“London,September 2, 1743.“My wife has been in trying circumstances, partly through the unskilfulness of a chaise-driver—I mean myself. Being advised to take her out into the air, I drove her, as well as myself, through inadvertence, into a ditch. The ditch might be about fourteen feet deep. All, who saw us, cried out, ‘They are killed!’ but, through infinite mercy, we received no great hurt. The place was very narrow near the bottom, and yet the horse went down, as though lowered by a pulley. A bystander ran, and caught hold of its head, to prevent its going forwards. I got upon its back, and was drawn out; whilst my wife, still hanging between the chaise and the bank, was pulled up by two or three kind assistants. The chaise and horse being taken up, and our bruises being washed with vinegar in a neighbouring house, we went on our intended way, and came home rejoicing in God our Saviour.“Not expecting my wife’s delivery for some time, I intend making a short excursion, and then you may expect further news from yours,etc.,“George Whitefield.”Northampton, among other places, was visited by Whitefield, in the “short excursion” just mentioned. His friend Hervey had recently become curate at Weston-Favel; and, perhaps, it was this circumstance which brought Whitefield into this particular locality. Be that as it may, the visit became a memorable one, from the angry feelings it excited among some of the leading Dissenters of the day.Others, besides clergymen and Presbyterian ministers, were unpleasantly perplexed by Whitefield and the Methodists.Dr.Doddridge, though one of the most liberal-minded of the Dissenters, found it difficult to look with favourupon the proceedings ofsomeof the Methodist evangelists. Hence the following extract from a letter, addressed to theRev.Mr.Witton, son-in-law of the celebrated Philip Henry:—“Northampton,June 8, 1743.“I am much concerned at the anxiety and disturbance whichMr.Wesley’s coming into your neighbourhood has occasioned. You are pleased to ask my advice, and therefore I give it.“I think the gentlest methods will be the most effectual. Opposition will but give strength to the faction, if it be attended with violence and heat. ShouldMr.Wesley come hither, as perhaps he may, and excite such a flame among the weaker part of my hearers, I would appoint some stated season for meeting once a week, with a few steady and experienced brethren of the church, that an hour or two might be spent in prayer and consultation, as new incidents might arise within the sphere of our personal observation. I would endeavour to renew my zeal in preaching the great truths of the gospel, and in visiting and exhorting my hearers. I would, with great meekness and compassion, and yet with great solemnity, admonish the persons attacked with the contagion, and lay open before them the absurd nature and tendency of the views they had rashly entertained;and I would, as God enabled me, pray earnestly forthem.”71Among others, who wrote to Doddridge, respecting Whitefield, was theRev.Robert Blair,D.D., author of the well-known poem, “The Grave.” In a letter, dated July 28, 1743, he says:—“I wish you would give me your opinion ofMr.Whitefield, a man who has made abundance of noise in the world.I never in my life knew any person so much idolized by some, and railed at byothers.”72Soon after this, during a visit to London, Doddridge seems to have attended Whitefield’s Tabernacle, and to have taken part in one or more of its services. Perhaps the influence of Colonel Gardiner, one of his correspondents, had induced him to do this. Whatever the inducement, however, the act itself created alarm among the London Dissenters. Hence the following, addressed to Doddridge, fromDr.Isaac Watts:—“Stoke Newington,September 20, 1743.“I am sorry that, since your departure, I have had many questions asked me about your preaching or praying at the Tabernacle, and of sinking the character of a minister, and especially of a tutor, among the Dissenters, so low thereby. I find many of your friends entertain thisidea; but I can give no answer, not knowing how much you have been engaged there. I pray God to guard us from everytemptation.”73This is mightily amusing.Dr.Doddridge, the theological tutor of the Dissenters’ College, daring to preach or pray in Whitefield’s Tabernacle! What a sin against all ecclesiastical and ministerial propriety! The poor Doctor, however, went further than even this. He allowed Whitefield to preach in his own pulpit at Northampton!This seemed to perfect the enormity. Among others who took the Northampton professor to task for his eccentric conduct, was theRev.John Barker, an influentialminister,74in London, who wrote as follows:—“November 4, 1743.“It is an honour to our interest that you stand so well with the sober and moderate clergy. For this reason, I was troubled to hear of the late intercourse between you andMr.Whitefield, the consequence of which, with respect to the Church, it is easy to foresee. I was willing to think well of the Methodists; but, after a candid attention to them, their proceedings appear not to me to be wise and good. Their devotion is unseasonable, irregular, and injudicious. Their sermons are low and loose. Their spirit appears to me turbulent, unruly, and censorious. They practise upon weak people and poor people. They call them to pray and sing when they should be in their business or their beds. They disturb the peace and order of families, and give great uneasiness in them. What they pretend to above their neighbours appears to be mere enthusiasm. Their people are slothful, or mopish, or dejected, or pragmatical, rather than sober, discreet, judicious, exemplary, regular Christians; and I have no expectation but that Methodism, like any other enthusiasm, will promote infidelity, and turn out to the hurt and damage of religion, and the souls of men. Though I judge not their hearts, views, and motives, but admit those are secret things which belong to God, yet I thought it needful, very lately,to warn my hearers of these people’s errors, and advise them to avoidthem.”75Doddridge’s chief castigator, however, was Nathaniel Neal,Esq., son of theRev.Daniel Neal, the historian of the Puritans. Nathaniel was an eminent attorney, secretary to the Million Bank,and author of “A Free and Serious Remonstrance to Protestant Dissenting Ministers, on occasion of the Decay ofReligion.”76He wrote not fewer than three long letters to Doddridge, filling nine printed octavo pages, and dated respectively, Million Bank, October 11, October 15, and December 10, 1743. He addresses Doddridge with great deference and respect; but, evidently, in great alarm, lest Doddridge should irretrievably injure his position and character, as the chief of the Dissenters’ tutors, by countenancing the proceedings of the eccentric Methodist.In the first of his letters, he writes:—“It was with the utmost concern that I received the information ofMr.Whitefield’s having preached last week in your pulpit. I attended the meeting of the trustees ofMr.Coward’s benefaction this day, when the matter was canvassed, and I now find myself obliged to apprize you of the very great uneasiness which your conduct herein has occasioned them.”Mr.Neal proceeds to tell the Doctor that his “regard to the Methodists” was injuring him in the opinion of his friends, and was giving an advantage against him to his “secret and avowed enemies.” He adds:—“In the case of such a public character, and so extensive a province for the service of religion as yours, it seems to me a point well worth considering, whether it is a right thing to risk such a prospect as Providence has opened before you, of eminent and distinguished usefulness, for the sake of any good you are likely to do amongst these people. Your countenancing the Methodists has been the subject of conversation much oftener than I could have wished. The trustees are particularly in pain for it, with regard to your academy; as they know it is an objection made to it,by some persons seriously, and by otherscraftily.”77In his third letter,Mr.Neal expresses a holy dread lest Doddridge should be “engaged amongst men of weak heads, and narrow, gloomy sentiments, who may and ought to be pitied and prayed for, but whom no rules of piety or prudencewill oblige us to make our confidants and friends.” He continues:—“There are letters shewn about town, from several ministers in the west, which make heavy complaints of the disorders occasioned by Whitefield and Wesley in those parts. One of them, speaking ofMr.Whitefield, calls him ‘honest, crazy, confidentWhitefield.’ These letters, likewise, mention that some ministers there, who were your pupils, have given them countenance; and you can hardly conceive the disrespect this has occasioned several ministers and other persons in townto speak of youwith.”78Poor Doddridge, with the best intentions, had stirred up a nest of ecclesiastical hornets. He had to make the best of the affair; and part of his answer toMr.Neal was as follows:—“December 12, 1743.“I am truly sorry that the manner in which I spoke ofMr.Whitefield, in my last, should have given you uneasiness. What I said proceeded from a principle which I am sure you will not despise: I mean a certain frankness of heart, which would not allow me to seem to think more meanly of a man to whom I had once professed some friendship than I really did.“I must, indeed, look upon it as an unhappy circumstance that he came to Northampton just when he did, as I perceive that, in concurrence with other circumstances, it has filled town and country with astonishment and indignation.“I had great expectations from the Methodists and Moravians; and I am grieved that so many things have occurred among them which have been quite unjustifiable. I suppose they have also produced the same sentiments in the Archbishop of Canterbury, who, to my certain knowledge, received Count Zinzendorf with open arms, and wrote of his being chosen the Moravian Bishop, as what was done ‘plaudente toto cœlesti choro.’ I shall always be ready to weigh whatever can be said againstMr.Whitefield; and, though I must have actual demonstration before I can admit him to be a dishonest man, and though I shall never be able to think all he has written, and all I have heard from him to be nonsense; yet, I am not so zealously attached to him as to be disposed to celebrate him as one of the greatest men of the age, or to think that he is the pillar which bears up the whole interest of religion among us.“I had heard before of the offence which had been taken at two of my pupils in the west, for the respect they shewed toMr.Whitefield: and yet they are both persons of eminent piety. He whose name is chiefly in question, I meanMr.Darracott, is one of the most devout and extraordinary men I ever sent out, and a person who has, within these few years, been highly useful to numbers of his hearers.Mr.Fawcett labours atTaunton; and his zeal, so far as I can judge, is inspired both with love and prudence. Yet, I hear those men are reproached because they have treatedMr.Whitefield respectfully; and that one of them, after having had a correspondence with him for many years, admitted him into his pulpit.“I own, I am very thoughtful where these things will end. In the meantime, I am as silent as I can be. I commit the matter to God in prayer. I am sure I see no danger that any of my pupils will prove Methodists.I wish many of them may not run into the contraryextreme.”79These are long, almost tedious, extracts; but they are of great importance as plainly shewing that, at the beginning of his career, the Independents looked upon Whitefield with as much suspicion as many of the clergy of the Church of England and many of the Presbyterian ministers of Scotland did. It was a heinous sin against all the proprieties of their Church, that Doddridge and two of his ordained pupils had countenanced the preaching of this young, popular, powerful, and successful evangelist.We again return to Whitefield’s wanderings. In theScots’ Magazine, for 1743, under the heading of “Marriages and Births,” the following announcement was made: “October, 1743. At his house in Hoxton, the wife ofMr.George Whitefield, of a son.” This event seems to have occurred during Whitefield’s “short excursion” to Northampton and its neighbourhood. Hence, under date of October5th, he writes: “The last evening of my short excursion, I preached from a balcony, to many thousands, who stood in the street as comfortable as at noonday. Upon retiring to my lodgings, news was brought me, that God had given me a son. This hastened me up to London, where I now am, and from whence, after I have baptized my little one, I purpose to set out again on my Master’s public business.” Ten days after writing this, the untiring Whitefield was at Avon, in Wiltshire, and did not return to his wife and infant son until seven weeks afterwards. Perhaps, this was not an example of either connubial or paternal behaviour to be commended; but let it pass. The following extracts from his letters will furnish an idea of his labours, in the west of England, during the nexttwomonths:—“Collumpton,October 25, 1743.“I wrote to you on the15thinstant at Avon. In the morning, I walked to Tytherton, and preached. After sermon, I baptized four boys, each about three months old.The ordinance was so solemn and awful, thatMrs.Gotley80(who is a Quaker) had a mind immediately to partake of it. When I go to Wiltshire, I believe I shall baptize her and her children, with some adult persons who have tasted of redeeming love. About one o’clock I preached at Clack, in the street. I then rode to Brinkworth and preached there, and, afterwards, administered the holy sacrament to about two hundred and fifty communicants. Some strangers, from Bath, went home filled with our Redeemer’s presence. I have also preached at Chippenham. We had a wonderful time in Wiltshire.“I hope I managed all things right about the affair of the Hampton rioters. They have compelled us to appeal unto Cæsar. Evidences shall be examined in the country, in time enough to send the examinations to town.“On Saturday last (October22nd), when I came to Wellington, theRev.Mr.Darracott81persuaded me to stay there, because the country people had come from all quarters several times to hear me, and had been disappointed. I consented, and preached in his meeting-house, in the evening, to a large auditory.TheRev.Mr.Fawcett,82formerly pupil toDr.Doddridge, came there, and stayed all night. The blessed Jesus gave us much freedom in conversation. I hope both will be instruments, under God, in promoting a good work in these parts.