Sermon

# found: 0

Toggle:

Notes:

Sermon 107: On Faith

https://wesleyworks.ecdsdev.org/sermons/Sermon107

03:502 An Introductory Comment

Isa. 5:4 was something of a favourite of Wesley’s; there are fourteen notices of its use in his oral preaching from 1748 to 1788. He knew William Tilly’s reference to it in his university sermon, ‘On Grieving the Holy Spirit’; cf. Sermon XI in his Sixteen Sermons (1712), p. 320. Wesley’s abridgement of this, copied out in 1733, was found among his papers after his death and published as a Wesley original by Thomas Jackson in 1825. Wesley also knew Jeremiah Seed’s sermon on the same text; cf. Sermon III in Seed’s Posthumous Works (1750), I.69-94 (for Wesley’s admiring reference to him as a preacher, see the Preface to SOSO,V-VIII, §5, II.355-57).

What is wholly original in this present sermon, however, is Wesley’s direct identification of ‘God’s Vineyard’ with his own Methodist movement, together with the special pathos of his estimate of God’s special blessings to the Methodist people and of their failures to fulfil their original promise and prospects. I.8-9 is a capsule history of Methodism; V.1-7 is a candid summary of its leader’s discontents. Clearly, this was a sermon chiefly for Methodists, which raises the interesting question as to how widely Wesley expected the sermons in SOSO, VIII, to be read.

At any rate, this sermon was written at Witney (near Oxford), on October 17, 1787 (see JWJ for October 16 and diary for October 17) and was first published in SOSO, VIII.249-72 (1788), with its present title. In the January and February issues of the Arminian Magazine (1789), XII.6-14, 62-68, it was reprinted without a title and numbered ‘Sermon XLVIII’ (on p. 6) and ‘Sermon XLIX’ (on p. 62)—the latter number is the correct one. The present text here is based on SOSO, VIII, which is very nearly identical with the Magazine reprint.

03:503 On God’s Vineyard

Isaiah 5:4

What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it? Wherefore, when I looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes?

The ‘vineyard of the Lord’, taking the word in its widest sense, may include the whole world. All the inhabitants of the earth may in some sense be called ‘the vineyard of the Lord’, who ‘hath made all nations of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, that they might seek the Lord, if haply they may feel after him, and find him’.

Cf. Acts 17:26-27 (Notes); Isa. 5:7.

But in a narrower sense the vineyard of the Lord may mean the Christian world; that is, all that name the name of Christ

Cf. 2 Tim. 2:19.

and profess to obey his word. In a still narrower sense it may be understood of what is termed the reformed part of the Christian church. In the narrowest of all one may by that phrase, ‘the vineyard of the Lord’, mean the body of people commonly called Methodists.

An echo of Thomas Crane’s metaphor about the concentric circles of Providence; see No. 67, ‘On Divine Providence’, §16 and n.

In this sense I understand it now, meaning thereby that Society only, which began at Oxford in the year 1729, and remain united at this day. Understanding the word in this sense I repeat the question which God proposes to

AM, ‘by’.

the Prophet: ‘What could have been done more to my vineyard that I have not done in it? Wherefore, when I looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes?’

What could God have done more in this his vineyard (suppose he had designed it should put forth great branches, and spread over the earth) which he hath not done in it?

First, with regard to doctrine;

Secondly, with regard to spiritual helps;

Thirdly, with regard to discipline; and

Fourthly, with regard to outward protection.

These things being considered, I would then briefly inquire, 504‘Wherefore, when he looked [that] it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes?’

1I. 1. First, what could have been done in this his vineyard which God hath not done in it? What could have been done more with regard to doctrine? From the very beginning, from the time that four young men united together, each of them was homo unius libri—a man of one book.

See above, ‘Preface’ (1746), §5 and n. (1:104-5 in this edn.). For Wesley’s dating the Revival from 1729, of. No. 63, ‘The General Spread of the Gospel’, §16 and n.; see also below, I.3.

God taught them all to make his ‘Word a lantern unto their feet, and a light in all their paths’.

Cf. Ps. 119:105 (BCP).

They had one, and only one rule of judgment with regard to all their tempers, words, and actions, namely, the oracles of God. They were one and all determined to be Bible-Christians. They were continually reproached for this very thing; some terming them in derision Bible-bigots; others Bible-moths—feeding, they said, upon the Bible as moths do upon cloth. And indeed unto this day it is their constant endeavour to think and speak as the oracles of God.

