to get the outlines drawn, but the colourings also of the image of
  Jesus on their hearts. He had a very remarkable facility in making
  allusions of this kind. To give an instance. Being ordered to be let
  blood, while his blood was running into the cup he took occasion to
  expatiate on the precious blood-shedding of the Lamb of God. And even
  when he did not speak at all, the seraphic spirit which beamed from
  his languid face, during those months of pain and weakness, was—

               “‘A lecture silent, yet of sovereign use.’”

To this interesting account, probably written by Mr. Greenwood himself,
Wesley adds:—

  “It is necessary to be observed that this facility of raising useful
  observations from the most trifling incidents, was one of those
  peculiarities in Mr. Fletcher which cannot be proposed to our
  imitation. In him, it partly resulted from nature, and was partly a
  supernatural gift. But what was becoming and graceful in Mr. Fletcher,
  would be disgustful almost in any other.”[405]

Footnote 405:

  Wesley’s “Life of Fletcher.”

In the month of May, 1777, Fletcher left the hospitable home of Mr.
Greenwood, at Stoke Newington, and went to his kind friend Mr. Ireland,
at Brislington, near Bristol. In a letter dated “May 28, 1777,” and
addressed to his “very dear friends and benefactors Charles and Mary
Greenwood,” he wrote:—

  “I thought myself a little better last Sunday, but I have since spit
  more blood than I had done for weeks before. Glory be to God for every
  providence! His will be done in me by health or sickness, by life or
  death! All from Him is, and I trust will always be, welcome to your
  obliged pensioner,

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[406]

Footnote 406:

  Letters, 1791, p. 248.

To Michael Onions, one of the poor Methodists at Coalbrookdale, Fletcher
wrote:—

                                              “BATH, _July 8, 1777_.

  “MY DEAR BROTHER,—I heartily thank you for your kind letter; and, by
  you, I desire to give my best thanks to the dear companions in
  tribulation whom you meet, and who so kindly remember me. If I should
  be spared to minister to you again, my desire is to do it with more
  humility, zeal, diligence, and love. I hope to see you before the
  summer is ended, if it please God to give me strength for the journey.
  I am, in some respects, better than when I came here, and was enabled
  to bury a corpse last Sunday to oblige the minister of the parish;
  but, whether occasioned by that little exertion or something else, bad
  symptoms have returned since. Be that as it may, all is well; for He,
  who does all things well, rules and over-rules all.

  “I have stood the heats we have had these two days better than I
  expected. I desire you will help me to bless the Author of all good
  for this and every other blessing of this life; but above all for the
  lively hope of the next, and for Christ, our common hope, peace, joy,
  wisdom, righteousness, salvation, and all. Don’t let me want the
  reviving cordial of hearing that you stand together firm in the faith.
  Look much at Jesus. Be much in private prayer. Forsake not the
  assembling of yourselves together in little companies, as well as in
  public. Walk in the sight of death and eternity, and ever pray for
  your affectionate, but unworthy minister,

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[407]

  “P.S.—Let none of your little companies want. If any do, you are
  welcome to my house. Take any part of the furniture there, and make
  use of it for their relief. And this shall be your full title for so
  doing,

                              “Witness my hand, JOHN FLETCHER.”[408]

Footnote 407:

  Letters, 1791, p. 26.

Footnote 408:

  Wesley’s “Life of Fletcher.”

At this time, the Rev. Henry Venn was preaching in the chapel of the
Countess of Huntingdon at Bath; and Fletcher attended his ministry. Her
ladyship wrote:—

  “Dear Mr. Venn has been preaching most successfully at Bath to
  overflowing congregations. Captain Scott and Mr. Fletcher have been
  there, and heard him preach in the chapel. The latter is far gone in a
  consumptive disorder, but is alive to God, and ripening fast for
  glory. We have exchanged several letters lately. As a last resource,
  he is to accompany Mr. Ireland to the south of France.”[409]

Footnote 409:

  “Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon,” vol. ii., p. 71.

When Mr. Venn had completed his services at Bath, he removed to the
house of Mr. Ireland, at Brislington, where Fletcher was an honoured
guest. Speaking of this visit, after Fletcher’s death, to a brother
clergyman, Venn remarked:—

  “Sir, Mr. Fletcher was a luminary—a _luminary_ did I say? He was a
  _sun_! I have known all the great men for these fifty years, but I
  have known none like him. I was intimately acquainted with him, and
  was under the same roof with him once for six weeks; during which time
  I never heard him say a single word which was not proper to be spoken,
  and which had not a tendency to minister grace to the hearers. One
  time, meeting him when he was very ill, I said, ‘I am sorry to find
  you so ill.’ Mr. Fletcher answered, with the greatest sweetness,
  ‘Sorry, Sir, why are you sorry? It is the chastisement of our heavenly
  Father, and I rejoice in it. I love the rod of my God, and rejoice
  therein as an expression of His love towards me.’ Never,” continued
  Mr. Venn, “did I hear Mr. Fletcher speak ill of any one. He would pray
  for those who walked disorderly, but he would not publish their
  faults.”[410]

Footnote 410:

  “Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon,” vol. ii., p. 72.

In a letter to the Rev. J. Stillingfleet, Mr. Venn remarked:—

  “I have been six weeks with the extraordinary and very excellent Mr.
  Fletcher. Oh that I might be like him! I strictly observed him, but, I
  assure you, I never heard him speak anything but what was becoming a
  pastor of Christ’s Church;—not a single unbecoming word of himself, or
  of his antagonists, or of his friends. All his conversation tended to
  excite to greater love and thankfulness, for the benefits of
  redemption; whilst his whole deportment breathed humility and love. We
  had many conversations. I told him, most freely, that I was shocked at
  many things in his ‘Checks;’ and pointed them out to him. We widely
  differ about the efficacy of Christ’s death, the nature of
  justification, and the perfection of the saints; but I believe we
  could live years together, as we did, in great love. He heard me
  twice; and I was chaplain both morning and evening in the family, as
  his lungs would not suffer him to speak long or loud. He desired his
  love, by me, to all his Calvinistic brethren; and begged their pardon
  for the asperity with which he had written. I am persuaded, as I told
  him, that, if he were to live with some of those whom he has been
  taught to conceive of as Antinomians, and hear them preach, he would
  be much more reconciled to them.”[411]

Footnote 411:

  “Life of Rev. Henry Venn, M.A.,” p. 240.

Mr. Venn’s last remarks were quite unneeded, for Fletcher always readily
allowed that the hearts and lives of his opponents were far better than
their creed.

At the close of the month of July, Wesley came to Bristol, to hold his
annual conference with his preachers, and wrote:—

  “Wednesday, July 30. I spent an hour or two with Mr. Fletcher,
  restored to life in answer to many prayers. How many providential ends
  have been answered by his illness! And perhaps still greater will be
  answered by his recovery.”[412]

Footnote 412:

  Wesley’s Journal.

The “providential ends” meant by Wesley were, probably, the steps taken
by Fletcher to bring to an end the Calvinian controversy, which had so
greatly disturbed the Methodist movement during the last six years.

Wesley’s conference began on Tuesday, August 5, and ended on Friday,
August 8.[413] It was short, but important. Its most interesting event,
however, was the attendance of Fletcher. Thomas Taylor remarked, in his
unpublished diary,—

  “On August 7, that great and good man Mr. Fletcher came into the
  conference. My eyes flowed with tears at the sight of him. He spoke to
  us in a very respectful manner, and took a solemn farewell. Dear, good
  man! I never saw so many tears shed in my life.”

Footnote 413:

  Wesley’s Journal.

Fletcher’s valued friend, Joseph Benson, wrote:—

  “August 8. We have had an edifying conference. Mr. Fletcher’s visit
  to-day and yesterday has been attended with a blessing. His
  appearance, his exhortations, and his prayers, broke most of our
  hearts, and filled us with shame and self-abasement, for our little
  improvement.”[414]

Footnote 414:

  Macdonald’s “Life of Benson,” p. 62.

In his “Life of Fletcher,” Benson says:—

  “Mr. Fletcher happened to be passing by the door of the stable,
  belonging to our chapel in Broadmead, when I was lighting from my
  horse, ‘on my arrival in Bristol.’ I shall never forget with what a
  heavenly air, and sweet countenance, he instantly came to me in the
  stable, and, in a most solemn manner, put his hands upon my head, as
  if he had been ordaining me for the sacred office of the ministry, and
  prayed most fervently for and blessed me in the name of the Lord.”

By far the best account, however, of Fletcher in connection with the
Bristol Conference, was written, not by one of Wesley’s sturdy
Itinerants, but by a young Welshman, who was present, for the purpose of
offering himself for the Itinerant work. On account of his delicate
health and feeble voice, the offer of David Lloyd was not accepted; but,
some years afterwards, he was ordained by Bishop Horsley, who gave him
the living of Llanbister, which, even now, is not worth more than £150 a
year. The parsonage was a plain stone building, the door of which opened
into the main room of the house,—its floor consisting of stone slabs,
its fireplace wide, with benches in the corners, and the fire on the
hearth made principally of turf. On the same floor was another
apartment, which served as kitchen, and above were two humble bed-rooms.
“Such,” wrote the late Rev. James Dixon, D.D., who, at the commencement
of his ministry, was often the delighted guest of Mr. Lloyd,—“Such was
the residence of a philosopher, a poet, and a divine, who seemed to
enjoy, with unmixed contentment, the inheritance given him by
Providence.” Mr. Lloyd’s wife was a good old Methodist; their house was
the home of Methodist itinerant preachers; out of his small income, Mr.
Lloyd subscribed £10 a year to the Methodist and Church Missionary
Societies; presented to each a donation of £500; by his will, directed
that the residue of his property should be equally divided between these
two Societies; and built a Methodist chapel in his parish, secured it to
the Connexion by deed, and gave to it an endowment, “that Methodist
preaching,” as he said, “might continue in the parish as long as water
should run.”[415]

Footnote 415:

  _Wesleyan Methodist Magazine._ Sixpenny Edition, 1863, pp. 1–8.

This remarkable man, for whom Dr. Dixon had the highest admiration,
wrote as follows to the Rev. Dr. Adam Clarke:—

                 “LLANBISTER, NEAR KNIGHTON, RADNORSHIRE,

                                                “_November 7, 1821_.

  “REV. AND DEAR SIR,—At the conference of the Methodist preachers, held
  at Bristol in the year 1777, an interview took place between the Rev.
  Mr. Wesley and the Rev. John Fletcher, of Madeley. I was both an eye-
  and ear-witness to the facts I here relate. The Rev. Mr. Fletcher had
  for a long time laboured under the effects of a deep-rooted
  consumption, which was then adjudged to be rapidly advancing to its
  final crisis. He was advised by the faculty to make the tour of the
  Continent, and to breathe his native air. He resided, at that time,
  with Mr. Ireland, a gentleman of known celebrity for the exercise of
  catholic love towards all such as possessed the essential attributes
  of great and good men. On the forenoon of a day, when the sitting of
  the Conference was drawing to a close, tidings announced the approach
  of Mr. Fletcher. As he entered the vestibule of the New Room,
  supported by Mr. Ireland, I can never forget the visible impulse of
  esteem which his venerable presence excited in the house. The whole
  assembly stood up, as if moved by an electric shock. Mr. Wesley rose,
  _ex cathedrâ_, and advanced a few paces to receive his highly
  respected friend and reverend brother, whose visage seemed strongly to
  bode that he stood on the verge of the grave; while his eyes,
  sparkling with seraphic love, indicated that he dwelt in the suburbs
  of heaven. In this his languid but happy state, he addressed the
  Conference, on their work and his own views, in a strain of holy and
  pathetic eloquence, which no language of mine can adequately express.
  The influence of his spirit and pathos seemed to bear down all before
  it. I never saw such an instantaneous effect produced in a religious
  assembly, either before or since. He had scarcely pronounced a dozen
  sentences before a hundred preachers, to speak in round numbers, were
  immersed in tears. Time can never efface from my mind the recollection
  and image of what I then felt and saw. Such a scene I never expect to
  witness again on this side eternity. Mr. Wesley, in order to relieve
  his languid friend from the fatigue and injury which might arise from
  a too long and arduous exertion of the lungs through much speaking,
  abruptly kneeled down at his side, the whole congress of preachers
  doing the same, while, in a concise and energetic manner, he prayed
  for Mr. Fletcher’s restoration to health and a longer exercise of his
  ministerial labours. Mr. Wesley closed his prayer with the following
  prophetic promise, pronounced in his peculiar manner, and with a
  confidence and emphasis which seemed to thrill through every heart,
  ‘HE SHALL NOT DIE, BUT LIVE, AND DECLARE THE WORKS OF THE LORD.’ The
  event verified the prediction. Mr. Fletcher lived for eight succeeding
  years, exerting all the zeal of a primitive missionary, and enjoying
  all the esteem of a holy patriarch.

  “I am, dear Sir, with high regard and esteem, your sincere friend and
  humble servant,

                                                 “DAVID LLOYD.”[416]

Footnote 416:

   “Life of Adam Clarke, LL.D.,” by Rev. Samuel Dunn, p. 127.

Remembering the position which Fletcher had occupied, during the last
six years, as the valiant and greatly abused expounder and defender of
Wesley’s Anti-Calvinian doctrines, and also bearing in mind the
heavenly-mindedness in which Fletcher was now living, and, apparently,
dying, there is no room to wonder at Mr. Lloyd’s account, or to doubt of
its being strictly accurate. Who can adequately conceive the influence
of Fletcher’s visit on the piety and usefulness of Wesley’s conclave of
Itinerant Preachers? This is one of the secrets to be revealed
hereafter.

Another incident, belonging to this period, must be introduced. James
Rogers was now a young Itinerant of five years’ standing, but already
possessed the confidence and esteem of Wesley, and afterwards had the
honour of seeing Wesley die. No doubt, all of Wesley’s Preachers, at
this time assembled in Bristol, would have been delighted to be
introduced to poor Fletcher at Brislington; but, on account of his state
of health, this was a privilege not many were permitted to enjoy. James
Rogers was one of the favoured few, and he shall be allowed, in his own
artless way, to tell the story of his interview, and of an open-air
sacramental service. During the previous year, he had been stationed in
Edinburgh; now he was appointed to Cornwall. He writes:—

  “In the year 1777, I was appointed to labour in the east of Cornwall.
  A journey of between four and five hundred miles was no small fatigue,
  in my then weak state of body; but the Lord was with me. I took my
  appointment as from God, and set out in His name, and found sweet
  communion with Him in the way.

  “I had long desired to see that most eminently pious man of God, Mr.
  Fletcher; and now an opportunity offered. Stopping at Bristol a few
  days, to rest myself and horse, I heard of his being at Mr. Ireland’s,
  about three miles off, and, with two of my brethren, took a ride to
  see him. When we came there, he was returning from a ride, which he
  was advised by his physician to take every day. Dismounting from his
  horse, he came to us with arms spread open, and eyes lifted up to
  heaven. His apostolic appearance, with the whole of his deportment,
  greatly affected me. The first words he spoke, while yet standing in
  the stable by his horse, were a part of the sixteenth chapter of St.
  John’s Gospel. He pointed out from thence the descent of the Holy
  Ghost, as the great promise of the Father, and the privilege of all
  New Testament believers, in a manner I had never heard before. My soul
  was dissolved into tenderness, and became as melting wax before the
  fire.

  “As an invidious report had been spread, that he had renounced what he
  had lately written against Calvinism, I took the liberty to mention
  the report, and asked him what he thought had given rise to it? He
  replied, he could not tell, except that he had refrained from speaking
  on controverted points since he came to Mr. Ireland’s: partly, by
  reason of the poor state of his health; and partly, because he did not
  wish to grieve his kind friend, by making his house a field of
  controversy; but he assured us, he had not seen cause to repent of
  what he had written in defence of the Rev. Mr. Wesley’s ‘Minutes.’
  And, though he believed his close application to study had been the
  means of reducing his body to the state in which we then saw it, yet,
  he said, if he fell a victim, it was in a good cause.

  “After a little conversation upon his darling topic, the _universal
  love of God in Christ Jesus_, we were about to take our leave, when
  Mr. Ireland sent his footman into the yard with a bottle of red wine,
  and some slices of bread upon a waiter. We all uncovered our heads,
  while Mr. Fletcher craved a blessing upon the same; which he had no
  sooner done, than he handed first the bread to each, and, lifting up
  his eyes to heaven, pronounced these words, ‘The body of our Lord
  Jesus Christ, which was given for thee, preserve thy body and soul
  unto everlasting life.’ Afterwards, handing the wine, he repeated in
  like manner, ‘The blood of our Lord Jesus Christ,’ etc. Such a
  sacrament I never had before. A sense of the Divine presence rested
  upon us all; and we were melted into floods of tears. His worthy
  friend, Mr. Ireland, grieved to see him exhaust his little strength by
  so much speaking, took him by the arm, and almost forced him into the
  house; while he kept looking wistfully, and speaking to us, as long as
  we could see him. We then mounted our horses, and rode away. That hour
  more than repaid me for my whole journey from Edinburgh to
  Cornwall.”[417]

Footnote 417:

  “Experience and Labours of James Rogers,” written by himself, 1796, p.
  22.

The scene so simply described is worthy of being painted by an artistic
Methodist.

About the same time, Fletcher wrote as follows to the venerable Vicar of
Shoreham, the Rev. Vincent Perronet.

  “1777, September 6. My very dear father,—I humbly thank you for the
  honour and consolation of your two kind letters. Your vouchsafing to
  remember a poor, unprofitable worm, is to me a sure token that my
  heavenly Father remembers me. He is God, and therefore I am not
  consumed. He is a _merciful, all-gracious God_, and therefore I am
  blessed with sympathizing friends and gracious helpers on all sides. O
  Sir! if in this disordered, imperfect state of the Church, I meet with
  so much kindness, what shall I not meet with, when the millennium you
  pray for shall begin? O that the happy thought, the glorious hope may
  animate me to perfect holiness in the fear of God; that I may be
  accounted worthy to escape the terrible judgments, which will make way
  for that happy state of things, and that I may have a part in the
  first resurrection, if I am numbered among the dead before that happy
  period begin!

                  “‘Oh! for a firm and lasting faith,
                  To credit all the Almighty saith!
                  To embrace the promise of His Son,
                  And call that glorious rest our own!’

  “We are saved by hope at this time; but hope that is seen is not hope.
  Let us abound, then, in hope through the power of the Holy Ghost: so
  shall we antedate the millennium, take the kingdom, and enjoy
  beforehand the rest, which remains for the people of God.

  “One of my parishioners brought a horse, last week, to carry me home;
  and desired to walk by my side all the way. By the advice of your dear
  son, Mr. William Perronet, who still continues to bestow upon me all
  the help I could expect from the most loving brother, I sent the man
  back. I thank God, I am a little stronger than when I came here. I
  kiss the rod, lean on the staff, and wait the end. I yesterday saw a
  physician, who told me my case is not yet an absolutely lost case. But
  the prospect of languishing two or three years longer, a burden to
  everybody, a help to none, would be very painful, if the will of God
  and the covenant of life in Christ Jesus did not sanctify all
  circumstances, and dispel every gloom. I remember, with grateful joy,
  the happy days I spent at Shoreham: _Tecum vivere amem; tecum obeam
  lubens_. But, what is better still, I shall live with the Lord and
  with you for ever and ever.

                    “Your obliged servant and affectionate son,
                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[418]

Footnote 418:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

The next letter has not before been published. It was addressed to the
lady who afterwards became his wife:—

                                       “BRISTOL, _October 20, 1777_.

  “DEAR MADAM,—The hope of thanking you in person for the favour of your
  friendly directions, as well as bodily weakness, has prevented me
  sending you a letter full of grateful acknowledgments. But, as
  Providence may postpone your intended journey to Bath, and hasten mine
  into Spain, or into eternity, I trouble you with these lines to
  testify how indebted I am to you for thinking of admitting me into the
  number of your patients. I have not tried your remedy yet, because the
  gentlemen of the faculty, who have attended me here, say, that, though
  it might be very good for persons of a cold, phlegmatic habit of body,
  it is improper for those who are, like myself, of a dry, bilious
  habit. I have taken the bark and rhubarb for some days, and I thought
  yesterday that the former medicine had removed the spitting of blood;
  but to-night it has again made its appearance. However, I think I can
  speak a little better, though I cannot bear the motion of a horse so
  well as I could two months ago.

  “All is well that comes from our heavenly Friend and Physician. Shall
  we receive the sweet at His hands, and not the bitter? Is not His
  every dispensation of providence and grace to be received with
  thankfulness? I would not get well against His will for all the world,
  and for what I esteem more than all the world,—the pleasure of seeing
  those whom He has chosen out of the world. If Providence parts us on
  earth, we shall meet in heaven.

  “I have had it, however, in my thoughts to antedate that pleasure with
  respect to you and your devoted family:[419] I was once going to take
  the pen to ask your leave to enter and die under your friendly roof;
  but the fear of troubling you and taking a step contrary to the
  leadings of Providence, made me decline. If you have not a poor
  Lazarus at your door to trouble you, you have Lazarus’s Friend in your
  sight and heart, to comfort and save you. May He, every day, appear
  more glorious in your sight, and may you, every hour, drink deeper
  into His Spirit!

  “My Christian love waits upon Mrs. Crosby, Miss Hurrel, and Miss
  Ritchie.[420] I hope the Lord binds you each day closer to Himself and
  to each other, and enables you to see and experience the glory of the
  promise made to the daughters and handmaids, as well as to the sons
  and servants of the Lord. Oh, what a day when we shall all be so
  filled with power from on high, as to go forth and prophesy, and water
  the Lord’s drooping plants and barren parched garden with _rivers of
  living water flowing from our own souls_; and when an ardent fire of
  Divine love will make us put our candle to the chaff of sin, and fire
  all the harvests and tents of the Laodiceans! As Abraham saw the day
  of _Christ_, our _first Comforter_, and was glad, so I see the day of
  the _Spirit_, our _other Comforter_, and rejoice. May you live to
  enjoy it! May you and yours hasten it by the pleadings of mighty
  prayer! To thank the _Father_ for the unspeakable gift of His Son; and
  to look to both for the fulness of that other _gift of God_, for that
  _well of living water_ which Christ offered to the woman of Samaria,
  is a blessed work, in which I beg you would assist your obliged
  brother,

                                                       “J. FLETCHER.

    “Miss Bosanquet,
     “At Cross Hall,
      “Near _Leads_,
  “Yorkshire, by Manchester.”
    Bristol postmark.

Footnote 419:

  Miss Bosanquet kept an orphanage, wholly at her own expense.

Footnote 420:

  Three grand old Methodists, and, at least, one of them a preacheress.

In another letter to Miss Bosanquet, written about the same time, he
remarked:—

  “I calmly wait, in unshaken resignation, for the full salvation of
  God: ready to trust Him, to venture on His faithful love and on the
  sure mercies of David, either at midnight, noonday, or cock-crowing:
  for my time is in His hand, and His time is best, and shall be my
  time. Death has lost his sting; and I know not what hurry of spirits
  is, or what are unbelieving fears, under the most trying
  circumstances. Thanks be to God for His unspeakable gift.”[421]

Footnote 421:

  Mrs. Fletcher’s “Letter to Mons. H. L. De la Flechere,” 1786, p. 35.

At the same period, Fletcher commenced a correspondence with another
distinguished lady, the Right Hon. Lady Mary Fitzgerald, daughter of the
Earl of Bristol, and aunt of Lord Liverpool. She had been married to
George Fitzgerald, Esq., and, for about twelve years past, had been an
exemplary member of the Methodist Society. The friendship between her
and Wesley was great, and Wesley visited her only nine days before his
death. In 1815, at the age of ninety, her clothing caught fire, and she
died, her last words being, “Come, Lord Jesus, my blessed Redeemer, come
and receive my spirit!” In conformity with a clause in her will, her
remains were interred in the burial ground at the front of City Road
Chapel; and, in memory of her, there is a plain white marble tablet in
that sacred edifice.[422] The following is an extract from Fletcher’s
letter to this Methodist lady:—

                                                “_October 21, 1777._

  “HONOURED AND DEAR MADAM,—The honour of your Christian letter humbles
  me; and the idea of your taking half-a-dozen steps, much more that of
  your taking a journey, to consult so mean a creature as myself, lays
  me in the dust. My brothers and sisters invite me once more to breathe
  my native air, and the physicians recommend to me a journey to the
  continent. If I go, I shall probably pass through London, and, in that
  case, I could have the honour of waiting upon you. I say, probably,
  because I shall have to accompany my friend and a serious family, who
  intend to spend the winter in the south of France, or in Spain; and I
  do not yet know whether they design to embark at Dover, or at some
  port in the west of England.

  “You have been afflicted as well as myself. May our maladies yield the
  peaceable fruits of righteousness, complete deadness to the world, and
  increased faith in the mercy, love, and power of Him, who supports
  under the greatest trials, and can make our extremity of weakness an
  opportunity of displaying the greatness of His power!

  “I have taken the bark for some days, and it seems to have been
  blessed to the removal of my spitting of blood. Time will decide
  whether it be a real removal, or only a suspension of that symptom.
  Either will prove a blessing, as His will is our health. To live
  singly to God, the best method is to desire it in _meekness_; to
  spread the desire in _quietness_ before Him who inspires it; to offer
  Him _now_ all we have and are, _as we can_; and to open our mouth of
  expectation wide, that He may fill it with all His fulness, or that He
  may _try our patience_, and teach us to know our _total helplessness_.
  With respect to the weeping frame of repentance, and the joyous one of
  faith, they are both good alternately; but the latter is the better of
  the two, because it enables us to do, and suffer, and praise, which
  honours Christ more. Both are happily mixed. May they be so in you,
  Madam, and in your unworthy and obliged servant,

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[423]

Footnote 422:

  Stevenson’s “City Road Chapel.”

Footnote 423:

  Letters, 1791, p. 256.

To another lady, Mrs. Thornton, Fletcher wrote:—

  “I spend more time in giving my friends an account of my health, than
  the matter is worth. You will see by the enclosed, which I beg you to
  send to the post, when you have shown it to Mr. John and Charles
  Wesley, how their poor servant does. I am kept in sweet peace, and am
  looking for the triumphant joy of my Lord, and for the fulness
  expressed in these words, which sweetly filled the sleepless hours of
  last night,—

                   “‘Drawn—and redeem’d—and seal’d,
                     I bless the One and Three;
                   With Father, Son, and Spirit fill’d
                     To all eternity.’

  “With respect to my body, I sleep less, and spit more blood than I did
  when you were here, nor can I bear the least trot of an easy horse. If
  this continues many days, instead of thinking to go and see my friends
  on the continent, I shall turn my steps to my earthly home, to be
  ready to lay my bones in my churchyard. Two of my parishioners came to
  convey me safe home, and had persuaded me to go with them in a
  post-chaise; but I had so bad a night before the day that I was to set
  out, that I gave it up. I have nothing to look at but Jesus and the
  grave. May I so look at them, as to live in my Resurrection and my
  life; and die in all the meekness and holiness of my Lord and my
  all.”[424]

Footnote 424:

  Letters, 1791, pp. 249, 253.

Fletcher having decided to go to the continent, it became necessary to
arrange monetary and other matters before he started. To two of his
friends at Madeley, Mr. Thomas York and Mr. Daniel Edmunds, he wrote as
follows:—

                                         “BRISTOL, _November, 1777_.

  “MY DEAR FRIENDS,—The debt of gratitude I owe to a dying sister, who
  once took a long journey to see me, when I was ill in Germany, and
  whom I just stopped from coming, last winter, to Newington to nurse
  me,—the unanimous advice of the physicians whom I have consulted,—and
  the opportunity of travelling with serious friends,—have at last
  determined me to remove to a warmer climate. As it is very doubtful
  whether I shall be able to stand the journey; and, if I do, whether I
  shall be able to come back to England; and, if I come back, whether I
  shall be able to serve my church, it is right to make what provision I
  can to have it properly served while I live, and to secure some
  spiritual assistance to my serious parishioners when I shall die.

  “I have attempted to build a house in Madeley Wood, about the centre
  of my parish, where I should be glad the children might be taught to
  read and write in the day, and the grown-up people might hear the Word
  of God in the evening, when they can get an Evangelist to preach it to
  them; and where the serious people might assemble for social worship
  when they have no teacher. The expense of that building, and paying
  for the ground it stands upon, have involved me in some difficulties;
  especially as my ill health has put on me the additional expense of an
  assistant.

  “If I had strength, I would serve my church alone, board as cheaply as
  I could, and save what I was able to do from the produce of the living
  to clear the debt, and leave that little token of my love, free from
  encumbrances, to my parishioners.

  “But, as Providence orders things otherwise, I have another object,
  which is to secure a faithful minister to serve the church while I
  live. Providence has sent me dear Mr. Greaves, who loves the people,
  and is loved by them. I should be glad to make him comfortable; and,
  as all the care of my flock, by my illness, devolves upon him, I would
  not hesitate for a moment to let him have all the profit of the
  living, if it were not for the debt contracted about the room. My
  difficulty lies, then, between what I owe to my fellow-labourer, and
  what I owe to my parishioners, whom I should be sorry to have burdened
  with a debt contracted for the room.

  “My agreement with Mr. Greaves was to allow him forty guineas a year,
  out of which I was to deduct twelve for his board; but, as I cannot
  board him when I go abroad, I design to allow him, during my absence,
  £50 a-year, together with the use of my house, furniture, garden, and
  my horse, if he chooses to keep one; reserving the use of a room, and
  a stall in the stable, to entertain the preachers who help us in their
  Round: not doubting but that the serious people will gladly find them
  and their horses proper necessaries.

  “But I know so little what my income may be, that I am not sure it
  will yield Mr. Greaves £50, after paying all the expenses of the
  living. Now I beg you will consult together, and see whether the
  Vicar’s income, _i.e._, tithes, etc., etc., will discharge all the
  expenses of the living, and leave a residue sufficient to pay a
  stipend of £50. I except the royalty, which I have appropriated to the
  expense of the Room. If it be, well; if there be any surplus, let it
  be applied to the Room; if there be anything short, then Mr. Greaves
  may have the whole, and take his chance in that respect, as it will be
  only taking the Vicar’s chance; for I doubt if sometimes, after
  necessary charges defrayed, the Vicars have had a clear £50.

  “I beg you will let me know how the balance of my account stands,
  that, some way or other, I may order it to be paid immediately; for,
  if the balance is against me, I could not leave England comfortably
  without having settled the payment. A letter will settle this business
  as well as if twenty friends were at the trouble of taking a journey;
  and talking is far worse for me than reading or writing.

  “Ten thousand pardons, my dear friends, for troubling you with this
  scrawl about worldly matters. I am quite tired with writing, but I
  cannot lay by my pen without desiring my best Christian love to all my
  dear companions in tribulation, and neighbours in Shropshire;
  especially to Mrs. York, Miss Simpson, Mrs. Harper, Mr. Scott, Winny
  Edmunds, and all enquiring friends. Thank Molly for her good
  management, and tell her I recommend her to our common Heavenly
  Master. If she wants to go to London, or to come to Bristol, I shall
  give her such a character as will help her to some good place. I
  heartily thank Daniel, both as churchwarden and as receiver and
  house-steward; and I beg Mr. York to pay him a proper salary.

  “I am, in the best bonds, your affectionate neighbour, friend, and
  minister,

                                                  J. FLETCHER.”[425]

Footnote 425:

  Letters, 1791, p. 34.

A letter on small matters, so far as the reader is concerned; but a
letter unveiling Fletcher’s heart, and exhibiting his perfect
unworldliness. The following, extracted from a letter to Mr. William
Wase, reveals other characteristics:—

                                         “BRISTOL, _November, 1777_.

  “MY DEAR BROTHER,—Go to Mrs. Cound, and tell her, I charge her, in the
  name of God, to give up the world, to set out with all speed for
  heaven, and to join the few about her who fear God. If she refuses,
  call again; call weekly, if not daily, and warn her from me till she
  is ripe for glory. Tell the brethren at Broseley that I did my body an
  injury the last time I preached to them on the Green; but, if they
  took the warning, I do not repine. Give my love to George Crannage;
  tell him to make haste to Christ, and not to doze away his last days.

  “The physician has not yet given me up; but, I bless God, I do not
  wait for his farewell, to give myself up to my God and Saviour. I
  write by stealth, as my friends here would have me forbear writing,
  and even talking; but I will never part with my privilege of writing
  and shouting, _‘Thanks be to God who giveth us the victory’ over sin,
  death, and the grave ‘through Jesus Christ.’_ To Him be glory for ever
  and ever! Amen!”[426]

Footnote 426:

  _Ibid_, p. 36.

To his congregation in Madeley Church, Fletcher wrote as follows:—

                                      “BRISTOL, _November 26, 1777_.

    “To the Brethren who hear the Word of God in the parish church of
                                 Madeley.

  “MY DEAR BRETHREN,—I thank you for the declaration of your
  affectionate remembrance, which you sent me by John Owen, the
  messenger of your brotherly love.

  “As various reasons prevent my coming to take leave of you in “erson,
  permit me to do it by letter. The hope of recovering a little
  strength, to serve you again in the Gospel, makes me take the advice
  of the physicians, who say that removing to a drier air and warmer
  climate may be of great service to my health.

  “I am more and more persuaded that I have not declared unto you
  cunningly devised fables, and that the Gospel I have had the honour of
  preaching, though feebly, among you, is the power of God to salvation,
  to every one who believes it.

  “Want of time does not permit me to give you more than the following
  directions. Have, every day, lower thoughts of yourselves, higher
  thoughts of Christ, kinder thoughts of your brethren, and more hopeful
  thoughts of all around you. Love to assemble in the great
  congregation; but, above all, love to pray to your Father in secret;
  consider your Saviour; and listen for your Sanctifier. Wait all day
  long for His glorious appearing within you; and, when you are
  together, by suitable prayers, proper hymns, and enlivening
  exhortations, keep up your earnest expectation of His pardoning and
  sanctifying love. Let not a drop satisfy you; desire an ocean. Do not
  eat your morsel by yourselves, like selfish, niggardly people, but be
  ready to share it with all. Let every one with whom you converse be
  the better for your conversation. Be burning and shining lights
  wherever you are. Set the fire of divine love to the hellish stubble
  of sin. Be valiant for the truth. Be champions for love. Be sons of
  thunder against sin; and sons of consolation towards humbled sinners.
  Be faithful to your God, your king, and your masters. Let not the good
  ways of God be blasphemed through any of you.

  “You have need of patience, as well as of faith and power. You must
  learn to _suffer_, as well as _do_ the will of God. Think it not
  strange to pass through fiery trials. Let your faith be firm in a
  tempest. Let your hope in Christ be as a sure anchor cast within the
  veil; and your patient love will soon outride the storm. God is the
  same merciful and faithful God, ‘_yesterday, to-day, and for ever_.’
  Believe in His threefold name. Rejoice in every degree of His great
  salvation. Triumph in hope of the glory which shall be revealed. Do
  not forget to be thankful for a cup of water; much less for being out
  of hell, for the means of grace, the forgiveness of sins, the blood of
  Jesus, the communion of saints on earth, and the future glorification
  of saints in heaven. Strongly, heartily believe every Gospel truth,
  especially the latter part of the Apostles’ Creed. Believe it till
  your faith becomes the substance of the eternal life you hope for; and
  then, come life, come death, either or both will be welcome to you,
  as, through grace, I find they are to me.

  “If I am no more permitted to minister to you in the land of the
  living, I rejoice at the thought that I shall, perhaps, be allowed to
  accompany the angels, who, if you continue in the faith, will be
  commissioned to carry your souls into Abraham’s bosom. If our bodies
  do not moulder away in the same grave, our spirits shall be sweetly
  lost in the same sea of divine and brotherly love. I hope to see you
  again in the flesh; but my sweetest and firmest hope is to meet you
  where there are no parting seas, no interposing mountains, no
  sickness, no death, no fear of loving too much, no shame for loving
  too little.

  “I earnestly recommend you to the pastoral care of the great Shepherd
  and Bishop of souls, to the brotherly care of one another, and to the
  ministerial care of my substitute. Should I be spared to come back,
  let me have the joy of finding you all of one heart and one soul;
  continuing steadfast in the Apostles’ doctrine, in fellowship one with
  another, and in communion with our sin-pardoning and sin-abhorring
  God.”[427]

Footnote 427:

  Letters, 1791, p. 40.

Immediately after the date of this pastoral epistle, in company with Mr.
Ireland, two of his daughters, and another family, Fletcher left
Brislington for the south of France. During a halt at Reading, he wrote
the following to the Rev. Vincent Perronet, the venerable vicar of
Shoreham:—

                                       “READING, _December 2, 1777_.

  “HONOURED AND DEAR SIR,—I acknowledge, though late, the favour of your
  letter. I have given up the thought of going to my parish, and am now
  on the road to a warmer climate. The Lord may bless as much the change
  of air, as He has blessed the last remedy your son prescribed for me—I
  mean the bark. If I should mend a little, I would begin to have faith
  in your prophecy. In the meantime, let us have faith in Christ, more
  faith day by day, till all the sayings of Christ are verified to us
  and in us. Should I go to Geneva, I shall enquire after the Swiss
  friends of my dear benefactors at Shoreham, to whose prayers I humbly
  recommend myself and my dear fellow-travellers, one of whom, my little
  god-daughter, is but eight weeks old.”[428]

Footnote 428:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

At the same time, and on the same sheet, he wrote as follows to Miss
Damaris Perronet:—

  “MY DEAR FRIEND,—I snatch a moment upon the road to acknowledge the
  favour of your letter, and to wish you joy in seeing the Lord is
  faithful in rewarding as well as punishing. I once met a gentleman, an
  infidel, abroad, who said, ‘Men have no faith: if they believed that
  by forsaking houses, lands, and friends, they should receive a
  hundredfold, they would instantly renounce all: for who would not
  carry all his money to the bank of heaven, to receive a hundredfold
  interest?’ The Papists have made so bad a use of the doctrine of the
  rewardableness of works, that we dare neither preach it, nor hold it
  in a scriptural manner. For my part, I think that if it were properly
  received, it would make a great alteration in the professing world.
  _You_ dare receive it; try the mighty use of it; and when you have
  fully experienced it, do not keep your light to yourself, but impart
  it to all within the reach of your tongue and pen. I am glad you see
  that every reward, bestowed upon a reprieved sinner, has free-grace
  for its foundation, and the blood of Christ for its mark. May the
  richest rewards of Divine grace be yours in consequence of the most
  exalted faithfulness; and let me beseech you to pray that I may follow
  you, as you follow Christ, till our reward be full.”[429]

Footnote 429:

  _Methodist Magazine_, 1804, p. 520.

Thus did Fletcher leave England, reiterating one of the great truths
that he had been explaining and defending during the last six years. On
the next day after the date of his letter, he arrived at Stoke
Newington. Wesley writes:—

  “Wednesday, _December 3, 1777_. I visited as many of the sick as I
  could in the north-east part of the town; and spent the evening at
  Newington, with Mr. Fletcher, almost miraculously recovering from his
  consumption. On Thursday, December 4, he set out, with Mr. Ireland,
  for the south of France.”[430]

Footnote 430:

  Wesley’s Journal.




                              CHAPTER XXI.
                          _A LONG RETIREMENT._

                               778–1781.


WHEN the travellers arrived at Dover, Fletcher wrote as follows to his
hospitable friends at Stoke Newington:—

  “Ten thousand blessings light upon the heads and hearts of my dear
  benefactors, Charles and Mary Greenwood! May their quiet retreat at
  Newington become a Bethel to them! Their poor pensioner travels on,
  though slowly, towards the grave. His journey to the sea seems to him
  to have hastened, rather than retarded, his progress to his old
  mother—Earth. May every Providential blast blow him nearer to the
  heavenly haven of his Saviour’s breast; where he hopes to meet all his
  benefactors! O, my dear friends, what shall I render? What to Jesus?
  what to you? May He, who invites the heavy-laden, take upon Him all
  the burdens of kindness you have heaped on your Lazarus! And may
  angels, when you die, find me in Abraham’s bosom, and bring you into
  _mine_, that by all the kindness which may be shown in heaven, I may
  try to requite that you have shown to your obliged brother,

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[431]

Footnote 431:

  Letters, 1791, p. 249.

Leaving Calais on December 12, 1777, the travellers pursued their way to
the South of France. Mr. Ireland thus described the journey:—

  “When we departed from Calais, the north wind was very high, and
  penetrated us even in the chaise. We put up at Bretuil, and the next
  day got to Abbeville, whence we were forced, by the miserable
  accommodation we met with, to set out, though it was Sunday. Hitherto
  Mr. Fletcher and I had led the way, but now the other chaises got
  before us. Nine miles from Abbeville our axletree gave way through the
  hard frost, and we were left to the piercing cold on the side of a
  hill, without shelter. After waiting an hour and a half, we sent the
  axletree and wheels back to be repaired; and, leaving the body of the
  chaise under a guard, procured another to carry us to the next town.
  On the 15th, our chaise arrived in good repair. The country was
  covered with snow, but travelling steadily forward, we reached Dijon
  on the 27th. During the whole journey, Mr. Fletcher showed marks of
  recovery. He bore both the fatigue and cold as well as the best of us.
  On the 31st, we put up at Lyons, and solemnly closed the year, bowing
  our knees before the throne, which indeed we did all together every
  day. January 4, 1778, we left Lyons, and came on the 9th to Aix. Here
  we rest, the weather being exceedingly fine and warm. Mr. Fletcher
  walks out daily. He is now able to read and pray with us every morning
  and evening. He has no remains of his cough nor of the weakness in his
  breast. His natural colour is restored, and the sallowness quite gone.
  His appetite is good, and he takes a little wine.”

In another letter Mr. Ireland wrote:—

  “Soon after our arrival here, I rode out most days with my dear and
  valued friend. Now and then he complained of the uneasiness of the
  horse, and there were some remains of soreness in his breast; but this
  soon went off. The beginning of February was warm, and the warmth,
  when he walked in the fields, relaxed him; but when the wind got north
  or east, he was braced again. His appetite is good; his complexion as
  healthy as it was eleven years ago. As his strength increases, he
  increases the length of his rides. Last Tuesday, he set out on a
  journey of a hundred and twelve miles. The first day he travelled
  forty miles without feeling any fatigue; and the third day fifty-five.
  He bore the journey as well as I did; and was as well and as active at
  the end of it as at the beginning. During the day, he cried out, ‘Help
  me to praise the Lord for His goodness; I never expected to see this
  day.’ He accepted a pressing invitation to preach to the Protestants
  here; and he fulfilled his engagement on Sunday morning, taking as his
  text, ‘Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith.’ Both the
  French and English were greatly affected; the word went to the hearts
  of both saints and sinners. His voice is now as good as ever it was;
  and he has an earnest invitation to preach near Montpelier, where we
  are going. You would be astonished at the entreaties of pastors as
  well as people. He has received a letter from a minister in the Levine
  Mountains, who intends to come to Montpelier, sixty miles, to press
  him to go and preach to his flock. He purposes to spend the next
  summer in his own country, and the following winter in these
  parts.”[432]

Footnote 432:

  Wesley’s “Life of Fletcher.”

It was probably at this time that Fletcher and Mr. Ireland made a tour
through Italy, and visited Rome, concerning which visit Wesley writes:—

  “While he was at Rome, as Mr. Ireland and he were one day going
  through the streets in a coach, they were informed the Pope was
  coming, and it would be required of them to kneel while he went by, as
  all the people did; if they did not, in all probability the mob would
  knock them on the head. But this they flatly refused to do; judging
  the paying such honour to a man was idolatry. The coachman was
  terrified, but turned aside into a narrow way. The Pope was in an open
  landau, waved his hands, and frequently repeated, ‘God bless you all!’
  Mr. Fletcher’s spirit was greatly stirred, and he longed to bear a
  public testimony against anti-Christ; and he would have done it had he
  been able to speak Italian. He could hardly refrain from doing it in
  Latin, till he considered that only the priests could understand
  him.”[433]

Footnote 433:

  Wesley’s “Life of Fletcher.”

While in the south of France, Fletcher wrote to Miss Bosanquet the
following letter, which is now for the first time published:—

                                       “MARSEILLES, _March 7, 1778_.

  “DEAR MADAM,—Your letter did not reach me till after it had lain here,
  at the post office, several days.

  “I cannot be answerable for what the person you mention thinks of Mr.
  Wesley or me, or our sentiments. Nothing is more common than to see
  people drawing rash inferences from premises which are partly false
  and partly true. I can only answer for myself, and for what I deem to
  be the truth.

  “If you ask me what I think to be the truth with respect to Christian
  perfection, I reply, my sentiments are exposed to the world in my
  essay on ‘Christian Perfection,’ and in my essay on ‘Truth,’ where I
  lay the stress of the doctrine on the great _promise of the Father_,
  and on the _Christian fulness of the Spirit_. This I have done more
  particularly in a treatise on the ‘Birth of the Spirit;’ which
  treatise is not yet published. I do not rest the doctrine of Christian
  perfection on the _absence of sin_,—that is the perfection of a dove
  or a lamb; nor on the _loving God with all one’s power_, for I believe
  all perfect Gentiles and Jews have done so; but on the _fulness_ of
  that superior, nobler, warmer, and _more powerful_ love, which the
  Apostle calls the _love of the Spirit_, or _the love of God shed
  abroad by the Holy Ghost_, given to the Christian believers, who,
  since the Day of Pentecost, go on to the perfection of the Christian
  dispensation.

  “You will find my views of this matter in Mr. Wesley’s sermons on
  Christian Perfection and on Spiritual Christianity; with this
  difference, that I would distinguish more exactly between the
  believers baptized with the Pentecostal power of the Holy Ghost, and
  the believer who, like the Apostles after our Lord’s ascension, is not
  yet filled with that power.

  “I own to you, Madam, that I have been much surprised to see the gross
  inattention to, and unbelief of, the promise of the Father among
  believers of various classes. It is the sun among the stars, and yet
  some can hardly distinguish it. When I preached it to the Calvinists
  in Wales, they called it Mr. Wesley’s _whim_. When I have spoken of it
  to our brethren, some have called it Lady Huntingdon’s _whim_; and
  others have looked upon it as a _new thing_; which to me is the
  strongest proof that this capital Gospel doctrine is as much under a
  cloud now as the doctrine of justification by faith was at the time of
  the Reformation.

  “Should you go back by way of London, my essay on the Birth by which
  we enter into the Kingdom in the Holy Ghost is in the hands of Miss
  Thornton, Mrs. Greenwood’s sister, who will give it you if you think
  worth while to look into it. I build my faith not on my experience,
  though this increases it, but upon the revealed truth of God. Go,
  Madam, and do the same, and pray for your affectionate brother and
  servant,

                                                       “J. FLETCHER.

  “Miss Bosanquet,
      “at Mrs. Southcot’s,
         “Broad Mead,
          “Bristol.”

The “treatise,” or rather sermon, referred to in this letter, was
written in French, and was not published during the lifetime of
Fletcher; but in 1794, Henry Moore, one of Wesley’s first biographers,
translated and printed it, with the title, “The New Birth. A Discourse
written in French, by the Rev. John Fletcher, late Vicar of Madeley,
Salop.”  8vo, 39 pp.  This was one of the most remarkable productions of
Fletcher’s pen; and great would be the service rendered to the cause of
Christ if, in this day of loose thinking and carnal living, it were
reprinted in a separate form, and read by the myriads who call
themselves Methodists. Though mere quotations from it cannot do justice
to it, yet two or three may be acceptable.

  _Regeneration._—“What is the state of a soul that is born again; and
  in what does regeneration consist? In general, we may say, it is that
  great change by which man passes from a state of nature to a state of
  grace. He was an animal man; in being born again he becomes a
  spiritual man. His natural birth had made him like to fallen Adam—to
  the old man, against whom God had pronounced the sentence of death,
  seeing it is the wages of sin; but his spiritual birth makes him like
  to Jesus Christ—to the new man—which is created according to God in
  righteousness and true holiness. He was before born a child of
  wrath—proud, sensual, and unbelieving, full of the love of the world
  and of self-love, a lover of money and of earthly glory and pleasure,
  rather than a lover of God; but, by regeneration, he is become a child
  and an heir of God, and a joint heir with Christ. The humility, the
  purity, the love of Jesus, is shed abroad in his heart by the Holy
  Spirit which is given to him, making him bear the image of the _Second
  Adam_. He is in Christ a new creature; old things are passed away, all
  things are become new. All the powers and faculties of his soul are
  renovated. His understanding, heretofore covered with darkness, is
  illuminated by the experimental knowledge which he has of God and of
  His Son Jesus Christ. His conscience, asleep and insensible, awakes
  and speaks with a fidelity irreproachable. His hard heart is softened
  and broken. His will, stubborn and perverse, yields, and becomes
  conformable to the will of God. His passions, unruly, and earthly, and
  sensual, submit to the conduct of grace, and turn of themselves to
  objects invisible and heavenly. And the members of his body, servants
  more or less to iniquity, are now employed in the service of
  righteousness unto holiness.”

  _Why regeneration is necessary._—“To rejoice in the pleasures that are
  at God’s right hand, it is needful to have senses and a taste that
  correspond thereto. The swine trample pearls under their feet. The
  elevated discourse of a philosopher is insupportable to a stupid
  mechanic; and an ignorant peasant, introduced into a circle of men of
  learning and taste, is disgusted, sighs after his village, and
  declares no hour ever appeared to him so long. It would be the same to
  a man who is not regenerated, if we could suppose that God would so
  far forget His truth as to open to him the gate of heaven. He would be
  incapable of those transports of love which make the happiness of the
  glorified saints. It would be insupportable for him now to meditate
  one hour on the perfections of God; what then shall He do among the
  _cherubim_ and _seraphim_, and _the spirits of just men made perfect_,
  who draw from thence their ravishing delights? He loves the pleasures
  and comforts of an animal life; but are these the same with the
  exercises of the spiritual life? His conversations, his readings, his
  amusements, as void of edification as of usefulness, rarely fatigue
  him; but an hour of meditation or prayer is insufferable. If he be not
  born again, not only he cannot be in a state to rejoice in the
  pleasures of Paradise, any more than a deaf man to receive with
  transport the most exquisite music; but the ravishing delights of
  angels would cause in him an insupportable distaste. Yes, he would
  banish himself from the presence of God, rather than pass an eternity
  in prostrating himself before the throne, and crying day and night,
  _Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord of hosts, who is, and who was, and who
  is to come!_ We conclude that the gate of heaven must be opened upon
  earth by regeneration, and by the love of God, or that it will remain
  shut for ever; and that a local paradise would be only a sorrowful
  prison, to a man not regenerated, because, carrying nothing thither
  but depraved and earthly appetites and passions, and finding nothing
  there but spiritual and celestial objects, disgust and dissatisfaction
  would be the consequence; and, like Satan, his own mind would be his
  hell.”

Perorations are too often rhetorical flourishes, and nothing more; but,
in the case of Fletcher, they were the outpourings of a heart
overcharged with feeling. The following is the last paragraph in the
remarkable “Treatise” from which the foregoing extracts are taken:—

  “I conjure you by the majesty of that God before whom angels rejoice
  with trembling;—by the terror of the Lord, who may speak to you in
  thunder, and this instant require your soul of you;—by the tender
  mercies, the bowels of compassion of your heavenly Father, which are
  moved in your favour, all ungrateful as you are!—I conjure you by the
  incarnation of the Eternal Word, by whom you were created;—by the
  humiliation, the pains, the temptations, the tears, the bloody sweat,
  the agony, the cries of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ!—I
  conjure you by the bonds, the insults, the scourgings, the robes of
  derision, the crown of thorns, the ponderous cross, the nails, the
  instruments of death which pierced His torn body; by the arrows of the
  Almighty, the poison of which drank up His spirit; by that mysterious
  stroke of Divine wrath, and by those unknown terrors which forced Him
  to exclaim, ‘My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken Me!’—I conjure you
  by the interests of your immortal soul, and by the unseen accidents
  which may precipitate you into eternity;—by the bed of death, upon
  which you will soon be stretched, and by the useless sighs which you
  will then pour out, if your peace be not made with God!—I conjure you
  by the sword of Divine justice, and by the sceptre of grace;—by the
  sound of the last trumpet, and by the sudden appearance of the Lord
  Jesus Christ, with ten thousand of His holy angels;—by that august
  tribunal, at which you will appear with me, and which shall decide our
  lot for ever;—by the vain despair of hardened sinners, and by the
  unknown transports of regenerate souls!—I conjure you from this
  instant work out your salvation with fear and trembling! Enter by the
  door into the sheepfold. Sell all to purchase the pearl of great
  price. Count all things dung and dross in comparison of the excellency
  of the knowledge of Jesus Christ. Let Him not go till He blesses you
  with that faith which justifies, and that sanctification without which
  no man shall see the Lord. And, soon transported from this vale of
  tears into the mansions of the just made perfect, you shall cast your
  crown of immortal glory at the feet of Him that sitteth upon the
  throne, and before the Lamb who has redeemed us by His blood: to whom
  be the blessing, and the honour, and the glory, and the power for ever
  and ever! Amen.”

It is time to return to Fletcher in the south of France. At the close of
his sojourn here, he wrote as follows to his curate, Mr. Greaves:—

  “MY VERY DEAR BROTHER,—I received a letter yesterday from my second
  brother, who acquaints me, that he was to set out the 23rd of last
  month, to come hither” (Montpelier), “and take me to my native
  country, where my sick sister wants greatly to see me; so that, if it
  please God, I shall, next week, leave this place. The winter has been
  uncommonly rainy and windy; and even last week we had half an inch of
  snow. The climate has, nevertheless, agreed with me better than
  England, and, as a proof of it, I need only tell you, that I rode last
  Friday, from Hieres, the orange gardens of France, hither, which is
  nearly fifty miles, and was well enough to preach last Sunday in
  French at the Protestant Church. Two English clergymen came to hear
  me, and one of them takes these lines to England, where I hope they
  will find you in health of body and soul, growing in strength of
  faith, in firmness of hope, and in fervency of love to God and man,
  and especially to those whom you are tempted to think hardly of, if
  any such there be. O my dear brother, no religion will do us or our
  people any good, but that which ‘works by love,’—humble, childlike,
  obedient love. May that religion fill our souls, and influence all our
  tempers, words, and actions, and may the leaven leaven the whole lump!
  May St. James’s peaceable religion spread through all our parish!

  “I hope you are settled to your satisfaction; and I shall be glad to
  do what is in my power to make your stay at Madeley agreeable. I wish
  you may have as much success as we desire; but, whatever success we
  have, we must cast our bread upon the waters, though we should see as
  little fruit as he that said of old, ‘I have laboured in vain:’ for
  our reward will be with the Lord, if not with men.”[434]

Footnote 434:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

In company with his brother, Fletcher left Montpelier, and arrived at
Nyon, the place of his nativity, where, in the house once occupied by
his father, he received the utmost attention from his affectionate
relatives, and had medical advice equal to any to be obtained in Europe.
One of his first acts was to write “to the Societies in and about
Madeley.” He addressed them as “My dear, very dear brethren;” charged
them all to meet him in heaven, “with all the mind that was in Christ;”
and sent his “love and thanks to Mr. Murlin and Mr. Roberts,” the two
Methodist preachers stationed at Chester, showing that Madeley, at this
period, was a part of the Chester circuit.[435]

Footnote 435:

  Letters, 1791, p. 43.

Soon afterwards, he wrote to his beloved medical adviser, in England,
Mr. William Perronet, as follows:—

                                              “NYON, _May 15, 1778_.

