« PreviousContinue »
charge whoever opposes me. Your next words are, “ You affirm that you never said or thought, that what you do is to be accounted the work of God. If it be the work of God, you need not deny the other point.” Yes, Sir : whether it be or not, I must still deny, that I ever charged you with rejecting the Spirit in opposing me.
You remark, 9. “ His own dreams must be regarded as oracles." I answered, “Whose ? I desire neither my dreams nor my waking thoughts, may be regarded at all, unless just so far as they agree with the Oracles of God.' To this also you make no reply.
You remark, 10. “However wild his behaviour may be, whatever he does, is to be accounted the work of God.” It was to this I answered, “I never said so of what I do: I never thought so.' This answer was ill expressed. And I might have foreseen, you would hardly fail to make your advantage of it. I must, therefore, explain myself upon it a little farther. You said, “An enthusiast accounts whatever he does to be the work of God.” I should have said, “but I do not account whatever I do to be the work of God. What that is, which I do account his work, will be considered by and by.
You remark, 11. “He talks in the style of inspired persons." I answered, “No otherwise inspired, than you are, if you love God. You reply, (p. 126,) “ The point was not, whether you are actually inspired, but whether you have talked in the style of those who were so.”
That was so much the point, that if it were allowed, it would overturn your whole argument. For if I were inspired (in your sense) you could not term that inspiration enthusiasm without blasphemy; but you again mistake my words. The plain meaning of them is, that I talk in the style of those persons, who are 'no otherwise inspired than you are, if you love God.'
You remark, 12. “ He applies Scripture phrases to himself, without attending to their orignal meaning, or once considering the difference of times and circumstances,” (p. 62.) I answered, “I am not conscious of any thing like this. I apply no Scripture phrase (p. 39,) either to myself or any other, without carefully considering both the original meaning, and the secondary sense, wherein, allowing for different times and circumstances, it may be applied to ordinary Christians. You reply, “ This also you deny to have done; holding, however, some secondary sense, (what it is you have not told us,) in which Scripture phrases may be applied to ordinary Christians.“ I have largely told you, what I mean by a secondary sense, in the first part of the Farther Appeal. You add, (p. 126.) “ Many things which were truly written of the preaching of Christianity at first, you have vainly applied to yourselves.” Sir, I am to answer only for myself: as I will for that expression, “Behold the day of the Lord is come; he is again visiting and redeeming bis people !'
3. I come now to what you expatiate upon at large, as the two grand instances of enthusiasm. The first is plainly this.
At some rare times when I have been in great distress of soul, or in utter uncertainty how to act, in an important case, which required a speedy determination : after using all other means that occurred, I have.
cast lots, or opened the Bible. And by this means I have been relieved from that distress, or directed in that uncertainty. Instances of this kind occur in the Third Journal, Vol. I. p. 241, 242, 251, 286; as also in the Fourth Journal, Vol. I. p. 303, 344. I desire any one who would understand this matter thoroughly, to read those passages as they stand at length.
As to the particular instances, I would observe, 1. That with regard to my first journey to Bristol, you should in any wise have set down those words, that preface the scriptures there recited. “I was entreated, in the most pressing manner, to come to Bristol without delay. This I was not at all forward to do: and, perhaps a little the less inclined to it, because of the remarkable scriptures which offered, as often as we inquired touching the consequence of this removal: though whether this was permitted only for the trial of our faith, God knoweth, and the event will show.' From the scriptures afterwards recited, some inferred, that the event they apprehended, was yet afar off. I infer nothing at all. I still know not how to judge ; but leave the whole to God. This only I know, that the continual expectation of death, was then an unspeakable blessing to me: that I did not dare, knowingly, to waste a moment, neither to throw away one desire on earthly things: those words being ever uppermost in my thoughts, and, indeed, frequently on my tongue,
Ere long, when sov'reign wisdom wills,
My soul an unknown path shall treau,
This frame, and mingle with the dead.
And life is all re-touch'd again. s observe, 2. That in two other of those instances, Third Journal, Vol. I. p. 241, 242, it is particularly mentioned, that “I was troubled;" and that by the seasonable application of those scriptures, that trouble was entirely removed. The same blessing I received (so I must term it still) from the words set down in the 419th and in a yet higher degree, from that exceeding apposite scripture mentioned in the Fourth Journal, Vol. I. p. 344.