22. It is true a learned man, Dr. Trapp,

Joseph Trapp (1679-1747), ally of Henry Sacheverell and first professor of poetry at Oxford, whose four sermons on The Nature, Folly, Sin, and Danger of Being Righteous Overmuch (1739), aimed mostly at Law and Whitefield, gained him more fame among the Methodists than he enjoyed elsewhere.

soon after their setting out, gave a very different account of them. ‘When I saw’, said the Doctor, ‘these two books, The Treatise on Christian Perfection, and the Serious Call to a Holy Life,

Law, A Practical Treatise Upon Christian Perfection (1726), and A Serious Call to a Devout and Holy Life (1729).

I thought, these books will certainly do mischief. And so it proved; for presently after up sprung the Methodists. So he (Mr. Law) was their parent.’

Cf. Trapp, A Reply to Mr. Law’s Earnest and Serious Answer (as it is called) to Dr. Trapp’s Discourse of the Folly, Sin, and Danger of Being Righteous Overmuch (London, Gilliver, 1741), pp. 6-7. Wesley paraphrases Trapp, whose references are mainly to Law’s Christian Perfection. Cf. Moore, Wesley, I.171, for Samuel Wesley, Sen.’s claim that if ‘my son John has the honour of being styled the “Father of the Holy Club”, I must be the grandfather of it…’.

Although this was not entirely true, yet there was some truth in it. All the Methodists carefully read these books, and were greatly profited thereby. Yet they did by no means spring from them, but from the Holy Scriptures; ‘being born again’, as St. Peter speaks, ‘by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever’.

Cf. 1 Pet. 1:23.

03:505

33. Another learned man, the late Bishop Warburton, roundly affirms that ‘they were the offspring of Mr. Law and Count Zinzendorf together.’

William Warburton (1698-1779), Bishop of Gloucester. In his Doctrine of Grace (1762), p. 152 (cf. Works, VII.342-43), he had asserted that ‘Mr. Law begot Methodism and Count Zinzendorf rocked the cradle.’ See No. 100, ‘On Pleasing All Men’, I.2 and n. For other references to Zinzendorf, cf. No. 13, On Sin in Believers, I.5 and n.

But this was a greater mistake still. For they had met together several years before they had the least acquaintance with Count Zinzendorf, or even knew there was such a person in the world.

Another pointer to the origins of Methodism in the Holy Club in 1729. See above I.1; and No. 63, ‘The General Spread of the Gospel’, §16 and n.

And when they did know him, although they esteemed him very highly in love, yet they did not dare to follow him one step farther than they were warranted by the Scripture.

44. The book which, next to the Holy Scripture, was of the greatest use to them in settling their judgment as to the grand point of justification by faith was the Book of Homilies.

Cf. Wesley’s abridgement of the first Edwardian Homilies in his little tract, The Doctrine of Salvation, Faith, and Good Works, Extracted from the Homilies of the Church of England (1739). Cf. LPT Wesley, pp. 121-33; see Bibliog, No. 11, and Vol. 12 of this edn.

They were never clearly convinced that we are justified by faith alone till they carefully consulted these, and compared them with the Sacred Writings, particularly St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans.

See JWJ, Nov. 11, 1738.

And no minister of the Church can with any decency oppose these, seeing at his ordination he subscribed to them in subscribing the Thirty-sixth Article of the Church.

Actually, it was the thirty-fifth ‘Article’: ‘Of the Homilies’.

55. It has been frequently observed that very few were clear in their judgment both with regard to justification and sanctification. Many who have spoken and written admirably well concerning justification had no clear conception, nay, were totally ignorant, of the doctrine of sanctification. Who has wrote more ably than Martin Luther on justification by faith alone? And who was more ignorant of the doctrine of sanctification, or more confused in his conceptions of it? In order to be thoroughly convinced of this, of his total ignorance with regard to sanctification, there needs no more than to read over, without prejudice, his celebrated comment on the Epistle to the Galatians.

Cf. JWJ, June 15, 1741, for Wesley’s disparaging evaluation of Luther’s Commentary on Galatians; see also No. 14, The Repentance of Believers, I.9 and n.