  “The climate, and prospect, and fine roads, and pure air I enjoy here,
  had contributed to strengthen me a little; when, about a month ago,
  something I was chewing got into my windpipe, and caused a fit of
  coughing which lasted half-an-hour. I then began to spit blood again,
  and ever since I have had a bad cough, which has sometimes exercised
  me violently for an hour after my first sleep. My cough, however, has
  been better the last two days, and I hope it will go off. I have
  bought a quiet horse, whose easy pace I can bear; and I ride much. I
  have not ventured upon preaching since I came hither: it would be
  impossible for me now to go through it. If the weather should grow
  hot, I may, at any time, go to the hills, the foot of which is five or
  six miles distant. I drink goats’ milk, and have left off meat since
  the cough came on, but design eating a little again at dinner.”[436]

Footnote 436:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

Two days after the date of this letter, Fletcher was at Macon, whither
he had gone to meet his friend Mr. Ireland, on his return from
Montpelier to England. Whilst he was here, he wrote two letters, which
must be quoted. The first, addressed to “The Rev. Messrs. John and
Charles Wesley,” was as follows:—

                                “MACON, IN BURGUNDY, _May 17, 1778_.

  “REV. AND DEAR SIRS,—I hope while I lie by, the Lord continues to
  renew your vigour, and sends you to water His vineyard, and to stand
  in the gap against error and vice.

  “I preached twice at Marseilles, but was not permitted to follow the
  blow. There are few noble, inquisitive Bereans in these parts. The
  ministers in the town of my nativity have been very civil. They have
  offered me the pulpit; but, I fear, if I could accept the offer, it
  would soon be recalled. I am loath to quit this part of the field
  without casting a stone at that giant, sin, who stalks about with
  uncommon boldness. I shall, therefore, stay some months longer, to see
  if the Lord will give me strength to venture an attack.

  “Gambling and dress, sinful pleasure and love of money, unbelief and
  false philosophy, lightness of spirit, fear of man, and love of the
  world, are the principal sins by which Satan binds his captives in
  these parts. Materialism is not rare; Deism and Socinianism are very
  common; and a set of Free-thinkers, great admirers of Voltaire[437]
  and Rosseau, Bayle and Mirabeau, seem bent upon destroying
  Christianity and government. If we believe them, the world is the dupe
  of kings and priests. Religion is fanaticism and superstition.
  Subordination is slavery. Christian morality is absurd, unnatural, and
  impracticable; and Christianity the most bloody religion that ever
  was. And here it is certain, that, by the example of Christians _so
  called_, and by our continual disputes, they have a great advantage,
  and do the truth immense mischief. _Popery will certainly fall in
  France, in this or the next century_; and I have no doubt God will use
  those vain men to bring about a reformation here, as he used Henry the
  Eighth to do that work in England; so the madness of His enemies
  shall, at last, turn to His praise, and to the futherance of His
  kingdom.

  “In the meantime, it becomes all lovers of the truth to make their
  heavenly tempers, and humble, peaceful love to shine before all men,
  that those mighty adversaries, seeing the good works of professors,
  may glorify their Father who is in heaven, and no more blaspheme that
  worthy name, by which we are all called Christians.

  “If you ask, what system these men adopt? I answer, some build on
  Deism a morality founded on _self-preservation_, _self-interest_, and
  _self-honour_. Others laugh at all morality, except that which being
  neglected _violently_ disturbs society. And external order is the
  decent covering of Fatalism, while Materialism is their system.

  “Oh, dear Sirs, let me entreat you, in these dangerous days, to use
  your wide influence, with unabated zeal, against the scheme of these
  modern Celsuses, Porphyries, and Julians, by calling all professors to
  think and speak the same things, to love and embrace one another, and
  to firmly resist those daring men; many of whom are already in
  England, headed by the admirers of Mr. Hume and Mr. Hobbes. But it is
  needless to say this to those who have made, and continue to make,
  such a stand for vital Christianity; so that I have nothing to do but
  pray that the Lord may abundantly support and strengthen you, and make
  you a continued comfort to His enlightened people, loving reprovers of
  those who mix light with darkness, and a terror to the perverse.

  “I need not tell you, Sirs, that the hour in which Providence shall
  make my way plain to return to England, to unite with those who feel
  or seek the power of Christian godliness, will be welcome to me. O
  favoured Britons! Happy would it be for them, if they knew their
  Gospel privileges!

  “My relations in Adam are all very kind to me; but the spiritual
  relations, whom God has raised me in England, exceed them yet. Thanks
  be to Christ, and to His blasphemed religion!

  “I am, Rev. Sirs, your affectionate son, and obliged servant in the
  Gospel,

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[438]

Footnote 437:

  Thirteen days after the date of this letter, Voltaire, in Paris, took
  a large dose of opium, without the advice of his physicians, and died.

Footnote 438:

  _Arminian Magazine_, 1788, p. 384.

On the day after the date of this letter, Fletcher wrote the following
to the Rev. Dr. Conyers, another Methodist Clergyman, to whom he had
sent his “_Reconciliation; or, an easy Method to unite the people of
God_,” published in 1777:—

                                “MACON, IN BURGUNDY, _May 18, 1778_.

  “HON. AND DEAR SIR,—I left orders, with a friend, to send you a little
  book called ‘_The Reconciliation_,’ in which I endeavour to bring
  nearer the children of God, who are divided about their _partial_
  views of divine truths. I know not whether that tract has, in any
  degree, answered its design; but I believe truth can be reconciled
  with itself, and the candid children of God one with another. O that
  some _abler_ hand, and _more loving_ heart, would undertake to mend my
  plan, or draw one more agreeable to the Word of God! My eyes are upon
  _you_, dear Sir, and those who are like-minded with you, for this
  work. Disappoint not my hope. Stand forth, and make way for
  reconciling love, by removing, so far as lies in you, what is in the
  way of brotherly union.

  “O Sir! the work is worthy of you. If you saw with what boldness the
  false philosophers of the continent, who are the apostles of the age,
  attack Christianity, and represent it as one of the worst religions in
  the world, and fit only to make the professors of it murder one
  another, or at least to contend among themselves, and how they urge
  our disputes to make the Gospel of Christ the jest of nations, and the
  abhorrence of all flesh, you would break through your natural
  timidity, and invite all our brethren in the ministry to unite and
  form a close battalion, and face the common enemy.

  “O dear Sir! take courage. Be bold for reconciling truth. Be bold for
  peace. You can do all things through Christ strengthening you; and, as
  _Doctor Conyers_, you can do many things, a great many more than you
  think. What if you go, Sir, in Christ’s name, to all the Gospel
  ministers of your acquaintance, exhort them as a father, entreat them
  as a brother, and bring them, or as many of them as you can, together?
  Think you that your labour would be in vain in the Lord? Impossible,
  Sir! O despair not. If you want a coach, or a friend to accompany you,
  when you go upon this errand of love, remember there is a _Thornton_
  in London, and an _Ireland_ in Bristol, who will wish you God speed;
  and God will raise many more to concur in the peaceful work.

  “Let me humbly entreat you to go to work, and to persevere in it. I
  wish I had strength to be, at least, your postilion when you go. I
  would drive, if not like Jehu, at least with some degree of cheerful
  swiftness, while Christ smiled on the Christian attempt. But I am
  confident you can do all in the absence of him, who is, with brotherly
  love, and dutiful respect, Hon. and dear Sir, your obedient servant in
  the Gospel,

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[439]

Footnote 439:

  _Arminian Magazine_, 1788, p. 386.

Dr. Conyers, to whom this letter was addressed, was a notable man. Born
at Helmsley, Yorkshire, in 1725, he, in due time, became the Vicar of
that extensive parish. His conversion there, and his labours, were
remarkable. In 1765, he married Mrs. Knipe, a rich and pious widow, the
sister of the well-known John Thornton, Esq., of Clapham. Three years
before the foregoing letter was written, Mr. Thornton presented him to
the living of St. Paul’s, Deptford; and here he died in 1786, eight
months after the death of Fletcher.[440] At the beginning of his
evangelical career, he was warmly attached to Wesley, and a firm
believer in the doctrines of the Arminians. Afterwards, he was, to some
extent, influenced by certain of the Calvinian Ministers, with whom he
held converse; but, like his brother-in-law, John Thornton, he was a
lover of all good men; and, occupying a kind of neutral position between
the contending parties, Fletcher deemed him well qualified to bring
about the reconciliation of the two.

Footnote 440:

  _Evangelical Magazine_, 1794.

At this period, the venerable Vicar of Shoreham had been recently
informed that he was entitled to a valuable estate in Switzerland, and
William Perronet, Fletcher’s medical adviser in England, had undertaken
to visit Switzerland to enforce his father’s rights. Before doing so,
however, he wrote to Fletcher, requesting his advice; and Fletcher’s
reply was as follows:—

                                              “NYON, _June 2, 1778_.

  “MY DEAR FRIEND,—When I wrote to you last, I mentioned two ladies of
  your family who have married two brothers, Messrs. Monod. Since then,
  they have requested me to send your father the enclosed memorial,
  which I hope will prove of use to your family. As the bad writing and
  the language may make the understanding of it difficult, I forward you
  the substance of it, and of the letter of the ladies’ lawyer.

  “While I invite you to make your title clear to a precarious estate on
  earth, permit me, my dear Sir, to remind you of the heavenly
  inheritance entailed on believers. The will, the New Testament by
  which we can recover it, is proved. The Court is just and equitable;
  the Judge is gracious and loving. To enter into possession of a part
  of the estate here, and of the whole hereafter, we need only believe
  and prove _evangelically_ that we are believers. Let us then set about
  it _now_, with earnestness, with perseverance, and with a full
  assurance that, through grace, we shall carry our cause. Alas! what
  are estates and crowns to grace and glory?

  “I have had a pull back since I wrote last. After I left Mr. Ireland
  at Macon, to shorten my journey and enjoy new prospects, I ventured to
  cross the mountains which separate France from this country. On the
  third day of the journey, I found a large hill, whose winding roads
  were so steep that, though we fed the horses with bread and wine, they
  could scarcely draw the chaise, and I was obliged to walk in all the
  steepest places. The climbing lasted several hours; the sun was hot; I
  perspired violently; and the next day I spit blood again. I have
  chiefly kept to goat’s milk ever since; I find myself better; and my
  cough is neither frequent nor violent.

  “This is a delightful country. If you come to see it, and to claim the
  estate, bring all the papers and memorials you can collect; and share
  a pleasant apartment, and one of the finest prospects in the world, in
  the house where I was born. I design to try this fine air some months
  longer. We have a fine shady wood near the lake, where I can ride in
  the cool all the day, and enjoy the singing of a multitude of birds.
  But this, though sweet, does not come up to the singing of my dear
  friends in England. There I meet them in spirit several hours in the
  day.”[441]

Footnote 441:

  Letters, 1791, p. 263, and Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

The ensuing letter, kindly lent by the Rev. Dr. Knowles, of Tunbridge
Wells, has not before been published. It was addressed to “Mr. Power,
Druggist, in Broadmead, Bristol, Angleterre.”

                                             “NYON, _June 20, 1778_.

  “DEAR SIR,—A journey and my constant rides have hindered me
  acknowledging sooner the favour of your observations and criticisms,
  which I received some time ago. If I had my little publications here,
  to turn to the pages you quote, I would immediately make notes, and
  alter or rectify what you object to, as a preparation for a more
  correct edition, should the work be ever reprinted. I wish all my
  friends had taken as much pains about my works as you have, Sir; they
  would by this time be more correct. Accept my sincere thanks for the
  favour; and, if I live to see England again, we shall (please God)
  talk the matter over fully.

  “I am obliged to you for your caution about preaching. I have followed
  it, and have not yet preached in this country, though I believe I
  shall soon venture again upon it, but with care and in a sparing
  manner. I hope at least the Lord will give me grace so to do.

  “I heartily rejoice that Mrs. Power has been carried safely, a second
  time, through the danger of child-bearing. May she and the two fruits
  of her body live to the glory of God, and to your comfort! Remember me
  kindly to her; and give my blessing to my god-son, whose will, I hope,
  you continue to break with the wisdom, patience, and steadiness which
  become a parent.

  “I sent your mother a few lines by Mr. Ireland. I hope she received
  them; but I shall never get an answer, if what he writes me is true.
  Is she dead indeed? Sometimes I hope it is a rumour without
  foundation; and yet his account that she died at Bath, where your
  letter mentions she was gone, makes me fear he was well-informed. If
  she is no more, you have lost a tender mother, and I a kind friend;
  but the Lord will make up all our losses, and has already made them up
  by giving us His Son. May we receive Him, and with Him all that is
  excellent among the living and the dead! As she has been for many
  years a woman of sorrow,—a true Hannah—wading almost constantly
  through a sea of temptations, they may have followed her to the last,
  and she may have escaped out of many tribulations, as the saints
  mentioned in the Revelation. A line about it, and about your welfare,
  and that of my god-son, will greatly oblige, dear Sir, your obedient
  and already obliged servant,

                                                        J. FLETCHER.

  “My love to your brother, when you see him.”

The next letter, written to Mr. Ireland, contains a sylvan scene worthy
of being painted:—

                                             “NYON, _July 15, 1778_.

  “MY DEAR FRIEND,—I have ventured to preach once, and to expound once
  in the church. Our ministers are very kind, and preach to the purpose.
  A young one of this town gave us lately a very excellent gospel
  sermon.

  “Grown-up people stand fast in their stupidity, or in their
  self-righteousness. The day I preached, I met some children in my wood
  gathering strawberries. I spoke to them about our _common_ Father. We
  felt a touch of brotherly affection. They said they would sing to
  their Father, as well as the birds; and followed me, attempting to
  make such melody as you know is commonly made in these parts. I
  outrode them, but some of them had the patience to follow me home; and
  said they would speak with me. The people of the house stopped them,
  saying, I would not be troubled with children. They cried, and said,
  _they were sure I would not say so, for I was their good brother_. The
  next day, when I heard this, I enquired after them, and invited them
  to come and see me; which they have done every day since. I make them
  little hymns, which they sing. Some of them are unde, sweet drawings.
  Yesterday, I wept for joy on hearing one of them speak, as an
  experienced believer in Bristol would have done, of conviction of sin,
  and of the joy unspeakable in Christ that followed. Last Sunday, I met
  them in the wood; there were a hundred of them, and as many adults.
  Our first pastor has since desired me to desist from preaching in the
  wood (for I had exhorted), for fear of giving umbrage; and I have
  complied, from a concurrence of circumstances which are not worth
  mentioning; I therefore now meet them in my father’s yard.”[442]

Footnote 442:

  Letters, 1791, p. 264.

What a contrast to this scene of gentleness among children is the
following!

Fletcher had a nephew, who had been in the Sardinian army, where his
ungentlemanly and profligate conduct had given such general offence to
his brother officers that they determined to compel him to leave their
corps, or to fight them all in succession. After engaging in two or
three duels, with various success, the young bravo left the service, and
now, during Fletcher’s present visit, he returned to Switzerland. His
resources were soon spent in profligacy; and, gaining access to his
uncle, General De Gons, he presented a loaded pistol, and said, “Uncle
De Gons, if you do not give me a draft on your banker for five hundred
crowns, I will shoot you.” The General was a brave man, but, seeing
himself in the power of a desperado capable of any mischief, he wrote
the draft. “Uncle,” said the young fellow, “you must do another thing;
you must promise me, on your honour, to use no means to recover the
draft, or to bring me to justice.” The General promised, and the bandit
rode away triumphantly. Passing the door of his uncle Fletcher, he
called upon him, and told him General De Gons had generously given him
five hundred crowns. Fletcher doubted the truthfulness of this
statement. The draft was produced. “Let me see it,” said Fletcher. It
was handed to him. Fletcher examined it, and remarked, “It is indeed my
brother’s writing, and it astonishes me; because my brother is not
wealthy, and I know that he justly disapproves your conduct, and that
you are the last in the family to whom he would make such a present.”
Then, folding the draft and putting it into his pocket, Fletcher added,
“It strikes me, young man, that you have obtained this draft improperly;
and, in honesty, I cannot return it without my brother’s approbation.”
Out came the pistol, and was levelled at Fletcher’s breast. “Return it,”
cried the young scoundrel, “or I will take your life.” “My life,” calmly
replied Fletcher, “is secure in the protection of the Almighty Power who
guards it; nor will He suffer it to be the forfeit of your rashness, or
my integrity. Do you think that I, who have been a minister of God for
five-and-twenty years, am afraid of death? It is for you to fear death,
who have every reason to fear it. You are a gamester and a cheat, yet
call yourself a gentleman! You are the seducer of female innocence, and
still you say that you are a gentleman! You are a duellist and your hand
is red with blood, and for this you call yourself a man of honour! Look
there, Sir! look there! See, the broad eye of heaven is upon us. Tremble
in the presence of your Maker, who can in a moment kill your body, and
for ever damn your soul!” The culprit turned pale; then he argued,
threatened, and entreated. Sometimes, taking out his pistol, he fixed
himself against the door to prevent egress; and, at other times, closed
on frail Fletcher, menacing him with instantaneous death. All was of no
avail. The poor country parson was as valorous as the most heroic
soldier. He gave no alarm to the family; he sought no weapon; he
attempted no escape; he simply conversed with the calmness of a hero and
a saint. At length, the young fellow began to be affected; and now,
having gained the victory, Fletcher addressed him in another strain: “I
cannot return my brother’s draft,” said he; “yet I feel for your
distress, and will endeavour to relieve it. My brother Gons, at my
request, I am sure will give you a hundred crowns; I will do the same;
perhaps my brother Henry will do as much; and I hope your own family
will make up the five hundred crowns among them.” Fletcher then fell
upon his knees, and began to pray; uncle and nephew parted, and the
family, by Fletcher’s mediation, furnished the young scapegrace with the
five hundred crowns he had feloniously attempted to extort.[443]

Footnote 443:

  Cox’s “Life of Fletcher,” p. 129.

Amidst such scenes, Fletcher did not forget his friends at Madeley. On
July 18, he wrote three messages:—

  _To his curate, the Rev. Mr. Greaves._—“I trust you lay yourself out
  for the good of the flock committed to your care. I shall be glad to
  hear that they grow in grace, and humble love.”

  _To the congregation in Madeley church._—“John Fletcher begs a farther
  interest in the prayers of the congregation of Madeley; and desires
  those, who assemble to serve God in the church, to help him to return
  public thanks to Almighty God for many mercies received; especially,
  for being able to do a little ministerial duty. He humbly beseeches
  them to serve God as Christians, and to love one another as brethren;
  neglecting no means of grace, and rejoicing in all the hopes of
  glory.”

  _To the Methodist Societies “in Madeley, Dawley, and the Banks.”_—“We
  are all called to grow in grace, and, consequently, in love, which is
  the greatest of all Christian graces. Your prayers for my soul and my
  body have not been without answer. Blessed be God! Glory be to His
  rich mercy in Christ, I live yet _the life of faith_; as to my body, I
  recover some strength. God bless you all, with all the blessings
  brought to the Church by Christ Jesus, and by the other Comforter! My
  love to the preachers” (John Murlin and Robert Roberts), “whom I beg
  you will thank in my name.”[444]

Footnote 444:

  Letters, 1791, p. 45.

Two months later (September 15), he wrote to his friend Thomas York:—

  “Blessed be the God of all consolation, though I have still very
  trying and feverish nights, I am kept in peace of mind; resigned to
  His will, who afflicts me for my good, and justly sets me aside for my
  unprofitableness. His grace within, and His people without, turn my
  trying circumstances into matter of praise. Give my love to all your
  dear family; to the two or three who may yet remember me at Shiffnal;
  and, also, to Daniel, and desire him, when he gathers the Easter dues,
  to give my love and thanks to _all_ my parishioners.“[445]

Footnote 445:

  _Ibid_, p. 45.

No doubt Fletcher’s statement to Mr. York, respecting himself, was
strictly true; but, still, there must have been a considerable
improvement in his health since he left England. Hence the following
interesting letter, written to Mr. Ireland only ten days later:—

                                        “NYON, _September 25, 1778_.

  “MY DEAR FRIEND,—I am just returned from an excursion I have made with
  my brother, through the fine vale in the midst of the high hills which
  divide France from this country. In that vale we found three lakes,
  one on French ground, and two on Swiss: the largest is six miles long
  and two wide. It is the part of the country where industry is most
  apparent, and where population thrives best. The inhabitants are
  chiefly woodmen, coopers, watchmakers, and jewellers. They told me,
  they had the best singing, and the best preacher, in the country. I
  asked, if any sinners were converted under his ministry? They stared,
  and asked, what I meant by conversion? When I had explained myself,
  they said, ‘We do not live in the time of miracles.’

  “I was better satisfied in passing through a part of the vale which
  belongs to the King of France. I saw a prodigious concourse of people,
  and supposed they kept a fair, but was agreeably surprised to find
  three missionaries in the midst of them, who went about as itinerant
  preachers to help the regular clergy. They had been there some days,
  and were three brothers, and preached morning and evening. The evening
  service opened with what they called _a conference_. One of the
  missionaries took the pulpit, and the parish priest proposed questions
  to him, which he answered at full length and in a very edifying
  manner. The subject was the unlawfulness and the mischief of those
  methods by which persons of different sexes lay snares for each other,
  and corrupt each other’s morals. The subject was treated with
  delicacy, propriety, and truth. The method was admirably well
  calculated to draw and fix the attention of a mixed multitude. This
  _conference_ being ended, another missionary took the pulpit. His text
  was our Lord’s description of the day of judgment. Before the sermon,
  all those who, for the press, could kneel, did, and sang a French hymn
  to beg a blessing on the word; and indeed it was blessed. An awful
  attention was visible upon most, and, during a good part of the
  discourse, the voice of the preacher was almost lost in the cries and
  bitter wailings of the audience. When the outcry began, the preacher
  was describing the departure of the wicked into eternal fire. They
  urged that God was merciful, and that Jesus Christ had shed His blood
  for them. ‘But that mercy you have slighted, and now is the time of
  justice. That blood you have trodden under foot, and now it cries for
  vengeance. Know your day. Slight the Father’s mercy and the Son’s
  blood no longer.’ I have seen but once or twice congregations as much
  affected in England.

  “One of our ministers being ill, I ventured, a second time, into the
  pulpit last Sunday; and, the Sunday before, I preached, six miles off,
  to two thousand people in the yard of a jail, where they were come to
  see a murderer before his execution. I was a little abused by the
  bailiff on the occasion, and was refused the liberty of attending the
  poor man to the scaffold, where he was to be broken on the wheel. I
  hope he died penitent. The day before he suffered, he said he had
  broken his irons, and that, as he deserved to die, he desired new ones
  to be put on, lest he should be tempted to make his escape.

  “You ask, what I design to do? I propose, if it be the Lord’s will, to
  spend the winter here. In the spring, I shall, if nothing prevents,
  return to England with you, or with Mr. Perronet, if his affairs are
  settled, or alone, if other ways fail. In the meanwhile, I rejoice
  with you in Jesus, and in the glorious hope of that complete salvation
  His faithfulness has promised, and His power can never be at a loss to
  bestow. We must be saved by faith and hope till we are saved by
  perfect love, and made partakers of heavenly glory. I am truly a
  _stranger_ here. As strangers let us go where we shall meet the
  assembly of the righteous gathered in Jesus.“[446]

Footnote 446:

  Letters, 1791, p. 268.

Mr. William Perronet arrived at Nyon in the month of December, and, in
letters to his father, related:—

  “However engaged Mr. Fletcher is the greater part of the day, he is
  generally so kind as to spend a little time with me in the evening in
  prayer and conversation. His chief delight seems to be in meeting his
  little society of children. He is exceedingly fond of them, and they
  appear to be as fond of him. He seldom walks abroad or rides out, but
  some of them follow him, singing the hymns they have learned, and
  conversing with him by the way. But you must not suppose that he is
  permitted to enjoy this happiness unmolested. Not only do the
  drunkards make songs on him and his little companions, but many of the
  clergy loudly complain of such irregular proceedings. However, he is
  upon good terms with three ministers of the place; all of whom are
  serious men, and desirous of promoting true religion.

  “He is better, I think, than when he left England; but he frequently
  puts his strength to too severe a trial, by meeting his Society of
  children, and some grown persons; and other exercises of a like
  nature. When he ventures to preach, his spitting of blood returns; and
  whenever this happens, his strength and spirits decay
  surprisingly.”[447]

Footnote 447:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher”.

Fletcher and his brother translated all the papers of William Perronet
into French, and, in other ways, assisted him, in reference to the
estate which he had gone to Switzerland to obtain. Notwithstanding the
delicate state of Fletcher’s health, the three set out, in the wintry
weather of that December month, to visit Chateau d’Oex, where the
property was situated. The distance from Nyon was fifty-seven miles.
When they had made about a quarter of the journey, “the horses were
tired out, the coachman refused to proceed further,” and they were
obliged to return home again.[448] A few days later, they made another
attempt, and arrived at their destination on January 10, 1779. Five days
afterwards, they were again at Nyon.

Footnote 448:

  _Ibid._

In Fletcher’s state of health, such a journey was perilous; but his love
to the Perronet family was such that, to him, no labour and risk, on
their behalf, were too great. In letters to his venerable father, at
Shoreham, William Perronet states, that none of them having been to
Chateau d’Oex before, they were obliged to employ a guide, and that “on
account of the badness of the ways,” they had “to go some leagues
about,” which made their journey about eighty miles. Their coach had to
pass “over mountains of snow and rocks of ice.” When nine miles from
Chateau d’Oex, they were obliged to exchange their coach for “an open
sledge;” and now they “travelled through narrow passes, cut through the
snow, which, on both sides, was many feet above their heads; on the
sides of mountains, whose summits the eye could scarcely reach; and
frequently on the brink of precipices, at the bottoms of which they
could hear the waters roar like thunder.” In one place, Fletcher and
William Perronet, being obliged to walk, their feet slipped: Fletcher
“received a violent blow on the back part of the head;” and William
Perronet “sprained” his “wrist.” In crossing the Alps, they had to lie
“two nights in beds that were not only damp, but musty and without
curtains;” and, “being in a Popish canton, and Friday and Saturday being
meagre days,” they “were almost starved with hunger as well as cold.”
“The weather was extremely severe, and it was scarce in the power of
clothes, or even of fire, to keep” them “warm.” William Perronet
concludes his narrative of their adventures as follows:—

  “Whether I succeed in my temporal business or not, I shall ever
  remember, with pleasure and thankfulness, the opportunities I have
  been blessed with in spending so much time in company with our
  inestimable friend; who, wherever he goes, preaches the Gospel, both
  by his words and example; nay, by his very looks, not only to his
  friends, but to all whom he meets: so that, on the top of the frozen
  Alps, and in the dreary vale of Chateau d’Oex, good seed has been
  sown. At Chateau d’Oex, he was visited by some of the principal
  inhabitants, who stood around him, in deep attention, for almost an
  hour, while he exhorted and prayed.”[449]

Footnote 449:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

In a postscript to this letter, Fletcher wrote:—

  “I have had the pleasure of accompanying your son to your father’s
  birthplace. It is a charming country for those who have a taste for
  highland prospects; but what is it to our heavenly Father’s _Hill of
  Sion_? Thither may we all travel, summer and winter, and there may we
  all have a happy meeting, and find an eternal inheritance!”

Three weeks later, Fletcher wrote the following to Mr. Ireland:—

                                          “NYON, _February 2, 1779_.

  “MY DEAR FRIEND,—I am sorry to hear that you are still tried by
  illness; but our good, heavenly Father is wise; His will be done; His
  name be praised!

  “I am better, thank God! and ride out every day, when the slippery
  roads will permit me to venture without the risk of breaking my
  horse’s legs and my own neck. You will ask me how I spend my time? I
  pray, have patience, rejoice, and write, when I can; I saw wood in the
  house when I cannot go out; and eat grapes, of which I have always a
  basket by me.

  “Our little Lord-Lieutenant has forbidden the ministers to let me
  exhort in the parsonage, because it is the _sovereign’s house_. My
  second brother has addressed a memorial to him, in which he informs
  him that he will give up neither his religious nor civil liberty, and
  will open his house for the Word of God. According, we have since met
  at his house.

  “On Sunday, we met at the young clergyman’s who writes against the
  conduct of the clergy; but I fear we fence against a wall of brass.
  However, I am quite persuaded that Providence calls me to leave a
  testimony to my French brethren, and it may be of some use when I
  shall be no more. I have been comforted by the apology of a minister
  at Yverdon, who was persecuted at the beginning of this century under
  the name of Pietist; and I have become acquainted with a faithful
  minister of Geneva, but he dares no more offer me his pulpit than my
  brother-in-law at Lausanne.

  “Several young women seem to have received the Word in the love of it,
  and four or five grown-up ones; but not one man, except the young
  hopeful clergyman I mention, who helps me at my little meetings, and
  begins to preach extempore. The truths I chiefly insist upon, when I
  talk to the people who will hear me, are those which I feed upon
  myself as my daily bread. ‘God, our Maker and Preserver, though
  invisible, is _here_ and _everywhere_. He is our chief good, because
  all beauty and all goodness centre in and flow from Him. He is
  especially _love_; and love in us, being His image, is the sum and
  substance of all moral and spiritual excellence—of all true and
  lasting bliss. In Adam we are all estranged from love and from God;
  but the Second Adam—Jesus, Emanuel, God with us,—is come to make us
  know and enjoy again our God as the God of love and the chief good.
  All who receive Jesus receive power to become the sons of God,’ etc.,
  etc.

  “I hope I shall be able to set out for England with Mr. Perronet, in
  April or May. O that I may find that dear island in peace within and
  without![450] Well, I hope you make peace in the Church if you cannot
  make peace with the patriots.

  “The coats and shoes you gave me have lasted _all this while_, and are
  yet good; so that I need not draw upon your banker. Thank God, and
  you, for a thousand favours! God bless and comfort you, my dear
  friend! We are poor creatures, but we have a good God to cast all our
  burdens upon, and who often burdens us that we may have constant and
  free recourse to His bounty, power, and faithfulness. Stand fast in
  the faith. Believe _lovingly_, and all will be well.”[451]

Footnote 450:

  The war with the American Colonists was now raging, and England was
  greatly excited.

Footnote 451:

  Letters, 1791, p. 271.

To his friend and Methodist helper among the Madeley Societies, William
Wase, Fletcher wrote as follows:—

                                         “NYON, _February 11, 1779_.

  “MY DEAR FRIEND,—I have just received yours of January 24, and rejoice
  to hear of the welfare of your friends, whom I long much to see; but
  there is no blessing _here_ without some alloy of grief, and such was
  to me the account of the poor state of health of dear Mrs. Wase. Tell
  her I should be glad to hold up her hands in her fight of affliction;
  but, if the poor, unprofitable, weak servant is afar off, the Master,
  who is rich in mercy, who fills the whole world with His goodness and
  patience, is near to her and to all His afflicted ones. I recommend to
  her two remedies. One is a cheerful resignation to the will of God,
  whereby her animal spirits will be greatly raised or sweetly
  refreshed. The other is, four lumps of heavenly sugar, to be taken
  every half hour, day and night, when she does not sleep. I make a
  constant use of them, to my great comfort. They have quickened my soul
  when I was dying, and I doubt not they will have the same effect upon
  hers. They are: ‘God so loved the world,’ etc. ‘If any man sin,’ etc.
  ‘It is a faithful saying,’ etc. ‘Come unto Me, all ye that are weary,’
  etc.

  “Tell my little god-daughter, Patty Cartwright, she is big enough and
  bad enough to take these heavenly pills. Tell her mother to take them
  regularly with her. What a shame it is to have such a remedy and not
  to make more use of it!

  “Remember me in much love to dear Mr. Hatton. Thank brother Costerdine
  and his fellow-labourer[452] for their occasional help. May the Lord
  vouchsafe to consecrate our little Zoar[453] by calling one sinner and
  establishing another saint! How abundantly shall we be repaid for our
  little expense and trouble! Thank the brethren you have mentioned;
  salute them kindly from me, not forgetting John Tranter and our
  friends at the Fore Bank—Thomas Pool and Thomas Banks, and our friends
  at Dawley Green. You may see in the enclosed that I am not without
  hopes of telling you in May how much I am yours,

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[454]

Footnote 452:

  James Barry and Robert Costerdine, the two Methodist itinerant
  preachers stationed in the Chester circuit, of which Madeley and its
  neighbourhood were a part.

Footnote 453:

  The meeting-house Fletcher had recently erected in Madeley Wood, and
  which is now a part of the Wesleyan Chapel there.

Footnote 454:

  Letters, 1791, p. 47, and the _Christian Miscellany_, 1877, p. 333.

“The enclosed” communication bore the same date as this letter to
William Wase, of Broseley, and was addressed “To the Brethren in and
about Madeley;” _i.e._, the Methodists:—

  “MY DEAR COMPANIONS IN TRIBULATION,—Peace and mercy, faith, hope, and
  love be multiplied to you all from the Father of mercies through the
  Lord Jesus Christ, by the Spirit of grace! I thank you for your kind
  remembrance of me in your prayers. I am yet spared to pray for you. O
  that I had more power with God! I would bring down heaven into all
  your hearts. Strive together in love for the living faith, the
  glorious hope, the sanctifying love once delivered to the saints. Look
  to Jesus. Move on; run yourselves in the heavenly race, and let each
  sweetly draw his brother along, till the whole company appears before
  the redeeming God in Sion.

  “I hope God will, in His mercy, spare me to see you in the flesh; and
  if I cannot labour for you, I shall gladly suffer with you. If you
  will put health into my flesh, joy into my heart, and life into my
  whole frame, be of _one heart_ and of _one soul_. Count nothing your
  _own_ but your _sin_ and _shame_; and bury that dreadful property in
  the grave of our Saviour. Let all you are and have be His who bought
  you. Dig hard in the _Gospel_ mines for hidden treasure. Blow hard the
  furnace of prayer with the bellows of faith until you are melted into
  love, and the dross of sin is purged out of every heart. Get together
  into Jesus, the heavenly ark, and sweetly sail into the ocean of
  eternity; so shall you be true miners, furnacemen, and bargemen.
  Farewell, in Jesus! Tell Mrs. Cound I shall greatly rejoice if she
  remembers Lot’s wife.”[455]

Footnote 455:

  Letters, p. 48, and _ibid_, p. 334.

Six weeks after the date of this letter to the Madeley Methodists,
Wesley visited them, and wrote:—

  “1779. March 25, _Thursday_. I preached in the new house which Mr.
  Fletcher has built in Madeley Wood. The people here exactly resemble
  those at Kingswood, only they are more simple and teachable. But, for
  want of discipline, the immense pains which he has taken with them has
  not done them the good which might have been expected. I preached at
  Shrewsbury in the evening, and next day, about noon, in the
  assembly-room at Broseley. It was well we were in the shade, for the
  sun shone as hot as it usually does at midsummer. We walked from
  thence to Coalbrook Dale, and took a view of the bridge which is
  shortly to be thrown over the Severn. It is one arch, a hundred feet
  long, fifty-two high, and eighteen wide; all of cast-iron, weighing
  many hundred tons. I doubt whether the Colossus at Rhodes weighed much
  more.”[456]

Footnote 456:

  Wesley’s Journal.

Fletcher’s health was still feeble, but he longed to be back to his
parishioners and to the Methodists surrounding Madeley. Hence the
following to the Vicar of Shoreham:—

  “1779, March 29. I am still weak in body, but able to ride out and
  exhort some children. Well, the time shall come when, in a better
  state, we shall be able to glorify our heavenly Father. In the
  meantime, let us do it either in the stocks of weakness or in the
  fires of tribulation; and on our death-bed may we sing, with hearts
  overflowing with humble love, ‘The Resurrection and the Life, the
  Friend and Saviour of sinners, loved me and gave Himself for me; and I
  am going to see Him and to thank Him, face to face, for His matchless
  love!’

  “I hope the prospect respecting the inheritance of your fathers in
  this country clears up a little, and I trust the matter will be
  decided without a lawsuit. As soon as the affair is brought to some
  conclusion, we design to set out for England. The will of the Lord be
  done in all things!”[457]

Footnote 457:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

This was written in the week before Easter. The Puritanical Calvinists
of Switzerland of course denounced the observance of holy days, and
hence, at Nyon, there was no service on Good Friday, April 2; but
Fletcher and William Perronet, who all their life had been accustomed to
commemorate the death of the incarnate Son of God, crossed the lake into
Savoy, to hear a celebrated Capuchin.

  “He made,” says Mr. Perronet, “a very good discourse, and he and his
  brethren invited us to dine with them. This we declined; but, after
  dinner, we paid our respects to them, when Mr. Fletcher spent two or
  three hours with them in serious and friendly conversation.”[458]

Footnote 458:

  _Ibid._

Fletcher had expressed a hope that he would be able to return to his
flock at Madeley in April or May, but his hope was not realized. The
reasons for this will be found in the following extracts from his
letters. To his curate, the Rev. Mr. Greaves, he said:—

  “Nyon, May 18, 1779. My dear fellow-labourer,—My departure being
  delayed some weeks gives me much concern, although, from the
  confidence I have in your pastoral diligence, I am easy about the
  flock you feed. Last week, a Visitation was held here, and the clergy
  of the town took my part against the Visitor and others, who said I
  was of a sect everywhere spoken against. The conversation about it
  held so long, and was so trying to my grain of humility, that I went
  out. The matter, however, ended peaceably by a vote that they should
  invite me to dinner. God ever save us from jealous and persecuting
  zeal.

  “I hope, my dear friend, you go on comfortably, doing more and more
  the work of an evangelist. Remember my love to as many of my
  parishioners as you meet with, and especially to all our good
  neighbours and to the Society.”[459]

Footnote 459:

  Letters, 1791, p. 49.

On the same day, he wrote to Michael Onions as follows:—

  “I have complied with the request of my friends to stay a little
  longer among them, as it was backed by a small Society of pious people
  gathered here. Three weeks ago, they got about me, and on their knees,
  with many tears, besought me to stay till they were a little stronger
  and able to stand alone; nor would they rise till they had got me to
  comply. However, yesterday, I spoke with a carrier, from Geneva, to
  take me to London, who said he would take us at a fortnight’s notice.

  “My love to your fellow-leaders, and, by them, to the companies you
  meet in prayer; also to the preachers who help in the
  Round[460].”[461]

Footnote 460:

  The name often given by the old Methodists to a Methodist Circuit.

Footnote 461:

  Letters, 1791, p. 51.

On May 22, William Perronet, in a letter to his father, observed:—

  “On the 9th of this month, Mr. Fletcher preached in the church, on 2
  Cor. v. 20—‘We are ambassadors for Christ,’ etc. He spoke with a
  strong and clear voice for more than three-quarters of an hour, and
  did not find himself hurt by it. He has preached four times in the
  church since I have been here, and might have preached much oftener if
  his health would have allowed him; for, by his friendly and prudent
  conduct towards the three ministers of the place, he is upon good
  terms with them now, although, at his first coming hither, they were
  afraid to own him, on account of his _irregular conduct_; for such
  they deemed his exhorting the children, and holding meetings in
  private houses.”[462]

Footnote 462:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

On the same day, Fletcher remarked to the same venerable minister:—

  “MY VERY DEAR BROTHER, AND HONOURED FATHER,—I rejoice that you are yet
  preserved to be a witness of the grace and saving health of Jesus. Let
  us rejoice that when _our_ strength shall decay, _His_ will remain
  entire for ever, and, in His strength, we, who take Him for our life,
  shall be strong. Our Redeemer liveth; and, when sickness and death
  shall have brought down our flesh to the earth, we shall, by His
  resurrection’s power, rise and live for ever with Him in heavenly
  places; for the new earth will be a heaven, or a glorious province in
  the kingdom of heaven. The meek shall inherit it; and that inheritance
  will be fairer than yours at Chateau d’Oex, and surer too.

  “I hope to accompany your son soon to England.”[463]

Footnote 463:

  _Ibid._

The following, also, was written at the same time, and was addressed to
his honoured host and friend, Mr. Charles Greenwood, of Stoke
Newington:—

                                              “NYON, _May 22, 1779_.

  “MY DEAR FRIEND,—“I am yet alive, able to ride out, and now and then
  to instruct a few children. I hope Mr. Perronet will soon have settled
  his affairs, and then, please God, I shall inform you, by word of
  mouth, how much I am indebted to you, Mrs. Greenwood and Mrs.
  Thornton. Thank and salute, on my behalf, Mr. John and Mr. Charles
  Wesley, Dr. Coke, and Mr. Atlay.[464] Thanks be to God for His
  unspeakable gifts,—His Son, His Spirit, and His Word! And thanks be to
  His people, for their kindness towards the poor, the sick, the
  stranger, and especially towards me! But, at this time, a sleepless
  night and a constant toothache unfit me for almost everything but
  lying down under the cross, kissing the rod, and rejoicing in hope of
  a better state, in this world or in the next. Perhaps weakness and
  pain are the best for me in this world. Well, the Lord will choose for
  me, and I fully set my heart and seal to His choice. Let us not faint
  in the day of adversity. The Lord tries us, that our faith may be
  purged of all the dross of self-will, and may work by that love, which
  beareth all things, and thinketh evil of nothing. Our calling is to
  follow the crucified, and we must be crucified with Him, until body
  and soul know the power of His resurrection, and pain and death are
  done away.

  “I hope my dear friend will make, with me, a constant choice of the
  following mottoes of St. Paul,—_Christ is gain in life and death—Our
  life is hid with Christ in God—If we suffer with Him, we shall also
  reign with Him—We glory in tribulation—God will give us rest with
  Christ in that day—We are saved by hope._ To the Lord our God,
  Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier, let us give glory _in the fires_.
  Amen.”[465]

Footnote 464:

  Wesley’s Book Steward, who, nine years afterwards, seceded from the
  Methodists, and took possession of a chapel which they had built at
  Dewsbury.

Footnote 465:

  Letters, 1791, p. 272.

Besides his own physical weakness and suffering, Fletcher had other
trials in Switzerland. In a letter, written about the same time as the
foregoing, he remarked:—

  “Let us bear with patience the decays of nature; let us see, without
  fear, the approach of death. We must put off this sickly, corruptible
  body, in order to put on the immortal and glorious one. I have some
  hopes that my poor sister will yet be my sister in Christ. Her
  self-righteousness, I hope, breaks as fast as her body. I am come
  hither to see death make havoc among my friends. I wear mourning for
  my father’s brother, and for my brother’s son. The same mourning will
  serve for my dying sister, if I do not go before her. She lies on the
  same bed where my father and mother died, and where she and I were
  born. How near is life to death! But, blessed be God, Christ, the
  Resurrection, is nearer to the weak, dying believer!”[466]

Footnote 466:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

Fletcher, notwithstanding his longing to get back to his flock at
Madeley, was still detained in Switzerland. Hence the following,
addressed to Mr. Thomas York:—

                                                     “NYON, _Ibid._.

  “MY DEAR SIR,—Providence is still gracious to me, and raises me
  friends on all sides. May God reward them all, and may you have _a
  double reward_ for all your kindness! I hope I am getting a little
  strength. The Lord has blessed to me a species of black cherry, which
  I have eaten in large quantities. I have had a return of my spitting
  blood; but, for a fortnight past, I have catechized the children of
  the town every day; and I do not find much inconvenience from that
  exercise. Some of them seem to be under sweet drawings of the Father,
  and a few of their mothers begin to come, and desire me with tears in
  their eyes to stay in this country. They urge much my being born here,
  and I reply, that I was _born again_ in England; that is, _of course_,
  the country which, to me, is the dearer of the two.

  “My friends have prevailed on me to publish ‘A Poem on the Praises of
  God,’ which I wrote many years ago. The revising it for the press is
  at once a business and a pleasure, which I go through on horseback.
  Help me, by your prayers, to ask a blessing on this little attempt.

  “I wish I could procure you an estate in this fine country, as I hope
  to do Mr. Perronet, one of the physicians who showed me so much love
  when I lay sick at Newington. His grandfather was a Swiss, who was
  naturalized in the reign of Queen Anne. By calling upon some of his
  relations, I have found that he is entitled to an estate of some
  £1000, of which he is come to take possession. So Providence prepares
  for me a friend, a kind physician, and a fellow-traveller, to
  accompany me back to England; where one of my chief pleasures will be
  to embrace you, and to assure you, how much I am, my dear friend, your
  obliged servant,

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[467]

Footnote 467:

  Letters, 1791, p. 53.

Alas! little did Fletcher think that William Perronet would not return
to England.

“Providence,” said Fletcher, in the letter just quoted, “raises me
friends on all sides.” He soon had need of them. In the month of
September, William Perronet wrote:—

  “Mr. Fletcher has been wont to preach, now and then, in the church
  here (Nyon), at the request of one or other of the ministers; but,
  some time ago, he was summoned before the Seigneur Bailiff, who
  sharply reprehended him for preaching against Sabbath-breaking and
  stage plays. The former, he said, implied a censure on the magistrates
  in general, as if they neglected their duty. And the latter he
  considered as a personal reflection on himself, he having just then
  sent for a company of French Comedians to come to Nyon. Accordingly,
  he forbade Mr. Fletcher to exercise, any more, any of the functions of
  a minister in this country. However, one of the Ministers here has
  given him a room in his own house to preach in; and here Mr. Fletcher
  meets a few serious persons, particularly a number of children, two or
  three times a week. Hitherto, his lordship has not interfered with
  respect to this mode of exhortation; and both the number and the
  seriousness of the congregation increase daily.”[468]

Footnote 468:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

Referring to the same incident, Fletcher wrote:—

  “Our Lord Lieutenant, being stirred up by some of the clergy, and
  believing firmly that I am banished from England, took the alarm, and
  forbade the ministers to let me exhort in their houses; threatening
  them with the power of the Senate if they did. They all yielded, but
  are now ashamed of it. A young clergyman, a true Timothy, has opened
  me his house, where I exhort twice a week; and the other clergymen,
  encouraged by his boldness, come to our meetings.”

William Perronet completes this story by relating that the minister, who
began this discreditable opposition, died suddenly, as he was dressing
to go to church; and that his successor continued the same intolerant
behaviour towards poor, well-meaning Fletcher. Mr. Perronet adds:—

  “Mr. Fletcher now thinks himself obliged, before he leaves his native
  country, to bear a public testimony to the truth. When his writing
  will be finished, I cannot say, for it multiplies under his fertile
  pen; so that, I fear, we shall be obliged to spend another winter in
  this severe climate.”[469]

Footnote 469:

  _Ibid._

There can be little doubt that the “public testimony,” which Fletcher
was now composing was his “Portrait of St. Paul,” to be noticed anon.

Soon after this, Fletcher had an attack of rheumatism, and wrote as
follows to William Perronet, who had gone to Lausanne. After relating
that the pain in his left shoulder had deprived him of sleep, and almost
crippled him, he added:—

  “I have partly recovered the use of my shoulder; but it is still very
  weak. I drink a decoction of pine-apple, which is as warm as guaiacum.
  My writing does not go on; but the will of the Lord is done, and that
  is enough. I would press you to come back soon, if I were not
  persuaded you are better where you are. I have been afraid that our
  bad meat here would make you lose your flesh; and, for the honour of
  Switzerland, I should be glad you had some to carry back to England,
  if we live to go and see our friends there. I had last Sunday
  (December 19), a great trial in my family. I see the Lord will not use
  me in this country for good, and, when we shall have finished our
  little matters, I shall be glad to go to my spiritual friends, and to
  my flock; so much the more, as Mr. Ireland mentions my curate’s danger
  of being in a consumption. My compliments and thanks wait on Miss
  Perronet. She was very obliging to share her drops with me. May we all
  share the springs of grace and glory together! If you will come a few
  leagues southward, and try the weather here, your room waits for you,
  and I shall be glad to see you. In the meantime, keep yourself warm by
  the Word of God within, and a good fire without. The Lord direct us in
  all things! Oh for quietness and English friends!”[470]

Footnote 470:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher;” and _Wesleyan Methodist Magazine_, 1825,
  p. 744.

Two days after writing this, Fletcher addressed his curate, Mr. Greaves,
as follows:—

                                         “NYON, _December 25, 1779_.

  “MY DEAR BROTHER,—Glory be to God for His unspeakable gift! May that
  Jesus, that eternal, all-creating, all-supporting, all-atoning,
  all-comforting Word, which was with God, and is God, and came, in the
  likeness of sinful flesh, to dwell among men, and to be our Emmanuel,
  God with us,—may He, by a lively faith, be formed in our hearts; and,
  by a warm love, lie and grow in the manger of our emptiness, filling
  it always with the bread that comes down from heaven!

  “Though absent in body, I am with you and the flock in spirit. You are
  now at the Lord’s table. O may all the dear people, you have just now
  preached to, receive Jesus in the pledge of His dying love, and go
  home with this lively conviction, ‘God has given _me_ eternal life,
  and this life is _in His Son_!’

  “Glory be to God in heaven! Peace on earth! Love and good-will
  everywhere! Especially in the place where Providence has called us to
  cry, ‘_Behold! what manner of love the Father has testified to us, in
  Jesus, that we, children of wrath, should be made children of God_, by
  that only-begotten Son of the Most High, who was born for our
  regeneration, crucified for our atonement, raised for our
  justification, and who now triumphs in heaven for our sanctification,
  for our full redemption, and for our eternal glorification. To Him be
  glory for ever and ever;’ and may all, who fear and love Him about
  you, say, for ever, Amen! Hallelujah!

  “Out of the fulness of my heart, I invite them to do so; but how
  shallow is my fulness to His! What a drop, compared to an ocean
  without bottom or shore! Let us, then, receive continually from Him,
  who is the overflowing and ever-present source of pardoning,
  sanctifying, and exhilarating grace; and, from the foot of the Wrekin,
  where you are, to the foot of the Alps, where I am, let us echo back
  to each other the joyful, thankful cry of the primitive Christians,
  which was the text here this morning, ‘_Out of His fulness, we have
  all received grace for grace._’

  “I long to hear from you and the flock. How do you go on? Let me know
  that you cast _joyfully_ all your burdens on the Lord. Mr. Ireland
  sends me word, that Mr. Romaine told him you are not very well. Take
  care of yourself. Lay nothing to heart. Should your breast be weak,
  preach but once on Sundays; for you know the evening sermon is not a
  part of our _stated_ duty. I say this, that you may not _over-do_, and
  lie by, as I do. God direct, sustain, and comfort you in all things!

  “Give my pastoral love to all my flock. May all see, and see more
  abundantly, the salvation of God! May national distress be sanctified
  unto them; and may they all be loyal subjects of the King of kings,
  and of His Anointed, our King! May the approaching new year be to them
  a year of peace and Gospel grace! I hope Molly takes good care of you.
  God bless her!”[471]

Footnote 471:

  Letters, 1791, p. 56.

Fletcher refers to the “national distress.” This was great. Parliament
was excited. Ireland was in a state of veiled rebellion. England rang
with reports of threatened invasion. The war with the American colonists
had already added sixty-three millions to the national debt. Trade was
paralysed, and taxes were intolerable. Popery had been established in
Canada, and had received encouragement in England. The Protestant
Association had sprung into existence, and the Gordon riots were at
hand. In the midst of this state of things, Fletcher wrote to a
nobleman, whose name is not given, but who, probably, was Lord North, as
follows:—

                                         “NYON, _December 15, 1779_.

  “MY LORD,—If the American Colonies and the West India Islands are rent
  from the Crown, there will not grow one ear of corn the less in Great
  Britain. We shall still have the necessaries of life, and, what is
  more, the Gospel, and liberty to hear it. If the great springs of
  trade and wealth are cut off, good men will bear that loss without
  much sorrow; for springs of wealth are always springs of luxury,
  which, sooner or later, destroy the empires corrupted by wealth. Moral
  good may come out of our losses. I wish you may see it in England.
  People on the Continent imagine they see it already in the English on
  their travels, who are said to behave with more wisdom and less
  haughtiness than they used to do.”[472]

Footnote 472:

  Letters, 1791, p. 273.

Lord North, King George the Third’s Prime Minister, was, at this time,
harassed by the American rebellion, incessantly assailed by the
Opposition, and frequently threatened with impeachment. Probably,
Fletcher’s letter, of which the above is only a part, was intended to
help him in his troubles. Though a foreigner by birth, John de la
Flechere was a most loyal and devoted subject of King George. Hence,
also, the following, taken from a letter to his curate, Mr. Greaves:—

  “March 7, 1780. I long to hear from you. I hope you are well, and grow
  in the love of Christ, and of the souls bought with His blood, and
  committed to your care. I recommend to you the most helpless of the
  flock,—I mean the _children_ and the _sick_. They most want your help,
  and they are the most likely to benefit by it; for affliction softens
  the heart, and children are not yet quite hardened through the
  deceitfulness of sin.

  “I beg you will not fail, when you have opportunity, to recommend to
  our flock, to honour the King, to study to be quiet, and to hold up
  the hands of the Government by which we are protected.”[473]

Footnote 473:

  _Ibid._, p. 57.

On the same day, Fletcher wrote to his friend and helper, Mr. William
Wase, on another matter which was causing him considerable anxiety. His
Methodist meeting-house in Madeley Wood had cost much more than he
expected. The letter to Mr. Wase needs no further explanation, except
that the work, ready to be printed, was, probably, his poem, in French,
entitled, “La Louange.”

                                             “NYON, _March 7, 1780_.

  “MY DEAR BROTHER,—I am sorry the building has cost so much more than I
  intended; but, as the mischief is done, it is a matter to exercise
  patience, resignation, and self-denial; and it will be a caution in
  the future. I am going to sell part of my little estate here to
  discharge the debt. I had laid by £50, to print a small work, which I
  wanted to distribute here; but, as I must be just, before I presume to
  offer that mite to _the God of truth_, I abandon the design, and send
  that sum to Mr. York.

  “Money is so scarce here, at this time, that I shall sell at a very
  great loss; but necessity and justice are two great laws, which must
  be obeyed. As I design, on my return to England, to pinch until I have
  got rid of this debt, I may go and live in one of the cottages
  belonging to the vicar, if we could let the vicarage for a few pounds;
  and, in that case, I dare say Mr. Greaves would be so good as to take
  the other little house.

  “My dear friend, let us die to sin. Hold fast Jesus, the way, the
  truth, and the life. Walk by faith in Him; and not by the sight and
  passions of the old Adam. I hope the sun of affliction, which burns
  poor England and us, will ripen us all for glory. Give my best love to
  all our friends in Christ, and tell them that the hope of seeing them
  does me good.”[474]

Footnote 474:

  Letters, 1791, p. 58.

Fletcher was hard at work; the weather was cold; and, for the present,
exercise out of doors was impracticable. The following, taken from an
unpublished letter written by William Perronet, contains an amusing
scene:—

  “Nyon, March 1, 1780. As this is Mr. Fletcher’s native village, no
  wonder that it agrees with him; otherwise, it must be very trying to
  so tender a constitution as his; for the weather here is much hotter
  in summer, and much colder in winter, than in England; and the
  transitions from intense heat to extreme cold are often very sudden.

  “Mr. Fletcher was once told by two physicians (somewhere), that the
  benefit of exercise, for consumptive persons, must be estimated by the
  violence of it; consequently, that riding on horseback was better than
  going in a carriage, that walking was better than riding, running than
  walking, and jumping better than all of them put together. Our worthy
  friend has scrupulously followed this maxim; so that, whenever he does
  not take his little hasty rides (which by-the-bye frequently occurs),
  he allows himself, for exercise, not more than three minutes, from his
  studies, just as dinner is being served, and then, like harlequin, he
  takes about half a score such violent leaps and plunges across the
  room, that I am _sometimes_ in pain for the floor, and _always_ for
  his bones.”

