Wesley's disappointment and struggle with a preacher who got off to a promising start

 

Based on Wesley's letters about Thomas Maxfield  


Odilon Massolar Chaves 

 

============================

  


Copyright © 2026, Odilon Massolar Chaves

All rights reserved to the author.

It is allowed to read, copy and share for free.

Article 184 of the Penal Code and Law 96710 of February 19, 1998.

Books published in the Wesleyan Digital Library: 874

Books published by the author: 914

Cover:

Odilon Massolar Chaves is a retired Methodist pastor, with a doctorate in Theology and History from the Methodist University of São Paulo.

Son of Rev. Adherico Ribeiro Chaves and Roza Massolar Chaves.

He is married to RoseMary.

He has two daughters: Liliana and Luciana.

His thesis dealt with the Methodist revival in England in the eighteenth century and its contribution as a paradigm for our days.

 

============================

 

Table of Contents

 

·       Introduction

·       Who was Thomas Maxfield

·       Context of the Relationship

·       Letters about Thomas Maxfield

·       Thomas Maxfield was causing a lot of trouble

·       If Thomas Maxfield continues as he is, it is impossible for him to continue with us for long

·       The matters at hand between Mr. Maxfield and myself

·       The devil would fight for T. Maxfield

·       Mr. Maxfield is disabled by a persistent illness

·       What I don't like about your doctrine, spirit, or outward behavior

·        Mr. Maxfield did not put an end to it

·         I was a little surprised to read, in a late publication of yours

 

============================

 

Introduction 

 

"Wesley's Disappointment and Struggle with a Preacher Who Got Off to a Promising Start" is a 38-page book based on Wesley's letters to Thomas Maxfield.

Thomas Maxfield was born in Bristol. He was from a poor background. He was converted by Wesley during his preaching in Bristol on May 1, 1739.

He was the first Methodist preacher to preach in the open air, in 1739. After a period in the army, he was ordained a minister.

"In the 1760s, Maxfield distanced himself from Wesley due to disagreements over fanaticism and extreme views regarding Christian perfection (involving figures such as George Bell)." [1]

At first, Wesley defended and praised Thomas Maxfield in the face of accusations. Wesley wrote to him and said, "I would not believe anything evil from my friend."

But Maxfield brought confusion and division into society in Wesley's absence. In 1762, Wesley told his brother Charles that Thomas Maxfield was "the head and source of evil." [2]

On November 2, 1762, Wesley wrote to Thomas Maxfield saying what he liked and disliked about him: "Without any preface or ceremony, which is unnecessary between you and me, I will say simply and plainly what I dislike in your doctrine, spirit, or outward behavior." [3]

In 1763, Wesley wrote to his brother and said, "If Thomas Maxfield continues as he is, it is impossible that he should continue with us for long." [4]

After separating from Wesley's movement  in 1763, Thomas Maxfield led his own church. [5]

In 1764, Wesley stated, "It is what I foresaw from the beginning—that the devil would fight for T. Maxfield and company to drive perfection out of the kingdom." [6]

In 1778, Maxfield "published a pamphlet accusing the Wesleys of turning the hearts away from the people of George Whitefield during his absence in America, and John Wesley replied with A Letter to the Reverend Thomas Maxfield." [7]

John Wesley wrote A Letter to the Rev. Mr. Thomas Maxfield in 1778 in response to a critical pamphlet published by Maxfield. [8]

On February 14, 1778, Wesley replied to him and ended the letter by saying, "Your brother wounded, but still affectionate." [9]

"In 1779 there was further talk of reunification, but Charles Wesley insisted that it was necessary to acknowledge guilt on Maxfield's side. Wesley showed personal affection for him, but nothing came of the negotiations. Wesley visited Maxfield in his last illness and preached in his chapel." [10]

A story of Wesley's early disappointments with a promising preacher who went down in history as the first Methodist preacher to preach outdoors.

 

The Author

 

============================

 

Who was Thomas Maxfield

 

Thomas Maxfield was a Methodist preacher.

Maxfield was a native of Bristol, from a poor background. He was converted by John Wesley during his first visit to the city, on May 1, 1739.

He was one of the first local preachers and began preaching in 1739. Taking advantage of Wesley's absence, he went to preach in the open air.

"Wesley was informed of this irregularity, and hastened to London, alarmed, to check it up, for his prejudices in favour of 'ecclesiastical order' were still strong. Wesley's mother advised him to hear Maxfield preach before rebuking him, adding, 'But be careful what you do respecting that young man; he is as surely called by God to preach as you are.' Wesley listened to him, and, his prejudices yielding to the power of truth, he no longer objected."[11]

Wesley authorized Maxfield to preach and he became the first of numerous itinerant Methodist lay preachers.

After a stint in the army, he was ordained a Methodist preacher.