I observe, 3. That at the times to which your other citations refer, I was utterly uncertain how to act, in points of great importance, and such'as required a speedy determination : and that by this mean my uncertainty was removed, and I went on my way rejoicing. Vol. I. p. 241, 242, Vol. I. p. 303.
My own experience, therefore, which you think should discourage me for the future from any thing of this kind, does, on the contrary, greatly encourage me herein; since I have found much benefit, and no inconvenience : unless perhaps this be one, that you cannot acquit me of enthusiasm; add, if you please, and presumption.
But you ask, “ Has God ever commanded us to do thus ?” I believe he has neither commanded nor forbidden it in Scripture.
But then remember, “That Scripture' (to use the words which you cite
" that we
from our learned and judicious Hooker) is not the only rule of all things which in this life may be done by men.' All I affirm concerning this, is, That it may be done, and that I have, in fact, received assistance and direction thereby.
4. I give the same answer to your assertion, (p. 123,) are not ordered in Scripture to decide any point in question by lots.” You allow, indeed, there are “instances of this in Scripture ;" but affirm, these “ were miraculous : nor can we without presumption" (a species of enthusiasm) “apply this method." I want proof of this : bring one plain text of Scripture, and I am satisfied. “ This, I apprehend, you learned from the Moravians.” I did ; though it is true, Mr. Whitefield thought I went too far therein. 66 Instances of the same occur in your journals. I will mention only one. It being debated whether you should go to Bristol, you say, 'We at length all agreed to decide it by lot. And by this it was determined I should go.' (Vol. I. p. 251.) Is this your way of carefully considering every step you take? 'Can there be greater pashness and extravagance ? Reason is thus in a manner rendered useless : prudence is set aside, and affairs of moment left to be determined by chance!" (p. 124.)
So this you give as a genuine instance of my proceedings. And, I suppose, of your own fairness and candour ! We agreed at length to decide it by lot.' True, at length : after a debate of some hours : after carefully hearing and weighing coolly, all the reasons which could be alleged on either side : Our brethren still continuing the dispute, without any probability of their coming to one conclusion, we at length, (the night being now far spent) all agreed to this.' “Can there be greater rashness and extravagance?” I cannot but think there can. “ Reason is thus in a manner rendered useless.” No: we had used it as far as it could go : from Saturday, March 17, (when I received the first letter) to Wednesday 28, when the case was laid before the society. “ Prudence is set aside:” Not so: but the arguments here were so equal, that we saw not how to determine. " And affairs of moment left to be determined by chance!" By chance? What a blunder then is that, The lot is cast into the lap; but the whole disposal thereof is of the Lord !
This I firmly believe is truth and reason, and will be to the end of the world. And I therefore still subscribe to that declaration of the Moravian church, (laid before the whole body of divines in the university of Wirtemberg, and not by them accounted enthusiasm,) • We have a peculiar esteem for lots, and accordingly use them both in public and private, to decide points of importance, when the reasons brought on each side, appear to be of equal weight. And we believe this to be then the only way, of wholly setting aside our own will, of acquitting ourselves of all blame, and clearly knowing what is the will of God, Third Journal, Vol. I. p. 228.
5. You next remarked several instances of my enthusiasm. The first was, That of Mrs. Jones. The next ran thus. say, 'I expounded out of the fulness that was given me,' (p. 64.) I
“ Again you
answered, “I mean I had then a fuller, deeper sense (of what I spoke) than I ordinarily have,' (p. 41.) But if you still think, “It would have been more decent to have said, according to the best of my power and ability, with God's assistance, I expounded;" I will say so another time.
With regard to the third instance of enthusiasm, you remarked, * If you would not have us look on this as miraculous, there is nothing in it worthy of being related,” (p. 64.) I answered, It may be so. Let it pass then as a trifle not worth relating ; but still it is no proof of enthusiasm. For I would not have you look upon it as miraculous—But as a signal instance of God's particular providence, (p. 42.) How friendly and generous is your reply! “You seem ashamed of it-I am glad you give this fooling up, and hope for the future you will treat your readers better,” (p. 131.) Sir, I am not ashamed of it ; nor shall I ever give this fooling up, till I give up the Bible.