During the year 1779, Fletcher and William Perronet had lodged in the
same house in Nyon; now, as might be expected from the foregoing
extract, William Perronet’s state of health obliged him to seek a more
salubrious situation. He went to Lausanne; Fletcher remained at Nyon;
and was thus pictured by his friend in the month of July next ensuing:—

  “About half a year ago, we broke up housekeeping at Nyon. Poor dear
  Mr. Fletcher, with difficulty, procured a miserable lodging in the
  neighbourhood; and I was obliged to go to Lausanne, which is seven
  leagues from Nyon. I submitted the more willingly to this, because he
  talked of spending some time at Lausanne. I have been disappointed in
  this respect; but, once or twice, I have had the pleasure of seeing
  him at Nyon. I found him to-day sitting in his small apartment,
  surrounded with books and papers, writing, or, as he expressed it,
  ‘finishing the _first part_’ of one of his pieces. When the _whole_ is
  likely to be finished, one cannot pretend to say.”[475]

Footnote 475:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

Fletcher intended to return to England in the month of September, but
two occurrences prevented him. First of all, he mislaid a portion of the
manuscript which he wished to publish before he left Switzerland, and
had to re-write what was missing.

  “The misfortune I hinted at,” said he to William Perronet, “was the
  mislaying of a considerable part of my manuscript. After giving it up
  as lost, I fell to work again; went through the double toil; and, when
  I had done, last night, I accidentally found what I had mislaid. This
  has thrown me back a great deal. The Lord’s will be done in all
  things! I thank God, I have been kept from fretting on the occasion;
  though I would not for a great deal have such another trial.”[476]

Footnote 476:

  _Ibid._

Added to this, and, perhaps, partly in consequence of it, his health
relapsed. These, and other matters, are referred to in the following
letter, addressed to his curate, Mr. Greaves:—

                                        “NYON, _September 15, 1780_.

  “MY DEAR FELLOW-LABOURER,—I had fixed the time of my departure for
  this month; but now two hindrances stand in my way. When I came to
  collect the parts of my manuscript, I found the most considerable part
  wanting; and, after a thousand searches, I was obliged to write it
  over again. This accident compelled me to put off my journey; and now
  the change of weather has brought back some symptoms of my disorder. I
  speak, or rather whisper, with difficulty; but I hope the quantity of
  grapes I begin to eat will have as good an effect upon me as in the
  last two autumns.

  “Have patience then a little while. If things are not as you could
  wish, you can do but as I have done for many years,—_learn patience by
  the things which you suffer_. Crossing our will, getting the better of
  our inclinations, and growing in experience, are no mean advantages,
  and they may all be yours.

  “Mr. Ireland writes me word that if I return to England now, the
  winter will undo all I have been doing for my health for many years.
  However, I have not quite laid aside the design of spending the winter
  with you; but don’t expect me till you see me. I am, nevertheless,
  firmly purposed that, if I do not set out this autumn, I shall do so
  next spring, as early as I can.

  “Till I had this relapse, I was able to exhort, in a private room,
  three times a week; but the Lord Lieutenant will not allow me to get
  into a pulpit, though they permit the schoolmasters, who are laymen,
  to put on a band and read the Church prayers; so high runs the
  prejudice. The clergy, however, tell me that if I will renounce my
  ordination, and get Presbyterian Orders among them, they will allow me
  to preach, and on these terms one of the ministers of this town offers
  me his curacy. A young clergyman of Geneva, tutor to my nephew,
  appears to me a truly converted man; and he is so pleased when I tell
  him there are converted souls in England, that he will go with me to
  learn English, and converse with the British Christians. He wrote last
  summer, with such force, to some of the clergy, who are stirring up
  the fire of persecution, that he made them ashamed, and we have since
  had peace from that quarter.

  “There is little genuine piety in these parts; nevertheless, there is
  yet some of _the form_ of it; so far as to go to the Lord’s table
  regularly four times a year. There meet the adulterers, the drunkards,
  the swearers, the infidels, and even the materialists. They have no
  idea of the double damnation that awaits hypocrites. They look upon
  the partaking of that sacrament as a ceremony enjoined by the
  magistrate. At Zurich, the first town of this country, they have
  lately beheaded a clergyman who wanted to betray his country to the
  Emperor, to whom it chiefly belonged. It is the town of the great
  reformer, Zuinglius; yet there they poisoned the sacramental wine a
  few years ago. I mention this to show you there is great need to bear
  a testimony against the faults of the clergy here; and, if I cannot do
  it from the pulpit, I must try to do it from the press. Their canons,
  which were composed by two hundred and thirty pastors, at the time of
  the Reformation, are so spiritual and apostolic that I design to
  translate them into English, if I am spared.

  “Farewell, my dear brother. Take care, _good, constant, care_ of the
  flock committed to your charge; especially _the sick_ and _the young_.
  Salute all our dear parishioners. Let me still have a part in your
  prayers, public and private; and rejoice in the Lord, as, through
  grace, I am enabled to do in all my little tribulations.”[477]

Footnote 477:

  Letters, 1791, p. 60.

On the same day, Fletcher wrote to Mr. Thomas York:—

  “I have been so well, that my friends here thought of giving me a
  wife; but what should I do with a _Swiss wife_ at Madeley? I want
  rather an English nurse; but more still a mighty Saviour, and, thanks
  be to God! that I have. Help me to rejoice in that never-dying,
  never-moving Friend.

  “Having heard that my dear friend Ireland has discharged the greatest
  part of my debt, I have not sent the money; but I hope to bring with
  me £100, to reimburse my friends in part, till I can do it altogether.
  But I shall never be able to pay you the debt of kindness I have
  contracted with you. I look to Jesus, my Surety, for that. May He
  repay you a thousand-fold!”[478]

Footnote 478:

  Letters, 1791, p. 62.

To William Wase, the good old Methodist, Fletcher wrote, at the same
time:—

  “Give my love and thanks to the preachers” (William Boothby and
  Jonathan Hern) “who come to help us. Enforce my exhortation to the
  Societies in much love. Go and comfort, from me, Mrs. Palmer and Mrs.
  Cartwright; and, since God has placed you all in a widowed state,
  agree to take Jesus for a never-dying Friend and Bridegroom. Your
  Maker is your husband. He is all in all. What, then, have you lost?
  Christ is _yours_ and _all things with Him_. The resurrection day will
  soon come. Prepare yourselves for the marriage feast of the Lamb; and
  till then, rejoice in the _expectation_ of that day. I sympathize with
  our sickly friends, widow Matthews, M. Blummer, E. Whittaker, I. York,
  and S. Aston. Salute them kindly from me. Help them to trim their
  lamps, and to wait for the Bridegroom. Thank Thomas and Nelly Fennel
  for their love to the” (Methodist) “preachers, and give them mine, and
  also give it to the little companies they meet with, to call for
  strength, comfort, and help, in time of need. Fare ye all well in
  Jesus! I say, again, farewell!”[479]

Footnote 479:

  _Ibid._, p. 61.

Fletcher’s “Exhortation” to the Methodist Societies was as follows:—

  “To the Societies in and about Madeley.

  “Grace and peace, truth and love, be multiplied to you all. Stand fast
  in the Lord, my dear brethren. Stand fast in Jesus; stand fast to one
  another; stand fast to the vow we have so often renewed together, upon
  our knees, and at the Lord’s table. Don’t be _so unloving, so
  cowardly_, as to let one of your little company fall into the hands of
  the world and the devil; and agree to crucify the body of sin
  altogether.

  “I am still in a strait between the work which Providence cuts out for
  me here, and the love which draws me to you. When I shall have the
  pleasure of seeing you, let it not be embittered by the sorrow of
  finding any of you half-hearted and lukewarm. Let me find you all
  strong in the Lord, and increased in humble love. Salute from me all
  who followed with us fifteen years ago. Care still for your old
  brethren. Let there be no Cain among you, no Esau, no Lot’s wife. Let
  the love of David and Jonathan, heightened by that of Martha, Mary,
  Lazarus, and our Lord, shine in all your _thoughts_, your _tempers_,
  your _words_, your _looks_, and your _actions_. If you love one
  another, your little meetings will be a renewed feast; and the God of
  love, who is peculiarly present where two or three are gathered
  together in the name of Jesus, will abundantly bless you. Bear me
  still upon your breasts in prayer, as I do you upon mine; and rejoice
  with me that the Lord, who made, redeemed, and comforts us, _bears us
  all upon His_. I am yours in Him,

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[480]

Footnote 480:

  Letters, 1791, p. 63.

For some time after his arrival in Switzerland, Fletcher lived in the
house where he was born, a respectable old building, erected on an
elevated site at the extremity of the town. Close at hand was the shady
wood, where he used to read, meditate, and pray, and meet his flock of
little children. Near the house was a terrace, from which the whole of
the glorious lake of Geneva was visible; and, in the distance, might be
seen the city itself. Towering above all, there was the unutterably
grand Mont Blanc. No wonder Fletcher spoke of the “pleasant apartment”
where he was born, as having “one of the finest prospects in the world.”
For some reason, however, he now exchanged the house of his nativity for
another not so enchanting. Hence the following letter to William
Perronet, who was residing at Lausanne:—

                                           “NYON, _October 3, 1780_.

  “MY VERY DEAR FRIEND,—I thank you for your letters. They have given me
  much pleasure, as I see that you will at last end your business, and
  get ready to set out in the spring with Mr. Ireland, who comes with
  his family, I know not where; but I think he will spend the winter at
  or about Avignon. If you will go and join him, I shall be glad to go
  also, for the _stream under this house_ does not make it very
  wholesome.

  “My brother thinks, as well as myself, that you may conclude upon the
  terms you mention. ‘Better a dinner of herbs with peace, than a
  stalled ox and noise therewith.’

  “I hope to go to Lausanne, directly after vintage, to offer a
  manuscript to the censors, to see if they will allow its being
  published; so I do not invite you to share my _damp bed_. My sister
  was so kind as to look for another house, but we find none to let
  under a year. We are here travellers, so we must expect some
  difficulties and a good many inconveniences.

  “If Mr. Ireland goes to Marseilles, you might go and see your cousin
  there. Lift up your heart, and see by faith our Lord and Saviour, our
  heavenly Kinsman and Brother; and when you rise there, take by the
  hand of prayer your affectionate friend,

                                               “JOHN FLETCHER.”[481]

Footnote 481:

  _Wesleyan Methodist Magazine_, 1830, p. 831.

Soon after this, William Perronet was seized with mortal illness. In a
letter to the Vicar of Shoreham, Fletcher wrote:—

  “December 5, 1780. Our wise and good God sees fit to try my dear
  friend, your son, with a want of appetite and uneasiness in his
  bowels. He also often returns the little food he takes. Some time ago,
  he came to Nyon, from Lausanne, and we went together to Geneva, where
  we settled your affair with three of the Geneva co-heirs, upon the
  same footing as he had settled with those of Chateau d’Oex. He bears
  his weakness with much patience and resignation.”[482]

Footnote 482:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

Fletcher was now employed in finishing the poem, which he wished to
publish before he left Switzerland; but he delighted in spending as much
time with his dying friend as possible.

  “Every night,” says William Perronet, in a letter dated January 22,
  1781, “after praying with me, he sings this verse at parting:—

                   “‘Then let our humble faith address
                     His mercy and His power;
                   We shall obtain delivering grace
                     In the distressing hour.’”[483]

Footnote 483:

  _Ibid._

Within three weeks after this, Fletcher’s book was finished, and the
business of William Perronet was ended. Fletcher wished to set out for
England, but was still detained in Switzerland. Hence the following,
addressed to Mr. Wase:—

                                         “NYON, _February 14, 1781_.

  “MY DEAR FRIEND,—I thank you for your kind remembrance of me. I need
  not be urged to return; brotherly love draws me to Madeley, and
  circumstances drive me hence.

  “I am exceeding glad that there is a revival on your side the water”
  [the river Severn], “and that you are obliged to enlarge your
  Room.[484] I wish I could contribute to shake the dry bones in my
  parish, but I have no confidence in the flesh. What I could not do
  when I was in my strength, I have little prospect of doing now that my
  strength is broken. However, I don’t despair, for the work is not
  _mine_ but the _Lord’s_. If the few who love the Gospel would be
  simple and zealous, God would again hear their prayers for those who
  are content to go on in the broad way. I thank you for your view of
  the iron bridge.[485]

  “My friend Ireland invites me to join him in the South of France; and
  I long to see whether I could not have more liberty to preach the Word
  among Papists than among Protestants. But it is so little that I can
  do, that I doubt much whether it is worth while going so far upon so
  little a chance. If I were stronger, and had more time, the fear of
  _being hanged_ should not detain me. I trust to set out next month,
  and to be in England in May; it won’t be my fault if it is not in
  April.

  “I am here in the midst of rumours of war. The burghers of Geneva have
  disarmed the garrison, and taken possession of one of the gates. I
  had, however, the luck to get in, and to bring away my nephew, who is
  a student there. Troops are preparing to block them up. The Lord may,
  at this time, punish the repeated backslidings of those Laodicean
  Christians, most of whom have become infidels. This event may a little
  retard my journey, as I must pass through Geneva. It also puts off the
  printing of my manuscript, for there is nothing going on in that
  unhappy town but disputes, and fights, and mounting of guards.

  “Remember me in much love to Mr. Greaves, Mr. Gilpin, and the”
  [Methodist] “preachers who labour with us.”[486]

Footnote 484:

  The Methodist meeting-house.

Footnote 485:

  The bridge across the Severn at Coalbrookdale, the first iron bridge
  erected in England; cast in 1779, under the direction of Mr. Abraham
  Darby.

Footnote 486:

  Letters, 1791, p. 67.

At the same date, Fletcher wrote to Mr. John Owen, his schoolmaster at
Madeley, as follows:—

  “Nyon, February 14, 1781. I thank you, my dear brother, for your kind
  lines. I hope you help both Mr. Greaves and the” [Methodist]
  “preachers to stir up the people in my parish. Be _much_ in prayer.
  Take counsel with Michael Onions, Mrs. Palmer, and Molly Cartwright
  about the most effectual means to recover the backsliders, and to keep
  together to Christ and to each other those who still hold their
  shield. Salute them kindly from me, and tell them that I hope they
  will give me a good account of their little companies” [Methodist
  classes] “and of themselves.

  “If I were not a minister, I would be a _schoolmaster_, to have the
  pleasure of bringing up children in the fear of the Lord. That
  pleasure is yours; relish it, and it will comfort and strengthen you
  in your work. The joy of the Lord and of charity is our strength.
  Salute the children from me, and tell them I long to show them the way
  to happiness and heaven. Have you mastered the stiffness and shyness
  of your temper? Charity gives _a meekness, an affability, a child-like
  simplicity and openness_, which nature has denied you. Let me find you
  shining by these virtues, and you will revive me much. God bless your
  labour about the sheep and the lambs!

  “Read the following note to all who fear God and love Jesus and each
  other, assembling in Madeley church:—

  “MY DEAR BRETHREN,—My heart leaps with joy at the thought of coming to
  see you and bless the Lord with you. Let us not stay to praise Him
  till we see each other. Let us see Him in His Son, in His works, and
  in all the members of Christ. How slow will post-horses go in
  comparison of love! Meet me, as I do you, in _spirit_; and we shall
  not stay till April or May to bless God together. _Now_ will be the
  time of union and love.”[487]

Footnote 487:

  Letters, 1791, p. 65.

For another month Fletcher was detained at Nyon, when he wrote to
Michael Onions the following:—

                                                “NYON, _March 1781_.

  “I thank you, my dear brother, for your kind remembrance of me, and
  for your letters. I hope to bring my fuller thanks to you in person.

  “Hold up your hands. Confirm the feeble knees. Set up an Ebenezer
  every hour of the day. In everything give thanks; and, in order to
  this, pray without ceasing, and rejoice evermore. My heart sympathizes
  with poor Molly Cartwright. Tell her, from me, that her husband lives
  in Him who is the Resurrection. In Christ there is no death, but the
  victory over death. O! let us live in Him, to Him, for Him, who more
  than repairs all our losses. My love to your wife. Tell her she
  promised me to be Jesus’s, as well as yours. My love to John Owen and
  all our other” [Methodist] “leaders, and by them to the few who do not
  tire by the way. With regard to the others, despair of none. Charity
  hopeth all things, and brings many things to pass. All things are
  _possible_ to him that believeth; all things are _easy_ to him that
  loveth. God be with you, and make you faithful unto death! This is my
  prayer for you, and all the Society, and all my dear parishioners, to
  whom I beg to be remembered. I have no place to write their names, but
  I pray they may all be written _in the book of life_. God is merciful,
  gracious, and faithful. I set my seal to His lovingkindness. Witness
  my heart and hand,

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[488]

Footnote 488:

  _Ibid_, p. 68.

Fletcher had promised to join Mr. Ireland at Montpelier; but, meanwhile,
William Perronet, who had returned to Lausanne, was so much worse in
health, that it was impossible for him to accompany his friend. Two days
before leaving Switzerland, Fletcher visited him, and, in a letter to
the aged Vicar of Shoreham, wrote:—

  “Miss Perronet and her mother[489] are as kind to him as my dear
  friends at Stoke Newington were to me when I lay sick there. His mind
  is quite easy; he is sweetly resigned to the will of God.”[490]

Footnote 489:

  Probably William Perronet’s aunt and cousin; certainly not his mother
  and sister.

Footnote 490:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

At Montpelier, Fletcher overtaxed his strength; and at Lyons, on his way
to England, wrote as follows to his sick and dying friend, whom he had
been obliged to leave behind him:—

                                            “LYONS, _April 6, 1781_.

  “MY DEAR FRIEND,—We are both weak, both afflicted; but Jesus careth
  for us. He is everywhere, and here He has all power to deliver us; and
  He may do it by ways we little think of: ‘As Thou wilt, when Thou
  wilt, and where Thou wilt,’ said Baxter: let us say the same. It was
  of the Lord you did not come with me: you would have been sick as I
  am. I am overdone with riding and preaching. I preached twice in the
  fields. I carry home with me much weakness and a pain in the back,
  which I fear will end in the gravel. The Lord’s will be done! I know I
  am called to suffer and die. The journey tires me; but, through mercy,
  I bear it. Let us believe and rejoice in the Lord Jesus.”[491]

Footnote 491:

  _Ibid._

Three weeks after this, Fletcher preached in City Road Chapel, London,
and, the next day (April 28), set out to the hospitable home of his
friend, Mr. Ireland, at Brislington. At this time, one of the Methodist
preachers, stationed in the Bristol circuit, was Thomas Rankin, who had
spent nearly five years in America, and who, in 1778, had been driven
home by the American rebellion. Hearing of Fletcher’s arrival at
Brislington, Rankin went to visit him, and wrote:—

  “I had such an interview with him as I shall never forget. I had not
  seen him for upwards of ten years. His looks, his salutation, and his
  address, struck me with wonder, solemnity, and joy. We retired into
  Mr. Ireland’s garden; and he began to inquire concerning the work of
  God in America. I gave him a full account of everything that he wished
  to know. During this relation, he stopped me six times, and, in the
  shadow of the trees, poured out his soul to God, for the prosperity of
  the work, and for our brethren there. He several times called upon me,
  also, to commend them to God in prayer. This was an hour never to be
  forgotten. Before we parted, I engaged him to come to Bristol, on the
  Monday following, to meet the select band in the forenoon, and to
  preach in the evening. During the hour he spent with the select band,
  the room appeared as ‘the house of God, and the gate of heaven.’ At
  night, he preached from, ‘We are bound to give thanks alway to God for
  you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning
  chosen you to salvation, through sanctification of the Spirit and
  belief of the truth.’ The whole congregation was in tears. He spoke
  like one who had but just left the converse of God and angels. The
  different conversations I had with him, and his prayers and preaching,
  during the few days he stayed at Bristol and Brislington, were
  attended with such effects upon me, that, for some months afterwards,
  not a cloud intervened between God and my soul, no, not for one hour.
  Of all the men I ever knew, I never saw such love to God and man, such
  deadness to the world, such entire consecratedness to Jesus, as in
  him. It often appeared to me that his every breath was prayer and
  praise. He lived more like a disembodied spirit than a human
  being.”[492]

Footnote 492:

  Thomas Rankin’s MS. Journal.

When at Marseilles, on his way to Switzerland, in March, 1778, Fletcher
wrote a long letter,[493] to Miss Bosanquet, on Christian Perfection,
and respecting his unpublished Essay on the New Birth. Miss Bosanquet
replied to that, in a letter dated August 30, 1778. Strange to say, this
letter was not put into Fletcher’s hands until nearly three years
afterwards. During this interval, there seems to have been no
correspondence between him and the lady who was speedily to become his
wife. On his return from Switzerland, he wrote her the following, which
is now for the first time published:—

                          “BRISLINGTON, NEAR BRISTOL, _May 1, 1781_.

  “DEAR MADAM,—Your kind favour dated August 30, 1778, having been
  mislaid in a drawer and forgotten, did not come into my hands till
  this morning. I hope my speedy taking of the pen, to acknowledge so
  unexpected a favour, will atone for the forgetfulness of my friend.

  “You speak, Madam, of a _letter from Bath_; I do not recollect, at
  present, your having favoured me with one from that place. Is it my
  lot to be tried, or disappointed in this respect? Well, the hairs of
  our heads, and the letters of our friends, are all numbered: not one
  of the former falls, not one of the latter miscarries, without the
  will of Him, to whose orders we have long since fully and cheerfully
  subscribed.

  “I have sincerely aimed at truth in writing the Essay you have been so
  kind as to peruse.[494] If I am not mistaken, Dr. Coke told me, when I
  passed through London, that he had it; but I went out of town in such
  a hurry that I had not time to take it with me. I feel the propriety
  of your remarks, and shall make the alterations you mention, as soon
  as I shall have the manuscript.

  “I had thought of what you name, respecting a _less plan_ of the
  doctrine of the New Birth,—a plan calculated to make way for the
  larger essay, and to guide into the truth those who have never taken
  one step without the leading strings of prejudice, and who cannot
  judge of a doctrine if it be not brought within the narrow compass and
  focus of their understanding. I shall be glad of an opportunity of
  consulting you about that sketch, if I live to make it. I love
  _truth_, because I love _Jesus_; but I am, every way, too feeble an
  instrument to defend and hold it forth with success. Your thought
  about it makes me pray with earnestness that I may, in some degree,
  answer your too favourable opinion of the importance of my little
  attempts to vindicate, or clear up, some part of the Gospel truths.

  “Alas! what am I? A cracked voice crying in the wilderness;—a blunted
  pen scribbling in a village. Thanks be to grace, however, I sincerely
  desire to be a living shadow of the Divine Man, who is truth and love
  incarnate. I sincerely desire to embrace those great and precious
  promises given unto us, whereby we may become partakers of the Divine
  nature. I will not rest in the first Comforter, so as to slight that
  _other Comforter_, who is to abide with us for ever. I want not only
  to see Jesus _altogether lovely_, but to feel Him _altogether powerful
  and wise_, both in myself and in all my fellow-Christians. Restless,
  resigned for this, I wait for this. My vehement soul is on the
  stretch. Some tell me I carry my views too high; but how can that be,
  if God can do in us exceeding abundantly above all we can ask or
  think? Is not the soul joined completely to the Lord, _one spirit with
  Him_? Are we not called to come to the measure of the stature of the
  fulness of Christ? Is a dwarf’s state of grace the full prize of our
  high calling? If this hope preys upon my feeble frame, I dare not cast
  it off: let me rather die a martyr to it than lose it. Why should
  there not be true martyrs for the hope, as well as for the faith of
  the Gospel? At all events, let us wait for the great salvation of God
  the Spirit. Against hope, let us believe in hope that we shall see
  _the royal priesthood_ clothed with Divine righteousness, and all
  God’s saints rejoice and sing.

  “The openness with which you mention what some _might_ call _your
  enthusiasm_, makes me reveal to you, Madam, what some call _mine_. I
  own I do not believe that Scripture repealed, ‘Your young men shall
  see visions; your old men shall dream dreams.’ ‘These signs shall
  follow them that believe,’ etc. (See Mark xvi. 17, 18). ‘My sons and
  my daughters shall prophesy.’ ‘Desire spiritual gifts, but rather that
  ye may prophesy’ (1 Cor. xiv. 2). Shall I offend you, if I ask you in
  simplicity the following questions? Do you know any soul filled with
  all the fulness of God? Anyone walking as Christ also walked, and able
  to say, in truth, ‘As He was, so are we in this world?’ Do you know
  any knit together in love, sharing all the riches of _the full
  assurance of understanding_, to the acknowledgment of the mystery of
  God, and of Christ in us the hope of glory (Col. i. 27; ii. 2)? Or,
  are the professors about you (far from having the full assurance of
  understanding with respect to this mystery) ready to say, when one
  speaks of this mystery, ‘Thou bringest strange things to our ears’?

  “If you condescend to favour me with an answer, please to direct it to
  me at Madeley, Salop. There I hope to be next week. In the meantime, I
  pray the Lord to give us an understanding, that we may know more of
  Him, and be completely in His Son Jesus Christ, that is, in the true,
  Divine, and eternal life. May the living unction be and abide with
  you! I ask it ardently for you; condescend to ask it also for, dear
  Madam, your obliged friend and servant in the Gospel,

                                                       “J. FLETCHER.

  “P.S.—The third part, which I designed to add[495] to the ‘Essay on
  the New Birth,’ was an application to the disciples of Moses, of John,
  and of Jesus glorified; to those who have the fear of God, the faith
  of the Son, and the love of the Spirit. My health is mended, thanks be
  to God! but my lungs remain weak. Please to remember me in Christian
  love to Sister Crosby.

  “Miss Bosanquet,
    “At Cross Hall,
  “Near _Leads (sic)_,
    “Yorkshire.”

Footnote 493:

  See the letter dated “March 7, 1778.”

Footnote 494:

  His “Essay on the New Birth.”

Footnote 495:

  This was not added.

A few days after the date of this letter, Fletcher, accompanied by Mr.
Ireland, returned to Madeley, having been absent from his flock since
November 1776,—four years and a-half.




                             CHAPTER XXII.
                  _LITERARY WORK DONE IN RETIREMENT._


FLETCHER’S long seclusion from public life is well described in two
lines of the poet Thompson:

             “_Retirement_, rural quiet, friendship, books,
             Progressive virtue, and approving Heaven.”

The four and a-half years, during which he was away from Madeley, were
spent in great weakness, but not in idleness. To say nothing of the
works he published, while he remained in England, namely, his “Answer to
the Rev. Mr. Toplady’s ‘Vindication of the Divine Decrees;’” his
“Vindication of the Rev. Mr. Wesley’s ‘Calm Address to our American
Colonies;’” his “American Patriotism;” his “Doctrines of Grace and
Justice;” and his “Plan of Reconciliation;” he was employed, whilst in
Switzerland, upon two of the most remarkable productions of his fertile
genius.

The first was a poem, in the French language, and was published in
Geneva, with the title “La Louange;”—a paraphrastic expansion of Psalm
cxlviii. The work was conceived in England, but was written in
Switzerland. Fletcher says he “was favoured with the critical remarks of
many persons distinguished for their learning, taste, and the works with
which they had enriched the Church, and the Republic of Letters. At the
end of certain Cantos, are Notes, or small Dissertations, serving to
explain, or illustrate, some of the truths inserted in the body of the
work.” According to the custom of the country and the age, before the
book could be published, it had to be submitted to an official appointed
to read manuscripts, previous to their being printed; and the following
was the approbation given to Fletcher’s Poem:—

  “I have read this work, which, in my judgment, everywhere breathes
  Piety, Faith, and Christian Charity.

                                               “DE BONS, _Censeur_.”

After his return to England, Fletcher enlarged the work, and, in 1785,
published an edition, still in the French language, with the title:—“La
Grace et la Nature, Poëme—Seconde Edition plus compléte. A Londre. De
l’Imprimerie de R. Hindmarsh, Clerkenwell Close; Chez T. Longman, dans
Paternoster Row; à Dublin Chez J. Charrnier, dans Kapel Street; et près
du Pont de fer, in Shropshire, 1785,” 8vo 442 pp. By permission, the
book was dedicated, “A la Reine de la Grande Bretagne.” The dedication,
dated “à Madeley près de Coalbrook-dale, dans la Comté de Salop, le 6 de
Sept. 1784,” was characteristic, and as follows:—

  “MADAM,—The parish, which, in the centre of your kingdom, produced an
  iron bridge,[496] being always fruitful in singularities, has now
  produced a French poem: His Majesty gave a favourable reception to the
  model of our bridge, and will Your Majesty refuse the dedication of
  our poem? The solidity of an iron bridge sustained by two rocks
  renders useless the support of a Royal hand; but a work on devotion
  has not the same solidity.

  “A French Poem in England will always require support; but, if the
  subject be religious, a powerful protection becomes doubly necessary;
  and where can I find, among mortals, a more firm security than your
  august name? Your court, Madam, admits the French language; your
  generous heart cherishes moral virtues; your exalted mind is pleased
  to encourage the cultivation of the fine Arts, among which poetry
  occupies the first rank. And, if a Queen of England permitted Voltaire
  to dedicate to her the praises of a French Monarch,[497] your piety,
  Madam, will not refuse those of the King of kings, celebrated in a
  poem, which has for its argument the divine song of a Sovereign, and
  the third Canto of which regards Kings and Princes.

  “May your Majesty, constantly surrounded with the most precious
  benedictions, never stand in need of the consolations offered to the
  afflicted in the ninth Canto! And, when you have long beheld that
  happy and sweet peace flourish, which is celebrated in this poem,[498]
  may you, without sorrow, exchange your heavy crown for one of those
  brilliant diamonds reserved for princes, who serve God, and cause
  righteousness to flourish in the earth! These are the ardent prayers
  of him who has the honour to be, with that profound respect, which
  virtue truly merits when united to greatness,

             “Madam, your majesty’s most humble and devoted servant,
                                                  “J. W. FLETCHER.”

Footnote 496:

  The bridge across the Severn, at Coalbrook Dale, regarded as one of
  the wonders of the age.

Footnote 497:

  Voltaire’s “Henriade,” printed in London in 1726, was dedicated to the
  Queen of George I.

Footnote 498:

  “An Essay on the Peace of 1783,” also written in French, and now
  incorporated with “La Grace et la Nature.”

In his preface, Fletcher says:—

  “A former edition of this poem was entitled ‘_Praise_,’[499] because
  the writer’s principal design was to impress his readers with the
  force of these words, ‘_Offer to the Lord the sacrifice of praise._’
  It is now presented to the public with alterations, and the addition
  of ten new Cantos, under the title of ‘_Grace and Nature_;’ or a
  descant on creation, as productive of the praise due to the great
  Creator.”

Footnote 499:

  The title, in French, was “La Louange.”

The book is a remarkable one. Every creature of God, animate and
inanimate, except devils and damned men in hell, seems to be called upon
to unite in offering praise to God. That Fletcher throbbed with the
poetic fire cannot, in fairness, be denied. Perhaps some of his thoughts
are fanciful; and his work, in other respects, may be imperfect; but
many of his conceptions and utterances are worthy not only of being
read, but of being remembered. The following quotations, taken from a
translation of it by the Rev. Miles Martindale, may furnish a faint idea
of its style and merits.

Like other poets, Fletcher begins with prayer for supernatural
inspiration:—

          “Thou Glorious Power, whom thrones supernal praise,
          Eternal source of life, of love, and grace;
          While joyful throngs surround Thy shining seat,
          Behold a worm low-bending at Thy feet!
          His darkness chase with Thy all-cheering ray;
          On his weak reason shed celestial day;
          His breast transform with renovating fire,
          With harmony divine his soul inspire.”

It has been already stated that a wood adjoined the house where Fletcher
resided at Nyon, and that this was one of his favourite resorts for
prayer, reading, and meditation, and that here he was accustomed to
instruct his congregation of little children. There can be no doubt that
the ensuing lines are descriptive of Fletcher’s enjoyments in this
sylvan cathedral:—

         “Ye solemn woods, where music loves to dwell,
         Whose zephyrs breathe the sweet balsamic smell;
         Here kindles piety divinely bright,
         The heart replete with love and joyous light.
         To crown the lay, the feather’d nations raise
         Their notes with mine, to sound the Eternal’s praise;
         While innocence inspires the sacred song,
         Ten thousand throats the swelling theme prolong.
         Amid these happy groves, see Eden shine,
         Than Bourbons’ pompous gardens, more divine.
         Fly the vile orchestra, where impious tongues
         Soft warble vice in loose lascivious songs.
         ’Tis here, ’mid zephyrs’ mild and melting strains,
         Lost Paradise her pristine bliss regains.”

One more quotation must suffice. It is taken from a long description of
the Lake of Geneva. After apostrophizing the divine Creator, who has “in
heaven” His “dwelling-place,” Fletcher proceeds:—

            “Thy bless’d serenity, Thy palace fair,
            The sleeping waters of this lake declare.
            To give mankind an emblem of Thy might,
            An image of Thy skill supremely bright,
            Thy plastic hand drew the rough rocks around,
            And scoop’d the wondrous vale, a gulf profound;
            Where winding Rhone his active force resigns,
            And, in wild fields of ice, resplendent shines.
            To shadow heaven, and the fair scene unfold,
            This lake with azure glows, and burnished gold;
            What brilliant rays, what awful glories stand,
            To show the wonders of Thy mighty hand!”

To several of the cantos of his poem, Fletcher attaches lengthened
notes, in prose; most of them levelled against the infidelity of
Voltaire, Rosseau, and the Unitarians.

Leaving the poem, “La Grace et la Nature,” another of Fletcher’s works
in Switzerland must be briefly noticed. This also was written in the
French language; and after Fletcher’s death was translated, and
published with the following title: “The Portrait of St. Paul; or, the
true Model for Christians and Pastors: translated from the French
Manuscript of the late Rev. John William de la Flechere, Vicar of
Madeley. To which is added, Some Account of the Author, by the Rev.
Joshua Gilpin, Vicar of Rockwardine, in the County of Salop. In two
volumes. Shrewsbury. 1790.” 12mo, pp. 377 and 330.

Mr. Gilpin was an ardent admirer of Fletcher, as his biographical
“Notes” amply show. He had been a resident in Fletcher’s vicarage, and
had enjoyed the unspeakable benefit of his example, prayers, and
instruction. He writes:—

  “Before I was of sufficient age to take holy orders, I thankfully
  embraced the offered privilege of spending a few months beneath the
  roof of this exemplary man; and I well remember how solemn an
  impression was made upon my heart by the manner in which he received
  me. He met me at his door with a look of inexpressible benignity; and,
  conducting me by the hand into his house, intimated a desire of
  leading me immediately into the presence of that God to whom the
  government of his little family was ultimately submitted. Instantly he
  fell upon his knees and poured out an earnest prayer that my present
  visit might be rendered both advantageous and comfortable, and that
  our society might be crowned by an intimate fellowship with Christ.
  This may serve as a specimen of the manner in which he was accustomed
  to receive his guests.

  “In his social prayers, he paid but little attention to those rules
  which have been laid down with respect to the composition and order of
  such devotional exercises. His words flowed spontaneously, and without
  premeditation, though always wonderfully adapted to the occasion.
  Nothing impertinent, artificial, or superfluous appeared in his
  addresses to the Deity. His prayers were the prayers of faith; always
  fervent, often effectual, and invariably a mingled flow of
  supplication and gratitude, humility and confidence, resignation and
  fervour, adoration and love.

  “Of his secret supplications, He alone can judge ‘who seeth in
  secret.’ His closet was his favourite retirement, to which he
  constantly retreated whenever his public duties allowed him a season
  of leisure. Here, in times of uncommon distress, he continued during
  whole nights in prayer before God; and that part of the wall, against
  which he was accustomed to kneel, appeared deeply stained with the
  breath he had spent in fervent worship.”

In the preface to his translation, Mr. Gilpin remarks:—

  “The following work was begun, and nearly completed, in the course of
  Mr. Fletcher’s last residence at Nyon; where it formed a valuable part
  of his private labours during a long and painful confinement from
  public duty.[500] On his return to England, he suffered the manuscript
  to lie by him, intending, at his leisure, to translate and prepare it
  for the press. After his decease, Mrs. Fletcher discovered it, and the
  translator, finding it a work of no common importance, was readily
  induced to render it into English. _The Portrait of St. Paul_ was
  originally intended for publication in the author’s native country, to
  which its arguments and quotations apply with peculiar propriety. It
  contains Mr. Fletcher’s last and best thoughts upon some of the most
  important subjects that can occupy the human mind.”

Footnote 500:

  Mrs. Fletcher says, her husband told her the manuscript “was a rough
  draft, written in his illness when abroad, and which he intended to
  re-write and to improve.” (“Mrs. Fletcher’s Life,” by H. Moore, p.
  395.)

Unfortunately, Fletcher’s “Portrait of St. Paul” has, at the present
day, but few readers. At the beginning of the century, it was one of the
text-books of the Methodist itinerant preachers; and, even within the
last forty years, the _Methodist Magazine_ spoke of it as an “admirable
work” and an “inestimable volume.”[501] Methodists, now-a-days, too
often prefer ornament to truth.

Footnote 501:

  _Wesleyan Methodist Magazine_, 1845, p. 74.

The traits of St. Paul upon which Fletcher descants are the following:
his early piety; his Christian piety; his intimate union with Christ
by faith; his extraordinary vocation to the holy ministry, and in what
that ministry chiefly consists; his entire devotion to Jesus Christ;
his strength and his arms; his power to bind, to loose, and to bless
in the name of the Lord; the earnestness with which he began and
continued to fill up the duties of his vocation; the manner in which
he divided his time between prayer, preaching, and thanksgiving; the
fidelity with which he announced the severe threatenings and
consolatory promises of the Gospel; his profound humility; the
ingenuous manner in which he acknowledged and repaired his errors; his
detestation of party spirit and divisions; his rejection of praise;
his universal love; his particular love to the faithful; his love to
those whose faith was wavering; his love to his countrymen and his
enemies; his love to those whom he knew only by report; his charity
towards the poor; his charity towards sinners; the condescension of
his humble charity; his courage in defence of truth; his prudence in
frustrating the designs of his enemies; his tenderness toward others,
and his severity toward himself; his love never degenerated into
cowardice; his perfect disinterestedness; his condescension in
labouring with his own hands; his respect for the holy estate of
matrimony; the ardour of his love; his generous fears and succeeding
consolation; the grand subject of his glorying; his patience and
fortitude; his firmness before magistrates; his courage in consoling
his persecuted brethren; his humble confidence in producing the seals
of his ministry; his readiness to seal with his blood the truths of
the Gospel; the sweet suspense of his choice between life and death;
the constancy of his zeal and diligence to the end of his course; his
triumphs over the evils of life and the terrors of death.

After this follows “The Portrait of Lukewarm Ministers and False
Apostles;” then Fletcher answers “Objections” to the “Portrait of St.
Paul;” and next, with consummate ability, states “The Doctrines of an
Evangelical Pastor;” and concludes with “An Essay on the Connexion of
Doctrines with Morality,” in answer to the infidel philosophy of
Voltaire and Rosseau, recently deceased. The last two sections are
invaluable, and exhibit Fletcher in all the strength of his sanctified
genius.

To make selections from so comprehensive a work as this is difficult,
but the following specimens may be acceptable and useful:—

  _The faithful pastor._—“The disposition of a faithful pastor is, in
  every respect, diametrically opposed to that of a worldly minister. If
  you observe the conversation of an ecclesiastic who is influenced by
  the spirit of the world, you will hear him intimating either that he
  has, or that he would not be sorry to have, the precedency among his
  brethren; to live in a state of affluence and splendour, and to secure
  to himself such distinguished appointments as would increase both his
  dignity and his income, without making any extraordinary addition to
  his pastoral labours. You will find him anxious to be admitted into
  the best companies, and occasionally forming parties for the chase, or
  some other vain amusement. While the true pastor cries out, in the
  self-renouncing language of the great Apostle, ‘God forbid that I
  should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the
  world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.’ Oh! ye, who preside
  over the household of God, learn of the Apostle Paul to manifest your
  real superiority. Surpass your inferiors in humility, in charity, in
  zeal, in your painful labours for the salvation of sinners, in your
  invincible courage to encounter those dangers which threaten your
  brethren, and by your unwearied patience in bearing those persecutions
  which the faithful disciples of Christ are perpetually called to
  endure from a corrupt world. Thus shall you honourably replace the
  first Christian prelates, and happily restore the Church to its
  primitive dignity.”

  _Writing sermons, and reading or delivering them._—“He, who spake as
  never man spake, rejected the arts of our modern orators, delivering
  His discourses in a style of easy simplicity, and unaffected zeal. We
  do not find that St. Paul and the other Apostles imposed upon
  themselves the troublesome servitude of penning down their discourses.
  And we are well assured that, when the Seventy and the Twelve were
  commissioned to publish the Gospel, no directions of this nature were
  given in either case.”

  “What advantage has accrued to the Church, by renouncing the apostolic
  method of publishing the Gospel? We have indolence and artifice, in
  the place of sincerity and vigilance. Those public discourses, which
  were anciently the effects of conviction and zeal, are now become the
  weakly exercises of learning and art. ‘_We believe, and therefore
  speak_,’ is an expression, that has grown entirely obsolete among
  modern pastors. Nothing is more common among us than to say, ‘As we
  have sermons prepared upon a variety of subjects, we are ready to
  deliver them, as opportunity offers.’

  “Many inconveniences arise from this method of preaching. While the
  physician of souls is labouring to compose a learned dissertation upon
  some plain passage of Scripture, he has but little leisure to visit
  those languishing patients, who need his immediate assistance. He
  thinks it sufficient to attend upon them every Sabbath-day, in the
  place appointed for public duty: but he recollects not, that those, to
  whom his counsel is peculiarly necessary, are the very persons who
  refuse to meet him there. His unprofitable employments at home leave
  him no opportunity to go in pursuit of his wandering sheep. He meets
  them, it is true, at stated periods, in the common fold; but it is
  equally true that, during every successive interval, he discovers the
  coldest indifference with respect to their spiritual welfare. From
  this unbecoming conduct of many a minister, one would naturally
  imagine, that the flock were rather called to seek out their indolent
  pastor, than that he was purposely hired to pursue every straying
  sheep.

  “Since the orator’s art has taken the place of the energy of faith,
  what happy effects has it produced upon the minds of men? Have we
  discovered more frequent conversions among us? Are formal professors
  more generally seized with a religious fear? Do the wicked depart from
  the Church, to bewail their transgressions in private; and believers
  to visit the mourners in their affliction? Is it not rather to be
  lamented that we are, at this day, equally distant from Christian
  charity, and primitive simplicity?

  “Reading approved sermons is generally supposed to be preaching the
  Gospel. If this were really so, we need but look out some schoolboy of
  tolerable capacity; and, after instructing him to read, with proper
  emphasis and gesture, the sermons of Tillotson, Sherlock, or Saurin,
  we shall have made him an excellent minister of the Word of God. But,
  if preaching the Gospel is to publish among sinners that repentance
  and salvation, which we have experienced in ourselves, it is evident
  that experience and sympathy are more necessary to the due performance
  of this work, than all the accuracy and elocution that can possibly be
  acquired.

  “When this sacred experience and this generous sympathy began to lose
  their prevalence in the Church, their place was gradually supplied by
  the trifling substitutes of study and affectation. Carnal prudence has
  now for many ages solicitously endeavoured to adapt itself to the
  taste of the wise and the learned. But, while ‘_the offence of the
  cross_’ is avoided, neither the wise nor the ignorant are effectually
  converted.

  “In consequence of the same error, the ornaments of theatrical
  eloquence have been sought after, with a shameful solicitude. And what
  has been the fruit of so much useless toil? _Preachers_, after all,
  have played their part with much less applause than _comedians_; and
  their curious auditories are still running from the pulpit to the
  stage, for the purpose of hearing fables repeated with a degree of
  sensibility, which the messengers of truth can neither _feel_, nor
  _feign_.”

For want of space, further extracts from Fletcher’s invaluable, but
neglected, book cannot be given here. Those, however, already presented
deserve attention. Though written a hundred years ago, they are sadly
appropriate to the state of things at the present day.

As already stated, both “La Grace et la Nature,” and the “Portrait of
St. Paul,” were written in the French language, a strong presumptive
proof that he intended to publish _both_ of them in his native country.
So far as the “Portrait of St. Paul” is concerned, that intention was
not fulfilled.




                             CHAPTER XXIII.
                _THE FIRST THREE MONTHS AFTER FLETCHER’S
                          RETURN TO MADELEY._

                                 1781.


FLETCHER recommenced his ministry at Madeley on Sunday, May 27,
1781.[502] During his absence of four years and a-half, religion, in his
parish, had not prospered. In a letter to his hospitable friend, Charles
Greenwood, at Stoke Newington, he wrote:—

  “Madeley, June 12, 1781. I stayed longer at Brislington than I
  designed. Mr. Ireland was ill, and would nevertheless come hither with
  me; so that I was obliged to stay till he was better. And, indeed, it
  was well I did not come without him; for he has helped me to regulate
  my outward affairs, which were in great confusion. Mr. Greaves leaves
  me; and I will either leave Madeley, or have an assistant able to stir
  among the people: for I had much rather be gone than stay here, to see
  the dead bury their dead. A cloud is over my poor parish; but, alas!
  it is not the luminous cloud by day, nor the pillar of fire by night.
  Even the few remaining professors stared at me the other day, when I
  preached to them on these words, ‘Ye shall receive the Holy Ghost; for
  the promise is unto you.’ Well, the promise is unto _us_: if others
  despise it, still let us believe and hope. Nothing enlarges the heart
  and awakens the soul more than that believing, loving
  expectation.”[503]

Footnote 502:

  _Methodist Magazine_, 1811, p. 312.

Footnote 503:

  Fletcher’s “Life,” by Wesley.

The following, addressed to Wesley, refers to the same subject, and also
to other matters:—

                                           “MADELEY, _June 6, 1781_.

  “REV. AND DEAR SIR,—I rejoice to hear that your spiritual bow abides
  in strength. I would have wished you joy about it since my arrival, if
  I knew where a letter could overtake you.[504] I heartily thank you
  for the directions you give me to hinder my bow, so far split, from
  breaking quite. Now I must imitate your prudence, or the opportunity
  of doing it will soon be lost for good.

  “I would do something in the Lord’s vineyard, but I have not strength.
  I can hardly, without over-doing myself, visit the sick of my parish.
  I was better when I left Switzerland than I am now. I had a great pull
  back, in venturing to preach in the fields, in the Cevennes, to about
  two thousand French Protestants. I rode thirty miles to that place,
  from Montpelier, on horseback, but was obliged to be brought back in a
  carriage. And now that I am here, I can neither serve my church, nor
  get it properly served. Mr. Greaves owns, the place is not fit for
  him, nor he for it. He will go when I can get somebody to help me.
  Could you spare me Brother Bayley?[507] It would be a charity. Unless
  I can get a curate zealous enough to stir among the people, I will
  give up the place: it would be little comfort to me to stay here to
  see the dead bury the dead. I thank God, however, for resignation to
  His will. As soon as I shall discern it clearly, I shall follow it;
  for, I trust, I have learned in what state soever I am, therewith to
  be content.

  “What a blessing is Christ to the soul, and health to the body! When
  you go to, or come from the Conference, be so good as to remember that
  you have now a pilgrim’s house in the way from Shrewsbury to Broseley;
  and do not climb our hills without baiting. At our first interview, I
  shall ask your thoughts about a French work or two I have upon the
  anvil; but which I fear I shall not have time to finish. Be that as it
  will, God needs not the hand of Uzzah, nor my finger, to keep up His
  ark.

  “I read, with pleasure and edification, your _Arminian Magazine_.[506]
  Your storehouse is inexhaustible. The Lord strengthen you to
  _Nestor’s_ years, or rather to the useful length of St. John’s life!
  It is worth living to serve the Church, and to teach Christians to
  love one another.

  “I am, rev. and dear Sir, your affectionate, though unprofitable
  servant,

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[505]

Footnote 504:

  The veteran evangelist was now visiting the Isle of Man, “east, south,
  north, and west,” and said, “I was thoroughly convinced that we have
  no such circuit as this, either in England, Scotland, or Ireland.”
  (Wesley’s Journal.)

Footnote 505:

  The Rev. Cornelius Bayley, at this time one of the Masters of Wesley’s
  School at Kingswood. Cornelius Bailey was born near Whitchurch, in
  Shropshire, about the year 1752. He was an excellent Hebrew scholar,
  and published a Hebrew grammar, which procured him a doctor’s degree
  from a foreign university. Afterwards, when he took the same degree,
  D.D., at Cambridge, he delivered a Latin sermon, which was much
  applauded. As will soon be seen, he became Fletcher’s curate. On
  leaving Madeley, he went to Manchester, where he became the founder
  and the minister of St. James’s Church. This is not the place to give
  a detailed account of this remarkable man. Suffice it to say, he died,
  in Manchester, on April 2, 1812, his last words being, “O my Saviour!
  The Lord is with me!” His remains were interred in a vault of his own
  church; more than forty clergymen attended his funeral; the church was
  crowded, and more than a thousand of his friends had to stand outside.
  The Rev. John Crosse, afterwards so well-known in Bradford, preached
  the funeral sermon. (_Christian Observer_, 1812, p. 477.)

Footnote 506:

  Wesley began to publish this magazine during Fletcher’s absence on the
  continent.

Footnote 507:

  _Arminian Magazine_, 1782, p. 48.

Wesley’s approaching Conference was to be held at Leeds, and to Joseph
Benson, who had recently been married, Fletcher wrote as follows:—

  “I am, at present, without an assistant here, but hope soon to have
  Mr. Bayley, one of the masters of Kingswood School. If he come, I
  shall be at liberty to go to Leeds, and I hope God will strengthen me
  for the journey. A godly wife is a peculiar blessing from the Lord. I
  wish you joy for such a loan. Possess it with godly fear and holy joy;
  and the God who gave her you help you both to see your doubled piety
  take root in the heart of the child that crowns your union. So prays,
  my dear brother, your affectionate friend,

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[508]

Footnote 508:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

Meanwhile, Fletcher had begun a correspondence with a lady hitherto
unknown to him; or rather she had begun a correspondence with him. Miss
Ann Loxdale, daughter of Joseph Loxdale, Esq., of Shrewsbury, was now
about twenty-six years of age. Two years before the date of her letter
to Fletcher, she had been converted. In reply to her communication, he
said:—

                                           “MADELEY, _May 24, 1781_.

  “DEAR MADAM,—I embrace the first opportunity of thanking my unknown
  _friend_ for her kind Christian letter. As I believe you are sincere,
  and mean what your pen has traced upon paper, I may rejoice over a
  greater treasure than that of the Indies—I mean, the _treasure of a
  Christian friend_; for nothing but Christianity could give you courage
  to express any degree of friendship for so contemptible a neighbour. I
  shall preach here next Sunday, please God. If you can, and if you are
  not afraid of dining upon a bit of cold meat, come and dine with your
  new and yet _old friend_, who, though he cannot converse long with his
  friends, on account of his weakness, will find a quarter of an hour to
  assure you, that, in the faith, hope, and love of the Gospel, he is,

              “Madam, your obliged friend and obedient servant,
                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[509]

Footnote 509:

  _Methodist Magazine_, 1811, p.312.

There cannot be a doubt respecting Miss Loxdale’s ardent piety; but she
was in danger of falling into some of the errors of the mystics. She had
written to Wesley, asking his advice respecting the works of Madam
Bourignon, which she had been reading. Wesley, in his reply, dated “June
10, 1781,” told her that Madam Bourignon’s “new and peculiar
expressions” were “only shadows,” not “an excellence, but a capital
defect.” Wesley continued,—

  “As I apprehend your mind must be a little confused by reading those
  uncommon treatises, I wish you would give another deliberate reading
  to the ‘Plain Account of Christian Perfection.’ You may be assured
  there is no religion under heaven higher or deeper than that which is
  there described. I desire nothing, I will accept of nothing, but the
  common faith and common salvation; and I want you to be only just such
  a common Christian as Jenny Cooper was.”[510]

Footnote 510:

  Wesley’s Works, vol. xiii., p. 121.

Meantime, Miss Loxdale and Fletcher had met and conversed with each
other; for, in a long letter to her, dated twelve days after Wesley’s,
he gave her what he considered suitable advice, and said, “I never
doubted your sincerity, my dear friend; and can, without wavering,
confess you _a member of my Lord, a child of my heavenly Father, and a
fellow-heir of the kingdom of heaven_, purchased for penitent
believers.”[511]

Footnote 511:

  _Methodist Magazine_, 1811, p. 312.

This epistolary and _vivâ voce_ intercourse grew into a sincere
friendship, but nothing more than that. Miss Loxdale became one of the
most holy and devoted Methodists of the last century; and, in 1811, at
the age of fifty-six, married the Rev. Dr. Coke. A year afterwards, she
died at York, and was buried in Dr. Coke’s family vault at Brecon.[512]

Footnote 512:

  Drew’s “Life of Coke,” p. 346.

Just at the time when Fletcher was writing his letters to Miss Loxdale,
and giving her, most sincerely, the best advice he could, his heart was
full of Miss Bosanquet, and, as will soon be seen, at the beginning of
the month of June, he proposed to marry her. The reply was not
unfavourable, and Fletcher at once decided to attend Wesley’s Conference
at Leeds, in the neighbourhood of which Miss Bosanquet resided. The
following letter, addressed to Wesley, announces this decision, and
refers to the case of Miss Loxdale, and to an interesting incident in
Switzerland:—

                                          “MADELEY, _June 24, 1781_.

  “REV. AND DEAR SIR,—As to Miss Loxdale, I believe her to be a simple,
  holy follower of the Lord. Nothing throws _unscriptural_ mysticism
  down like holding out the promise of the Father, and the fulness of
  the Spirit, to be received _now_, _by faith_ in the two Promisers, the
  _Father_ and the _Son_. Ah! what is the _penal fire_ of the mystics,
  to the _burning love_ of the _Spirit_, revealing the glorious power of
  the _Father_ and the _Son_, according to John xiv. 26, and filling us
  with all the fulness of God? Plain Scripture is better than all mystic
  refinements.

  “When I was at Nyon, near Geneva, three ministers received the Word,
  and preached the Truth. When persecution arose because of the Word,
  the two pastors were afraid; but the curate of the first pastor, a
  burgess of the town, stood by me. This Timothy opened his house, when
  the pastors shut both their pulpits and houses; and I heard him preach
  a discourse before I came away, worthy of _you_, Sir, upon the heights
  and depths of holiness. He wrote an apology for me, which I sent to
  the head of the persecuting Clergy, and so stopped the torrent of
  wrath. He made observations upon the mischief done to Christianity by
  bad Clergy, such as George Fox and you, Sir, would not disown. When I
  told him of you and the Methodists, he expressed a great desire to
  come to England, to hear you, to see the English brethren, and to
  learn the English language, that he might read your works, and,
  perhaps, translate some of them. He can have no living in his own
  country, because he will not _swear to prosecute all who propagate
  Arminian tenets_; which is more honest than many of the Clergy, many
  of whom are _Arians_, _Socinians_, or _Deists_, and do not scruple to
  take the _Calvinian Oaths_.

  “I shall endeavour to wait upon you at Leeds, at the time of the
  Conference: in the meantime, I am, Rev. and dear Sir, your obedient
  Servant, and affectionate Son in the Gospel,

                                               “JOHN FLETCHER.”[513]

Footnote 513:

  _Arminian Magazine_, 1782, p. 49.

Another of Fletcher’s letters, belonging to this period, is too valuable
to be omitted. His interview with Thomas Rankin, at Brislington, has
been related. He now wrote to Rankin, as follows:—

                                          “MADELEY, _June 25, 1781_.

  “MY DEAR BROTHER,—I thank you for your kind letter to me. I found
  myself of _one heart_ with you, both as a preacher and believer,
  before I left Bristol, and I am glad you find freedom to speak to me
  as your friend in Christ.