Maxfield brought confusion and division in society in Wesley's absence. In 1762, Wesley told his brother Charles that Thomas Maxfield was "the head and source of evil". [12]

Because of exaggerations and visions, they separated. "After separating from John Wesley's movement  in 1763, Maxfield led his own church. The two later reconciled on a personal level, but Maxfield never rejoined the Methodists."[13]

In 1778, Maxfield published a pamphlet accusing John and Charles Wesley of alienating Whitefield 's people when he was in America. Wesley replied to Thomas Maxfield.

In 1779 there was further talk of reunification, but Charles Wesley insisted that it was necessary to acknowledge guilt on Maxfield's side. Wesley showed personal affection for him, but nothing came of the negotiations. Wesley visited Maxfield in his last illness and preached in his chapel." [14]

Maxfield died at his home in Moorfields on 18 March 1784.

 

============================

 

Context of the Relationship

 

"Promising beginnings: Thomas Maxfield was the first lay preacher authorized by John Wesley in the early Methodist movement.

Theological conflict: In the 1760s, Maxfield distanced himself from Wesley due to disagreements over bigotry and extreme views regarding Christian perfection (involving figures such as George Bell).

Definitive break: In 1778, Maxfield published accusations against the Wesley brothers, which prompted John Wesley's public letter of reply.[15]

 

============================

 

 

Letters about Thomas Maxfield

 

For some people, Wesley wrote talking about Maxfield. Among them, we highlight:

Being with the leaders on a Sunday afternoon can be a way to bring you together

To William Holland, on February 6, 1748, Wesley said, "... I am going to write Mr. Maxfield this post. Being with the leaders on a Sunday afternoon can be a way to unite you. O let us wait for the Lord; He has the preeminence, and His right hand makes mighty things happen." [16]

The Head and Source of Evil

To his brother Charles, on December 23, 1762, he wrote: "I could play with all this if I could, but put Thomas Maxfield in the place. He is mali caput et fons ['The head and source of evil.']; so inimitably mistaken and absolutely unconvincing! And yet (which is exceedingly strange) God continues to bless his labors." [17]

Fooled by George Bell and Maxfield

In the letter to Mrs. Crosby, on May 2, 1767, it is recorded: "Benjamin Colley, a clerical aide to Wesley, was deceived by George Bell and Maxfield; but he realized his mistakes, and was restored to Methodism. Wesley buried him on November 8." [18]

My hope in him is lost

To his brother Charles, on March 17, 1772, Wesley said, "You have done exactly right in regard to T. Maxfield. For the time being, my hope in him is lost. [He had a disappointing interview with Maxfield on February 25.] [19]

Mr. Maxfield used to incite him without any prejudice, neither to humility nor sobriety of spirit.

To Miss March, June 29, 1767, Wesley said, "And still hold fast what he has received, and look for the fulness of the promise? Surely he can maintain all that sincerity of expectation to which Mr. Maxfield used to incite him without any prejudice, either to humility or sobriety of spirit." [20]

For a while I thought Maxfield knew

To Miss March, on October 13, 1764, Wesley said, "You must not speak explicitly to many: very few would understand or know how to advise you. For some time I thought Maxfield knew, and so I was glad of your knowledge of him, hoping that he would lead you by the hand in a more profitable way than I did. But then I doubted. May the Lord send help by whom He will send!" [21]

Wesley wrote to his brother Charles Wesley and Methodist leaders about problems with Maxfield. He wrote to Thomas Maxfield himself.

We highlight these letters:

 

Thomas Maxfield was causing a lot of trouble

 

Thomas Maxfield was causing a lot of trouble.] Before I came to town, it was like a bear garden; full of noise, quarrels, swearing, swearing, blasphemies, and confusion. (2) Those who prayed were partly the occasion of it, by their horrible cries and enthusiastic, unscriptural expressions

 

To your brother Charles

LONDON, December 11, 1762.

DEAR BROTHER,-- For eighteen or twenty days I heard with both ears, but I seldom opened my mouth. I think I now understand the case at least as well as anyone in England.

The sum is this: (1) The meeting at Beech Lane, [The meeting was apparently at the home of Joseph Guilford (see Diary, v. 7). On visiting the classes in November, Wesley noticed that 'some were vehement for, some against, the prayer meetings which were taking place in various parts of the city. I spoke little, lest I should take any step which I might afterwards repent" (ibid. iv. 538). Thomas Maxfield was causing a lot of trouble.] Before I came to the city, it was like a bear garden; full of noise, quarrels, profanity, profanity, blasphemies, and confusion. (2) Those who prayed were partly the occasion of it, by their horrible shouts and enthusiastic, unscriptural expressions. (3) Determined to 'fix them or do away with them,' I transferred the meeting to the Foundation. (4) Immediately the noise, quarrels, swearing, swearing, blasphemies, and confusion ceased. (5) There was less and less shouting, and less enthusiastic, unscriptural language. (6) In examining the Society, I found about eighty persons convinced of sin, and nearly eighty who were justified in these meetings. So, on the whole, they caused some heartache and much good. I trust that they will now do more good, and do no harm. Seven persons had left the Society for this reason; but four of them have already returned.

