Notes:
Sermon 143: Public Diversions Denounced
1This was John Wesley’s fifty-eighth written sermon and is something of a curiosity. Its setting is Epworth, where Wesley had arrived from Oxford on Thursday, August 31, 1732, on the eve of what was to have been an exciting ‘public diversion’ (i.e., a horse-race) on Friday—an event of intense interest in Epworth and vicinity. Instead, as we learn from Wesley’s diary, there had been a disastrous fire which had caused extensive damage in the town. Wesley’s diary suggests that the fire had started in the malt-kiln belonging to his own scapegrace brother-in-law, Richard Ellison. In any case, there was an Epworth tradition that this had been the breaking point in the marriage between Ellison and John’s sister, Susanna. To John’s dismay, the populace had blithely ignored so obvious a sign of God’s wrath against them and had simply postponed their ‘diversion’ until the day following. John, however, saw it for the communal self-indulgence that it was and promptly vented his righteous indignation against the townfolk who showed up in church on Sunday, September 2. This, then, is the context for the large number of local allusions in the diatribe.
2Clearly, however, this was not the sort of piece that Wesley would have wanted published under his name; that he even kept the sermon in his papers for so long sheds an interesting light on his self-image. After his death it was published, in a carelessly edited transcription, in the Arminian Magazine,
Oct. 1797 (XX.482-90).
3The negative connotation here for the phrase, ‘public diversions’ had already become a standard reference for various kinds of popular spectacles: races, games, even fairs.
See The Tatler, No. 5, April 21, 1709, ‘This week being sacred to holy things and no public diversions allowed…’; see also The Spectator, No. 258, Dec. 26, 1711; Edward Stillingfleet, Twelve Sermons Preached on Several Occasions (1696), I.389, 502; John Tillotson, Works, III.298; William Law, Serious Call, ch. i, and Christian Perfection, chs. iii and viii. In Keith Thomas, Religion and the Decline of Magic (New York, Scribner, 1971), pp. 84-85, there is an interesting summary of seventeenth- and eighteenth-century views of ‘physical disasters’ as ‘manifestations of divine displeasure’ (notice in particular the account of a couple of fires at Tiverton).
Cf. No. 89, ‘The More Excellent Way’, V.2-5. There is also a passing reference to a similar interpretation of Amos 3:6 in No. 48, ‘Self-denial’, II.7.
4The holograph of this sermon is in the Colman Miscellany in the Methodist Archives, Manchester. It is written on sixteen duodecimo pages, with none of the usual indications of dates or provenance. We may suppose that it was an occasional sermon in the quite literal sense and not thereafter repeated. The present text is a transcription of the holograph.
Public Diversions DenouncedAmos 3:6
Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? Shall there be evil in a city, and the Lord hath not done it?
’Tis well if there are not too many here who are too nearly concerned in these words of the prophet, the plain sense of which seems to be this: Are there any men in the world so stupid and senseless, so utterly void of common reason, so careless of their own and their neighbours’ safety or destruction, as when an alarm of approaching judgments is given to show no signs of apprehension? To take no care of preventing them, but go on as securely as if no alarm had been given? Do not all men know that whatever evil befalls them, it befalls them by God’s appointment?
See Nos. 140, ‘The Promise of Understanding’, II.1-2; 57, ‘On the Fall of Man’, § 1; and 62, ‘The End of Christ’s Coming’, I.4-7; but note Wesley’s more positive emphasis here on God’s part in retributive justice.
I intend in speaking on this subject, first, to show in few words that there is no evil in any place which the Lord hath not done; secondly, to prove that every uncommon evil is the trumpet of God blown in that place, that the people may be afraid; and thirdly, to consider whether, after God had blown his trumpet in this place, we were duly afraid.
1[I.] I am first to show in few words that there is no evil in any place which the Lord hath not done. No evil, that is, no affliction or calamity, whether of a public or of a private nature, whether it concerns only one or a few persons, or reaches to many or all of the place where it comes. Whatever circumstance occasions loss or pain to any man or number of men may in that respect be called an evil; and of such evils the prophet here speaks.
Of such evil we are to believe that it never is in any place but where the Lord hath done it. He hath done it either by his own immediate power, by the strength of his own right hand,
See Ps. 20:6.
See Ps. 10321 (BCP).
Ps. 10:16.
Ps. 47:2.
See Ps. 74:13 (BCP).
Rev. 19:6.
See Matt. 6:10. Wesley’s punctuation here follows the translations of Tyndale and Cranmer (and Douai-Rheims) and their stress on the parity of the first three petitions in the Lord’s Prayer. Later, as in No. 26, ‘Sermon on the Mount, VI’, in the Notes and elsewhere, he will change to the form in Wycliffe, Geneva, AV, and the BCP, which single out the third petition for special stress (‘Thy will be done on earth’). See No. 26, ‘Sermon on the Mount, VI’, II.19 and n.
