Footnotes

FOOTNOTES

ft1 We find this letter referred to in a letter of Mr. Fletcher to the Rev. Charles Wesley, dated August 18, 1761, and recorded in page 73 of his life, octavo edition, in the following words: I do not know whether I mentioned to you a sermon preached at the archdeacon’s visitation. It is almost all levelled at the points which are called ‘The Doctrines of Methodism,’ and as the preacher is minister of a parish near mine, it is probable he had me in his eye. After the sermon, another clergyman addressed me with an air of triumph, and demanded what answer I could make? As several of my parishioners were present, beside the churchwardens, I thought it my duty to take the matter up; and I have done so, by writing a long letter to the preacher, in which I have touched the principal mistakes of his discourse, with as much politeness and freedom as I was able: but I have as yet had no answer. [And, it seems, he never had any.] I could have wished for your advice before I sealed my letter; but as I could not have it, I have been very cautious, entrenching myself behind the ramparts of Scripture, as well as those of our homilies and articles.]

ft2 1 John 5:7. This passage is so decisive that the enemies of the trinity have used all their efforts to render it suspected. But Mr. Travis has demonstrated its authenticity in a manner sufficiently clear to remove the doubts of the most scrupulous critic.]

ft3 Consult your annals, and ye shall find, that in the days of Pilate, while Christ was suffering, the sun withdrew at noon, and obscured the day with darkness.]

ft4 A blooming dancer, under twenty years of age, whom I loudly warned on Saturday evening to “prepare for death and judgment,” and who distinguished himself among the nimblest of the company, while some cried, “Play away - dance away,” &c. The next week, far from growing wiser, he procured money by wrong methods to go every evening to a show, against the will and entreaties of his parents. And this he continued to do till, putting one day his knee to the ground, the unseen point of a nail made an insignificant wound in it, not unlike the prick of a pin. The show man, to whom he mentioned this accident, by an unfortunate application inadvertently poisoned his trifling wound, and spoiled his dancing for ever. Terrible symptoms soon followed, with excruciating pains, which carried him off the Saturday following. The circumstances of his death, his solemn warnings to some of his companions on his death bed, and his affecting cries for mercy, which were heard for a considerable distance, struck a transitory awe upon many young people, and brought them to hear the funeral sermon, which I referred to in the beginning of this.]

ft5 A woman, thirty five years of age, passing before a looking glass the day after she heard this sermon, was surprised to see an unusual paleness upon her face. She called her husband, told him she was a dying woman, and actually died in a quarter of an hour. She heard me on the Friday, and I buried her on the Monday following. Another middle aged person, that was also among my hearers, followed her to the grave the next day in the next parish. How soon may we be called to give an account of what we speak or hear, write or read.]

ft6 It is not improbable that Vesuvius was once a plain, or an inconsiderable eminence, and that the rocks, ashes, lava, &c, that make the bulk of it, have been vomited out of the mouth of the volcano, which grows larger and wider by the additional matter that comes out of it at every new eruption.]

ft7 “Esse quoque in fatis reminiscitur affore tempus, Quo mare, quo tellus, correptaque regia coeli Ardeat, et mundi moles operosa laboret.” Ovid. Metam. Lib. i, line 256.]

ft8 “Si fractus illabatur orbis, Impavidum feriunt ruinae.”]

ft9 Although the subject of this discourse is nearly the same with that of the preceding sermon, the reader will perceive they are two entirely different sermons. The latter is supposed to have been preached soon after Mr. Fletcher’s entrance into the ministry.]

ft10 This sermon was preached on a fast day, in 1762.]

ft11 This sermon appears to have been delivered soon after the interment of a woman who was drowned by crossing the Severn in a boat.]

ft12 Sed nihil aliud inveni quam superstitionem pravam et immodicam.]

ft13 Pertinaciam et inflexibilem obstinationem.]

ft14 Affirmabant hanc fuisse summam vel culpae vel erroris, quod essent soliti stato die ante lucem convenire, carmenque Christo quasi Deo dicere, &c.]

ft15 Judaeos, impulsore Chresto, assidue tumultuantes Roma expulit.]

ft16 Ton megan ekeinon anqrwpon ton en Palistinh anaskolopisqenta.]

ft17 Ton anaskolopismenon ekeinon sofisthn autwn wrostkunein.]