I bought the land before the Kingswood School of Margaret Ward, and paid for it with my own money. [This land was divided into pastures and gardens, on which the boys worked. See Kingswood School, p. 19.] Surely, therefore, I have a right to employ it as I please. What any reasonable man can say to the contrary

I answered the bishop and received counsel on my answer. If the devil owes him shame, he will answer. He is a sensible man; but I really think he does not understand Greek! [See the letter heading on p. 338.]

I would be glad to see Mr. Nitchman. [David Nitschmann, who had sailed with the Wesleys to Georgia as bishop responsible for Moravian emigrants. See Diary, i.111, ii.37.] What is beyond loving the faith! We unite in love to Sally and to you. Farewell! [22]

 

If Thomas Maxfield continues as he is, it is impossible for him to continue with us for long

 

If Thomas Maxfield continues as he is, it is impossible for him to continue with us for long. [This was a period of great 'care and trouble' for Wesley, owing to Maxfield and Bell. Wesley had defended Maxfield against charges at the Conference of 1761 and had written to him plainly.] But I live in the hope of better things. In the meantime, feast lens!


To your brother Charles

LONDON, January 5, 1763.

 [Wesley wrote 1762, but the year was still young. The contents of the letter show that it should be 1763, since Charles Wesley endorsed it.]

DEAR BROTHER, — Take me to the right. I am far from uttering my ex cathedra remarks. I only wish that they be considered fairly.

I was a little surprised to find Bishop Warburton [See letter of December 11, 1762.] so utterly unknown to the New Testament; and, notwithstanding all his parade of knowledge, I believe he is not critical in Greek.

If Thomas Maxfield continues as he is, it is impossible for him to continue with us long. [This was a period of great 'care and trouble' for Wesley, owing to Maxfield and Bell. Wesley had defended Maxfield from accusations at the Conference of 1761, and had written to him plainly. See the Diary, iv. 541-2; Wesley of Tyerman, ii. 432-41.] But I live in the hope of better things. In the meantime, feast lens!

I baptized two Turks two or three weeks ago. [On December 4, 1762, at Maxfield's request, Wesley baptized these two men, who proved to be impostors. See Diary, iv. 540, v. 3; and letter of February 8.] They seem to be strong in faith; and their story is very probable, but I am not sure whether it is true. I wait for further proof.

This week I began to speak my opinion of five or six honest enthusiasts. [Maxfield led a selected band in London. They had 'dreams, visions, and impressions,' and he encouraged these enthusiasts. See letter of November 2, 1762.] But I move only a hair at a time, and so we draw closer and closer. No sharpening will profit. It takes both the hand of a lady and the heart of a lion (...). [23].

 

The matters at hand between Mr. Maxfield and myself

 

The matters in question between Mr. Maxfield and myself [See the preceding letter.] may sleep till I have the pleasure of seeing you. Wishing you all light and love, I remain, dear sir.

 

To Mr. ——

May 1763. [Fragment]

they do not receive the feeling that I have insisted on

And I do not know that [Joseph] Guilford [See Diary, v. 7, 362; vi. 149.] [had any other] objection to them than

more or less, than 'By grace you are saved by faith.' And whenever we let go of this fundamental truth, God's work for us will come to an end.

It is true that saving faith is both the gift and the work of God; yes, and a work of Omnipotence. But, still, this excludes no man; for God is ready to work it in every man: there is nothing more certain, taking the words in a sacred sense, than that 'every man may believe if he will.'

The matters in question between Mr. Maxfield and myself [See the preceding letter.] may sleep till I have the pleasure of seeing you. Wishing you all light and love, I remain, dear sir,

His brother and affectionate servant. [24]

 

The devil would fight for T. Maxfield

 

It is what I foresaw from the beginning—that the devil would fight for T. Maxfield and company to drive perfection out of the kingdom

 

To your brother Charles

HADDINGTON, May 25, 1764.

DEAR BROTHER,--Is there any reason why you and I should no longer have intercourse (...)? I know none; though perhaps there are people in the world who would not regret it. I hope they will find peace and unity in the South, as we do in the North. Only the Secessionists and Mr. Sandeman's friends are ready to devour us. And it is no wonder; to these, as well as to Deists and Socinians, I oppose the former professor. But as Thomas Maxfield and his friends continue Silently, or gladiatorial animo And as are John Jones, Downes, and Richardson and my best friend, [his wife.] and their

The frightful stories written from London made all our Northern preachers afraid even to murmur about perfection; and, of course, people on all sides were already good Calvinists by that time. It is what I foresaw from the beginning—that the devil would fight for T. Maxfield and company to drive perfection out of the kingdom.

O may you and I stand firm where we have come, and may our yes be yes and our no be no! I feel the desire of some in me who are all faith and love. No man has been more profitable to me than George Bell while he was simple of heart. Ah, warmth and light united! My love to Sally. Farewell. [25]

 

Mr. Maxfield is disabled by a persistent illness

 

For eight or ten weeks, Mr. Maxfield has been incapacitated by a persistent illness. This has contributed not a little to the peace of our Society

 

For Samuel Furly

LEWISHAM, March 6, 1764.