“Sunday morning, I preached again in the meeting-house; and, in the evening, to seven thousand in thefield.83“On Monday, at ten in the morning, and at two in the afternoon, I preached, at Collumpton, with much freedom and power; was kindly received, met some reputable Dissenters, and am now setting out for Exeter.”Whitefield seems to have made Exeter his head-quarters for nearly a fortnight. Hence the following letters:—“Exeter,October 28, 1743.“I have a strong conviction that our Lord intends doing something in the west. Since my arrival here, letters of invitation have come from many parts. The common people begin to feel. I preached this afternoon on Southernay Green. Even some of the polite were much affected. I believe I shall think it my duty to stay in these parts for some time.”“Exeter,November 6, 1743.“On Monday last” (October31st), “I went to Axminster, and preached to about two thousand without; and afterwards exhorted within the house where I lay. The next day, I preached to a greater number of people; and, at night, gave an exhortation, and met the Society. Our Lord vouchsafed us a gracious blessing.“On Wednesday, I went to Ottery; but, just as I named my text, the bells rang. Upon this, I adjourned to a field, whither the people ran in droves. As I stepped into the inn, before I went to the field, a clergyman came, who asked me by what authority I preached, and said it was a riot, and that the meeting was illegal. I answered him, as I thought pertinently, and afterwards went and shewed him my authority, by preaching on these words, ‘Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.’ In the evening, I returned to Exeter, where some hundreds were waiting to hear me expound. The Lord makes this place very comfortable to me. Prejudices fall off daily, and people begin not only to discern, but to feel, the doctrines of the gospel.“Postscript.—Ten at night. It would have pleased you to be here this evening. I question whether near a third part of Exeter were not attending on the word preached. All was solemn and awful, and the Lord gave me much assistance from His Holy Spirit. Help me to praise Him.”From Exeter, Whitefield proceeded to Bideford, where he wrote as follows:—“Bideford,November 11, 1743.“TheRev.Mr.Thompson, Rector ofSt.Gennys, Cornwall, is here. God willing, I will go with him to-morrow. There is also another clergyman about eighty years of age,but not above one year old in the school ofChrist.84He lately preached three times and rode forty miles the same day. The Dissenting minister and his wife were very hearty; and, perhaps, here is one of the most settled female Christian Societies in the kingdom. I cannot well describe with what power the word was attended. Yesterday, in the afternoon and evening, it was just like as at Edinburgh. The old clergyman was much broken. A young Oxonian, who came with him, and many others, were most deeply affected. I suppose, there were upwards of two thousand, in the evening, in the meeting-house.DearMr.Hervey,85one of our first Methodists at Oxford, and who was lately a curate here, had laid the blessed foundation.“So far from thinking of nestling at London, I am more and more convinced that I should go from place to place; and I therefore question if I shall see London for some time.“Postscript.—Seven at night. To-day has been as yesterday, and much more abundant. I am here, as in Scotland and New England. Here is work enough for three months. The weather is very favourable; range, therefore, I must and will.”On Saturday, November 12, Whitefield accompaniedMr.Thompson to his rectory atSt.Gennys, Cornwall, where he seems to have remained a fortnight. Hence the following:—“St.Gennys,November 25, 1743.“I am glad that the Lord inclined my heart to come hither. He has been with us of a truth. How did His stately steps appear in the sanctuary last Lord’s-day! Many, many prayers were put up, by the worthy rector and others, for an outpouring of God’s blessed Spirit. They were answered. Arrows of conviction fled so thick and so fast, and such a universal weeping prevailed from one end of the congregation to the other, that goodMr.Thompson could not help going from seat to seat, to encourage and comfort the wounded souls. The Oxonian’s father was almost struck dumb; and the young Oxonian’s crest was so lowered, that I believe he will never venture to preach an unknown Christ, or to deal in the false commerce of unfelt truths.“I could enlarge, but I must away to Bideford, just to give Satan another stroke, and bid my Christian friends farewell; and then return the way I came, namely, through Exeter, Wellington, and Bristol, to the great metropolis.”Whitefield arrived in London at the beginning of December, and wrote the following hitherto unpublished letter to “Mr.Howell Harris, at Trevecca, near the Hay, South Wales, Breconshire.”“London,December 6, 1743.“My very dear Brother,—I thank you for your kind letters and kind present. Our Saviour will plentifully reward you for all favours conferred on me and mine.“I rejoice exceedingly that the word runs and is glorified in Wales. I hope to rejoice together with you at the next Association. Great things have been doing in the west. I believeMr.Thompson, of Cornwall, will come with me into Wales. I have thoughts of removing my little family to Abergavenny in a short time; and to leave that house for you and yours to live in, till I come from abroad again, if you will be pleased to accept of it.“I can easily forgive our dear brotherBeaumont;86but, I think, he and his wife have dealt very unsimply in respect to their marriage. I pray our Lord Jesus Christ to bless them exceedingly, and to prevent all ill consequences that may arise, to the people of God, from such a procedure.“I intend being here but a few days; and I have many things to say to you when we see each other face to face. Oh, my brother, my dear, very dear brother Harris, Jesus is better and better to me every day. I have had close attacks, but strong consolations. I would write much, would time and business permit; but I must bid you adieu. My tender, tender love to all. My dear wife andMr.Grace send their most cordial respects. The Lord Jesus be with your dear soul, and give you to pray for, my dear, dear, dear brother,“Yours most affectionately in Christ Jesus,“George Whitefield.”“P.S.—Mr.Mason, the bookseller, is dead; alsoMr.Dubert’s wife. About seven of our friends have lately died in the Lord. Courage, my dear man,—courage; we shall go ere long. Yet a little while, and He that cometh will come, and will not tarry.”In less than a fortnight, Whitefield was again on the wing. On Friday, December 16, he rode to a place “five miles beyond Reading.” The next day, he got to Clack. “It rained and snowed much for about seven miles,” says he, “and the way was dangerous; but the blessed Jesus kept us in safety.” On Sunday morning, he preached,and administered the sacrament to the Wiltshire Societies, atTytherton;87and, in the evening, he preached at Brinkworth. He writes: “They were good times. I have a cold, but our Lord warms my heart. To-morrow (December 19) I must away to Gloucester. Oh, follow, follow with your prayers.”Whitefield was now on his way to a new sphere of labour. All readers of Methodist history are well acquainted with the disgraceful and terrible riots which took place at Walsal, Wednesbury, Darlaston, and West Bromwich, in 1743. In the former part of the year, both the Wesleys had preached here, at the peril of their lives. As recently as October 20, John Wesley had been all but murdered by the godless ruffians of the neighbourhood;and now, at the end of December, Whitefieldcame.88The following extract is takenfrom a pamphlet, entitled, “Some Papers, giving an Account of the Rise and Progress of Methodism at Wednesbury, in Staffordshire, and in other Parishes adjacent; as likewise of the late Riot in those parts.” Printed by J. Roberts, London. 1744. (8vo. 30pp.)“Mr.Whitefield was at Birmingham, where there is a Society, about Christmas last; and you may suppose great numbers would, out of curiosity, flock to hear a man who had been so much talked of. He was also invited to Wednesbury, where he preached in the streets for several days. He was invited to Birmingham by a Dissenter. His stay was not above a week or ten days, and, towards the last, his auditors were not so numerous, and the behaviour of some of them not over civil. I do not find the number of the Methodist converts to be near so numerous as was at first apprehended; and those few of them, who were of the communion of the Church of England, are, in general, very regular in their behaviour, and in their attendance at church. The Dissenters constitute the greater number, and are their greatest admirers, particularly ofMr.Whitefield. About Wednesbury, some of their converts have been raised into strange and unaccountable ecstasies; but I cannot find there have been any of the like instances at Birmingham.”Such was the testimony of an unfriendly writer. Whitefield’s own account is as follows:—“December 31, 1743.“What do you think? Since my last, I have stolen a whole day to dispatch some private business; however, in the evening, I expounded, at Birmingham, to a great room full of people, who would rush into my lodgings, whether I would or not.“On Sunday morning (Christmas Day), at eight, I preached, in thestreet, to about a thousand, with much freedom. I then went to church and received the sacrament, and afterwards preached to several thousands in the street.As no minister would preach in a house atWednesbury,89where a weekly lecture used to be kept up, I was earnestly entreated to go; and, after my afternoon’s preaching at Birmingham, I went and preached there, at six in the evening, to many hundreds in the street. The word came with power, and only one or two made a noise. We afterwards had a precious meeting in private.“On Monday morning, about eight, I preached to a large company in a field. By eleven, I returned to Birmingham, and preached to many thousands, on a common near the town. The soldiers were exercising; but the officers, hearing that I was come to preach, dismissed them, and promised that no disturbance should be made. All was quiet, and a blessed time we had. In the afternoon, at three, I preached again to about the same company, with the same success. Then I rode to Wednesbury, and preached there, and afterwards exhorted. About one, I went to bed exceeding happy.“In the morning, I broke up some fallow-ground at a place called Mare Green, about two miles from Wednesbury. Much mobbing had been there againstMr.Wesley’s friends. A few began to insult me. Several clods were thrown, one of which fell on my head, and another struck my fingers, while I was in prayer. A sweet gospel spirit was given to me. I preached again at Birmingham, to larger auditories than before, about eleven in the morning and three in the afternoon. In the evening, I expounded twice in a large room; once to the rich, and once to the poor;and went to rest happier than the nightbefore.90“In the morning (Wednesday,Dec.28), I took my leave of the Birmingham people, who wept much, and shewed great concern at my departure. I then went to Kidderminster, where I was kindly received byMr.Williams, with whom I have corresponded for near two years. Many friends were at his house. I was greatly refreshed to find what a sweet savour of good remained to this day, fromMr.Baxter’s doctrine, works, and discipline. I preached, about three in the afternoon, to a large auditory, near the church. Some unkind men, though they promised not to do so, rang the bells; but our Saviour enabled me to preach with power. In the evening and next morning, I preached in the meeting-house.“I then (Thursday) went withMr.Williams to Bromsgrove, and was kindly received by oneMr.K——y, a good man, and several others, among whom were two or three Baptist ministers, and one Independent.In the afternoon, I preached in a field. Some rude people kicked a football, and sounded a horn; but the Lord enabled me to preach with boldness. About six, I preached in the Baptist meeting-house; left Kidderminster at eight, and reached Worcester at ten.Mr.Williams and another friend accompanied us.“The next day, I reached Gloucester, very thankful, and rejoicing greatly in Christ for giving me such a delightful and happy Christmas.”This is a notable letter. Whitefield was now on the ground where Wesley and his friends had been nearly murdered; but all the inconvenience suffered by Whitefield was a little noise at Wednesbury, the throwing of a few clods at Mare Green, the ringing of the church bells at Kidderminster, and a game at football and the sounding of a horn at Bromsgrove. Compared with Wesley, the lines fell to Whitefield in pleasant places.The observant reader will also notice Whitefield’s enormous labours. In four days, in mid-winter, he held nineteen services, twelve of his sermons being preached in the open air, and three in Dissenting chapels. The opportunity of thus serving his great Master was Whitefield’s idea of spending “a delightful and happy Christmas!” No wonder that his Master blessed him, and filled him so full of joy at midnight hours.But little more remains to be said respecting Whitefield’s career in 1743. In common with his friend Wesley, he was again and again fiercely assailed by the public press. He was pilloried in the famous Dunciad of Alexander Pope, as follows:—“So swells each windpipe; ass intones to ass,Harmonic twang! of leather, horn, and brass;Such as from lab’ring lungs th’ Enthusiast blows,High Sound, attemper’d to the vocal nose!Or such as bellow from the deep Divine;There, Webster! peal’d thy voice, and, Whitefield! thine.”Pope was a poet; another assailant, the author of “The Progress of Methodism in Bristol, or, the Methodists Unmasked, 1743” (18mo. 72pp.), was apoetaster, and unworthy of being further noticed; but, possibly, his ribald verses, in which he malignantly attacked Whitefield, as well as Wesley, were quite as goading as Pope’s more polished lines.Whitefield began the year 1744 in his native city, Gloucester. He then went to Watford in Wales, and, as moderator of the Calvinistic Methodists, presided, on January3rd, at one of their associations, or conferences. Among the subjects considered at this meeting, the Hampton riot seems to have been the principal. Whitefield writes:—“After mature deliberation, we determined to prosecute the affair to the utmost, and to set apart January 24 (the first day of the term) for a day of fasting and prayer, and to make collections for that purpose. The cause is the Lord’s, and much depends on our getting the victory. I believe we shall.”The work in Wales was in great prosperity. In a letter, written soon after the assembling of this conference, Howell Harris says:—“The labours of all our associates are more or less blessed. The Lord countenances the lay-preachers much; but He is more abundantly with the ordained ministers. The believers are generally strong and full of spiritual warmth and life. They do, indeed, adorn the gospel. The congregations are exceedingly large wherever we preach. Some of the greatest opposers are not only silenced, but constrained to own that the Lord is among us of a truth. In many places, the people meet at five o’clock in the morning to adore and worship the Lord together; and, in some places, meetings are resumed in the evenings,and kept up all night in prayer andpraise.”91It is a strange fact, that, notwithstanding the falsely reputed wealth of Whitefield’s wife, and his own enormous popularity, his income was insufficient for the maintenance of his family in London. Hence, during his visit to Wales,he made arrangements for the removal of his wife and child toAbergavenny;92and, on his return to London, wrote, as follows, to a friend at Gloucester:—“London,January 18, 1744.