  “By what you mention of your experience, I am confirmed in the
  thought, 1. That it is often harder to keep in the way of faith and
  light than to get into it. 2. That speculation and reasoning hinder us
  to get into that way, and lead us out of it when we are in it. 3. The
  only business of those who come to God, as a Redeemer or Sanctifier,
  must be to feel their want of redemption and sanctifying ‘power from
  on high,’ and to come for it by simple, cordial, working faith.
  Easily, the heart gets into a false rest before our last enemy is
  overcome. Hence arises a relapsing, in an imperceptible degree, into
  indolence and carnal security; hence a dreaming that we are rich and
  increased in goods.

  “This is one of the causes of the declension you perceive among some
  of the Methodists. Another is the _outward rest_ they have. Another
  may be the judging of the greatness of the work by the numbers in
  Society. Be the consequence what it will, those who see the evil
  should honestly bear their testimony against it, first in their own
  souls, next by their life, and thirdly by their plain and constant
  reproofs and exhortations.

  “The work of justification seems stopped, in some degree, because the
  glory and necessity of the pardon of sins, to be _received_ and
  _enjoyed now by faith_, is not pressed enough upon _sinners_; and the
  need of _retaining it_ upon _believers_. The work of sanctification is
  hindered, if I am not mistaken, by the same reason, and by holding out
  the being _delivered from sin_ as the mark to be aimed at, instead of
  being _rooted in Christ_, and _filled with the fulness of God_, and
  with _power from on high_. The dispensation of the Spirit is
  confounded with that of the Son, and the former not being held forth
  clearly enough, formal and lukewarm believers in Jesus Christ suppose
  they have the gift of the Holy Ghost. Hence the increase of _carnal_
  professors, see Acts viii. 16. And hence so few _spiritual_ men.

  “Let us pray, hope, love, believe for ourselves, and call for the
  display of the Lord’s arm. My love to your dear fellow-labourer, Mr.
  Pawson. Pray for your affectionate brother,

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[514]

Footnote 514:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

The sentiments expressed in this valuable letter were important a
hundred years ago; and are far more important now. Methodists, and
especially Methodist Preachers, ought to lay them seriously to heart.
Holding them, Fletcher proceeded to the Methodist Conference of 1781,
which began at Leeds on Tuesday, August 7, and concerning which Wesley
writes as follows:—

  “1781. Sunday, _August 5_. At the old church in Leeds, we had eighteen
  clergymen, and about eleven hundred communicants. I preached there at
  three; the church was thoroughly filled; and I believe most could
  hear, while I explained the ‘new covenant’ which God has now made with
  the Israel of God.

  “Monday, 6th. I desired Mr. Fletcher, Dr. Coke, and four more of our
  brethren, to meet every evening, that we might consult together on any
  difficulty that occurred. On _Tuesday_ our Conference began, at which
  were present about seventy preachers, whom I had severally invited to
  come and assist me with their advice, in carrying on the great work of
  God. _Wednesday_, 8th. I desired Mr. Fletcher to preach. I do not
  wonder he should be so popular; not only because he preaches with all
  his might, but because the power of God attends both his preaching and
  prayer. On _Monday_ and _Tuesday_ (August 13 and 14) we finished the
  remaining business of the Conference, and ended it with solemn prayer
  and thanksgiving.”[515]

Footnote 515:

  Wesley’s Journal.

Notwithstanding the evils even then existing, and which were lamented by
Fletcher in the foregoing letter, these were glorious days, and their
conferences memorable “times of refreshing from the presence of the
Lord.” Mr. Gorham, of St. Neots, was at the Conference of 1781, and
wrote:—

  “Mr. Fletcher preached at five in the morning, from 2 Peter i. 4.
  Notwithstanding the earliness of the hour, at least two thousand
  persons were present, who appeared to listen to him with the deepest
  attention.”

Joseph Pescod, one of Wesley’s itinerant preachers, in a letter to his
wife, remarked:—

  “I arrived at Leeds on Saturday evening; and on Sunday morning, at
  five o’clock, I had the happiness to hear that venerable servant of
  God, Mr. Fletcher. Never did I see any man more like what I suppose
  the ancient Apostles to have been. His text was 2 Peter i. 4: ‘Whereby
  are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises.’ He spoke
  particularly of the three great promises of God to man. The leading
  promise of the Old Testament, he remarked, was, ‘The seed of the woman
  shall bruise the serpent’s head.’ On this promise, he observed, the
  saints lived four thousand years, and were saved through the Messiah
  to come. The other two, he said, were New Testament promises. First,
  the promise of the Holy Ghost, whom our Lord told His disciples He
  would send after His ascension. The dispensation of the Spirit is to
  renew us after the image of God; which implies light, and power, and
  love. The third promise, on which he dwelt, was that of the
  resurrection of the body. I think I never heard a sermon to be
  compared with it. I wish I could tell you every word. I had, also, the
  happiness to receive from his hand the bread in the sacrament of the
  Lord’s Supper. The ordinance was administered in the old church, by
  Mr. Wesley, Mr. Fletcher, and nine other clergymen. Mr. Wesley
  preached in the afternoon, in the church, from Hebrews viii.
  10–12.”[516]

Footnote 516:

  _Wesleyan Methodist Magazine_, 1829, p. 528.

Wesley’s Conference finished its business on August 14; but Fletcher,
the happy guest of Miss Bosanquet, at Cross Hall, continued in the
neighbourhood about three weeks longer, “preaching,” says his delighted
hostess, “in different places, with much power.”[517] A record of one of
the meetings that Fletcher attended fortunately exists, and is here
given almost without abridgment.

Footnote 517:

  Moore’s “Life of Mrs. Fletcher,” p. 141.

James Rogers was, at this time, stationed at Sheffield; but, no doubt,
both he and his far-famed wife, “Hester Ann,” attended the Conference at
Leeds. After its sittings were ended, she, like Fletcher, still
remained. On August 24, Fletcher came with Miss Bosanquet, and Mrs.
Crosby, to dine at Mr. Smith’s, in Park Row, and to meet the Select
Society. Mrs. Rogers writes:—

  “When I entered the room, where they were assembled, the heavenly man
  was giving out the following verses, with such animation as I have
  seldom witnessed—

              “‘Near us, assisting Jesus, stand;
                Give us the op’ning heavens to see;
              Thee to behold at God’s right hand,
                And yield our parting souls to Thee.

              “‘My Father, O my Father, hear,
                And send the fiery chariot down;
              Let Israel’s flaming steeds appear,
                And whirl us to the starry crown.

              “‘We, we would die for Jesus too;
                Through tortures, fires, and seas of blood,
              All triumphantly break through,
                And plunge into the depths of God.’

  “After this, Mr. Fletcher poured out his full soul in prayer to God.
  Indeed, his every breath seemed to be prayer, or praise, or spiritual
  instruction; and every word that fell from his lips appeared to be
  accompanied by unction from above.

  “After dinner, I took an opportunity to beg him to explain an
  expression he had used in a letter to Miss Loxdale;[518] namely, that,
  on all who are renewed in love, God bestows the gift of prophecy. He
  called for the Bible; then read and explained Acts ii.; observing,
  that, to prophesy in the sense _he_ meant, was, to magnify God with
  the _new heart_ of love, and the _new tongue_ of praise, as they did,
  who, on the day of Pentecost, were filled with the Holy Ghost. He
  insisted that believers now are called upon to prove the same
  baptismal fire; that the day of Pentecost was the opening of the
  dispensation of the Spirit,—the great promise of the Father; and that
  the _latter day glory_, which he believed was near at hand, should far
  exceed the first effusion of the Spirit. Seeing then that they, on the
  day of Pentecost, bore witness to the grace of our Lord, so should
  _we_; and, like them, spread the flame of love.

  “After singing a hymn, he cried, ‘O to be filled with the Holy Ghost!
  I want to be filled! O, my friends, let us wrestle for a more abundant
  outpouring of the Spirit!’ To me, he said, ‘Come, my sister, will
  _you_ covenant with me this day, to pray for _the fulness of the
  Spirit_? Will _you_ be a witness for Jesus?’ I answered, with flowing
  tears, ‘In the strength of Jesus I will.’ He cried, ‘Glory, glory be
  to God! Lord, strengthen Thy handmaid to keep this covenant, even unto
  death!’

  “He then said, ‘My dear brethren and sisters, God is here! I feel Him
  in this place; but I would hide my face in the dust, because I have
  been ashamed to declare what He has done for _me_. For many years, I
  have grieved His Spirit; I am deeply humbled; and He has again
  restored my soul.’ Last Wednesday evening, He spoke to me by these
  words, ‘_Reckon yourselves, therefore, to be dead indeed unto sin; but
  alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord._’ I obeyed the voice of
  God: I now obey it; and tell you all, to the praise of His love,—_I am
  freed from sin._ Yes, I rejoice to declare it, and to be a witness to
  the glory of His grace, that _I am dead unto sin, and alive unto God,
  through Jesus Christ_, who is my Lord and King! I received this
  blessing four or five times before; but I lost it, by not observing
  the order of God; who has told us, _With the heart man believeth unto
  righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation._
  But the enemy offered his bait, under various colours, to keep me from
  a public declaration of what God had wrought.’

  “‘When I first received this grace, Satan bid me wait awhile, till I
  saw more of the _fruits_: I resolved to do so; but I soon began to
  doubt of the _witness_, which, before, I had felt in my heart; and, in
  a little time, I was sensible I had lost both. A second time, after
  receiving this salvation, I was kept from being a witness for my Lord,
  by the suggestion, ‘Thou art a public character—the eyes of _all_ are
  upon thee—and if, as before, by _any_ means thou lose the blessing, it
  will be a dishonour to the doctrine of _heart-holiness_.’ I held my
  peace, and again forfeited the gift of God. At another time, I was
  prevailed upon to hide it, by reasoning, ‘How few, even of the
  _children of God_, will receive this testimony; many of them supposing
  every transgression of the Adamic law is sin; and, therefore, if I
  profess to be _free_ from sin, _all_ these will give my profession the
  lie; because I am _not_ free in _their_ sense: I am not free from
  ignorance, mistakes, and various infirmities; I will, therefore, enjoy
  what God has wrought in me; but I will not say, _I am perfect in
  love._ Alas! I soon found again, _He that hideth his Lord’s talent,
  and improveth it not, from that unprofitable servant shall be taken
  away even that he hath._

  “‘Now, my brethren, you see my folly. I have confessed it in your
  presence; and _now_ I resolve before you all to confess my Master. I
  will confess Him to all the world. And I declare unto you, in the
  presence of God, the Holy Trinity, I am now _dead indeed unto sin_. I
  do not say, _I am crucified with Christ_, because some of our
  well-meaning brethren say, by _this_ can only be meant _a gradual
  dying_; but I profess unto you, _I am dead unto sin, and alive unto
  God_: and, remember, all this is _through Jesus Christ our Lord_. _He_
  is my Prophet, Priest, and King—my indwelling Holiness—my _all in
  all_. I wait for the fulfilment of that prayer, _That they all may be
  one, as Thou, Father, art in me, and I in Thee, that they also may be
  one in us: and that they may be one, even as we are one._ O for that
  pure baptismal flame! O for the fulness of the dispensation of the
  Holy Ghost! Pray, pray, pray for this! This shall make us all of one
  heart, and of one soul. Pray for _gifts_—for the gift of utterance;
  and confess your royal Master. A man without gifts is like a king in
  disguise: he appears as a subject only. You are _kings and priests
  unto God_! Put on, therefore, your robes, and wear on your _garter,
  holiness to the Lord_.’

  “A few days after this, I heard Mr. Fletcher preach upon the same
  subject; inviting all, who felt their need of full redemption, to
  believe _now_ for this great salvation. He observed, ‘As when you
  reckon with your creditor, or with your host, and, as when you have
  paid all, you reckon yourselves free, so now reckon with God. _Jesus_
  has paid all: He has paid for _thee_!—has purchased _thy pardon_ and
  _holiness_; therefore, it is now God’s command, _Reckon thyself dead
  indeed unto sin_; and thou art alive unto God from this hour! O,
  begin, begin to reckon now! Fear not: believe, believe, believe! and
  continue to believe every moment! So shalt thou continue _free_; for
  it is retained, as it is received, by _faith alone_. And, whosoever
  thou art that perseveringly believeth, it will be as fire in thy
  bosom, and constrain thee to confess with thy mouth _thy Lord and
  King, Jesus_. And, in spreading the sacred flame of love, thou shalt
  be saved to the uttermost.’

  “He also dwelt largely on those words, ‘Where sin abounded, grace did
  much more abound.’ He asked, ‘How did sin abound? Had it not
  overpowered your whole soul? Were not all your passions, tempers,
  propensities, and affections, inordinate and evil? Did not pride,
  anger, self-will, and unbelief, all reign over you? And, when the
  Spirit of God strove with you, did you not repel all His convictions,
  and put Him far from you? Well, my brethren, ye were _then_ the
  servants of sin, and were free from righteousness; but now, being made
  free from sin, ye become servants to God; and holiness shall
  overspread your whole soul, so that all your tempers and passions
  shall be henceforth regulated and governed by Him who now sitteth upon
  the throne of your heart, making all things new. As you once resisted
  the Holy Spirit, so now you shall have power to resist all the subtle
  frauds or fierce attacks of Satan.’

  “Mr. Fletcher then, with lifted hands, cried, ‘Who will thus be saved?
  Who will believe the report? You are only in an improper sense called
  believers who reject this. Who is a believer? One who believes a few
  things which his God has spoken? Nay, but one who believes all that
  ever proceeded out of His mouth. Here then is the word of the Lord:
  _As sin abounded, grace shall much more abound_! As no _good thing_
  was in you by nature, so now _no evil_ thing shall remain. Do you
  believe this? Or are you a _half_ believer only? Come! Jesus is
  offered to thee as a _perfect Saviour_. Take Him, and He will make
  thee a _perfect saint_. O ye _half_ believers, will you still plead
  for the murderers of your Lord? Which of these will you hide as a
  serpent in your bosom? Shall it be anger, pride, self-will, or
  _accursed_ unbelief? O be no longer befooled! Bring these enemies to
  thy Lord, and let Him slay them.’”[519]

Footnote 518:

  The letter already referred to, and dated June 22, 1781. See it in
  _Methodist Magazine_, 1811, p. 312.

Footnote 519:

  Dr. Coke’s funeral sermon on the death of Mrs. H. A. Rogers, 1795; and
  “Experience and Letters of Mrs. Hester Ann Rogers.”

Mrs. Rogers was not a shorthand writer. She wrote from memory; and
though what she relates in the foregoing extracts is, no doubt,
_substantially_ correct, yet Fletcher must not be held accountable for
_every word_ she uses. The narrative, however, is very valuable, because
it exhibits Fletcher at a most important epoch of his life, and exhibits
him in his free-and-easy religious dishabille among his friends. Wesley
says:—

  “There is a peculiar difficulty in giving a full account of either the
  life or character of Mr. Fletcher, because we have scarce any light
  from himself. He was upon all occasions very uncommonly reserved in
  speaking of himself, whether in writing or conversation. He hardly
  ever said anything concerning himself, unless it slipped from him
  unawares. And, among the great number of papers which he has left,
  there is scarce a page (except the account of his conversion to God),
  relative either to his own inward experience, or the transactions of
  his life. So that the most of the information we have is gathered up,
  either from short hints scattered up and down in his letters, from
  what he had occasionally dropped among his friends, or from what one
  and another remembered concerning him.

  “This defect was indeed, in some measure, supplied by the entire
  intimacy which subsisted between him and Mrs. Fletcher. He did not
  willingly, much less designedly, conceal anything from her. They had
  no secrets with regard to each other, but had indeed one house, one
  purse, and one heart. Before her, it was his invariable rule to _think
  aloud_; always to open the window in his breast. And to this we are
  indebted for the knowledge of many particulars which must otherwise
  have been buried in oblivion.”[520]

Footnote 520:

  Wesley’s “Life of Fletcher.”

No doubt this statement is perfectly accurate. Fletcher, like Wesley
himself, was never a talkative religious professor; and the outpourings
of his heart, related by Hester Ann Rogers, may be regarded as
exceptional.

Nothing more need be added to the present chapter except the incident
that, both in going to Leeds and returning to Madeley, Fletcher preached
at Sheffield, where the husband of Hester Ann Rogers was at that time
Wesley’s “Assistant.” He was the guest of Mr. Thomas Holy. The following
is taken from an unpublished memoir of Mr. Holy, written by the late
Rev. James Everett:—

  “The sainted Fletcher was twice an inmate of Mr. Holy’s house. This
  extraordinary man preached twice in Norfolk Street chapel, on going to
  and returning from the Conference at Leeds, in 1781. One of of his
  texts was, ‘The kingdom of God is within you;’ and the other, ‘Behold,
  now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.’ On
  both occasions, the chapel was crowded, and several clergymen were
  present. When he was introduced to Mr. Holy, his salutation was,
  ‘Peace be to thee, my brother;’ and, on crossing Mr. Holy’s threshold,
  he said, ‘Peace be to this house.’ Mrs. Brammah, the widow of an old
  itinerant preacher, and one of Mr. Holy’s pensioners, was present, and
  observed that Mr. Fletcher frequently repeated the latter text, as if
  desirous to impress the company with its importance and its
  blessedness. ‘Mr. Fletcher’s conversation,’ remarked Mr. Holy, ‘was
  always instructive and impressive; and I felt while I was with him as
  if I were in the presence of a superior being.’ During his stay in
  Sheffield, Mr. Fletcher bathed every morning in a river, about half a
  mile distant from Mr. Holy’s residence. His host always accompanied
  him, and was much struck with his excellent swimming.”

This is a trivial matter, but trifles concerning “mighty men, men of
renown,” are worth preserving.

A journey from Madeley to Leeds, a hundred years ago, was a somewhat
serious affair. In an unpublished letter, addressed to Mr. Ireland,
Fletcher tells his friend that the journey occupied two days and a half,
and that his new saddle was so hard that, to save himself from
suffering, he was obliged to put the hair-skins, used for the protection
of his chest, into his “breeches.” In the same letter, he gives an
account of the suicide of his “atheistical nephew;” and concludes as
follows:—

  “If Mr. Romaine be still with you, please to remember me in much love
  to him. I went yesterday to Salop, saw Mr. De Courcy,[521] and invited
  Mr. Rowland Hill to preach here to cement love.”

Footnote 521:

  At that time the incumbent of the parish of St. Alkmond, Shrewsbury.
  (“Life of Rev. R. Hill,” by Sidney, p. 137.)




                             CHAPTER XXIV.
                         _FLETCHER’S MARRIAGE._

                                 1781.


FLETCHER spent a happy month among the “elect” ladies of Methodism in
the North of England; to wit, Miss Bosanquet, Hester Ann Rogers, Sarah
Crosby, and their friends; and, on his return to Madeley, he had to
correspond with two others in the south, Miss Perronet and Lady Mary
Fitzgerald. To the former he wrote as follows:—

                                      “MADELEY, _September 4, 1781_.

  “MY DEAR FRIEND,—You want ‘some _thoughts_ on the love of God;’ and I
  want the warmest _feelings_ of it. Let us believe His creating, feel
  His preserving, admire His redeeming, and triumph in His sanctifying
  love. _Loving_ is the best way to grow in love. Let us then look at
  the love of our heavenly Father, shining in the face of our elder
  Brother, and we shall be changed into love—His image and nature—from
  one _glorious_ and _glorifying_ degree of _love_ to another. Love
  always delights in the object loved. ‘Delight thou in the Lord,’ then,
  and ‘thou shalt have thy heart’s desire;’ for we can desire nothing
  more than the _supreme good_ and _infinite bliss_; both are in God.
  When, therefore, we love God truly, we _delight_ in what _He is_; we
  share in His infinite happiness; and, by divine sympathy, His throne
  of glory becomes _ours_; for true love rejoices in all the joy of the
  object to which it cleaves.

  “Add to this, that when we love God we have always our hearts’ desire;
  for we love _His will_, His desires become ours, and ours are always
  perfectly resigned to His. Now as God does whatsoever He pleases, both
  in heaven and earth, His lovers have always their hearts’ desire,
  forasmuch as they always have _His will_, which is theirs. Submitting
  our private will to His is only preferring a greater good to a less,
  and we are called to do it in afflictions.

  “Farewell, my dear friend, and excuse these reflections, which you
  could make much better than your humble servant,

                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[522]

Footnote 522:

  Letters, 1791, p. 277.

An excellent love-letter, from one who was now the declared lover of
Mary Bosanquet.

Lady Mary Fitzgerald wished to visit Fletcher at Madeley, and to her he
wrote the following:—

                                      “MADELEY, _September 3, 1781_.

  “MY MUCH-HONOURED LADY,—Two days ago I came here, after an absence of
  above a month; and yesterday I received your letter, without date,
  which has been, I am told, waiting here some time.

  “What a pity I did not rejoice sooner in the good news you send
  me,—that you desire to be _entirely_ devoted to God. Indeed,
  complaints follow; but _heaven_ is in that holy desire. If you
  cultivate it, it will produce all that conformity to a holy God, which
  love can bring to a human soul. As for your complaints, they are the
  natural expressions of that repentance which precedes the coming of
  the Comforter, who is to abide with us for ever. I am ready to
  rejoice, or to mourn with my honoured friend; and I have abundant
  cause to do both with respect to myself, my ministrations, the Church,
  and my people.

  “And will you, indeed, find it in your heart to honour my house with
  your presence, and perfume also with your prayers the plain apartment
  occupied by your friend Johnson?[523] I wonder at nothing on earth,
  when I consider the condescension with which Emmanuel came down from
  heaven and filled a stable with His glory. Your time, my condescending
  friend, will suit me best. You will be queen in my hermitage; the Lord
  will rule in our hearts; and you will command, under Him, within our
  walls. You smile, perhaps, at the vastness of your new empire; but if
  you can be content and happy in God in my homely solitude, you will
  make greater advances towards bliss than if you obtained the
  Principality of Wales. But if you cannot be happy with Jesus, prayer,
  praise, godly conversation, and retirement, expect a disappointment.
  However, my honoured friend, if you come, come as the serious
  Catholics go on a pilgrimage, as French noblemen go to the Carthusian
  Convent at La Trappe, as the French king’s aunts went to the
  Carmelites,—come and do _evangelical penance_. Our good friend Johnson
  will tell you of an upper room where we crucify our old man, and have
  had many a visit from the new. If you do not bring her with you, bring
  her faith, which brought Him down, and then you shall not pine for the
  company of earthly princes. The Prince of Peace Himself will keep His
  court in our cottage, and your heart shall be one of His favourite
  thrones.”[524]

Footnote 523:

  Probably Ann Johnson, who was a member of the Methodist Society in
  London sixty years; a class-leader, thirty-seven; who died at the age
  of eighty in 1828, and whose remains were interred in the
  burial-ground of City Road Chapel. See Stevenson’s “City Road Chapel,”
  p. 458.

Footnote 524:

  Letters, 1791, p. 276.

From these Christian ladies, the reader’s attention must now be directed
to another.

Mary Bosanquet, oddly enough, was born in the same month, and on the
same day of the month, as Fletcher; but there was this difference—she
was ten years younger than he. Her birth took place in 1739, the year in
which Methodism was cradled. Her father was “one of the chief merchants
in London,”[525] and “lord of the manor of Leytonstone, in Essex.”[526]
The place of her nativity was Forest House, a fine old mansion, three
stories high, still standing in its own beautiful and spacious grounds,
about a mile from Leyton, and still owned by a member of the Bosanquet
family (S. R. Bosanquet, Esq.), who has recently given a plot of ground
in the main street of the town on which to build the “Mary Fletcher
Memorial Chapel.”

Footnote 525:

  “Life of Rev. H. Venn,” p. 376.

Footnote 526:

  “Sermon on the death of Mrs. Fletcher,” by John Hodson, p. 47.

By means of a Methodist servant, Mary Bosanquet found peace with God,
through faith in Jesus Christ, when she was only eight years old. At the
age of thirteen, she became acquainted with Mrs. Lefevre, whose
admirable “Letters on Religious Subjects” used to be one of the
favourite books of the early Methodists; and concerning which Wesley
himself testified: “The ‘Letters’ are patterns of truly polite
epistolary correspondence; expressing the noblest sentiments in the most
elegant manner, in the purest, yea, and finest language.”[527] At the
house of Mrs. Lefevre, Miss Bosanquet was introduced to a number of
godly people, many of them Methodists. When fourteen years of age, she
was confirmed in St. Paul’s Cathedral, and began to receive the
sacrament of the Lord’s Supper.

Footnote 527:

  Preface to the Letters.

Soon after this, her father and mother thought her “righteous over
much,” and great uneasiness, on both sides, followed. The parents were
members of the Church of England; but, like many other professedly
Christian people, they loved gaiety and worldly pleasure. Their daughter
grieved them, because she attired herself plainly, and objected to go to
balls and theatres. In the midst of this unpleasantness, she became
acquainted with Sarah Ryan and Sarah Crosby, and, at their humble
dwelling, in Christopher Alley, Moorfields, was accustomed to meet
companies of the Old Foundery Methodists. Meanwhile, the unhappiness at
home increased.

At the age of twenty-one, Miss Bosanquet came into possession of “a
small fortune;” and, for her own comfort and that of her family, she
left the parental home, and rented two unfurnished rooms in the house of
Mrs. Gold, in Hoxton Square. She “hired a sober girl;” her mother gave
her two beds; and she was driven to her lodgings in her father’s coach.
She reached her new home about eight o’clock at night. She had no
candle. The people of the house she had never seen. She borrowed a
table; and the window seat served her as a chair. Her supper consisted
of bread, “rank salt butter, and water;” but she says, she “could truly
say, ‘_I eat my meat with gladness and singleness of heart_.’ The
bedstead was not, as yet, put up, and, therefore, she laid upon the
floor; “and the windows” of the bedless bedroom “having no shutters, and
it being a bright moonlight night,” she remarks, “the sweet solemnity
thereof well agreed with the tranquillity of my spirit.”

Her “maid was dull and ignorant, though good;” and she herself “knew
little more of the world than” did her maid, “having been used to so
different a way of life.” Just at this juncture, ill-health obliged
Sarah Ryan to leave Wesley’s meeting-house in Bristol, and to return to
London, where she lodged with her sister. Here her illness became
serious; and Miss Bosanquet served, as her nurse, “night and day.”
“After a time,” writes Miss Bosanquet, “the Lord was pleased to restore
her to health; and, having one heart, one mind, and one purse, we agreed
that one habitation also would be most profitable;” and, accordingly,
the two now resided together at Hoxton.

On March 24, 1763, Miss Bosanquet and Sarah Ryan removed from Hoxton to
Leytonstone, and occupied a house belonging to the former. Miss
Bosanquet told her father that she intended to have Methodist preaching
in her house; her father made no objection, but remarked, “If a mob
should pull your house about your ears, I cannot hinder them.” She and
Sarah Ryan began to hold meetings, on Thursday nights, at which they
“read a chapter, and sometimes spoke from it.” They also gathered a
Methodist class, of twenty-five members; and, in due time, Wesley sent
his Itinerant, John Murlin, to preach to them. Thus began Methodism at
Leytonstone. “Sometimes on Sundays, when the nights were dark, a mob
would collect at the gate” of Miss Bosanquet’s domestic cathedral, “and
throw dirt at the people as they went out; after which, they used to
come into the yard, and, putting their faces to a window, which was
without shutters, would roar and howl like wild beasts.”

At the first, Miss Bosanquet’s family at Leytonstone consisted of
herself, her maid, Sarah Ryan, and “Sally Lawrence,[528] a child about
four years old, whom” she had “taken from the side of her mother’s
coffin.” In a little while, five other orphans were admitted; and it
became necessary to employ Ann Tripp[529] to serve as their governess.
Miss Bosanquet writes: “Some serious women also were added to our
household, and each had their duties and employments assigned them. In
the whole, we received thirty-five children, and thirty-four grown
persons, but not all at one time.” Thus did Miss Bosanquet turn her
dwelling into a chapel, an orphanage, and a poor-house. All in the
house, herself included, wore the same kind of dress, made of “a dark
purple cotton;” and all dined at the same table, which was “five yards
long,” and stood in the hall. Here also they all assembled “for morning
and evening devotion, and on several other occasions.”

Footnote 528:

  Sarah Lawrence was the niece of Sarah Ryan. She lived with her
  benefactress until her death, which occurred at Madeley, on December
  3, 1800. Like Mrs. Fletcher, for several years, she was a
  _preacheress_, and very useful.

Footnote 529:

  Ann Tripp was converted under the ministry of Wesley and Thomas
  Maxfield. After the marriage of Miss Bosanquet and her removal to
  Madeley, she settled at Leeds, and, at the time of her death, in 1823,
  was one of the oldest leaders of the Leeds Society. (_Wesleyan
  Methodist Magazine_, 1823, p. 706.)

Miss Bosanquet soon found that her family was larger than her income
could maintain; but even this did not discourage her, as she was at
perfect liberty to spend her capital.

Most of the children when admitted to her house “were naked, full of
vermin, and some of them were afflicted with disagreeable distempers.
The first thing was to clean and clothe them, and attend to their
health; which usually was followed with much success.”

  “The eldest of the children arose between four and five; the younger
  not much later. At half-an-hour after six,” says Miss Bosanquet, “we
  had family prayer; at seven, we breakfasted together on herb tea, or
  milk porridge. The small children then went into the garden till
  eight. At eight, the bell rang for school, which continued till
  twelve. Then, after a few minutes spent in prayer, the children came
  down to us, when we either walked out with them, or, if the weather
  did not permit, we found them some employment in the house,
  endeavouring, at the same time, to give them both instruction and
  recreation. At one, we dined; about two, the bell rang again for
  school; and, at five, they returned to us, and were employed as before
  till supper time. Then, after family prayer, they were washed, and
  were put to bed at eight. Four or five of the bigger girls were each
  week kept out of the school, by turns, and employed in house-work,
  cooking, etc., that they might be accustomed to every sort of
  business; and there was work enough in so large a family. Several of
  the children were very young, though I do not remember we had any
  under two years, except one of about a month old, which was laid, very
  neatly dressed, one night late at our door; but it lived only a
  fortnight, being full of humours, probably derived from its parents.

  “We had, I think, never more than ten grown persons in the family at
  one time, who were not invalids; nor do I remember above five or six
  altogether in health. The children also, for the first few years,
  suffered under various disorders; for we did not refuse either old or
  young, on account of their being sick or helpless.”

Miss Bosanquet, as might be expected, was soon involved in pecuniary
embarrassments. Just about this period, a young lady of fortune, Miss
Lewen, came to board and lodge with her, and also brought two children
of whom she had taken charge. After residing about half a year in this
unique retreat at Leytonstone,—chapel, orphanage, school, poor-house,
and infirmary all combined in one,—Miss Lewen wished to make a new will,
and to bequeath her hostess “a large sum of money.” Miss Bosanquet
objected, because Miss Lewen had already “left the bulk of her estate
(which was large) to charitable uses.” In 1766, Miss Lewen became
suddenly very ill; and, one night, while some of the inmates of the
house were watching at her side, she cried, “Give me pen and paper; I
cannot die easy, unless I write something of my mind concerning Sister
Bosanquet having £2,000.” Pen and paper were supplied, and the writing
was written; but, of course, it was illegal and worthless. Miss Lewen
died; but Miss Bosanquet, instead of receiving the £2,000, which Miss
Lewen wished her to have, received not a farthing, and was considerably
out of pocket on her dead friend’s account.

About the beginning of 1765, Miss Bosanquet’s father died; and nine
months afterwards her mother. By his will, her father bequeathed her
£4,500, to be invested by her trustees for her benefit; and, when she
married with their approval and consent, this amount of money was to be
transferred to herself, and to be absolutely at her own disposal.[530]

Footnote 530:

  “Probate of Mr. Bosanquet’s Will.”

From a letter, written by S. Bosanquet, Esq., and dated “Forest House,
October 15, 1781,” it appears that Miss Bosanquet had altogether a
fortune of not less than £10,500,—a large sum, when it is remembered
that money then was about three or four times the value of money now.
Mr. Bosanquet’s letter was addressed to his sister, and in it he says:—

                                                         £
  “You had Leytonstone estate, valued at                  3,000
  You had from my grandmother                             2,500
  You had the savings of Leyton estate till you came        500
    of age
  You had by my father’s will                             4,500
                                                         ——————
                                                       £10,500” [531]
                                                         ——————

Footnote 531:

  Unpublished letter.

With the exception of her father’s bequest, the whole of this money was
at her own disposal, and, at the time of her marriage, was entirely
spent, not on herself, but solely on behalf of others. Added to this,
she was also, to a serious amount, in debt; but more of this anon.

About three years after the death of Miss Bosanquet’s father, Richard
Taylor, a good and well-meaning man, “left his wife and young family” in
Yorkshire, “and came to London in hope of settling with his creditors.”
Sarah Crosby, who was now resident in Miss Bosanquet’s house, and John
Murlin, one of the itinerant preachers stationed in the London Circuit,
recommended Taylor, the improvident debtor, to Miss Bosanquet’s notice,
and, for some time, he also became a member of her motley household.
This unfortunate event created a world of trouble. By her father’s
bequest, Miss Bosanquet’s income was increased; but her income was not
equal to her expenses. Added to this, Sarah Ryan’s health entirely
failed; and, partly on her account, and also for other reasons, Miss
Bosanquet entertained the thought of removing her family to Yorkshire.
Accordingly, on June 7, 1768, she and her two friends, Sarah Ryan and
Sarah Crosby, set out, in a chaise, on this long and tiresome journey,
Richard Taylor accompanying them on horseback. For seven weeks, they
lived in the house of Taylor’s father-in-law, when they procured a house
for themselves at Gildersome, a village in the parish of Batley, and
about four miles and a half from Leeds. At the same time (on August 17,
1768), Sarah Ryan died; and this event augmented Miss Bosanquet’s
anxieties, and affected her health. She writes:—

  “My health began to fail. For three years, I had had much fatigue in
  nursing my dear friend. I grew large, and had dropsical symptoms. My
  soul, also, was in a low and cold state. My path was strewed with many
  perplexities. My family consisted of thirty persons, some of whom were
  rather unruly. I saw the need of taking the reins into my own hands,
  and supplying the place of my friend Ryan. But this determination was
  very difficult to execute; and I daily and hourly felt my
  insufficiency. While she was alive, I considered her as a mother, and
  desired her to allot me my employments, as she did in the case of the
  young women. These were, 1. An attention to the spiritual affairs of
  the family. 2. Taking care for their sustenance. 3. Instructing the
  children. 4. Meeting each member of the family, one by one, at fixed
  times. 5. Superintending, by turns, the more public meetings of the
  Society. 6. Attending my friend in her frequent illnesses; with the
  direction and management of the sick. But the care of the kitchen,
  buying stores, managing the needlework, and many other things
  belonging to housekeeping, I was quite unaccustomed to. While I lived
  in my father’s house, I saw very little of domestic affairs, because
  we lived rather high.

  “Beside, the manner of life in Yorkshire was entirely different from
  what I had been used to about London. Here wheat was to be bought to
  be made into flour; bread to be made; cows to be managed; and
  men-servants to be directed. And when I had provided as well as I
  could, some persons in my family would despisingly say, my victuals
  were not worth eating, and that I knew not how to order anything. The
  house was large, and there was land to it; but, one day, Richard
  Taylor, whom I had employed in ordering the out-door affairs, brought
  me word of a farm very cheap, on which were malt-kilns, a small house,
  and many out-buildings. The farm was large, and he thought if, besides
  the farm-house, we were to build one big enough for our family, it
  would be cheaper than to rent a house. I went to Leeds to consult the
  most judicious of my friends; in particular Mr. R——, a man well
  acquainted with business, and the most intimate friend I had in
  Yorkshire. He replied, ‘Had you waited a dozen years, you might not
  have met with such an opportunity. Richard Taylor knows well how to
  manage, if you do not; and I have no doubt the farm will clear you
  £150 a year, which will be good interest for your money.

  “I prayed for light, bought the estate, formed the plan for the house,
  and set about it. But I found building no cheaper in Yorkshire than in
  the south, or but little so. It cost a good deal more than was at
  first proposed. The farm took much money to stock it, and to bring it
  into order; and, as I had not sufficient for all the expenses, I was
  obliged to take up money on interest, which I hoped to pay off at the
  rate of £50 a year. The malt-kilns seemed to answer well, and cleared
  the first year £50, above all expenses.

  “I found my mind much united to Brother and Sister Taylor. I strove to
  remove their burdens, and went in person to their creditors. After
  meeting with some opposition, I got their affairs settled, at the
  expense of between two and three hundred pounds.

  “My perplexities increased. The farm had sunk a very large sum to
  bring it into order, and the kilns took much money to work them, a
  great deal of which lay scattered up and down in debts, owing to me
  from lesser maltsters. I also saw that Richard Taylor went too far;
  that he was inclined to venture much; that he kept too many men; and
  that he gave a great deal too much credit.

  “I lessened my family all I could, by putting out some of the bigger
  children to trades, or servants’ places; but much expense attended it.
  Richard Taylor also had several children, while with me, so that the
  family still consisted of twenty-five persons; the majority of whom
  were grown persons. Losses continually occurred. I consulted Mr. ——,
  and other friends about my situation; but most of them were for some
  further exertion in trade. That I knew would not do. Some said, ‘Turn
  away all the members of your family: you have enough to live on alone
  with a servant or two;’ but I could not see how that could be done,
  for several of them were old, sickly, or helpless. Mr. —— said, ‘There
  is but one way for you; put the farm into the hands of Richard Taylor,
  entirely separate from yourself; let him have the stock just as it is,
  and work the kilns as he can raise the money. Let him pay you £60 a
  year, and take his family to the end of the house. I agreed to this,
  and Richard Taylor paid his rent regularly: but, as he was to have the
  farm free of debt, I found a good deal to pay which he had not brought
  to account; so that, before all was settled, I had again to take up
  money on interest, which was no small affliction to me. Could I have
  sold the place, I would have chosen it rather.

  “We went on tolerably for three years. Mr. —— thought the farm
  increased in heart; the stock also improved, and all was cheerful,
  except in my own mind, which foreboded deep waters. This was soon
  realized. In the beginning of the fourth year, Taylor was £600 in
  debt. I thought, I am not obliged to pay his debt; let him break, and
  bear his own burden; but I soon saw that I must either give up the
  stock, which would be sold for half its value, or I must pay the
  money. Besides, I was now informed, that, when he ceased to act as my
  agent, I ought to have advertised it, that no one might trust him
  through confidence in me.”

Thus, through wretched Richard Taylor, Miss Bosanquet found herself in a
most serious entanglement. At the first, she felt she was not bound to
pay Taylor’s debt; but Taylor’s wife, big with child, came to her
wringing her hands, and entreating her to save her husband from being
sent to prison. The result was, Miss Bosanquet paid the debt, by
accepting the offer of a loan of £600 from Mr. ——, who became a partner
with her in the farm and malt-kilns, and took the management of the
whole. This, however, did not end her anxieties. She writes:—

  “In my deep troubles, a thought occurred to my mind. ‘Perhaps Mr.
  Fletcher is to be my deliverer;’ but I started from the idea, lest it
  should be a stratagem of Satan. We had not seen or heard from each
  other for more than fifteen years. Besides, I was now (in August,
  1777), told that Mr. Fletcher was dying. As I was, one day, in prayer,
  offering him up to the Lord, these words occurred to me,—‘The prayer
  of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up.’ I
  thought if the Lord should raise him up, and should bring him back
  from Switzerland to England, and he should propose to marry me, could
  I doubt its being of God? I felt an unaccountable liberty to ask,—1.
  That Mr. Fletcher might be raised up. 2. That he might be brought back
  to England. 3. That he might write to me on the subject before he saw
  me, though we had been so many years asunder, without so much as a
  message passing on any subject. 4. That he might tell me, in his
  letter, that (marrying me) had been the subject of his thoughts and
  prayers for years. It also occurred to me, that, should this take
  place in the end of 1781, it would be a still greater confirmation, as
  Providence seemed to point me to that season as a time of hope.”

Miss Bosanquet’s troubles were continued. Her new partnership was
disastrous, and Mr. ——’s management a failure. He had told her she would
receive £100 a-year towards paying off the debts she owed to himself and
others; but the farm, instead of yielding a profit, was worked at a
loss. The interest she had to pay so reduced her income, that it became
impossible to keep more than half her family with what remained. She
writes:—

  “As to the kilns, I had neither money nor courage to work them. I
  strove, I worked hard, I prayed; and, at length, I proposed to the
  members of my family to disperse, and learn some little business; and
  I would allow to each of them what I could. It was a most painful
  thing; but I saw there was no way but first to sell the place, and
  then disperse.

  “Just at this time, a gentleman proposed to buy the place, stock,
  lease, and everything. He was a man both of fortune and of honour, and
  really wished to help me out of my difficulties; and the price he
  offered would bring me through all, and leave me a good income. The
  bargain was in part made; but, alas! he took a fever, and, in a few
  days, died. I now saw but one way—to advertise Cross Hall, and sell it
  for what I could; and, paying the purchase money away as far as it
  would go, strive yearly to lessen the remaining part of the debt by my
  income, reserving only £50 per year to live on, and to help my
  friends. But I recollected that I might not live long enough thus to
  pay the debt by my income. I then proposed to myself to keep only £20
  per year; nay, I thought, how can I have a right even to twenty?
  Justice is before mercy. One day, as I was standing at a window,
  musing on this subject, I saw a poor man driving asses laden with
  sand, by which he gained his bread. As I looked on him, I thought, I
  am perfectly willing to take up the business of that man. If I can
  preserve unsold one of the freehold cottages, the asses might graze on
  the common, and I could follow them with something to sell. There were
  but few trades which my conscience would suffer me to follow; and my
  abilities were equal to still fewer; but to anything in the world
  would I turn, that was not sinful, rather than remain in debt.”

  “The 7th of June, 1781, was the day that began my fourteenth year in
  Yorkshire. I saw difficulties, as mountains, rise all around me; but
  the very next day, June the 8th, I received a letter from Mr.
  Fletcher, in which he told me, that he had, for twenty-five years,
  found a regard for me, which was still as sincere as ever; and, though
  it might appear odd that he should write on such a subject, when but
  just returned from abroad, and more so without seeing me first, he
  could only say, that his mind was so strongly drawn to do it, he
  believed it to be the order of Providence.”[532]

Footnote 532:

  These statements are partly taken from “A Letter to the Rev. Mr. John
  Wesley. By a Gentlewoman, 1764” (Miss Bosanquet); and partly from the
  “Life of Mrs. Mary Fletcher. By Henry Moore, 1818.”

Thus began Fletcher’s courtship, which ended five months afterwards in
his marrying Mary Bosanquet.

The foregoing is a strange story. Of set purpose, nothing has been said
of Miss Bosanquet’s earnest piety, gospel labours, and spiritual
successes, both in the south of England and in Yorkshire. The object has
been to show to what straits a young lady of fortune was brought, by
injudicious generosity, by foolish advisers, and, perhaps, it may be
added, by crafty mendicants. Eighteen years before this, in a letter to
Charles Wesley, Fletcher confessed that he regarded Miss Bosanquet with
admiration;[533] and that Miss Bosanquet regarded Fletcher with equal
admiration the foregoing extracts amply prove; as does also a letter,
which she addressed to Wesley, nearly six years before her marriage, and
from which the following is taken:—

                                    “CROSS HALL, _February 7, 1776_.

  “REV. SIR,—I thank you for your kind favour of January 27. It yielded
  us much satisfaction; for never before could we get any account to be
  depended on.

  “I am exceedingly thankful Mr. Fletcher is with Mrs. Greenwood. She
  will tenderly care for him: and, having a spiritual mind, will be
  sensible of the honour God does her, in giving her such an
  opportunity.

  “How wise are all the ways of God, in keeping His faithful servant in
  that retired spot” (Stoke Newington), “while those precious works are
  completed, by which he will yet speak to us, though in glory: and now
  to enable him to bring them out, while his exemplary life and
  conversation add a lustre to the truths he has so powerfully defended.

  “We could have liked to have seen him once more; but the will of the
  Lord be done! Should it happen that this sickness is not unto death,
  we shall rejoice in having an opportunity of assisting him in anything
  which lies in our power. Should this favour be denied us, we must be
  content; and beseech God to reward those who may supply our lack of
  service.

  “The blessed account you give of the state of his mind filled my soul
  with sacred joy, as also those of my friends. While I was reading it,
  it was a solemn season of faith and love, and we could not help
  saying, ‘Ah, Lord! Let not this shining light be so soon
  extinguished!’

  “A few weeks ago, I once more read the ‘_Equal Check_’ and felt an
  unction in it above all I had ever found before. The ‘_Essay on
  Truth_,’ with the Appendix, is as marrow and fatness to my soul. O may
  all the height and depth of every Gospel promise be written on his
  heart!”[534]

Footnote 533:

  Letters, 1791, p. 143.

Footnote 534:

  _Arminian Magazine_, 1788, p. 48.

Did Fletcher ever see this loving, admiring letter? Perhaps he did. At
all events, Wesley’s most intimate and confidential friendship with both
Fletcher and Miss Bosanquet was such as to justify utterances, which,
under other circumstances, would have been almost impertinent. In his
sermon on the death of Fletcher, Wesley remarked, “Miss Bosanquet was
the only person in England whom I judged to be worthy of Mr. Fletcher;”
and again, in a letter to Hester Ann Rogers, written a month after the
marriage took place, he observed, “I should not have been willing that
Miss Bosanquet should have been joined to any other person than Mr.
Fletcher.”[535] To some, such language may seem unusual, but, in
reality, it was natural; for Wesley had long been regarded as their
father in Christ, both by Fletcher and his wife; and, no doubt, both of
them had consulted him with respect to the step they proposed to take.

Footnote 535:

  Wesley’s Works, vol. xiii., p. 78.

After all, Fletcher’s matrimonial offer was a curious incident. He was
now fifty-two years of age. For the last four years and a-half, he had
been absent from his parish, and so seriously ill, that, again and
again, his friends expected him to die. Some of his views, also, of
ministers marrying at all were rather peculiar, though rational and
sound. In his “Portrait of St. Paul,” composed in Switzerland, and
revised and finished after his return to Madeley, Fletcher wrote:—

  “When a man is perpetually called to travel from place to place,
  prudence requires that he should not encumber himself with those
  domestic cares, which must occasion many unavoidable delays in the
  prosecution of his business: or, if he derives his maintenance from
  the generosity of the poor, charity should constrain him to burden
  them as little as possible. St. Paul could not prevail upon himself to
  expose a woman and children to those innumerable dangers, which he was
  constantly obliged to encounter. The first peril, from which he made
  his escape, was that which compelled him to descend from the wall of
  Damascus in a basket: now if a family had shared with him in the same
  danger, what an addition would they have made to his affliction and
  his care! Is it not evident, that, in such circumstances, every man,
  who is not obliged to marry from reasons either physical or moral, is
  called to imitate the example of this disinterested Apostle, from the
  same motives of prudence and charity. This indefatigable preacher,
  always on a mission, judged it advisable to continue in a single state
  to the end of his days: but, had he been fixed in a particular church;
  had he there felt how much it concerns a minister neither to tempt
  others, nor to be tempted himself; and had he known how much
  assistance a modest, provident, and pious woman is capable of
  affording a pastor, by inspecting the women of his flock, he would
  then probably have advised every resident pastor to enter into the
  marriage state, provided they should fix upon regenerate persons,
  capable of edifying the Church.”

Probably, while writing this, Fletcher was thinking of Wesley and his
itinerant preachers, and also of the difference between them and
himself, as the Vicar of Madeley. Be that as it may, from the doctrine
he has laid down, he deduces the following principles:—

  “1. In times of great trouble and grievous persecutions, the followers
  of Christ should abstain from marriage, unless obliged thereto by
  particular and powerful reasons. 2. The faithful, who mean to embrace
  the nuptial state, should be careful, on no account, to connect
  themselves with any persons, except such as are remarkable for their
  seriousness and piety. 3. Missionaries ought not to marry, unless
  there is an absolute necessity. 4. A bishop, or resident pastor, is
  usually called to the marriage state. 5. A minister of the Gospel, who
  is able to live in a state of celibacy _for the kingdom of heaven’s
  sake_, that he may have no other care except that of preaching the
  Gospel and attending upon the members of Christ’s mystical body,—such
  a one is undoubtedly called to continue in a single state.”

Many will disapprove of some of Fletcher’s deductions; but it is easier
to disapprove than to refute.

On the 8th of June, 1781, Miss Bosanquet received Fletcher’s offer of
marriage. They had long admired each other, but, when they first became
acquainted, Fletcher regarded Miss Bosanquet’s fortune as an insuperable
barrier to their union; and Miss Bosanquet was too much occupied with
her philanthropic schemes to think of being married. Now, Fletcher, to a
great extent, was an invalid, and, as much as any man alive, needed a
pious and loving nurse. Miss Bosanquet, also, was in a quagmire of
financial embarrassments, and greatly needed a tender, judicious friend.

Fletcher’s letter, despatched early in the month of June, led to a
correspondence which lasted till August 1, when Fletcher arrived in
Yorkshire to attend Wesley’s Conference at Leeds. Miss Bosanquet
writes:—

  “Mr. Fletcher came to Cross Hall, and abode there a month; preaching
  in different places with much power. Having opened our whole hearts to
  each other, both on temporals and spirituals, we believed it to be the
  order of God that we should become one, when He should make our way
  plain.”[536]

Footnote 536:

  “Mrs. Fletcher’s Life.”

Properly enough, Fletcher wished, before marrying Miss Bosanquet, to
consult her family, and to obtain their approval. To this she consented;
and, three weeks after his return to Madeley, Fletcher wrote the
following, hitherto unpublished, letters. Some will condemn the printing
of this private correspondence; but as it contains nothing but what is
honourable to all the parties concerned, and as it exhibits the Vicar of
Madeley in a new position, most readers will be thankful for it.

The first letter was addressed to Miss Bosanquet, and shows the ardour
of her wooer:—

                                     “MADELEY, _September 22, 1781_.

  “MY DEAREST FRIEND,—I have received thy dear letter, with the one
  enclosed from thy brother. I shall send it back to thee by Mr.
  Brisco,[537] who will call here on his way to Birstal.

  “O Polly! generous, faithful Polly! dost thou indeed permit me to
  write to thy friends, and to ask the invaluable gift of thy hand? That
  hand, that is _half_ mine, shall be wholly mine. I have, to-day,
  written two letters,—one to thy uncle, the other to thy elder brother.
  Correct them, and, when thou hast, forward them with much prayer and
  love. Back them with some of thy sweet arguments. Thou knowest how to
  come at thy friends. I don’t: I have only followed my instinct for
  thee in this new business.

  “Polly! I read thy letter, and wondered at the expression in it,—‘_If
  you think me worth writing for_.’ Ah! my holy, my loving, my lovely,
  my precious friend, I think thee worth writing for _with my vital
  blood_: I am only sorry that I had not thee beside me to write with
  _thy wisdom_. However, I write by the _first_ post: direct the letters
  properly; and excuse my _sending them by thee_, as I don’t remember
  the names and streets.

  “‘Difficulties!’ If thou hast any, I shall gladly share them with
  thee, and think myself well repaid with the pleasure of praying and
  praising _with thee_, and _for thee_. Therefore, do not talk of
  _struggling through alone_. I charge thee, by thy faithfulness, let me
  be alone as little time as thou canst.

  “‘Three thousand pounds’ with thee! My dear, if thou art mine, and
  canst live in our cottage here, praising and blessing God, I shall
  rejoice more than Mephibosheth, when, through joy, he said, ‘Let Ziba
  take all, forasmuch as my lord the king is come back in peace’ (2 Sam.
  xix. 30). Let not thy wisdom, Polly, make thee suspect and surmise
  evil. Let thy charity make thee hope all things for thy friends.

  “I thank thee for that believing sentence,—‘But, all shall be right.’
  The worst thy friends can do is to keep thy money, which I look upon
  as dung and dross in comparison of thee. Ah Polly! with the _treasure_
  of _thy_ friendship, and the _unsearchable_ riches of Christ, how rich
  thinkest thou I am? Count—cast up—but thou wilt never make out the
  amazing sum.

  “So thou wilt keep ‘two years’ from me to bring me some money! Oh,
  Polly! that is a saying more worthy of Change Alley than of the
  paradise of love. Let me comfort thee a little. If thou lovest me half
  as much as I do thee, thou wilt think thyself rich. _Thou_ art worth
  to me a _million_; and cannot _I_ be worth thy £5,000?

  “I embrace thee in spirit, and more than mix my soul with thine.
  Farewell!

                                                      “J. FLETCHER.”

Footnote 537:

  Thomas Brisco, a fine old Methodist Itinerant Preacher, at that time
  the Superintendent of the Birstal Circuit.

The two letters referred to in this sweethearting epistle, and addressed
to Miss Bosanquet’s uncle, Claudius Bosanquet, Esq., and to her brother,
S. Bosanquet, Esq., were the following:—

  “To Claudius Bosanquet, Esq.

                                     “MADELEY, _September 22, 1781_.

  “SIR,—Permit a stranger to claim some moments of the time you
  consecrate to your neighbours’ happiness and the welfare of your own
  family.

  “I was born in the Pays de Vaud at Nyon, a town about fifteen miles
  north of Geneva, on the borders of the lake. My father, in his youth,
  was an officer in the French service, which he left to marry. He was
  afterwards a colonel in the militia of his country, and a judge or
  assessor to the lord-lieutenant of the town where he lived. I am the
  youngest of his eight children. Having some desires to be a clergyman,
  I was, for seven years, sent to Geneva to pursue my studies. But after
  I had stayed there seven years, a fear of being unfit for the
  Christian ministry, and the enticing offers of my father’s brother,
  who was a lieutenant-colonel in the Dutch service, made me for a time
  prefer the sword to the gown. I left the academy” [at Geneva] “and
  went to Flanders to join my eldest brother, who was an officer in the
  Dutch service; but, before I could enter the army, the peace was made,
  and my uncle, on whom my hopes depended, left the service.

  “Seeing my way to military preferment blocked up by these two events,
  I came to England, to get more perfect in the English tongue, which I
  had begun to learn at Geneva. Some months after I was come over, Mr.
  Des Champs, a French minister, to whom I had been recommended,
  procured me the place of tutor to the son of Mr. Hill, member of
  Parliament for Shrewsbury. In his family I lived some years, and
  applied myself to the study of divinity; and, at his request, and by
  his interest, I got into Orders; a calling which now suited my more
  serious turn of mind.

  “It was soon after my ordination that I saw Miss Mary Bosanquet, your
  pious niece. I had resolved not to marry, but the sweetness of her
  temper, and her devotedness to God, made me think that if ever I broke
  through my resolution, it would be to cast my lot with one like her.

  “Not long after, at Mr. Hill’s request, his nephew, Mr. Kinaston,
  member for Montgomery, presented me to the living of Madeley, a little
  market-town in the county of Salop, worth about £100 per annum; and
  here I have chiefly lived, sequestered from the world, as your amiable
  niece has done at Leyton and at Cross Hall.

  “After having corresponded some years with her on various subjects,
  last spring, on my return from a journey to the continent, I ventured
  to mention to her my first thoughts about a closer union with
  her,—thoughts which I had kept to myself for nearly twenty-five years.
  After maturely discussing the point, your pious niece has given me
  room to hope she will give me her hand, if you, Sir, whom she honours
  as a father, give your consent to our union. I earnestly ask it, Sir;
  and beg you will share the pleasure of uniting two persons who, from a
  remarkable agreement of taste, sentiments, and pursuits, as well as
  from a particular sympathy, seem formed for each other by the God of
  nature and of grace.