For eight or ten weeks Mr. Maxfield has been incapacitated by a persistent illness. This has contributed not a little to the peace of our Society, which in general thinks of one thing—to save their own souls, and seldom strike first, though they sometimes strike again, especially when they are attacked without fear or intelligence, which has generally been the case. [26]

 

What I don't like about your doctrine, spirit, or outward behavior

 

Without any preface or ceremony, which is unnecessary between you and me, I will simply and plainly say what I do not like about your doctrine, spirit, or outward behavior

 

To Thomas Maxfield

CANTERBURY, November 2, 1762. 

Without any preface or ceremony, which is unnecessary between you and me, I will simply and plainly say what I do not like about your doctrine, spirit, or outward behavior. When I say yours, I include Brother Bell and Owen, and those who have the most connection with them.

 

I like your doctrine of Perfection, or pure love; love excluding sin

 

1. I like your doctrine of Perfection, or pure love; love excluding sin; you insist that it is by faith alone; that consequently it is instantaneous (though preceded and followed by a gradual work), and that it may be now, at this instant.

 

But I don't like you to suppose that man can be as perfect as an angel

 

But I do not like you to suppose that man can be as perfect as an angel; that he can be absolutely perfect; that he can be infallible, or above being tempted; or that, the moment he is pure in heart, he cannot fall from it.

 

I don't like the saying, it was only known or taught among us in two or three years

 

I don't like the saying, it was only known or taught among us in two or three years. I admit you didn't know it. You repeatedly denied me instant sanctification; but I knew and taught you (and my brother too, as our writings show) throughout these twenty years.

 

I don't like your direct or indirectly derogatory justification that a justified person is not in Christ, not born of God, not a new creature

 

I don't like your direct or indirectly derogatory justification that a justified person is not in Christ, is not born of God, is not a new creature, has no new heart, is not sanctified, is not a temple of the Holy Spirit, or that he cannot please God or cannot grow in grace.

 

I don't like you to say that those who are saved from sin need nothing more than to look to Jesus

 

I do not like you to say that he who is saved from sin needs nothing more than to look to Jesus; he does not need to hear or think of anything else; to believe, to believe is enough; that he needs no self-examination, nor moments of private prayer; he does not need to care for small or outward things; and that he cannot be taught by anyone who is not in the same state.

 

I do not like you to assert that justified people, in general, persecute those who are saved from sin; that they persecuted you for that reason

 

I do not like you to assert that justified persons, in general, persecute those who are saved from sin; that they persecuted you for that reason; and that for two years you were more persecuted by the two brothers than you ever were by the world in all your life.

 

But I don't like something that looks like pride, of overvaluing and underestimating others, especially preachers

 

2. As for his spirit, I like his trust in God and his zeal for the salvation of souls.

But I do not like something that looks like pride, of overvaluing and underestimating others, especially preachers: to think not only that you are blind, and that you have not been sent of God, but that you are dead—dead to God, and walking in the way of hell; that they go one way, you another; that they have no life within them. You speak of yourselves as if you were the only men who knew and taught the gospel; and as if not only all the clergy, but all the Methodists beyond that, were in complete darkness. I do not like something that looks like enthusiasm, overvalued feelings, and inward impressions: to mistake the mere work of the imagination for the voice of the Spirit; to expect the end without the means; and to devalue reason, knowledge, and wisdom in general.

 

I don't like something that has the appearance of antinomianism, not of enlarging the law and making it honorable

 

I do not like anything that has the appearance of antinomianism, not of enlarging the law and making it honorable; not valuing the sensibility of conscience and exact vigilance sufficiently for it; to use faith more as counterdistinct to holiness than as productive of it.

But what I disgust most is your smallness of love for your brethren, for your own Society; your want of union of heart with them, and of wills of mercy towards them; your lack of manor, gentleness, patience; your impatience with contradiction; you regard every man as your enemy who rebukes you or rebukes you for love; your prejudice and narrow-mindedness, loving in a way that only those who love you do; your reproach, tendency to think little of everyone who does not exactly agree with you: in a word, your divisive spirit. Indeed, I do not believe that any of you plan or desire a separation; but you do not fear it enough, you abhor and detest it, shuddering at the very thought. And all previous tempers tend to this, and gradually prepare you for it. Observe, I have told you before. God grant that you will immediately and fondly accept the warning!

 

But I don't like you disrespecting any rules of the bands or the Society

 

3. As for his outward behavior, I like the general tone of his life, dedicated to God and dedicated to doing good.

But I don't like you disrespecting any rules of the bands or the Society, nor do you do anything that hinders others from observing you exactly. Therefore--

I do not like you to name meetings as to prevent others from participating either in the public preaching, in your class or band, or in any other meeting that the Rules of the Society or your office require.

