Notes:
Sermon 81: In What Sense We Are to Leave the World
This is the first sermon in the seventh volume of SOSO (1788) and is a logical sequel to the last one in SOSO, VI. It argues the same practical conclusion—i.e., Christian discipline ‘requires us to keep at a distance, as far as is practicable, from all ungodly men’ (§4), and it is in this sense that we are ‘to leave the world’. It was, however, written almost two years earlier and in a very different setting (July 17, 1784). Wesley had already recorded his optimistic reflections on his eighty-first birthday, in the midst of an arduous itinerary through the West Country, Wales, Ireland, Scotland, and now the north of England: ‘Today I entered on my eighty-second year, and found myself just as strong to labour and as fit for any exercise of body or mind as I was forty years ago.’ (JWJ, June 28, 1784). The Journal entry for July 15 is terse: ‘I retired to Otley and rested two days.’ The diary for the 17th records that he spent that morning writing a sermon; that it was this one is confirmed by its postscript in the Arminian Magazine (VII.632): ‘Otley, July 17, 1784’.
What is not mentioned, either here or elsewhere in the Journal or diary, was a momentous crisis looming over the Methodist movement as a whole. By this time, Wesley had decided to provide his movement with a new structure in the form of a Deed of Declaration, to be proposed to the Conference in Leeds, July 27-August 3. One would never know from Wesley how deeply this move toward autonomy for the Conference had stirred the emotions of many, or how decisively it had marked the point of no return in the evolution of Methodism toward eventual separation from the Church of England.
See Curnock’s understated note, VII.5-6, where he comments that ‘the manner in which the Deed was devised and executed, and the names selected for the constitution of the first Legal Conference, gave offence to some;’ see also Baker, John Wesley and the Church of England, chs. 13-15.
In such a crisis it would have been important for Wesley to reject the conventional Nonconformist interpretations of 2 Cor. 6:17-18—which 03:142had served so long as their scriptural warrant for separation from the Established Church. Wesley had never intended any such separation, and steadfastly denied that separation was inevitable or even ‘expedient’. Thus, he could lay an even heartier stress on his very different interpretation of the same Scripture as the basis for that asceticism-in-the-world to which he would return in ‘On Friendship with the World’. His ideal was a revival that helped renew the church without leaving it, and a Christian discipline that would ‘leave the world’ without fleeing from it.
This Otley sermon was published in the Arminian Magazine, without title, in the November and December issues of 1784 (VII.569-77, 626-32), and numbered as ‘Sermon XXIV’. Then in 1788 he could invert the chronological order and use this sermon with a somewhat cumbersome title added to it for the opening message in the third volume of his ‘original sermons’. It was not reprinted in Wesley’s lifetime, but it serves both as a variation of a constant theme and as something of a mirroring of Wesley’s basic character: a man who had himself ‘left the world’ long since, and who never ceased to call on others to follow in his train.
In What Sense We Are to Leave the World2 Corinthians 6:17-18
Come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you;
And I will be to you a Father, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.
11. How exceeding few in the religious world have duly considered these solemn words! We have read them over and over, but never laid them to heart, or observed that they contain as plain and express a command as any in the whole Bible. And it is to be feared, there are still fewer that understand the genuine meaning of this direction. Numberless persons in England have interpreted it as a command to come out of the Established Church. And in the same sense it has been understood by 03:143 thousands in the neighbouring kingdoms.
In England this included both the Independents and the Nonconformists; cf. H. W. Clark, History of English Nonconformity (2 vols.; 1911-13), II.244-86. They regarded conformity to the Church of England as sinful and appealed to the arguments of Milton’s Consideration Touching the Likeliest Means to Remove Hirelings Out of the Church (1659). In Scotland disestablishment sentiments were strong; in Ireland it was the Roman Catholics who were the disestablishmentarians. And, at the time of this writing, Wesley had just come from preaching visits to all of these ‘neighbouring kingdoms’.
