The
strength of the laity in the Methodist Movement
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: 900
Books
published by the author: 940
Cover: John Nelson, Mary Bosanquet, Sarah Crosby, Captain Webb, Thomas Olivers (center).
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.
Give me a hundred preachers
who fear nothing but sin and desire nothing but God, and I don't care for a
straw whether they are clergy or laity, they alone will shake the gates of hell
and establish the kingdom of heaven on earth. [1]
(John Wesley)
Table of Contents
· Introduction
· The Need of Lay Preachers
· Wesley explained the criteria for using lay
preachers
· This I categorically deny
· I never censured all the clergy
· How We Were Led to Accept Lay Assistants
· We allow preachers who have not been ordained
episcopally
· How God's Present Work Could Be Accomplished
Without the Help of Lay Preachers
· We allow lay people who we believe to have
called God to preach
· I bring them to meet the ministry
· Whether clergy or laity, I will make them an
example for the benefit of all others
· Criteria for being a Methodist preacher
· His position is in the absence of the
Minister
· Only they will shake the gates of hell
· There was so much danger of our clergy
dominating the laity
· The whole work of God, called Methodism, is
an extraordinary dispensation of His providence
Introduction
"The Strength of the Laity in the
Methodist Movement" is a 26-page book based especially on Wesley's letters
and diary.
"Lay ministry gave voice and active responsibility to ordinary people, challenging the rigid clerical model of the time."[2]
The laity were instrumental
in the expansion of Methodism. But Methodism was much criticized for using lay
people. Some clergy and newspapers claimed that Wesley criticized Anglican
clergy and used unprepared lay people.
To the Editor of 'Lloyd's Evening, November 22, 1760, Wesley said, "You blame me for allowing lay preachers." [4]
In a letter to George L. Fleury, May 18, 1771, Wesley rebutted him and said: Among them, none can be an avowed preacher, but those who (1) are truly alive to God, who experience the faith that works by love, as the love of God and of all mankind; (2) those who possess competent knowledge of the Word of God and of the work of God in the souls of men; (3) those who have given proof that they are called of God by converting sinners from the error of their ways. And to show whether they have these qualifications or not, they are a year, sometimes more, in judgment." [5]
Thomas Maxfield is considered the first layman to preach in Methodism. Sarah Mallet and Mary Bosanquet are considered the first preachers authorized to preach.
Hannah Ball was noted for creating the first
Sunday School in 1769. "Hannah
Ball (1734–1792) was an English Methodist, a close disciple of John Wesley, and
a pioneer of the Sunday School. Converted in 1765 by hearing Wesley preach, she
became an active leader in High Wycombe, teaching the Bible to needy children
and creating the first formal Sunday School in 1769. "[6]
Thomas Olivers was a preacher, editor of the
"Arminian Magazine" and author of the hymn "To the God of
Abraham".
The mason John Nelson was considered the
"Prince of Methodist preachers".
Laymen Philip Embury and Barbara Heck were
responsible for the beginnings of the Methodist Church in America.
"Thomas Thompson became a prosperous
banker, a member of the British Parliament, and one of the leading laymen and
financiers of Methodism in his region. He also actively worked alongside
William Wilberforce in the campaign for the abolition of slavery."[7]
Others
were leaders of the Bands and Classes, among them are: Hester Ann Roe Rogers
(1756–1794); Mary Bosanquet Fletcher (1739–1815); Darcy, Lady Maxwell (c.
1743–1810; Sarah Crosby (1729–1804), etc.
Methodism lived in the extraordinary of God's calling, that is, outside of what was "common" at the time.
For Wesley, everything in Methodism was an "Extraordinary Dispensation of God's Providence."
He said, "It is clear to me that the whole work of God called Methodism is an extraordinary dispensation of His providence. Therefore I do not wonder whether several things occur in it which do not fall within the ordinary rules of discipline." [8]
This extraordinary includes the very existence of Methodism, the doctrine of holiness, the use of laity and women in ministry, etc.
In the letter to Mary Bosanquet, one of the first lay preachers in Methodism, we see this:
Londonderry, June 13, 1771.