I do not like you to spend so much time in various meetings, for many who attend cannot free themselves from the other tasks of their vocation unless they omit the preaching, the class, or the band. This naturally tends to dissolve our Society by cutting its sinews.

 

As to their more public gatherings, I like to pray earnestly and largely for all the blessings of God

 

As to your more public meetings, I like to pray earnestly and largely for all the blessings of God; and I know that much good has been done here, and I hope much more will be done.

 

But I don't like a lot of things there

 

But I do not like several things there,--(1) The singing, speaking, or praying of several at once: (2) praying only to the Son of God, or more than to the Father; (3) using improper expressions in prayer; sometimes too bold, if not irreverent; sometimes too pompous and magnificent, exalting themselves instead of God, and telling Him what they are, not what they want: (4) using poor, flat, bald hymns: (5) never kneeling in prayer; (6) using highly indecent postures or gestures; (7) shouting, so far as to render the words unintelligible: (8) their affirmative people will be justified or sanctified even now: (9) what they affirm when they are not: (10) he who commands them says, 'I believe': (11) the bitterly condemning anyone who opposes, calling them wolves, etc.; and call them hypocrites, or unjustified.

Read this calmly and impartially before the Lord in prayer. Thus evil will cease and good will remain, and you will be more than ever united to your affectionate brother. [27]

 

Mr. Maxfield did not put an end to it

 

Shortly after I left, some of them had dreams, visions, or impressions, for they thought of God. Mr. Maxfield did not put an end to it; on the contrary, he encouraged them.

When I returned, I faced them with all my strength, and in a short time I heard no more from them. 

 

For a friend

[LONDON, May] 1763.

 

Looking back on things I wish to forget forever

 

At your request, I take on the nagging task of looking back on things I wish to forget forever. I have had innumerable proofs (though it would now be an endless task to gather) of all the facts I cite. And I recite it as briefly as possible, because I do not wish to aggravate anything, but to scarcely put it truthfully.

 

Mr. Maxfield was justified as I prayed with him

 

1. Mr. Maxfield was justified while I prayed with him in Baldwin Street, Bristol. [For his conversion, see letter of May 28, 1739.]

2. Shortly afterwards he was employed by me as a preacher in London.

3. By this he had access to Mrs. Maxfield, [Miss Elizabeth Branford, one of the first fruits of Whitefield's ministry in London. She died November 23, 1777.] that otherwise he would probably never see, much less marry; whence sprang all his outward prosperity.

 

recommended to the Bishop of Derry to be ordained a priest

 

4. He was, by me (by those who made my request), recommended to the Bishop of Derry to be ordained a priest, who said to him then (I understood it from his own mouth): 'Mr. Maxfield, I command you to help this good man, that he may not kill himself.'

 

When, a few years ago, many reproached him very much, I defended him continuously and vehemently

 

5. When, some years ago, many reproached him much, I defended him continually and vehemently; though to the repugnance of several preachers and a large number of people.

 

Praise you in strong terms from time to time

 

6. I disgusted them, not only by defending him, but by praising him in strong terms from time to time, both in public and private, as to his rectitude and usefulness.

 

All the while, Mr. Maxfield complained

 

7. During all this time, Mr. Maxfield complained (from what I was often informed by those with whom he spoke) that he was never so badly persecuted by the mob in Cornwall as by my brother and me.

 

When I left London, I left these in the care of Mr. Maxfield

 

8. Four or five years later, some persons were appointed to meet weekly at the Foundry. When I left London, I left these in the care of Mr. Maxfield, desiring them to regard him as they regarded me.

 

Mr. Maxfield did not put an end to it; on the contrary, he encouraged them

 

9. Shortly after I left, some of them had dreams, visions, or impressions, for they thought of God. Mr. Maxfield did not put an end to it; on the contrary, he encouraged them.

 

I defended and praised Mr. Maxfield as before

 

10. When I returned, I met them with all my might, and in a short time heard no more of them. In the meantime, I defended and commended Mr. Maxfield as before, and when I left the city again, I left them in his care.

 

To this was added a contempt for those who did not have them

 

11. Soon the visions and revelations returned: Mr. Maxfield did not discourage them. To this was added a contempt for those who had them not, with the belief that they were proofs of the highest grace.

 

He did not make an effort to put out the fire, but rather took the opportunity to separate them from other preachers

 

12. Some of our preachers vehemently opposed them. Upon this they were fired upon, and refused to hear them preach, but crowded behind Mr. Maxfield. He did not endeavour to put out the fire, but rather took advantage of it to separate them from other preachers, and to arrest them himself. He also continually told them that they should not be taught by man, especially by those who had less grace than themselves. I was told this from time to time; but he denied it, and I would not believe anything evil of my friend.