“This afternoon, I received your kind letter; and I thank you a thousand times for your great generosity in lending me some furniture, having little of my own. I know who will repay you. Next week, God willing, my dear wife and little one will come to Gloucester, for I find it beyond my circumstances to maintain them here. I leave London this day sennight. My brother will receive a letter about my wife’s coming. She and the little one are brave and well. But why talk I of wife and littleone? Let all be absorbed in the thoughts of the love, sufferings, free and full salvation, of the infinitely great and glorious Emmanuel.”Three weeks after this, Whitefield’s “little one” was dead. The letter containing an account of his bereavement is so characteristic, and so unfolds Whitefield’s weaknesses as well as virtues, that it must be inserted without abridgment.“Gloucester,February 9, 1744.“Who knows what a day may bring forth? Last night, I was called to sacrifice my Isaac; I mean, to bury my only child and son, about four months old.“Many things had occurred to make me believe he was, not only to be continued to me, but, to be a preacher of the everlasting gospel. Pleased with the thought, and being ambitious of having a son of my own so divinely employed, Satan was permitted to give me some wrong impressions, whereby, as I now find, I misapplied several texts of Scripture. Upon these grounds, I made no scruple of declaring ‘that I should have a son, and that his name was to be John.’ I mentioned the very time of his birth, and fondly hoped that he was to be great in the sight of the Lord.“Everything happened according to the predictions, and my wife having had several narrow escapes while pregnant, especially by her falling from a high horse, and my driving her into a deep ditch in a one-horse chaise a little before the time of her lying-in, and from which we received little or no hurt, confirmed me in my expectation, that God would grant me my heart’s desire.“I would observe to you, that the child was even born in a room which the master of the house had prepared as a prison for his wife, on account of her coming to hear me. With joy would she often look upon the bars and staples and chains, which were fixed in order to keep her in. About a week after his birth, I publicly baptized him in the Tabernacle, and, in the company of thousands, solemnly gave him up to that God, who gave him to me. A hymn, too fondly composed by an aged widow, as suitable to the occasion, was sung, and all went away big with hopes of the child’s being hereafter to be employed in the work of God; but how soon have all their fond, and, as the event has proved, their ill-grounded expectations been blasted, as well as mine!“House-keeping being expensive in London, I thought it best to send both parent and child to Abergavenny, where my wife had a little house, the furniture of which, as I thought of soon embarking for Georgia, I had partly sold, and partly given away. In their journey thither, they stopped at Gloucester, at the Bell Inn, which my brother now keeps, and in which I was born. There, my beloved was cut off with a stroke. Upon my coming here, without knowing what had happened, I enquired concerning the welfare of parent and child; and, by the answer, found that the flower was cut down.“I immediately called all to join in prayer, in which I blessed the Father of mercies for giving me a son, continuing it to me so long, and taking it from me so soon. All joined in desiring that I would decline preaching till the child was buried; but I remembered a saying of goodMr.Henry, ‘that weeping must not hinder sowing;’ and, therefore, I preached twice the next day, and also the day following; on the evening of which, just as I was closing my sermon, the bell struck out for the funeral. At first, I must acknowledge, it gave nature a little shake; but, looking up, I recovered strength, and then concluded with saying, that this text, on which I had been preaching, namely, ‘All things work together for good to them that love God,’ made me as willing to go out to my son’s funeral, as to hear of his birth. Our parting from him was solemn. We kneeled down, prayed, and shed many tears, but, I hope, tears of resignation; and then, as he died in the house wherein I was born, he was taken and laid in the church where I was baptized, first communicated, and first preached.“All this, you may easily guess, threw me into very solemn and deep reflection, and, I hope, deep humiliation; but I was comforted from that passage in the book of Kings, where is recorded the death of the Shunammite’s child, which the prophet said, ‘the Lord had hid from him,’ and the woman’s answer to the prophet when he asked, ‘Is it well with thee? Is it well with thy husband? Is it well with thy child?’ And she answered, ‘It is well.’ This gave me no small satisfaction. I preached upon the text, the day following, at Gloucester; and then hastened up to London, and preached upon the same there.“Though disappointed of a living preacher, by the death of my son, yet, I hope, what happened before his birth, and since at his death, has taught me such lessons, as, if duly improved, may render his mistaken parent more cautious, more sober-minded, more experienced in Satan’s devices, and, consequently, more useful in his future labours to the Church of God. Thus, ‘out of the eater comes forth meat, and out of the strong comes forth sweetness.’ Not doubting but our future life will be one continued explanation of this blessed riddle, I commend myself and you to the unerring guidance of God’s word and Spirit, and am,“Yours,etc.,“George Whitefield.”Whilst Whitefield was burying his child at Gloucester, his friend, Charles Wesley, was preaching, at the peril of his life, in Staffordshire. At Wednesbury, the mob “assaulted, one after another, all the houses of those who were called Methodists.” All the windows were broken, and furniture of every kind was dashed in pieces. At Aldridge and several other villages, many of the houses were plundered, and the rioters “loaded themselves with clothes and goods ofall sorts, as much as they couldcarry.”93Whitefield heard of this execrable rioting, and wrote:—“There has been dreadful work near Birmingham; but Satan will be overthrown. We had a glorious fast on Monday (February20th), and collected above£60 for our poor suffering brethren.”A week after this, Whitefield set out on a visit to his wife at Abergavenny, and took her “a second-hand suit of curtains,” which he had bought for her humble dwelling.At the beginning of the month of March, he returned to Gloucester, to be present at the assizes, at which the Hampton rioters, already mentioned, were tried, and found guilty, the amount of damages to be paid being referred to the King’s Bench, London. Whitefield writes:—“I hear the rioters are hugely alarmed; but they know not that we intend to let them see what we could do, and then to forgive them. This troublesome affair being over, I must now prepare for my intended voyage to America.”Nearly seven months, however, elapsed before Whitefield’s voyage was begun,—an interval which was partly occupied with what, to Whitefield, was extremely uncongenial, a literary war.To understand the controversy, it is needful to remark, that, of late, several publications had been issued, and industriously circulated, attacking the loyalty of Whitefield and his friends. Among others, there was a quarto-sized sheet, of four pages, entitled, “The Case of the Methodists briefly stated, more particularly in the point of Field-Preaching.” The writer tries to prove that field-preaching is contrary to the Act of Toleration; and then he proceeds to shew, that, because of the largeness of his congregations, Whitefield’s preaching in the open air was eminently calculated to promote sedition, and to be a serious danger to the state.The principal publication, however, was “Observations upon the Conduct and Behaviour of a certain Sect, usually distinguished by the name of Methodists. London: printed by E. Owen, in Amen Corner. 1744.” (4to. 24pp.) Rightly or wrongly,Dr.Gibson, Bishop of London, wassupposed to be the author. The pamphlet consisted of three parts. In the first, it was alleged, 1. That the Methodists generally set the government at defiance, by appointing public places of religious worship, and by preaching in the fields, without taking the prescribed oaths, and subscribing the declaration against popery. 2. That they broke the rules of the Church, of which they professed themselves members, by going to other than their own parish churches to receive the sacrament. 3. It was also stated that really there was no need for Methodist meetings, because, for many years past, many of the Religious Societies, in London and Westminster, had spent their Sunday evenings (after attending church) in serious conversation and reading good books; and the bishops and clergy had encouraged these Societies, though some of them had been misled into Methodist extravagances.In the second part, which is principally levelled against Whitefield, thirteen questions are asked, of which the following are specimens:—Question 4. Whether a due and regular attendance in the public offices of religion does not better answer the true ends of devotion, and is not better evidence of the co-operation of the Holy Spirit, than those sudden agonies, roarings, and screamings, tremblings, droppings-down, ravings, and madness into which the hearers of the Methodists had been cast? Question 9. Whether it does not savour of self-sufficiency and presumption, when a few young heads, without any colour of a Divine commission, set up their own schemes as the great standard of Christianity?The third part is a severe critique on theChristian History, of which Whitefield was the chief promoter. Here, again, sundry questions were asked, as, for instance, “Whether the zealous endeavours to form Band-Societies, according to the Moravian way, and putting them under the instruction and ordering of particularsuperintendents, andexhorters; and the holding ofassociationsandmeetings, at set times and places, with select moderators; together with the fixing ofvisitationsand their boundaries and limits,—whether these proceedings, not warranted by any law, are not a presumptuous attempt to erect a new church constitution, upona foreign plan, in contempt of those wise rules of government, discipline, and worship, which were judged by our pious ancestors to be the best means for preserving and maintaining religion, together with public peace and order in Church and State?” Again, “Whether these itinerant preachers, and the setting up of separate places of public worshipat pleasure, and those pretences to more immediate communications with God, and the visible endeavours to bring the parochial pastors and the public worship under a disesteem among the people,—whether these and the like practices are not of the same kind with those of the last century, that had so great a share in bringing on those religious confusions, which brought a reproach upon Christianity in general, and which, by degrees, worked the body of the people into a national madness and frenzy in matters of religion?”To see the full force of these accusations, it must be borne in mind, that, they were published at a time when, (1) The nation was in a state of great excitement from an expected invasion by Prince Charles, the young Pretender; (2) The Methodists in Wiltshire, Gloucestershire, and Staffordshire, were being subjected to the most brutal treatment by clerically encouraged mobs; and (3) The general belief was that these “Observations upon the Conduct and Behaviour of the Methodists” were not of ignoble origin, but were written by the bishop of the metropolitan diocese, and with the approval of a considerable number of his prelatic brethren.On January 26, 1744, Whitefield published the following advertisement:—
“London,September 2, 1743.“My wife has been in trying circumstances, partly through the unskilfulness of a chaise-driver—I mean myself. Being advised to take her out into the air, I drove her, as well as myself, through inadvertence, into a ditch. The ditch might be about fourteen feet deep. All, who saw us, cried out, ‘They are killed!’ but, through infinite mercy, we received no great hurt. The place was very narrow near the bottom, and yet the horse went down, as though lowered by a pulley. A bystander ran, and caught hold of its head, to prevent its going forwards. I got upon its back, and was drawn out; whilst my wife, still hanging between the chaise and the bank, was pulled up by two or three kind assistants. The chaise and horse being taken up, and our bruises being washed with vinegar in a neighbouring house, we went on our intended way, and came home rejoicing in God our Saviour.“Not expecting my wife’s delivery for some time, I intend making a short excursion, and then you may expect further news from yours,etc.,“George Whitefield.”