  “I wish, Sir, I had a fortune equal to Miss Bosanquet’s deserts; but I
  hope I have one suitable to her piety, and to the moderate wishes of
  that godliness which, together with contentment, is a great gain. I
  have only about £1,500 worth of property in my native country, and
  about £400 or £500 more in my parish, besides the income of my living,
  and a house much better than those with which most country clergymen
  are obliged to put up.

  “Whatever be your pious niece’s fortune, I assure you, Sir, I seek her
  person, not her property; and to convince you of it, I request that
  before she gives me her hand, her whole fortune may be secured to her
  by a proper settlement.

  “With respect to my character, and the truth of what I have here
  advanced, I beg leave to refer you, Sir, to four creditable persons.
  With regard to my conduct, and what I affirm of myself as Vicar of
  Madeley, you may get proper informations from Thomas Hill, Esq., now
  in Salop, the old gentleman in whose house or neighbourhood I have
  lived very near thirty years; and from his son, Noel Hill, Esq.,
  member for Shropshire, the gentleman to whom I was tutor. With respect
  to what I have mentioned of myself as a native of Switzerland, you
  may, Sir, procure proper informations from two clergymen now in that
  country, Mr. De Bons and Mr. Tavan, whom I saw last Christmas at
  Lausanne, and whom you have probably seen in London, when they served
  French churches there.

  “I would, Sir, have waited upon you in person, in London, if some
  journeys which my curate must take did not oblige me to stay here to
  serve my own church.

  “I shall have the honour to write upon the same subject to Miss
  Bosanquet’s brothers, and shall take the liberty of referring them to
  this letter, for some account of him who aspires to the hand of their
  pious sister; and who, with respect to temporal happiness, desires
  nothing so ardently as to have your leave to add the name of nephew to
  that of, Sir, your most humble and obedient servant,

                                                 “JOHN DELAFLECHERE.

  “P.S.—Soon after I came to England, my English friends, complaining of
  the length of my Swiss name, began to contract it by dropping the
  French syllables of it. So they called me Fletcher; and by that name I
  have been known among the English ever since. If you favour me with an
  answer, Sir, it will find me if it is directed thus:—

                        “Mr. Fletcher,
                              “Vicar of Madeley,
                                       “Near Shiffnal,
                                             “Shropshire.”

The letter addressed to Miss Bosanquet’s brother was as follows:—

                                “MADELEY, NEAR SHIFFNAL, SHROPSHIRE,
                                          “_September 22, 1781_.

  “SIR,—Aspiring to the happiness of being united to your pious sister,
  Miss Bosanquet, and to the honour of being, by her means, connected
  with your family, I should be wanting both to my duty and my
  inclination if I proceeded in my addresses to her without informing
  you of my design, and asking your approbation of it.

  “By this post I send to Claudius Bosanquet, Esq., some account of
  myself, which I hope he will communicate to you, Sir, and to your
  brother. I shall only add two things.

  “Among the reasons which hindered me from making my addresses to your
  amiable sister, when first I felt that sympathy which binds my soul to
  hers, the superiority of her fortune was not the least. Since that
  time, debts, which unforeseen circumstances led her to contract, have
  considerably lessened that difficulty; and the prudent fear of
  contracting new ones seems to make it expedient for her to get into a
  state where she may, without difficulty and with propriety, bring her
  expensive housekeeping within narrower bounds. That end will at once
  be attained if she favours me with her hand.

  “Further, in extricating herself from some difficulties, she will
  crown the wishes of the oldest and warmest of her friends; and
  contribute not to my happiness only, but to that of my numerous flock.
  You are too well acquainted with your pious sister’s turn of mind not
  to know that Providence designed her for a clergyman’s partner and
  fellow-helper. Her instructions, her employment, her very pleasures
  from her childhood, have led her to assist her neighbours in temporal
  as well as in spiritual matters. She has even been blamed for the
  warmth of her zeal. But what seemed rather awkward and improper in a
  single woman, will become highly expedient and highly commendable in a
  clergyman’s wife. The _secondary_ inspection and care of the children
  and women of a flock of two thousand souls will then naturally devolve
  to her share, and in some sense become her duty.

  “I hope that if you, Sir, your worthy uncle, your brother, and Mrs.
  Gassen[538] weigh these particulars you will consent to our union, and
  by that means contribute more than I can express to the happiness,
  Sir, of your most humble and most obedient servant,

                                                      “J. FLETCHER.”

Footnote 538:

  Miss Bosanquet’s married sister. The two sisters began their
  _religious_ life together at a very early age.

In due time, in a letter, dated “Forest House, October 2, 1781,” S.
Bosanquet, Esq., informed Fletcher that he approved of the proposed
marriage; but added:—

  “My sister’s fortune is so encumbered, that nothing but the sale of
  all her landed estate can free her from her difficulties; and, if that
  portion of her fortune, which came to her by my father’s will, had not
  been tied up, she would have been ruined.”[539]

Footnote 539:

  Unpublished letter.

A fortnight later, Mr. S. Bosanquet wrote to his sister, and gave her an
account of her fortune, amounting in the aggregate to £10,500. He then
told her that she had already squandered the whole of this amount, with
the exception of £4,500 settled on trustees, for her benefit, by her
father’s will. He continued:—

  “One reason why my father secured this money, by leaving it on trust,
  was, lest, by your placing too great confidence in those with whom you
  were connected, and by your endeavouring to do more good than your
  circumstances would afford, you might be left destitute.”

He then added:—

  “I cannot conclude without remarking that, although you are encumbered
  with debts, you must be, at least, an equal match for Mr. Fletcher.
  Your two estates[540] have always been considered as fully equal to
  your debts; but, suppose they should not turn out to be so, the
  difference cannot be very great; and, as the remainder of your income
  exceeds £200 a year, it at least equals Mr. Fletcher’s income, such as
  it has been stated to me; besides the consideration that the greater
  part of his income dies with him, and the capital of yours survives in
  case there should be children, for their benefit.”[541]

Footnote 540:

  The Leytonstone estate, valued at £3,000; and that bequeathed by her
  grandmother, valued at £2,500.

Footnote 541:

  Unpublished letter.

At the same time, Miss Bosanquet’s brother William, in a letter dated
“Lime Street, London, October 16, 1781,” replied to her wail that she
could “carry Mr. Fletcher nothing but debts,” and stated that he was in
favour of her marrying Fletcher.[542]

Footnote 542:

  _Ibid._

Before taking leave of the Bosanquet family, it may be added, that Mr.
S. Bosanquet sent his sister, as his wedding present, a pair of silver
candlesticks;[543] and that her brother William, in a letter dated
“November 27, 1781,” and addressed “Mrs. Fletcher, Cross Hall, Morley
Common, near Leeds,” wrote:—

  “I cannot but hope the greatest happiness will attend your union with
  a gentleman to whom, by general report, the highest praise is due.
  Permit me to wish you joy on this occasion, and to add my best
  respects to Mr. Fletcher, assuring him that I shall be happy to
  cultivate his acquaintance, and to show him every attention in my
  power.”[544]

Footnote 543:

  _Ibid._

Footnote 544:

  _Ibid._

With this loving letter, Mr. William Bosanquet forwarded to his sister a
nuptial present of £100.

Another fact must be mentioned. William Bosanquet loved his sister, and,
not only now, but in aftertime, he showed the genuineness of his
affection by his deeds. The uncle, Claudius Bosanquet, in his last will
and testament, bequeathed to Miss Bosanquet’s two brothers £18,000 each;
but Miss Bosanquet and her sister Gassen were unnamed. At the uncle’s
death, their brother William, ever generous and open-handed, gave them
£500 each; when Fletcher died, he presented to the widow £40 a year to
relieve the wants of the poor of Madeley; and when he himself died, in
1813, he bequeathed her the sum of £2,000.

These details have not been given without a reason. Some ill-informed
Methodists have a sort of floating idea that Fletcher’s marriage was an
unequal one—that is, they seem to think that the Bosanquet family was
much more respectable than that of Fletcher; and that Miss Bosanquet’s
fortune was much greater than the fortune of the man who became her
loving and devoted husband. Enough has been said to show the inaccuracy
of this. Fletcher’s family was quite equal, in point of respectability,
to the Bosanquet family, and, perhaps, superior; and his yearly income
was not less than that of the lady who rejoiced to become his wife.
Never was there a marriage more free from mercenariness than that of
John Fletcher, of Madeley, and Mary Bosanquet, of Cross Hall, Yorkshire.
It was, in the highest and purest sense, a love-match. The letters, just
given, exhibit Fletcher’s affection, disinterestedness, honour, and
respect for others. Miss Bosanquet had still a remnant of her fortune;
but he wished the whole of this to be settled upon herself. He wished to
marry her, but, before carrying out his wish, as a courteous gentleman,
he asked for the approbation of her family, thereby setting a good
example to his inferiors and juniors. She wished to marry him; but,
shrinking from the idea of involving him in her pecuniary
embarrassments, she proposed to postpone the marriage till her affairs
were in a more settled state. Her family were consulted by Fletcher; and
they responded in the most kind and straightforward manner. In genius,
talent, and learning, Fletcher was immensely Miss Bosanquet’s superior;
but, for pure, ardent, disinterested, unselfish love, it is impossible
to decide which of the two was entitled to bear the palm.

Consent to the marriage having been obtained from the Bosanquet family,
Fletcher made an arrangement to spend the remainder of the year with his
affianced in Yorkshire. The well-known Rev. John Crosse,[545] Vicar of
Bradford, took Fletcher’s pulpit at Madeley, and Fletcher took Mr.
Crosse’s at Bradford.[546] To some, this may seem somewhat strange; but
it must be borne in mind that Miss Bosanquet’s temporal affairs were in
a most entangled state, and that it was of great importance that her
Cross Hall property should be sold, and all her business assets and
debts in Yorkshire satisfactorily settled before her removal to Madeley.
Fletcher went to help his intended bride, and did help her; for her
brother William, in a letter, written to her a fortnight after her
marriage, observed, “You have done very well in disposing of your
place.”[547] For months past, she had been longing and trying to turn
her troublesome property into money: now she succeeded in doing so. A
week after Fletcher’s arrival, “a gentleman came quite unexpectedly, and
bought” the Cross Hall[548] estate “for £1,620; and, three days
afterwards, another took the stock, etc.” Arrangements were also made
for the locating of her domestic dependants; and she was enabled to
write:—

  “All was now so far settled, that I did not need to sell Leytonstone
  estate. My income would afford to allow my dispersed family £55 per
  year; pay the interest of the money still owing; and yet leave me such
  an annual sum as was about equal to my dear Mr. Fletcher’s; and, in
  case of my death, there was in Leytonstone more than would pay all.
  So, on Monday, the 12th of November, 1781, in Batley Church, we
  covenanted in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
  Ghost, to bear each other’s burdens, and to become one for ever.”[549]

Footnote 545:

  Mr. Crosse had been acquainted with Miss Bosanquet when she resided at
  Leytonstone, and, from that time to this, a warm friendship had
  existed between them. (“Life of Crosse,” by Morgan, p. 8.)

Footnote 546:

  “Life of Rev. John Crosse,” by Morgan, p. 9.

Footnote 547:

  Unpublished letter.

Footnote 548:

  Cross Hall still exists; at all events, it did a few years ago, when
  the present writer visited it—a square, substantial, two-story
  edifice, built of stone, shaded with trees, and having a good garden
  behind it.

Footnote 549:

  “Mrs. Fletcher’s Life,” by H. Moore, p. 142.

Fletcher reached Cross Hall towards the end of October, 1781, and
continued there till January 2, 1782, when he and his bride set out for
Madeley. A glimpse of this brief interval, and of his unique wedding,
may interest the reader.

Of course, Fletcher had to preach every Sunday in Mr. Crosse’s church;
but, in addition to this, he also preached in Methodist chapels. Samuel
Bradburn, at that time Wesley’s “Assistant” in the Bradford Circuit,
wrote:—

  “Mr. Fletcher is married to Miss Bosanquet. Such a pair! I am inclined
  to think there never was a holier, or a happier, couple, since Adam
  ate the forbidden fruit. At all events, I can say, such a man and
  woman I never knew married before. He has preached in two of our
  houses at Halifax and Bradford; and I think that there never were two
  better sermons preached in England.”[550]

Footnote 550:

  Unpublished letter.

This, from one of the greatest of Methodism’s pulpit orators, was no
ordinary praise.

Mrs. Crosby was one of the members of Miss Bosanquet’s family, and
wrote:—

  “Mr. Fletcher’s general conversation, while at Cross Hall, was
  praising God, and speaking of the love of our dear Redeemer. He took
  opportunities of speaking to every one in the family, concerning the
  state of their souls, and of giving them suitable directions. At other
  times, he met us all together, and exhorted us. Our daily meals were
  like sacraments. When he drank to any one, it was, ‘Heavenly health!’
  or ‘The cup of salvation!’ At, or after each meal, he generally began,
  or called upon us to begin, to sing—

                      “‘Still, O my soul, prolong
                      The never-ceasing song!
                  Christ my theme, my hope, my joy!
                      His be all my happy days!
                  Praise my every hour employ:
                      Every breath be spent in praise!’

  “Thus did he walk with God, filled with the Spirit: confirming his
  love to all the family, and caring for both their spiritual and
  temporal concerns. He preached in many places while in Yorkshire, and
  to numerous congregations. Many were blest thereby; some convinced of
  sin; others comforted. Whenever he either preached or conversed, the
  comforts of the Holy Ghost were multiplied.

  “Monday, _November 12_, was the day appointed for the marriage. On the
  morning of this day, several friends met together. They reached Cross
  Hall before family prayers. Mr. Fletcher was dressed in his
  canonicals. After giving out one of Mr. Wesley’s marriage hymns, he
  read Rev. xix. 7, 8, 9, ‘Let us be glad, and rejoice, and give honour
  to Him; for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made
  herself ready. And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in
  fine linen, clean and white; for the fine linen is the righteousness
  of saints. And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are
  called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me,
  These are the true sayings of God.’ Mr. Fletcher then spoke from these
  verses, in such a manner as greatly tended to spiritualize the
  solemnities of the day. He said, ‘We invite you to our wedding; but
  the Holy Ghost invites you to the marriage of the Lamb. The bride, the
  Lamb’s wife, represents the whole Church, triumphant and militant
  united together. You may all be the Bride, and Jesus will condescend
  to be the Bridegroom. Make yourselves ready by being filled with the
  Spirit.’ He then engaged in prayer, and said, ‘Lord, thou knowest we
  would not take this step, if we had not eternity in view, and if we
  were not as willing to be carried into the churchyard, as to go into
  the church.’ At breakfast, he remarked, ‘The postilions are now ready
  to carry us to the church; but death will soon be here to carry us to
  the marriage supper of the Lamb.’

  “On the way to Batley Church, which was nearly two miles distant, he
  spoke much of the mystery represented by marriage, namely the union
  between Christ and His Church. They were married in the face of the
  congregation: the doors were opened, and everyone came in that would.
  We then returned home, and spent a considerable time in singing and
  prayer. There were nearly twenty of us. I then presented Mrs. Fletcher
  with some wedding hymns. She looked over them, and gave them to Mr.
  Fletcher. He read the Scripture text at the top, namely, ‘Husbands,
  love your wives, as Christ loved the Church.’ Then turning to the
  company, he said, ‘My God, what a task! Help me, my friends, by your
  prayers, to fulfil it. As Christ loved the Church! He laid aside His
  glory for the Church; He submitted to be born into our world; to be
  clothed with a human body, subject to all our sinless infirmities; He
  endured shame, contempt, pain, yea, death itself for His Church! O my
  God, none is able to fulfil this task, without Thine Almighty aid!
  Help me, O my God! Pray for me, O my friends!’

  “He next read, ‘Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands.’ Mrs.
  Fletcher added, ‘As unto the Lord.’ ‘Well, my dear,’ returned Mr.
  Fletcher, ‘only in the Lord. And if ever I wish you to do anything
  otherwise, resist me with all your might.’

  “From dinner, which was a spiritual meal as well as a natural one,
  until tea-time, our time was chiefly spent in prayer or singing. After
  singing the covenant hymn, Mr. Fletcher went to Mrs. Fletcher, and
  said to her, ‘Well, my dearest friend, will you unite with me in
  joining ourselves in a perpetual covenant to the Lord? Will you with
  me serve Him in His members? Will you help me to bring souls to the
  Blessed Redeemer? And, in every possible way, this day lay yourself
  under the strongest ties you can, to help me to glorify my gracious
  Lord? She answered, ‘May my God help me so to do!’

  “In the evening, Mr. Valton[551] preached in the hall, from, ‘What
  shall I render unto the Lord for all His benefits? I will take the cup
  of salvation, and call upon the name of the Lord.’ His words did not
  fall to the ground; many were greatly refreshed. After the preaching,
  there was a sweet contest among us: every one thought, ‘I, in
  particular, owe the greatest debt of praise;’ at length we agreed to
  sing,—

                “‘I’ll praise my Maker, while I’ve breath,
                And when my voice is lost in death,
                  Praise shall employ my nobler powers:
                My days of praise shall ne’er be past,
                While life, and thought, and being last,
                  Or immortality endures.’”[552]

Footnote 551:

  John Valton, one of Wesley’s Preachers, then in the seventh year of
  his itinerancy, and labouring in the Birstal Circuit. He wrote: “On
  the 12th of November, 1781, Mr. Fletcher stole hallowed fire from my
  people, by taking away Miss Bosanquet. I and a few friends accompanied
  them to Batley Church. Surely, such a blessed wedding I never knew
  before. By request, I improved the occasion in the evening, from these
  words, ‘What shall we render to the Lord for all His benefits? I will
  take the cup of salvation, and call upon His name.’ It was a
  refreshing time; and many prayers were offered that eternal blessings
  might crown the devoted pair.” (“Life of the Rev. John Valton,” p.
  104.)

Footnote 552:

  Wesley’s “Life of Fletcher.”

Is there on record another wedding day such as this? To criticise the
account would spoil it. It may, however, interest the reader to give a
verbatim copy of the marriage certificate:—

  “No. 112. John William Fletcher, of the parish of Madeley, in the
  county of Salop, Clerk, and Mary Bosanquet, of this parish, were
  married in this church (Batley) by license, this twelfth day of
  November, in the year 1781, by me, John Deighton, Curate.

  “This marriage was solemnized between us, John William Fletcher, or De
  la Flechere, and Mary Bosanquet, in the presence of William Smith and
  Ann Tripp.”

Twelve days after the marriage, Wesley wrote to Fletcher the following
characteristic letter:—

                                       “LONDON, _November 24, 1781_.

  “DEAR SIR,—There is not a person to whom I would have wished Miss
  Bosanquet joined besides you. But this union, I am thoroughly
  persuaded, is of God; and so are all the children of God with whom I
  have spoken. Mr. Bosanquet’s being so agreeable to it, I look upon as
  a token for good; and so was the ready disposing of the house and
  stock, which otherwise would have been a great encumbrance.

  “From the first day which you spend together at Madeley, I hope you
  will lay down an exactly regular plan of living; something like that
  of the happy family at Leytonstone. Let your light shine to all that
  are round about you. And let Sister Fletcher do as much as she can for
  God, and no more. To His care I commit you both, and am, my dear
  friends,

                                  “Your very affectionate brother,
                                                 “JOHN WESLEY.”[553]

Footnote 553:

  Wesley’s Works, vol. xii., p. 154.

A curious letter to be written to a man on his being married; but Wesley
and Fletcher were far too earnest, and were engaged in far too great a
work, to permit them to write commonplace and empty congratulations.

One of the first acts of Fletcher, after his marriage, was to make a
settlement of his own monetary matters. The following is an exact copy
of his will, written by himself:—

  “This is the last Will and Testament of John William Fletcher, Vicar
  of Madeley, in the County of Salop, whereby I give and bequeath to my
  dear wife, Mary Fletcher, all my personal estate, of what nature or
  kind soever, in the kingdom of Great Britain, for her own use and
  benefit.

  “With regard to my personal estate in Switzerland, I give and bequeath
  it all to my second brother, Henry de la Fletcher, assessor to the
  Lord Bailie, at Nyon, in the Canton of Berne, on condition that he or
  his heirs will take care to pay to my said dear wife, Mary Fletcher,
  or order, the income or produce of that personal estate during the
  term of her natural life; and, in case my said brother or his heirs do
  not fulfil this condition, according to the tenour of this Will, then
  my said wife shall sell, or cause to be sold, that my said personal
  estate in Switzerland, for her own use and benefit; and get the money
  over to England, on condition that she shall pay one hundred crowns to
  the poor of Nyon, in the said Canton of Berne.[554]

  “And I do hereby appoint my said dear wife sole executrix of this my
  last Will and Testament. In witness whereof I have hereunto set my
  hand and seal this 24th of December, 1781.

                          “JOHN WILLIAM FLETCHER, OR DE LA FLECHERE.

  “Signed and sealed by the Testator, and by him declared to be his last
  Will and Testament, in the presence of us,

                                                  “JOHN VALTON.
                                                  “RICHARD TAYLOR.
                                                  “THOMAS
                                                     GARFORTH.”[555]

Footnote 554:

  Fletcher’s relatives in Switzerland most faithfully fulfilled this
  part of Fletcher’s Will. In an unpublished letter to Mrs. Crosby,
  dated June 20, 1786, his widow wrote:—

  “My brother Henry possesses so much of the spirit of my dear husband,
  that his care of me exceeds all imagination. The family have sent me a
  bond, laying in their own estates as security to forward me the whole
  produce every year. I do not yet know exactly what it will be; but it
  is far better than I thought; and so is everything in which my dearest
  Mr. Fletcher has been concerned.”

Footnote 555:

  _The Wesley Banner_, 1850, p. 314.

Fletcher’s marriage was, in all respects, a happy one. He was thankful
for his wife, and proud of her. Hence the following letter to “The Hon.
Mrs. C——:”

                        “CROSS HALL, YORKSHIRE, _December 26, 1781_.

  “MY VERY DEAR FRIEND,—Your favour of the 4th instant did not reach me
  until a considerable time after date, through my being still absent
  from Madeley; a clergyman of this neighbourhood having made an
  exchange with me, to facilitate my settling some temporal affairs in
  this county.

  “The kind part you take in my happiness demands my warmest thanks; and
  I beg you will accept them, multiplied by those which my dear partner
  presents to you. Yes, my dear friend, I am married in my old age, and
  have a new opportunity of considering a great mystery, in the most
  perfect type of our Lord’s mystical union with His Church. I have now
  a new call to pray for a fulness of Christ’s holy, gentle, meek,
  loving Spirit, that I may love my wife, as He loved His spouse, the
  Church. But the emblem is greatly deficient: the Lamb is worthy of His
  spouse, and more than worthy; whereas I must acknowledge myself
  unworthy of the yoke-fellow, whom heaven has reserved for me. She is a
  person after my own heart; and, I make no doubt, we shall increase the
  number of the happy marriages in the Church militant.

  “Indeed, they are not so many, but it may be worth a Christian’s while
  to add one more to the number. God declared it was not good that man,
  a social being, should live alone, and, therefore, He gave him a
  help-meet for him. For the same reason, our Lord sent forth His
  disciples two and two. Had I searched the three kingdoms, I could not
  have found one brother willing to share gratis my weal, woe, and
  labours, and complaisant enough to unite his fortunes to mine; but God
  has found me a partner, _a sister, a wife_, to use St. Paul’s
  language, who is not afraid to face with me the colliers and bargemen
  of my parish, until death part us.

  “Buried together in our country village, we shall help one another to
  trim our lamps, and wait for the coming of the heavenly
  Bridegroom.”[556]

Footnote 556:

  Letters, 1791, p. 281.

Before leaving this memorable year, 1781, it must be added that, twenty
days after Fletcher’s marriage, his beloved friend and travelling
companion, William Perronet, died, on his way to England, at Douay.
Three months before this event took place, Fletcher remarked, in a
letter to William Perronet’s venerable father:—

  “Madeley, September 4, 1781. I have been for some weeks in Yorkshire,
  chiefly at the house of an old friend of mine, Miss Bosanquet, whose
  happy family put me in mind of yours. At my return home, I have found
  a letter from my brother, who informs me that my dear friend, your
  son, continues very weak. He is now at Gimel, a fine village between
  Lausanne and Geneva, where Miss Perronet’s sister is settled. There he
  rides, and drinks ass’s milk, and breathes the purest air. Mrs.
  Perronet is there with her two daughters, so that if the illness of my
  dear friend should grow more grievous, he will not want for good
  attendance and the most tender nursing.”[557]

Footnote 557:

  _Methodist Magazine_, 1817, p. 864.

Now, in another letter to the father of William Perronet, Fletcher
wrote:—

  “I condole with you, Rev. and dear Sir, about the death of my dear
  friend and your dear son. We shall one day see why our heavenly Father
  made your sons go before you, and my kind physician before me. About
  the time he died, so far as I can find by your kind letter, a strong
  concern about him fell upon me by day and by night, insomuch that I
  could not help waking my wife to join me in praying for him; and at
  once that concern ceased, nor have I since had any such spiritual
  feeling, whence I concluded that the conflict I supposed my friend to
  be in was ended. But how surprised was I to find it was _by death_!
  Well, whether Paul or Apollos, or life or _death_, all things are ours
  through Jesus, who knows how to bring good out of evil, and how to
  blow us into the harbour by a cross wind, or even by a dreadful
  storm.”[558]

Footnote 558:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”




                              CHAPTER XXV.
                _TWO YEARS OF MARRIED LIFE AT MADELEY._

                             1782 AND 1783.




IN a letter to an aristocratic friend in London, Fletcher began the year
1782 as follows:—

  “January 1, 1782. I live, blessed be God, to devote myself again to
  His blessed service in this world or in the next, and to wish my dear
  friends all the blessings of a year of jubilee. Whatever this year
  brings forth, may it bring us the fullest measures of salvation
  attainable on earth, and the most complete preparation for heaven.

  “I have a solemn call to gird my loins and keep my lamp burning.
  Strangely restored to health and strength (considering my years), I
  have ventured to preach of late as often as I did formerly; and after
  having read prayers and preached twice on Christmas-day, I did, last
  Sunday, what I had never done,—I continued doing duty from ten o’clock
  in the morning till after four in the afternoon. This was owing to
  christenings, churchings, and the sacrament, which I administered to a
  church full of people,[559] so that I was obliged to go from the
  communion table to begin the evening service, and then to visit some
  sick. This has brought back upon me one of my old, dangerous symptoms;
  so I have flattered myself in vain that I should be able to do the
  whole duty of my own parish. My dear wife is nursing me with the
  tenderest care; gives me up to God with the greatest resignation; and
  helps me to rejoice that life and death, health and sickness, work for
  our good, and are all _ours_, as blessed means to forward us in our
  journey to heaven.

  “We intend to set out for Madeley to-morrow. The prospect of a
  winter’s journey is not sweet; but the prospect of meeting you, and
  your dear sister, and Lady Mary Fitzgerald, and all our other
  companions in tribulation in heaven, is delightful. If Lady Huntingdon
  is in London, I beg you to present my duty to her, with my best
  wishes.”[560]

Footnote 559:

  No doubt this six hours’ continuous service took place in the parish
  church, Bradford.

Footnote 560:

  Letters, 1791, p. 283.

Fletcher and his bride left Cross Hall on Wednesday, January 2, 1782.
Mrs. Fletcher wrote:—

  “1782, January 2. We set out for Madeley. Where shall I begin my song
  of praise? What a turn is there in all my affairs! From what a depth
  of sorrow, distress, and perplexity am I delivered! How shall I find
  language to express the goodness of the Lord! I know no want but that
  of more grace. I have a husband, in everything suited to me. He bears
  with all my faults and failings in a manner that continually reminds
  me of the text, ‘Love your wives, as Christ loved the Church.’ His
  constant endeavour is to make me happy; his strongest desire is for my
  spiritual growth. He is, in every sense of the word, the man my
  highest reason chooses to obey. I am also happy in a servant[561] whom
  I took from the side of her mother’s coffin when she was four years
  old. She loves us as if we were her parents, and is also truly devoted
  to God.”[562]

Footnote 561:

  Sarah Lawrence.

Footnote 562:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

On January 6, Fletcher and his wife spent their first Sunday at Madeley.
Seventeen years afterwards, Mrs. Fletcher remarked:—

  “The first Sabbath after I came to Madeley my dear husband took me
  into the kitchen, where his people were assembled to partake of
  refreshment between the times of worship. He introduced me to them,
  saying, ‘I have not married this wife for myself only, but for your
  sakes also.’”

And then the happy throng sang the hymn beginning with the verse—

                    “Blow ye the trumpet, blow
                    The gladly solemn sound;
                    Let all the nations know,
                    To earth’s remotest bound;
                  The year of jubilee is come!
                  Return, ye ransomed sinners, home.”

A few weeks after this, Wesley paid his friends a visit of one day and
two nights. He says:—

  “1782. Saturday, March 23. It was with a good deal of difficulty that
  we got” [from Kidderminster] “to Bridgenorth, much of the road being
  blocked up with snow. In the afternoon, we had another kind of
  difficulty; the roads were so rough and so deep that we were in
  danger, every now and then, of leaving our wheels behind us. But, by
  adding two horses to my own, at length we got safe to Madeley.

  “Both Mr. and Mrs. Fletcher complained that, after all the pains they
  had taken they could not prevail on the people to join in Society; no,
  nor even to meet in class. Resolved to try, I preached to a crowded
  audience on ‘I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ.’ I followed the
  blow in the afternoon by strongly applying those words, ‘Awake, thou
  that sleepest;’ and then enforcing the necessity of Christian
  fellowship on all who desired either to awake or keep awake. I then
  desired those that were willing to join together for this purpose to
  call upon me and Mr. Fletcher after service. Ninety-four or
  ninety-five persons did so—about as many men as women. We explained to
  them the nature of a Christian Society, and they willingly joined
  therein.”[563]

Footnote 563:

  Wesley’s Journal.

Methodist preachers, for some time past, had preached in Madeley Wood,
Coalbrookdale, and other adjacent places, and here Society Classes seem
to have been formed; but, up to the present, the Methodist people at
Madeley had refused to meet in class. Henceforth, it was different. This
altered state of things was owing partly to Wesley and to Fletcher, but
chiefly to Fletcher’s devoted wife.

At the time of Wesley’s visit, there was living at Little Dawley, near
Madeley, a child nearly four years old, who, nineteen years afterwards,
became a Methodist Itinerant Preacher, and who, in 1879, died in the one
hundred and first year of his age—the tall, stalwart, grand old William
Tranter. Naturally, Mr. Tranter loved Madeley, and affectionately
cherished the memory of Fletcher and his wife. In an article published
forty-five years ago, he wrote:—

  “When Mr. Wesley’s preachers came to the neighbourhood of Madeley, Mr.
  Fletcher hospitably received those laborious servants of God into his
  house; the vicarage kitchen, before consecrated by his prayers, was
  now further consecrated by their earnest and faithful preaching; the
  Vicar of Madeley himself being one of their humblest and most
  prayerful hearers. The kitchen becoming too small, a barn on the
  premises was neatly fitted up for a preaching room. In this place, the
  Methodist travelling preachers, and the curate of the parish,
  regularly preached the Word of God. Here, also, Mrs. Fletcher, after
  the removal of her holy husband to his heavenly rest, held her
  meetings for exposition of the Scriptures, religious experience, and
  prayer. Surviving her husband many years” (thirty), “she lived a widow
  indeed, doing good to all around her, and winning the veneration and
  love of rich and poor, not only in the village and parish of Madeley,
  and in the adjoining parishes, but in all places where she was known,
  and to which the fame of her piety and charity had extended. The
  rector not only allowed her to remain in the vicarage-house,
  undisturbed during life, but allowed her to choose the curate by whom
  the duties of the living were to be performed; assigning as his
  reason, that she knew better than himself what would suit and benefit
  the parishioners. Besides exercising publicly, at stated times, in the
  vicarage room, she occasionally visited Madeley Wood, Coalbrookdale,
  Coalport, and other places more distant, at which times the chapels
  were usually crowded with delighted and profited hearers. To her
  house, the Itinerant Preachers continued to come to the end of her
  earthly sojourn. Here they always found a hearty welcome, and a
  delightful home. Several lovely Societies were formed, others were
  augmented, hundreds of souls were converted, Christian believers were
  edified and blessed, the fruit of Mr. Fletcher’s ministry was
  preserved, and Madeley became the rendezvous for religious persons and
  purposes—a privileged, honoured place,—a sort of Christian Jerusalem.
  It was not uncommon to see two, three, or more clergymen, pious and
  able men, from neighbouring and even distant parishes, among the
  congregation at her week-night lectures. On the Sabbath, the pious
  people, living at the distance of from one to four miles from Madeley,
  usually arrived in time for her morning meeting, at nine o’clock; and,
  from there, they went to the parish church close at hand. At noon,
  respectable strangers, visiting Madeley for religious purposes, were
  usually invited to dine with her at the vicarage; the poor, living too
  far off to allow them to return from their own houses for the after
  services of the day, partook, if so disposed, of her hospitalities in
  the vicarage-kitchen; others, having brought their provisions with
  them, were seen, in fine weather, in little companies in the fields,
  engaged in heavenly conversation and prayer; and others of the
  respectable portion of these pious people, had, in an apartment to
  themselves, a cheap family dinner provided at the village inn. On the
  ringing of a bell, at one o’clock, all assembled at Mrs. Fletcher’s
  meeting, when she was accustomed to read the life of some eminently
  holy man, and make remarks upon it; then they adjourned to the church,
  for the afternoon service there, and sermon; after which they repaired
  to their respective homes, and attended their own meeting-houses, at
  one or other of which the Curate of Madeley officiated every Sabbath
  evening, as well as occasionally on the week-days, always announcing
  at the close of the afternoon service in the church, the chapel in
  which he would preach that evening. This plan was adopted by Mr.
  Fletcher, and was followed by his evangelical and pious successors,
  for upwards of forty years.”[564]

Footnote 564:

  _Wesleyan Methodist Magazine_, 1837, p. 903.

The godly reader will easily forgive this rich digression, and will be
inclined to sing, with Charles Wesley:—

              “Meek, simple followers of the Lamb,
              They lived, and spake, and thought the same;
              They joyfully conspired to raise
              Their ceaseless sacrifice of praise.

              “With grace abundantly endued,
              A pure, believing multitude,
              They all were of one heart and soul,
              And only love inspired the whole.

              “O what an age of golden days!
              O what a choice, peculiar race!
              Washed in the Lamb’s all-cleansing blood,
              Anointed kings and priests to God!”[565]

Footnote 565:

  Deep indentations in the stone pillars of the vicarage gate still
  exist, occasioned by the Sunday visitors to Madeley sharpening their
  knives to eat their dinners. (Randall’s “Lives and Usefulness of the
  Rev. J. and Mary Fletcher,” p. 33.)

Madeley will long continue to be a kind of Mecca to the Methodists. Many
years ago, the present writer, in company with the late Rev. Dr. Jobson,
visited it. They met with the utmost courtesy, the lady of the Vicar
showing them everything likely to interest a Methodist. She had a lock
of Fletcher’s silky hair, which she greatly prized. They were taken into
Fletcher’s study, about nine feet by twelve in size, and had pointed out
to them a portion of the wall, still stained with Fletcher’s breathings
while engaged in prayer. The old barn-chapel was no longer in existence,
but, near to its site, there was a small building, containing its
pulpit, brass lamps, and prayer-book, together with the small oaken
communion table at which Fletcher celebrated his last sacrament. The
vicarage, a respectable old edifice, had beautiful gardens and grounds
attached to it; and the parish church, built upon the site of the small
old church, in which Fletcher ministered to crowded congregations,
contained several mementoes to remind visitors of its memorable vicar.
The steps leading both to the reading-desk and pulpit were those which
Fletcher used to tread; and, in a small vestry, was preserved the
register of all the baptisms, marriages, and deaths during his
incumbency, and showing that his last baptism was on July 29, 1785, six
weeks before his death. The old church, in which Fletcher preached,
would hold five hundred; the present one, built in 1794, will seat about
a thousand; and, since its erection, two others have been built in other
parts of the parish. Besides these, the following Wesleyan Methodist
chapels have been built: one in Court Street, Madeley, holding eight
hundred; another, of the same size, in Madeley Wood; another, half the
size, in Coalbrookdale; and a fourth at Coalport, capable of containing
two hundred. And to these may be added two chapels, at Madeley and
Madeley Wood, belonging to the Methodist New Connexion; and another
belonging to the Primitive Methodists.

It is time to return to Fletcher. Among the first Methodists in Ireland
were Henry and Robert Brooke, who, up to the year 1758, resided in the
neighbourhood of Rantavan. Henry became the far-famed author of “The
Fool of Quality; or, The History of Henry, Earl of Moreland;” published,
in five volumes, 1766–1770; and of other ably-written books, which
gained him the friendship of Pope, Swift, and several more of the
literati of his age. He married a young lady, to whom he was guardian,
when she was thirteen years of age, by whom he had seventeen children,
only two of whom survived him, when he died in 1783. His brother Robert
had three children: Henry, the eldest, who, for about forty years, was
one of the leading Methodists in Dublin; Robert, the second, a colonel
in the army; and Thomas Digby, the youngest, also connected with the
Dublin Methodist Society. In the year 1772, Henry wrote to Fletcher;
Fletcher mistook the nephew for the uncle, whose “Fool of Quality” had
recently been completed; and this amusing mistake led Fletcher to
address to the famous author the following valuable epistle:—

                                      “MADELEY, _September 6, 1772_.

  “DEAR SIR,—I cannot tell you how often I have thought of thanking you
  for your kind letter. My controversy made me put it off some time,
  and, when I was going one day to answer you, a clergyman called upon
  me, read your letter, said you were a sensible author, and, if I would
  let him have it, he would let me have your ‘Fool of Quality,’ of which
  I had never heard. I forgot to take your address; but, after some
  months, my friend has sent me back your unexpected and welcome favour;
  and I now know in what street you live. A thousand thanks for your
  letter. May this sheet convey them from my heart to yours; and thence
  may they fall, like a thousand drops, into that immense ocean of
  goodness, truth, and love, whence come all the streams, which gladden
  the universe of God!

  “I thankfully accept the pleasure, profit, and honour of your
  correspondence. But I must not deceive you; I have not yet learned the
  blessed precept of our Lord in respect of writing and receiving
  letters. I still find it more blessed to _receive_, than to _give_;
  and, till I have got out of this selfishness, never depend on a letter
  from me till you see it, and be persuaded, nevertheless, that one from
  you will always be welcome.

  “I see, by your works, that you love truth, and that you will force
  your way, through all the barriers of prejudice, to embrace it in its
  meanest dress. That makes me love you. I hope to improve by your
  example and your lessons. One thing I want truly to learn, that is,
  that creatures and visible things are but _shadows_, and that God is
  God, Jehovah, the true, eternal Substance. To live practically in this
  truth is to live in the suburbs of heaven. Really to believe that in
  God we live, move, and have our being, is to find and enjoy the root
  of our existence: it is to slide from self into our original
  principle; from the carnal into the spiritual; from the visible into
  the invisible; from time into eternity. Give me, at your leisure, some
  directions, how to cease from busying myself about the husks of
  things, and how to break through the shell, so that I may come to the
  kernel of resurrection, life, and power, that lies hidden from the
  unbeliever’s sight.

  “About _feelings_. Pray, my dear Sir, are you possessed of all the
  feelings of your Clinton, Clement, and Harry? Are they natural to you,
  I mean, previous to what we generally call conversion? I have often
  thought that some of the feelings you describe depend a good deal upon
  the fineness of the nerves, and bodily organs; and, as I am rather of
  a Stoic turn, I have, sometimes, comforted myself in thinking, that my
  want of feelings might, in a degree, proceed from the dulness of Swiss
  nerves. If I am not mistaken, Providence directs me to you to have
  this important question solved. May not some persons have as much true
  faith, love, humanity, and pity, as others who are ten times more
  affected, at least for a season? And what directions would you give to
  a Christian Stoic, if these two ideas are not absolutely incompatible?

  “My Stoicism helps me, I think, to weather out a storm of displeasure,
  which my little pamphlets have raised against me. You see, I at once
  consult you as an old friend and spiritual casuist; nor know I how to
  testify better to you how unreservedly I begin to be, my very dear
  friend,

                                     “Yours in the Lord,
                                                 “J. FLETCHER.”[566]

Footnote 566:

  Letters, 1791, p. 214.

Probably “The Fool of Quality” was the only novel Fletcher ever read;
but it taught him to respect its author. It is more than doubtful,
however, whether Fletcher’s letter ever reached the gentleman for whom
it was intended. At all events, there is no evidence whatever that any
correspondence took place between Henry Brooke, senior, and the Vicar of
Madeley. Of course, Fletcher’s communication reached the nephew of
Brooke, and, nearly ten years afterwards, he and others wrote to
Fletcher, requesting him and his newly-wedded wife to visit the
Methodists in Dublin. Fletcher replied:—

                                         “MADELEY, _April 20, 1782_.

  “DEAR SIR,—Last Saturday, I received your kind invitation to take a
  journey to Dublin, with my wife; and we join in sincere thanks for the
  kind and generous offer which accompanies that invitation.

  “Two reasons, at this time, concur to make me postpone the accepting
  of it. Not to mention my state of health, I have been so long absent
  from my parish, that my parishioners have a just claim to my stated
  labours for some time; and Mr. Bayley, my curate, being wanted at
  Kingswood School, I must serve my own church myself, and the duty is
  so continual that I dare not go twenty miles from home, much less to a
  neighbouring kingdom. Providence may, if it be for the glory of God,
  make a way for me to go, and return my thanks in person. In the
  meantime, I beg you, Sir, to present them to all our brethren, who set
  their hands to your kind letter.

  “If I took you, Sir, for the author of ‘The Fool of Quality,’[567] I
  thought I saw his style in the style of your letter; however, I was
  not much mistaken. Your pen is nearly allied to his, as your blood is
  to his. May one Spirit, the humble, loving Spirit of Jesus, make us
  all of one heart and soul! May we, notwithstanding the channel which
  separates our bodies, rejoice that one truth unites our souls, and
  that the common faith and love make us join daily in Christ our Head!
  So prays, dear Sir, your affectionate and obliged brother and servant,

                                               “JOHN FLETCHER.”[568]

Footnote 567:

  Two years before this, Wesley had published his abridged edition of
  “The Fool of Quality,” in two volumes, 12mo.

Footnote 568:

  Original Letter.

Fletcher and his wife remained at Madeley, and the latter wrote:—

  “May 30, 1782. I have the kindest and tenderest of husbands; of so
  spiritual a man, and so spiritual a union, I had no adequate
  conception. He is every way suited to me, all I could wish. The work
  among souls increases.”[569]

Footnote 569:

  “Mrs. Fletcher’s Life,” by H. Moore.

A few weeks later, in a letter to Wesley, she said:—

                                           “MADELEY, _July 7, 1782_.

  “VERY DEAR SIR,—I find a desire of informing you how we go on. The
  people you joined, when here, are, I trust, coming forward. I have not
  conversed with the men; but the women are more in number than at that
  time. Some have been clearly justified, I think five; and three or
  four are restored to that communion with God, which they had for some
  years lost. A few are athirst for a clean heart; and, on the whole,
  there is a good increase of freedom and liberty in our class-meetings.
  We have now also a band,[570] into which I gather the most lively; all
  that are newly blest, or that have any light into sanctification; and
  we have much of the presence of God with us.

  “My dear Mr. Fletcher spares no pains. I know not which is greater,
  his earnest desire for souls, or his patience in bearing with their
  infirmities and dulness. His preaching is exceeding lively; and our
  sacraments are more like those in the chapels of London than any I
  have seen since I left it. Yet, I find a great difference between the
  people here and those in Yorkshire: however, the Lord has little ones
  here also.

  “Last Friday, after riding two hours in the rain, we came to a good
  congregation, where there was neither house nor church to cover us;
  but I have not seen more of the Yorkshire attention since I left that
  county, nor had a more solemn time; though we were under a wet cloud
  all the while, and our poor servant waiting for us, who brought us
  safe home by ten o’clock the same night. This is one of the old
  congregations which my husband has visited for years; and where he
  joined (in Society) sixty persons. Next Friday, we are to see them
  again, and he purposes to enquire into the state of those which
  remain. There are, in many parts about here, some serious hearers, and
  we wish them all to be brought into a regular discipline. My husband
  has been at near £500 expense in building a small Preaching-house,
  that, if he should be removed, they may have a fold to prevent them
  from being scattered. But were they joined (in Society) _now_, it
  would be far more likely to answer the end. On this subject we wish to
  have a little conversation with you.

                              “I am your affectionate servant,
                                               “MARY FLETCHER.“[571]

Footnote 570:

  A term well understood by Methodists: a meeting of the most spiritual
  people who met in class.

Footnote 571:

  _Arminian Magazine_, 1790, p. 391.

Two months after this, Fletcher was temporarily disabled by an accident,
mentioned in a long letter to Lady Mary Fitzgerald, from which the
following is extracted:—

                                        “MADELEY, _August 28, 1782_.

  “MY HONOURED FRIEND,—The Lord has peculiar favours in store for your
  ladyship, and for me; the proof is, that we are _afflicted_. Have you
  been in a weak state of health? I have had the honour to drink of your
  cup. The influenza laid me down; and, when I was partly well, I broke
  my shin against a bench, in consequence of which I am confined by a
  bad leg to my bed, where I write this.

  “You still complain of _vile self_. Let vile self be reduced to order,
  and, though he be a bad master, he will become _an excellent servant_.
  Do this, by letting the Lord, the Maker, the Preserver, the Redeemer,
  the Lover of your soul, ascend upon the throne of your thoughts, will,
  and affections. Who deserves to engross them better than He does? Is
  not He your first Lord, your best Husband, your most faithful Friend,
  and your greatest Benefactor? Oh! allow Jehovah, the Supreme Being, to
  be to you what He deserves to be, _All in all_. One lively act of
  faith, one assent and consent to this delightful truth, that your
  Father, who is in heaven, loves you a thousand times more than you
  love your idol (for God’s love is, like Himself, _infinite_ and
  boundless), will set your heart at liberty, and even make it dance for
  joy. What, if to this ravishing consideration, you add the
  transporting truth, that the Son of God, fairer than the sons of men
  and brighter than the angels, has loved you unto death, to the death
  of the cross, and loves you still more than all your friends do, were
  their love collected into _one_ heart, could you help thinking, with a
  degree of joyous gratitude, of such an instance of Divine
  condescension? No, your _vile self_ would be _ennobled_, _raised_,
  _expanded_, and set at liberty by this evangelical thought. Self would
  be nobody; Emmanuel would be all in all. You would be so employed in
  praising your Father’s mercy, and your Saviour’s love and tenderness,
  that you would have but little time to speak either of _good or bad
  self_. When self is forgotten, _as nothing_ before God, you put self
  in its proper place; and you make room for the heavenly Being, whose
  holy and happy existence you are to shadow out. If you have left off
  attending on the Princess,[572] attend on the Prince of Peace with
  double diligence.

  “Shall we ever have the honour of seeing you, my lady? My wife, who
  joins in respectful love and thanks to your ladyship, for your
  remembrance of her, says, she will do her best to render our cold
  house safe for you, if not convenient. You would have had a repeated
  invitation from us, if a concern for your health, heightened by the
  bad weather, had not checked our desires to have an opportunity of
  assuring you how much we are devoted to your service. But the roads
  and weather beginning to mend, we venture to offer you the best
  apartment in our hermitage. I wish it were large enough to take in
  dear Mrs. G——,[573] and our dear friends in St. James’s Place; but we
  have only two small rooms; to which, however, you would be received
  with two enlarged hearts,—I mean those of your ladyship’s obedient,
  devoted servants,

                                      “JOHN AND MARY FLETCHER.”[574]

Footnote 572:

  Probably, Princess Elizabeth Caroline, the third daughter of George
  the Second, one of the most excellent of women. She died, in St.
  James’s Palace, in 1787.

Footnote 573:

  Probably Mrs. Grinfield, “one of Cæsar’s household,” as Whitefield
  called her, an attendant at St. James’s Palace.

Footnote 574:

  Letters, 1791, p. 287.

How long Fletcher was laid aside from his public work there is no
evidence to show. His position was somewhat trying, for the work was
heavy, and Mr. Bayley, his curate, had been obliged to return to
Wesley’s school at Kingswood. This and other matters are referred to in
the following letter to Charles Wesley:—

                                      “MADELEY, _December 19, 1782_.

  “REV. AND DEAR SIR,—I thank you for your hint about exemplifying the
  love of Christ and His Church. I hope we do. I was afraid, at first,
  to say much of the matter; but, having lived thirteen months in my new
  state, I can tell you, Providence has reserved a _prize_ for me, and
  that my wife is far better to me than the Church to Christ, so that if
  the parallel fails, it will be on my side.

  “Be so good as to peruse the enclosed sheets. Mr. De Luc, to whom they
  are addressed, is reader to the Queen, and the author of some volumes
  of Letters to her: he is a true philosopher. I flatter myself, he will
  present my letter to the Queen. Do you find anything improper in the
  addition I have made to my poem? I wish I were near you for your
  criticisms; you would direct me, both as a _poet_ and a _Frenchman_.

  “I have yet strength enough to do my parish duty without the help of a
  curate. O that the Lord would help me to do it acceptably and
  profitably! The colliers began to rise in this neighbourhood: happily
  the cockatrice’s egg was crushed, before the serpent came out.
  However, I got many a hearty curse from the colliers, for the plain
  words I spoke on that occasion. I want to see days of power both
  _within_ and _without_; but, meantime, I would follow closely my light
  in the narrow path.

  “My wife joins me in respectful love to Mrs. Wesley and yourself; and,
  requesting an interest in your prayers for us, I remain, my dear Sir,
  your affectionate, obliged brother, servant, and son in the Gospel,

                                               “JOHN FLETCHER.”[575]

Footnote 575:

  Letters, 1791, p. 288.

The “poem,” mentioned in this letter, was “La Grace et la Nature,” which
Fletcher had composed in Switzerland, and published in Geneva. He had
now enlarged it, and wished to publish a second edition of it, and to
dedicate the book to the Queen of King George the Third. This was done a
few months before he died; but, previous to committing his sheets to the
press, he submitted them to the criticism of Charles Wesley, Methodism’s
unequalled hymnologist.

This, however, was not the only poem on which Fletcher was now engaged.
On November 30, 1782, the preliminaries of the peace with America were
signed; and, on January 20, 1783, peace was concluded with France and
Spain. The termination of the long and disastrous war gave no one
greater joy than it did Fletcher. He celebrated it in another poem,
written also in French, and dedicated to the Archbishop of Paris.[576]
This was published, but is now extremely scarce. Fletcher enlarged it;
and, in 1785, Mr. Gilpin translated it into English, and intended to
dedicate his translation to the author; but, just as this English
edition was being printed, Fletcher died, and the dedication, dated
exactly a fortnight after Fletcher’s death, was, “To the Honoured Mrs.
Mary de la Flechere, of Madeley, in Shropshire.” The title of the poem
was, “An Essay upon the Peace of 1783. Dedicated to the Archbishop of
Paris. Translated from the French of the Rev. J. Fletcher, late Vicar of
Madeley. By the Rev. J. Gilpin, Vicar of Wrockwardine, Salop. London:
Printed by R. Hindmarsh, 1785.” 4to, 79 pp.

Want of space renders it impossible to furnish extracts from this
poetical production. In rhyme and rhythm, Fletcher, or, more probably,
his translator, was far from perfect; but that the Vicar, bred among the
inspiring scenery of Switzerland, was possessed of real poetic genius,
there cannot be a doubt. His descriptions of a naval battle, and of a
fight on land, and of the bombarding of Gibraltar, are very graphic. So
also are his definitions of the passions which war too frequently
evokes.

Though hardly worth mentioning, it may be stated, that the only thing
published by Fletcher, in the year 1782, was the following: “A Race for
Eternal Life: being an Extract from the Heavenly Footman. A Sermon on 1
Cor. ix. 24: written by the Author of the ‘Pilgrim’s Progress.’ By the
Rev. Mr. Fletcher. London: printed by R. Hindmarsh.” 12mo, 16 pp.
Fletcher says:—

  “This extract is published,—1. To stir up lazy and inconsistent
  Arminian professors, who assert that we should work out our own
  salvation with all diligence, and yet neglect doing it. And, 2. To
  convince of partiality the contentious Calvinists, who quarrel with
  their brethren for preaching _consistently_ the very same doctrine,
  which is _inconsistently_ maintained by their orthodox teachers, among
  whom pious John Bunyan stands in the first rank.”

Footnote 576:

  Fletcher’s dedication is dated, “Madeley, Salop, January 28, 1784.”

About this time, two young men were introduced to Fletcher, whom he
helped to the utmost of his power, and who, soon afterwards, attained
distinction, as clergymen of the Church of England.

One of these was Nathaniel Gilbert, the eldest son of Nathaniel Gilbert,
Esq., Speaker of the House of Assembly in Antigua, and who formed the
first Methodist Society in the West Indies. In 1759, he had requested
Fletcher to accompany him to the Western Archipelago; but Fletcher had
declined, on the ground that he had neither “sufficient zeal, nor grace,
nor talents” for such missionary work. His son, Nathaniel, was sent to
England at the age of seven (about the year 1761), and, three years
later, was placed under the care of the Rev. Mr. Hatton, of Water’s
Upton, in Shropshire, where he acquired a knowledge of the Latin and
Greek languages. On returning to Antigua, he found that the estate of
his father was overwhelmed with debt, and that the subsistence of the
family depended on a small jointure belonging to his mother. He came
back to England; settled in the parish of Madeley; enjoyed the
advantages of Fletcher’s ministry and counsels; and devoted himself to
God. On receiving episcopal ordination, the places of his ministerial
labours were Bristol, London, Budworth, Sierra Leone, Aveley, and
Bledlow. He was an eminently good and useful man; and peacefully fell
asleep in Jesus, in 1807, in the forty-sixth year of his age.[577]

Footnote 577:

  _Christian Observer_, 1807, pp. 768–772.

The other youth, who greatly benefited by Fletcher’s example and advice,
was Melville Horne, who, for a few years, was one of Wesley’s Itinerant
Preachers, and then was ordained for the ministry of the Church of
England. Melville Horne was a remarkable man, of whom it would be an
easy and pleasant task to write a more than ordinary biography. Suffice
it to say here, that, a year after Fletcher’s death, he became the
officiating minister in Fletcher’s church; that, in 1792, he and his
friend Gilbert went as missionaries to Sierra Leone; that, on his return
in 1794, he was appointed Chaplain of Magdalen Chapel, Bristol; and then
became Vicar of Olney.[578] This is not the place to record his
subsequent career of distinguished usefulness; but the testimony of such
a man, concerning Fletcher, is worthy of being quoted. Many years after
his first introduction to Fletcher, he wrote:—

  “On all my visits to Mr. Fletcher, I derived the highest pleasure and
  edification. I not only had the opportunity of hearing many excellent
  sermons, but of seeing him in the privacies of life; and I know not
  which most to venerate,—his public or his private character. Grave and
  dignified in his deportment and manners, he yet excelled in all the
  courtesies of the accomplished gentleman. In every company, he
  appeared as the least, the last, and the servant of all. From head to
  foot, he was clothed with humility; while the heavenly-mindedness of
  an angel shone from his countenance, and sparkled in his eyes. His
  religion was without labour, and without effort; for Christianity was
  not only his great business, but his very element and nature. As a
  mortal man, he doubtless had his errors and failings; but what they
  were, they who knew him best would find it difficult to say; for he
  appeared as an instrument of heavenly minstrelsy always attuned to the
  Master’s touch.