On the other hand, how many writers of the Romish 03:506Church (as Francis Sales

Francis de Sales (1567-1622), Bishop of Geneva and author of two classics of devotional literature: An Introduction to the Devout Life (1609), and A Treatise on the Lave of God (1616). Wesley had read the former in 1733.

and Juan de Castaniza

Juan de Castañiza (c. 1536-99), a Spanish Benedictine, credited in the eighteenth century as author of Pugna Spiritualis; tractatus vere aureus de perfectione vitae Christianae (1599). Susanna Wesley owned a copy of its English translation (by Richard Lucas in 1698) and used it in the family devotions in the Epworth rectory. Since then, it has been more often attributed to Lorenzo Scupoli, a Spanish Theatine. Cf. M. Alamo in Dictionnaire d’histoire et de géographie ecclésiastiques, XI.1414-15; see also No. 3, ‘Awake, Thou That Sleepest’, II.9 and n.

in particular) have wrote strongly and scripturally on sanctification; who nevertheless were entirely unacquainted with the nature of justification. Insomuch that the whole body of their divines at the Council of Trent in their Catechismus ad Parochos

Catechism which every parish priest is to teach his people. [Wesley had read this Catechism in Oct. 1732. Cf. The Catechism of the Council of Trent for Parish Priests (1566), translated into English, with notes, by T. A. Buckley, 1852.]

totally confound sanctification and justification together. But it has pleased God to give the Methodists a full and clear knowledge of each, and the wide difference between them.

For other comments on Methodist ‘triumphalism’, cf. No. 102, ‘Of Former Times’, §22 and n.

66. They know, indeed, that at the same time a man is justified sanctification properly begins. For when he is justified he is ‘born again’,

John 3:3, 7.

‘born from above’,

John 3:3, where ἄνωθεν literally means ‘from above’. Cf. No. 45, ‘The New Birth’, II.3; and below, I.9.

‘born of the Spirit’;

John 3:6, 8.

which, although it is not (as some suppose) the whole process of sanctification, [it] is doubtless the gate of it. Of this likewise God has given them a full view. They know the new birth implies as great a change in the soul, in him that is ‘born of the Spirit’, as was wrought in his body when he was born of a woman; not an outward change only, as from drunkenness to sobriety, from robbery or theft to honesty (this is the poor, dry, miserable conceit of those that know nothing of real religion); but an inward change, from all unholy to all holy tempers, from pride to humility, from passionateness to meekness, from peevishness and discontent to patience and resignation—in a word, from an earthly, sensual, devilish

Jas. 3:15.

mind to the mind that was in Christ Jesus.

Phil. 2:5.

03:507

77. It is true a late very eminent author, in his strange treatise on regeneration,

William Law, whose The Grounds and Reasons of Christian Regeneration (1739) had been read straightaway by Charles Wesley to the Methodist Society in London in 1739. Cf. Moore, Wesley, I.300, and see Law’s Works (1762), V.180, 170. Echoed in No. 45, ‘The New Birth’, IV.3. The most famous eighteenth-century essay on this theme, however, was Daniel Waterland’s Regeneration Stated and Explained (1740), which Wesley had also read.

proceeds entirely on the supposition that it is the whole, gradual progress of sanctification. No; it is only the threshold of sanctification—the first entrance upon it. And as in the natural birth a man is born at once, and then grows larger and stronger by degrees, so in the spiritual birth a man is born at once, and then gradually increases in spiritual stature and strength. The new birth, therefore, is the first point of sanctification, which may increase more and more unto the perfect day.

Prov. 4:18.

88. It is then a great blessing given to this people that, as they do not think or speak of justification so as to supersede sanctification, so neither do they think or speak of sanctification so as to supersede justification. They take care to keep each in its own place, laying equal stress on one and the other. They know God has joined these together, and it is not for man to put them asunder.

See Matt. 19:6.

Therefore they maintain with equal zeal and diligence the doctrine of free, full, present justification on the one hand, and of entire sanctification both of heart and life on the other—being as tenacious of inward holiness as any mystic, and of outward as any Pharisee.

99. Who then is a Christian, according to the light which God hath vouchsafed to this people? He that, being justified by faith, hath peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ;

See Rom. 5:1.

and at the same time is ‘born again’, ‘born from above’, ‘born of the Spirit’;

See above, I.6.

inwardly changed from the image of the devil to that ‘image of God wherein he was created’.

Cf. Col. 3:10.

He that finds the love of God shed abroad in his heart by the Holy Ghost which is given unto him;

See Rom. 5:5.

and whom this love sweetly constrains to ‘love his neighbour’, every man, ‘as himself’.

Cf. Mark 12:33 and Matt. 22:38-40; see also No. 7, ‘The Way to the Kingdom’, I.8 and n. For Wesley’s definition of inward and outward holiness (love of God and love of neighbour), cf. ibid., I.10 and n.

He that has learned of his Lord to be meek and lowly in heart,

Matt. 11:29.

and in every state to be content.

See Phil. 4:11.

He in 03:508whom is that whole mind, all those tempers, which were also in Christ Jesus.

See Phil. 2:5.