“London,September 2, 1743.
“My wife has been in trying circumstances, partly through the unskilfulness of a chaise-driver—I mean myself. Being advised to take her out into the air, I drove her, as well as myself, through inadvertence, into a ditch. The ditch might be about fourteen feet deep. All, who saw us, cried out, ‘They are killed!’ but, through infinite mercy, we received no great hurt. The place was very narrow near the bottom, and yet the horse went down, as though lowered by a pulley. A bystander ran, and caught hold of its head, to prevent its going forwards. I got upon its back, and was drawn out; whilst my wife, still hanging between the chaise and the bank, was pulled up by two or three kind assistants. The chaise and horse being taken up, and our bruises being washed with vinegar in a neighbouring house, we went on our intended way, and came home rejoicing in God our Saviour.
“Not expecting my wife’s delivery for some time, I intend making a short excursion, and then you may expect further news from yours,etc.,
“George Whitefield.”
Northampton, among other places, was visited by Whitefield, in the “short excursion” just mentioned. His friend Hervey had recently become curate at Weston-Favel; and, perhaps, it was this circumstance which brought Whitefield into this particular locality. Be that as it may, the visit became a memorable one, from the angry feelings it excited among some of the leading Dissenters of the day.
Others, besides clergymen and Presbyterian ministers, were unpleasantly perplexed by Whitefield and the Methodists.Dr.Doddridge, though one of the most liberal-minded of the Dissenters, found it difficult to look with favourupon the proceedings ofsomeof the Methodist evangelists. Hence the following extract from a letter, addressed to theRev.Mr.Witton, son-in-law of the celebrated Philip Henry:—
“Northampton,June 8, 1743.“I am much concerned at the anxiety and disturbance whichMr.Wesley’s coming into your neighbourhood has occasioned. You are pleased to ask my advice, and therefore I give it.“I think the gentlest methods will be the most effectual. Opposition will but give strength to the faction, if it be attended with violence and heat. ShouldMr.Wesley come hither, as perhaps he may, and excite such a flame among the weaker part of my hearers, I would appoint some stated season for meeting once a week, with a few steady and experienced brethren of the church, that an hour or two might be spent in prayer and consultation, as new incidents might arise within the sphere of our personal observation. I would endeavour to renew my zeal in preaching the great truths of the gospel, and in visiting and exhorting my hearers. I would, with great meekness and compassion, and yet with great solemnity, admonish the persons attacked with the contagion, and lay open before them the absurd nature and tendency of the views they had rashly entertained;and I would, as God enabled me, pray earnestly forthem.”71
“Northampton,June 8, 1743.
“I am much concerned at the anxiety and disturbance whichMr.Wesley’s coming into your neighbourhood has occasioned. You are pleased to ask my advice, and therefore I give it.
“I think the gentlest methods will be the most effectual. Opposition will but give strength to the faction, if it be attended with violence and heat. ShouldMr.Wesley come hither, as perhaps he may, and excite such a flame among the weaker part of my hearers, I would appoint some stated season for meeting once a week, with a few steady and experienced brethren of the church, that an hour or two might be spent in prayer and consultation, as new incidents might arise within the sphere of our personal observation. I would endeavour to renew my zeal in preaching the great truths of the gospel, and in visiting and exhorting my hearers. I would, with great meekness and compassion, and yet with great solemnity, admonish the persons attacked with the contagion, and lay open before them the absurd nature and tendency of the views they had rashly entertained;and I would, as God enabled me, pray earnestly forthem.”71
Among others, who wrote to Doddridge, respecting Whitefield, was theRev.Robert Blair,D.D., author of the well-known poem, “The Grave.” In a letter, dated July 28, 1743, he says:—
“I wish you would give me your opinion ofMr.Whitefield, a man who has made abundance of noise in the world.I never in my life knew any person so much idolized by some, and railed at byothers.”72
“I wish you would give me your opinion ofMr.Whitefield, a man who has made abundance of noise in the world.I never in my life knew any person so much idolized by some, and railed at byothers.”72
Soon after this, during a visit to London, Doddridge seems to have attended Whitefield’s Tabernacle, and to have taken part in one or more of its services. Perhaps the influence of Colonel Gardiner, one of his correspondents, had induced him to do this. Whatever the inducement, however, the act itself created alarm among the London Dissenters. Hence the following, addressed to Doddridge, fromDr.Isaac Watts:—
“Stoke Newington,September 20, 1743.“I am sorry that, since your departure, I have had many questions asked me about your preaching or praying at the Tabernacle, and of sinking the character of a minister, and especially of a tutor, among the Dissenters, so low thereby. I find many of your friends entertain thisidea; but I can give no answer, not knowing how much you have been engaged there. I pray God to guard us from everytemptation.”73
“Stoke Newington,September 20, 1743.
“I am sorry that, since your departure, I have had many questions asked me about your preaching or praying at the Tabernacle, and of sinking the character of a minister, and especially of a tutor, among the Dissenters, so low thereby. I find many of your friends entertain thisidea; but I can give no answer, not knowing how much you have been engaged there. I pray God to guard us from everytemptation.”73
This is mightily amusing.Dr.Doddridge, the theological tutor of the Dissenters’ College, daring to preach or pray in Whitefield’s Tabernacle! What a sin against all ecclesiastical and ministerial propriety! The poor Doctor, however, went further than even this. He allowed Whitefield to preach in his own pulpit at Northampton!This seemed to perfect the enormity. Among others who took the Northampton professor to task for his eccentric conduct, was theRev.John Barker, an influentialminister,74in London, who wrote as follows:—
“November 4, 1743.“It is an honour to our interest that you stand so well with the sober and moderate clergy. For this reason, I was troubled to hear of the late intercourse between you andMr.Whitefield, the consequence of which, with respect to the Church, it is easy to foresee. I was willing to think well of the Methodists; but, after a candid attention to them, their proceedings appear not to me to be wise and good. Their devotion is unseasonable, irregular, and injudicious. Their sermons are low and loose. Their spirit appears to me turbulent, unruly, and censorious. They practise upon weak people and poor people. They call them to pray and sing when they should be in their business or their beds. They disturb the peace and order of families, and give great uneasiness in them. What they pretend to above their neighbours appears to be mere enthusiasm. Their people are slothful, or mopish, or dejected, or pragmatical, rather than sober, discreet, judicious, exemplary, regular Christians; and I have no expectation but that Methodism, like any other enthusiasm, will promote infidelity, and turn out to the hurt and damage of religion, and the souls of men. Though I judge not their hearts, views, and motives, but admit those are secret things which belong to God, yet I thought it needful, very lately,to warn my hearers of these people’s errors, and advise them to avoidthem.”75
“November 4, 1743.
“It is an honour to our interest that you stand so well with the sober and moderate clergy. For this reason, I was troubled to hear of the late intercourse between you andMr.Whitefield, the consequence of which, with respect to the Church, it is easy to foresee. I was willing to think well of the Methodists; but, after a candid attention to them, their proceedings appear not to me to be wise and good. Their devotion is unseasonable, irregular, and injudicious. Their sermons are low and loose. Their spirit appears to me turbulent, unruly, and censorious. They practise upon weak people and poor people. They call them to pray and sing when they should be in their business or their beds. They disturb the peace and order of families, and give great uneasiness in them. What they pretend to above their neighbours appears to be mere enthusiasm. Their people are slothful, or mopish, or dejected, or pragmatical, rather than sober, discreet, judicious, exemplary, regular Christians; and I have no expectation but that Methodism, like any other enthusiasm, will promote infidelity, and turn out to the hurt and damage of religion, and the souls of men. Though I judge not their hearts, views, and motives, but admit those are secret things which belong to God, yet I thought it needful, very lately,to warn my hearers of these people’s errors, and advise them to avoidthem.”75
Doddridge’s chief castigator, however, was Nathaniel Neal,Esq., son of theRev.Daniel Neal, the historian of the Puritans. Nathaniel was an eminent attorney, secretary to the Million Bank,and author of “A Free and Serious Remonstrance to Protestant Dissenting Ministers, on occasion of the Decay ofReligion.”76He wrote not fewer than three long letters to Doddridge, filling nine printed octavo pages, and dated respectively, Million Bank, October 11, October 15, and December 10, 1743. He addresses Doddridge with great deference and respect; but, evidently, in great alarm, lest Doddridge should irretrievably injure his position and character, as the chief of the Dissenters’ tutors, by countenancing the proceedings of the eccentric Methodist.
In the first of his letters, he writes:—
“It was with the utmost concern that I received the information ofMr.Whitefield’s having preached last week in your pulpit. I attended the meeting of the trustees ofMr.Coward’s benefaction this day, when the matter was canvassed, and I now find myself obliged to apprize you of the very great uneasiness which your conduct herein has occasioned them.”
“It was with the utmost concern that I received the information ofMr.Whitefield’s having preached last week in your pulpit. I attended the meeting of the trustees ofMr.Coward’s benefaction this day, when the matter was canvassed, and I now find myself obliged to apprize you of the very great uneasiness which your conduct herein has occasioned them.”
