Notes:
Sermon 92: On Zeal
This sermon, written three years earlier than No. 91, ‘On Charity’, is thematically subsequent to it, so its place here is fitting. It is further comment on love in a single, crucial aspect. Thus, Wesley focuses on the much misunderstood impulse labelled ‘religious zeal’, and then proceeds to show that true ‘zeal’ is actually an expression of love or else it is both false and destructive (‘Christian zeal is all love,’ etc.; I.2). This allows him then to distinguish between the zeal which fuels the fires of controversy and persecution and that special quality of holy love which is, as he says, ‘the queen of all graces’ (III.12). That this idea was a favourite in his mid-career is suggested by the fact that Gal. 4:18 is mentioned eighteen times as a preaching text between 1758 and 1779.
The written sermon first appeared in the September and October issues of the Arminian Magazine for 1781 (IV.463-69, 520-25), numbered ‘Sermon V’, without a title but with a postscript: ‘Haverford West, May 6, 1781’. This fits with his account in the Journal (April 29-May 7) of his visit for that year to Wales, where Haverford West is located as ‘seventeen measured miles from St. David’s’: ‘In the evening [of April 29th] I preached at Haverford West to the liveliest congregation I have seen in Wales.’
The sermon was then placed directly after ‘On Charity’ in SOSO, VII.257-76. It was not thereafter reprinted in Wesley’s lifetime.
On ZealGalatians 4:18
It is good to be always zealously affected in a good thing.
11. There are few subjects in the whole compass of religion that are of greater importance than this. For without zeal it is impossible either to make any considerable progress in religion 03:309ourselves, or to do any considerable service to our neighbour, whether in temporal or spiritual things. And yet nothing has done more disservice to religion, or more mischief to mankind, than a sort of zeal which has for several ages prevailed, both in pagan, Mahometan, and Christian nations. Insomuch that it may truly be said: pride, covetousness, ambition, revenge, have in all parts of the world slain their thousands, but zeal its ten thousands.
See 1 Sam. 18:7.
Cf. No. 23, ‘Sermon on the Mount, III’, III.5 and n.
The bloodiest single episode of its kind in French history. The ‘Massacre’ had begun on St. Bartholomew’s Eve, Aug. 22, 1572, and had raged in and around Paris for a full week by order, or at least by the connivance, of the queen mother (Catherine de Medici) and King Charles IX. Estimates of the total number of its victims (in the sources readily available to Wesley) varied from the 100,000 of Beaumont de Péréfixe (Archbishop of Paris, 1662-71) to J. L. von Mosheim’s and Samuel Pufendorf’s 30,000. Cf. Mosheim, Institutiones historiae ecclesiastiae (1726; Eng. trans. by J. Murdock, 1841), p. 667: ‘The bloody scene began at midnight at the signal of the tolling of the great bell of the palace…. Six thousand Protestants were butchered in Paris alone…. More than thirty thousand—some say seventy thousand—perished by the hands of the royal assassins, and the pope ordered a jubilee throughout Christendom.’ See also Pufendorf, Introduction to the History of the Principal Kingdoms and States of Europe (rev. edn. 1764), I.260-61: ‘The example set at Paris being followed in many other cities, above 30,000 Protestants were massacred…. This horrid business, which is commonly called the Wedding at Paris, has been scandalously represented by Gabriel Maude as a masterpiece of policy.’
‘The Rising of 1641’, the beginning of the first large scale rebellion of the Irish against English rule, leading to the Ulster ‘plantation’ of Scottish colonists in Northern Ireland. This tragic struggle dragged on until Cromwell’s decisive reconquest in 1649-50. The sober truth about this horror was soon lost in partisan legends with estimates of the victims of ‘the great Popish Massacre’ ranging from Milton’s ‘hundreds of thousands’ to Cromwell’s Commission’s Report (2,109 murders in ten years of war). Ferdinand Warner, History of the Irish Rebellion (1767; 2nd edn., 1770), calculated that 4,028 Protestants were killed within the first two years of the rebellion and 8,000 died of ‘ill-usage’. For all his love of the Irish, Wesley had no sympathy for their nationalism and had come to accept the Miltonian exaggeration. For example, in JWJ, Aug. 14, 1747, he records having read Sir John Temple’s The Irish Rebellion; or an history of the beginning and first progresse of the general rebellion raised within the Kingdom of Ireland upon the…23 October, 1641 (1646), with the following comment: ‘I procured a genuine account of the great Irish massacre in 1641. Surely never was there such a transaction before, from the beginning of the world! More than two hundred thousand men, women, and children butchered within a few months, in cool blood, and with such circumstances of cruelty as make one’s blood run cold! It is well if God has not a controversy with the nation, on this very account, to this day.’