 

I found the Society in an uproar, and several of Mr. Maxfield's most intimate friends formed a separate body

 

13. When I returned in October, 1762, I found the Society in an uproar, and several of Mr. Maxfield's most intimate friends formed a separate body. Enthusiasm, pride, and great lack of charity appeared in many who had before had much grace. I rebuked them very tenderly. They would not bear it; one of them, Mrs. Coventry, [See letter of January 26.] exclaimed, 'We shall no longer be intimidated; let us take off the mask.' So a few days later she came, and before a hundred persons brought her and her husband's notes, and said, 'Sir, we want nothing more to do with you; Mr. Maxfield is our teacher.' Soon after, several others left the Society (one of them George Bell), saying, 'Blind John is not able to teach us; let us stay with Mr. Maxfield.'

 

Ever since I heard of George Bell's prophecy, I have explicitly stated against it both in private

 

14. Since I heard of George Bell's prophecy, I have explicitly stated against it both privately, in the Society and in preaching, again and again; and widely in the public papers. Mr. Maxfield made no such statement; I have reason to think that he believed it. [Maxfield says in his Vindication, p. 16: 'At Wapping, Mr. Bell mentioned the destruction that was to take place on February 28. As soon as he had finished speaking, I arose and laid aside all that he had said on the subject; and went to the Foundation the next morning, and told Mr. Wesley what I had done.] I know that many of his friends did so, and several of them lay awake at the end of February at the home of their most intimate friend, Mr. Biggs, [See letter of February 8.] in full expectation of the conquest.

 

he sent me a notice that the chapel was his, and that Mr. Bell should exhort there, whether I wanted it or not

 

15. About this time, one of our stewards, [Mr. Arvin., who held the lease.] who, at my desire, took the chapel at Snowsfields for my use, sent me notice that the chapel was his, and that Mr. Bell should exhort there, whether I wanted it or not. Whereupon I requested the next preacher there to inform the congregation that, as long as things were so, neither I nor our preachers could preach there any longer in conscience.

 

'If you do, you renounce your connection with me'

 

16. Even so, Mr. Maxfield preached there. With that, I sent a note asking him not to do so and adding: 'If you do, you renounce the connection with me.'

 

On this point, and on no other, we are divided

 

17. On receiving this, he said, 'I am going to preach at Snowsfields.' He did so, and thus relinquished connection. On this point, and on no other, did we split; by this act the knot was cut. Determined to do this, he said to Mr. Clementson, 'I must no longer preach at the Foundry.'

 

Since then, he has spoken all kinds of evil about me, his father, his friend, his greatest earthly benefactor

 

18. From that time he spoke all manner of evil about me, his father, his friend, his greatest earthly benefactor. I quote Mr. Fletcher [See Life and Times of the Countess of Huntingdon, i. 321-2.] as a witness to this, and Mr. Madan to another. Did he speak ill of me to Mr. Fletcher one day, one day only? No, but every day for six weeks together. To Mr. Madan he said (among a thousand other things, which he had been collecting twenty years): 'Mr. Wesley believed and accepted all that Mr. Bell said; and the reason of our separation was this: he said to me one day, "Tommy, I will tell the people that you are the greatest preacher of the gospel in England; and you will tell them that I am the greatest." For refusing to do this, Mr. Wesley arrested me!'

 

what connection should I have with Mr. Maxfield

 

Now, with complete calmness, and I really think without the least prejudice, I refer to your own judgment what connection I must have with Mr. Maxfield, either until I am convinced that these things are not true, or until he is fully conscious of his guilt. [28]

 

I was a little surprised to read, in a late publication of yours

 

I was a little surprised to read, in a late publication of his, the following statements:

Thomas Maxfield was 'some of the first fruits of Mr. Whitefield's ministry'

 

To Thomas Maxfield

February 14, 1778.

 

I was a little surprised to read, in a late publication of yours

 

I was a little surprised to read, in a late publication of his, the following statements:—

1. Thomas Maxfield was 'some of the first fruits of Mr. Whitefield's ministry' (page 18).

2. 'When he went abroad, he delivered me and many thousands more into the hands of those whom he thought could trust them, and who would have returned them to him on his return. But, alas! it was not so.' (Ibid.)

 

I heard Mr. Whitefield say, in the Tabernacle

 

'I heard Mr. Whitefield say, in the Tabernacle, in the presence of five or six ministers, to Mr. Wesley, shortly before he left England for the last time: "I delivered thirty thousand persons into the hands of your brother and you when I went abroad. And when I returned, you had already turned their hearts so much against me that not three hundred of them would come to hear me." I knew this to be true.' (Ibid.)

3. 'I heard Mr. Whitefield say, "When I came back from Georgia, there was no one speaking ill of one another. What I would not give, suffer, or do to see those times again! But ah, this division! This division! What a massacre it caused

'It was doctrine that caused the difference; or, at least, it was pretended to do so.' (Ibid.)

'He preached a few times in connection with his old friends. But, alas! How quickly was the sword of restraint drawn!' (Page 19.)

4. 'Where can you now find someone loving on either side? They have no more love for each other than the Turks.' (Ibid.)

'Read their vile accusations and the evil characters they give each other, tearing up the filthiest ashes to find some black history against their fellow preachers' (page 20).