He that abstains from all appearance of evil

See 1 Thess. 5:22.

in his actions, and that ‘offends not’ with ‘his tongue’.

Cf. Ps. 39:1 (BCP).

He that walks in all the commandments of God, and in all his ordinances, blameless.

See Luke 1:6.

He that in all his intercourse with men does to others as he would they should do to him;

See Matt. 7:12.

and in his whole life and conversation, whether he eats or drinks, or whatsoever he doth, doth all to the glory of God.

See 1 Cor. 10:31.

Now what could God have done more for this his vineyard which he hath not done in it, with regard to doctrine?

II. We are to inquire, secondly, what could have been done which he hath not done in it, with regard to spiritual helps.

11. Let us consider this matter from the very beginning. Two young clergymen, not very remarkable any way, of middle age, having a tolerable measure of health, though rather weak than strong, began about fifty years ago to call sinners to repentance. This they did, for a time, in many of the churches in and about London. But two difficulties arose: first, the churches were so crowded that many of the parishioners could not get in; secondly, they preached new doctrines—that we are saved by faith, and, that ‘without holiness no man could see the Lord’.

Cf. Heb. 12:14. A recollection of the first critical reactions to ‘Methodism’; the most popular charge was ‘enthusiasm’, the most serious was doctrinal inconsistency. Cf. Josiah Tucker’s letter, June 14, 1739, in the Gent’s Mag. (1739), IX.292-97 (‘…this new set of principles’, etc.). But see also Tucker’s longer critique of the ‘medley of [Wesley’s] principles’ in his Brief History of the Principles of Methodism; Wherein the Rise and Progress…and Present Inconsistencies of this Sect Are…Traced Out and Accounted For (1742), p. 32. Tucker’s main thesis (pp. 32-39) is that Wesley was trying to reconcile William Law, John Calvin, and James Arminius, a venture that was patently absurd.

For one or other of these reasons they were not long suffered to preach in the churches. They then preached in Moorfields, in Kennington Common, and in many other public places.

Wesley records having first preached in Moorfields on June 17, 1739. This was the large open tract outside the City of London, north of Moorgate. The Foundery was there, and later it became Wesley’s headquarters and home. Also on June 17, he preached on Kennington Common, another open space south of the Thames, across London Bridge and just east of the pleasure gardens of Vauxhall. Note that this account ignores the fact that he had already begun his field preaching near Bristol Apr. 2, 1739.

The fruit of their preaching quickly appeared. Many sinners were changed both in heart and life. But it seemed this could not continue long; for everyone clearly saw these preachers would quickly wear 03:509themselves out, and no clergyman dared to assist them. But soon one and another, though not ordained, offered to assist them. God gave a signal blessing to their word. Many sinners were thoroughly convinced of sin, and many truly converted to God. Their assistants increased both in number and in the success of their labours. Some of them were learned, some unlearned. Most of them were young, a few middle-aged. Some of them were [of] weak, some, on the contrary, of remarkably strong understanding. But it pleased God to own them all, so that more and more brands were plucked out of the burning.

See Amos 4:11; Zech. 3:2; cf. No. 4, Scriptural Christianity, II.2 and n.

22. It may be observed that these clergymen, all this time, had no plan at all. They only went hither and thither, wherever they had a prospect of saving souls from death. But when more and more asked, ‘What must I do to be saved?’

Acts 16:30.

they were desired to meet all together. Twelve came the first Thursday night;

Would Wesley’s choice of Thursday night have been influenced by his memories that it was the special evening of the week that his mother had ‘formerly bestowed upon [him]’ for study and counselling? Cf. his letter to her from Oxford, Feb. 28, 1732; and see Susanna’s letter to her husband, dated Feb. 6, 1712, which Wesley included in his Journal account of her death and burial, Aug. 1, 1742.

forty, the next; soon after, a hundred. And they continued to increase, till three or four and twenty years ago the London Society amounted to about 2,800.

The first official record of membership in the Society at London is in the Minutes, Aug. 18, 1767, §8: ‘2250’.

33. But how should this multitude of people be kept together? And how should it be known whether they walked worthy of their profession? They were providentially led, when they were thinking on another thing (namely, paying the public debt),

Debts owed to lenders outside the Methodist Societies.

to divide all the people into little companies, or classes, according to their places of abode, and appoint one person in each class to see all the rest weekly. By this means it was quickly discovered if any of them lived in any known sin. If they did, they were first admonished; and, when judged incorrigible, excluded from the Society.