Mr.Neal proceeds to tell the Doctor that his “regard to the Methodists” was injuring him in the opinion of his friends, and was giving an advantage against him to his “secret and avowed enemies.” He adds:—
“In the case of such a public character, and so extensive a province for the service of religion as yours, it seems to me a point well worth considering, whether it is a right thing to risk such a prospect as Providence has opened before you, of eminent and distinguished usefulness, for the sake of any good you are likely to do amongst these people. Your countenancing the Methodists has been the subject of conversation much oftener than I could have wished. The trustees are particularly in pain for it, with regard to your academy; as they know it is an objection made to it,by some persons seriously, and by otherscraftily.”77
“In the case of such a public character, and so extensive a province for the service of religion as yours, it seems to me a point well worth considering, whether it is a right thing to risk such a prospect as Providence has opened before you, of eminent and distinguished usefulness, for the sake of any good you are likely to do amongst these people. Your countenancing the Methodists has been the subject of conversation much oftener than I could have wished. The trustees are particularly in pain for it, with regard to your academy; as they know it is an objection made to it,by some persons seriously, and by otherscraftily.”77
In his third letter,Mr.Neal expresses a holy dread lest Doddridge should be “engaged amongst men of weak heads, and narrow, gloomy sentiments, who may and ought to be pitied and prayed for, but whom no rules of piety or prudencewill oblige us to make our confidants and friends.” He continues:—
“There are letters shewn about town, from several ministers in the west, which make heavy complaints of the disorders occasioned by Whitefield and Wesley in those parts. One of them, speaking ofMr.Whitefield, calls him ‘honest, crazy, confidentWhitefield.’ These letters, likewise, mention that some ministers there, who were your pupils, have given them countenance; and you can hardly conceive the disrespect this has occasioned several ministers and other persons in townto speak of youwith.”78
“There are letters shewn about town, from several ministers in the west, which make heavy complaints of the disorders occasioned by Whitefield and Wesley in those parts. One of them, speaking ofMr.Whitefield, calls him ‘honest, crazy, confidentWhitefield.’ These letters, likewise, mention that some ministers there, who were your pupils, have given them countenance; and you can hardly conceive the disrespect this has occasioned several ministers and other persons in townto speak of youwith.”78
Poor Doddridge, with the best intentions, had stirred up a nest of ecclesiastical hornets. He had to make the best of the affair; and part of his answer toMr.Neal was as follows:—
“December 12, 1743.“I am truly sorry that the manner in which I spoke ofMr.Whitefield, in my last, should have given you uneasiness. What I said proceeded from a principle which I am sure you will not despise: I mean a certain frankness of heart, which would not allow me to seem to think more meanly of a man to whom I had once professed some friendship than I really did.“I must, indeed, look upon it as an unhappy circumstance that he came to Northampton just when he did, as I perceive that, in concurrence with other circumstances, it has filled town and country with astonishment and indignation.“I had great expectations from the Methodists and Moravians; and I am grieved that so many things have occurred among them which have been quite unjustifiable. I suppose they have also produced the same sentiments in the Archbishop of Canterbury, who, to my certain knowledge, received Count Zinzendorf with open arms, and wrote of his being chosen the Moravian Bishop, as what was done ‘plaudente toto cœlesti choro.’ I shall always be ready to weigh whatever can be said againstMr.Whitefield; and, though I must have actual demonstration before I can admit him to be a dishonest man, and though I shall never be able to think all he has written, and all I have heard from him to be nonsense; yet, I am not so zealously attached to him as to be disposed to celebrate him as one of the greatest men of the age, or to think that he is the pillar which bears up the whole interest of religion among us.“I had heard before of the offence which had been taken at two of my pupils in the west, for the respect they shewed toMr.Whitefield: and yet they are both persons of eminent piety. He whose name is chiefly in question, I meanMr.Darracott, is one of the most devout and extraordinary men I ever sent out, and a person who has, within these few years, been highly useful to numbers of his hearers.Mr.Fawcett labours atTaunton; and his zeal, so far as I can judge, is inspired both with love and prudence. Yet, I hear those men are reproached because they have treatedMr.Whitefield respectfully; and that one of them, after having had a correspondence with him for many years, admitted him into his pulpit.“I own, I am very thoughtful where these things will end. In the meantime, I am as silent as I can be. I commit the matter to God in prayer. I am sure I see no danger that any of my pupils will prove Methodists.I wish many of them may not run into the contraryextreme.”79
“December 12, 1743.
“I am truly sorry that the manner in which I spoke ofMr.Whitefield, in my last, should have given you uneasiness. What I said proceeded from a principle which I am sure you will not despise: I mean a certain frankness of heart, which would not allow me to seem to think more meanly of a man to whom I had once professed some friendship than I really did.
“I must, indeed, look upon it as an unhappy circumstance that he came to Northampton just when he did, as I perceive that, in concurrence with other circumstances, it has filled town and country with astonishment and indignation.
“I had great expectations from the Methodists and Moravians; and I am grieved that so many things have occurred among them which have been quite unjustifiable. I suppose they have also produced the same sentiments in the Archbishop of Canterbury, who, to my certain knowledge, received Count Zinzendorf with open arms, and wrote of his being chosen the Moravian Bishop, as what was done ‘plaudente toto cœlesti choro.’ I shall always be ready to weigh whatever can be said againstMr.Whitefield; and, though I must have actual demonstration before I can admit him to be a dishonest man, and though I shall never be able to think all he has written, and all I have heard from him to be nonsense; yet, I am not so zealously attached to him as to be disposed to celebrate him as one of the greatest men of the age, or to think that he is the pillar which bears up the whole interest of religion among us.
“I had heard before of the offence which had been taken at two of my pupils in the west, for the respect they shewed toMr.Whitefield: and yet they are both persons of eminent piety. He whose name is chiefly in question, I meanMr.Darracott, is one of the most devout and extraordinary men I ever sent out, and a person who has, within these few years, been highly useful to numbers of his hearers.Mr.Fawcett labours atTaunton; and his zeal, so far as I can judge, is inspired both with love and prudence. Yet, I hear those men are reproached because they have treatedMr.Whitefield respectfully; and that one of them, after having had a correspondence with him for many years, admitted him into his pulpit.
“I own, I am very thoughtful where these things will end. In the meantime, I am as silent as I can be. I commit the matter to God in prayer. I am sure I see no danger that any of my pupils will prove Methodists.I wish many of them may not run into the contraryextreme.”79
These are long, almost tedious, extracts; but they are of great importance as plainly shewing that, at the beginning of his career, the Independents looked upon Whitefield with as much suspicion as many of the clergy of the Church of England and many of the Presbyterian ministers of Scotland did. It was a heinous sin against all the proprieties of their Church, that Doddridge and two of his ordained pupils had countenanced the preaching of this young, popular, powerful, and successful evangelist.
We again return to Whitefield’s wanderings. In theScots’ Magazine, for 1743, under the heading of “Marriages and Births,” the following announcement was made: “October, 1743. At his house in Hoxton, the wife ofMr.George Whitefield, of a son.” This event seems to have occurred during Whitefield’s “short excursion” to Northampton and its neighbourhood. Hence, under date of October5th, he writes: “The last evening of my short excursion, I preached from a balcony, to many thousands, who stood in the street as comfortable as at noonday. Upon retiring to my lodgings, news was brought me, that God had given me a son. This hastened me up to London, where I now am, and from whence, after I have baptized my little one, I purpose to set out again on my Master’s public business.” Ten days after writing this, the untiring Whitefield was at Avon, in Wiltshire, and did not return to his wife and infant son until seven weeks afterwards. Perhaps, this was not an example of either connubial or paternal behaviour to be commended; but let it pass. The following extracts from his letters will furnish an idea of his labours, in the west of England, during the nexttwomonths:—
“Collumpton,October 25, 1743.“I wrote to you on the15thinstant at Avon. In the morning, I walked to Tytherton, and preached. After sermon, I baptized four boys, each about three months old.The ordinance was so solemn and awful, thatMrs.Gotley80(who is a Quaker) had a mind immediately to partake of it. When I go to Wiltshire, I believe I shall baptize her and her children, with some adult persons who have tasted of redeeming love. About one o’clock I preached at Clack, in the street. I then rode to Brinkworth and preached there, and, afterwards, administered the holy sacrament to about two hundred and fifty communicants. Some strangers, from Bath, went home filled with our Redeemer’s presence. I have also preached at Chippenham. We had a wonderful time in Wiltshire.“I hope I managed all things right about the affair of the Hampton rioters. They have compelled us to appeal unto Cæsar. Evidences shall be examined in the country, in time enough to send the examinations to town.“On Saturday last (October22nd), when I came to Wellington, theRev.Mr.Darracott81persuaded me to stay there, because the country people had come from all quarters several times to hear me, and had been disappointed. I consented, and preached in his meeting-house, in the evening, to a large auditory.TheRev.Mr.Fawcett,82formerly pupil toDr.Doddridge, came there, and stayed all night. The blessed Jesus gave us much freedom in conversation. I hope both will be instruments, under God, in promoting a good work in these parts.“Sunday morning, I preached again in the meeting-house; and, in the evening, to seven thousand in thefield.83“On Monday, at ten in the morning, and at two in the afternoon, I preached, at Collumpton, with much freedom and power; was kindly received, met some reputable Dissenters, and am now setting out for Exeter.”
“Collumpton,October 25, 1743.
“I wrote to you on the15thinstant at Avon. In the morning, I walked to Tytherton, and preached. After sermon, I baptized four boys, each about three months old.The ordinance was so solemn and awful, thatMrs.Gotley80(who is a Quaker) had a mind immediately to partake of it. When I go to Wiltshire, I believe I shall baptize her and her children, with some adult persons who have tasted of redeeming love. About one o’clock I preached at Clack, in the street. I then rode to Brinkworth and preached there, and, afterwards, administered the holy sacrament to about two hundred and fifty communicants. Some strangers, from Bath, went home filled with our Redeemer’s presence. I have also preached at Chippenham. We had a wonderful time in Wiltshire.
“I hope I managed all things right about the affair of the Hampton rioters. They have compelled us to appeal unto Cæsar. Evidences shall be examined in the country, in time enough to send the examinations to town.
“On Saturday last (October22nd), when I came to Wellington, theRev.Mr.Darracott81persuaded me to stay there, because the country people had come from all quarters several times to hear me, and had been disappointed. I consented, and preached in his meeting-house, in the evening, to a large auditory.TheRev.Mr.Fawcett,82formerly pupil toDr.Doddridge, came there, and stayed all night. The blessed Jesus gave us much freedom in conversation. I hope both will be instruments, under God, in promoting a good work in these parts.
“Sunday morning, I preached again in the meeting-house; and, in the evening, to seven thousand in thefield.83
“On Monday, at ten in the morning, and at two in the afternoon, I preached, at Collumpton, with much freedom and power; was kindly received, met some reputable Dissenters, and am now setting out for Exeter.”
Whitefield seems to have made Exeter his head-quarters for nearly a fortnight. Hence the following letters:—
“Exeter,October 28, 1743.“I have a strong conviction that our Lord intends doing something in the west. Since my arrival here, letters of invitation have come from many parts. The common people begin to feel. I preached this afternoon on Southernay Green. Even some of the polite were much affected. I believe I shall think it my duty to stay in these parts for some time.”“Exeter,November 6, 1743.“On Monday last” (October31st), “I went to Axminster, and preached to about two thousand without; and afterwards exhorted within the house where I lay. The next day, I preached to a greater number of people; and, at night, gave an exhortation, and met the Society. Our Lord vouchsafed us a gracious blessing.“On Wednesday, I went to Ottery; but, just as I named my text, the bells rang. Upon this, I adjourned to a field, whither the people ran in droves. As I stepped into the inn, before I went to the field, a clergyman came, who asked me by what authority I preached, and said it was a riot, and that the meeting was illegal. I answered him, as I thought pertinently, and afterwards went and shewed him my authority, by preaching on these words, ‘Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.’ In the evening, I returned to Exeter, where some hundreds were waiting to hear me expound. The Lord makes this place very comfortable to me. Prejudices fall off daily, and people begin not only to discern, but to feel, the doctrines of the gospel.“Postscript.—Ten at night. It would have pleased you to be here this evening. I question whether near a third part of Exeter were not attending on the word preached. All was solemn and awful, and the Lord gave me much assistance from His Holy Spirit. Help me to praise Him.”
“Exeter,October 28, 1743.
“I have a strong conviction that our Lord intends doing something in the west. Since my arrival here, letters of invitation have come from many parts. The common people begin to feel. I preached this afternoon on Southernay Green. Even some of the polite were much affected. I believe I shall think it my duty to stay in these parts for some time.”
“Exeter,November 6, 1743.
“On Monday last” (October31st), “I went to Axminster, and preached to about two thousand without; and afterwards exhorted within the house where I lay. The next day, I preached to a greater number of people; and, at night, gave an exhortation, and met the Society. Our Lord vouchsafed us a gracious blessing.