For a careful and comparatively objective account of this rebellion, see Edmund Borlase, The History of the Execrable Irish Rebellion…to the Grand Eruption (London, 1680), pp. 109-25. This ‘appendix’ is an inventory, county by county, of English and Scots slain in the Insurrection of 1641-42; the total adds up to 9,350.
Wesley’s apparent source here is Bengel, Gnomon, Apocalypse 18:24. Bengel cites Matthias Hoë von Hoenegg, Commentariorum in beati Apostoli et evangelistae Joannis Apocalypsin (2 pt.; Lipsiae, 1610-11), Apoc. XVII, Q. 234; and also G. D. Seyler, whose estimate is put at 900,000. Bengel’s own judgment is that ‘neither of these calculations is probable…. The true number, whatever it is, is stupendous;’ cf. Fausset’s edn. of the Gnomon (1877), 4:360. Cf. also Nos. 102, ‘Of Former Times’, §14; and 22, ‘Sermon on the Mount, II’, III.18 and n.
22. But is it not possible to distinguish right zeal from wrong? Undoubtedly it is possible. But it is difficult—such is the deceitfulness of the human heart! So skilfully do the passions justify themselves.
Cf. Nos. 49, ‘The Cure of Evil-speaking’, §4 and n.; and 12, ‘The Witness of Our Own Spirit’, §5 and n.
Thomas Sprat (1635-1713), Bishop of Rochester, 1684-1713. The sermon, on Gal. 4:18, was preached ‘before the King at Whitehall’, Dec. 22, 1678, when Sprat was not ‘then Bishop of Rochester’ but still Chaplain to the King; cf. Sermons Preached on Several Occasions (London, 1722), pp. 143-90. In Sept. 1733 Wesley read William Reeves’s Fourteen Sermons Preached on Several Occasions (1729); No. 4 in that volume is entitled ‘On Zeal for the Faith Requisite for a Christian.’
33. I would gladly cast in my mite, by God’s assistance, toward the clearing up this important question, in order to enable well-meaning men who are desirous of pleasing God to 03:311distinguish true Christian zeal from its various counterfeits. And this is more necessary at this time than it has been for many years. Sixty years ago there seemed to be scarce any such thing as religious zeal left in the nation. People in general were wonderfully cool and undisturbed about ‘that trifle, religion’.
π; source unidentified.
44. But has this zeal been of the right or the wrong kind? Probably both the one and the other. Let us see if we cannot separate these, that we may avoid the latter and cleave to the former. In order to this, I would first inquire what is the nature of true Christian zeal; secondly, what are the properties of it; and thirdly, draw some practical inferences.
1I. And first, what is the nature of zeal in general, and of true Christian zeal in particular?
11. The original word, in its primary signification, means heat, such as the heat of boiling water. When it is figuratively applied to the mind it means any warm emotion or affection. Sometimes it is taken for envy. So we render it, Acts 5:17, where we read, ‘The high priest and all that were with him were filled with envy’—ἐπλήσθησαν ζήλου (although it might as well be rendered were filled with zeal.)
Wesley’s translation (Notes), following Poole’s Annotations, loc. cit. The AV reads ‘indignation’, which is more literal; the NEB reads ‘jealousy’.