I still look upon this as a signal instance of God's particular providence. But “ how is this consistent with yielding it to be a trifle ?” (p. 132.) My words do not imply, that I yield it so to be. Being urged with the dilemma, • Either this is related as miraculous, (and then it is enthusiasm,) or it is not worth relating : I answered, (to avoid drawing the sword of controversy,) · Let it pass then as a trifle not worth relating. But still (if it be a trifle, which I suppose, not grant,) it is no proof of enthusiasm. For í would not have you look upon it as miraculous.?
And yet I believe I yielded too much, and what might too much favour your assertion, that "there is a great difference between particular providences and such extraordinary interpositions." Pray, Sir, show me what this difference is. It is a subject that deserves your coolest thoughts. “ I know no ground to hope or pray for such immediate reliefs. These things must be represented either as common accidents, or as miracles.” I do not thoroughly understand your terms. What is a common accident? That a sparrow falls to the ground? Or something more inconsiderable than the hairs of your head? Is there no medium between accident and miracle? If there be, what is that medium ? When we are agreed with regard to these few points, I shall be glad to resume the subject.
6. The fourth instance of my enthusiasm was this, that I “related judgments inflicted on my opposers.” As to Mr. Molther, I must observe once more, that I do believe there was a particular proviJence in his sickness. But I do not believe, (nor did I design to insinuate,) that it was a judgment, for opposing me. You go on.
“ Again, you mention as an awful providence, the case of a poor wretch who was last week cursing and blaspheming, and had boasted to many, that he would come again on Sunday, and no man should stop his mouth then. But on Friday God laid his hand upon him, and on Sunday he was buried,” (p. 66.) I answered, • I look on this as a manifest judgment of God on a hardened sin. ner, for his complicated wickedness, (p. 42.) You reply, (p. 133,
Add, if you please, “His labouring with all his might to hinder
the word of God.' Here therefore is a confessed judgment, for his opposition to you.” There is, for his thus opposing with curses and blasphemy. This was part of his complicated wickedness. Here then you “ think I plead guilty.” Not of enthusiasm; till you prove, this was not an awful providence.'
“ Again, "One was just going to beat his wife, (which he frequently did,) when God smote him in a moment, so that his hand dropped, and he fell down upon the ground, having no more strength than a new-born child.' Have we any warrant either from Scripture, or the common dispensations of Providence, to interpret misfortunes of this nature as judgments?” (p. 67.) I answered, Can you, Sir, consider this as one of the common dispensations of Providence? Have you known a parallel one in your life? But it was never cited by me (as it is by you) as an immediate punishment on a man for opposing me, (p. 42.) You reply, “As if what is not common, or what I have not known, must be a miraculous judgment." I believe it was, whether miraculous or not, a judgment mixed with mercy.
You now add to the rest the following instance: “One John Haydon, a man of regular life and conversation, being informed, that people fell into strange fits at the societies, came to see and judge for himself. But he was still less satisfied than before ; insomuch that he went about to his acquaintance one after another, and laboured above measure to convince them, it was a delusion of the devil. We were going home, when one met us in the street, and informed us, that J. H. allen raving mad. It seems he had sat down to dinner, but had a mind first to end the sermon on Salvation by Faith. In reading the last page he changed colour, fell off his chair, and began screaming terribly, and beating himself against the ground. The neighbours were alarmed, and flocked into the house. I came in and found him upon the floor, the room being full of people, whom his wife would have kept without, but he cried aloud, No; let them all come ; let all the world see the just judgment of God. Two or three men were holding him as well as they could. He immediately fixed his eyes on me and cried, Ay, this is he, who I said was a deceiver of the people. But God has overtaken me. I said it was all a delusion. But this is no delusion. He then voared out, I thou devil! Thou cursed devil! Yea, thou legion of devils! Thou canst not stay. Christ will cast thee out. I know his work is begun. Tear me to pieces, if thou wilt, but thou canst not hurt me. He then beat himself against the ground again, his breast heaving at the same time, as in the pangs of death, and great drops of sweat trickling down his face. We all betook ourselves to prayer. His pangs ceased, and both his body and soul were set at liberty.' Vol. I. p. 256.
If you had pleased, you might have added from the next paragraph, Returning to J. H. we found his voice was lost, and his body weak as that of an infant. But his soul was in peace, full of love, and rejoicing in hope of the glory of God.'