  “In every view, he was a great man, and entitled to rank in the very
  first class of ministers; but it was his _goodness_ that raised him
  above all the ministers of his day.

  “On my occasional visits to Madeley, I was struck with several things.
  Once, when preaching on Noah as a type of Christ, he was in the midst
  of a most animated description of the terrible day of the Lord, when
  he suddenly paused. Every feature of his expressive countenance was
  marked with painful feeling; and, striking his forehead with the palm
  of his hand, he exclaimed, ‘Wretched man that I am! Beloved brethren,
  it often cuts me to the soul, as it does at this moment, to reflect,
  that, while I have been endeavouring, by the force of truth, by the
  beauty of holiness, and even by the terrors of the Lord, to bring you
  to walk in the peaceable paths of righteousness, I am, with respect to
  many of you who reject the Gospel, only tying millstones round your
  necks, to sink you deeper in perdition!’ The whole congregation was
  electrified, and it was some time before he could resume his subject.

  “On another occasion, after the morning service, he asked if any of
  the congregation could give him the address of a sick man whom he was
  desired to visit. He was answered, ‘He is dead, Sir.’ ‘Dead! dead!’ he
  exclaimed; ‘another soul launched into eternity! What can I do for him
  now? Why, my friends, will you so frequently serve me in this manner?
  I am not informed you are ill till I find you dying, or hear that you
  are dead.’ Then sitting down, he covered his head with his gown, and,
  when the congregation had retired, walked home crushed with sorrow.

  “One New Year’s Day, Gilbert and myself dined with him, as did also a
  pious young man and his wife. After he had entertained us with much
  pious and instructive conversation, as we all stood around the fire
  and were ready to separate, he took Gilbert’s hand and mine and joined
  them together, and said, ‘You two young men are united by blood, by
  friendship, and by your destination to the blessed service of the
  sanctuary.’ Then, turning to the young man and his wife, he remarked,
  ‘Do you also, whom God has joined in the tenderest of earthly bonds,
  join hands, and I will take that of my beloved wife.’ This being done,
  he continued, ‘And now what shall we render unto the Lord for all His
  benefits? What blessings have we received! What mercies have followed
  us the last year! This is the first day of a new year. Let us give our
  whole soul to God. Let us start afresh on the road to immortality.
  Forgetting the things that are behind, let us press toward the mark
  for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.’ And then,
  lifting his eyes to heaven, he prayed for the whole of us most
  fervently and affectionately.”[579]

Footnote 578:

  Unpublished letters.

Footnote 579:

  Cox’s “Life of Fletcher,” p. 147.

After this account of the covenant service in Fletcher’s vicarage, Mr.
Horne proceeds to relate other anecdotes which came within his own
personal knowledge. He writes:—

  “In the contests of humility, kindness, and affection, it was
  impossible to surpass Mr. Fletcher. On one occasion, the Rev. Moseley
  Cheek had been preaching in his parish; and, on their way home to
  Madeley, in a dark night, and along a deep, dirty road, Mr. Fletcher
  carefully held the lantern to Mr. Cheek, while he himself walked
  through the mire. Mr. Cheek made fruitless attempts to take the
  lantern from him; Mr. Fletcher replying to his protests, ‘What, my
  brother, have you been holding up the glorious light of the Gospel,
  and will you not permit me to hold this dim taper to your feet?’

  “At another time, the Rev. Mr. Gilpin perceiving a funeral waiting at
  the church gate, took the surplice and commenced the service; but he
  had hardly got into the desk when Mr. Fletcher, who had been visiting
  a sick person, came into the church, and gently drawing away a lad who
  was officiating in the absence of the clerk, took his place. After the
  service was ended, he observed that he could not bear to see the place
  of an inferior servant of the Church improperly filled up without
  attempting to supply it himself with a greater degree of decorum and
  reverence.

  “Once, when my coat was dusty with riding, he insisted on brushing it,
  but objected to let me perform the same office for himself. Mrs.
  Fletcher, who perceived our contest, said, with a smile, ‘Then suffer
  me to do it; for I assure you, my dear, you need it as much as Mr.
  Horne.’ ‘If you please, my love,’ was the reply, ‘you shall do it, for
  you are a part of myself.’”[580]

  “Some of these anecdotes,” says Mr. Cox, “may, at first sight, appear
  too trivial for publication; but they are highly descriptive of Mr.
  Fletcher’s general demeanour; and, as Rosseau observes, ‘The
  physiognomy does not show itself in great features, nor the character
  of a man in great actions. It is in trifles that the natural
  disposition discovers itself.’”[581]

Footnote 580:

  _Ibid._, p. 149.

Footnote 581:

  Cox’s “Life of Fletcher,” p. 150.

While Fletcher was forming new friendships with young Nathaniel Gilbert
and Melville Horne, his old friends were rapidly dying. His generous
host, Mr. Charles Greenwood, of Stoke Newington, triumphantly exchanged
mortality for eternal life on February 21, 1783, on which occasion
Fletcher wrote the following to Mrs. Thornton:—

                                          “MADELEY, _March 3, 1783_.

  “MY DEAR FRIEND,—Yesterday, I received your melancholy joyful letter
  as I came from the sacrament, where the grace of God had armed me to
  meet the news. And is my merciful host gone to reap the fruit of his
  mercy to me? I thought I should have been permitted to go first, and
  welcome him into everlasting habitations; but Providence has ordered
  it otherwise, and I am left behind to say, with you and dear Mrs.
  Greenwood, ‘The Lord gave and has taken away; blessed be the name of
  the Lord.’ The glory with which Mr. Greenwood’s setting sun was
  gilded, is the greatest comfort by which heaven could alleviate his
  loss. Let me die as he died, and let my last end be like his! I was so
  affected by your account that I could not help reading part of your
  letter at church in the afternoon, and desiring all the congregation
  to join me in thanksgiving for the late mercies God has vouchsafed to
  my generous benefactor. On such occasions, let sighs be lost in
  praise, and repining in humble submission and thankful acquiescence. I
  hope dear Mrs. Greenwood mixes tears of joy with tears of sorrow. Who
  would not be landed on the other side of the stream of time if he were
  sure of such a passage? Who would wish his best friend back on the
  shores of sorrow so triumphantly left by Mr. Greenwood?

  “So Mr. and Mrs. Perronet are no more; and Lazarus is still alive!
  What scenes does this world afford! But the most amazing is that of
  Emmanuel crucified, and offering us pardons and crowns of glory!”[582]

Footnote 582:

  Letters, 1791, p. 290.

Another letter, written three months after this, was addressed to John
Valton, the Methodist itinerant, who preached at Cross Hall to the
wedding party on the evening of Fletcher’s marriage.

                                             “MADELEY, _July, 1783_.

  “Our dear friend’s acceptable favour gave us much pleasure, though we
  have been so long in thanking him for it.

  “Never did we imagine till lately how great your trial has been about
  the house at Birstal.[583] But how gracious is the Lord! How has He
  here paid you by the refreshing shower which has since distilled as
  the dew on the grass. O what comfortable accounts have reached us of
  the wonderful revival in your circuit.[584] In this my heart does
  indeed rejoice.

  “God is good unto us also. He has not left us without encouragement.
  For some time past, we have scarcely had a week in which one or more
  has not been set at liberty. But we are called, I believe, to leave
  them for a little while, and to spend a few weeks in Dublin. They
  complain of this, but the will of the Lord must be done. When He
  calls, even life itself must not be esteemed too dear.

  “You will be thankful to hear that my best earthly friend continues in
  tolerable health, though neither of us is strong. We are more and more
  sensible of the loving kindness of the Lord in casting our lot
  together. Every day helps us to praise Him more and more for His
  condescension and goodness to such unworthy worms. I speak thus freely
  to you because you were a witness of the beginning of our pilgrimage
  together. I see many professors, and many really in earnest; but,
  alas! very seldom any who can warm one’s heart with the deep things of
  God. O for a deeper baptism of the Spirit! I want that promise _more
  fully_ accomplished, ‘I and my Father will come, and will make our
  abode with you.’

  “Praying that the Lord may be with you all at the ensuing Conference,
  we remain, dear brother, your affectionate friends,

                                 “JOHN AND MARY FLETCHER.”[585][586]

Footnote 583:

  The Methodist meeting-house, erected, under the auspices of John
  Nelson, about the year 1751. The trouble, at this time, arose out of
  the demand of the trustees to elect, after Wesley’s death, their own
  preachers, and to order them to preach in Birstal chapel twice every
  Sunday, every Christmas Day, New Year’s Day, and Good Friday, and also
  every Thursday night. (See “Life and Times of Wesley,” vol. iii., pp.
  373–383.)

Footnote 584:

  See an account of this remarkable work of God in the “Life and Labours
  of the Rev. John Valton, edited by Joseph Sutcliffe, A.M., 1830,” pp.
  104–114.

Footnote 585:

  _Methodist Magazine_, 1798, p. 598.

Footnote 586:

  It is said that, after his marriage, Fletcher, when writing to his
  _friends_, always subscribed his letters “_John and Mary Fletcher_.”
  (See “Six Letters of the late Rev. J. Fletcher. Bath, 1788.” 12mo, 20
  pp.)

The foregoing letter mentions an intended visit to Dublin. It has been
already stated that Fletcher received an invitation from the Dublin
Methodists to visit them in 1782; and that he was then obliged to
decline their invitation. Now his way to Ireland seemed open. Mrs.
Fletcher writes:—

  “1783, August 5. Since May 22” [the date of the last entry in her
  journal], “a fever has been in the parish, which took off many whom we
  saw it our duty to attend. It brought eternity very near, and that
  always does me good. It came into our family, and Sally” [Lawrence]
  “was attacked with it; but God raised her up again in a wonderful
  manner. Soon after her recovery, Dr. Coke came, on his way from
  Dublin, and brought letters to each of us. We went to church, where
  the doctor preached. When we returned home, I followed my dear to his
  study, and told him if he saw it his call to go to Dublin, I saw it
  mine to go with him. Since that day, we have been preparing for our
  journey. My dear husband’s health is not very good. What the Lord will
  do with us I know not. We are, however, ready for setting off.”

Five weeks after this, Mrs. Fletcher wrote again in her journal as
follows:—

  “1783, September 12, William Street, Dublin. This day of our birth
  calls for solemn praise. I say OUR birth, because, as far as we can
  learn, my dear Mr. Fletcher was born on the same day ten years before
  me.

  “With the prayers and blessings of many of our friends, we set off
  from Madeley on Tuesday, August 12. At night, we were affectionately
  received by Mrs. Glynne, of Shrewsbury, whose love to the children of
  God does not grow cold. My dear husband preached on the danger of
  being _ashamed of the Gospel_.

  “The next day, we pursued our journey as far as Llangollen, in Wales,
  where we abode all night. Enquiring, as we walked about the town,
  whether they had any praying people among them, the poor things
  answered us in the best manner they could, and said, ‘Yes, Sir, there
  are some people who pray in houses at the other end of the town, but
  we know not what they be. This very night a man is to preach in their
  chapel.’ We went to the place, and found a few poor people gathered in
  a building which, I believe, was part of an old house. The preacher
  seemed very earnest, but we could not understand a word he said,
  except _ogoniant_ and _gwaed_—glory and blood; which, with much
  emphasis, he often repeated. After we were returned to our inn, a few,
  who could understand English, came to us, and desired my dear to give
  them a sermon in the morning, which he did, on these words, ‘This is
  His commandment, that we should believe on the name of His Son, Jesus
  Christ, and love one another, as He hath given us commandment.’ It was
  a good time, and several were present who understood English.

  “We then sent off for Conway, and, on Friday afternoon, reached
  Holyhead. Mr. Fletcher was very poorly, and a swelling on his face now
  broke, which gave him much inconvenience; but, on Saturday morning, we
  embarked. Mr. Fletcher was not affected by the sea, but I was very
  ill. About one o’clock on Sunday morning, we cast anchor three miles
  from Dublin; and, at five, reached the Hotel on Dublin Quay.

  “We now abide with our hospitable friends, Mr. and Mrs. Smyth, in
  William Street, and have seen much of the Lord’s hand in bringing us
  hither. My dear husband has been favoured with much unction in
  preaching the word. The present (Methodist) preachers in Dublin,
  brothers Rutherford and Jackson, are simple, pious men, and respect
  that command, ‘In honour preferring one another.’ They heartily
  rejoice in the message my dear husband delivers among them. I feel
  much liberty in meeting the classes. Here are a few truly athirst for
  full salvation. Our kind and generous host and hostess allow us all
  freedom in their house, for the glory of God, and the good of His
  people; and, as their servants also are pious, upright persons, we can
  here worship with them in calm and brotherly love.”

Before referring to the testimonies of other persons, it may be best to
complete what Mrs. Fletcher has to say concerning this evangelistic
visit to the sister island. She writes:—

  “Madeley, _October 30_. On the 7th of this month, we left Dublin, and
  embarked for Holyhead. In the night, the wind grew high. My husband,
  myself, and also Sally, were so ill, we could scarce speak, or look
  towards each other. Since our return, I have closely examined what I
  have lost or got in these last three months. I praise the Lord that we
  went to Dublin, and that for various reasons. There are some there
  with whom I found much fellowship; at whose feet I sat, and, I trust,
  learned many useful lessons. My dear Mr. Fletcher preached in several
  places besides the (Methodist) Preaching-house in White-Friars-street,
  both to the French and English, and we had some remarkable proofs that
  he was called there by God.

  “Since our return, my dear husband has taken another journey of about
  two hundred miles,[587] from which he has suffered a good deal. His
  face is not yet well; but the unwearied patience, wherewith he goes
  through all, is to me a continual lesson.

  “_November 12._ We see another anniversary of our blessed union, and
  are yet more happy, and more tender towards each other; and, what is
  better, our souls get nearer God. We are more spiritual, and live more
  for eternity.”[588]

Footnote 587:

  This was a journey to Bristol, whither he escorted his hostess, Mrs.
  Smyth, Lady Mary Fitzgerald, and the eldest daughter of the Rev.
  Edward Smyth. (“Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon,” vol.
  ii., p. 195.)

Footnote 588:

  “Mrs. Fletcher’s Life,” by H. Moore, p. 155.

Henry Moore, Wesley’s sturdy Itinerant, was appointed to the Dublin
Circuit, three years after Fletcher’s visit, and, in 1818, wrote:—

  “Never did I see such deep impressions made on the people of Dublin as
  by the truly evangelical labours of Mr. and Mrs. Fletcher, except,
  perhaps, in the very short visits of Mr. Wesley. A great revival of
  pure religion followed in the Dublin Society. That Society had usually
  consisted of about 500 persons, but it soon increased to upwards of
  1000, and has never since fallen below that number. Such longing after
  entire conformity to the Son of God I never beheld. How wide this
  sacred influence might have extended, who can tell, if a poor
  sectarian spirit had not limited Mr. Fletcher’s labours. On his
  arrival in Dublin, his host, Mr. Smyth, a distinguished and most
  respectable gentleman, applied to the rector of St. Andrew’s Parish,
  in which he lived, to allow Mr. Fletcher to preach in his church, and
  this was immediately granted. The church was crowded to excess. Mr.
  Fletcher’s text was, ‘Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian.’
  His earnestness and power astonished the congregation, some of whom
  seemed to doubt if he were not more than human. But, alas! it was soon
  known that he preached on the evening of that same day at the
  Methodist Preaching-house; and the pulpits of the churches were
  immediately closed against him, with the exception of that of the
  French Church. The first time he preached there, his text was Hebrews
  x. 32, when he brought before the congregation the faith of their
  ancestors. When some of them were asked, ‘Why did you go to hear Mr.
  Fletcher, when you could not understand a word he said?’ they
  answered, ‘We went to look at him, for heaven seemed to beam from his
  countenance.’”[589]

Footnote 589:

  “Mrs. Fletcher’s Life,” by H. Moore, p. 154.

Mr. Henry Brooke,[590] who took a leading part in inviting Fletcher to
visit Dublin, wrote:—

  “_1783, September 6._ The same grace and power which attend Mr.
  Fletcher’s pulpit lectures, and gather innumerable crowds of
  hungering, thirsting souls to flock to his ministry, also attend his
  conversation in private. He seems never—no, never—for a moment, to
  turn his eye from the one great object of our faith and love; and he
  continually stirs up all around him to love and praise. He appears to
  live and breathe nothing else.”

Footnote 590:

  Mr. Brooke is described, in Wesley’s “Last Will and Testament,” as a
  “Painter.”

In another letter, to his father, Mr. Brooke observed:—

  “I wish it were in my power to convey to you the substance and energy
  of those precious and excellent discourses, with which we are
  frequently favoured from Mr. Fletcher. His words are living sparks,
  rushing from the furnace of divine love glowing in his heart.”

Mr. Brooke, in a letter to the Rev. J. Gilpin, the translator of
Fletcher’s “Portrait of St. Paul,” remarked:—

  “When Mr. Fletcher was about to leave us, knowing the scanty pittance
  he received from his parish, we thought it but an act of common
  honesty to refund him the expense he had been at in coming to Dublin,
  and to bear his charges back again to Madeley. Accordingly, after he
  had preached on the last evening of his stay among us, the stewards
  and trustees united to press his acceptance of a small purse, not as a
  present, but as a debt justly due to him. But he firmly and absolutely
  refused it. At length, being very urgent with him and importunate to
  an excess, he took the purse in his hand, and said, ‘Do you really
  force it upon me? Must I accept it? Is it entirely mine? and may I do
  what I please with it?’ ‘Yes, yes,’ we all replied. ‘God be praised
  then! God be praised!’ cried he, raising his eyes towards heaven.
  ‘What a mercy is here! I heard some of you complaining that your
  Poor’s Fund was never so low before; take this purse; God has sent it
  to you; raised it among yourselves; and bestowed it upon your poor.
  You cannot deny me; it is sacred to them. God be praised! I thank you,
  I heartily thank you, my dear kind brethren.’”[591]

Footnote 591:

  “Life of Mr. Henry Brooke,” by Isaac D’Olier, LL.D., pp. 102–121.

A number of other anecdotes respecting this memorable visit, all more or
less authentic, might be inserted; but enough has been said to show that
it must always be one of the great events in the history of Methodism in
Dublin.

Soon after the return to Madeley of Fletcher and his wife, they received
the following, hitherto unpublished letter, signed by one hundred and
fifty-one members of the Dublin Methodist Society, the signature of
“Henry Brooke” standing first.

                                                   “_1783, October._

  “REV. AND VERY DEAR SIR AND MADAM,—Your kindness in accepting our
  united invitation, your labour of love in crossing the sea to visit
  us, and your spending body and soul for our profit while among us,
  demand a return of acknowledgment and gratitude, which we find
  ourselves, jointly and severally, as unable to express as to repay.

  “Confession of our debt is the utmost extent of our ability. As for
  reward, we must call upon Him to answer for us, who has already paid
  the mighty debt due by the whole world. May He, then, even that
  Master, the sound of whose feet was heard behind you, and the power of
  whose Spirit clothed your word in private and in public,—may He
  abundantly reward both your bodies and souls, and, according to the
  measure you have meted out, measure to you again a hundred-fold,
  pressed down, shaken together, and running over into your own bosoms
  in time and eternity.

  “Your liberality to the sick poor, in the generous donation of
  twenty-five guineas, has gladdened the hearts of numbers, besides
  those who are partakers of your alms; for you have nobly honoured the
  Lord by your free ministry, and set your seal to His Word with your
  substance. May you be watered again and again abundantly for it!

  “We can only pray for the prosperity of your labours where the
  adorable providence of God has cast your lot in His vineyard; and hope
  that the Lord may give the people to see and know (in mercy and not in
  judgment) that a prophet has been among them.

  “Lastly, we entreat that, after the example of St. Paul, you will
  remember us all in your daily and nightly addresses to the throne of
  grace, that the precious seed, which has been sown, may bring forth
  its hundred-fold increase, to our joint happiness in the kingdom of
  God.”

In the month of November, a reply was sent to this, from which the
following extract is taken:—

                                         “MADELEY, _November, 1783_.

                        “To the Society in Dublin.

  “To all the dear Brethren, who, after kindly inviting John and Mary
  Fletcher, patiently bearing with them and their infirmities, and
  entertaining them in the most hospitable manner, have added, to all
  their former favours, that of thanking them for their most pleasant
  and profitable journey.

  “We had felt shame enough under the sense of your kindness and
  patience towards us, and of our unprofitableness towards you, when at
  Dublin. We owed you the letter of thanks you have gratuitously sent to
  us. But in all things, you will have the pre-eminence, and we are glad
  to drink the cup of humility at your feet. If your profuse liberality
  toward _us_ abounded to the comfort of our poor brethren, we doubly
  rejoice on _your_ account, and on _theirs_.

  “When we see so many of your dear names, we rejoice in hope that they
  are enrolled on the list of the dear people, whom our great High
  Priest bears, not on the breastplate as Aaron, but on His bleeding
  hands, and in His very heart, which is the overflowing and
  ever-flowing fountain of divine and brotherly love. Let our worthless
  names still find a place in your memory, when you remember your
  brethren distant in the flesh, but near in the Spirit. Among such,
  vouchsafe to reckon your very affectionate and truly obliged servants
  in Christ,

                                           “JOHN AND MARY FLETCHER.”

To their Irish host, William Smyth, Esq., Fletcher wrote as follows:—

                                         “MADELEY, _November, 1783_.

  “DEAR SIR,—The many and great favours with which you loaded us, during
  our long stay under your hospitable roof, have been, are now, and, we
  trust, ever shall be deeply engraven on our hearts. You united, for
  us, Irish hospitality, English cordiality, and French politeness. And
  now, Sir, what shall we say?

  “You are our generous benefactor, and we are your affectionate, though
  unprofitable servants. In one sense, we are on a level with those to
  whom you show charity in the streets: we can do nothing but pray for
  you and yours. You kindly received us for Christ’s sake; may God
  receive you freely for His sake also! You bore with our infirmities;
  the Lord bear with yours! You let your servant serve us; the Lord give
  all His servants and His angels charge concerning you! You gave us a
  most comfortable apartment, next your own chamber; the Lord grant you
  eternal rest with Himself in His heavenly mansions! You fed us with
  the richest food; may the Giver of every perfect gift fit you for a
  place at His table, and may you rank there with Abraham, Isaac, and
  Jacob! You gave us wines; may you drink, with Christ Himself, the
  fruit of the vine, new in your Father’s kingdom!”[592]

Footnote 592:

  Letters, 1791, p. 293.

It has been asserted, that, “towards the close of his life,” Fletcher
“abstained entirely from wine and strong drink;”[593] but the evidence
in favour of this is dubious, and, certainly, the last sentence of the
foregoing letter seems to disprove it. Throughout the whole of his life,
he was exceedingly temperate in eating and drinking; but it may fairly
be doubted whether Fletcher was ever a “teetotaler.”[594] It is a
curious fact, however, that in this very year, 1783, he wrote a pamphlet
bearing upon the subject of drunkenness and other matters, which he
intended to be published, but which, I believe, never was. It was sent
to “Mr. Hindmarsh, printer, in Baker’s Court, Holborn Bars, London,”
together with a letter of instructions as to the printing of it, dated,
“Madeley, November 20, 1783.” When printed, Mr. Hindmarsh was requested
to send, as soon as possible, a copy to every member of Parliament. The
title was, “Three National Grievances,—the Increase of Taxes, the
Hardships of Unequal Taxation, and the Continual Rise of the Poor’s
Rates: with the Causes and Remedies of these Evils: Humbly Submitted to
the Consideration of the Legislature, in a Letter to the Right Honorable
Lord John Cavendish, Chancellor of the Exchequer, and one of the Lords
of the Treasury. London: November, 1783.”

Footnote 593:

  _Local Preachers’ Magazine_, 1853, p. 172.

Footnote 594:

  Jonathan Crowther, President of the Methodist Conference in 1819,
  says, in his unpublished autobiography:—

  “Mr. Yates, of Madeley, told me that, one cold, snowy, frosty day,
  when Mr. Fletcher called at his house, as he was sallying out to visit
  his parishioners, he asked him to take a little punch, which was then
  upon the table, after dinner. Mr. Fletcher consented, but said,
  ‘First, let us ask a blessing: it makes it twice as good.’”

The temptation is strong to insert this remarkable production _in
extenso_; but to do so, in a chapter like the present, would be an
inconvenient excrescence; besides, want of space makes it impossible.
Suffice it to say, that, under the heading of the first “Grievance,”
Fletcher argues, that, the decrease of the national revenue, and
consequent increase of the national taxation, were occasioned by “the
amazing progress of smuggling.” He says, “No one can deny that vast
quantities of foreign brandy, rum, gin, tobacco, snuff, tea, wines of
all sorts, and a variety of other articles, are fraudulently imported
and that these, on the sea-coast, are sold at “half the price which they
cost the conscientious merchant.” “Many thousands of lawless men are
perpetually forming or executing schemes, to defraud the Government, and
reduce us to beggary.” Fletcher says, it was once his opinion that
“smuggling might be prevented, by the combined services of the army and
navy; but,” he adds, “as most of the inferior Custom House officers on
the coast, with £50 a year, live in splendour, and as the evil is deeply
rooted, I am now convinced that the only way to check it is to take off
the duties, to lessen the number of officers in both Customs and Excise,
and to advance the salaries of those who are retained. If I prove that,
by lessening the duties, the revenue will be increased and smuggling
suppressed, there can be no objection to the adoption of the plan
proposed.” Fletcher enters into many details to establish his theory;
and thus, long before the days of Peel and Gladstone, took the part of
_free-traders_.

His chapter on _unequal taxation_ must be passed; but some of his
statements, in the _third_, deserve notice. He insists that—

  “The continual increase of the Poor Rates is occasioned by the
  corrupted morals of the lower classes of the people, who are seduced
  into idleness and neglect of their families, in the public-houses to
  be met with at every turn. There are also multitudes of _private_
  retailers of _smuggled_ spirits, who, by enticing their neighbours
  into drunkenness, entail ruin on them and their families. In some
  parishes, the number of these lawless retailers far exceeds that of
  the publicans. But to speak only of _licensed_ houses, what multitudes
  of these are found all over England! In some places, almost every
  fifth house is one of those nurseries of vice.”

Terrible is the picture which Fletcher draws, respecting the ruinous
consequences of drunkenness; and his arguments would help Sir Wilfrid
Lawson to make a most effective speech on “Local Option” in the House of
Commons.

  “If,” continues Fletcher, “these paltry public-houses are the bane of
  the nation, let the legislative power interfere in England, as it has
  done in Holland. Let two-thirds of these nuisances be suppressed; and
  by raising the licenses of the others, so as to indemnify the revenue,
  let the law put it out of the power of the _idle poor_ to set up these
  petty schools of idleness and vice. Then people of character will no
  longer be afraid to become publicans.”

In a “postscript,” Fletcher refers to a pamphlet which states that—

  “Sixty thousand of the ablest young men in the kingdom, and one
  hundred thousand horses, are employed in smuggling, whilst one hundred
  thousand women and children make it their business to hawk about the
  country the articles which the men have smuggled. If these one hundred
  and sixty thousand people were employed in fishing, agriculture,
  spinning, etc., their labour would amount annually to £2,464,000, to
  which must be added the sum of £1,820,000, the cost of keeping the one
  hundred thousand horses used by smugglers.... The Dutch catch fish, on
  our coasts, to the yearly amount of one million sterling.... Fishing
  and smuggling never flourish together.... In Scotland, there are
  upwards of ten thousand private stills,” etc., etc.

Thus Fletcher, the polemical divine, turned social reformer; and his
efforts to correct the crying evils of the age were not confined to the
employment of his pen. In his own parish, there were eighteen public
houses,—all of them “nurseries for sin, particularly on Sunday
evenings.” He had long desired to correct these abuses; but had seldom
been favoured with the services of a churchwarden willing to second his
endeavours. Now he had one, who was resolved to act according to the
oath he had taken. Fletcher visited several of these dens of iniquity
every Sunday, and all of them in their turn. In every one of them, he
bore a faithful testimony against their wickedness; and, in some
instances, his efforts were attended with much success.[595]

Footnote 595:

  “Letter to Mons. H. L. De la Flechere,” 1786, p. 16.

At this period, trade was bad, taxes were crushing, and corn was dear.
King George the Third, in his speech to “My Lords and Gentlemen,” the
members of the two Houses of Parliament, remarked, “The scarcity, and
consequent high price of corn, requires your instant interposition.”
Corn was scarce, and, in many instances, it was bought and hoarded by
execrable speculators, for the purpose of raising the price of it, and
increasing their own blood-soaked profits. Fletcher was indignant, and
proposed the formation of an association of persons of unblemished
character:—

  “1. To prosecute legally all engrossers and forestallers of the
  necessaries of life.

  “2. If there be any laws against those who cause an artificial
  scarcity, by monopolizing the necessaries of life,—to apply to the
  magistrates to put such laws in force against the offenders,—and, if,
  through fear or favour, the magistrates refuse, to apply for redress
  to Quarter Sessions, or to the Court of King’s Bench.

  “3. That the members of the Association subscribe, according to their
  ability, towards defraying the expense of detecting, and legally
  prosecuting the offenders.”

Fletcher added:—

  “If such a plan is entered upon, and carried on in this county”
  (Salop), “I will gladly become a subscriber of a guinea, _provided no
  illegal steps be taken by the associates_.”

This is copied from an unpublished manuscript in Fletcher’s own
handwriting. The following also is taken from another original
manuscript, written by Fletcher:—

  “It is proposed—

  “1. That Sunday Schools be set up in this parish, for such children as
  are employed all the week, and for those whose education has been
  neglected.

  “2. That, in those schools, children shall be taught to read and
  write, and shall be instructed in the principles of morality and
  piety.

  “3. That, in the Dale, in Madeley, and in Madeley Wood, there shall be
  a school for boys, and another for girls,—six schools in all.

  “4. That £20 be raised, by subscription, for this charity; namely, £14
  for the salaries of six teachers; which, at the rate of one shilling,
  per time, for fifty-two Sunday afternoons, excepting Easter-Day and
  Whit-Sunday, will amount to fifty shillings each teacher. The
  remaining £6 shall be laid out in tables, benches, books, paper, pens,
  and ink.

  “5. That, if the expenses incurred should run higher than is here
  supposed, the subscribers shall be acquainted with it, and their
  charity shall be again solicited.

  “6. That, whosoever shall subscribe a guinea towards this charity
  shall be a director of it.

  “7. That, at a parish meeting, two treasurers shall be appointed to
  ask and to receive the contributions of those who shall be willing to
  encourage this charity.

  “8. That, three or four inspectors shall be appointed to visit these
  schools, to see that the children attend regularly, and that the
  masters do their duty by the children, and to make their report to the
  directors.

  “9. That, a book shall be provided by the treasurers, in which they,
  or a secretary whom they shall appoint, shall yearly enter the sums
  subscribed, and the manner in which they are laid out; and that such
  book shall be laid before the subscribers when they shall desire it.

  “10. That, another book shall be provided, in which the names of the
  masters and the scholars, belonging to each school, shall be entered.

  “11. And lastly, that, to encourage emulation, at a solemn visitation
  of these schools, once or twice a year, some premium shall be given to
  the children who distinguish themselves by their assiduity and
  improvement.”

This was rather elaborate legislation for the administration of a
charity fund of £20 a year; but money, in 1783, was scarce, and the
Sunday School institution was then in its infancy.

For some years, Fletcher had had a school at Madeley, which he himself
taught every day; and he had also established a similar school in
Madeley Wood. Now he commenced his Sunday Schools, being, in this
respect, almost contemporaneous with Raikes at Gloucester.

  “Three hundred children were soon gathered, whom he took every
  opportunity of instructing, by regular meetings, for some time before
  the schools were opened; and these meetings he attended to the very
  last Thursday before his fatal illness. He gave the children little
  hymn-books; and pointed them to some friend or neighbour, who would
  teach them the hymns, and instruct them to sing. Many of the little
  creatures would scarcely allow themselves time to eat or sleep, for
  the desire they had of learning their lessons. In every meeting, after
  inquiring who had made the greatest proficiency, he never forgot to
  distinguish it by a little reward.”

  “His proposals to the parish were received with the greatest
  unanimity. Many, both of the rich and trading people, lent their
  helping hand, not only to defray the expense of teachers, but to raise
  a very convenient school-house in Coalbrookdale.”[596]

Footnote 596:

  “Letter to Mons. H. L. De la Flechere, 1786, pp. 17 and 18.

The “Proposals” were prefaced with a statement of “the advantages likely
to arise from Sunday Schools,” which was as follows:—

  “Our parochial and national depravity turns upon two hinges,—the
  _profanation_ of the Lord’s day, and the _immorality_ which flows from
  neglecting the education of children. Till these two great inlets of
  wickedness are stopped, we must expect to see our workhouses full of
  aged parents forsaken by their prodigal children; of wives deserted by
  their faithless husbands; or of the wretched offspring of lewd women,
  and idle and drunken men. Nay, we may expect to see the jails, and
  even the gallows, stocked with unhappy wretches, ready to fall a
  sacrifice to the safety of their neighbours, and the penal laws of
  their country.

  “Persons concerned for the welfare of the next generation, and
  well-wishers to the Church and State, have already set us a fine
  example in Stroud, Gloucester, Leeds, Manchester, Birmingham, Bristol,
  and in several country parishes. They have attempted to remedy these
  evils by setting up Sunday Schools, which, by keeping children from
  corrupting one another, by promoting their attendance on Divine
  worship, and by laying the first principles of useful knowledge in
  their minds, and of true piety in their hearts,—bid fair for a public
  reformation of manners; and seem well calculated to nip in the bud the
  vices of _ignorance and impiety_, so common among the lower and more
  numerous classes of the people.”[597]

Footnote 597:

  “Letter to Mons. H. L. De la Flechere,” 1786, p. 20.

It may be added, that the last productions of Fletcher’s pen were an
unfinished catechism, to be used in his Sunday Schools; prayers to be
read by the children; and “Hints” to the teachers. Among the last
mentioned, were instructions respecting the correction of any child
“guilty of lying, swearing, Sabbath-breaking, stealing, fighting, or
disobedience;” and recommendations that the teachers should “attend the
scholars to Divine worship”; that they should “not break up too early in
the evening, _that_ being the time in which children are most likely to
run into temptation;” and that “pious persons” should be induced to
“visit and interrogate the children, in order that the whole might be
carried on as a business sanctified by the Word of God, by prayer, and
by Christian admonition.”[598]

Footnote 598:

  _Ibid._, p. 63.

It would not be difficult to enlarge on facts and principles such as
these; but the intelligent reader can do this himself.

Before leaving the year 1783, one more incident must be introduced. At
the close of the year, the celebrated Rev. Henry Venn visited Fletcher,
at Madeley, and wrote:—

  “Mr. Fletcher is a genius, and a man of fire—all on the stretch to do
  good—to lose not a day, not an hour. He is married to a lady worthy of
  him, Miss Bosanquet, a lady with whom I was acquainted twenty-nine
  years ago. She was then sixteen, and bred up in all the pride of life;
  her father being one of the chief merchants of London. By the grace of
  God, she, at that time, renounced the world, and gave up herself to
  the Lord. Since then, she has bred up seventy-four destitute young
  girls for service, and seen them placed out to her satisfaction; and,
  instead of dressing, visiting, and conforming to all the vain and
  expensive customs of the world, she has been wholly employed in doing
  good. I left this happy house as Cecil, Secretary to Queen Elizabeth,
  left Bernard Gilpin’s, saying, ‘There dwells as much happiness as can
  be known on earth.’”[599]

Footnote 599:

  “Life of Rev. Henry Venn,” p. 377.




                             CHAPTER XXVI.
                         _LAST DAYS ON EARTH._

                               1784–1785.


FLETCHER took a profound interest, not only in Sunday Schools, which
were being opened in various places, but in an institution which has
long been the greatest of which the Methodists can boast. In 1783, Dr.
Coke and a few of his friends drew up “A Plan of the Society for the
Establishment of Missions among the Heathen.” This curious and most
interesting document is too long to be inserted here. Suffice it to say,
there is reason to believe that Fletcher was one of Coke’s counsellors.
It has been already stated that, in the summer of 1783, the Doctor, on
his way from Dublin, called at Madeley, and preached in Fletcher’s
church. Soon after this, Fletcher and his wife went to Dublin; and now,
at the beginning of the year 1784, Coke forwarded to Fletcher the
aforesaid “Plan,” and a list of his missionary subscribers, twenty-six
in number, seven of whom resided in Dublin. Is it chimerical to suppose
that the formation of this Missionary Society was a subject of
conversation between Coke and Fletcher, when the former was at Madeley,
and that it was mainly through Fletcher’s influence that so many of its
first subscribers were Dublin Methodists? It is a curious fact that
neither of the Wesleys appeared in the list of contributors, the reason
perhaps of which might be that they had not been consulted in drawing up
the “Plan.” Fletcher, however, subscribed £2 2_s._ 0_d._ of the first
year’s income, which amounted to £66 3_s._ 0_d._, and to him Coke sent
the “Plan” and the report, and also the following letter appended:—

                                  “Near PLYMOUTH, _January 6, 1784_.



  “MY VERY DEAR SIR,—Lest _Mr. Parker_ should neglect to send you one of
  our Plans for the establishing of foreign Missions, I take the liberty
  of doing it. Ten subscribers more, of two guineas per annum, have
  favoured me with their names. If _you_ can get a few subscribers more,
  we shall be obliged to you.

  “We have now a very wonderful outpouring of the Spirit in the West of
  Cornwall. I have been obliged to make a winter campaign of it, and
  preach here and there out of doors.

  “I beg my affectionate respects to Mrs. Fletcher. I entreat you to
  pray for

                         “Your most affectionate Friend and Brother,
                                                   “THOMAS COKE.”

At this period, Fletcher was engaged in the last of his literary works.
The following, hitherto unpublished letter, may serve as an introduction
to the essays Fletcher was now writing. It was addressed to the “Rev.
Mr. Bouverot, Geneva;” and, though without date, was evidently written a
few days before Fletcher’s memorable visit to Dublin:—

  “The Society of Christian Philosophers, which you mention, seems, in
  this day, to be a useful Institution. The most redoubtable attacks
  upon religion come from our modern Sadducees, who say there is neither
  angel nor spirit; and the famous Dr. Priestly openly maintains that we
  have no soul, or, at least, that it is no other than the animal
  spirits. It may be, therefore, that God, who never leaves Himself
  without witnesses, has permitted this Society for the maintenance of a
  metaphysical doctrine so opposite to that of materialism. ‘Prove all
  things; hold fast that which is good.’

  “A Swedish gentleman, called Baron Swedenborg,[600] published many
  pieces in England, and declared he had conversed with angels and
  spirits for more than forty years, and that with as much familiarity
  as with men. Some of his works have been translated into English.
  There is one, of which I have the original Latin by me, entitled,
  ‘Mirabilia Coeli et Inferni,’ and which I mean to send you as soon as
  I shall find a convenient opportunity. It is certain, if believers
  were more detached from earthly things, and more concentred in Christ
  by faith, they would converse with angels and with the spirits of the
  departed saints, as the Patriarchs and first Christians were
  accustomed to do. There would, indeed, in this, be some danger of
  following after piety, with a view to such an advantage, through a
  species of curiosity, which, if it ought not to be called the _back
  door_, yet would not deserve to be entitled the _front_, which
  consists in an humble faith disengaged from sense and from all
  self-seeking,” etc., etc.

  “I have not yet had leisure to cast my eyes over mys’ Next week, at
  the invitation of many who love the Word of God, I mean to make a tour
  into Ireland, from whence I propose returning before winter. Mr.
  Wesley, who is eighty years of age, is now on a tour in the Low
  Countries, where he preaches, even at Amsterdam.

  “Assist me to bless God, who has sustained me hitherto, and who is my
  light and my salvation in Jesus Christ, to whom be glory for ever and
  ever! Remember me before God in your prayers, as I have a continual
  remembrance of you in mine.”

Footnote 600:

  Swedenborg died in 1772.

Fletcher’s bold speculation, respecting the possibility of conversing
with angels and the spirits of departed saints, may be passed in
silence. The reader’s attention must now be asked to the famous Dr.
Priestley.

This remarkable man was born at Fieldhead, near Leeds, in 1733. While a
student at the Dissenting Academy, kept by Dr. Ashworth, at Daventry, he
became an Arian. His subsequent career need not here be traced. It is
enough to say, that, about the year 1767, while he was the minister of a
large congregation of Dissenters at Leeds, he embraced Socinianism; and
that, about 1781, he wrote and published his “History of the Corruptions
of Christianity,”—some of the teachings of which work Fletcher felt it
his duty to refute. Dr. Priestley died at Philadelphia, in the United
States of America, in 1804.

It has been already stated, that, early in the year 1785, Fletcher
published a second and enlarged edition of his poem, entitled, “La Grace
et la Nature.” At the end of that work, the following advertisement was
inserted: “Prêt à être publié en Anglois: A Rational Vindication of the
Catholic Faith, respecting the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost:
being the First Part of a Scriptural Vindication of Christ’s Divinity.
Inscribed to the Rev. Dr. Priestley.”

The Rev. Joseph Benson, the quondam tutor of Lady Huntingdon’s Trevecca
College, when Fletcher was its president, says this “Rational
Vindication” was left by Fletcher “not quite finished;” which assertion
seems to clash with Fletcher’s own advertisement just given. There can
be no doubt it was as finished as Fletcher meant it to be; though not as
complete as Mr. Benson thought it ought to be, and as he himself tried
to make it. In addition to this, however, Fletcher began a second essay,
entitled, “Socinianism Unscriptural; or, the Prophets and Apostles
vindicated from the Charge of holding the Doctrine of Christ’s mere
Humanity: being the Second Part of a Vindication of His Divinity.
Inscribed to the Rev. Dr. Priestley.” The first of these was intended to
be an answer to Priestley’s assertion that “the doctrine of the Trinity
is irrational;” and the second to refute his equally unfounded dogma,
that, the doctrine of Christ’s “divinity has no proper foundation in the
Old Testament,—the prophets speaking of the Messiah only as a man like
themselves;” nor in the “New Testament,—the Apostles never giving our
Lord any higher title than that of a man approved of God.” In Mr.
Benson’s opinion, both of the essays were left unfinished; and it is
certain that neither of them was published in Fletcher’s lifetime.
Rightly or wrongly, Mr. Benson—a very able theologian—undertook, after
Fletcher’s death, to write supplements to both, and then published them;
and these irrefutable productions of Mr. Benson’s pen have, ever since
1818, when he was the Methodist Connexional Editor, been improperly
incorporated in Fletcher’s “Collected Works.” Mr. Benson’s additions to
Fletcher’s essays are invaluable; but they ought, in fairness to both
authors, to be published separately. On this subject, however, nothing
more need be added. Fletcher’s replies to Priestley, which were printed
a few years subsequent to his death,[601] were revised by Wesley, who
writes, in his Journal:—

  “1784, Saturday, March 27. I went to Madeley; and, at Mr. Fletcher’s
  desire, revised his letters to Dr. Priestley. I think there is hardly
  another man in England so fit to encounter him.—Sunday, 28.
  Notwithstanding the severe weather, the church was more than filled. I
  preached on part of the Epistle (Heb. ix. 13, etc.); in the afternoon,
  ons’ and I believe God applied it to many hearts.”

Footnote 601:

  The titles were:—1. “A Rational Vindication of the Catholic Faith:
  being the First Part of a Vindication of Christ’s Divinity; inscribed
  to the Rev. Dr. Priestley, by J. Fletcher, Vicar of Madeley, Salop.
  Left imperfect by the Author, and now _revised_ and _finished_, at
  Mrs. Fletcher’s request, by Joseph Benson, Hull.” 12mo, 223 pp. No
  date, but published in 1788 or 1789. The work consists of fourteen
  chapters, only four of which were written by Fletcher. The remaining
  ten were Mr. Benson’s productions.

  2. “Socinianism Unscriptural; or, the Prophets and Apostles vindicated
  from the Charge of holding the Doctrine of Christ’s _mere Humanity_:
  being the Second Part of a Vindication of His Divinity: inscribed to
  the Rev. Dr. Priestley, by the late Rev. John Fletcher, Vicar of
  Madeley, Salop. To which is added, a Demonstration of the want of
  Common Sense in the New Testament Writers, etc., etc., in a Series of
  Letters to the Rev. Mr. Wesley, by Joseph Benson. Birmingham: 1791.”
  12mo, 239 pp. Fletcher’s part of the volume occupies 118 pages.

Never has there been a time when there was more need of essays like
those of Fletcher than that which is now passing. Socinianism, in
various shapes, even among many who think themselves orthodox, is
rampant; and the Methodist Book Committee would render incalculable
service to the cause of Christian truth, by publishing in a separate
form, and at as cheap a price as possible, Fletcher’s two unanswerable
replies to the redoubtable Dr. Priestley.

In his “Expostulatory Letter,” Fletcher writes:—

  “While you invite archdeacons and bishops to defend their church and
  the divinity of their Saviour, may the voice of a poor country vicar
  be heard amidst the groans of the press which repeats your challenges?
  Will not your sense of honour feel too great a disappointment in
  seeing so mean a person step forth to present you with an
  expostulatory letter, and to break a spear with you, on the very
  ground where you think yourself invincible,—philosophy, reason, and
  common sense?

  “Conscious of the variety of your learning, and the greatness of your
  reputation, I apologize for my boldness, by observing, that the Church
  is my mother; that the feeblest child has a right to cry out when his
  mother is stabbed to the heart; and that, when the Divine crown of our
  Lord is publicly struck at, the least of believers may show his
  astonishment at the antichristian deed.

  “When the Socinians of the last century said that it was impossible to
  believe God and man were united in the person of our Lord, the
  Catholics replied, it was as easy to believe that God and man make one
  Christ, as to believe that the immortal soul and the mortal body are
  one man. And Dr. Sherlock added, that the best way for the Socinians
  to set aside this argument against the mystery of our Lord’s
  incarnation, was to deny the union of soul and body, because they
  could not understand it; and openly to maintain, that man is a body
  without a soul, a compound of mere matter.

  “When that judicious divine dropped this hint, he little thought that
  some philosophers of our day would be so desperately bent upon
  divesting Christ of His Divine glory, that they would be content to
  die like dogs, without leaving any surviving part of themselves, so
  that they might win the day against the Catholic Church, and the
  divinity of our Lord.

  “I am sorry to observe that you have the dangerous honour to be at the
  head of these bold philosophers. Dr. Berkeley was so singular as to
  deny the existence of matter. According to his doctrine, there is
  nothing but spirit in the world, and matter exists only in our ideas.
  As a rival of his singularity, you run into the opposite extreme; you
  annihilate our souls; you turn us into mere machines; we are nothing
  but matter; and if you allow us any spirit, it is only such as can be
  distilled like spirits of wine. Thus, if we believe you both, being
  ground not only to atoms but to absolute nonentity between the two
  millstones of your preposterous and contrary mistakes, we have neither
  form nor substance, neither body nor soul!

  “Glad am I, Sir, that when you made so free with the souls of men you
  did not pass your philosophical sponge over the existence of the
  Father of spirits, the great Soul which gives life and motion to the
  universe. But, though you spare the Father’s dignity, you attack the
  Son’s divinity; you deny the sanctifying influences of the Holy Ghost;
  and, by hasty strides, you carry us back to a dwarf, mongrel
  Christianity, made up of materialism, Judaism, and the baptism of
  John.

  “To gain this inglorious end, in yours’ you collect the capital errors
  invented by fallen Christians in the corrupt ages of Christianity;
  then, taking some of the most precious Gospel truths, you blend them
  with these errors, and rendering them all equally odious, you turn
  them promiscuously out of the Church as the ‘Corruptions of
  Christianity.’ Thus you cleanse the temple of truth as our Lord would
  have cleansed that of Jerusalem, if he had thrown down the tables of
  show-bread as well as the tables of the money changers, and if He had
  turned out the cherubim of glory as He did the beasts which defiled
  that holy place. In short, you treat our Lord’s divinity as the Jews
  treated His humanity when they numbered Him with felons, that the mob
  might cry with a show of piety, ‘Away with Him! Crucify Him!’ with the
  thieves, His accursed companions!”

On the mysterious and holy doctrine of the Trinity in unity, Fletcher
writes:—

  “That there is a Supreme, Infinite, and Eternal Mind by which the
  world was made, is evident from the works of creation and providence.
  Every leaf of the trees which cover a thousand hills, every spire of
  the grass which clothes a thousand vales, echoes, ‘There is a God.’
  But the peculiar mode of His existence is far above our reach. Of this
  we only know what He plainly reveals to us, and what we may infer from
  what He hath plainly revealed; for sooner shall the vilest insect find
  out the nature of man, than the brightest man shall of himself
  discover the nature of God.

  “It is agreed on all hands that the Supreme Being, compared with all
  other beings, is One,—one Creator over numberless creatures, one
  Infinite Being over myriads of finite beings, one Eternal Intelligence
  over millions of temporary intelligences. The distance between the
  things made and Him that made them being boundless, the living God
  must stand for ever far higher above all that lives, than the sun
  stands superior to all the beams it emits, and to all the tapers
  lighted at its fire. In this sense, true Christians are all
  Unitarians: God having plainly revealed His unity by the prophets, by
  the Apostles, and by our Lord Himself, there is no doubt about this
  point. And may the hand which writes these sheets wither a thousand
  times over rather than it should designedly write one word against
  this glorious and ever-adorable unity!

  “But although the Supreme Being is One when He is compared to all
  created beings, shall we quarrel with Him when He informs us that
  notwithstanding he has no second in the universe of creatures, yet, in
  Himself, He exists in a wonderful manner, insomuch that His own
  eternal and perfect essence subsists, without division or separation,
  under three adorable distinctions, which are called sometimes ‘the
  Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost;’ and sometimes ‘the Father, the
  Word, and the Spirit’? ‘Shall the thing formed say to Him that formed
  it, Why hast Thou made me thus?’ or, Why dost Thou exist after such a
  manner?”

Fletcher then proceeds to describe the different opponents of his
doctrine; namely,—

  “_Tritheists_, who so unscripturally distinguish the Divine Persons as
  to divide and separate them into three deities; and who, by this
  means, run into polytheism, or the belief of many gods. _Ditheists_,
  generally called Arians, who worship two gods, a great god and a
  little god; the former uncreate, the latter created; the former God by
  nature, and the latter only by courtesy. _Deists_, who so
  unscripturally maintain the unity of the Divine essence as to admit
  but one Divine subsistence;” and who include Jews, Mahometans,
  Infidels, and Socinians.

Fletcher next undertakes to show and prove that God the Father has a
proper Son, by whom He made the world; that our Lord Jesus Christ
claimed the divine honour of being this Son; that He is the Redeemer and
Saviour of lost mankind; that He is to be the final and universal Judge;
and that divine worship was paid to Him by patriarchs, prophets, and
Apostles, and is His undoubted right.

Fletcher’s second pamphlet, entitled “Socinianism Unscriptural,”
consists of eight letters, addressed to Dr. Priestley, in which he shows
that Socinians err when they assert that the prophets always spoke of
the Messiah as of a mere man like themselves. He proves that our first
parents expected a _Divine_ Messiah, and that the _Divine Person_ who
appeared to the patriarchs, and to Moses, was Jehovah, the Son, or
Christ in His pre-existent state; that the foundation of the proofs of
Christ’s divinity, in the writings of the prophets, is laid in the three
original prophecies (Gen. iii. 15, xxii. 16, etc., and xlix. 8–10),
recorded by Moses concerning the Messiah; that all the prophets bear
witness to His Godhead, as do also the Evangelists and Apostles.

This is a meagre outline of Fletcher’s exceedingly able pamphlet, but
nothing more can be here attempted. Two brief extracts, however, may be
added, illustrative of his style:—

  “I have proved that the king of Israel who brought his people out of
  Egypt was Christ, in His pre-existent nature. Moses was the prime
  minister of this great King; Joshua, the general of His armies; the
  tabernacle, His palace; the mercy-seat, His throne; the ark, His royal
  standard; the priests, His officers; the Levites, His guards; and the
  shekinah, the visible display of His presence.”

  “Read, dear Sir, the Scriptures without the veil of your system, and
  you will see that the Messiah, the wonderful Person whom you so
  constantly endeavour to degrade, was to be a mediating Prophet, like
  Moses; an atoning Priest, like Aaron; a pacific King, like Solomon; a
  royal Prophet, like David; a kingly Priest, like Melchisedec; the
  Everlasting Father, as the Logos by whom all things were created; and
  the Mighty God, as the proper Son of Him with whom He shares, in the
  unity of the Divine Spirit, the supreme title of ‘Jehovah, Lord of
  hosts.’”

It has been already shown in a letter which Fletcher addressed to Wesley
in 1755, the year of his conversion, that he was what is commonly called
a Millenarian. Twenty-nine years had elapsed since then. During this
long interval, no man had been a more diligent and devout student of the
Holy Scriptures than himself, and yet his Millenarian belief remained
unchanged. Hence the following remarkable passage in his “Socinianism
Unscriptural.” After quoting and paraphrasing Isa. lxvi. 15–24, Fletcher
proceeds to say:—

  “Here ends Isaiah’s account of that glorious reign of Jehovah-Shiloh,
  which the fathers called the ‘Millennium,’ as being to last a thousand
  years, and during which it is probable our Lord will use these
  extraordinary means to keep all the nations in the way of
  obedience:—1. A constant display of His goodness over all the earth,
  but particularly in and about Jerusalem, where the Lord will manifest
  His glory, and bless His happy subjects with new manifestations of His
  presence every Lord’s day and every new moon. 2. A distinguishing
  interposition of Providence which will withhold the Messiah’s wonted
  blessings from the disobedient (Zech. xiv. 17). 3. The constant
  endeavours of the saints, martyrs, patriarchs, prophets, and Apostles,
  raised from the dead and conversing with men, as Moses and Elijah did
  with our Lord’s disciples upon the mount, where they were indulged
  with a view of His glorified person, and of His ‘kingdom come with
  power.’ These glorified high priests and kings, as ministers and
  lieutenants of the Messiah, will rule all churches and states with
  unerring wisdom and unwarped fidelity. 4. The care that the Lord
  Himself will take to set apart for the ministry, under His glorified
  saints, those who in every nation shall distinguish themselves by
  their virtue and piety. This seems to be the meaning of His own words:
  ‘And when they shall come out of all nations to My holy mountain, I
  will take of them for priests and Levites, saith the Lord,’ Isaiah
  lxvi. 20, 21. 5. A standing display of the ministration of
  condemnation, as appears from Isaiah lxvi. 24, and from other parallel
  Scriptures. 6. At the same time that the ministration of condemnation
  will powerfully work upon the fears of mankind to keep men in the way
  of duty, an occasional display of the ministration of righteous mercy
  will work upon their hopes. How will those hopes be fired when they
  shall ‘see the Lamb’ of God ‘standing on the Mount Sion, and with Him’
  His ‘hundred and forty-four thousand’ worthies, ‘having His Father’s
  name,’ Divine Majesty, Irresistible Power, Ineffable Love, and Bliss
  Inexpressible, ‘written on their foreheads!’ (Rev. xiv). But, 7. What
  will peculiarly tend to keep men from lapsing into rebellion against
  God will be the long life of the godly, and the untimely death of
  those who shall offer to tread the paths of iniquity. The godly shall
  attain to the years of antediluvian patriarchs, and the wicked shall
  not live out half their days; they shall not live above a hundred
  years; or, to speak after our manner, they shall die in their
  childhood. This seems to be Isaiah’s meaning in Isaiah lxv. 17–25.”