ft18 This refers to the poem entitled La Grace et la Nature.]

ft19 The following letter by Mr. Fletcher on the prophecies, written in the year 1775, was communicated to Mr. George Story, several years ago, by a gentleman from Yorkshire, now resident in London. The superscription was lost, but it appears from the contents that it was addressed to the Rev. Mr. Wesley.]

ft20 I should rather be of this opinion, for a day is before the Lord as 1000 years, and 1000 years as a day. How would at last vanish the pitiful objections of unbelievers concerning God’s choosing to create a world, where the good were to bear no proportion to the wicked! What a fine instance should we have of God’s mercy, and of the efficacy of our saviours blood! How gloriously would these words be explained, “I punish to the third or fourth generation, but show mercy unto thousands (of generations) of them that love me!”]

ft21 Preached at Madeley, on the Wake Sunday, A. D. 1763]

ft22 The reader will observe, that those of Mr. Fletcher’s Pastoral and Familiar Letters, which were inserted in the narrative of his life, by the late Rev. Joseph Benson, are here omitted.]

ft23 Thank God, this is not now the character of all the farmers of Madeley! - Editor.]

ft24 Mr. Fletcher, when he wrote the above, mistook Mr. Henry Brook, Jun. for Mr. Henry Brook, Sen., the author of the Fool of Quality, and when he wrote this letter, had only seen a small extract from that work.]

ft25 That is, speaking to the edification of those with whom they converse.]

ft26 Messrs. Vincent and Charles Perronet, who with other branches of their family had died in great peace and triumph.]

ft27 This communication is inserted to explain some passages in the succeeding letters, as well as to exhibit the amiable disposition of Mr. Fletcher’s friend and correspondent.]

ft28 He was then married.]

ft29 Mr. Fletcher added in a parenthesis here “except Ireland, which being a kingdom by itself, and no English colony, coins its own money, and has its peculiar parliament.” As Ireland is now incorporated with Great Britain in one empire, and sends representatives to the British parliament, that clause is here omitted.]

ft30 N. B. This was written in the latter end of the year 1775, or in the beginning of the year 1776.]

ft31 This word, according to its Greek etymology, means Rebaptizers. Mr. Evans, and the Protestants of his denomination, are called by this name, because their grand peculiarity is to rebaptize those who were baptized in their infancy. No Church - of - England man can enter their Church, but at the door of rebaptization. Nor can he go through that door without renouncing his former baptism and all his communions. Dreadful abjuration! Hence it is that too many of those who have taken that rash step, are as zealous for rebaptization as the Christians who have renounced their baptism for Turkish ablutions, are zealous for their new washings. They exceed all others in zeal for making proselytes. I do not say this to prejudice the reader against the Anabaptists: on the contrary I could have him think, as I do, that many of them are very good people, and that most of them mean well; and I believe this is the case with my opponent.]

ft32 Did Cromwell absolutely wrong them when he said this? Is it not probable that some of them leaned to the levelling principles of the head strong Anabaptists? Was it not when such Anabaptists were most in favour, that England saw a Church without bishops, a parliament without lords, and a king without a head? And were not these some important steps taken toward levelling Anabaptistry; though Cromwell’s ambition prevented republicans and levellers from proceeding any farther, as Baxter soon observes? The reader will be glad to see what Lord Clarendon says of the levelling agitators: - “The agitators would not be so dismissed from state affairs, of which they had so pleasant a relish, &c; and therefore, when they were admitted no more to consultations with their officers, they continued their meetings without them and thought there was as great need to reform their officers, as any part of the Church or state. They entered into new associations, and made many propositions to their officers, and to the parliament, to introduce an equality into all conditions and a party among all men; from whence they had the appellation of levellers, which appeared a great party. They did not only meet against the express commands of their officers, but drew very considerable parties of the army to rendezvous, without the order or privity of their superiors; and there persuaded them to enter into such engagements as would in a short time have dissolved the government of the army, &c. The suppression of this license put Cromwell to the expense of all his cunning, dexterity, and courage; so that after he had cajoled the parliament, as if the preservation of their authority had been all he cared for, &c, and had sent some false brothers to comply in the counsels of the conspirators by that means having notice of their rendezvous, he was unexpectedly found with an ordinary guard at those meetings; and with a marvellous vivacity, having asked some questions of those whom he observed most active, and receiving insolent answers, he knocked two or three of them on the head with his own hand, and then charged the rest with his troop, and took such a number of theirs as he thought fit; whereof he presently caused some of them to be hanged, and sent others to London to a more formal trial. By two or three such encounters, [of which that at Burford, mentioned by Baxter, seems to have been one,] for the obstinacy continued long, he totally subdued that spirit in the army, though it continued and increased very much in the kingdom; and if it had not been encountered at that time, with that rough and brisk spirit of Cromwell, it would presently have produced all imaginable confusion in the parliament, army, and kingdom (History of the Reb. book 10.)]