22. But it is not all that is called religious zeal which is worthy of that name. It is not properly religious or Christian zeal if it be not joined with charity. A fine writer (Bishop Sprat) carries the matter farther still. ‘It has been affirmed’, says that great man, ‘no zeal is right which is not charitable. But this is not saying enough. I affirm that true zeal is not only charitable, but is mostly so. Charity or love is not only one ingredient, but the chief 03:312ingredient, in its composition.’
A misquotation from Sprat, whose text here (p. 166) reads: ‘Whereas no religion is true that is not peaceable, …no zeal is spiritual that is not also charitable, nay, chiefly so.’
33. Yet it is not every degree of that love to which this appellation is given. There may be some love, a small degree of it, where there is no zeal. But it is properly love in a higher degree. It is ‘fervent love’.
1 Pet. 4:8 (Notes).
1II. 1. From hence it follows that the properties of love are the properties of zeal also. Now one of the chief properties of love is humility—‘love is not puffed up.’
1 Cor. 13:4 (Notes); see also No. 21, ‘Sermon on the Mount, I’, I.7 and n.
22. Another of the properties of love is meekness:
Cf. No. 22, ‘Sermon on the Mount, II’, I.4 and n.
See Ps. 68:2 (BCP).
33. Yet another property of love, and consequently of zeal, is unwearied patience; for ‘love endureth all things’.
1 Cor. 13:7 (Notes). For other comments on patience, cf. No. 83, ‘On Patience’, §5 and n.
1 Sam. 3:18.
Phil. 4:11.
Cf. 1 Thess. 5:18.
44. There is a fourth property of Christian zeal, which deserves 03:313to be more particularly considered. This we learn from the very words of the Apostle: ‘It is good to be zealously affected’ (not to have transient touches of zeal, but a steady, rooted disposition) ‘in a good thing’—in that which is good; for the proper object of zeal is good in general, that is, everything that is good, really such, in the sight of God.
55. But what is good in the sight of God? What is that religion wherewith God is always well pleased? How do the parts of this rise one above another? And what is the comparative value of them?
This is a point exceeding little considered, and therefore little understood. Positive divinity many have some knowledge of. But few know anything of comparative divinity. I never saw but one tract wrote upon this head; a sketch of which it may be of use to subjoin.
James Garden (1647-1726), Scottish disciple of Antoinette Bourignon, brother to a more famous divine, George Garden (1649-1733), had written a tract entitled Comparative Theology, or the True and Solid Grounds of a Pure and Peaceable Theology (1700), which Wesley regarded highly enough to extract and include in the Christian Lib., XXII.243-87. But if this is Wesley’s source here, he is taking large liberties with Garden’s text, for the metaphor of ‘love seated on the throne’ is not in Garden. However, the essential idea here of concentric circles of the Christian virtues and tempers, with love as their centre and peak, is reminiscent of both the Gardens and Bourignon—and William Law as well.
In a Christian believer love sits upon the throne, which is erected in the inmost soul; namely, love of God and man, which fills the whole heart, and reigns without a rival. In a circle near the throne are all holy tempers: long-suffering, gentleness, meekness, goodness, fidelity, temperance
See Gal. 5:22-23.
Cf. Phil. 2:5.
Cf. below, III.7, 12; also No. 14, The Repentance of Believers, I.13 and n.
Ibid.
See Heb. 10:24.
66. This is that religion which our Lord has established upon earth, ever since the descent of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost. This is the entire, connected system of Christianity: and thus the several parts of it rise one above another, from that lowest point, ‘the assembling ourselves together’,
Heb. 10:25.
Gal. 4:18.
77. For example: every Christian ought undoubtedly to be zealous for the church, bearing a strong affection to it, and earnestly desiring its prosperity and increase. He ought to be thus zealous, as for the church universal, praying for it continually, so especially for that particular church or Christian society whereof he himself is a member. For this he ought to wrestle with God in prayer; meantime using every means in his power to enlarge its borders, and to strengthen his brethren, that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour.
Titus 2:10.
88. But he should be more zealous for the ordinances of Christ than for the church itself: for prayer in public and private, for the Lord’s Supper, for reading, hearing, and meditating on his Word; and for the much neglected duty of fasting. These he should earnestly recommend, first, by his example, and then by advice, by argument, persuasion, and exhortation, as often as occasion offers.