Leaving it to others to advocate or to attack these interpretations of
Scripture, the present writer will only add, that thus full of firm
unwavering faith in the Divine majesty and glorious kingship of his Lord
and Saviour Jesus Christ, the devout and reverent Fletcher drew near to
the mysterious spirit-world.

In harmony with all this, Fletcher wrote to his friend, Mr. Henry
Brooke, of Dublin, as follows:—

                                         “MADELEY, _April 27, 1784_.

  “MY DEAR BROTHER,—Mercy, peace, and perfect love attend you, and your
  dear partner, and the dear friends who live under your roof; and with
  whom I beg you may abide under the cross, till, with John, Mary, and
  Salome, you _all_ can say, ‘We are crucified with Him, and the life we
  now live, we live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved us, and
  gave Himself for us.’

  “With respect to the glory of the Lord, _it is at hand_; whatever
  false wisdom and unbelief may whisper to our hearts. It can be no
  farther off than the presence of Him, who _fills all in all_.

  “With respect to what you say of the kingdom not coming with the
  outward pomp, which is observable by the men of the world, it is
  strictly true; but that there is an _inward_ display of _power_ and
  _glory_ under Pentecostal Christianity is undeniable, both from our
  Lord’s _promises_ to His imperfect disciples, and from their
  _experiences_ after the kingdom of God was come to them with power. To
  wait in deep resignation, and with a constant attention to what the
  Lord will please to do or say concerning us and His Church; and to
  leave to Him _the times and seasons_, is what I am chiefly called to
  do; taking care to avoid falling into either _speculation_ careless of
  _action_, or into the _activity_ which is devoid of _spirituality_. I
  _would_ not have a lamp without oil; and I _could_ not have oil
  without a lamp, and a vessel to hold it in for myself, and to
  communicate it to others.

                        “Fare you all well in Christ! So prays
                                               “JOHN FLETCHER.”[602]

Footnote 602:

  “Thirteen Original Letters of the Rev. John Fletcher.” Bath, 1791, p.
  36.

On the day that Fletcher penned the foregoing, his wife wrote as follows
to Mrs. Smyth, their hostess in Dublin. The letter, however, was signed,
“John and Mary Fletcher,” and has not before been published. It
furnishes a glimpse of the Madeley Methodists:—

                                                  “_April 27, 1784._

  “MY VERY DEAR MADAM,—If anything I said in my last was attended with a
  blessing, I give glory to my adorable Father. I am ready to wonder
  that He ever works by so poor a worm.

  “I wish you had been with us yesterday morning, in our upper chamber,
  to hear the simple tales of our dear women. Do you remember a little
  woman, who sat in the window of the room when you met the class, and
  who expressed great desire for more of the life of God? It was she who
  lived on horse-beans so many weeks, while suckling twins, for fear of
  running into debt for bread. She has, since then, been greatly
  exercised by poverty, temptation, and illness; but, in all, her desire
  for the pure image of God seemed to rise above every other wish; and,
  about a fortnight ago, the Lord poured out upon her such an abundance
  of His Spirit, that nature almost sank beneath it. She told us
  yesterday, that every moment she seems to be so surrounded with God,
  and so penetrated with His love, that, said she, ‘I cannot help, many
  times in the day, stopping in the midst of my work, when alone, to
  shout aloud, Glory! Glory! Glory! My very heart is glad. Yes, my heart
  is _so glad_, I could shout from morning till night; but, oh! I can
  think of no words to tell what I see and feel of Jesus. I _can_ choose
  nothing: I know _no will_—_no choice_: the will of God is my all.’ Had
  you heard her speak, and also two others who have just found the Lord,
  you would have wept tears of love and joy.

  “Our love to Dr. Coke; and thank him for his two letters, which we
  have received.

  “Begging our tender regards to all our dear Christian friends, we
  remain, with kindest remembrance and grateful acknowledgment to our
  dear Mr. and Mrs. Smyth, their sincere though unworthy friends,

                                           “JOHN AND MARY FLETCHER.”

The next is a letter which, I believe, has not before been published. It
was addressed to a sister of Lady Mary Fitzgerald, and is full of faith
in Christ:—

  “Christ Jesus is alone the desirable, the everlasting distinction and
  honour of men. All other advantages are like the down on the thistle,
  blown away in a moment. Riches are incapable of satisfying; friends
  are changeable; dear relations are taken away with a stroke; but, amid
  all the changes of life, Christ is a Rock. To see Him by faith, to lay
  hold on Him, to rely on Him, to live upon Him, this—this is the refuge
  from the storm, the shadow from the heat.

  “In order that you may obtain it, nothing more or less is required, on
  your part, than a full and frequent confession of your own abominable
  heart; and kneeling, as a true beggar, at the door of mercy, declaring
  you come there only expecting notice and relief because God our
  Saviour came to redeem incarnate devils and to convert them into
  saints.

  “I think you take a sure method to perplex yourself if you look at
  yourself for proof of faith. Others must see it in your works; but you
  must feel it in your heart. The glory of Jesus is, by faith, realized
  to the mind in some such manner as an infinitely grand and beauteous
  object in the firmament of heaven arrests the spectator on itself. It
  captivates him; and, by the pleasure it imparts, he is led on to view
  it. So it is with Jesus, our peace, strength, righteousness,
  salvation.

  “For my own part, I am often tempted to suspect whether I am not
  speaking great swelling words of Christ, and yet am myself nothing
  more than sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal; and I find that the
  only successful way of answering this doubt is an immediate address to
  Jesus Christ, and prayer to Him, to this effect: ‘Whosoever cometh
  unto Thee, Thou wilt in no wise cast out. Lord, have I not come unto
  Thee? Am I not depending on Thee for life, as a brand plucked out of
  the fire? See if there be any way of wickedness in me, and lead me in
  the way everlasting!’

  “My eyes look to the blessed Jesus; my heart longs to be more in His
  service; I mourn my corruptions; they are many and great. When I look
  at Him, and contemplate His finished salvation, I admire, I adore, in
  some measure I love. When I look at myself, my heart rises at the
  sight,—black and selfish, proud and carnal, covetous and unclean. I
  want all things that are good; but, oh! I have a blessed Lord Christ,
  in whom all fulness dwells for me, and for my dear friend to whom I am
  writing,—a fulness of pardon, wisdom, holiness, strength, peace,
  salvation, righteousness,—a fulness of mercy, goodness, truth,—all
  this, and ten thousand times more, without condition, without
  qualification, without workings, without servings, only for receiving.
  O blessed free grace of God! What a gift! And for whom? My dear
  friend, for you. What says the everlasting God? ‘Believe He gave His
  Son for sinners.’ Can God lie? Impossible! Can we have a better
  foundation to build upon than the promise and the oath of God?

  “My very dear friend, I know you will not be angry at my preachment. I
  aim all I say at my own heart. I stand more in need of it than you;
  and I always feel my heart refreshed when I am talking or thinking of
  the blessed Jesus. But oh! how little I know of Him! O Thou light of
  the world, enlighten me! Teach me to know more of Thy infinite,
  unsearchable riches, that I may love Thee with an increasing love, and
  serve Thee with an increasing zeal till Thou bring me to glory!”

Gratitude was one of Fletcher’s characteristics. Hence, when the son of
his dead friend, Mr. Charles Greenwood, of Stoke Newington, visited him
at Madeley, he wrote to the loving widow:—

  “Madeley, June 20, 1784. The sight of Mr. Greenwood, in his son, has
  brought some of my Newington scenes to my remembrance, and I beg leave
  to convey my tribute of thanks by his hands. Thanks! Thanks! What,
  nothing but words? There is my humbling case. I wish to requite your
  manifold kindnesses, but I cannot. I must be satisfied to be ever your
  insolvent debtor. Nature and grace do not love it. Proud nature lies
  uneasy under great obligations; and thankful grace would be glad to
  put something in the scale opposite to that which you have filled with
  so many favours. But what shall I put? I wish I could send you all the
  Bank of England, and all the Gospel of Christ; but the first is not
  mine, and the second is already _yours_.”[603]

Footnote 603:

  Letters, 1791, p. 300.

Wesley’s annual Conference, in 1784, was held at Leeds. He writes, in
his Journal:—

  “1784, Tuesday, _July 27_. Our Conference began; at which four of our
  brethren, after long debate (in which Mr. Fletcher[604] took much
  pains), acknowledged their fault, and all that was past was forgotten.
  Thursday, July 29, being the public Thanksgiving Day, as there was not
  room for us in the old church, I read prayers, as well as preached, at
  our Room. I admired the whole service for the day. The prayers,
  Scriptures, and every part of it, pointed at one thing: ‘Beloved, if
  God so loved us, we ought also to love one another.’ Having five
  clergymen to assist me, we administered the Lord’s Supper, as was
  supposed, to sixteen or seventeen hundred persons. Sunday, August 1.
  We were fifteen clergymen at the old church. Tuesday, August 3. Our
  Conference concluded in much love, to the great disappointment of
  all.”

Footnote 604:

  Before attending the Conference, Fletcher visited Miss Ritchie, who
  wrote: “1784, July 16. Mr. and Mrs. Fletcher visited Otley. I was
  truly blessed and edified by their society. Our house was full of
  company.” (“Memoir of Mrs. Mortimer,” by Agnes Bulmer, p. 97.)

Such is Wesley’s brief account of one of the most important Conferences
he ever held, and the last which Fletcher had the opportunity of
attending. During the year, Dr. Coke had begun the Methodist Foreign
Missionary Society; and Wesley had signed and sealed his famous “Deed of
Declaration,” constituting, for all time to come, the Legal Conference
of the Methodists, and defining the powers and duties of its members.
Charles Atmore, who was present, relates,[605] that, on the Sunday
evening before the Conference opened, the congregation, assembled to
hear Wesley, was four times greater than the chapel could contain, and,
therefore, Wesley “preached in a field adjoining, on the judgment of the
great day.” On Monday morning, Fletcher “preached an excellent sermon
from Matt. v. 13–16, ‘Ye are the salt of the earth,’” etc. At night,
Wesley took for his text, “Give the king Thy judgments, O God, and Thy
righteousness unto the king’s son.” On Tuesday morning, at five o’clock,
Henry Moore delivered a sermon founded upon “Casting all your care upon
Him; for He careth for you.” At the conclusion of the service, Wesley
“opened the Conference;” and, in the evening of the day, preached from,
“Even the very hairs of your head are all numbered,” etc. Next morning,
July 28, at five o’clock, the text of Thomas Taylor was, “What then?
notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is
preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice.” At night,
Wesley preached from, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy
heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.” Thursday, July 29,
“was a high day indeed.” At five a.m. Thomas Hanby discoursed on “My
grace is sufficient for thee,” etc. In the forenoon, Wesley expounded
and enforced 1 Cor. xiii. 1–4, “Though I speak with the tongues of men
and of angels, and have not charity,” etc. Then followed the sacramental
service, in which Wesley was assisted by Fletcher, Coke, Cornelius
Bayley, who had been Fletcher’s curate, Mr. Dillon, an ordained
clergyman from Ireland, and the well-known David Simpson, of
Macclesfield, the services of the day being concluded with another
sermon from Wesley, on the text, “This is the first and great
commandment.” At five a.m. on Friday, July 30, Joseph Pilmoor preached
from “I have set the Lord always before me; because he is at my right
hand, I shall not be moved”; and, at night, Fletcher, from, “These all
having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:
God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us
should not be made perfect.”[606] At seven o’clock on Sunday morning,
August 1, Fletcher preached again, taking as his text 1 Kings xiii. 26,
selected from the first lesson for the day: “It is the man of God, who
was disobedient unto the word of the Lord: therefore the Lord hath
delivered him unto the lion, which hath torn him, and slain him,
according to the word of the Lord, which he spake unto him.” Joseph
Benson, who was present, writes:—

  “Mr. Fletcher drew such a picture of the degradation and misery of a
  backsliding minister, and of the corruption and injury he introduced
  into the Church of Christ, as produced a general and deep sensation,
  not easily to be forgotten.”

Footnote 605:

  _Wesleyan Methodist Magazine_, 1845, p. 12.

Footnote 606:

  Respecting this sermon, John Beaumont, father of the celebrated Rev.
  Dr. Joseph Beaumont, wrote: “Mr. Fletcher dwelt much on the context,
  which speaks of the faith and works of the ancient worthies, and
  strongly enforced what he termed a _working faith_. I was blessed
  beyond description, and thought him certainly the most angelic man I
  had ever heard.” (“The Experience and Travels of John Beaumont.”)

And Henry Moore, another of Fletcher’s auditors, remarks:—

  “I was extremely impressed with the whole service: the shadow of the
  Divine presence was seen among us, and His going forth was in our
  sanctuary.”

Next morning, Mr. Moore himself had to preach. He writes:—

  “I went to the chapel at the hour appointed, and, to my dismay, found
  the venerable Mr. Fletcher in the pulpit, leaning upon his staff. My
  first impression was to run away; but a moment’s reflection changed my
  purpose. I ascended the pulpit and gave out the hymn; while I did so,
  my knees smote one against the other: I knelt down to pray, and indeed
  lifted my heart with my voice, that I might be endued with power and
  wisdom from on high: my soul was calmed, and I took my text, and
  continued the service, fully set free from fear, and strengthened in
  my resolution ever to obey the voice of duty.”[607]

Footnote 607:

  “Life of Henry Moore,” by Mrs. Smith, p. 321.

At five o’clock on the following morning, Wesley, eighty-one years of
age, again preached, selecting a text admirably adapted to be a sequel
to that chosen by Fletcher on the previous Sunday; and also peculiarly
suited to what had taken place in the Conference: “And Jeremiah said
unto the house of the Rechabites, Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God
of Israel: Because ye have obeyed the commandment of Jonadab your
father, and kept all his precepts, and done according unto all that he
hath commanded you; therefore, thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of
Israel; Jonadab the son of Rechab shall not want a man to stand before
me for ever” (Jer. xxxv. 18, 19). The Conference was concluded on
Tuesday, August 3; and next morning, at five o’clock, Wesley delivered
another sermon, and immediately afterwards took the coach for Wales. His
last text, at this remarkable Conference, was, “Take heed unto thyself,
and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt
both save thyself, and them that hear thee.”[608]

Footnote 608:

  _Wesleyan Methodist Magazine_, 1845, p. 14.

A purpose is intended to be served by these minute statements, namely,
to convey an idea of what Methodist Conferences were in the olden times,
and to indicate the chief preachers, and the _kind_ of texts they took.

It is a well-known fact that the great event of the Conference of 1784
was the rebellion raised in Wesley’s camp of preachers. In his “Deed of
Declaration,” he had appointed his brother Charles, Dr. Coke, James
Creighton, and ninety-seven of his itinerants to be, after his decease,
his legalized successors, and to exercise the powers he had exercised
from the beginning. By confining the number of the members of the legal
Conference to a hundred, he necessarily excluded not fewer than
ninety-two, whom he had employed in circuit work; and, among these,
there were several who had claims quite equal to many of the elected
ones, as, to wit, Thomas Lee, John Atlay, John Pritchard, John Pool,
John Hampson, sen., John Hampson, jun., William Eells, and Joseph
Pillmoor. Previous to the Conference being held, certain of the
non-elected preachers published a protest against Wesley’s partiality.
The crisis was a serious one. Fletcher was not included in the hundred,
probably because he desired to be left out; but he was intensely anxious
respecting apprehended results. Mrs. Fletcher wrote:—

  “O how deeply was he affected for the welfare of his brethren, when we
  were at Leeds, in the year 1784! When disputes arose among them, his
  soul groaned beneath the burden. By two or three o’clock in the
  morning, I was sure to hear him breathing out prayers for the peace
  and prosperity of Sion; and when I said to him, I was afraid this
  would hurt his health, and that I wished him to sleep more, he would
  answer, ‘O Polly, the cause of God lies near my heart.’”

At the opening of the Conference, on July 27, Wesley mentioned the “Deed
of Declaration,” and the “Appeal” which had been published against it:—

  “He showed that, from the commencement of Methodism, the annual
  Conferences had always consisted of persons whom he had desired to
  meet for the purpose of conferring with him. He insisted, that he had
  a right to name the members of the Legal Conference, and to fix their
  number. The ‘Appeal,’” he said, “represented him as unjust,
  oppressive, and tyrannical, which he was not; the authors of it had
  betrayed him; and, by doing so, had hurt the minds of many, and
  kindled a flame throughout the kingdom. Hence, he required that they
  should acknowledge their fault, and be sorry for it, or he could have
  no further connection with them.”[609]

Footnote 609:

  Benson’s “Life,” by Macdonald, p. 160.

For seven days, the dispute remained unsettled. Fletcher acted as
mediator.

  “Never,” says Charles Atmore, “shall I forget the ardour and
  earnestness with which Mr. Fletcher expostulated, even on his knees,
  both with Mr. Wesley and the preachers. To the former, he said, ‘My
  father! my father! they have offended, but they are your children!’ To
  the latter, he exclaimed, ‘My brethren! my brethren! he is your
  father!’ and then, portraying the work in which they were unitedly
  engaged, he fell again on his knees, and with fervour and devotion
  engaged in prayer. The Conference was bathed in tears; many sobbed
  aloud.”[610]

Footnote 610:

  _Wesleyan Methodist Magazine_, 1845, p. 15.

This appears to have been on the last day but one that the Conference
sat. Hence Joseph Benson writes:—

  “August 2. Our brethren, who had been concerned in the ‘Appeal,’
  rejoiced our hearts, by acknowledging their fault, and making
  submission. In consequence of their doing so, they were admitted among
  their brethren, and appointed to Circuits.”[611]

Footnote 611:

  Benson’s “Life,” by Macdonald, p. 160.

It may be added, that, the principal appellants—John Hampson, sen., and
John Hampson, jun., Joseph Pillmoor, John Atlay, and William Eells—soon
afterwards left the Connexion.

Two other incidents, concerning the Conference, must be mentioned.

It is a well-known fact, that, one of the most important questions asked
at Wesley’s Conferences was, “Are there any objections to any of our
preachers?” Upon the question being put, the names of all (Wesley’s name
included), were read seriatim. When this part of the business of the
Conference, in 1784, was reached, Fletcher rose from his seat, to
withdraw from the chapel.

  “He was eagerly recalled, and asked why he would leave them?
  ‘Because,’ said he, ‘it is improper, and painful to my feelings, for
  me to hear the minute failings of my brethren canvassed, unless my own
  character be submitted to the same scrutiny.’ They promised, if he
  would stay, that his character should be investigated. On these terms,
  he consented to remain; and, when his name was read, an aged preacher
  rose, bowed to him, and said, ‘I have but one thing to object to Mr.
  Fletcher; God has given him a richer talent than his humility will
  suffer him duly to appreciate. In confining himself to Madeley, he
  puts his light, comparatively, under a bushel; whereas, if he would
  come out more among us, he would draw immense congregations, and would
  do much more good.’ In answer to this, Mr. Fletcher stated the tender
  and sacred ties which bound him to his parish; its numerous
  population; the daily calls for his services; the difficulty of
  finding a proper substitute; his increasing infirmities, which
  disqualified him for horse exercise; his unwillingness to leave Mrs.
  Fletcher at home; and the expense of travelling in carriages. In reply
  to his last argument, another preacher arose, and observed that the
  expense of his journeys would be cheerfully paid; and that, though he
  knew and highly approved Mr. Fletcher’s disinterestedness and delicacy
  in pecuniary transactions, yet he feared there was a mixture of pride
  in his objection; for that by no importunity could he be prevailed on
  to accept a present to defray his expenses on his late visit to
  Ireland. ‘A little explanation,’ replied Mr. Fletcher, ‘will set that
  matter right. When I was invited to visit my friends at Dublin, I had
  every desire to accept their invitation; but I wanted money for the
  journey, and knew not how to obtain it. In this situation, I laid the
  matter before the Lord, humbly requesting that, if the journey were a
  providential opening to do good, I might have the means of performing
  it. Shortly afterwards, I received an unexpected sum of money, and
  took my journey. While in Dublin, I heard our friends commiserating
  the distresses of the poor, and lamenting the inadequate means they
  had to relieve them. When, therefore, they offered me a handsome
  present, what could I do? The necessary expenses of my journey had
  already been supplied; my general income was quite sufficient; I
  needed nothing. Had I received the money, I should have given it away.
  The poor of Dublin most needed, and were most worthy of, the money of
  their generous countrymen. How then could I hesitate to beg that it
  might be applied to their relief? You see, brethren, I could not in
  conscience do otherwise than I did.’”[612]

Footnote 612:

  Benson’s “Life of Fletcher.”

After these explanations, the honest old Methodist preachers, of course,
recorded no objection to the “_character_” of John Fletcher; but Wesley,
nearly a year afterwards, wrote to his brother Charles:—

  “1785, June 2. About once a quarter, I hear from Mr. and Mrs.
  Fletcher. I grudge his sitting still; but who can help it? I love ease
  as well as he does; but I dare not take it while I believe there is
  another world.”[613]

Footnote 613:

  Wesley’s Works, vol. xii., p. 142.

Fletcher’s examination, on this occasion, took place by special
arrangement: if he had lived, perhaps, it would afterwards have been a
matter of course; for, about the middle of the Conference, he rose, and,
addressing Wesley, said:—

  “I fear my successor will not be interested in the work of God, and my
  flock may suffer. I have done what I could. I have built a chapel in
  Madeley Wood, and I hope, Sir, you will continue to supply it, and
  that Madeley may still be part of a Methodist Circuit. If you please,
  I should be glad to be put down in the ‘Minutes’ as a supernumerary.”

Wesley was not easily moved, but even he could hardly bear this, and the
preachers burst into tears.[614]

Footnote 614:

  Mrs. Fletcher’s “Life,” by H. Moore, p. 183.

The other incident, to be mentioned, was of a different kind, and is a
good illustration of the remarkable allegorical talent which Fletcher
possessed, and often exercised, not only in his published works, but in
his correspondence, and in conversation among his friends.

On March 31, 1784, Wesley visited Burslem, where Mr. Enoch Wood resided,
a Methodist, and an artist of great ability. Mr. Wood prevailed on
Wesley to permit him to model a bust from his person; and a considerable
number of copies were executed. The likeness was so striking, that, when
Wesley looked at the bust, he said to Mr. Wood, “If you touch it again,
you will mar it.” Every wrinkle, dimple, and vein of the face and
forehead were marked with perfect accuracy. Four months afterwards, Mr.
Wood went to the Conference at Leeds, and soon became one of the most
popular men there. Samuel Bardsley hoisted the artist on his shoulder;
at the moment, Fletcher was passing through the grave-yard, and was
told, by the applauding preachers, the name of the hero, so ludicrously
exhibited. Fletcher paused a moment, and then said, “Are you the young
man who made that beautiful likeness of Mr. Wesley?” Being answered in
the affirmative, and having been made acquainted with the whole process
of making the bust, he stood on a grave, and, putting his hand on the
artist’s shoulder, he began to spiritualize what he had heard, by using
it to illustrate the work of God, in the _new_ creation of the human
soul, by the power of the Holy Ghost. He spoke of the rough and
unpromising materials,—the corrupt nature derived from fallen Adam; he
showed how this, by the energy of the Holy Spirit, is softened and
melted down into godly sorrow; how it becomes _plastic_ in the hands of
the Divine Artist; how it is cast into a new mould: and how it is formed
after the likeness of Christ. His extemporaneous address lasted twenty
minutes, and was never forgotten by those who heard it.[615]

Footnote 615:

  _Christian Miscellany_, 1848, p. 230.

It may be added that, some years afterwards, Dr. Adam Clarke obtained
from Mr. Wood the loan of the original mould, and had a bust cast in
solid brass, which is now in the possession of Mr. G. J. Stevenson. This
was lent to the sculptor who chiselled the marble effigy of Wesley, now
placed in the entrance-hall of the Wesleyan Theological Institution,
Richmond. The face and head of the effigy were obtained from it.[616]

Footnote 616:

  Stevenson’s “Memorials of the Wesley Family,” p. 349.

On his return to Madeley, Fletcher wrote to his friend, Mr. Ireland, as
follows:—

                                     “MADELEY, _September 13, 1784_.

  “MY DEAR FRIEND,—I keep in my sentry-box till Providence removes me.
  My situation is _quite suited_ to my little strength. I may do as much
  or as little as I please, according to my weakness; and I have an
  advantage, which I can have nowhere else in such a degree,—my little
  field of action is just at my own door, so that if I happen to overdo
  myself, I have but to step from my pulpit to my bed, and from my bed
  to my grave. If I had a body full of vigour, and a purse full of
  money, I should like well enough to travel about as Mr. Wesley does;
  but as Providence does not call me to it, I readily submit. The snail
  does best in its shell; were it to aim at galloping, like the
  racehorse, it would be ridiculous indeed. My wife is quite of my mind
  with respect to the call we have to a sedentary life. We are two poor
  invalids, who between us make _half_ a labourer.

  “We shall have tea cheap and light very dear;[617] I don’t admire the
  change. Twenty thousand chambers walled up, and filled with foul air,
  are converted into so many dungeons for the industrious artizan, who,
  being compelled by this murderous tax, denies himself the benefit of
  _light_ and _air_. Blessed be God! the light of heaven and the air of
  the spiritual world are still free.

  “My dear partner sweetly helps me to drink the dregs of life, and to
  carry with ease the daily cross. We are not long for this world—we
  _see_ it, we _feel_ it; and, by looking at death and his conqueror, we
  fight beforehand our last battle with that last enemy whom our dear
  Lord has overcome for us. That we may triumph over him with an humble,
  Christian courage is the prayer of, my dear friend, yours,

                                               “JOHN FLETCHER.”[618]

Footnote 617:

  On June 21, Pitt moved several resolutions to put an end to smuggling
  by reducing the duty upon tea from 50 to 12½ per cent.; and to
  increase the window tax in proportion. These resolutions were passed,
  though not without much debate.

Footnote 618:

  Letters, 1791, p. 302.

Fletcher’s apprehension of the nearness of death, so far as he was
concerned, was realized; but his wife did not die until thirty-one years
after this, not a year of which passed without her keeping the
anniversary of their wedding-day. In the present year she wrote:—

  “1784, November 12. We have been married three years this day. A good
  day it has been to me! While reflecting on the wonderful goodness of
  God in my providential union with my dear husband (so far, so very
  far, beyond my warmest wishes), my heart was enlarged with desire to
  render to my God a suitable return for all His mercies!”[619]

Footnote 619:

  “Mrs. Fletcher’s Life,” by H. Moore, p. 158.

On her birthday, two months previously, she had written in her journal:—

  “September 12. This day I am forty-five years old. I have had such a
  sense of the goodness of God toward me as I cannot express. I am
  filled with favours. I have the best of husbands, who daily grows more
  and more spiritual, and I think more healthful, being far better than
  when we first married. My call also is so clear, and I have such
  liberty in the work, and such sweet encouragement among the people. My
  servant, too, is much improved, and as faithful as if she were my own
  child. An income quite comfortable, and a good deal to help the poor
  with! O what shall I render to the Lord for all the mercies He hath
  shown unto me!”

In this happy home, Fletcher wrote the following happy letter to a
youth, his godson, by name John Fennel:—

                                      “MADELEY, _November 28, 1784_.

  “DEAR JOHN,—I rejoice to hear that you think of a better world; and of
  that better part which Mary, and your mother—another Mary—chose before
  you. May all her prayers, and, above all, may the dew of heaven, come
  down upon your soul in solemn thoughts, heavenly desires, and strong
  resolutions to be the Lord’s, cost what it will. Let the language of
  your heart and lips be, ‘I will be a follower of Christ, a child of
  God, an inheritor of the kingdom of heaven.’ A noble promise this! of
  which I have so peculiar a right to put you in mind. In order to be
  this happy and holy soul, you must not forget that your Christian
  name, your Christian vow, and ten thousand reasons beside, bind you to
  turn your back upon the world, the flesh, and the devil; and to set
  yourself to look steadfastly to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, your
  Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier.

  “Dear John, you have no time to lose. We have calls here to the young
  without end. I lately buried, in our churchyard, two brothers and
  sisters in the same grave. Be you also ready! I was praying for you
  some nights ago on my bed, in my sleepless hours; and I asked for you
  the faith of righteous Abel, the chastity of Joseph, the early piety
  of Samuel, the right choice of young Solomon, the self-denial and
  abstinence of Daniel, together with the early zeal and undaunted
  courage of his three friends; but, above all, I asked that you might
  follow John the Baptist and John the Apostle as they followed our
  Lord. Back, earnestly back my prayers. So shall you be faithful,
  diligent, godly; a blessing to all around you, and a comfort to your
  affectionate old friend and minister,

                                               “JOHN FLETCHER.”[620]

Footnote 620:

  _The Youth’s Instructor_, 1835, p. 305.

At this period, the Rev. Charles Simeon, a young man of twenty-five, and
full of faith and zeal, was rising into great popularity among the
Methodist clergymen of the day. He was an intimate friend of Berridge
and of Henry Venn; and had recently visited Riland at Birmingham,
Cadogan at Reading, Pentycross at Wallingford, and Robinson at
Leicester;[621] and now, toward the end of 1784, he came to Fletcher at
Madeley. As soon as he entered the vicarage, Fletcher took him by the
hand and brought him into the parlour, where the two engaged in prayer.
That being ended, Fletcher asked Simeon to preach in the church. After
some hesitation, Simeon consented; and away went Fletcher, bell in hand,
through the village, and, ringing as loudly as he could, told the people
they must attend church, for a young clergyman from Cambridge had come
to preach to them.

Footnote 621:

  “Simeon’s Memoirs,” by W. Carus, M.A.

After the service in the church, Fletcher and his visitor went for a
walk, in the course of which they entered the ironworks. Simeon was
surprised at the aptitude of Fletcher to turn everything he saw to
spiritual profit. To one of the ironworkers, hammering on an anvil, he
remarked, “O, pray to God that He may hammer that hard heart of yours.”
To another, who was heating a bar of iron, “Ah! thus it is that God
tries His children in the furnace of affliction.” And to a third, who
was drawing a furnace, “See, Thomas! if _you_ can make such a furnace as
that, think what a furnace God can make for sinners.”[622]

Footnote 622:

  _Christian Miscellany_, 1848, p. 326.

Soon after this, Wesley wrote:—

  “1784, Monday, December 20. I went to Hinxworth, where I had the
  satisfaction of meeting Mr. Simeon, Fellow of King’s College in
  Cambridge. He has spent some time with Mr. Fletcher, at Madeley: two
  kindred souls; much resembling each other both in fervour of spirit
  and in the earnestness of their address. He gave me the pleasing
  information that there are three parishes in Cambridge wherein true
  Scriptural religion is preached, and several young gentlemen who are
  happy partakers of it.”[623]

Footnote 623:

  Wesley’s Journal.

Fletcher, the Madeley revivalist, was closing his last year on earth;
Simeon, the Cambridge one, lived and laboured for more than half a
century afterwards; and who can say that in Simeon’s life and labours
the influence of Fletcher’s spirit and example was not an element?

A few more extracts from Fletcher’s letters, and then the end will come.
Already he seemed to be waiting to “gather up his feet,” and die. In a
letter to Mrs. Thornton, a friend of the Greenwood family, at Stoke
Newington, he wrote:—

  “Madeley, _January 21, 1785_. I make just shift to fill up my little
  sentry box, by the help of my dear partner. Had we more strength, we
  should have opportunity enough to exert it. O that we were but truly
  faithful in our little place! Your great stage of London is too high
  for people of little ability and little strength; and, therefore, we
  are afraid of venturing upon it. We should be glad to rise high in
  usefulness; but God, who needs us not, calls us to sink in deep
  resignation and humility. His will be done!”[624]

Footnote 624:

  Letters, 1791, p. 303.

Three weeks later, he wrote to the Right Hon. Lady Mary Fitzgerald, as
follows:—

  “Madeley, February 11, 1785. Who are we, my lady, that we should not
  be swallowed up by the holy, loving, living Spirit, who fills heaven
  and earth? Whether we consider it or not, there He is, a true, holy,
  loving, merciful God. Assent to it, my lady, believe it; rejoice in
  it. Let Him be God, _all in all_; your God in Christ Jesus. What an
  ocean of love to swim in—to dive into!”[625]

Footnote 625:

  _Ibid._, p. 304.

From Fletcher’s letter to Wesley in 1755, and his “Socinianism
Unscriptural,” written during the last years of his life, it is
undeniably evident that Fletcher was a Millenarian. The following
letter, to Mr. Henry Brooke, of Dublin, refers to the same subject, but
shows that he was not so confident with respect to some of his views as
he had been heretofore—

                                 “MADELEY, _February 28, 1785_.[626]

  “MY DEAR BROTHER,—We are all shadows. Your mortal parent has passed
  away; and we must pass away after him. A lesson I learn daily, is to
  see things and persons in their _invisible root_, and in their
  _eternal principle_; where they are not subject to change, decay, and
  death; but where they blossom and shine in the primæval excellence
  allotted them by their gracious Creator. By this means, I learn to
  walk by faith, and not by sight. Tracing His image, in all the
  footsteps of nature, and finding out that which is of God _in
  ourselves_, is the true wisdom, genuine godliness. I hope you will
  never be afraid, nor ashamed of it. I see no danger in these studies
  and meditations, provided we still keep the end in view—the _all_ of
  God, and the _shadowy nothingness_ of all that is visible.

  “With respect to the great Pentecostal display of the Spirit’s glory,
  I still look for it within and without; and to look for it aright is
  the lesson I am learning. I am now led to be afraid of that in my
  nature, which would be for pomp, show, and visible glory. I am afraid
  of falling, by such an expectation, into what I call a spiritual
  Judaizing; into a looking for Christ’s coming in my own pompous
  conceit, which might make me reject Him, if _His_ wisdom, to crucify
  _mine_, chose to come in a meaner way: if, instead of coming in His
  Father’s glory, He chose to come meek, riding, not on the cherubim,
  but on the foal of an ass. Our Saviour said, with respect to His going
  to the feast, ‘My time is not yet come:’ whether His time to come and
  turn the thieves and buyers out of the outward church is yet come, I
  know not. I doubt Jerusalem, and the holy place, are yet given to be
  trodden under foot by the Gentiles. But _my_ Jerusalem! why it is not
  swallowed up of that which comes down from heaven, is a question which
  I wait to be solved by the teaching of the great Prophet, who is alone
  possessed of Urim and Thummim. The mighty power to wrestle with Him is
  all divine: and I often pray,—

                  “‘That mighty faith on me bestow,
                    Which cannot ask in vain,
                  Which holds and will not let Thee go,
                    Till I my suit obtain:

                  “‘Till Thou into my soul inspire
                    That perfect love unknown,
                  And tell my infinite desire,
                    Whate’er Thou wilt be done.’

  “In short, the Lord crucifies my _wisdom_ and my _will_ every way; but
  I must be crucified as the _thieves_. _All my bones must be broken_;
  for there is still in me that impatience of wisdom, which would stir,
  when the tempter says, ‘Come down from the cross.’ It is not for us to
  know the times and seasons, the manner and mystical means of God’s
  working; but only to hunger and thirst, and lie passive before the
  great Potter. I begin to be content to be a vessel of _clay_ or of
  _wood_, so that I may be emptied of self, and filled with my God, my
  all.

  “I am exceeding glad that your dear partner goes on simply and
  believingly. Such a companion is a great blessing; for when two shall
  agree touching one thing in prayer, it shall be done. My wife and I
  endeavour to fathom the meaning of that deep promise. Join us, and let
  us search after that which exceeds _knowledge_—I mean the wisdom, and
  the power, the love, and the faithfulness of God.

  “Adieu! _Be God’s_, as the French say, and see God is _yours_ in
  Christ, for you,[627] for brothers Dugdale, Shannon, Pickering, Mrs.
  Blashford, etc.

                       “We are your obliged friends,
                                      “JOHN AND MARY FLETCHER.”[628]

Footnote 626:

  In an unpublished letter, dated, “Sunday Evening, _February 27,
  1785_,” and signed “John and Mary Fletcher,” but evidently written by
  the latter, it is said:—“My dear Mr. Fletcher has had a bad cold; but
  is better. He is all alive, and living for eternity.”

Footnote 627:

  These names are in the _original_ letter.

Footnote 628:

  Letters, 1791, p. 307.

It must be confessed that there is a little mysticism in Fletcher’s
letter; but let it pass. The next was written a month later. The Rev.
Peard Dickenson was now in the twenty-sixth year of his age. He had been
ordained a deacon, on June 16, 1783, and, a few months afterwards, had
been ordained a priest by the Archbishop of Canterbury. He was now the
Curate of the venerable Vicar of Shoreham, the Rev. Vincent Perronet,
and wrote to Fletcher, asking his advice respecting pastoral visitation.
Fletcher replied, as follows:—

                                         “MADELEY, _March 29, 1785_.

  “DEAR SIR,—I did not answer your obliging letter, because I thought it
  would be presumption in me to advise you, when you have my reverend
  father, Mr. Perronet, to advise with. To send a line, in those
  circumstances, appeared to me like ‘sending coals to Newcastle.’

  “However, having now an opportunity to forward a letter to London, I
  shall say what I have thought on the subject. It is exceeding well to
  visit from house to house, even the Infidels, to feel their pulse, and
  to see whether they do not begin to entertain more favourable thoughts
  of ‘the pearl of great price’ than grunting ‘swine’ or snarling ‘dogs’
  generally do. Such visits, half upon the footing of Christian love,
  and half upon the footing of human civility, may tend to remove
  prejudices. In some cases, writing a letter with tenderness, or giving
  a little tract suited to the circumstances of the person, may clear
  our own conscience, though it should do him no good.

  “My love, respects, and duty, to your venerable Vicar, who, I am told,
  is now your grandfather.[629] I hope the report is well grounded; and,
  if it is, I wish you joy on entering into so respectable a family; and
  I wish you and your partner all the help and comfort I find in mine;
  who, as well as myself, desires to be kindly remembered to all the
  dear family at Shoreham.

  “I am, dear Sir, your affectionate brother and servant in Christ,

                                               “JOHN FLETCHER.”[630]

Footnote 629:

  This was a premature statement. Mr. Dickenson did not marry Miss
  Briggs, Mr. Perronet’s grand-daughter, until three years later.

Footnote 630:

  _Wesleyan Methodist Magazine_, 1825, p. 745.

The Rev. Melville Horne was one of Fletcher’s protegees. At Wesley’s
Conference, in 1784, he had been “admitted on trial,” as a Methodist
Itinerant Preacher, and appointed to the Liverpool circuit. It is well
known that, after this, he obtained episcopal ordination, became curate
at Madeley, published a collection of Fletcher’s letters in 1791, went
as a missionary to Western Africa, and, on his return to England, rose
to considerable distinction. Fletcher had lent the young itinerant
certain books, and now wrote to him the following letter, which refers
to a practice which must have been of recent adoption. Romaine made it a
rule to read nothing but the Bible; wisely or unwisely, Fletcher had
begun, to some extent, to copy his example:—

                                           “MADELEY, _May 10, 1785_.

  “DEAR BROTHER,—I am sorry you should have been uneasy about the books.
  I received them safely, after they had lain for some days at Salop. I
  seldom look into any book but my Bible; not out of contempt, as if I
  thought they cannot teach me what I do not know; but because, ‘_Vita
  brevis, ars longa_,’ I may never look into them again.

  “Go on improving yourself by reading, but above all by _meditation_
  and _prayer_: and allow our Lord to refine you in the fire of
  temptation. Where you see a want, at home or abroad, within or
  without, look upon that want as a warning to avoid the cause of the
  leanness you perceive, and a call to secure the blessings which are
  ready to take their flight; for sometimes ‘_the true riches_,’ like
  those of this world, make themselves wings and flee away. The heavenly
  dove may be grieved, and take its flight to humbler and more peaceful
  roofs. I am glad you do not want hard or violent measures: I hope you
  will never countenance them, no, not against what you dislike. I
  believe things will turn out very well at the Conference, and I shall
  be a witness of it, if the Lord gives me a commission to be a
  spectator of the order and quietness of those who shall be there. If
  not, I shall help you by prayer to draw the blessing of love upon our
  friends.[631]

  “In being moderate, humble, and truly desirous to be a Christian,—that
  is, to be the _least_, the _last_, and the _servant_ of all, we avoid
  running ourselves into difficulties; we escape many temptations, and
  many mortifying disappointments. For my part, as I expect nothing from
  men, they cannot disappoint me; and, as I expect all good things from
  God, in the _time_, _way_, _measure_, and _manner_ it pleaseth Him to
  bestow, here I cannot be disappointed; because He does, and will do,
  all things well.

  “I trust you labour for God and souls, not for praise and self. When
  the latter are our aim, God, in mercy, blesses us with barrenness,
  that we may give up Barabbas, and release the humble Jesus, whom we
  crucify afresh by setting the thief on the throne, and the Lord of
  glory as our footstool: for so do those who preach Christ out of
  contention, or that they may have the praise of men.

  “That God may bless you and your labours is the prayer of your old
  brother,

                                               “JOHN FLETCHER.”[632]

Footnote 631:

  Evidently, Fletcher hoped to attend Wesley’s Conference, begun in
  London on July 26, 1785, but his hope was not fulfilled.

Footnote 632:

  Letters, 1791, p. 309.

A capital letter for a young Methodist preacher, like Melville Horne,
who, six years afterwards, published it for the benefit of all Methodist
probationers.

At this time, fever was raging at Madeley. Mr. W. Bosanquet, in an
unpublished letter, addressed to his sister, Mrs. Fletcher, and dated
“Bishopsgate Street, May 16, 1785,” observed:—

  “I am very happy to hear that both you and Mr. Fletcher have escaped
  the fevers, having been so much among them. The poor must feel
  themselves greatly obliged for this; for it is of much more use to
  visit them when sick than even to give them money.”

The revered Vicar of Shoreham, the Rev. Vincent Perronet, died exactly a
week before the date of this letter, and was buried on May 14, by
Charles Wesley, who wrote to Mrs. Fletcher, as follows:—

                                        “MARYLEBONE, _May 24, 1785_.

  “MY DEAR SISTER,—If you love Mr. Fletcher, you ought to love the poor
  Methodists; for to their prayers you owe him, and he you. I found
  words, and the people faith, while we heard, at Bristol” (in 1776),
  “that our friend was just departing.[633] You have been the instrument
  of adding some years to his valuable life. Remember, for the short
  time that I shall want your prayers, my dear friend, your old faithful
  servant,

  “C. WESLEY.”

Footnote 633:

  The reference is to the hymn quoted at page 362 of the present work.

And then, on the same sheet, the poet of Methodism wrote to Fletcher
himself the following:—

  “MY VERY DEAR BROTHER,—You ought to have paid the last office, instead
  of me, to our most venerable Archbishop at Shoreham. On Sunday, I
  deposited the sacred ashes in his partner’s grave, and preached twice.
  His death was such as his life promised. For many years, he breathed
  the pure spirit of love. The survivor who follows him nearest is
  _longo proximus intervallo_.

  “A fortnight ago, I preached the condemned sermon to above twenty
  criminals. Every one of them, I have good grounds to believe, died
  penitent. Twenty more must die next week.

  “Sally presents her duty and love: the rest join. Direct to me in
  Marylebone, and help me to depart in peace.”[634]

Footnote 634:

  “Memoir of Mrs. Mortimer,” p. 101.

This, probably, was the last letter which Fletcher received from his old
and loving friend. Within three years afterwards, Charles Wesley did
“depart in peace.” Fletcher’s last letters, written eight weeks after
the date of the foregoing, were addressed to James Ireland, Esq., and to
Lady Mary Fitzgerald. It has been already stated that fever was fatally
prevalent at Madeley in the summer of 1785, and an extract from a letter
written by William Bosanquet, Esq., expressing his happiness that
Fletcher and his wife had escaped the pestilence, has been already
given. Soon after that, the sister of Mr. Bosanquet caught the
infection; and Fletcher wrote as follows to Mr. Ireland:—

  “MADELEY, _July 19, 1785_.

  “MY DEAR FRIEND,—Blessed be God, we are still alive, and, in the midst
  of many infirmities, we enjoy a degree of health, spiritually and
  bodily. O how good was the Lord, to come as Son of man to live here
  for us, and to come in His Spirit to live in us for ever! This is a
  mystery of godliness. The Lord make us _full_ witnesses of it!

  “A week ago, I was tried to the quick by a fever with which my dear
  wife was afflicted. Two persons, whom she had visited, having been
  carried off, within a pistol-shot of our house, I dreaded her being
  the third. But the Lord has heard prayer, and she is spared. Oh, what
  is life! ‘On what a slender thread hang everlasting things!’ My
  comfort, however, is, that this _thread_ is as strong as the will of
  God, and the word of His grace, which cannot be broken.

  “That grace and peace, love and thankful joy, may ever attend you is
  the wish of your most obliged friends,

                                      “JOHN AND MARY FLETCHER.”[635]

Footnote 635:

  Letters, 1791, p. 310.

The day after this, he wrote the following to the Right Honorable Lady
Mary Fitzgerald:—

                                          “MADELEY, _July 20, 1785_.

  “HON. AND DEAR LADY,—We have received your kind letter, and have
  mournfully acquiesced in the will of our heavenly Father, who, by
  various infirmities and providences, weans us from ourselves and our
  friends, that we may be His without reserve. It was, perhaps, a
  peculiar mercy that Providence blocked up your way to this place this
  summer. A bad putrid fever carries off several people in these parts.
  Two of our neighbours died of it last week; and my wife, who had
  visited them, was taken in so violent a manner, that I was obliged to
  offer her up to God in good earnest, as an oblation worthy a son of
  Abraham. I hope the worst is over; but her weakness will long preach
  to me, as well as my own.

  “Dying people, we live in the midst of dying people. O let us live in
  sight of a dying, rising Saviour; and the prospect of death will
  become first tolerable, and then joyous! Or, if we weep, as our Lord,
  at the grave of our friends, or at the side of their deathbeds, we
  shall triumph in hope that all will be for the glory of God, and the
  good of our souls.

                               “I am, my dear lady, etc.,
                                               “JOHN FLETCHER.”[636]

Footnote 636:

  Fletcher’s Works, vol. viii., p. 329.

Twenty-five days after writing this, his last letter, Fletcher himself
was dead. His wife, who had so narrowly escaped becoming a victim to the
prevailing fever, shall tell the remainder of his earthly story. The day
after the funeral, she wrote a letter to Wesley, a copy of which she
immediately gave to Fletcher’s “old friend, Winifred Edmunds, whose
son,” says she, “prints it for the satisfaction of many who have made
applications for some account of God’s dealings with my beloved husband.
I consider this a debt I owe to his dear orphans at Madeley; and, as it
is probable I may be called away by the same fever, perhaps this may be
the last office of love I can yield them.” The title of the publication
was, “A Letter to the Rev. Mr. Wesley, on the Death of the Rev. Mr.
Fletcher, Vicar of Madeley, in Shropshire. Madeley: Printed by J.
Edmunds.”  16mo, 16 pp. About the same time, however, Mrs. Fletcher
wrote a much longer account, which was printed with the following title:
“A Letter to Mons. H. L. de la Flechere, Assessor Ballival of Nyon, in
the Canton of Berne, Switzerland, on the Death of his Brother, the
Reverend John William De la Flechere, Twenty-five Years Vicar of
Madeley, Shropshire. London, 1786.”  12mo, 64 pp. From these two
publications, the following account is taken. Writing to Fletcher’s
brother, the mourning widow said:—

  “As there is no one to whom my dearest husband was more closely united
  than yourself, so there is no one who can more tenderly sympathize
  with me in a loss _so mutual_. You have expressed a desire to receive
  from my own pen some account of a life the most angelic I have ever
  known; and I will endeavour to comply with your request as far as my
  weak state of body and torn nerves will permit.

  “From the beginning, he was a laborious workman in his Lord’s
  vineyard, till he had spent himself in the best of services and was
  ripening fast for glory. Those sinners who fled from him he pursued to
  every corner of his parish by all sorts of ways, public and private,
  early and late, in season and out of season, entreating and warning
  them to flee from the wrath to come. Some made it an excuse for not
  attending the service on Sunday _mornings_ that they did not awake
  early enough to get their families ready. He promised to be their
  watchman; and, taking a bell in his hand, was accustomed, at five in
  the morning, to go round the more distant parts of the parish,
  reminding the inhabitants of their invitation to the house of God.

  “But he did not confine his labours to this parish. For many years, he
  regularly preached at places eight, ten, or sixteen miles distant,
  returning home the same night, though he seldom reached it before one
  or two in the morning. At a little Society, which he had gathered
  about six miles from Madeley, he preached two or three times in a week
  at five in the morning. As to visiting the sick, this was a duty for
  which he was ever ready. If he heard the knocker in the middle of the
  coldest winter night, his window was instantly thrown up, and the
  uniform answer was, ‘_I will attend you immediately_.’

  “His frequent journeys to Trevecca, where he superintended a college
  of young men designed for the ministry, added much to his other
  fatigues,—riding on bad roads and wading through waters. Very often,
  in travelling through Wales, he was obliged to lie in damp and
  unsuitable lodgings; which, I have heard him observe, gave a deep
  stroke to his constitution.

  “With regard to the _success_ of his labours, it is a subject on which
  he has so often stopped my mouth that I will only say, besides the
  great reformation that has taken place in this parish, as to outward
  behaviour, he has left behind him a goodly company of upright, earnest
  people, whom he had gathered into little Societies, and who now mourn,
  as sheep bereaved of their dear shepherd.

  “Never did I behold any one more dead to the things of the world. I
  have heard him say he was never happier than when he had given away
  the last penny he had in the house. If at any time I had gold in the
  drawer, it seemed to afford him no comfort; but if he could find a
  handful of small silver when going out to visit the sick, he would
  express as much pleasure over it as a miser would in discovering a bag
  of hidden treasure. He was never better pleased with my employment
  than when he had set me to prepare food or physic for the poor. He
  could hardly relish his dinner if some sick neighbour had not a part;
  nor could I sometimes keep the linen in his drawers for the same
  reason. On Sabbath days, he provided refreshments for numbers of
  people who came from a distance to hear the Word, and his house was
  devoted to their convenience. Once a poor widow, who feared God, being
  brought into difficulties, he immediately took all his pewter from the
  kitchen shelves, saying, ‘This I can do without; it will relieve your
  want, and a wooden trencher serves me better.’ Sometimes, in epidemic
  disorders, when the neighbours were afraid to nurse the sick, he has
  gone from house to house seeking help for them; and, when none could
  be found, has offered to sit up with the sick himself. In his younger
  years, he was ready to weep when five or six letters were brought, at
  threepence or fourpence a-piece, and he, perhaps, had only a shilling
  in the house to distribute among the poor to whom he was going.
  Frequently would he say to me, ‘O Mary, cannot we do without beer? Let
  us drink water, and buy less meat, that our necessities may give way
  to the extremities of the poor.’ But with all his charity, he was
  careful to avoid debts. While he gave all he could, he made it a rule
  to pay ready money for everything, believing this was the only way to
  keep the mind free from cares.

  “He always had a steady, firm reliance upon the love and faithfulness
  of God. Sometimes, when I have expressed a fear of trials, he would
  answer, ‘The Lord orders all, and I leave everything to Him. I always
  seem conscious He gives His angels charge concerning us, and therefore
  think we are equally safe everywhere.’ He had many remarkable
  deliverances. Sometimes, both himself and his horse, in dark nights,
  have fallen down steep places, and yet both have been preserved. Once,
  I believe in Wales, in passing over a wooden bridge it broke asunder,
  and he and his mare sank into the river, but both got safe to land.

  “A little before his last illness, being on his knees in prayer for
  light whether he should go to London or not,[637] the answer seemed to
  him, ‘No, not to London, but to your grave.’ Acquainting me with this,
  he said, with a heavenly smile, ‘Satan would represent this as
  something awful, _the cold grave, the cold grave_!’ On the following
  Sabbath (which I think was the next day), the anthem sung in the
  church was the Twenty-third Psalm. On his return home, he observed how
  the words of the Psalm had been blest to him; and from that time he
  seemed to be without the least temptation.

  “Still, there was scarce a night but some part of it was spent in
  groans for the souls and bodies of those committed to his care. I
  really dreaded his hearing either of the sins or sufferings of any of
  his people before he went to bed, knowing how strong the impression
  would be upon his mind.

  “In the last years of his life, he never, except once, travelled far
  from home without being in danger of a relapse into his consumption;
  and after his return, he would be weeks before he recovered his usual
  strength. He also sometimes said to me that, though he had been
  engaged in the work of the Lord in various places and situations, the
  seasons of his closest communion with God were always in his own house
  and church.

  “With regard to his communion with God, he constantly endeavoured to
  maintain an uninterrupted sense of the Divine presence. In order to
  this, he was slow of speech, and had the greatest government of his
  words. He acted, he spake, he thought, as under the immediate eye of
  God. Thus setting God always before him, he remained unmoved, at all
  times possessing internal recollection. I never saw him diverted
  therefrom on any occasion whatever. I travelled with him above a
  thousand miles, during which journeys neither change of company,
  place, nor circumstances ever seemed to make the least difference in
  his fixed attention to the presence of God. He was always striving to
  raise his own and every other spirit into close and immediate
  intercourse with God; and I can say, with truth, that all his union
  with me was so mingled with prayer and praise, that every employment
  and every meal were perfumed therewith.

  “Some time ago, when the fever began to rage among us, he preached a
  sermon on visiting the sick; in which he seemed to be carried out of
  himself, observing, ‘What do you fear? You are afraid of catching the
  distemper, and of dying with those who have it. O fear no more! What
  an honour to die in your Master’s service! If this were permitted to
  me, I should esteem it a singular favour.’

  “During the last few months, though his health and strength sensibly
  increased, he was constantly crying out for dying grace. Often would
  he say, ‘O Mary, I am afraid lest we should have our good things here.
  Let us look up. Let us live above all. We have one foot in the grave.’
  He scarcely ever lay down or rose up without repeating—

                   “I nothing have, I nothing am;
                   My treasure’s in the bleeding Lamb,
                   Both now and evermore.

  “There was scarce an hour in which he was not calling upon me to drop
  every thought and every care, that we might attend to nothing but
  drinking deeper into God. We spent much time in prayer for the fulness
  of the Spirit, and were led to an act of _abandonment_ (as we called
  it) of our whole selves into the hands of God, to do or to suffer
  whatever was pleasing to Him.

  “On Thursday, August 4, he was occupied in the work of God from three
  in the afternoon till nine at night; when he came home, and said, ‘I
  have taken cold.’ On Friday and Saturday, he was poorly; but went out
  part of each day, and seemed uncommonly drawn out in prayer.

  “On Saturday night, his fever first appeared very strong. I begged him
  not to go to the church in the morning; but to let a pious
  brother,[638] who was with us, preach in the yard; but he told me, it
  was the will of the Lord that he should go. When I met a little
  company of our pious women, on Sunday morning, I begged they would
  pray that he might be strengthened. In reading the prayers, he almost
  fainted. I got through the crowd, with a friend, and entreated him to
  come out of the desk, as did some others; but, in his sweet manner, he
  let us know we were not to interrupt the order of God. I then retired
  to my pew. All around me were in tears. When he was a little
  refreshed, by the windows being opened and a nosegay thrown into the
  desk by a friend, he proceeded with the service. Going into the
  pulpit, he preached with a strength and recollection which surprised
  us all. In his first prayer, he said, ‘Lord, Thou wilt manifest Thy
  strength in weakness. We confer not with flesh and blood; but put our
  trust under the shadow of Thy wings.’