"My dear sister,--I
think the strength of the cause is there—in your extraordinary attachment. I am
convinced that all our lay preachers; otherwise I could not tolerate your
preaching at all. It is clear to me that the whole work of God, called Methodism,
is an extraordinary dispensation of His providence. Therefore I do not wonder
whether several things occur there which do not fall under the ordinary rules
of discipline. St. Paul's common rule was, 'I do not permit a woman to speak in
the congregation.' However, in extraordinary cases he made some exceptions; in
Corinth, in particular.--I am, my dear sister,
Your affectionate
brother." [9]
For this reason, Methodism
is differentiated in the participation of the laity.
The laity have always been
and will be important in the life and mission of the Church.
The Author
Then John appointed more lay preachers to serve the
societies. No one was set aside for such service, though not until they had
been examined through the "gifts, grace, and fruits.[10]
"(...)
the task of preaching throughout the kingdom was, quite simply, too great a
task for John and Charles. Necessity dictated the innovative means of "lay
preaching" to the Methodist movement. This idea was not one that John
readily accepted, because he was tenaciously a traditionalist. But events and
needs cried out for evangelists. So John appointed more lay preachers to serve
the societies. No one was set aside for such service, though not until they had
been examined through the "gifts, grace, and fruits."[11]
The
Layman in the Expansion of Methodism in America
Wesley
appointed laymen to America to minister the Word, the Lord's Supper, and
organize churches. Among them was Francis Asbury.
"Methodism
spread to the 13 American Colonies through immigrants and lay preachers in the
1760s." [12]
In
the American colonies in Philadelphia in 1773, there were 1,160 members led by
10 lay preachers. [13]
The laity were preachers, cell leaders,
teachers, butlers, etc. Some women stood out in the area of education.
Some excelled in secular life. "Thomas
Thompson became a prosperous banker, a member of the British Parliament, and
one of the leading laymen and financiers of Methodism in his region. He also
actively worked alongside William Wilberforce in the campaign for the abolition
of slavery."[14]
Wesley explained the
criteria for using lay preachers
And to show whether
they have these qualifications or not, they are a year, sometimes longer, on
trial. Now, I ask that it be the common examination for orders of deacons or
priests for this
Letter to George L. Fleury
Limerick, 18 May 1771.
After answering George L.
Fleury to some accusations against Methodism, Wesley quotes and combats what is
on "page" and what is with quotation marks (').
He said:
The charge: "... The
first part of this objection we have had before. The last is a total error.
They do not allow the 'most ignorant men to preach any inward calling' they
pretend to make.
Wesley answers:
"Among them, none can
be avowed preachers, but those who (1) are truly alive to God, who experience
the faith which works by love, as love to God and to all mankind; (2) those who
possess competent knowledge of the Word of God and of the work of God in the
souls of men; (3) those who have given proof that they are called of God by
converting sinners from the error of their ways. And to show whether they have
these qualifications or not, they are a year, sometimes more, on trial. Now, I
request that it be the common examination for orders of deacons or priests for
this."
Another charge: "But
no ambassador can act without a commission from his king; consequently, no
preacher with wittiness, has no commission from God' (page 11)."
Wesley answers, "This
is a delicate point; But you compel me to speak." I ask, then, He was
commissioned by God to preach the gospel, he who does not know the gospel,
knows little more of the Bible than the Qur'an, I am afraid? But if so, how many
of our brethren have sent from man, but not from God!
Accusation: "However,
these laymen were not sent by God to preach; for St. Paul does not say, 'No one
takes this honor for himself but he called of God, as was Aaron' (Page 13.)
Wesley answers: " Another text very badly applied; for Aaron
preached nothing. But if these men are not sent by God, how is it that God
confirms his word by convincing and converting sinners? He confirms the word of
His messenger, but of no one? Therefore, if God has his word, it is clear that
God sent them." [15]
Some of
the letters that Wesley refers to the laity are:
This I categorically deny
'For we despise the
ministers of the Church of England.' This I flatly deny
To Mr. ----
[September 3, 1756.]
You give five reasons why
the Rev. Mr. P.---- will not return among us: (1) 'Because we despise the
ministers of the Church of England.' This I flatly deny. I am answering letters
in this same post which bitterly blame me for the contrary. (2) 'Because so
much wrong comment and speech suffers among our people.' It is not suffered:
every possible means is used both to prevent it and to remove it.