44. This division of the people, and exclusion of those that walked disorderly, without any respect of persons, were helps which few other communities had. To these, as the societies increased, was soon added another. The stewards of the societies 03:510in each district were desired to meet the preachers once a quarter, in some central place, to give an account of the spiritual and temporal state of their several societies. The use of these Quarterly Meetings was soon found to be exceeding great; in consideration of which they were gradually spread to all the societies in the kingdom.

55. In order to increase the union between the preachers (as well as that of the people) they were desired to meet all together in London, and, some time after, a select number of them.

This annual ‘Conference of Preachers in Connexion with Mr. Wesley’ was a unique feature of Methodist polity from 1744 onwards. Cf. Wesley’s description of it in the Minutes, Aug. 12, 1766, §§4-5, and his insistence that it was a consultative body only, without any legislative function or authority. For a summary of the history and role of the conference in Methodist polity, see also his ‘Thoughts Upon Some Late Occurrences’, dated Mar. 3, 1785, and published in AM (1785), VIII.267-69.

Afterwards, for more convenience, they met at London, Bristol, and Leeds, alternately. They spent a few days together in this general Conference in considering what might most conduce to the general good. The result was immediately signified to all their brethren.

In ‘Minutes of Several Conversations Between the Rev. Mr. John and Charles Wesley and Others.’ There are such records for 1744-47, and also ‘brief notices’ of the fifteen Conferences between 1749 and 1765; then a continuous run of Minutes from 1765 onwards (see Vol. 10 of this edn.).

And they soon found that what St. Paul observes of the whole church may be in a measure applied to every part of it: ‘The whole body being fitly framed together, and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, maketh increase of the body, to the edifying of itself in love.’

Eph. 4:16.

66. That this may be the more effectually done, they have another excellent help in the constant change of preachers;

Wesley set especial store by this idea of itinerancy, making it a distinctive feature of Methodist polity which has continued, in one form or another in Methodism until modern times. Cf. his letters to Joseph Benson, Dec. 11, 1772; to Samuel Walker, Sept. 3, 1756; to Mrs. Ward, July 16, 1788; see also, Baker, John Wesley and the Church of England, pp. 114, 172, 226, 320.

it being their rule that no preacher shall remain in the same circuit more than two years together, and few of them more than one year. Some indeed have imagined that this was a hindrance to the work of God. But long experience in every part of the kingdom proves the contrary. This has always shown that the people profit less by any one person than by a variety of preachers; while they

03:511

Used the gifts on each bestowed,

Tempered by the art of God.

Cf. John and Charles Wesley, Hymns and Sacred Poems (1740), p. 195 (Poet. Wks., I.362; see also No. 504 in Collection, 7:693-94 of this edn.). For quotations of other lines from this hymn, see Nos. 13, On Sin in Believers, IV.6; and 132, ‘On Faith, Heb. 11:1’, §6.

77. Together with these helps which are peculiar to their own Society, they have all those which are enjoyed in common by the other members of the Church of England. Indeed they have been long pressed to separate from it, to which they have had temptations of every kind. But they cannot, they dare not, they will not separate from it, while they can remain therein with a clear conscience. It is true, if any sinful terms of communion were imposed upon them, then they would be constrained to separate; but as this is not the case at present we rejoice to continue therein.

88. What then could God have done more for this his vineyard which he hath not done in it, with regard to spiritual helps? He has hardly dealt so with any other people in the Christian world! If it be said, He could have made them a separate people like the Moravian Brethren, I answer, This would have been a direct contradiction to his whole design in raising them up; namely, to spread scriptural religion throughout the land, among people of every denomination,

A relatively new usage for this term; cf. No. 104, ‘On Attending the Church Service’, §4 and n.

leaving everyone to hold his own opinions and to follow his own mode of worship. This could only be done effectually by leaving these things as they were, and endeavouring to leaven the whole nation with that ‘faith that worketh by love’.

Cf. Gal. 5:6; see also No. 2, The Almost Christian, II.6 and n.

1III. 1. Such are the spiritual helps which God has bestowed on this his vineyard, with no sparing hand. Discipline might be inserted among these; but we may as well speak of it under a separate head. It is certain that in this respect the Methodists are a highly favoured people. Nothing can be more simple, nothing more rational, than the Methodist discipline: it is entirely founded on common sense, particularly applying the general rules of Scripture. Any person determined to save his soul may be united (this is the only condition required) with them. But this desire must be evidenced by three marks: avoiding all known sin, doing good after his power, and attending all the ordinances of God.

A summary of the General Rules; cf. Vol. 9 of this edn.