99. Thus should he show his zeal for works of piety; but much more for works of mercy; seeing ‘God will have mercy and not sacrifice’
Cf. Hos. 6:6; Matt. 9:13; 12:7.
Samuel Wesley, Jun., ‘Upon These Two Verses of Mr. Oldham’, in Poems (1736), p. 121.
1010. But as zealous as we are for all good works, we should be 03:315still more zealous for holy tempers;
Cf. No. 91, ‘On Charity’, III.8 and n.
Cf. Deut. 6:7.
1111. But our choicest zeal should be reserved for love itself, the end of the commandment,
1 Tim. 1:5.
Rom. 13:10.
Cf. Phil. 3:14.
III. It remains only to draw some practical inferences from the preceding observations.
11. And, first, if zeal, true Christian zeal, be nothing but the flame of love, then hatred, in every kind and degree, then every sort of bitterness toward them that oppose us, is so far from deserving the name of zeal that it is directly opposite to it. If zeal be only fervent love, then it stands at the utmost distance from prejudice, jealousy, evil surmising; seeing ‘love thinketh no evil’.
Cf. 1 Cor. 13:5 (Notes).
Cf. Nos. 38, ‘A Caution against Bigotry’; and 39, ‘Catholic Spirit’.
1 John 3:8.
22. Secondly; if lowliness be a property of zeal, then pride is inconsistent with it. It is true some degree of pride may remain after the love of God is shed abroad in the heart;
See Rom. 5:5. For other references to pride, cf. No. 14, The Repentance of Believers, I.3 and n.
See 1 Thess. 5:19.
33. Thirdly; if meekness be an inseparable property of zeal, what shall we say of those who call their anger by that name? Why, that they mistake the truth totally; that they in the fullest sense put darkness for light, and light for darkness.
Isa. 5:20.
It were well that this point were thoroughly understood. Let us consider it a little farther. We frequently observe one that bears the character of a religious man vehemently angry at his neighbour. Perhaps he calls his brother ‘Raca’, or ‘Thou fool’;
Matt. 5:22; cf. No. 7, ‘The Way to the Kingdom’, II.4 and n.
See Jude 9.
44. Fourthly; if patience, contentedness, and resignation, are the properties of zeal, then murmuring, fretfulness, discontent, impatience, are wholly inconsistent with it. And yet how ignorant are mankind of this! How often do we see men fretting at the ungodly, or telling you they are ‘out of patience’ with such or such 03:317things, and terming all this their zeal! O spare no pains to undeceive them! If it be possible, show them what zeal is; and convince them that all murmuring, or fretting at sin, is a species of sin, and has no resemblance of, or connection with, the true zeal of the gospel.
55. Fifthly; if the object of zeal be ‘that which is good’,
See II.7, above.
Cf. 1 Cor. 13:3.
From the same premises it follows that fervour for indifferent things is not Christian zeal. But how exceedingly common is this mistake too! Indeed one would think that men of understanding could not be capable of such weakness. But alas! the history of all ages proves the contrary. Who were men of stronger understandings than Bishop Ridley and Bishop Hooper?
Nicholas Ridley (c. 1500-55) and John Hooper (d. 1555). Ridley, Bishop of London, was a moderate reformer whereas Hooper, Bishop of Gloucester-Worcester, was an aggressive ‘puritan’ who regarded vestments as vestiges of popery and, therefore, ‘impious’ and ‘idolatrous’. Archbishop Cranmer refused to consecrate him as bishop without the traditional vestments and appointed Bishop Ridley to debate the issue with Hooper (cf. DNB). John Strype reports that the debate was bitter and angry; cf. Historical Memorials, Chiefly Ecclesiastical as such as Concern Religion and the Reformation of It and the Progress Made Therein, Under the Reign and Influence of King Edward VI (London, 1721), II.224-27. Hooper later agreed to a vested consecration but carried his zeal over into his episcopal ministry. He was martyred in Gloucester in 1555 during the same period that saw Ridley, Hugh Latimer, and Archbishop Cranmer burned in Oxford. Thomas Fuller, Church History of Britain (1656), XVI.21, says that ‘of all the Marian martyrs…Bishop Ridley was the profoundest scholar, …. Archbishop Cranmer of the mildest, meekest temper, Bishop Hooper of the sternest and austerest nature, …and Mr. Latimer had the plainest, simplest heart….’