They "kill with the sword of bitterness and anger and envy. Still more their shame is what they sent out into the world against one another on both sides about five or six years ago, and to this day." (Page 21.)

 

I propose some questions about each of these four heads

 

To satisfy both friend and foe, I propose some questions about each of these four heads.

 

soon he began to roar and slam himself against the ground, so that six men could barely catch him. This was Thomas Maxfield

 

I. As to the first, I read a remarkable passage in the Third Diary, the truth of which may yet be attested by Mr. Durbin, Mr. Westall, and several others present at the time, who are still alive: 'A young man who was behind sank as a dead man; but soon he began to roar and beat himself against the ground, so that six men could scarcely hold him. This was Thomas Maxfield.' [See letter of May 28, 1739; and to Henry Durbin, May 3, 1786, n.] Were you gone, how is it that you are 'the first fruits of Mr. Whitefield's ministry'? And how is it that neither I nor your fellow-workers have heard a word of it during all those years that you have worked with us

 

When, where, in what way?

 

II. 'When he returned abroad, he delivered me and many thousands into the hands of Mr. Wesley.'

When, where, in what way? This is quite new to me! I have never heard a word of it before!

But stay! Here's something even more curious! 'I heard Mr. Whitefield say, in the Tabernacle, in the presence of five or six ministers, just before he left England for the last time, 'I delivered thirty thousand into the hands of you and your brother when I went abroad.'"

 

Is not this, then, a total misrepresentation. It would, to God, not be a voluntary declaration!

 

Mr. Whitefield's trip abroad, as it is here mentioned, was in the year 1741. Did he then deliver you into my hands? Were you not in my hands before? Had you not been a member of the Society under my care for more than a year? No, were you not, at the present time, one of my preachers? Have you not then served me as a son in the gospel? Have you not eaten my bread and lodged in my house? Is not this, then, a total misrepresentation. It would, to God, not be a voluntary declaration!

 

And first, I want to know what the names of these five or six ministers are

 

'I heard,' you say, 'Mr. Whitefield say in the Tabernacle, in the presence of five or six ministers, just before he left England for the last time.' What, then, can doubt the truth of what comes next? For here is chapter and verse! Here are specified both the time, the place, and the persons present. And they ought to be, since the alleged crime is of a very heinous nature. Many men have been justly put to death for sins which, in the sight of God, were not equal to these. So the point calls for a little more analysis. And, first, I want to know what the names of these five or six ministers are, and which of them have heard Mr. Whitefield say, 'When I went abroad' (in 1741) 'I delivered thirty thousand persons into the hands of you and your brother.' Whence came they? Did they spring from the earth?

 

He never entrusted me with that. He never gave it into my hands or my brother's

 

Now, at that time there were not five thousand Methodists in England or in the world. The Societies at London, Bristol, and Kingswood (the only ones I had) had fourteen or fifteen hundred members. I believe there were not so many in their Societies. But whether they were fewer or more, they meant nothing to me. He never entrusted me with it. He never delivered it into my hands or my brother's, nor his Society in the Tabernacle at London, nor that of Bristol, nor Kingswood, nor anywhere else. He never delivered (that I remember) a single Society into my hands. I bless God, I needed it not. I needed not to build on another man's foundation. I was also granted a dispensation from the gospel; and my labour was not in vain. I was compelled to cry out (and you yourself used the same words to God in my name)—

O unfathomable love

That he deigned to approve

And let the work of my hands prosper!

With my pastoral trickster

I crossed the creek,

Behold, I am scattered in flocks!

 

From what point of view, then, can you accuse me of this perfidy of which I am no more guilty than of high treason?

 

From what point of view, then, can you accuse me of that perfidy of which I am no more guilty than of high treason? To what end can you say, 'When he went abroad, he delivered many thousands into the hands of those whom he thought he could trust to them' I delivered! When, where, how? What do you mean? I flatly deny that he ever delivered a thousand or a hundred souls into my hands. Do you mean, 'He spoke of you with honour to them at Kennington Common and Rose Green'? True; but not with as much honour as I spoke of you in London – yes, even in the year 1763 I. But was that the same thing with 'delivering the people' in London 'into your hands'? No, but 'Mr. Whitefield trusted that you would return them when he returned.' They! to whom His Society in London or Bristol I did not give them to give. He never entrusted it to me. Therefore, I could not 'return' them.

 

But how melancholy is the exclamation that follows

 

But how melancholy is the exclamation that follows: 'Woe is me! It was not so.' That was not the reason, I did not return what I never received, but went on my direct way, taking care as best I could of those who entrusted themselves to me.

III. Farewell to the second article. As to the third, his words are: 'I heard Mr. Whitefield say, 'Ah, this division! This division! What a massacre he has caused!"'