22. But this interpretation is totally foreign to the design of the Apostle, who is not here speaking of this or that church, but on quite another subject. Neither did the Apostle himself or any of his brethren draw any such inference from the words. Had they done so it would have been a flat contradiction both to the example and precept of their Master. For although the Jewish church was then full as ‘unclean’, as unholy both inwardly and outwardly, as any Christian church now upon earth, yet our Lord constantly attended the service of it. And he directed his followers in this, as in every other respect, to ‘tread in his steps’.
Cf. 1 Pet. 2:21.
Matt. 23:2-3.
33. Neither have they any reference to the direction given by the Apostle in his first Epistle to the Corinthians. The whole passage 03:144 runs thus: ‘I wrote unto you in an epistle, not to company with fornicators. Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. But now I have written unto you, not to [keep]
Wesley here is quoting the AV of 1 Cor. 5:11, which reads ‘not to keep company’, etc. His omission, however, is in line with the translations of Tyndale, Cranmer, and the Geneva Bible, and good English—cf. the next sentence but one.
1 Cor. 5:9-11. [In the Notes Wesley had translated this: ‘I wrote to you an epistle not to converse with lewd persons; …not to converse with such an one, no, not to eat with him.’]
Cf. 1 Pet. 4:15.
44. But although this direction relates only to our Christian brethren (such at least by outward profession), that in the text is of a far wider extent: it unquestionably relates to all mankind. It clearly requires us to keep at a distance, as far as is practicable, from all ungodly men. Indeed it seems the word which we render 03:145‘unclean thing’, τοῦ ἀκαθάρτου, might rather be rendered ‘unclean person’, probably alluding to the ceremonial law which forbade touching one that was legally unclean.
See Lev. 5:2-3, etc.
55. The words therefore must necessarily be understood with considerable restriction. They do not prohibit our conversing with any man, good or bad, in the way of worldly business. A thousand occasions will occur whereon we must converse with them, in order to transact those affairs which cannot be done without them. And some of these may require us to have frequent intercourse with drunkards or fornicators; yea, sometimes it may be requisite for us to spend a considerable time in their company; otherwise we should not be able to fulfil the duties of our several callings. Such conversation therefore with men, holy or unholy, is no way contrary to the Apostle’s advice.
66. What is it then which the Apostle forbids? First, the conversing with ungodly men when there is no necessity, no providential call, no business, that requires it; secondly, the conversing with them more frequently than business necessarily requires; thirdly, the spending more time in their company than is necessary to finish our business; above all, fourthly, the choosing ungodly persons, however ingenious or agreeable, to be our ordinary companions, or to be our familiar friends. If any instance of this kind will admit of less excuse than others it is that which the Apostle expressly forbids elsewhere, the being ‘unequally yoked with an unbeliever’
Cf. 2 Cor. 6:14.
Rom. 3:18.
Acts 5:29; cf. No. 96, ‘On Obedience to Parents’, §§5-6.
77. The ground of this prohibition is laid down at large in the preceding verses: ‘What fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? What communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? Or what part hath he that believeth with an unbeliever?’ (Taking that word in the extensive sense for him that hath neither the love nor the fear of God.) ‘Ye are the temple of the living God: as God hath said, I will dwell in them and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.’ It follows, ‘Wherefore come out from among them’—the unrighteous, the children of darkness, the sons of Belial, the unbelievers—‘and be ye separate, and touch not the unclean thing (or person), and I will receive you.’
2 Cor. 6:14-17.
88. Here is the sum of this prohibition—to have any more intercourse with unholy men than is absolutely necessary. There can be no profitable ‘fellowship’ between the righteous and the unrighteous; as there can be no ‘communion’ between light and darkness (whether you understand this of natural or of spiritual darkness). As Christ can have no ‘concord’ with Belial, so a believer in him can have no concord with an unbeliever. It is absurd to imagine that any true union or concord should be between two persons while one of them remains in darkness and the other walks in the light. They are subjects not only of two separate, but of two opposite kingdoms. They act upon quite different principles: they aim at quite different ends. It will necessarily follow that frequently, if not always, they will walk in different paths. How can they walk together till they are agreed?
