It was in consequence of the paper published by Wesley, in 1770, that the Methodists, who had received the truth through Whitefield, separated themselves from those who are now called the Wesleyan Methodists. Berridge, Romaine, Howell Harris, Hill, Toplady, Venn, and Lady Huntingdon, took an active part in this separation. Of those who agreed with Wesley, the chief was Mr. Fletcher, afterward the clergyman of Madeley in Shropshire. He was, therefore, removed by Lady Huntingdon from her college at Trevecca, of which he had been the head. This college, formerly an old castle, had been opened by Lady Huntingdon in 1768, when the six students were expelled from Oxford. She meant it to be a place where young men might have Christian training to fit them for the ministry of the gospel. It was plain from what had happened, that neither Oxford nor Cambridge were likely to furnish anything much better than heathen training; Mr. Berridge did not quite approve of the plan. He thought it best to leave such training to the Lord Jesus, who could, he said, “glean up ministering servants when and where He pleased.” He reminded Lady Huntingdon that when Elijah was to have a successor, God did not take one out of “the school of the prophets” at Bethel, but chose a man from behind the plow. However, Lady Huntingdon had her college, which was afterward removed from Trevecca to Cheshunt, where it is still to be found. Howell Harris meantime had built an enormous house at Trevecca for the Lord’s work, though how it was to be used he had no definite idea. Scarcely was it finished, when families came from all parts of Wales desiring to settle at Trevecca to be taught by Harris. He lodged them in the house, and it became a sort of mission-station, whence laborers of all sorts were sent forth to work for God; but in the year 1773, Howell Harris was called away. The year following, our old friend, John Nelson, also departed to be with Christ. Martha was not long separated from her good husband. Two months later, September, 1774, she was laid by his side in Birstal churchyard.
I am sorry to have to tell you that the disputes between the Wesleyan and Calvinistic Methodists, which became so violent in the year 1770, lasted with increasing violence for at least six years. They ended in an almost entire separation of the one party from the other. Wesley said that the paper, of which I told you, and which had given rise to the disputes, was quite misunderstood by the Calvinistic Methodists. He had, soon after publishing it, signed a paper, written by Lady Huntingdon’s cousin, Mr. Shirley.
This good man was a clergyman who had been much used by God in the conversion of sinners. He was one of the most remarkable of the Methodist preachers. He had written the paper, of which I am telling you, in the name of John Wesley. It was as follows—“We,” (i.e. John Wesley and others, who had joined in publishing the former paper), “do declare that we had no such meaning as to favor justification by works, and that we abhor it as a most perilous and abominable doctrine; and we hereby solemnly declare, in the sight of God, that we have no trust or confidence, but in the alone merits of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, for justification or salvation; and, though no one is a real Christian believer (and consequently cannot be saved), who doeth not good works when there is time and opportunity, yet, our works have no part in meriting or purchasing our justification, from first to last, either in whole or in part.” This was just what Wesley himself had taught many years before and he said that it was what he still believed. But many of the Methodists said, very truly, that, if he believed it, he ought to own that the paper he had published before, and which had been so much blamed, was wrong. They were not satisfied with his signing the paper written by Mr. Shirley, unless he also made this acknowledgment. But Wesley, on the contrary, required that Mr. Shirley should make a written acknowledgment that he had mistaken the meaning of the paper which had given such offense. Mr. Shirley was willing, for the sake of peace, to make this acknowledgment. It is not wonderful that many of the Methodists were deeply grieved and much dissatisfied with this. If Wesley’s paper did not mean what it said, and said very plainly too, it must, to say the least, have been very badly expressed, and was very likely to mislead people. The error, too, which it in any case appeared to contain, was one so grievous, and so dishonoring to Christ, that it is a cause for thankfulness to find so many among the Methodists who were grieved and displeased at it. And one cannot but fear that Wesley must have been more anxious to defend himself, than to avoid the smallest risk of dishonoring the blessed work of Christ.
The heart, which is deceitful above all things, still exists, even in the children of God, and the moment that Christ is not with us, the one object, our eyes become dim and clouded, and we do harm, even without intending it, to the cause of God. I cannot, therefore, give you a truthful account of all these matters without owning that the Calvinistic Methodists, as they were called, showed far more faithfulness of heart to Christ on this occasion than did those who differed from them. But it must be owned of both that, in blaming one another, they spoke violently, angrily, and bitterly, forgetting that the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God. You will be grieved, but scarcely surprised, to hear of these errors and sins, unless you had expected to hear that the Methodists were perfect people. Whilst in some respects they were a bright example, in others they are a sad warning. There has been but one Man walking this earth who has been to us a bright example, and that only. It is but fair to add that there were, no doubt, some among the Calvinistic Methodists who went beyond the plain word of God in explaining how the sinner is saved.
Those who simply taught that salvation is entirely and wholly of the Lord, that man has no more share in saving himself than in creating himself, but that from first to last all is the work of God, were merely saying what the word of God plainly declares. When a man is born again, it is “not of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.” If it depended on our will we should be lost forever. Nor is it by our feelings, nor our doings. It is “Not that we loved God, but that He loved us.” It is “Not of works, lest any man should boast.”
But some of the Calvinistic Methodists added words of their own to the plain statements of the Bible. Some of them denied that God made any offer of mercy to sinners, except in the case of such as were chosen by Him before the foundation of the world. If this were true there would be no such sin as that of which Christ speaks in the 12th chapter of John—the sin of rejecting Him. If it were true, we should not read of the gracious invitation, “Come, for all things are now ready,” sent to those who all with one consent began to make excuse, and never came at all. Of them the Lord said, “none of them who were bidden shall taste of My supper.”
Some, too, of the Calvinistic Methodists, who were right in saying that our feelings and behavior have no share in saving us, seem to have gone further, and to have said it mattered not what our feelings or behavior were. They thus made the grace of God an excuse for sin. Let us ask to be kept from turning to the right hand or to the left. And let us be thankful that God tells us not only that Christ Himself has finished the work which saves us, but that He gives to us that eternal life which is in His Son, so that we can feel, think, speak, and act according to the mind of God, the Holy Spirit working in us to will and to do of His good pleasure. It must have been a joyful thing for Howell Harris and John Nelson to be called away from the sorrow and strife of the wilderness. But they were deeply mourned by those who were left behind. We read of the thousands who followed them to the grave, with tears, and yet with hymns of praise.
Wesley, meanwhile, grew stronger in his old age than ever he had been before. “My sight,” he writes, in 1774, “is considerably better now, and my nerves firmer than 30 years ago. I have none of the infirmities of old age, and have lost several I had in my youth. The grand cause is the good pleasure of God, who doeth whatsoever pleaseth Him. The chief means are—1. My constant rising at four for about 50 years. 2. My generally preaching at five in the morning, one of the most healthy exercises in the world. 3. My never traveling less, by sea or land, than 4500 miles in a year.” To this we might add his extremely temperate habits, which must have been a great means of keeping him in health.
There was not much opportunity for self-indulgent habits in the case of a man who, whatever his income, made a rule to spend no more upon himself than £28 each year. It is true that sum would go about twice as far then as it would now; but, allowing for that, it was indeed small to pay the expenses of a man who was constantly employed in riding about the country. Whilst spending so little upon himself, he probably gave away in the course of his life about £30,000.