66. It follows also from the same premises that fervour for opinions is not Christian zeal. But how few are sensible of this! 03:318And how innumerable are the mischiefs which even this species of false zeal has occasioned in the Christian world! How many thousand lives have been cast away by those who were zealous for the Romish opinions! How many of the excellent ones of the earth have been cut off by zealots for the senseless opinion of transubstantiation! But does not every unprejudiced person see that this zeal is ‘earthly, sensual, devilish’?
Jas. 3:15.
What an excess of charity is it then which our great poet expresses in his poem on the last day! Where he talks of meeting in heaven,
Cf. Young, The Last Day, ll. 113-16:
See also John Wesley, A Collection of Moral and Sacred Poems (1744), II.78.
Zeal indeed! What manner of zeal was this which led them to cut one another’s throats? Those who were fired with this spirit, and died therein, will undoubtedly have their portion, not in heaven—only love is there—but in ‘the fire that never shall be quenched’.
Mark 9:43, 45.
77. Lastly, if true zeal be always proportioned to the degree of goodness which is in its object, then should it rise higher and higher according to the scale mentioned above; according to the comparative value of the several parts of religion. For instance, all that truly fear God should be zealous for the church: both for the catholic or universal church, and for that part of it whereof they are members. This is not the appointment of men, but of God. He saw ‘it was not good for men to be alone’,
Cf. Gen. 2:18.
Cf. Eph. 4:16.
88. It remains only to make a close and honest application of these things to our own souls. We all know the general truth that ‘it is good to be always zealously affected in a good thing.’ Let us now, every one of us, apply it to his own soul in particular.
99. Those indeed who are still dead in trespasses and sins
Eph. 2:1.
See Acts 8:21.
Cf. Matt. 4:10.
See Rev. 3:15-16.
See Matt. 25:35-36.
Cf. Gal. 6:10.
Titus 3:8. Note Wesley’s reversal here of the third General Rule (using the means of grace) and the second (‘do all the good you can’).
Cf. Matt. 18:33.
Isa. 1:13.
Deut. 7:25, etc.
1010. Are you better instructed than to put asunder what God has joined?
See Matt. 19:6.
Cf. Rev. 2:23.
Cf. John 4:24.
1111. But of all holy tempers, and above all others, see that you be most zealous for love! Count all things loss in comparison of this, the love of God and all mankind. It is most sure that if you give all your goods to feed the poor, yea, and your body to be burned, and have not humble, gentle, patient love, it profiteth you nothing.
See 1 Cor. 13:3.
1212. Take then the whole of religion together, just as God has revealed it in his Word, and be uniformly zealous for every part of it, according to its degree of excellence, grounding all your zeal on the one foundation, ‘Jesus Christ and him crucified’;
1 Cor. 2:2.
Cf. Gal. 2:20.
Cf. BCP, Communion, Prayer for the Church Militant.
Cf. Heb. 13:16.
Cf. Gal. 5:22-23.
Cf. ‘Charity the queen of virtues’ (βασιλὶς τῶν ἀρετῶν), cited in Francis Atterbury, Fourteen Sermons Preached on Several Occasions (1708), p. 58, as from Chrysostom, ‘Tom. VI.193’. But see Lampe, Patristic Greek Lexicon, βασιλῖς, No. 5.
1 John 4:16.
Haverford West, May 6, 1781
Place and date as in AM, IV.525.
How to Cite This Entry
Bibliography:
, “.” In , edited by . , 2024. Entry published February 25, 2024. https://wesleyworks.ecdsdev.org/sermons/Sermon092.About this Entry
Entry Title: Sermon 92: On Zeal