See Amos 3:3.
99. And what are the consequences of our not obeying this direction? Of our not coming out from among unholy men? Of not being separate from them, but contracting or continuing a familiar intercourse with them? It is probable it will not immediately have any apparent visible ill consequences. It is hardly to be expected that it will immediately lead us into any outward sin. Perhaps it may not presently occasion our neglect of 03:147any outward duty. It will first sap the foundations of our religion; it will by little and little damp our zeal for God; it will gently cool that fervency of spirit which attended our first love. If they do not openly oppose anything we say or do, yet their very spirit will by insensible degrees affect our spirit, and transfuse into it the same lukewarmness and indifference toward God and the things of God. It will weaken all the springs of our soul, destroy the vigour of our spirit, and cause us more and more to slacken our pace in running the race that is set before us.
See Heb. 12:1.
1010. By the same degrees all needless intercourse with unholy men will weaken our divine evidence and conviction of things unseen;
See Heb. 11:1.
Cf. Heb. 6:5.
Cf. Eph. 2:6.
Ps. 73:25 (AV).
1111. By the same degrees, and in the same secret and unobserved manner, it will prepare us to ‘measure back our steps to earth again’.
Thomas Parnell, ‘The Hermit’, l. 227; cf. No. 80, ‘On Friendship with the World’, §28 and n.
Cf. No. 44, Original Sin, II.10 and n.
1 John 2:16; cf. No. 7, ‘The Way to the Kingdom’, II.2 and n.
2 Cor. 11:3.
1212. And it is not only the love of the world in all its branches which necessarily steals upon us while we converse with men of a worldly spirit farther than duty requires, but every other evil 03:148passion and temper of which the human soul is capable: in particular pride, vanity, censoriousness, evil surmising, proneness to revenge; while on the other hand levity, gaiety, and dissipation, steal upon us and increase continually. We know how all these abound in the men that know not God. And it cannot be but they will insinuate themselves into all who frequently and freely converse with them: they insinuate most deeply into those who are not apprehensive of any danger; and most of all if they have any particular affection, if they have more love than duty requires, for those who do not love God, with whom they familiarly converse.
1313. Hitherto I have supposed that the persons with whom you converse are such as we use to call ‘good sort of people’; such as are styled in the cant term of the day men of ‘worthy’ characters—one of the silliest insignificant
I.e., ‘meaningless’, as in Samuel Johnson’s first definition. In SOSO (1788), the text reads, ‘one of the most silly, insignificant words, …’ as in Johnson’s second sense of ‘unimportant’; cf. No. 80, ‘On Friendship with the World’, §21 and n.
Cf. No. 80, ‘On Friendship with the World’, §17.
See Ecclus. 13:1.
See Rev. 12:14.
1 Cor. 15:33.
1414. I have supposed likewise that those unholy persons with whom you frequently converse have no desire to communicate their own spirit to you, or to induce you to follow their example. 03:149But this also is a supposition which can hardly be admitted. In many cases their interest may be advanced by your being a partaker of their sins. But supposing interest to be out of the question, does not every man naturally desire and more or less endeavour to bring over his acquaintance to his own opinion or party? So that as all good men desire and endeavour to make others good like themselves, in like manner all bad men desire and endeavour to make their companions as bad as themselves.
1515. But if they do not, if we allow this almost impossible supposition, that they do not desire or use any endeavours to bring you over to their own temper and practice, still it is dangerous to converse with them. I speak not only of openly vicious men, but of all that do not love God, or at least fear him, and sincerely seek the kingdom of God and his righteousness.
Matt. 6:33.
1616. If conversing freely with worldly-minded men has no other ill effect upon you, it will surely, by imperceptible degrees, make you less heavenly-minded. It will give a bias to your mind which will continually draw your soul to earth. It will incline you, without your being conscious of it, instead of being wholly transformed in the renewing of your mind,
See Rom. 12:2.