(3) 'Because I, who have
written so much against hoarding money, have deposited seven hundred pounds as
interest.' I have never put sixpence in interest since I was born; nor had I
ever made a hundred pounds together since I came into the world. (4) 'Because
our lay preachers have told many stories about my brother and myself.' If they
did, I am sorry for them; when I hear the details, I can answer, and perhaps
shame those who believed them. (5) 'Because we did not help a friend to ramble
on.' We helped him as much as we could. 'But we could have put his case to Mr.
G----, Lady Huntingdon, etc.' So we did more than once; But we could not take
money from them, whether they wanted to or not. Therefore these motives have no
weight. You conclude by praying that God will remove pride and wickedness among
us. I am too proud; of wickedness I have none: but prayer is good, and I thank
you for it. [16]
I never
censured all the clergy
I have never censured
all the clergy; and God forbid that I ever succeed. I do not censure any, not
even the extremely immoral ones
For 'John Smith'
DUBLIN, March 22,
1748.
“(...) 4. I have
never censured all the clergy; and God forbid that I should ever succeed. I
censure none, not even the extremely immoral. But you advise to 'complain of it
to the Bishop of the diocese.' In that way, 'Be so witty to present them.' Much
may be said on this question. I must ask, (1) I have a right to present them
which I do not understand. The stewards of every parish must do this; which
they will hardly do when I have done so. (2) If I could do this personally, to
present them to the Court is not to present them to the Bishop: the Bishop, it
cannot be but known, has no more authority in what is called the Bishop's Court
than the Pope of Rome. (3) I cannot present, let us suppose, thirty persons in
so many counties as electors or lay officers (men whom I consider to have as
much authority from the Scriptures to administer the sacraments as to judge
ecclesiastical causes), without such an expenditure of labour, money, and time
as I can in no way sustain. And what would be the fruit, if I could sustain it,
if I were the general informant against the immoral clergy of England? O sir,
can you imagine, or dare you say, that I would 'have the thanks of the bishops
and all good men, clergy and laity.' If you would only allow them to be good
men who would thank me for it, I fear you would not find seven thousand good
men in all our Israel (...)."[17]
How We Were Led to
Accept Lay Assistants
I
mentioned how we were led to accept lay assistants. His office is in the
absence of the Minister
FOR VINCENT PERRONET
{December}, 1748.
“(...) 2. In the
third part of the appeal [see Works, viii. 218-24.] I have mentioned how we
have been led to accept lay assistants. Their office is, in the absence of the
Minister,--(1) To explain every morning and evening. (2) To meet with the
United Society, the bands, the selected society, and the penitents once a week.
(3) To visit the classes once a quarter. (4) To listen to and decide all
differences. (5) To put the rioters back on trial and receive judgment for the
bands or Society. (6) To ensure that the Stewards, the Leaders, and the Masters
faithfully discharge their various offices. (7) To meet weekly with the leaders
of the bands and classes, and the Stewards, and to supervise their accounts
(...)".[18]
We allow preachers
who have not been ordained episcopally
It is of a full
conviction that (1) we preach abroad, (2) we pray extemporaneously, (3) we form
Societies, and (4) we permit preachers who have not been ordained episcopally
For Samuel Walker
BRISTOL September 24,
1755
“(...) 4. At present
I consider those, and only those, who separate from the Church who renounce it
or refuse to participate in its public worship. So far we have done neither;
nor have we taken a step beyond what we were convinced was our obligatory duty.
It is from a full conviction of this that (1) we preach abroad, (2) we pray
extemporaneously, (3) we form Societies, and (4) we permit preachers who have
not been episcopally ordained. And if we were punished on this side, if there
were no alternative, we should judge it our legitimate duty to separate
ourselves entirely from the Church than to abdicate any of these points.
Therefore, if we cannot prevent a separation without stopping lay preachers,
the case is clear—we cannot prevent it at all. [19]
How God's Present
Work Could Be Accomplished Without the Help of Lay Preachers
I still want to know
in what particular way you think the present work of God could be accomplished
without the help of lay preachers
For Samuel Walker
LONDON, November 20, 1755.