See Ps. 103:22.
See Hab. 3:2.
See Ps. 148:8 (BCP).
[II.] I am secondly to prove that every uncommon evil is the trumpet of God blown in that place where it comes, that the people may be afraid. Every private affliction is doubtless the voice of God, whereby he calls upon the afflicted to fly to him for succour. But of any extraordinary affliction, especially when many persons are concerned in it, we may not only say that in this God speaketh to us, but that the God of glory thundereth!
Ps. 29:3.
See Ps. 29:4.
See Ps. 111:10.
’Tis needless to use many words to prove this, after what has been proved already. For if there be no evil in anyplace which the Lord hath not done, and if he doth not willingly send evil on any place, but only to warn them to avoid greater evils, then it is plain 04:322that wherever any evil is, it is the trumpet of God blown in that place, to the end that the people may be so afraid as not to continue in anything that displeases him. Then ’tis plain that in every such merciful evil God speaks to this effect: ‘O that there were such an heart in this people that they would fear me, and keep my commandments always, that it might be well with them and their children for ever!’
Cf. Deut. 5:29.
[III.] What signs we have shown of this wise and grateful fear I am thirdly to consider more at large. Let us consider first how God hath blown his trumpet in this place, and secondly whether we have been duly afraid.
1[1.] First, let us consider how God hath blown his trumpet among us of this place. And that it may never be forgotten, it were much to be wished, not only that parents would tell their children, to the intent that their posterity might know it, and the children that are yet unborn, but also that it were written in our public register, for a standing memorial to all generations,
See Exod. 3:15.
A peculiar variation on Acts 17:6; that it should be applied in this way to horse-racing is ironic. What had been ‘the sport of kings’ (or at least of ‘chivalry’) had now become a public diversion in out-of-the-way places like Epworth. Indeed, the stabilization of the breed of ‘the thoroughbred racer’ may be taken to date from the beginning of the eighteenth century (‘the Darley Arabian’, etc.); cf. Encyclopedia Britannica (11th edn.), XIII.719-20.
An echo here of his memory of the rectory fire in 1709?
This is the bare matter of fact. And even from this let anyone in whom is the spirit of man
See 1 Cor. 2:11.
See 1 Cor. 14:8.
Ps. 18:13.
Cf. 1 Sam. 3:9.
See Ps. 139:24.
Ps. 51:4.
See Heb. 12:1.
See 2 Pet. 1:10.
See Deut. 4:24.
2[2.] But have we indeed been thus duly afraid? This is now to be considered. And because we cannot see the hearts of others, let us form our judgment from their actions, which will be best done by a plain relation, of which everyone that hears it can easily tell whether it be true or false.
In the day following that on which the voice of God had so dreadfully commanded us to exchange our mirth for sadness, the diversion which that had broken off was as eagerly begun anew. Crowds of people flocked out of that very town where the destruction had been wrought the day before, and rushed by the place of desolation to the place of entertainment. Here you might see the ground covered with heaps of ruins, mingled with yet unquenched fire; a little way off as thick[ly] covered with horses 04:324and men, pressing on to see another new sight. On this side were the mourners bewailing the loss of their goods, and necessities of their families; on that the feasters delighting themselves with the sport they had gained. Surely such a mixture of mirth and sadness, of feasting and mourning, of laughing and weeping, hath not been seen from the day in which our forefathers first came up into this land, until yesterday!
4[IV.] Such is the fear we have shown of the wrath of God! Thus have we been afraid after he had blown his trumpet among us! These are the signs we have given of our resolution to avoid whatever is displeasing in his sight! Hereby we have proved how we design to avoid that diversion in particular, which he has given us so terrible a reason to believe is far from being pleasing to him. Not that this is the only reason we have to believe so. Beside this last melancholy argument against it, we have so many others as any serious Christian would find it a hard task to answer. But I have only time to mention slightly a few of the consequences that were never yet separated from it.
Before I mention these, I desire it may be particularly observed that I do not say this diversion is sinful in itself. If anyone can find a race which has none of these consequences, let him go to it, in the name of God. Only till he finds one which does not give occasion to these or the like villainies, let him who nameth the name of Christ
2 Tim. 2:19.
Cf. this way of discouraging diversions which cannot be ‘taken in the Name of Christ’ with the first General Rule of 1743: ‘Doing no harm, by avoiding evil in every kind; especially that which is most generally practised. Such is…the taking such diversions as cannot be used in the name of the Lord Jesus.’