He is then placed in such a class as is convenient for him, 03:512where he spends about an hour in a week. And the next quarter, if nothing is objected to him, he is admitted into the Society. And therein he may continue as long as he continues to meet his brethren and walks according to his profession.

22. Their public service is at five in the morning and six or seven in the evening, that their temporal business may not be hindered. Only on Sunday it begins between nine and ten, and concludes with the Lord’s Supper. On Sunday evening the Society meets; but care is taken to dismiss them early, that all the heads of families may have time to instruct their several households. Once a quarter the principal preacher in every circuit examines every member of the societies therein. By this means, if the behaviour of anyone is blameable, which is frequently to be expected in so numerous a body of people, it is easily discovered, and either the offence or the offender removed in time.

33. Whenever it is needful to exclude any disorderly member out of the Society, it is done in the most quiet and inoffensive manner—only by not renewing his ticket

These tokens of membership in good standing, personally subscribed by Wesley or one of his Assistants, were required for admission to class meetings and to Holy Communion.

at the quarterly visitation. But in some cases, where the offence is great, and there is danger of public scandal, it is judged necessary to declare when all the members are present, ‘A. B. is no longer a member of our Society.’ Now what can be more rational or more scriptural than this simple discipline—attended from the beginning to the end with no trouble, expense, or delay?

1IV. 1. But was it possible that all these things should be done without a flood of opposition? The prince of this world was not dead, nor asleep: and would he not fight that his kingdom might not be delivered up? If the word of the Apostle be found true, in all ages and nations ‘all they that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.’

Cf. 2 Tim. 3:12.

If this be true with regard to every individual Christian, how much more with regard to bodies of men visibly united together with the avowed design to overthrow his kingdom! And what could withstand the persecution he would not fail to stir up against a poor, defenceless, despised people, without any visible help, without money, without power, without friends?

03:513

22. In truth the god of this world was not asleep. Neither was he idle. He did fight, and that with all his power, that his kingdom might not be delivered up. He ‘brought forth all his hosts to war’.

Cf. Charles Wesley, ‘Christ the Friend of Sinners’, ‘And call forth all his hosts to war’, in Hymns and Sacred Poems (1739), p. 102. This hymn was also published in A Collection of Hymns (1780), No. 29, omitting st. 6. This is probably the hymn which Charles Wesley wrote on his conversion; cf. CWJ, May 23, 1738. For a more complete history of the hymn, cf. Baker, Representative Verse of Charles Wesley (London, Epworth Press, 1962), pp. 3-4.

First, he stirred up the beasts of the people.

Ps. 68:30 (BCP). Cf. No. 52, The Reformation of Manners, I.5 and n.

They roared like lions: they encompassed the little and defenceless flock on every side.

‘Flock’ is inserted in ink in Wesley’s own copies of the Sermons and AM, though not in his hand.

And the storm rose higher and higher till deliverance came, in a way that none expected. God stirred up the heart of our late gracious Sovereign

George II (1683-1760); cf. Wesley’s comment upon the king’s death (‘When will England have a better Prince?’), JWJ, Oct. 25, 1760. See also Leslie Stephen’s account in DNB of Samuel Chandler’s funeral sermon (Nov. 9, 1760) in which he compared George II to David (‘a man after God’s own heart’). In the Appendix to Chandler’s History of Persecution from the Patriarchal Age to the Reign of George II; A New Edition (Hull, 1813), p. 416, the late king is quoted as having declared in open court that ‘no man should be persecuted for conscience’ sake in his dominions’. Cf. also Wesley’s Thoughts upon Liberty, §19, and No. 127, ‘On the Wedding Garment’, §14. For other comments on George II, cf. No. 15, The Great Assize, §1.

to give such orders to his magistrates as, being put in execution, effectually quelled the madness of the people. It was about the same time that a great man applied personally to his Majesty, begging that he would please to ‘take a course to stop these run-about preachers’. His Majesty, looking sternly upon him, answered without ceremony, like a king, ‘I tell you, while I sit on the throne, no man shall be persecuted for conscience’ sake.’

On Nov. 1, 1762, Howell Harris recorded bits of gossip he picked up in Bath, including the statement: ‘Archbishop Seeker offered to Mr. Onslow, late Speaker, a scheme against the Methodists, and he [the elder Pitt, Leader of the House of Commons] said he did not like persecution;’ cf. Tom Beynon, ed., Howell Harris, Reformer and Soldier (Caernarvon, Calvinistic Methodist Bookroom, 1958), p. 139. See also Baker, John Wesley and the Church of England, pp. 180, 376.