REVEREND AND DEAR SIR,--I
thank you very much for Mr. Adam's letter of welcome [The reply to the Rev.
Thomas Adam (p. 149) is dated October 31st. The interval was spent in London,
where he remained until January 26th.] As well as to yours. I have answered
yours (which is written in a truly Christian spirit), and now proceed to
consider yours, after having observed that two of our preachers [Samuel
Larwood, John Edwards, Charles Skelton, and John Witford have left Wesley. See
Journal, iv. 95N; and letters of July 17, 1751, and August 4, 1769.] have gone
from us; and none of the rest (so far as I know) have, at present, any desire
or intention to separate themselves from the Church. Still, I observe,—
1. Those ministers who
really feared God nearly a hundred years ago had, no doubt, the same objections
to the Liturgy that some (who have never read their Works) have now. [Both his
grandfathers were among those suffering from 1662.] And I myself even now admit
the force of several of these objections that I would not dare to declare my
assent and assent to that book in the prescribed terms. In fact, they are so
strong that I think they cannot be safely used in relation to any book other
than the Bible. Neither dares to confine myself entirely to the forms of
prayer, not even in church. I use, indeed, all the forms; but I frequently add
extemporaneous prayers before or after the sermon.
2. In the name of many of
the Canons, I can say little; of the Spiritual Courts, nothing at all.
Therefore, I dare not allow the authority of the former nor the jurisdiction of
the latter. But I am not obliged to do so. So the difficulty is not yet.
3. 'Whether it is lawful to
attend to the ministers of one whom God has not sent me to minister to, since
he expressly denies the call of God, which is at least as necessary as the call
of man,' is really a question which (as I said before) I cannot satisfactorily
answer. Nor can I say—
4. How far that commandment
of our Lord, 'Beware of the false prophet,' obliges me to abstain from
listening to those who put darkness as light, and light for darkness. I still
doubt whether to attend to them silently while they do this is not, in practice,
to wish them good luck, to strengthen their hands in evil, and to encourage
others to listen to them until they fall together into hell.
I still want to know in
what particular way you think God's present work could be accomplished without
the help of lay preachers. [See letter of September 24.] I will weigh this
fairly and share my views on it.
A few little things
occurred to me as I read your Sermons [The volume of sermons published two
years before, entitled The Christian] which I wanted to communicate to you. On
the important points I cannot observe any difference between us. We both strive
for the inner kingdom, for the mind that was in Christ Jesus, the image of God
to be new and engraven on the heart. I am sometimes very discouraged to find so
little of it in myself. Help, both with your advice and with prayers, dear sir,
Your brother and very
affectionate servant.
All but the last bit of it
I had written three weeks ago. But my wife's dangerous illness prevented me
from finishing it sooner.
It is with full
conviction of this that we preach abroad, use extemporaneous prayer, form those
who seem to be awake in the Societies, and allow lay people who we believe we
have called God to preach. [20]
We allow lay people
who we believe to have called God to preach
It is with full
conviction of this that we preach abroad, use extemporaneous prayer, form those
who seem to be awake in the Societies, and allow lay people who we believe we
have called God to preach
For Thomas Adam
LONDON October 31,
1755,
REVEREND LORD, -- At
least a good effect has already come out of the change of the present question.
It was the occasion on which I had some contact with Mr. Walker and with you;
which I doubt would not be enlarged, were it not for what you probably think to
be a Christian prudence, I consider it to be a worldly prudence.
You have thanked me
very much with your clear and friendly answer, with the chief one with which I
fully agree. For I still retain my old feeling, -- 'We will not go out: if we
are expelled, well.' And of the same judgment are, I believe, at least nineteen
out of twenty of our preachers, and an equal majority of the people. We are
fully convinced that to separate from an Established Church is never lawful,
but when it is absolutely necessary; and yet we see no such necessity. Therefore at present we have no thoughts of
separation.