Cf. No. 79, ‘On Dissipation’, §1 and n.
1717. And if you go thus far in conformity to the world, it is hardly to be expected you will stop here. You will go farther in a short time; having once lost your footing, and begun to slide down, it is a thousand to one you will not stop till you come to the bottom of the hill; till you fall yourself into some of those outward sins which your companions commit before your eyes or in your hearing. Hereby the dread and horror which struck you at first will gradually abate, till at length you are prevailed upon to follow their example.
Cf. Addison’s essay on the effects of custom, in The Spectator, No. 447, Aug. 2, 1712: ‘[We must] take particular care how we too frequently indulge ourselves in the most innocent diversions and entertainments, since the mind may insensibly fall off from the relish of virtuous actions and, by degrees, exchange that pleasure which takes in the performance of its duty for delights of a much more inferior and unprofitable nature.’
Rom. 8:6.
1818. But as dangerous as it is to converse familiarly with men that know not God, it is more dangerous still for men to converse with women of that character; as they are generally more insinuating than men, and have far greater power of persuasion; particularly if they are agreeable in their persons, or pleasing in their conversation. You must be more than man if you can converse with such and not suffer any loss. If you do not feel any foolish or unholy desire—and who can promise that you shall not?—yet it is scarce possible that you should not feel more or less of an improper softness, which will make you less willing and less able to persist in that habit of denying yourself, and taking up your cross daily,
Luke 9:23.
2 Tim. 2:3.
Cf. 1 Cor. 6:9—μαλακοί (i.e., ‘soft’) as in Matt. 11:8 and Luke 7:25. In the General Rules, §4, Wesley inveighs against ‘softness and needless self-indulgence’.
Cf. Eph. 5:5.
1919. Such are the consequences which must surely, though perhaps slowly, follow the mixing of the children of God with the 03:151 men of the world. And by this means more than by any other, yea, than by all others put together, are the people called Methodists
For other comments on Methodist ‘triumphalism’, cf. No. 102, ‘Of Former Times’, §22 and n.
A remembrance of Samson as in Judg. 16:7-17.
2020. But how may this be done? What is the most easy and effectual method of separating ourselves from unholy men? Perhaps a few advices will make this plain to those that desire to know and do the will of God.
First, invite no unholy person to your house unless on some very particular occasion. You may say, ‘But civility requires this; and sure, religion is no enemy to civility. Nay, the Apostle himself directs us to “be courteous”, as well as to “be pitiful”.’
1 Pet. 3:8.
2121. Secondly, on no account accept any invitation from an unholy person. Never be prevailed upon to pay a visit unless you wish it to be repaid. It may be a person desirous of your acquaintance will repeat the visit twice or thrice. But if you steadily refrain from returning it the visitant will soon be tired. It is not improbable he will be disobliged; and perhaps he will show marks of resentment. Lay your account with this,
Cf. Joseph Wright, The English Dialect Dictionary (1896-1905), loc. cit. This is a Scottish phrase meaning, ‘to expect and be prepared for’, as in Wesley’s letter to his preachers, Aug. 4, 1769, §3, where he gives a similar forewarning.
2222. Thirdly, it is probable you were acquainted with men of the world before you yourself knew God. What is best to be done with regard to these? How may you most easily drop their acquaintance? First, allow a sufficient time to try whether you cannot by argument and persuasion, applied at the soft times of address, induce them to choose the better part.
See Luke 10:42.
Heb. 11:26.