33. But in defiance of this, several who bore his Majesty’s commission have persecuted them from time to time, and that under colour of law, availing themselves of what is called the Conventicle Act—one in particular, in Kent, who some years since took upon him to fine one of the preachers and several of his hearers. But they thought it their duty to appeal to his Majesty’s Court of King’s Bench. The cause was given for the plaintiffs, 03:514who have ever since been permitted to worship God according to their own conscience.

For this case in Rolvenden, Kent, in 1760, see WHS, XVIII.113-20; cf. John Wesley’s letter to his brother Charles, June 24, 1760. There are other references to the Methodists appealing to His Majesty’s Court of King’s Bench. The Canterbury rioters (Kent) are mentioned in JWJ, Nov. 11, 1751: ‘We had not any disturbance from first to last, the Court of King’s Bench having broke the spirit of the rioters.’ See also entries for Aug. 30, 1766; Apr. 20, 1752; July 29, 1786; and Wesley’s letter to Richard Bailey, Aug. 15, 1751.

44. I believe this is a thing wholly without precedent. I find no other instance of it in any age of the church, from the day of Pentecost to this day. Every opinion, right and wrong, has been tolerated, almost in every age and nation. Every mode of worship has been tolerated, however superstitious or absurd. But I do not know that true, vital, scriptural religion was ever tolerated before. For this the people called Methodists have abundant reason to praise God. In their favour he hath wrought a new thing in the earth: he hath stilled the enemy and the avenger.

See Ps. 8:2.

This then they must ascribe unto him, the author of their outward as well as inward peace.

1V. 1. What indeed could God have done more for this his vineyard which he hath not done in it? This having been largely showed, we may now proceed to that strong and tender expostulation: ‘After all that I had done, might I not have looked for the most excellent grapes? Wherefore then brought it forth wild grapes? Might I not have expected a general increase of faith and love, of righteousness and true holiness? Yea, and of the fruit of the Spirit—love, joy, peace, long-suffering, meekness, gentleness, fidelity, goodness, temperance?’

Cf. Gal. 5:22-23 (Notes); note Wesley’s rearrangement of the order of these Christian virtues.

Was it not reasonable to expect that these fruits would have overspread his whole church? Truly, when I saw what God had done among his people between forty and fifty years ago, when I saw them, warm in their first love, magnifying the Lord and rejoicing in God their Saviour,

See Luke 1:46-47.

I could expect nothing less than that all these would have lived like angels here below; that they would have walked as continually seeing him that is invisible,

Heb. 11:27.

having constant communion with the Father and the Son, living in eternity and 03:515walking in eternity. I looked to see ‘a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar people’, in the whole tenor of their conversation ‘showing forth his praise who had called them into his marvellous light’.

Cf. 1 Pet. 2:9.

22. But instead of this it brought forth wild grapes, fruit of a quite contrary nature. It brought forth error in ten thousand shapes, turning many of the simple out of the way. It brought forth enthusiasm, imaginary inspiration, ascribing to the all-wise God all the wild, absurd, self-inconsistent dreams of an heated imagination. It brought forth pride, robbing the Giver of every good gift of the honour due to his name. It brought forth prejudice, evil surmising, censoriousness, judging, and condemning one another—all totally subversive of that brotherly love which is the very badge of the Christian profession; without which, whosoever liveth is counted dead before God. It brought forth anger, hatred, malice, revenge, and every evil word and work—all direful fruits, not of the Holy Spirit, but of the bottomless pit.

33. It brought forth likewise in many—particularly those that are increased in goods—that grand poison of souls, the love of the world, and that in all branches: ‘the desire of the flesh’, that is, the seeking happiness in the pleasures of sense; ‘the desire of the eyes’, that is, seeking happiness in dress, or any of the pleasures of imagination;

Cf. No. 44, Original Sin, II.10 and n.

and ‘the pride of life’,

Cf. 1 John 2:16; and No. 7, ‘The Way to the Kingdom’, II.2 and n.

that is, seeking happiness in the praise of men;

Cf. No. 14, The Repentance of Believers, I.7 and n.

or in that which ministers to all these, laying up treasures on earth. It brought forth self-indulgence of every kind, delicacy, effeminacy, softness; but not softness of the right kind, that melts at human woe. It brought [forth] such base, grovelling affections, such deep earthly-mindedness as that of the poor heathens, which occasioned the lamentation of their own poet over them,

O curvae in terras animae et caelestium inanes!

Cf. Persius, Satires, ii.61. Wesley had already used this tag in his letter to Colonel Oglethorpe, Apr. 20, 1736, and would use it again in No. 125, ‘On a Single Eye’, III.8. He could have read it in Lactantius, Divinarum Institutionum, II.ii; and in Jeremy Taylor, ‘The House of Feasting’ (Sermon XVI), Works, I.701, where it appears in both Greek and Latin.