As to the measures we
have taken so far, we have used all possible caution. We have done nothing
rash, nothing without deep and long consideration, listening to and weighing
all objections, and many prayers. Nor have we taken a deliberate step of which
we still see reason to repent. It is true that in some things we differ from
the rules of our Church; but no parent that we apprehend is our obligatory
duty. It is with full conviction of this that we preach abroad, use
extemporaneous prayer, form those who seem to be awake in the Societies, and
allow laymen whom we believe to have called God to preach.
I say permit because
we have not hitherto seen it otherwise. We are clearly convinced that we can
do: that we can do more that we are not satisfied with. It is not clear to us
that elders as circumstantial as we can appoint or ordain others, but it is that
we can guide them and enable them to do that which we understand they are moved
by the Holy Spirit. It is true that, in ordinary cases, both an inward and an
outward call are necessary. But we understand that there is something far from
the ordinary in this case. And, with a calmer view of things, we think that
those who are called by God alone and not by man have more right to preach than
those who are called by man alone and not by God. Now, that many of the clergy,
though called by man, are not called by God to preach His gospel is undeniable,
(1) because they themselves utterly deny, no, and ridicule the inward call; (2)
because they do not know what the gospel is, of importance they do not preach
it, and cannot preach it.
Dear Sir, consider
this calmly and impartially, and you will see on which side the difficulty
lies. I assure you that this is my greatest embarrassment. I know that I have
not yet gone too far; but whether I have gone far enough, I have much doubt. I
see those fleeing whom God has not sent, destroying their own souls, and those
who hear them, perverting the right ways of the Lord, blaspheming the truth as
it is in Jesus. I see the shutter guiding the blind one, and the two falling
into the ditch. Unless I warn in every way I can of these perishing souls from
their danger, am I free from the blood of these men? Soul-condemning clergymen
put me under more trouble than laymen who say soul.
Those of us who are
in doubt whether we ought so much to distrust these false prophets as not to
listen to them at all, are not men of 'advanced zeal and uncharitable,' but of
a calm, loving, and moderate spirit. They are perfectly easy as to their own calling
to preach; but they are concerned about those poor blind and cageless guides.
And they sometimes fear that their behaviour will be dead weight even to
clergymen who are ready to be called of God. 'What else,' say they, 'does not
God bless their labors? Why do they still stretch out their hands in vain?' 'We
know Mr. Piers, Perone, Manning, and several regular clergymen who preach the
genuine gospel, but to no effect. There is one exception in England—Mr. Walker
at Truro. We know of no one else who has converted a soul in his own parish. If
it be said, 'Mr. Grimshaw and Mr. Baddeley [John Baddeley, Dean of Hayfield in
Derbyshire, were not converted in 1748 and 'preach the pure gospel of Jesus
Christ.' He was 'a sort of second Grimshaw.' He graduated. Societies and
appointed laymen to assist him." Wesley visited him in April, 1755; and
after the Leeds Conference, Baddeley wrote him an affectionate letter about the
separation from the Church of England. See Journal, iv. 110-11, v. 109;
Arminian Mag. 1779 p. 319; Wesley of Tyerman, ii. 195. For William Grimshaw, see letter of 2
November, 1748.] No, not one, until they became irregular—until both formed irregular
Societies and accepted laymen to help them. There may be a stronger proof that
God is even more pleased with irregularities than with ordinary preaching
'But could not the
Methodists, in general, better serve the interests of Christ as witnesses and
examples of a living faith by returning to a closer union with the Church than
by separating themselves further.' We have no intention of separating the father
(if we have ever separated). Neither dares to return to a closer union, whether
it means forbidding lay preachers or ceasing to care for each other in love,
and meeting regularly for that purpose.
If there be any
father's advice, whether on doctrine or practice, which he deems to be of use
to us, it will be gratefully received and regarded by the dear reverend sir,
His brother and
affectionate and obligatory servant. [21]
I bring them to meet
the ministry
Yes; those who were
not before accustomed to preach at all, or those whom you would call lay
brethren, I bring them to attend to the ministry of those regular preachers who
have the responsibility of their various parishes.