 

But who made this division? It was not I. It was not my brother. It was Mr. Whitefield himself; and that in spite of all the warnings, arguments, and appeals

 

But who made this division? It was not me. It was not my brother. It was Mr. Whitefield himself; and that in spite of all the warnings, arguments, and appeals. Mr. Whitefield first wrote a treatise against me by name. He sent it to my brother, who endorsed it with these words: 'Put the sword back in its place.' He slept a little; but, after a while, he published it. I did not answer. Soon after, Mr. Whitefield preached against my brother and I by name. He did this constantly, both at Moorfields and in all other public places. We never ran by handrail again, but spoke of him with honor all the time and in all places. But is it any wonder that those who loved us no longer chose to listen to him? Meanwhile, were we the ones who 'turned their hearts against him'? It was not himself

 

'At least, that's how it was faked.' It was so fake.

 

But you say, 'It was the doctrine that made the difference' (strangely expressed!); 'At least, that was how it was pretended.' It was so feigned 'What do you mean by this doctrinal difference was only pretended that we were in agreement on the basis, and only fought as wrestlers to show our skill. No, here there was no pretense. The thing was as clear as the sun at noonday. Did not Mr. Whitefield proclaim on the roof of the house the difference between us and him? And yet, it was not only the doctrinal difference that caused the division. It was rather the way he maintained his doctrine and treated us everywhere. Otherwise the doctrinal difference would not have created any difference of affection; but he might have lovingly guarded a special redemption and carried us to the end of our lives.

 

When he preached in his own foundry, and my brother sat beside him, he preached the absolute decrees in the most peremptory and offensive manner

 

He did indeed 'preach a few times in connection with his former friends.' But how quickly the sword of contention was drawn! 'By whom Truly, by himself. Do you not know (thousands know, if you do not know) that when he preached in the foundry itself, and my brother sat by him, he preached the absolute decrees in the most peremptory and offensive manner. What was this, but to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard? Which, then, is responsible for the strife and division which followed.

 

 Blessed be God, I can find many thousands

 

'But where,' you ask, 'can now find any love on either side' Blessed be God, I can find many thousands, both in London, in Bristol, in Kingswood, and in various parts, not only of England, but also of Scotland and Ireland; persons as full of love both to God and to man as any I knew forty years ago.

 

I plead, not guilty

 

Some of these I find (and I am very glad to find) in Mr. Whitefield's Societies. And I pray God that they increase a thousandfold both in number and in strength. No, they have no more love for one another than the Turks.' They! Who This is not the case with our Societies. They not only love each other, but they also love their enemies, even those who still use them contemptuously. But 'read their vile accusations and the evil character they give to each other, gathering up the filthiest ashes to find some black history.' I will answer for one. I do not give 'evil character' to my 'fellow preachers.' I 'do not reduce filthy ashes by black stories.' Let him who does it, who does it, stays with himself. 'They kill with the sword of bitterness, wrath, and envy.' I have not. I plead not guilty. As I do not envy man, neither my anger nor my bitterness kills any human creature. 'Still more to their shame is what they sent into the world against each other, on both sides, about five or six years ago, and to this day.'

 

If you haven't, how can you state so peremptorily what 'both sides' did?

 

'What they sent against each other on both sides about five or six years ago.' In five or six years I was vehemently called to answer for myself: twice by Mr. Richard Hill, and then by his brother. [See Green's Anti-Methodist Publications.] Have you ever read what 'we sent into the world against each other on both sides'? If you have not read it, how can you state so peremptorily what 'both sides' have done? You cannot be a judge of what you have not read; and if you had read it, you could not have handed down such a sentence.

 

Your brother wounded, but still affectionate

 

I have written three tracts; but in none of them do I 'kill with the sword of bitterness, wrath, or envy.' In none of them do I speak a bitter, passionate, or disrespectful word. Bitterness and wrath, yes, low, virulent invectives, both Mr. Richard and Mr. Rowland Hill (as well as Mr. Toplady) have overflowed upon me in great abundance. But where it is that I have on one occasion returned them, railing by railing, I have not so learned Christ. I dare not complain either of them or of you. I come back not cursing, but blessing. May the God of love bless them as well as you is the prayer of

His brother wounded, but still affectionate. [29]

 



[1] Overview of Google's AI Mode

[2] https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1762/ 

[3] https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1762/  

[4] https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1763/ 

[5] Overview of Google's AI Mode

[6] https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1764/ 

[7] Overview of Google's AI Mode

[8] Overview of Google's AI Mode

[9] https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1778/ 

[10] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Maxfield_(Methodist)

[11] https://www.biblicalcyclopedia.com/M/maxfield-thomas.html

[12] https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1762/ 

[13] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Maxfield_(Methodist)

[14] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Maxfield_(Methodist)

[15] Overview of Google's AI Mode

[16] https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1748/ 

[17] https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1762/ 

[18] https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1767/ 

[19] https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1772/  

[20] https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1767/ 

[21] https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1764/ 

[22] https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1762/  

[23] https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1763/  

[24] https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1763/ 

[25] https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1764/  

[26] https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1764/  

[27] https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1762/  

[28] https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1763/  

[29] https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1778/ 

 

Comentários

Postagens mais visitadas deste blog