ft33 The servants of God may sometimes be allowed to make use of strong metaphors. David speaks of “the BEASTS of the people, who refuse to bring pieces of silver,” or to pay taxes to their lawful sovereign. And St. Paul says, that he “fought with BEASTS at Ephesus,” because he narrowly escaped being torn in pieces lay the mob there. If the reader would see an admirable picture of the “beasts,” with which the apostle fought, and to which our overdoing patriots endeavour to “give the power,” I do not refer him so much to Revelation 17:14, as to Acts 19:28, &c, where he will find a masterly description of a mob.]

ft34 It is not in London and Boston only, that this tyrannical spirit breaks out. It probably makes its appearance in most American cities. Philadelphia is the seat of religious liberty and brotherly love no more. Persecuting tyranny and fierce insolence openly patrol in the once free and peaceful city. One of my parishioners, who went to settle there, sends his friends word that the day on which a fast was kept to obtain success upon the arms of the provincials, his windows were broken by the mob, because his religious principles did not permit him to fast on such an occasion, and because he quietly taught his scholars to read the Scriptures. A vociferous mob has no ears, though it has arms and tongues more than enough: or else the pacific sufferer might have made his godly persecutors ashamed of their devotions, by setting his scholars to read Isaiah 58:4, “Behold ye fast for strife and debate; and to smite with the fist of wickedness; ye shall not fast as ye do this day, to make your voice to be heard on high. Is it such a fast as I have chosen?” This text might have suited the solemnity, unless the following had been judged still more proper: - “Rebuke the company of the spearmen, the multitude of the bulls, with the calves of the people, till every one submit himself with pieces of silver: scatter thou the people that delight in war,” Psalm 68:30. My late parishioner was not the only one who was injured on that memorable day. Among others, a quiet Friend, who ventured to open his china shop, is said to have had his goods broken by the new king for this offence, to the amount of many pounds.]

ft35 This useless question is, whether Mr. Wesley had, or had not, forgotten the title of I know not what book, which he had recommended to some of his friends and which, through forgetfulness, he asserted that he had never seen; till, upon perusing the book, he discovered and owned his mistake. Mr. Evans diverts the reader’s mind from the true question, by setting before him eight letters, which passed between Mr. W. and others, about that insignificant particular. For my part, I admit the public acknowledgment which Mr. W. has made of his forgetfulness, rather than Mr. Evans’ insinuation, that he is not “an honest man:” and I do it, (1.) Because it is best to be on the safer side, which is that of charity. (2.) Because it is highly improbable that a wise man, except in case of forgetfulness, would deny a fact which a number of proper witnesses can prove, and are inclined to prove against him. And, (3.) Because experience constrains me to sympathise with those whose memory is as treacherous as my own. On a Sunday evening, after preaching three times, reading prayers, and being all day in a crowd, or hurrying from place to place, my mental powers are so incapacitated to do their office, that, far from being able to recollect the title of a book which I have seen some months before, I frequently cannot, after repeated endeavours, remember one of the texts on which I have preached that very day. Now Mr. W. lives all the year round in the hurry and crowd in which I am on my busy Sundays; and he is between seventy and eighty years of age, a time of life, this, when even the men who enjoy uninterrupted rest, find that their memory naturally fails. If Mr. Evans consider this, he will not be surprised that his first letter has not had its intended effect upon me.]

ft36 The idle report I mean is, that my Vindication “has received many additions and corrections from the pen of a celebrated nobleman.” This is a mistake. I find, indeed, some errors of the press, which injure the sense of my book; but I do not discover one addition in it, except that of two words, and if Mr. Evans will be pleased to inspect my manuscript, he will see that the few little negative emendations in it, were made by Mr. Wesley’s own pen.]