One thing more I would have observed, that it is so far from being uncharitable to warn well-meaning Christians of the tendency of these diversions, that the more clearly and strongly anyone represents it to them, the more charitable to them he is. This may be made plain by a very easy comparison. You see the wine when it sparkles in the cup,
Cf. Poole’s comment on Prov. 23:31, in his Annotations.
See Rom. 14:21.
1 Cor. 8:11.
1[1.] All the doubt there can be is: ‘Is there poison mixed with this diversion which is supposed to be harmless in itself?’ To clear this up let us first observe the notorious lying that is always joined with it, the various kinds of over-reaching and cheating, the horrid curses and oaths that constantly accompany it, wherewith the name of our Lord God, blessed for ever, is blasphemed. When or where was this diversion ever known without these glorious consequences? Who was ever one day present at one of these entertainments without being himself a witness to some of these?
Wesley is speaking here from experience; his diary indicates that he had spent two afternoons at the horse-races in Port Meadow near Oxford on August 18 and 19, 1725. Thomas Hearne, onetime librarian at the Bodleian, noted in his diary for August 24 that the rains had finally forced a cancellation of the races after five days, ‘and indeed, ’twas time to have done, these diversions (especially continuing them so long) being nothing else but incentives to idleness and vice, and doing a great deal of harm to the youth of the University and others.’ Thomas Hearne, Collections (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1914), IX.9-10. In 1733, a year after this present denunciation, Wesley records that he himself, while visiting friends in Lutterworth (October 3) had been invited to a race, and that his friends went; there is a marginal note in the diary entry: ‘the rain saved me from the race.’
2[2.] But over and above these we charge it, secondly, with affording the fairest means to exercise and increase covetousness. This it does by the occasion it gives to all who please to lay wagers with one another, which commonly brings so strong a desire of possessing what is another’s as will hardly cease when that one point is decided; but will be exceeding likely to leave such a thirst in the mind as not all the winning in the world will satisfy. And what amends can the trifling sport of a thousand people make for one soul thus ruined and corrupted? Therefore on this account, too, till a way is known to secure all that frequent it from this [04:326]danger, well may this sport itself be an abomination to him who values one soul more than the whole world.
See Matt. 16:26. See also Susanna Wesley’s letter to John (Oct. 25, 1732), probably in response to this sermon: ‘Your arguments against horse-races do certainly conclude against masquerades, balls, plays, operas, and all such light and vain diversions, which, whether the gay people of the world will own it or no, do strongly confirm and strengthen the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eye, and the pride of life; all which we must renounce, or renounce our God and hope of eternal salvation. I will not say it is impossible for a person to have any sense of religion who frequents those vile assemblies; but I never, throughout the course of my long life, knew so much as one serious Christian that did; nor can I see how a lover of God can have any relish for such vain amusements.’ Adam Clarke, Memoirs of the Wesley Family, p. 338.
3[3.] May we not well fear that it is an abomination to him because of a third effect of it—because it is so apt to inflame those passions which he so earnestly commands us to quench? Because so many people are on this occasion so heated, as they never ought to be on any occasion? A man may indeed be angry, and not sin,
See Eph. 4:26.
4[4.] Till this be done let no one ask, ‘What hurt is there in a horse-race?’
See No. 89, ‘The More Excellent Way’, V.4 and n.
See Jas. 4:4.
1 John 2:16; see No. 7, ‘The Way to the Kingdom’, II.2 and n.
See Jas. 3:15.
2 Tim. 3:4.
See Matt. 25:44-46.
See 1 Tim. 5:8.
See Matt. 6:34.
[V.] I have but a few words to add: and those I speak, not to them who are unwilling to hear, whose affections are set upon this world,
See Col. 3:2.
See Eccles. 12:1.
See Luke 24:29; Rom. 13:12.
See Luke 12:48.
What remains, but that we labour, one and all, young and old, rich and poor, to wipe off the past scandal from our town and people? First, by opposing to the utmost for the time to come, by word and deed, among our friends, and all we have to do with, this unhappy diversion which, if it be harmless in itself, has yet such terribly hurtful consequences; by doing all that in us lies,
The in se est proverb again; see Nos. 142, ‘The Wisdom of Winning Souls’, II and n. 65; and 151, ‘Hypocrisy in Oxford’ [Latin], II.7 and n.
Note this latent form of what will later become the General Rules: (1) doing no harm; (2) showing mercy; (3) constant attendance on God’s public service; see No. 24, ‘Sermon on the Mount, IV’, IV.1 and n.
Deut. 5:24.
Josh. 6:18, etc.
Cf. Deut. 5:25; note the omission of an ascription.
How to Cite This Entry
Bibliography:
, “.” In , edited by . , Entry published . https://wesleyworks.ecdsdev.org/sermons/Sermon143.About this Entry
Entry Title: Sermon 143: Public Diversions Denounced