“On Wednesday, I went to Ottery; but, just as I named my text, the bells rang. Upon this, I adjourned to a field, whither the people ran in droves. As I stepped into the inn, before I went to the field, a clergyman came, who asked me by what authority I preached, and said it was a riot, and that the meeting was illegal. I answered him, as I thought pertinently, and afterwards went and shewed him my authority, by preaching on these words, ‘Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.’ In the evening, I returned to Exeter, where some hundreds were waiting to hear me expound. The Lord makes this place very comfortable to me. Prejudices fall off daily, and people begin not only to discern, but to feel, the doctrines of the gospel.
“Postscript.—Ten at night. It would have pleased you to be here this evening. I question whether near a third part of Exeter were not attending on the word preached. All was solemn and awful, and the Lord gave me much assistance from His Holy Spirit. Help me to praise Him.”
From Exeter, Whitefield proceeded to Bideford, where he wrote as follows:—
“Bideford,November 11, 1743.“TheRev.Mr.Thompson, Rector ofSt.Gennys, Cornwall, is here. God willing, I will go with him to-morrow. There is also another clergyman about eighty years of age,but not above one year old in the school ofChrist.84He lately preached three times and rode forty miles the same day. The Dissenting minister and his wife were very hearty; and, perhaps, here is one of the most settled female Christian Societies in the kingdom. I cannot well describe with what power the word was attended. Yesterday, in the afternoon and evening, it was just like as at Edinburgh. The old clergyman was much broken. A young Oxonian, who came with him, and many others, were most deeply affected. I suppose, there were upwards of two thousand, in the evening, in the meeting-house.DearMr.Hervey,85one of our first Methodists at Oxford, and who was lately a curate here, had laid the blessed foundation.“So far from thinking of nestling at London, I am more and more convinced that I should go from place to place; and I therefore question if I shall see London for some time.“Postscript.—Seven at night. To-day has been as yesterday, and much more abundant. I am here, as in Scotland and New England. Here is work enough for three months. The weather is very favourable; range, therefore, I must and will.”
“Bideford,November 11, 1743.
“TheRev.Mr.Thompson, Rector ofSt.Gennys, Cornwall, is here. God willing, I will go with him to-morrow. There is also another clergyman about eighty years of age,but not above one year old in the school ofChrist.84He lately preached three times and rode forty miles the same day. The Dissenting minister and his wife were very hearty; and, perhaps, here is one of the most settled female Christian Societies in the kingdom. I cannot well describe with what power the word was attended. Yesterday, in the afternoon and evening, it was just like as at Edinburgh. The old clergyman was much broken. A young Oxonian, who came with him, and many others, were most deeply affected. I suppose, there were upwards of two thousand, in the evening, in the meeting-house.DearMr.Hervey,85one of our first Methodists at Oxford, and who was lately a curate here, had laid the blessed foundation.
“So far from thinking of nestling at London, I am more and more convinced that I should go from place to place; and I therefore question if I shall see London for some time.
“Postscript.—Seven at night. To-day has been as yesterday, and much more abundant. I am here, as in Scotland and New England. Here is work enough for three months. The weather is very favourable; range, therefore, I must and will.”
On Saturday, November 12, Whitefield accompaniedMr.Thompson to his rectory atSt.Gennys, Cornwall, where he seems to have remained a fortnight. Hence the following:—
“St.Gennys,November 25, 1743.“I am glad that the Lord inclined my heart to come hither. He has been with us of a truth. How did His stately steps appear in the sanctuary last Lord’s-day! Many, many prayers were put up, by the worthy rector and others, for an outpouring of God’s blessed Spirit. They were answered. Arrows of conviction fled so thick and so fast, and such a universal weeping prevailed from one end of the congregation to the other, that goodMr.Thompson could not help going from seat to seat, to encourage and comfort the wounded souls. The Oxonian’s father was almost struck dumb; and the young Oxonian’s crest was so lowered, that I believe he will never venture to preach an unknown Christ, or to deal in the false commerce of unfelt truths.“I could enlarge, but I must away to Bideford, just to give Satan another stroke, and bid my Christian friends farewell; and then return the way I came, namely, through Exeter, Wellington, and Bristol, to the great metropolis.”
“St.Gennys,November 25, 1743.
“I am glad that the Lord inclined my heart to come hither. He has been with us of a truth. How did His stately steps appear in the sanctuary last Lord’s-day! Many, many prayers were put up, by the worthy rector and others, for an outpouring of God’s blessed Spirit. They were answered. Arrows of conviction fled so thick and so fast, and such a universal weeping prevailed from one end of the congregation to the other, that goodMr.Thompson could not help going from seat to seat, to encourage and comfort the wounded souls. The Oxonian’s father was almost struck dumb; and the young Oxonian’s crest was so lowered, that I believe he will never venture to preach an unknown Christ, or to deal in the false commerce of unfelt truths.
“I could enlarge, but I must away to Bideford, just to give Satan another stroke, and bid my Christian friends farewell; and then return the way I came, namely, through Exeter, Wellington, and Bristol, to the great metropolis.”
Whitefield arrived in London at the beginning of December, and wrote the following hitherto unpublished letter to “Mr.Howell Harris, at Trevecca, near the Hay, South Wales, Breconshire.”
“London,December 6, 1743.“My very dear Brother,—I thank you for your kind letters and kind present. Our Saviour will plentifully reward you for all favours conferred on me and mine.“I rejoice exceedingly that the word runs and is glorified in Wales. I hope to rejoice together with you at the next Association. Great things have been doing in the west. I believeMr.Thompson, of Cornwall, will come with me into Wales. I have thoughts of removing my little family to Abergavenny in a short time; and to leave that house for you and yours to live in, till I come from abroad again, if you will be pleased to accept of it.“I can easily forgive our dear brotherBeaumont;86but, I think, he and his wife have dealt very unsimply in respect to their marriage. I pray our Lord Jesus Christ to bless them exceedingly, and to prevent all ill consequences that may arise, to the people of God, from such a procedure.“I intend being here but a few days; and I have many things to say to you when we see each other face to face. Oh, my brother, my dear, very dear brother Harris, Jesus is better and better to me every day. I have had close attacks, but strong consolations. I would write much, would time and business permit; but I must bid you adieu. My tender, tender love to all. My dear wife andMr.Grace send their most cordial respects. The Lord Jesus be with your dear soul, and give you to pray for, my dear, dear, dear brother,“Yours most affectionately in Christ Jesus,“George Whitefield.”“P.S.—Mr.Mason, the bookseller, is dead; alsoMr.Dubert’s wife. About seven of our friends have lately died in the Lord. Courage, my dear man,—courage; we shall go ere long. Yet a little while, and He that cometh will come, and will not tarry.”
“London,December 6, 1743.
“My very dear Brother,—I thank you for your kind letters and kind present. Our Saviour will plentifully reward you for all favours conferred on me and mine.
“I rejoice exceedingly that the word runs and is glorified in Wales. I hope to rejoice together with you at the next Association. Great things have been doing in the west. I believeMr.Thompson, of Cornwall, will come with me into Wales. I have thoughts of removing my little family to Abergavenny in a short time; and to leave that house for you and yours to live in, till I come from abroad again, if you will be pleased to accept of it.
“I can easily forgive our dear brotherBeaumont;86but, I think, he and his wife have dealt very unsimply in respect to their marriage. I pray our Lord Jesus Christ to bless them exceedingly, and to prevent all ill consequences that may arise, to the people of God, from such a procedure.
“I intend being here but a few days; and I have many things to say to you when we see each other face to face. Oh, my brother, my dear, very dear brother Harris, Jesus is better and better to me every day. I have had close attacks, but strong consolations. I would write much, would time and business permit; but I must bid you adieu. My tender, tender love to all. My dear wife andMr.Grace send their most cordial respects. The Lord Jesus be with your dear soul, and give you to pray for, my dear, dear, dear brother,
“Yours most affectionately in Christ Jesus,
“George Whitefield.”
“P.S.—Mr.Mason, the bookseller, is dead; alsoMr.Dubert’s wife. About seven of our friends have lately died in the Lord. Courage, my dear man,—courage; we shall go ere long. Yet a little while, and He that cometh will come, and will not tarry.”
In less than a fortnight, Whitefield was again on the wing. On Friday, December 16, he rode to a place “five miles beyond Reading.” The next day, he got to Clack. “It rained and snowed much for about seven miles,” says he, “and the way was dangerous; but the blessed Jesus kept us in safety.” On Sunday morning, he preached,and administered the sacrament to the Wiltshire Societies, atTytherton;87and, in the evening, he preached at Brinkworth. He writes: “They were good times. I have a cold, but our Lord warms my heart. To-morrow (December 19) I must away to Gloucester. Oh, follow, follow with your prayers.”
Whitefield was now on his way to a new sphere of labour. All readers of Methodist history are well acquainted with the disgraceful and terrible riots which took place at Walsal, Wednesbury, Darlaston, and West Bromwich, in 1743. In the former part of the year, both the Wesleys had preached here, at the peril of their lives. As recently as October 20, John Wesley had been all but murdered by the godless ruffians of the neighbourhood;and now, at the end of December, Whitefieldcame.88The following extract is takenfrom a pamphlet, entitled, “Some Papers, giving an Account of the Rise and Progress of Methodism at Wednesbury, in Staffordshire, and in other Parishes adjacent; as likewise of the late Riot in those parts.” Printed by J. Roberts, London. 1744. (8vo. 30pp.)
“Mr.Whitefield was at Birmingham, where there is a Society, about Christmas last; and you may suppose great numbers would, out of curiosity, flock to hear a man who had been so much talked of. He was also invited to Wednesbury, where he preached in the streets for several days. He was invited to Birmingham by a Dissenter. His stay was not above a week or ten days, and, towards the last, his auditors were not so numerous, and the behaviour of some of them not over civil. I do not find the number of the Methodist converts to be near so numerous as was at first apprehended; and those few of them, who were of the communion of the Church of England, are, in general, very regular in their behaviour, and in their attendance at church. The Dissenters constitute the greater number, and are their greatest admirers, particularly ofMr.Whitefield. About Wednesbury, some of their converts have been raised into strange and unaccountable ecstasies; but I cannot find there have been any of the like instances at Birmingham.”
“Mr.Whitefield was at Birmingham, where there is a Society, about Christmas last; and you may suppose great numbers would, out of curiosity, flock to hear a man who had been so much talked of. He was also invited to Wednesbury, where he preached in the streets for several days. He was invited to Birmingham by a Dissenter. His stay was not above a week or ten days, and, towards the last, his auditors were not so numerous, and the behaviour of some of them not over civil. I do not find the number of the Methodist converts to be near so numerous as was at first apprehended; and those few of them, who were of the communion of the Church of England, are, in general, very regular in their behaviour, and in their attendance at church. The Dissenters constitute the greater number, and are their greatest admirers, particularly ofMr.Whitefield. About Wednesbury, some of their converts have been raised into strange and unaccountable ecstasies; but I cannot find there have been any of the like instances at Birmingham.”