—

O souls bowed down to earth, and void of God!

03:516

44. O ye that have riches in possession,

Ps. 73:12 (BCP).

once more hear the word of the Lord! Ye that are rich in this world,

1 Tim. 6:17.

that have food to eat, and raiment to put on, and something over, are you clear of the curse of loving the world? Are you sensible of your danger? Do you feel, ‘How hardly will they that have riches enter into the kingdom of heaven?’

Cf. Mark 10:23.

Do you continue unburnt in the midst of the fire? Are you untouched with the love of the world? Are you clear from the desire of the flesh, the desire of the eyes, and the pride of life? Do you ‘put a knife to your throat’

Cf. Prov. 23:2.

when you sit down to meat, lest your ‘table’ should ‘be a snare to you’?

Cf. Ps. 69:22 (AV); Rom. 11:9.

Is not your belly your god? Is not eating and drinking, or any other pleasure of sense, the greatest pleasure you enjoy? Do not you seek happiness in dress, furniture, pictures, gardens; or anything else that pleases the eye? Do not you grow soft and delicate? Unable to bear cold, heat, the wind, or the rain, as you did when you were poor? Are you not increasing in goods, laying up treasures on earth;

See Matt. 6:19.

instead of restoring to God in the poor, not so much, or so much, but all that you can spare? Surely ‘it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven’!

Cf. Matt. 19:24.

55. But why will ye still bring forth wild grapes? What excuse can ye make? Hath God been wanting on his part? Have you not been warned over and over? Have ye not been fed with the sincere milk of the word?

1 Pet. 2:2.

Hath not the whole word of God been delivered to you, and without any mixture of error? Were not the fundamental doctrines both of free, full, present justification delivered to you, as well as sanctification, both gradual and instantaneous? Was not every branch both of inward and outward holiness clearly opened and earnestly applied? And that by preachers of every kind, young and old, learned and unlearned? But it is well if some of you did not despise the helps which God had prepared for you. Perhaps you would hear none but clergymen; or at least, none but men of learning. Will you not then give God leave to choose his own messengers? To send by whom he will send?

See Exod. 4:13; cf. No. 4, Scriptural Christianity, IV.2 and n.

It is well if this bad wisdom was not one cause of your ‘bringing forth wild grapes’!

603:5176. Was not another cause of it your despising that excellent help, union with a Christian society? Have you not read, ‘How can one be warm alone?’

Eccles. 4:11.

And, ‘Woe be unto him that is alone when he falleth’?

Cf. Eccles. 4:10.

‘But you have companions enough.’ Perhaps more than enough; more than are helpful to your soul. But have you enough that are athirst for God? And that labour to make you so? Have you companions enough that watch over your soul as they that must give account?

See Heb. 13:17.

And that freely and faithfully warn you if you take any false step, or are in danger of doing so? I fear you have few of these companions, or else you would bring forth better fruit.

77. If you are a member of the Society, do you make a full use of your privilege? Do you never fail to meet your class? And that, not as matter of form, but expecting that when you are met together in his name your Lord will be in the midst of you? Are you truly thankful for the amazing liberty of conscience which is vouchsafed to you and your brethren? Such as never was enjoyed before by persons in your circumstances?

The Methodists profited from the growing spirit of religious toleration even more than the Nonconformists or the Roman Catholics; cf. John H. Overton and Frederic Relton, The English Church from the Accession of George I to the End of the Eighteenth Century (1714-1800), Vol. VII in A History of the English Church, W. R. W. Stephens and William Hunt, eds. (London, Macmillan and Co., Ltd., 1924), pp. 226-29.

And are you thankful to the Giver of every good gift for the general spread of true religion? Surely you can never praise God enough for all these blessings, so plentifully showered down upon you, till you praise him with angels and archangels, and all the company of heaven.

See BCP, Communion, Preface to the Sanctus. For Wesley’s use of ascriptions, cf. No. 1, Salvation by Faith, III.9 and n.

Witney, October 17, 1787

Place and date as in AM.

How to Cite This Entry

, “” in , last modified February 25, 2024, https://wesleyworks.ecdsdev.org/sermons/Sermon107.

Bibliography:

, “.” In , edited by . , 2024. Entry published February 25, 2024. https://wesleyworks.ecdsdev.org/sermons/Sermon107.

About this Entry

Entry Title: Sermon 107: On Faith

Copyright and License for Reuse

Show full citation information...