2323. When it pleased God to give me a settled resolution to be not a nominal but a real Christian (being then about two and twenty years of age)
I.e., in 1725, which would coincide with Wesley’s account in JWJ, May 24, 1738, §4 (‘When I was about twenty-two…I began to see that true religion was seated in the heart.’), and also with his report in A Plain Account of Christian Perfection, §2 (‘In the year 1725…I met with Bishop Taylor’s “Rule and Exercises of Holy Living and Dying”…and I instantly resolved to dedicate all my life to God.’). Then follows (in both accounts) the successive ‘moments’ of Wesley’s conversion from a ‘nominal’ to a ‘real’ Christian. But both these accounts and Wesley’s remembrance here are in conflict with the public ‘confession’ in No. 2, The Almost Christian, I.13, ‘that all this time [he was in Oxford] I was but almost a Christian’, and also with the familiar stereotype in Wesleyan biography that he was no better than a nominal Christian until Aldersgate. It is interesting how Wesley’s memories (and perspective) had changed over the years.
Cf. No. 32, ‘Sermon on the Mount, XII’, II.2 and n.
Lincoln, where he had been elected in 1726 as one of the College’s twelve Fellows; cf. V. H. H. Green, The Young Mr. Wesley, pp. 100-23. Here, Wesley’s recollections agree with his earlier Journal memoir (May 24, 1738, §5).
2 Cor. 6:8 (Notes).
2424. I earnestly advise all of you who resolve to be not ‘almost, but altogether Christians’,
The ‘almost Christian’ here is presumed to be a worldling. In No. 2, The Almost Christian, he had been portrayed as very ‘religious’ without, however, being a real Christian (see espec. I.1-12).
Acts 10:35.
Cf. No. 24, ‘Sermon on the Mount, IV’, III.5 and n.
See Heb. 12:1.
Cf. 2 Pet. 2:21.
See Ezek. 33:9.
2525. I advise you, fourthly, walk circumspectly with regard to your relations. With your parents, whether religious or not, you must certainly converse if they desire it; and with your brothers and sisters—more especially if they want your service. I do not know that you are under any such obligation with respect to your more distant relations. Courtesy, indeed, and natural affection, may require that you should visit them sometimes. But if they neither know nor seek God, it should certainly be as seldom as possible. And when you are with them you should not stay a day longer than decency requires. Again, whichsoever of them you are with at any time, remember that solemn caution of the Apostle: ‘Let no corrupt communication (conversation) come out of your mouth; but that which is good, to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace to the hearers.’
Cf. Eph. 4:29.
Eph. 4:30.
2626. Thus it is that those who fear or love God should ‘come out from among’ all that do not fear him. Thus in a plain scriptural sense you should ‘be separate’ from them, from all unnecessary intercourse with them. Yea, ‘Touch not’, saith the Lord, ‘the unclean thing’ or person, any farther than necessity requires; ‘and I will receive you’ into the family and household of God. ‘And I will be unto you a Father’, will embrace you with paternal affection, ‘and ye shall be unto me sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.’ The promise is express to all that renounce the company of ungodly men, provided their spirit and conversation are in other respects also suitable to their duty. God does here absolutely engage to give them all the blessings he has prepared for his beloved children, both in time and eternity. Let all those therefore who have any regard for the favour and the blessing of God, first, beware how they contract any acquaintance or form any connection with ungodly men, any farther than necessary business or some other providential call requires; and secondly, with all possible speed, all that the nature of the thing will admit, break off all such acquaintance already contracted, and all such 03:155 connections already formed. Let no pleasure resulting from such acquaintance, no gain found or expected from such connections, be of any consideration when laid in the balance against a clear, positive command of God. In such a case, ‘pluck out the right eye,’ tear away the most pleasing acquaintance, ‘and cast it from thee:’ give up all thought, all design of seeking it again. ‘Cut off the right hand,’ absolutely renounce the most profitable connection, ‘and cast it from thee.’
Cf. Matt. 5:29-30.
Matt. 18:9.
Otley, July 17, 1784
Place and date as in AM.
How to Cite This Entry
Bibliography:
, “.” In , edited by . , 2024. Entry published February 25, 2024. https://wesleyworks.ecdsdev.org/sermons/Sermon081.About this Entry
Entry Title: Sermon 81: In What Sense We Are to Leave the World