Such was the testimony of an unfriendly writer. Whitefield’s own account is as follows:—
“December 31, 1743.“What do you think? Since my last, I have stolen a whole day to dispatch some private business; however, in the evening, I expounded, at Birmingham, to a great room full of people, who would rush into my lodgings, whether I would or not.“On Sunday morning (Christmas Day), at eight, I preached, in thestreet, to about a thousand, with much freedom. I then went to church and received the sacrament, and afterwards preached to several thousands in the street.As no minister would preach in a house atWednesbury,89where a weekly lecture used to be kept up, I was earnestly entreated to go; and, after my afternoon’s preaching at Birmingham, I went and preached there, at six in the evening, to many hundreds in the street. The word came with power, and only one or two made a noise. We afterwards had a precious meeting in private.“On Monday morning, about eight, I preached to a large company in a field. By eleven, I returned to Birmingham, and preached to many thousands, on a common near the town. The soldiers were exercising; but the officers, hearing that I was come to preach, dismissed them, and promised that no disturbance should be made. All was quiet, and a blessed time we had. In the afternoon, at three, I preached again to about the same company, with the same success. Then I rode to Wednesbury, and preached there, and afterwards exhorted. About one, I went to bed exceeding happy.“In the morning, I broke up some fallow-ground at a place called Mare Green, about two miles from Wednesbury. Much mobbing had been there againstMr.Wesley’s friends. A few began to insult me. Several clods were thrown, one of which fell on my head, and another struck my fingers, while I was in prayer. A sweet gospel spirit was given to me. I preached again at Birmingham, to larger auditories than before, about eleven in the morning and three in the afternoon. In the evening, I expounded twice in a large room; once to the rich, and once to the poor;and went to rest happier than the nightbefore.90“In the morning (Wednesday,Dec.28), I took my leave of the Birmingham people, who wept much, and shewed great concern at my departure. I then went to Kidderminster, where I was kindly received byMr.Williams, with whom I have corresponded for near two years. Many friends were at his house. I was greatly refreshed to find what a sweet savour of good remained to this day, fromMr.Baxter’s doctrine, works, and discipline. I preached, about three in the afternoon, to a large auditory, near the church. Some unkind men, though they promised not to do so, rang the bells; but our Saviour enabled me to preach with power. In the evening and next morning, I preached in the meeting-house.“I then (Thursday) went withMr.Williams to Bromsgrove, and was kindly received by oneMr.K——y, a good man, and several others, among whom were two or three Baptist ministers, and one Independent.In the afternoon, I preached in a field. Some rude people kicked a football, and sounded a horn; but the Lord enabled me to preach with boldness. About six, I preached in the Baptist meeting-house; left Kidderminster at eight, and reached Worcester at ten.Mr.Williams and another friend accompanied us.“The next day, I reached Gloucester, very thankful, and rejoicing greatly in Christ for giving me such a delightful and happy Christmas.”
“December 31, 1743.
“What do you think? Since my last, I have stolen a whole day to dispatch some private business; however, in the evening, I expounded, at Birmingham, to a great room full of people, who would rush into my lodgings, whether I would or not.
“On Sunday morning (Christmas Day), at eight, I preached, in thestreet, to about a thousand, with much freedom. I then went to church and received the sacrament, and afterwards preached to several thousands in the street.As no minister would preach in a house atWednesbury,89where a weekly lecture used to be kept up, I was earnestly entreated to go; and, after my afternoon’s preaching at Birmingham, I went and preached there, at six in the evening, to many hundreds in the street. The word came with power, and only one or two made a noise. We afterwards had a precious meeting in private.
“On Monday morning, about eight, I preached to a large company in a field. By eleven, I returned to Birmingham, and preached to many thousands, on a common near the town. The soldiers were exercising; but the officers, hearing that I was come to preach, dismissed them, and promised that no disturbance should be made. All was quiet, and a blessed time we had. In the afternoon, at three, I preached again to about the same company, with the same success. Then I rode to Wednesbury, and preached there, and afterwards exhorted. About one, I went to bed exceeding happy.
“In the morning, I broke up some fallow-ground at a place called Mare Green, about two miles from Wednesbury. Much mobbing had been there againstMr.Wesley’s friends. A few began to insult me. Several clods were thrown, one of which fell on my head, and another struck my fingers, while I was in prayer. A sweet gospel spirit was given to me. I preached again at Birmingham, to larger auditories than before, about eleven in the morning and three in the afternoon. In the evening, I expounded twice in a large room; once to the rich, and once to the poor;and went to rest happier than the nightbefore.90
“In the morning (Wednesday,Dec.28), I took my leave of the Birmingham people, who wept much, and shewed great concern at my departure. I then went to Kidderminster, where I was kindly received byMr.Williams, with whom I have corresponded for near two years. Many friends were at his house. I was greatly refreshed to find what a sweet savour of good remained to this day, fromMr.Baxter’s doctrine, works, and discipline. I preached, about three in the afternoon, to a large auditory, near the church. Some unkind men, though they promised not to do so, rang the bells; but our Saviour enabled me to preach with power. In the evening and next morning, I preached in the meeting-house.
“I then (Thursday) went withMr.Williams to Bromsgrove, and was kindly received by oneMr.K——y, a good man, and several others, among whom were two or three Baptist ministers, and one Independent.In the afternoon, I preached in a field. Some rude people kicked a football, and sounded a horn; but the Lord enabled me to preach with boldness. About six, I preached in the Baptist meeting-house; left Kidderminster at eight, and reached Worcester at ten.Mr.Williams and another friend accompanied us.
“The next day, I reached Gloucester, very thankful, and rejoicing greatly in Christ for giving me such a delightful and happy Christmas.”
This is a notable letter. Whitefield was now on the ground where Wesley and his friends had been nearly murdered; but all the inconvenience suffered by Whitefield was a little noise at Wednesbury, the throwing of a few clods at Mare Green, the ringing of the church bells at Kidderminster, and a game at football and the sounding of a horn at Bromsgrove. Compared with Wesley, the lines fell to Whitefield in pleasant places.
The observant reader will also notice Whitefield’s enormous labours. In four days, in mid-winter, he held nineteen services, twelve of his sermons being preached in the open air, and three in Dissenting chapels. The opportunity of thus serving his great Master was Whitefield’s idea of spending “a delightful and happy Christmas!” No wonder that his Master blessed him, and filled him so full of joy at midnight hours.
But little more remains to be said respecting Whitefield’s career in 1743. In common with his friend Wesley, he was again and again fiercely assailed by the public press. He was pilloried in the famous Dunciad of Alexander Pope, as follows:—
“So swells each windpipe; ass intones to ass,Harmonic twang! of leather, horn, and brass;Such as from lab’ring lungs th’ Enthusiast blows,High Sound, attemper’d to the vocal nose!Or such as bellow from the deep Divine;There, Webster! peal’d thy voice, and, Whitefield! thine.”
“So swells each windpipe; ass intones to ass,Harmonic twang! of leather, horn, and brass;Such as from lab’ring lungs th’ Enthusiast blows,High Sound, attemper’d to the vocal nose!Or such as bellow from the deep Divine;There, Webster! peal’d thy voice, and, Whitefield! thine.”
“So swells each windpipe; ass intones to ass,
Harmonic twang! of leather, horn, and brass;
Such as from lab’ring lungs th’ Enthusiast blows,
High Sound, attemper’d to the vocal nose!
Or such as bellow from the deep Divine;
There, Webster! peal’d thy voice, and, Whitefield! thine.”
Pope was a poet; another assailant, the author of “The Progress of Methodism in Bristol, or, the Methodists Unmasked, 1743” (18mo. 72pp.), was apoetaster, and unworthy of being further noticed; but, possibly, his ribald verses, in which he malignantly attacked Whitefield, as well as Wesley, were quite as goading as Pope’s more polished lines.
Whitefield began the year 1744 in his native city, Gloucester. He then went to Watford in Wales, and, as moderator of the Calvinistic Methodists, presided, on January3rd, at one of their associations, or conferences. Among the subjects considered at this meeting, the Hampton riot seems to have been the principal. Whitefield writes:—
“After mature deliberation, we determined to prosecute the affair to the utmost, and to set apart January 24 (the first day of the term) for a day of fasting and prayer, and to make collections for that purpose. The cause is the Lord’s, and much depends on our getting the victory. I believe we shall.”
“After mature deliberation, we determined to prosecute the affair to the utmost, and to set apart January 24 (the first day of the term) for a day of fasting and prayer, and to make collections for that purpose. The cause is the Lord’s, and much depends on our getting the victory. I believe we shall.”
The work in Wales was in great prosperity. In a letter, written soon after the assembling of this conference, Howell Harris says:—
“The labours of all our associates are more or less blessed. The Lord countenances the lay-preachers much; but He is more abundantly with the ordained ministers. The believers are generally strong and full of spiritual warmth and life. They do, indeed, adorn the gospel. The congregations are exceedingly large wherever we preach. Some of the greatest opposers are not only silenced, but constrained to own that the Lord is among us of a truth. In many places, the people meet at five o’clock in the morning to adore and worship the Lord together; and, in some places, meetings are resumed in the evenings,and kept up all night in prayer andpraise.”91
“The labours of all our associates are more or less blessed. The Lord countenances the lay-preachers much; but He is more abundantly with the ordained ministers. The believers are generally strong and full of spiritual warmth and life. They do, indeed, adorn the gospel. The congregations are exceedingly large wherever we preach. Some of the greatest opposers are not only silenced, but constrained to own that the Lord is among us of a truth. In many places, the people meet at five o’clock in the morning to adore and worship the Lord together; and, in some places, meetings are resumed in the evenings,and kept up all night in prayer andpraise.”91
It is a strange fact, that, notwithstanding the falsely reputed wealth of Whitefield’s wife, and his own enormous popularity, his income was insufficient for the maintenance of his family in London. Hence, during his visit to Wales,he made arrangements for the removal of his wife and child toAbergavenny;92and, on his return to London, wrote, as follows, to a friend at Gloucester:—
“London,January 18, 1744.“This afternoon, I received your kind letter; and I thank you a thousand times for your great generosity in lending me some furniture, having little of my own. I know who will repay you. Next week, God willing, my dear wife and little one will come to Gloucester, for I find it beyond my circumstances to maintain them here. I leave London this day sennight. My brother will receive a letter about my wife’s coming. She and the little one are brave and well. But why talk I of wife and littleone? Let all be absorbed in the thoughts of the love, sufferings, free and full salvation, of the infinitely great and glorious Emmanuel.”
“London,January 18, 1744.
“This afternoon, I received your kind letter; and I thank you a thousand times for your great generosity in lending me some furniture, having little of my own. I know who will repay you. Next week, God willing, my dear wife and little one will come to Gloucester, for I find it beyond my circumstances to maintain them here. I leave London this day sennight. My brother will receive a letter about my wife’s coming. She and the little one are brave and well. But why talk I of wife and littleone? Let all be absorbed in the thoughts of the love, sufferings, free and full salvation, of the infinitely great and glorious Emmanuel.”
Three weeks after this, Whitefield’s “little one” was dead. The letter containing an account of his bereavement is so characteristic, and so unfolds Whitefield’s weaknesses as well as virtues, that it must be inserted without abridgment.