For 'John Smith'
NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE,
25 March 1747.
You begin, 'Are you
going to ask what I mean by "order"? Was it not evident that I meant
to speak against lay preaching?' It was; but not only against that. Therefore,
before addressing the question, I have defined the term in a wider sense, to
include both this and every irregularity which you have disputed. You continue:
'How could you give such a strange answer, "I carry this order for which
you fight to places where it has never existed before"' I reply: This is
not my whole answer; it is only one, and that the most insignificant, part of
it: but it is strictly true. 'So, you bring in the ministry of regularly
ordained ministers, where, before, the people were accustomed to the preaching
of lay brethren? Yes; those who were not before accustomed to preaching at all,
or those whom you would call lay brethren, I bring them to attend to the
ministry of those regular preachers who have the responsibility of their
various parishes. [22]
Whether
clergy or laity, I will make them an example for the benefit of all others
And if it
seems that any of those under my care habitually 'rebuke' or 'rebuke' others,
whether clergy or laity, I will make them an example for the benefit of all
others
To Thomas Church
June 17, 1746.
As to those so-called
Methodists, whom you suppose to 'criticize and insult the clergy,' and 'despise
and reproach their neighbors,' I can only say, What are they. Show me the men.
And if it appears that any of those under my care habitually 'rebuke' or 'rebuke'
others, whether clergy or laity, I will make them an example for the benefit of
all the rest. [23]
Criteria
for being a Methodist preacher
Among them, none can be avowed preachers, but
those who (1) are truly alive to God, who experience the faith that works by
love, as the love of God and of all mankind; (2) those who possess competent
knowledge of the Word of God and of the work of God in the souls of men; (3)
those who have given proof that they are called of God by converting sinners
from the error of their ways.
To George L. Fleury [18]
LIMERICK, May 18, 1771.
“(...) The first part of
this objection we have had before. The last is an utter error. They do not
allow the 'most ignorant men to preach any inward calling' which they pretend
to make. Among them none can be avowed preacher, but those who (1) are truly
alive to God, who experience the faith which works by love, as the love of God
and of all mankind; (2) those who possess competent knowledge of the Word of
God and of the work of God in the souls of men; (3) those who have given proof
that they are called of God by converting sinners from the error of their ways.
And to show whether they have these qualifications or not, they are a year,
sometimes more, on trial. Now, I ask that it be the common examination for
orders of deacons or priests for this
17. But no ambassador can
act without a commission from his king; consequently, no preacher with
wittiness, has no commission from God' (page 11). This is a delicate point; But
you compel me to speak. I ask, then: Has he been commissioned by God to preach
the gospel, who does not know the gospel, knows little more of the Bible than
the Qur'an, am I afraid? But if so, how many of our brethren have sent from
man, but not from God!
Yet these laymen were not
sent by God to preach; for St. Paul does not say, "No man taketh this
honor for himself but that called of God, as was Aaron" (Page 13.) Another
very misapplied text; for Aaron preached nothing. But if these men are not sent
of God, how is it that God confirms his word by convincing and converting
sinners? Does He confirm the word of His messenger, but of no one? Therefore,
if God possesses his word, it is clear that God has sent them. [24]
His position is in the
absence of the Minister
In the third part of the appeal. I mentioned
how we were led to accept lay assistants. His office is in the absence of the
Minister
To Vincent
Perronet (1693-1785)
Vicar of
the Anglican Church
"REVEREND
AND DEAR LORD ,--1. Some time ago you desired an account of the whole economy
of the people commonly called the Methodists. And you have received a true
account (as far as it goes), but not complete. To supply what I think was
lacking in sending this account, that you may know not only of their practice
in every respect, but also of the reasons whereupon it is based, the occasion
of every step they have taken, and the benefits that have been reaped
therefrom."[25]
Wesley speaks of the
function of the lay assistants: "2. In the third part of the appeal [see
Works, viii. 218-24.] I have mentioned how we were led to accept lay
assistants. Their office is, in the absence of the Minister:
(1) Explain every morning
and evening.
(2) Meet with the United
Society, the bands, the selected society, and the penitents once a week.
(3) Visit the classes once
a quarter.
(4) Listen and decide all
differences.
(5) Put the rioters back on
trial and receive judgment for the bands or Society.
(6) To ensure that the
Stewards, the Leaders, and the Masters faithfully discharge their various
offices.