  “His text was, ‘O Lord, Thou preservest man and beast. How excellent
  is Thy lovingkindness, O God! therefore the children of men put their
  trust under the shadow of Thy wings.’ After sermon, he went up the
  aisle to the communion-table, with these words, ‘I am going to throw
  myself under the wings of the cherubim, before the mercy-seat.’ The
  congregation was large, and the service lasted till nearly two
  o’clock. Sometimes he could scarcely stand, and was often obliged to
  stop for want of power to speak. The people were deeply affected.
  Weeping was on every side. Notwithstanding his extreme weakness, he
  gave out several verses of hymns, and uttered various lively sentences
  of exhortation.

  “As soon as the service was over, we hurried him away to bed, where he
  immediately fainted. He then dropped into a sleep for some time; and,
  when he awoke, he cried out, with a pleasant smile, ‘Now, my dear,
  thou seest I am no worse for doing the Lord’s work. He never fails me
  when I trust in Him.’ He dozed most of the evening, now and then
  awaking full of the praises of God. At night, his fever returned, and
  his strength decreased amazingly.

  “On Monday and Tuesday, he lay on a couch in the study, was at times
  very restless, but often slept. When awake, he was delighted in
  hearing me read hymns, and tracts on faith and love. His words were
  animating, and his patience beyond expression. I asked, ‘Hast thou any
  conviction that the Lord is about to take thee?’ He answered, ‘No, not
  in particular; only I always see death so near, that we both seem to
  stand on the verge of eternity.’ Sometimes he would say, ‘O Polly!
  shall I ever see the day when thou must be carried out to be buried? I
  shrink at giving my dear Polly to the worms.’ Awaking on one occasion,
  he said, ‘It was Israel’s fault that they asked _for signs_. We will
  not do so; but, abandoning our whole selves into the hands of God, we
  will there lie patiently, assured that He will do all things well.’

  “On Wednesday, August 10, he told me, he had received such a
  manifestation of the full meaning of the words, ‘_God is love_,’ as he
  could not tell. ‘It _fills me_,’ he said, ‘it _fills me_ every moment.
  O Polly! my dear Polly! _God is love!_ Shout! Shout aloud! Oh! it so
  fills me, that I want a gust of praise to go to the ends of the earth.
  But it seems as if I could not speak much longer. Let us fix upon a
  sign between ourselves’ (tapping me twice with his finger). ‘By this I
  mean _God is love, and we will draw each other into God. Observe! by
  this we will draw each other into God._’ Sally coming in, he cried, ‘O
  Sally! _God is love!_ Shout, both of you! I want to hear you shout His
  praise!’ All this time, his medical attendant hoped he was in no
  danger. He knew his disease to be the fever; but, as he had no bad
  headache, slept much without the least delirium, and had an almost
  regular pulse, the symptoms were thought to be favourable.

  “On Thursday, August 11, his speech began to fail; but to his friendly
  doctor he would not be silent while he had any power to speak, often
  saying, ‘O Sir, you take much thought for my body; give me leave to
  take thought for your soul.’ When I could scarcely understand anything
  he said, I spoke the words, ‘_God is love!_’ Instantly he caught them,
  and broke out in a rapture, ‘God is _love, love, love_! O for the gust
  of praise I want to sound!’ Here his voice again failed. If I named
  his sufferings, he would smile, and make the sign.

  “On Friday, August 12, finding his body covered with spots, I so far
  understood them as to feel a sword pierce through my soul. As I knelt
  by his bed, with my hand in his, intreating the Lord to be with us in
  this tremendous hour, he strove to say many things, but could not. At
  length, pressing my hand, and often repeating the sign, he breathed
  out, ‘Head of the Church, be head to my wife!’ Sally said to him, ‘My
  dear master, do you know _me_?’ He replied, ‘Sally, God will put His
  right hand under you.’ She added, ‘O my dear master, should you be
  taken away, what a disconsolate creature will my poor mistress be!’ He
  answered, ‘God will be her all in all.’ He had always delighted in the
  lines—

                 “‘Jesu’s blood, through earth and skies,
                 Mercy, free, boundless mercy cries.’

  “When I repeated them to him, he cried, ‘_Boundless, boundless!_’ and
  added, though with great difficulty—

               “‘Mercy’s _full_ power _I soon_ shall prove,
               Lov’d with an everlasting love.’

  “On the afternoon of Saturday, August 13, while a few Christian
  friends were standing near his bed, he stretched out his hand to each
  of them, and, to a minister, remarked, ‘Are you ready to assist
  to-morrow?’ One asked, ‘Do you think the Lord will raise you up?’ He
  strove to answer, ‘Raise in resur... raise in resur....’ To another,
  who put the same question, he replied, ‘I leave it all to God.’ I
  said, ‘My dear creature, I ask not for myself, but for the sake of
  others. If Jesus is very present with thee, lift thy right hand.’ He
  did so. I added, ‘If the prospect of glory opens before thee, repeat
  the sign.’ He raised his hand again; and, in half a minute, a second
  time. After this, his dear hands moved no more; but, on my asking,
  ‘Art thou in much pain?’ he answered, ‘No.’

  “From this time, he entered into a kind of sleep, though with his eyes
  open and fixed. Twenty-four hours, my dearly beloved breathed like a
  person in common sleep; and then, at thirty-five minutes past ten on
  Sunday night, August 14, his precious soul entered into the joy of his
  Lord, in the fifty-sixth year of his age. I was scarce a minute at a
  time from him, night or day, during his illness, and I can truly say—

             “‘No cloud did arise, to darken the skies,
             Or hide for one moment his Lord from his eyes.’

  “And here I break off my mournful story. On my bleeding heart, his
  fair picture of heavenly excellence will be for ever drawn. When I
  call to mind his ardent zeal, his laborious endeavours to seek and
  save the lost, his diligence in the employment of his time, his
  Christlike condescension towards me, and his uninterrupted converse
  with heaven, I may well be allowed to add, my loss is beyond the power
  of words to paint.

  “On August 17, his dear remains were deposited in Madeley churchyard;
  amid the tears and lamentations of thousands, who flocked about the
  bier of their dead pastor. Between the house and the church, they sung
  these verses:—

                 “‘With heavenly weapons he hath fought
                   The battles of the Lord:
                 Finish’d his course, and kept the faith,
                   And gain’d the great reward.

                 “‘God hath laid up in heaven for him
                   A crown which cannot fade;
                 The righteous Judge, at that great day,
                   Shall place it on his head.’

  “The service was performed by the Rev. Mr. Hatton, Rector of
  Waters-Upton, whom the Lord moved, in a pathetic manner, to speak to
  the weeping flock. At my request, he read the following paper:—[639]

  “‘It was the desire of my beloved husband to be buried in this plain
  manner, and, out of tenderness, he begged that I might not be present.
  In all things I would obey him.

  “‘Permit me, by the mouth of a friend, to bear my testimony, to the
  glory of God, that I never knew anyone walk so closely with God as he
  did. The Lord gave him a conscience tender as the apple of an eye. He
  literally preferred the interest of every one to his own. He shared
  _his all_ with the poor, who lay so close his heart, that, when his
  speech was so gone that he could utter nothing without difficulty, he
  cried out, “_O my Poor!_ What will become of my Poor?” He was blessed
  with so great a degree of humility as is scarcely to be found. I am
  witness, how often he has taken real pleasure in being treated with
  contempt. It seemed the very food of his soul, to be little and
  unknown. When he said to me, “Thou wilt write a line or two to my
  brother in Switzerland, if I die,” I replied, “My dear, dear love, I
  will write him all the Lord’s dealings with thee.” “No, no,” said he,
  “write nothing about me. I only desire to be forgotten. _God is all._”

  “‘His diligent visitation of the sick laid the foundation of the
  spotted fever of which he died; and his vehement desire to take his
  last leave of _you_, with dying lips and hands, gave (it is supposed)
  the finishing stroke, by preparing his blood for putrefaction. Thus
  did he live and die your servant.

  “‘He walked with death always in sight. About two months ago, he came
  to me and said, “My dear love, I know not how it is, but I have a
  strange impression death is very near us, as if it would be a sudden
  stroke upon one of us; and it draws out my soul in prayer that we may
  be ready.” He then broke out, “Lord, prepare the soul Thou wilt call;
  and, O stand by the poor disconsolate one who shall be left behind!”

  “‘Three years, nine months, and two days, I have possessed my
  _heavenly-minded husband_; but now the sun of my earthly joy is _set
  for ever_.’”

Footnote 637:

  No doubt to attend Wesley’s Conference, which began on July 26.

Footnote 638:

  No doubt, one of Wesley’s preachers.

Footnote 639:

  Mr. Hatton also preached a funeral sermon, founded on Hebrews xiii. 7.

This is a very artless story; but it is not less valuable because of
that. Mrs. Fletcher sent a copy to Charles Wesley, together with the
following note:—

                                        “MADELEY, _August 24, 1785_.

  “DEAR SIR,—Enclosed you have an account of my feelings when I thought
  myself dying, as did most about me. I prayed for strength to do
  justice to my dearest, dearest love. I wrote it in one day, but could
  not go over it a second time. Take it, then, as it flowed from my full
  heart, without a second thought, and pray for your deeply distressed
  friend. I cannot find your brother. I wrote to him at first, but have
  got no answer.”[640]

Footnote 640:

  Jackson’s “Life of C. Wesley,” vol. ii., p. 432.

Wesley, in his eighty-third year, was in the west of England, travelling
and preaching with surprising energy. On the day of Fletcher’s death, he
preached twice at Salisbury; then hastened to Shaftesbury, Castle-Carey,
Shepton-Mallet, Taunton, Collumpton, Exeter, and Plymouth; then went
right through Cornwall; and, on September 3, got to Bristol, in the
neighbourhood of which city he spent a month. On October 3, he came to
London; then made what he calls “a little excursion” into Hertfordshire,
another into Oxfordshire, and a third into Norfolk. Here, at Norwich, on
October 24, he found time to write a sermon on the death of Fletcher,
which he delivered in London on November 6. The sermon was published
immediately, with the following address “To the reader” prefixed[641]:—

  “A consciousness of my own inability to describe, in a manner worthy
  of the subject, such a person as Mr. Fletcher, was one great reason of
  my not writing this sooner. I judged, only an _Apelles_ was proper to
  paint an _Alexander_. But I, at length, submitted to importunity, and
  hastily put together some memorials of this great man: intending, if
  God permit, when I have more leisure and more materials, to write a
  fuller account of his life.

                                                       “JOHN WESLEY.

  “London, _November 9, 1785_.”

Footnote 641:

  The title was, “A Sermon preached on the Occasion of the Death of the
  Rev. Mr. John Fletcher, Vicar of Madeley, Shropshire. By John Wesley,
  A.M.”  12mo. 32 pp.

The concluding paragraph of Wesley’s sermon must be quoted:—

  “For many years, I despaired of finding any inhabitant of Great
  Britain that could stand in any degree of comparison with Gregory
  Lopez, or Monsieur de Renty. But let any impartial person judge, if
  Mr. Fletcher was at all inferior to them? Did he not experience as
  deep communion with God, and as high a measure of inward holiness, as
  was experienced either by one or the other of those burning and
  shining lights? And it is certain his outward holiness shone before
  men, with full as bright a lustre as theirs. But if any should attempt
  to draw a parallel between them, there are two circumstances that
  deserve consideration. One is, we are not assured that the writers of
  _their_ Lives did not extenuate, if not suppress, what was amiss in
  them. And some things amiss we are assured there were, namely, many
  touches of superstition, and some of idolatry, in worshipping Saints,
  the Virgin Mary in particular. But I have not suppressed or extenuated
  anything in Mr. Fletcher’s character. For indeed I knew nothing that
  was amiss, nothing that needed to be extenuated, much less suppressed.
  A second circumstance is, that the Writers of _their_ Lives could not
  have so full a knowledge of them, as both Mrs. Fletcher and I had of
  Mr. Fletcher, being both eye and ear-witnesses of his whole conduct.
  Consequently, we know that his life was not sullied with any mixture
  of either idolatry or superstition. I was intimately acquainted with
  him for above thirty years. I conversed with him morning, noon, and
  night, without the least reserve, during a journey of many hundred
  miles. And, in all that time, I never heard him speak one improper
  word, nor saw him do an improper action.—To conclude. Many exemplary
  men have I known, holy in heart and life, within fourscore years. But
  one equal to him I have not known: one so inwardly and outwardly
  devoted to God. So unblameable a character in every respect, I have
  not found either in Europe or America. And I scarce expect to find
  another such, on this side eternity.”

Human praise could not be higher than this; and yet even the _Monthly
Review_, which had so often and so unjustly denounced the Methodists, in
its notice of Wesley’s sermon, remarked:—

  “Mr. Fletcher was one of the most considerable among the Methodist
  ministers of the Wesleyan division. We have long been acquainted with
  his good character; and we firmly believe that the high encomiums here
  passed on him were justly merited in their fullest extent.”[642]

Footnote 642:

  _Monthly Review_, 1786, p. 79.

Scores of other eulogies have been written, but only four shall be added
here, and these by persons who were well acquainted with the man of whom
they speak.

The Rev. Joshua Gilpin’s elaborate biographical “Notes,” interspersed in
Fletcher’s “Portrait of St. Paul,” are too numerous and lengthened to be
introduced, but an extract from the last of them (the twenty-ninth) must
be given:—

  “On the day of Mr. Fletcher’s departure, as I was preparing to attend
  my own church, which was at the distance of nine miles from Madeley, I
  received a message from Mrs. Fletcher, requesting my immediate
  attendance at the vicarage. I instantly followed the messenger, and
  found Mr. Fletcher with every symptom of approaching dissolution upon
  him. I had ever looked up to this man of God with an extraordinary
  degree of affection and reverence; and, on this afflicting occasion,
  my heart was uncommonly affected and depressed. It was now in vain to
  recollect that public duty required my presence in another place.
  Unfitted for every duty, except that of silently watching the bed of
  death, I found it impossible to withdraw from the solemn scene. I had
  received from this evangelical teacher, in days that were past, many
  excellent precepts with respect to _holy living_; and now I desired to
  receive from him the last important lesson with respect to _holy
  dying_. And truly this concluding lesson was of inestimable worth,
  since so much patience and resignation, so much peace and composure,
  were scarcely ever discovered in the same circumstances before.

  “While their pastor was breathing out his soul into the hands of a
  faithful Creator, his people were offering up their joint
  supplications on his behalf in the house of God. Little, however, was
  seen among them but affliction and tears.[643] The whole village wore
  an air of consternation and sadness, and not one joyful song was heard
  among its inhabitants. Hasty messengers were passing to and fro with
  anxious enquiries and confused reports; and the members of every
  family sat together in silence that day, awaiting, with trembling
  expectation, the issue of every hour. After the conclusion of the
  evening service, several of the poor, who came from distant parts, and
  who were usually entertained under Mr. Fletcher’s roof, still lingered
  about the house, and seemed unable to tear themselves away from the
  place without a sight of their expiring pastor. Secretly informed of
  their desire, I obtained them the permission they wished; and the door
  of the chamber being set open, immediately before which Mr. Fletcher
  was sitting upright in his bed, with the curtains undrawn, they slowly
  moved, one by one, along the gallery, severally pausing as they passed
  by the door, and casting in a look of mingled supplication and
  anguish. It was, indeed, an affecting sight.

  “And now the hour speedily approached that was to put a solemn
  termination to our hopes and fears. His weakness very perceptibly
  increased, but his countenance continued unaltered to the last. Mrs.
  Fletcher was kneeling by the side other departing husband, the medical
  attendant sat at his head, while I sorrowfully waited near his feet.
  Uncertain whether or not he was totally separated from us, we pressed
  nearer; but his warfare was accomplished, and the happy spirit had
  taken its everlasting flight.”

Footnote 643:

  Another writer, who was present, relates that the congregation sang,
  or tried to sing, the affecting hymn which was composed and used at
  the time of Fletcher’s dangerous illness in 1776 (see pp. 362 and
  368). He further says, “I never was witness to a scene so impressive
  and pathetic. Every breast felt, every countenance expressed, one
  common sentiment. Tears, sobs, and suppressed groans showed how
  sincerely the people esteemed their venerable pastor. When the hymn
  was sung, there was a general burst of sorrow. Even those who had
  spurned his instructions, deprecated his death as a public loss, and
  expressed their grief with uncommon agitation.” (_Methodist Magazine_,
  1802, p. 572.)

James Ireland, Esq., was one of Fletcher’s most loving and well-beloved
friends. In an unpublished letter, addressed to Mrs. Fletcher, and dated
“Brislington, November 6, 1785,” he says, Wesley had informed him he was
about to write the “Life of Fletcher,” and had asked him to supply
materials. In his reply, he had said, “I cannot assist _you_ to write
the life of my dear friend, though I have ever respected and honoured
you.” Mr. Ireland adds, that whatever information he can furnish he will
send to Mrs. Fletcher, and leave it to her to use as she thinks best. He
then proceeds:—

  “I have often felt that I would have divided my last shilling with Mr.
  Fletcher. We were once for months together, day and night; and when we
  parted, we both wept. Such a soul I never knew; such a great man, in
  every sense of the word. He was too great to bear the name of any
  sect. Mr. Townsend, with whom I lately parted, speaks of him as the
  greatest man that has lived in this century, and begs his life may not
  be penned in haste.”

In another unpublished letter, also addressed to Mrs. Fletcher, and
dated “October 6, 1786,” Mr. Ireland wrote:—

  “I never saw Mr. Fletcher’s equal. On him great grace was bestowed.
  What deadness to the world! What spiritual mindedness! What zeal for
  souls! What communion with God! What intercourse with heaven! What
  humility at the feet of Jesus! What moderation towards all men! What
  love for the poor! In short, he possessed the mind which was in Christ
  Jesus.”

“The Rev. Henry Venn, after reading Wesley’s “Life of Fletcher,” wrote
as follows to Lady Mary Fitzgerald:—

  “Yelling, March 3, 1787. Mr. Fletcher’s _humility_ was so unfeigned
  and so deep, that when I thanked him for two sermons he had one day
  preached to my people at Huddersfield, he answered as no man ever did
  to me. With eyes and hands uplifted, he exclaimed, ‘Pardon, pardon,
  pardon, O my God!’ The words went to my very soul. Great grace was
  upon this blessed servant of Christ.

  “_Love to man_ and bowels of mercies displayed in him a noble
  imitation of his Incarnate God. He indeed thought a day lost, and
  could find no rest in his soul, unless he was doing good to the bodies
  and souls of men.

  “_Love to the Lord._—How did it govern and flourish in dear Mr.
  Fletcher! His admirable consort tells us, he scarcely was awake in the
  night a moment without lifting up his soul to God in holy aspirations.

  “I have seen Mr. Fletcher, for six weeks together, under a hectic
  fever, sometimes spitting blood, when night after night he could rest
  very little—_well pleased to suffer_—never complaining, never but
  cheerful. Once, when I asked him how he did, ‘Oh!’ said he, ‘how light
  is the chastisement I suffer! How heavy the strokes I deserve! I love
  the rod of my heavenly Father!’ Like his Saviour, he could continue in
  prayer, in the wood, all night long; and, like Him, lie prostrate on
  the ground, pleading for grace to fulfil his ministry.”[644]

Footnote 644:

  “Life of Rev. H. Venn,” pp. 578–584.

Between Fletcher and Joseph Benson there was a most intimate and
confidential friendship. Benson, in a letter to Wesley, wrote:—

  “As to _drawing_ the character of that great and good man, Mr.
  Fletcher, it is what I will not attempt. I have been looking over many
  of his letters, and observe in them all, what I have a thousand times
  observed in his conversation and behaviour, the plainest marks of
  every Christian grace and virtue.

  “Perhaps, if he followed his Master more closely in one thing than
  another, it was in _humility_. He was constantly upon his guard lest
  any expression should drop, either from his lips or pen, which tended
  to make anyone think well of him; either on account of his family, or
  learning, or parts, or usefulness. He took as much pains to _conceal
  his_ excellences, as others do to _show theirs_.

  “He was a man of a _serious spirit_, one that stood at the utmost
  distance from levity of every kind. Though he was constantly cheerful,
  as rejoicing in hope of his heavenly inheritance, yet he had too deep
  a sense of his own wants, and the wants of the Church of God, as also
  of the sins and miseries of mankind, to be at any time light or
  trifling.

  “In _hungering and thirsting after righteousness_, he was peculiarly
  worthy of our imitation. He never rested in anything he had either
  experienced or done in spiritual matters. He was a true Christian
  racer, always on the stretch for higher and better things. Though his
  attainments, both in experience and usefulness, were far above the
  common standard, yet the language of his conversation and behaviour
  always was, ‘Not as though I had already attained, either were already
  perfected; but I follow after, if by any means I may apprehend that
  for which I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.’ He had his eye upon a
  full conformity to the Son of God; or what the Apostle terms, ‘the
  measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ.’ Nor could he be
  satisfied with anything less.

  “He was _meek_, like his Master, as well as _lowly in heart_. Not that
  he was so by nature, but of a fiery, passionate spirit; insomuch that
  he has frequently thrown himself on the floor, and lain there most of
  the night bathed in tears, imploring victory over his own temper. And
  he did obtain the victory, in a very eminent degree. For twenty years
  and upwards before his death, no one ever saw him out of temper, or
  heard him utter a rash expression, on any provocation whatever.[645]
  And he did not want provocation, and that sometimes in a high degree;
  especially from those whose religious sentiments he thought it his
  duty to oppose. But none of these things moved him: no, not in the
  least degree. The keenest word he used was, ‘What a world, what a
  religious world we live in!’ I have often thought the testimony, that
  Bishop Burnet bears of Archbishop Leighton, might be borne of him with
  equal propriety: ‘After an intimate acquaintance of many years, and
  after being with him by night and by day, at home and abroad, in
  public and in private, on sundry occasions and in various affairs,—I
  must say, I never heard an idle word drop from his lips, nor any
  conversation which was not to the use of edifying. I never saw him in
  any temper, in which I myself would not have wished to be found at
  death.’ Any one, who has been intimately acquainted with Mr. Fletcher,
  will say the same of him: and they who knew him best will say it with
  the most assurance.

  “Hence arose his readiness to bear with the weaknesses, and forgive
  the faults of others: which was the more remarkable, considering his
  flaming zeal against sin, and his concern for the glory of God. Such
  hatred to sin, and such love to the sinner, I never saw joined
  together before.

  “He never mentioned the faults of an absent person, unless absolute
  duty required it. And then he spoke with the utmost tenderness,
  extenuating, rather than aggravating. None could draw his picture more
  exactly than St. Paul has done, in the thirteenth chapter of the first
  Epistle to the Corinthians. ‘He suffered long and was kind; he envied
  not; acted not rashly; was not puffed up; did not behave himself
  unseemly; sought not his own; was not easily provoked; he thought no
  evil; rejoiced not in iniquity, but rejoiced in the truth; he covered
  all things; believed all things; hoped all things; and endured all
  things.’ It would be easy to enlarge on all these particulars, and
  show how they were exemplified in him; but, waiving this, I would only
  observe, that, with regard to two of them, _kindness_ to others, and
  _not seeking his own_, he had few equals.

  “His _kindness_ to others was such, that he bestowed his all upon
  them: his time, his talents, his substance. His knowledge, his
  eloquence, his health, his money, were employed, day by day, for the
  good of mankind. He prayed, he wrote, he preached, he visited the sick
  and well, he conversed, he gave, he laboured, he suffered, winter and
  summer, night and day: he endangered, nay, destroyed his health, and
  in the end gave his life also for the profit of his neighbours, that
  they might be saved from everlasting death. He denied himself even of
  such food as was necessary for him, that he might have to give to them
  that had none. And when he was constrained to change his manner of
  living, still his diet was plain and simple. And so were his clothing
  and furniture, that he might save all that was possible for his poor
  neighbours.

  “He _sought not his own_ in any sense: not his own honour, but the
  honour of God, in all he said or did. He sought not his own interest,
  but the interest of his Lord, spreading knowledge, holiness, and
  happiness, as far as he possibly could. He sought not his own
  pleasure, but studied to ‘please all men, for their good to
  edification;’ and to please Him that had called him to His kingdom and
  glory.

  “But I do not attempt his full character. I will only add, ‘_He was
  blameless and harmless, a son of God, without rebuke, in the midst of
  a crooked and perverse generation: shining among them as a light in
  the world._’”

Footnote 645:

  Wesley’s “Life of Fletcher,” p. 173.

Both Wesley and Benson insert this eulogium in their lives of Fletcher;
but Wesley adds:—

  “I think one talent wherewith God had endued Mr. Fletcher has not been
  sufficiently noted yet. I mean his _courtesy_; in which there was not
  the least touch either of art or affectation. It was pure and genuine,
  and sweetly constrained him to behave to everyone (although
  particularly to inferiors), in a manner not to be described: with so
  inexpressible a mixture of humility, love, and respect. This directed
  his words, the tone of his voice, his looks, his whole attitude, his
  every motion.

             “‘Grace was in all his steps, heaven in his eye,
             In all his gestures sanctity and love.’”

The entry of Fletcher’s death, in the register of Madeley parish church,
is a brief obituary:—

  “Memorandum.

  “John Fletcher, Clerk, died on Sunday evening, August 14, 1785. He was
  one of the most apostolic men of the age in which he lived. His
  abilities were extraordinary, and his labours were unparalleled. He
  was a burning and shining light; and as his life had been a common
  blessing to the inhabitants of this parish, so the death of this great
  man was lamented by them as a common and irreparable loss.

  “This little testimony was inserted by one who sincerely loved and
  honoured him.

                              “JOSHUA GILPIN, VICAR OF ROCKWARDINE.”

The inscription on his tombstone was written by his widow, and is as
follows[646]:—

            “HERE LIES THE BODY OF
            THE REV. JOHN WILLIAM DE LA FLECHERE,
            VICAR OF MADELEY,
            WHO WAS BORN AT NYON, IN SWITZERLAND,
            SEPTEMBER THE 12TH, 1729,
            AND FINISHED HIS COURSE, AUGUST THE 14TH, 1785,
            IN THIS VILLAGE;
            WHERE HIS UNEXAMPLED LABOURS
            WILL LONG BE REMEMBERED.

            HE EXERCISED HIS MINISTRY FOR THE SPACE OF
            TWENTY-FIVE YEARS,
            IN THIS PARISH,
            WITH UNCOMMON ZEAL AND ABILITY.

            MANY BELIEVED HIS REPORT, AND BECAME
            HIS JOY AND CROWN OF REJOICING;
            WHILE OTHERS CONSTRAINED HIM TO TAKE UP
            THE LAMENTATION OF THE PROPHET,

            ‘ALL THE DAY LONG HAVE I STRETCHED OUT MY HANDS
            UNTO A DISOBEDIENT AND GAINSAYING PEOPLE:
            YET SURELY MY JUDGMENT IS WITH THE LORD,
            AND MY WORK WITH MY GOD.’

                                  ---

                   “‘_He being dead, yet speaketh._’”

Footnote 646:

  The inscription, given at the end of Wesley’s “Life of Fletcher,” is
  slightly different. In an unpublished letter, to Mrs. Crosby, dated
  August 16, 1788, Mrs. Fletcher wrote: “What was written on my dear’s
  tomb was different from my directions, though done with a good design
  to mend my language. I saw it not to be as good as my own, and had it
  altered” (then follows the inscription). “Compare this with that in
  Mr. Wesley’s ‘Life,’ and give Mr. Downes a copy of the right one.
  Every one was much pleased with the change; and, indeed, I was never
  at ease till it was done; but there were so many anxious to have it
  right that they spoiled it.”

Another monument of Fletcher must be mentioned, erected in Methodism’s
“Westminster Abbey”—the sacred old chapel in City Road, London. It is
placed on the right-hand side of the communion table, immediately under
a monument of Wesley. The sculpture at the top of it is a representation
of the Ark of the Covenant. At one side are volumes, inscribed with the
words, “Checks,” and “Portrait of St. Paul.” At the other side is an
expanded scroll, with the motto, “With the meekness of wisdom.” At the
bottom is a dove, hovering over pens and a roll of paper. The
inscription on the tablet, composed by the Rev. Richard Watson,[647] is
as follows:—

                         “SACRED TO THE MEMORY OF
                  THE REV. JOHN WILLIAM DE LA FLECHERE,
                     VICAR OF MADELEY IN SHROPSHIRE;
           BORN AT NYON, IN SWITZERLAND, THE XII. OF SEPTEMBER,
            A.D. MDCCXXIX; DIED THE XIV. OF AUGUST, MDCCLXXXV.

      A MAN EMINENT FOR GENIUS, ELOQUENCE, AND THEOLOGICAL LEARNING;
   STILL MORE DISTINGUISHED FOR SANCTITY OF MANNERS, AND THE VIRTUES OF
                                PRIMITIVE
                              CHRISTIANITY.
 ADORNED WITH ‘WHATSOEVER THINGS ARE PURE, WHATSOEVER THINGS ARE LOVELY,’
 AND BRINGING FORTH ‘THE FRUITS OF THE SPIRIT,’ IN SINGULAR RICHNESS AND
                                MATURITY.
   THE MEASURE OF EVERY OTHER GRACE IN HIM WAS EXCEEDED BY HIS DEEP AND
                                UNAFFECTED
                                HUMILITY.
           OF ENLARGED VIEWS AS TO THE MERIT OF THE ATONEMENT,
   AND OF THOSE GRACIOUS RIGHTS WITH WHICH IT INVESTS ALL WHO BELIEVE,
    HE HAD ‘BOLDNESS TO ENTER INTO THE HOLIEST BY THE BLOOD OF JESUS,’
 AND IN REVERENT AND TRANSPORTING CONTEMPLATIONS,—THE HABIT OF HIS DEVOUT
                                   AND
                            HALLOWED SPIRIT,—
            THERE DWELT AS BENEATH THE WINGS OF THE CHERUBIM,
    BEHOLDING ‘THE GLORY OF GOD IN THE FACE OF JESUS CHRIST,’ AND WAS
                              ‘CHANGED INTO
                             THE SAME IMAGE;’
   TEACHING BY HIS OWN ATTAINMENTS, MORE THAN EVEN BY HIS WRITINGS, THE
                                FULNESS OF
                          EVANGELICAL PROMISES,
        AND WITH WHAT INTIMACY OF COMMUNION MAN MAY WALK WITH GOD.

         HE WAS THE FRIEND AND COADJUTOR OF THE REV. JOHN WESLEY,
      WHOSE APOSTOLIC VIEWS OF THE DOCTRINES OF GENERAL REDEMPTION,
                             JUSTIFICATION BY
        FAITH, AND CHRISTIAN PERFECTION, HE SUCCESSFULLY DEFENDED,
     LEAVING TO FUTURE AGES AN ABLE EXPOSITION OF ‘THE TRUTH WHICH IS
                               ACCORDING TO
                               GODLINESS,’
   AND ERECTING AN IMPREGNABLE RAMPART AGAINST PHARISAIC AND ANTINOMIAN
                                  ERROR,
   IN A SERIES OF WORKS, DISTINGUISHED BY THE BEAUTY OF THEIR STYLE, BY
                                 FORCE OF
                                ARGUMENT,
  AND BY A GENTLE AND CATHOLIC SPIRIT; AFFORDING AN EDIFYING EXAMPLE OF
                                ‘SPEAKING
                           THE TRUTH IN LOVE,’
                    IN A LONG AND ARDENT CONTROVERSY.

    FOR TWENTY-FIVE YEARS, THE PARISH OF MADELEY WAS THE SCENE OF HIS
                                UNEXAMPLED
                            PASTORAL LABOURS;
     AND HE WAS THERE INTERRED, AMIDST THE TEARS AND LAMENTATIONS OF
                                THOUSANDS,
 THE TESTIMONY OF THEIR HEARTS TO HIS EXALTED PIETY, AND TO HIS UNWEARIED
                                EXERTIONS
                           FOR THEIR SALVATION:
                   BUT HIS MEMORY TRIUMPHED OVER DEATH;
  AND HIS SAINTLY EXAMPLE EXERTS INCREASING INFLUENCE IN THE CHURCHES OF
                                 CHRIST,
 THROUGH THE STUDY OF HIS WRITINGS, AND THE PUBLICATION OF HIS BIOGRAPHY.

             IN TOKEN OF THEIR VENERATION FOR HIS CHARACTER,
 AND IN GRATITUDE FOR THE SERVICES RENDERED BY HIM TO THE CAUSE OF TRUTH,
      THIS MONUMENT WAS ERECTED BY THE TRUSTEES OF THIS CHAPEL, A.D.
                               MDCCCXXII.”

Footnote 647:

  Jackson’s “Centenary of Methodism,” p. 186.

No wonder that Wesley desired and requested Fletcher to be his
successor; and no wonder that, while among his numerous publications
there is only _one biography written by himself_, that conspicuous
exception is “A Short Account of the Life and Death of the Rev. John
Fletcher.“

Fletcher was distinguished for his genius; his learning; and his
biblical and theological knowledge; but let all Methodists, throughout
the world and as long as Methodism lasts, remember, in all their
church-meetings and church-appointments, that “Wesley’s Designated
Successor” was _pre-eminently_,—“A GOOD MAN, AND FULL OF THE HOLY GHOST
AND OF FAITH.”


                                THE END





       Hazell, Watson, and Viney, Printers, London and Aylesbury.


                                 INDEX.


                      NAMES OF PERSONS AND PLACES.

 Aberford, 119

 Abergavenny, 184

 Agutter, Rev. William, 144, 145

 Appian Way, 162

 Appleton, Mr., 22

 Asbury, Francis, 3

 Ashworth, Dr., 532

 Atcham, 21, 22, 29, 31

 Atlay, John, 340, 433, 545, 546

 Atmore, Charles, 542, 545

 Baratier, M., 145

 Bardsley, Samuel, 548

 Barnard, Mary, 74

 Barry, James, 424

 Bath, 102, 121, 172, 393, 420

 Batley, 494, 496, 497

 Bayley, Rev. Cornelius, 461, 462, 508, 542

 Beaumont, John, 543

 Beaumont, Dr. Joseph, 543

 Bell, George, 84, 85, 90

 Benson, Joseph, 3, 39, 157, 159, 166, 167, 175–177, 179, 182, 183, 209,
    216, 220, 254, 255, 310, 326, 348, 355–358, 367, 370, 395, 462, 532,
    533, 543, 546, 570–572

 Bentley, Rev. Mr., 119

 Berkeley, Dr., 534

 Berridge, Rev. John, 51–53, 62, 172, 283–285, 294, 298, 307, 330, 334,
    345, 371, 387

 Berwick, 111, 154

 Birches, The, 274

 Birstal, 487, 517

 Boothby, William, 442

 Bosanquet, Miss, 15, 28, 93, 126, 400, 401, 410, 448, 463, 467,
    479–497, 499, 529

 Bosanquet, Claudius, Esq., 488, 492

 Bosanquet, S., Esq., 479, 488, 490–492

 Bosanquet, S. R., Esq., 475

 Bosanquet, William, Esq., 492, 494, 556

 Bourignon, Madam, 463

 Bouverot, Rev. Mr., 531

 Bradburn, Samuel, 266–268, 494

 Bradford, 493, 494, 501

 Bradford, Joseph, 327

 Brammah, Mrs., 471

 Brecknock, 181

 Breedon, 100, 152

 Brighton, 51, 111, 120

 Brisco, Thomas, 487

 Bristol, 31, 33, 34, 102, 131, 144, 158, 172, 180, 238, 242, 255, 330,
    357, 388, 394–397, 519

 Bristol, Earl of, 401

 Brooke, Robert, 506, 507

 Brooke, Henry, 506, 507, 520, 521, 538, 552

 Broseley, 363, 405, 430

 Brown, Rev. Mr., 103, 107, 118, 331

 Buchan, Earl of, 123, 275

 Burchell, Mr., 10

 Burnet, Rev. Mr., 119

 Burslem, 548

 Cartwright, Rev. Mr., 21

 Cartwright, Molly, 442, 445, 446

 Chambers, Rev. Mr., 47, 55

 Chateau d’Oex, 426, 427

 Cheek, Rev. Moseley, 515

 Cheshunt College, 137

 Chester, 267, 415, 429

 Childs, Elizabeth, 272

 Clarke, Dr. Adam, 268, 396, 548

 Clarke, Mary, 33

 Coalbrook Dale, 63, 64, 99, 363, 392, 430, 445, 527

 Coke, Rev. Dr., 331–333, 433, 463, 466, 518, 530, 531, 542, 544

 Coles, Elisha, 155

 Conyers, Rev. Dr., 119, 417

 Costerdine, Robert, 429

 Cound, Mrs., 405, 430

 Cownley, Joseph, 90, 358

 Creighton, Rev. James, 544

 Crisp, Rev. Dr., 194, 202, 214

 Crosby, Sarah, 28, 33, 400, 467, 473, 475, 479, 480, 495, 573

 Crosse, Rev. John, 461, 493

 Cross Hall, 467, 486, 489, 494, 495, 502

 Crowther, Jonathan, 82, 523

 Dartmouth, Earl of, 353

 Daventry, 532

 Davies, Rev. Howell, 149–151

 Dawley, 429, 503

 De Bons, Mr., 489

 De Champs, Mr., 11, 488

 De Courcy, Rev. Mr., 472

 Deighton, Rev. John, 497

 De Luc, Mr., 511

 Deptford, 418

 Dewsbury, 433

 Dickenson, Rev. Peard, 554

 Dillon, Rev. Mr., 543

 Dixon, Dr. James, 396

 Dort, Synod of, 155

 Downes, John, 90

 Downs, Mr., 44

 Downs, John, 44

 Dublin, 221, 506, 508, 517–522, 530

 Dunham, 54

 Easterbrook, Rev. Joseph, 131–134, 144

 Eddowes, Mr., 288

 Edmondson, Jonathan, 152

 Edmunds, Daniel, 403

 Edmunds, Winifred, 558

 Edwards, Richard, 14, 23, 31

 Eells, William, 545, 546

 Elliott, Sir John, 388

 Elwall, Edward, 218, 219

 Erskine, Lady Anne, 117, 120, 137, 149, 171, 174

 Evans, Caleb, 334, 347–353, 357, 358

 Everton, 51, 371

 Fennel, John, 550

 Ferrars, Earl of, 50

 Fitzgerald, Lady Mary, 401, 473, 474, 501, 509, 540, 552, 558, 569

 Fletcher, Henry, 11, 14, 18, 498, 559

 Fletcher, Mrs., 502–504, 508, 512, 517–519, 521, 522, 539, 550, 553,
    556, 558–565, 568, 569, 573

 Fothergill, Dr., 390

 Fox, Mr., 370

 Furley, Miss, 44, 46

 Garforth, Thomas, 498

 Geneva, 7, 445, 454

 Genoa, 160

 Gilbert, Nathaniel, Esq., 36, 513

 Gilbert, Rev. Nathaniel, 513, 514

 Gildersome, 480

 Gilpin, Rev. Joshua, 81, 160, 445, 455, 512, 515, 520, 567, 572

 Glascott, Rev. Cradock, 120, 121, 135, 136, 154, 189

 Glazebrook, Rev. James, 122, 124

 Glenorchy, Lady, 174, 175

 Glossop, 389

 Glynne, Mrs., 22, 518

 Gold, Mrs., 476

 Good, Mr., 370

 Gorham, Mr., 371, 372, 466

 Greaves, Rev. Alexander B., 365, 366, 368, 384, 388, 389, 404, 414,
    423, 431, 436, 438, 440, 445, 460, 461

 Green, Rev. Mr., 14

 Greenwood, Charles, 372, 373, 382, 390, 392, 409, 432, 433, 460, 516,
    541

 Greenwood, James, 372

 Grimshaw, Rev. William, 97, 119, 384

 Halifax, 494

 Hampson, John, senior, 545, 546

 Hampson, John, junior, 545, 546

 Hanby, Thomas, 3, 542

 Hare, Mr., 370

 Harris, Howell, 148–151, 171, 182–184

 Harwich, 141

 Hatfield, 10

 Hatherleigh, 121

 Hatton, Miss, 90, 91, 95, 106–108, 111, 115

 Hatton, Rev. Mr., 80, 513, 564, 565

 Hatton, Samuel, 90, 91, 188, 429

 Haughton, Mr., 78

 Haworth, 119

 Hay, 182

 Helmsley, 418

 Henderson, John, 144–148

 Henderson, Richard, 145–147, 149

 Hereford, Bishop of, 58, 389

 Hern, Jonathan, 442

 Hervey, Rev. James, 345

 Hicks, Rev. Mr., 52

 Hill, Noel, Esq., 489

 Hill, Sir Richard, 40, 111, 120, 154, 189, 215, 219, 223–237, 241, 244,
    248–252, 279–282, 285–295, 299, 303, 307, 311–313, 316–320, 322,
    330, 334, 335

 Hill, Rev. Rowland, 178, 186, 237, 241, 244, 245, 248, 287, 330, 334,
    385, 387, 472

 Hill, Thomas, Esq., 11, 14, 22, 25, 29, 32, 35, 37, 41, 47, 54, 55, 58,
    64, 488, 489

 Hodson, John, 98

 Holy, Thomas, 471

 Hopper, Christopher, 3

 Horne, Rev. Melville, 88, 126, 513–516, 555

 Hotham, Sir Charles, 111

 Hotham, Lady Gertrude, 49

 Hoxton Square, 476

 Huddersfield, 119, 121

 Hull, 370

 Hurrel, Miss, 400

 Huntingdon, Countess of, 31, 32, 37, 44, 48–52, 56, 57, 59, 62, 64,
    102, 111, 116–122, 125, 131, 134, 136, 137, 143, 149, 151, 155, 157,
    164, 171, 172, 174, 175, 178–190, 192, 197, 209, 264, 299–302, 305,
    310, 345, 357, 387, 393, 501

 Ingham, Rev. Benjamin, 119

 Ireland, James, Esq., 103, 104, 109, 115, 118, 120, 121, 137, 138, 140,
    155, 156, 158, 160–162, 171, 189, 191, 192, 194, 197, 269, 299, 301,
    348, 355, 365, 366, 378, 387, 388, 392, 393, 399, 407, 409, 410,
    416–421, 424, 427, 436, 440, 444, 445, 447, 450, 460, 472, 549, 557,
    569

 Ireland, Miss, 107, 108, 138, 139

 Jackson, Daniel, 519

 Jackson, Thomas, 332

 Janes, Thomas, 242, 243

 Jobson, Dr., 505

 Johnson, Ann, 474

 Johnson, Dr., 146, 347

 Jones, Rev. John, 141–144

 Jones, Sir William, 146

 Keen, Mr., 117, 137

 Kinaston, Mr., 489

 Kingswood, 31, 64, 131, 144, 147, 152, 157, 462

 Kippax, 118–120

 Knipe, Mrs., 418

 Knowles, Dr., 420

 Kruse, Mrs., 39

 Kruse, Peter, 39

 Lausanne, 435, 439, 440, 443, 447, 489

 Lawrence, Sarah, 477, 518, 563

 Ledsham, 153

 Lee, Mr., 111

 Lee, Thomas, 545

 Leeds, 121, 465–470, 477, 481, 532, 541, 545–549

 Lefevre, Mrs., 475

 Lentzburg, 7

 Lewen, Miss, 478, 479

 Ley, Rev. William, 85

 Leytonstone, 475, 476, 479, 489, 491

 Liverpool, Lord, 401

 Llanbister, 395

 Llangollen, 518

 Lloyd, Rev. David, 395

 Lloyd, John, 171, 188

 London, 11, 36–39, 41, 47, 49, 50, 84, 111, 114, 180, 242, 447, 573

 Lowestoft, 369

 Loxdale, Miss Ann, 462–464, 468

 Ludlow, 78

 Lyons, 447

 Macon, 416, 417, 419

 Madan, Rev. Martin, 52, 79, 119, 134, 215, 246, 324, 361

 Madeley, 47, 55, 57–62, 76, 89, 93, 158, 191, 255, 258, 369, 373, 382,
    389, 405, 415, 423, 429, 430, 450, 460, 489, 492, 502, 505, 526,
    527, 530, 539, 551

 Madeley Wood, 63, 64, 74, 76, 79, 83, 118, 255, 388, 403, 429, 430,
    438, 526, 527, 547

 Maidenhead, 152

 Manchester, 461

 Marseilles, 160, 416, 448

 Mather, Alexander, 3, 99, 209

 Matthews, Mary, 74, 76, 77

 Maxfield, Rev. Thomas, 33, 39, 84, 85, 90, 91, 144, 180, 181

 Maxwell, Lady, 220

 Medhurst, Mrs., 119, 120

 Minethorpe, William, 99

 Montpelier, 155, 410, 414, 416, 447, 461

 Moore, Henry, 412, 519, 542, 543

 More, Miss Hannah, 146

 Morris, James, 347

 Murlin, John, 415, 477, 479

 Nelson, John, 3, 517

 Newcastle-on-Tyne, 356

 Newton, Rev. John, 283

 North, Lord, 437, 438

 Norwich, 369

 Nowell, Rev. Dr., 154, 206, 232

 Nyon, 4, 7, 9, 156, 162, 415, 421, 424–427, 431, 434–436, 439, 443–446,
    453, 455, 464, 488, 498

 Oathall, 111, 112, 117

 Olivers, Thomas, 3, 190, 208, 209, 232, 290, 335, 337, 339

 Onions, Michael, 363, 385, 392, 432, 445, 446

 Orton, Miss, 117, 171

 Otley, 541

 Owen, Rev. Mr., 189

 Owen, John, 445, 446

 Palmer, Robert, 388

 Pawson, John, 3, 153, 242

 Peckwell, Rev. Dr., 385, 387

 Perronet, Charles, 252, 364, 365, 390

 Perronet, Miss Damaris, 385, 389, 390, 407, 473

 Perronet, Edward, 285

 Perronet, Henry, 97

 Perronet, Rev. Vincent, 364, 365, 385, 390, 407, 419, 430, 432, 447,
    499, 500, 554, 556

 Perronet, William, 389, 399, 415, 419, 425–428, 431–435, 439, 440, 444,
    447, 499, 500

 Pescod, Joseph, 466

 Pewsey, 119

 Pilmoor, Joseph, 3, 543, 545, 546

 Pine, William, 191, 192, 349

 Pool, John, 545

 Power, Mr., 420

 Powley, Rev. Mr., 119

 Powys, Thomas, Esq., 111, 115, 189, 215

 Preston, Mr., 370

 Price, Dr., 219, 334, 350–353, 357, 358, 387

 Price, Owen, 38

 Priestley, Dr., 531–537

 Pritchard, John, 545

 Prothero, Rev. Mr., 65

 Ramsden, Mr., 370

 Rankin, Thomas, 3, 447, 464

 Reader, Thomas, 320

 Reading, 407

 Richardson, Rev. Mr., 119

 Ritchie, Miss, 400, 541

 Roberts, John, 274

 Rock Church, 76, 79

 Rogers, Hester Ann, 467–471, 473, 485

 Rogers, James, 397, 467

 Romaine, Rev. William, 111, 122, 154, 174, 345, 472

 Rome, 410

 Roquet, Rev. James, 242, 243, 355, 366

 Rowlands, Rev. Daniel, 148, 149, 151, 171, 172

 Rutherford, Thomas, 3, 519

 Ryan, Sarah, 28, 33, 35, 43, 46, 475–477, 480

 Ryland, Rev. Mr., 119

 Scott, Captain, 116–118, 120

 Sellon, Rev. Walter, 101, 151, 187, 206–208, 219, 232, 252, 292

 Serle, Ambrose, 294

 Shadford, George, 3

 Sheffield, 467, 471

 Sherlock, Bishop, 32, 534

 Shirley, Lady Frances, 49

 Shirley, Rev. Walter, 50, 149–151, 171, 172, 174, 177, 179, 183, 185,
    188–197, 201–204, 207, 209–215, 220–223, 229, 238, 239, 334, 345,
    378, 385, 387

 Shoreham, 385, 407

 Shrewsbury, 22, 29, 31, 34, 97, 120, 136, 191, 288, 430, 518

 Simeon, Rev. Charles, 551, 552

 Simpson, Mr., 370

 Simpson, Rev. David, 168, 543

 Smisby, 152

 Smith, William, 467, 497

 Smyth, Mrs., 518, 519, 539

 Smyth, William, 518, 520, 522

 South Mimms, 10

 Southey, Robert, 329

 St. Albans, 14

 St. Neots, 371, 372, 466

 Stevenson, G. J., 209, 549

 Stillingfleet, Rev. Edward, 133, 394

 Stoke Newington, 372, 373, 382, 391, 403, 408, 409, 484, 552

 Story, George, 3

 Swedenborg, Baron, 531

 Taunton, 320, 357

 Tavan, Mr., 489

 Taylor, Isaac, 329

 Taylor, Richard, 479–482, 498

 Taylor, Thomas, 3, 395, 542

 Terry, Mr., 370

 Thompson, William, 3

 Thornton, Mrs., 402, 433, 516, 552

 Thornton, John, Esq., 283, 284, 378, 388, 418

 Toplady, Rev. Augustus, 154, 203, 206, 208, 232, 284, 294, 312, 324,
    334–347, 451

 Townsend, Rev. Joseph, 119, 132

 Tranter, William, 503

 Trevecca College, 116, 117, 121, 131, 134–137, 141, 144, 145, 148–151,
    157, 158, 164, 171, 175–186, 209, 559

 Tripp, Ann, 28, 477, 497

 Tunbridge, 31, 32

 Turner, Dr., 387

 Valton, John, 496, 498, 516

 Vaughan, Mr., 22, 29, 42, 268, 269, 353, 358

 Venn, Rev. Henry, 52, 111, 119, 122, 133, 171, 172, 174, 371, 393, 394,
    529, 569

 Voltaire, 416, 452, 457

 Walsh, Father, 215

 Walsh, Thomas, 28, 30, 37, 38

 Wandsworth, 36

 Wase, William, 384, 388, 405, 429, 438, 442, 444

 Washington, General George, 347

 Watson, Richard, 574

 Wellington, 99

 Wem, 90, 95, 107, 177

 Wenlock, 79

 Wesley, Rev. Charles, 31, 32, 35–38, 41, 42, 44, 45, 47, 48, 50, 51,
    55, 57, 62–64, 66, 76, 78–80, 84, 89–91, 96, 97, 129, 132, 141, 142,
    152, 172, 180, 222, 285, 310, 327, 328, 346, 359–362, 367, 402, 433,
    484, 511, 544, 556, 557, 565

 Wesley, Rev. John, 1–3, 9, 16, 20, 23, 25, 26, 28, 29, 32, 34, 36, 50,
    57, 59, 67, 82, 84, 90, 91, 96, 122, 129, 132–134, 136, 141, 148,
    150–154, 157, 169, 173–177, 180–209, 220, 222, 224, 225, 231, 232,
    234–238, 241–243, 256, 263–266, 270, 280–282, 285–289, 298, 304,
    307, 310, 321, 322, 324–329, 335, 336, 339–349, 351–358, 369, 370,
    372, 373, 380, 384, 392, 394, 395, 402, 408, 410, 411, 430, 433,
    451, 460, 463, 465, 477, 484, 485, 497, 502, 508, 532, 533, 541–549,
    551, 558, 566, 570, 572, 575

 West Bromwich, 366

 Whatcoat, Richard, 3

 Whitefield, Rev. George, 31, 67, 114–116, 119, 121, 134–136, 148, 173,
    174, 180, 186, 187, 204, 265, 345

 Whitehead, Dr. John, 264, 265

 Wilberforce, William, Esq., 146

 Wilcocks, Samuel, 274

 Wilkes, John, 270–273

 Wilkes, Sarah, 272

 Williams, Rev. Peter, 149, 150, 171, 172

 Williams, Rev. William, 148-150, 171, 172

 Wood, Enoch, 548

 Wroxeter, 29

 Yates, Mr., 523

 Yelling, 371

 York, 120, 370

 York, Thomas, 403, 405, 424, 434, 438, 441

------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Transcriber’s Note

The footnotes references in the text were erratic, frequently
misaligning with the notes on each page, or missing altogether. The
latter’s placement in the text is done here on a best-guess basis.

Footnotes have been re-sequenced numerically to be unique across the
entire text.

The third full paragraph on p. 246 has a confusion of quotation near its
end. It is unclear, by the context, where the last nested quotation
should end, and so the confusion remains.

A similar confusion appears at the top of p. 296. A closing single quote
appears at “we are for ever justified by _Christ alone_,[’]”. Either it
is itself spurious, or the opening of that nested quotation is missing.

Near the bottom of p. 467, an extra space precedes the words ‘here
given’ at the beginning of a line. The lengthy quotation that follows is
assumed to be the description referenced, and the extra space has been
removed.

In the Index, the entries for Bouverot and Downes have been placed in
their proper alphabetic order.

Errors deemed most likely to be the printer’s have been corrected, and
are noted here. The references are to the page and line in the original.

  xiv.36   “_Driving_ Methodism and _Still_ Mysticism[”]  Added.
  19.34    I endeavoured to conc[ ea/eal]                 Replaced.
  40.5     a distinguished and ancient family[.]          Added.
  41.1     [“]After my conversation                       Added.
  41.39    [‘/“]I am here                                 Replaced.
  42.9     and ask, ‘Where are our hearts now?[’]”        Inserted.
  67.28    [“]He is our Creator                           Added.
  90.27    the ancient town of We[nn/m]                   Replaced.
  98.40    [“]‘Our life is a dream!                       Added.
  105.22   Opposition gradually died[.]                   Added.
  149.2    Howell Davies, rector of Prend[er]gast         Inserted.
  151.11   [“]‘Captain of Thine enlisted host,            Removed.
  155.9    [“]The Lord give you patience                  Added.
  158.35   so [pu]blicly pledged                          Restored.
  179.38   under the name of ‘Perfection.[’]              Added.
  193.29   to the Hon[.] and Rev. Author                  Added.
  201.22   [“]One difficulty remains                      Added.
  224.6    and second[l]y                                 Inserted.
  225.46   and mother Church[’/”]                         Replaced.
  245.37   so plentifully heaped upon my head?[’]         Added.
  248.27   This d[r]eadful _sanbenito_                    Inserted.
  254.2    [“]APPEAL TO MATTER OF FACT                    Added.
  287.15   quotations from Mr. Wesley’s ‘Minutes,[”/’]    Replaced.
  307.33   their [inamissable] title                      _sic_
  320.23   and a Death Purgatory,[”]                      Added.
  325.8    _good wo[r]ks_                                 Inserted.
  340.24   [“]‘Come, buy my fine powders; come buy dem of Removed.
             me;
  354.20   two shillings a week.[’]”                      Inserted.
  377.19   His wife,[’] the church of the first-born,     Removed.
  387.39   [“]They met and parted                         Added.”
  417.13   is the decen[t] covering                       Restored.
  423.38   [‘/“]We are all called                         Replaced.
  464.3    “MADELEY, _Ju[u/n]e 24, 1781_.                 Inverted.
  464.33   and affectionate Son in the Gospel[./,]        Replaced.
  469.10   and is [ ]here given almost without            Removed.
             abridgment.
  476.20   the tranquillity of my spirit.[”]              Added.
  478.43   concerning Sister Bosanquet having £2,000.[”]  Added.
  482.7    sold for half it[s] value                      Added.
  484.35   “A few weeks ag[s/o], I once more read         Replaced.
  496.18   O my God! Pray for me, O my friends![’]        Added.
  522.25   drink the cup of humility at your feet[.]      Added.
  525.23   horses use[s/d] by smugglers                   Replaced.
  543.8    I shall not be moved[”]                        Added.
  545.37   To the [ /l]atter, he exclaimed                Restored.
  546.13   Joseph Pillmoor, John Atlay, and William       Inserted.
             Ee[l]ls
  577.29   B[a/u]rnet, Rev. Mr., 119                      Replaced.