address was more productive of a searching introspection than was that of his brother evangelists. Charles had no charity for the extraordinary manifestations. John tolerated them on the ground that one must be careful not to oppose his personal fastidiousness to a method of working ordained or allowed by God. At the same time he regarded them as purely incidental, and indignantly denied the imputation that he ranked them among the marks of the new birth. As to the cause of the phenomena, his matured verdict inclined to the supposition of natural, supplemented by Satanic agency. Writing in 1744 of this class of events, he says that they may easily be accounted for, "either on principles of reason or Scripture. First, on principles of reason. For how easy is it to suppose that a strong, lively, and sudden apprehension of the heinousness of sin, the wrath of God, and the bitter pains of eternal death, should affect the body as well as the soul, during the present laws of vital union,- should interrupt or disturb the ordinary circulations, and put nature out of its course. Yea, we may question whether, while this union subsists, it be possible for the mind to be affected in so violent a degree, without some or other of those bodily symptoms following. It is likewise easy to account for these things on principles of Scripture. For when we take a view of them in this light, we are to add to the consideration of natural causes the agency of those spirits who excel in strength, and as far as they have leave of God, will not fail to torment whom they cannot destroy, to tear those that are coming to Christ." 1

1 Farther Appeal to Men of Reason and Religion.

A movement such as the evangelists had inaugurated naturally did not proceed far, in an age really averse to earnest piety, and dreading enthusiasm more than the devil, without exciting violent opposition. Doubtless animosity, in some cases, was needlessly provoked by the less discreet of the laborers, who denounced the clergy, whom they deemed utterly negligent of their duties, in terms more unsparing than politic. Wesley himself expresses his regrets over an instance of this kind that was brought to his notice. But no amount of caution consistent with a vigorous prosecution of the work could have saved the movement from a venomous hatred and opposition. The hatred

was in the spirit of the times, and it must needs vent itself; and it did vent itself right speedily and unmistakably. The mob, taking their inspiration from their superiors, were soon at work. Flying clods and stones became a frequent accompaniment of Methodist preaching. Raging crowds, abetted in some instances by clergymen and magistrates, maltreated the Methodist chiefs and their subordinates. In one case a whole community of Methodists (at Wednesbury and its neighborhood) were made the victims of a furious onset. Eighty houses had their windows smashed. Instances were not wanting in which outrage deepened into murderous violence. Some of the preachers were denounced as vagrants, and seized by the pressgang, and many of them were apparently more than once upon the verge of a sudden martyrdom. From the long catalogue of this class of incidents we give, as a specimen, the following item in the experience of Wesley, not because it is the most striking which he

has recorded, but as being of convenient brevity. Under date of Sept. 12, 1742, he writes: "Many of the beasts of the people labored much to disturb those who were of a better mind. They endeavored to drive a herd of cows among them; but the brutes were wiser than their masters. They then threw whole showers of stones, one of which struck me just between the eyes. But I felt no pain at all, and when I had wiped away the blood, went on testifying, with a loud voice, that God hath given to them that believe, not the spirit of fear, but of power and love, and of a sound mind." Wesley took events of this kind in a singularly complacent fashion, as though he regarded them a regular part of his ministerial pay. Among his rules for dealing with such scenes of turbulence was the maxim always to look a mob in the face.

99

But the violence of the mob was outdone by the violence of the pen. Methodism was pursued by a constant stream of invective and scurrility, in sermons, periodicals, and pamphlets. It was described as “a revival of the old fanaticism of the last century, when all manner of madness was practised, and all manner of villany committed in the name of Christ; as an "enthusiasm made up of a thousand incoherencies and absurdities, picked and collected from the vilest errors and most pestilent follies of every heresy upon earth." Methodists were stigmatized as "restless deceivers," "insolent pretenders," "men of capricious humors, spiritual sleight, and canting craftiness," "profane hypocrites," "buffoons in religion and mountebanks in theology." It was hinted of Wesley that he was a Romish emissary, and that he was in the pay of the

Spanish government. One styled him "the first Protestant pope," and another, as if anxious to defy competition, declared that in him "the angel of darkness had made his incarnate appearance. Whitefield received, if possible, even a fuller measure of abuse than Wesley. Besides being assailed with all sorts of epithets, he was made to figure prominently in a comedy which was brought out to caricature Methodism. Most of the diatribes were allowed to pass unnoticed. An answer, however, was rendered to a few of the more important, such as Bishop Lavington's "Enthusiasm of Methodists and Papists Compared." The bishop's performance neither honored himself nor the cause of religion in general. According to the severe comment of Julia Wedgwood, the facetious prelate "deserves to be coupled with the men who flung dead cats and rotten eggs at the Methodists, not with those who assailed their tenets with arguments, or even serious rebuke."1

2. WHITEFIELD AND CALVINISTIC METHODISM.-George Whitefield was born in 1714. His father, who was an inn-keeper in Gloucester, died while George was in youth, and the care of his education devolved upon his mother. At the age of eighteen he entered Pembroke College, Oxford. His straitened circumstances had previously compelled him, at least for a time, to do menial duties at the inn, and at college he was obliged. to work his way as a servitor. His early life had exhibited a mixture of religion and irreligion, but at college the religious impulses of his nature gained the

1 John Wesley and the Evangelical Reaction of the Eighteenth Century. On the general subject of the paragraph see in particular Tyerman's Life and Times of John Wesley.

ascendency. After passing through a profound and painful struggle, he issued into a clear experience of divine grace. In 1736 he was admitted to orders, and began directly his remarkable preaching career. His very first efforts produced an extraordinary impression. In 1738 he visited America, and conceived the project of the orphan house in Georgia, an institution which continued to claim his affectionate interest till the end of his life. Early in 1739, as already stated, he led Methodism to the field of victory, by initiating outdoor preaching. In the same year he visited Wales, and started a second time for America. His first trip

to Scotland occurred near the middle of 1741. But our space forbids us to particularize. Suffice it to say that, in his almost ubiquitous evangelism, he traversed England repeatedly, made numerous visits to Wales and Scotland, twice crossed into Ireland, made seven voyages to America, preached through the colonies on the Atlantic border, and died a few hours after delivering his last sermon, at Newburyport, Sept. 30, 1770.

Whitefield possessed but moderate learning and intellectual breadth. He was rather lacking in precision and poise. Cast out upon a conspicuous and tumultuous career as early as the age of twenty-three, he naturally exhibited some of the faults of immature thought and precipitate zeal. Of this he himself became conscious, and we find him writing, in 1748, as follows: "In how many things have I judged and acted wrong! I have been too rash and hasty in giving characters. both of places and persons. Being fond of Scripture language, I have often used a style too apostolical; and at the same time I have been too bitter in my zeal.