(7) Meet weekly with the
leaders of the bands and classes, and the Butlers, and supervise their
accounts," explained Wesley (...)".[26]
Only they will shake
the gates of hell
For
Alexander Mather
[BRISTOL,
August 6], 1777.
No, Aleck, no! The danger
of ruin to Methodism is not here. It comes from a very different side. Our
preachers, many of them, have fallen. They are not spiritual. They are not
alive to God. They are soft, exhausted, fearing shame, effort, difficulty. They
have not the spirit which God gave to Thomas Lee at Pateley Bridge or to you at
Boston. [In the fall of 1757, when he suffered much with the crowd (Wesley's
Veterans, ii 93-7). Lee was rolled in the common sewer, and nearly had his
back broken; for his sufferings at Pateley, see ibid iii, 204-6.] Give me a
hundred preachers who fear nothing but sin and desire nothing but God, and I
don't care for a straw whether they are clergy or laity, they alone will shake
the gates of hell and establish the kingdom of heaven on earth. [27]
There was so much danger of
our clergy dominating the laity
The honest
Richard Condy was terrified; and it is no wonder that he frightened others.
There was as much danger of our clergymen dominating the laity as of them
devouring them altogether.
To Penelope Newman
LONDON, February 2, 1780.
MY DEAR SISTER, - Honest
Richard Condy was terrified; and no wonder he frightened others. There was as
much danger of our clergymen dominating the laity as of them devouring them
altogether. But all this haste came from Alexander M'Nab. He let go of the water;
and who will gather
Beware of killing John
Valton [Valton was at Bristol. See Wesley's Veterans, vi. 78; and to M'Nab,
letter of January 18.] I know: You know that he is continually striving to do
more than he can do. I suppose he is somewhere in his circuit; but he did not
tell me where: that I should not know how to direct him. I am a letter indebted
to him.
You have forgotten that I
do not visit our Societies this year. I only play here and there on the way to
Ireland. On Monday, March 13, I hope to be in Stroud and then visit Tewkesbury,
Worcester, Evesham and Broadmarston. That is all I can do at present. - Yes, I
am, my dear sister,
Your affectionate brother. [28]
The whole work of God,
called Methodism, is an extraordinary dispensation of His providence
I am convinced that all our
lay preachers; otherwise I could not tolerate their preaching at all. It is
clear to me that the whole work of God, called Methodism, is an extraordinary
dispensation from His providence
To Mary Bosanquet
LONDONDERRY, June 13, 1771.
MY DEAR SISTER,--I think
the strength of the cause is there—in its extraordinary connection. I am
convinced that all our lay preachers; otherwise I could not tolerate their
preaching at all. It is clear to me that the whole work of God, called
Methodism, is an extraordinary dispensation from His providence. Therefore I do
not wonder whether several things occur there which do not fall under the
ordinary rules of discipline. St. Paul's common rule was, 'I do not permit a
woman to speak in the congregation.' However, in extraordinary cases he made
some exceptions; in Corinth, in particular.--I am, my dear sister,
Your affectionate brother. [29]
[1]https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1777/
[2] Overview of Google's AI Mode
[3]
https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1748/
[4]
https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1760/
[5]
https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1771/
[6] Overview of Google's AI Mode
[7] Overview of Google's AI
Mode
[8]
https://hannahadairbonner.com/tag/john-wesley/
[9]
https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1771/
[10] Diary of John Wesley. John Wesley,
the father of Methodism – 1735 -1791. São Paulo, SP – Angular Editora, 2017.
[11] Diary of
John Wesley. John Wesley, the father of Methodism – 1735 -1791. São Paulo, SP –
Angular Editora, 2017.
[12] Overview of Google's AI
Mode
[13] Overview of Google's AI
Mode
[14] Overview of Google's AI
Mode
[15]
https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1771/
[16]
https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1756/
[17]
https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1749/
[18]
https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1749/
[19]
https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1755/
[20]
https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1755/
[21]
https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1755/
[22]
https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1747/
[23]
https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1746/
[24]
https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1755/
[25]https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1771/
[26]https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1748/
[27]https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1777/
[28]
https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1780/
[29]
https://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-letters-of-john-wesley/wesleys-letters-1771/
Comentários
Postar um comentário