“Gloucester,February 9, 1744.“Who knows what a day may bring forth? Last night, I was called to sacrifice my Isaac; I mean, to bury my only child and son, about four months old.“Many things had occurred to make me believe he was, not only to be continued to me, but, to be a preacher of the everlasting gospel. Pleased with the thought, and being ambitious of having a son of my own so divinely employed, Satan was permitted to give me some wrong impressions, whereby, as I now find, I misapplied several texts of Scripture. Upon these grounds, I made no scruple of declaring ‘that I should have a son, and that his name was to be John.’ I mentioned the very time of his birth, and fondly hoped that he was to be great in the sight of the Lord.“Everything happened according to the predictions, and my wife having had several narrow escapes while pregnant, especially by her falling from a high horse, and my driving her into a deep ditch in a one-horse chaise a little before the time of her lying-in, and from which we received little or no hurt, confirmed me in my expectation, that God would grant me my heart’s desire.“I would observe to you, that the child was even born in a room which the master of the house had prepared as a prison for his wife, on account of her coming to hear me. With joy would she often look upon the bars and staples and chains, which were fixed in order to keep her in. About a week after his birth, I publicly baptized him in the Tabernacle, and, in the company of thousands, solemnly gave him up to that God, who gave him to me. A hymn, too fondly composed by an aged widow, as suitable to the occasion, was sung, and all went away big with hopes of the child’s being hereafter to be employed in the work of God; but how soon have all their fond, and, as the event has proved, their ill-grounded expectations been blasted, as well as mine!“House-keeping being expensive in London, I thought it best to send both parent and child to Abergavenny, where my wife had a little house, the furniture of which, as I thought of soon embarking for Georgia, I had partly sold, and partly given away. In their journey thither, they stopped at Gloucester, at the Bell Inn, which my brother now keeps, and in which I was born. There, my beloved was cut off with a stroke. Upon my coming here, without knowing what had happened, I enquired concerning the welfare of parent and child; and, by the answer, found that the flower was cut down.“I immediately called all to join in prayer, in which I blessed the Father of mercies for giving me a son, continuing it to me so long, and taking it from me so soon. All joined in desiring that I would decline preaching till the child was buried; but I remembered a saying of goodMr.Henry, ‘that weeping must not hinder sowing;’ and, therefore, I preached twice the next day, and also the day following; on the evening of which, just as I was closing my sermon, the bell struck out for the funeral. At first, I must acknowledge, it gave nature a little shake; but, looking up, I recovered strength, and then concluded with saying, that this text, on which I had been preaching, namely, ‘All things work together for good to them that love God,’ made me as willing to go out to my son’s funeral, as to hear of his birth. Our parting from him was solemn. We kneeled down, prayed, and shed many tears, but, I hope, tears of resignation; and then, as he died in the house wherein I was born, he was taken and laid in the church where I was baptized, first communicated, and first preached.“All this, you may easily guess, threw me into very solemn and deep reflection, and, I hope, deep humiliation; but I was comforted from that passage in the book of Kings, where is recorded the death of the Shunammite’s child, which the prophet said, ‘the Lord had hid from him,’ and the woman’s answer to the prophet when he asked, ‘Is it well with thee? Is it well with thy husband? Is it well with thy child?’ And she answered, ‘It is well.’ This gave me no small satisfaction. I preached upon the text, the day following, at Gloucester; and then hastened up to London, and preached upon the same there.“Though disappointed of a living preacher, by the death of my son, yet, I hope, what happened before his birth, and since at his death, has taught me such lessons, as, if duly improved, may render his mistaken parent more cautious, more sober-minded, more experienced in Satan’s devices, and, consequently, more useful in his future labours to the Church of God. Thus, ‘out of the eater comes forth meat, and out of the strong comes forth sweetness.’ Not doubting but our future life will be one continued explanation of this blessed riddle, I commend myself and you to the unerring guidance of God’s word and Spirit, and am,“Yours,etc.,“George Whitefield.”
“Gloucester,February 9, 1744.
“Who knows what a day may bring forth? Last night, I was called to sacrifice my Isaac; I mean, to bury my only child and son, about four months old.
“Many things had occurred to make me believe he was, not only to be continued to me, but, to be a preacher of the everlasting gospel. Pleased with the thought, and being ambitious of having a son of my own so divinely employed, Satan was permitted to give me some wrong impressions, whereby, as I now find, I misapplied several texts of Scripture. Upon these grounds, I made no scruple of declaring ‘that I should have a son, and that his name was to be John.’ I mentioned the very time of his birth, and fondly hoped that he was to be great in the sight of the Lord.
“Everything happened according to the predictions, and my wife having had several narrow escapes while pregnant, especially by her falling from a high horse, and my driving her into a deep ditch in a one-horse chaise a little before the time of her lying-in, and from which we received little or no hurt, confirmed me in my expectation, that God would grant me my heart’s desire.
“I would observe to you, that the child was even born in a room which the master of the house had prepared as a prison for his wife, on account of her coming to hear me. With joy would she often look upon the bars and staples and chains, which were fixed in order to keep her in. About a week after his birth, I publicly baptized him in the Tabernacle, and, in the company of thousands, solemnly gave him up to that God, who gave him to me. A hymn, too fondly composed by an aged widow, as suitable to the occasion, was sung, and all went away big with hopes of the child’s being hereafter to be employed in the work of God; but how soon have all their fond, and, as the event has proved, their ill-grounded expectations been blasted, as well as mine!
“House-keeping being expensive in London, I thought it best to send both parent and child to Abergavenny, where my wife had a little house, the furniture of which, as I thought of soon embarking for Georgia, I had partly sold, and partly given away. In their journey thither, they stopped at Gloucester, at the Bell Inn, which my brother now keeps, and in which I was born. There, my beloved was cut off with a stroke. Upon my coming here, without knowing what had happened, I enquired concerning the welfare of parent and child; and, by the answer, found that the flower was cut down.
“I immediately called all to join in prayer, in which I blessed the Father of mercies for giving me a son, continuing it to me so long, and taking it from me so soon. All joined in desiring that I would decline preaching till the child was buried; but I remembered a saying of goodMr.Henry, ‘that weeping must not hinder sowing;’ and, therefore, I preached twice the next day, and also the day following; on the evening of which, just as I was closing my sermon, the bell struck out for the funeral. At first, I must acknowledge, it gave nature a little shake; but, looking up, I recovered strength, and then concluded with saying, that this text, on which I had been preaching, namely, ‘All things work together for good to them that love God,’ made me as willing to go out to my son’s funeral, as to hear of his birth. Our parting from him was solemn. We kneeled down, prayed, and shed many tears, but, I hope, tears of resignation; and then, as he died in the house wherein I was born, he was taken and laid in the church where I was baptized, first communicated, and first preached.
“All this, you may easily guess, threw me into very solemn and deep reflection, and, I hope, deep humiliation; but I was comforted from that passage in the book of Kings, where is recorded the death of the Shunammite’s child, which the prophet said, ‘the Lord had hid from him,’ and the woman’s answer to the prophet when he asked, ‘Is it well with thee? Is it well with thy husband? Is it well with thy child?’ And she answered, ‘It is well.’ This gave me no small satisfaction. I preached upon the text, the day following, at Gloucester; and then hastened up to London, and preached upon the same there.
“Though disappointed of a living preacher, by the death of my son, yet, I hope, what happened before his birth, and since at his death, has taught me such lessons, as, if duly improved, may render his mistaken parent more cautious, more sober-minded, more experienced in Satan’s devices, and, consequently, more useful in his future labours to the Church of God. Thus, ‘out of the eater comes forth meat, and out of the strong comes forth sweetness.’ Not doubting but our future life will be one continued explanation of this blessed riddle, I commend myself and you to the unerring guidance of God’s word and Spirit, and am,
“Yours,etc.,
“George Whitefield.”
Whilst Whitefield was burying his child at Gloucester, his friend, Charles Wesley, was preaching, at the peril of his life, in Staffordshire. At Wednesbury, the mob “assaulted, one after another, all the houses of those who were called Methodists.” All the windows were broken, and furniture of every kind was dashed in pieces. At Aldridge and several other villages, many of the houses were plundered, and the rioters “loaded themselves with clothes and goods ofall sorts, as much as they couldcarry.”93Whitefield heard of this execrable rioting, and wrote:—
“There has been dreadful work near Birmingham; but Satan will be overthrown. We had a glorious fast on Monday (February20th), and collected above£60 for our poor suffering brethren.”
“There has been dreadful work near Birmingham; but Satan will be overthrown. We had a glorious fast on Monday (February20th), and collected above£60 for our poor suffering brethren.”
A week after this, Whitefield set out on a visit to his wife at Abergavenny, and took her “a second-hand suit of curtains,” which he had bought for her humble dwelling.
At the beginning of the month of March, he returned to Gloucester, to be present at the assizes, at which the Hampton rioters, already mentioned, were tried, and found guilty, the amount of damages to be paid being referred to the King’s Bench, London. Whitefield writes:—
“I hear the rioters are hugely alarmed; but they know not that we intend to let them see what we could do, and then to forgive them. This troublesome affair being over, I must now prepare for my intended voyage to America.”
“I hear the rioters are hugely alarmed; but they know not that we intend to let them see what we could do, and then to forgive them. This troublesome affair being over, I must now prepare for my intended voyage to America.”
Nearly seven months, however, elapsed before Whitefield’s voyage was begun,—an interval which was partly occupied with what, to Whitefield, was extremely uncongenial, a literary war.
To understand the controversy, it is needful to remark, that, of late, several publications had been issued, and industriously circulated, attacking the loyalty of Whitefield and his friends. Among others, there was a quarto-sized sheet, of four pages, entitled, “The Case of the Methodists briefly stated, more particularly in the point of Field-Preaching.” The writer tries to prove that field-preaching is contrary to the Act of Toleration; and then he proceeds to shew, that, because of the largeness of his congregations, Whitefield’s preaching in the open air was eminently calculated to promote sedition, and to be a serious danger to the state.
The principal publication, however, was “Observations upon the Conduct and Behaviour of a certain Sect, usually distinguished by the name of Methodists. London: printed by E. Owen, in Amen Corner. 1744.” (4to. 24pp.) Rightly or wrongly,Dr.Gibson, Bishop of London, wassupposed to be the author. The pamphlet consisted of three parts. In the first, it was alleged, 1. That the Methodists generally set the government at defiance, by appointing public places of religious worship, and by preaching in the fields, without taking the prescribed oaths, and subscribing the declaration against popery. 2. That they broke the rules of the Church, of which they professed themselves members, by going to other than their own parish churches to receive the sacrament. 3. It was also stated that really there was no need for Methodist meetings, because, for many years past, many of the Religious Societies, in London and Westminster, had spent their Sunday evenings (after attending church) in serious conversation and reading good books; and the bishops and clergy had encouraged these Societies, though some of them had been misled into Methodist extravagances.
In the second part, which is principally levelled against Whitefield, thirteen questions are asked, of which the following are specimens:—Question 4. Whether a due and regular attendance in the public offices of religion does not better answer the true ends of devotion, and is not better evidence of the co-operation of the Holy Spirit, than those sudden agonies, roarings, and screamings, tremblings, droppings-down, ravings, and madness into which the hearers of the Methodists had been cast? Question 9. Whether it does not savour of self-sufficiency and presumption, when a few young heads, without any colour of a Divine commission, set up their own schemes as the great standard of Christianity?
The third part is a severe critique on theChristian History, of which Whitefield was the chief promoter. Here, again, sundry questions were asked, as, for instance, “Whether the zealous endeavours to form Band-Societies, according to the Moravian way, and putting them under the instruction and ordering of particularsuperintendents, andexhorters; and the holding ofassociationsandmeetings, at set times and places, with select moderators; together with the fixing ofvisitationsand their boundaries and limits,—whether these proceedings, not warranted by any law, are not a presumptuous attempt to erect a new church constitution, upona foreign plan, in contempt of those wise rules of government, discipline, and worship, which were judged by our pious ancestors to be the best means for preserving and maintaining religion, together with public peace and order in Church and State?” Again, “Whether these itinerant preachers, and the setting up of separate places of public worshipat pleasure, and those pretences to more immediate communications with God, and the visible endeavours to bring the parochial pastors and the public worship under a disesteem among the people,—whether these and the like practices are not of the same kind with those of the last century, that had so great a share in bringing on those religious confusions, which brought a reproach upon Christianity in general, and which, by degrees, worked the body of the people into a national madness and frenzy in matters of religion?”
To see the full force of these accusations, it must be borne in mind, that, they were published at a time when, (1) The nation was in a state of great excitement from an expected invasion by Prince Charles, the young Pretender; (2) The Methodists in Wiltshire, Gloucestershire, and Staffordshire, were being subjected to the most brutal treatment by clerically encouraged mobs; and (3) The general belief was that these “Observations upon the Conduct and Behaviour of the Methodists” were not of ignoble origin, but were written by the bishop of the metropolitan diocese, and with the approval of a considerable number of his prelatic brethren.
On January 26, 1744, Whitefield published the following advertisement:—