ft37 Mr. Evans wants each American assembly to be invested with supreme power in conduction with the king, after the model of the Irish parliament; but I wish the British empire too well to be of his sentiment. The same rule holds in politics and in mechanics; the more a government and a machine are needlessly complicated, the weaker are their motions, and the greater the danger of their being out of order. It is the glory and strength of our constitution to be compact, “in se totus teres atque rotundus. As I could not admire a human body with one head and a dozen stomachs, I should not be pleased to see Great Britain and her colonies exhibiting to the world a political body, with one royal head and a dozen supreme courts of parliament. If such needless divisions and multiplications do not tend to speedy dissolution, they certainly do to weakness, confusion, slowness of operation, and a thousand evils which France with her several unconnected parliaments so severely feels.]

ft38 I call some Anabaptists fierce and levelling, to distinguish them from the “mild and moderate Anabaptists,” whom I have mentioned, (Vind. p. 464,) where I commend the candour of Bishop Burnet for making a just distinction between these two sorts of Anabaptists; and for observing that “they were not all of the same temper.” This, one would think, should have hindered our brethren, who contend for Anabaptism, to think that I reflect on “all” the people of their denomination for the political errors of some. Had I done this, I would publicly ask their pardon; being persuaded that nothing can be more cruel than to involve the innocent in undeserved guilt. Lest this construction should be put upon my quotations respecting the levelling Anabaptists, I inserted, in the second edition of my Vindication, p. 464, a note, where I say that “some Anabaptists are very good people, that most of them mean well, and that I hope this is the case with my opponent.” And I gladly embrace this third opportunity of testifying more fully my brotherly love to that respectable body of dissenters; not doubting but there are numbers of truly pious and loyal Anabaptists both in Germany, England, and America. However, p. 84, my opponent says, “Your telling the world that I am, &c, an Anabaptist, &c, is a display of illiberality, meanness, and impertinence.” But where did I tell the world, in the first edition of my book, that Mr. Evans is an Anabaptist? And if in a note inserted in the “second” edition (which, by the by, was not published when Mr. E. advanced this charge) I insinuate that he is one of the Anabaptists who “are very good people and mean well,” I appeal to the unprejudiced, if this insinuation is not a display of candour and brotherly love, rather than of “illiberality, meanness, and impertinence?” I grant that I have enforced Calvin’s doctrine of taxation upon my opponent, by reminding him that, as “he is a Calvinist,” he cannot well avoid paying some regard to that excellent doctrine of Calvin. But wherein consists the “impertinence” of such an argument? Are controvertists the only men who cannot use an argument “ad hominem?” And has not Mr. E. as much reason to charge me with “meanness,” because I have addressed him as a Briton and a Christian, and have pressed him, as such, with appeals to constitutional concessions, and his Christian profession? Some men will say what they please against their governors. Their most groundless charges must pass for patriotism, and a spirited defence of our liberties; but if you drop a self - evident truth that embarrasses them a little, you are guilty of “Helvetic rudeness, illiberality, meanness, and impertinence.” I appeal from this patriotic freedom and partiality to English candour, and British politeness.]

ft39 Dr. Price, speaking of the numbers of the Americans, says: “To think of conquering that whole continent with thirty or forty thousand men, to be transported across the Atlantic, and fed from hence and incapable of being recruited after any defeat; - this is folly so great, that Language does not afford a name for it.”]

ft40 No historian having had so good an opportunity of knowing Cromwell as judicious Mr. Baxter, who was personally acquainted with him, and served in his army as chaplain; some of my readers will be glad to see what he farther says of that extraordinary man. “When successes had broken down all considerable opposition, he [Cromwell] was in the face of all temptations, which conquered him, when he had conquered others. He thought that he had hitherto done well; that none but God had made him great; that if the war was lawful, the victory was lawful; that if it was lawful to fight against the king and conquer him, it was lawful to use him as a conquered enemy; and that it would be a foolish thing to trust him, when they had so provoked him. Hereupon he joined with that party in the parliament who were for cutting off the king, and raised with them the Independents and sectaries in the army, city, and country, to make a faction. Accordingly he modelled the army, disbanded the forces which were like to have hindered his design, pulled down the Presbyterian majority in parliament - and then the parliament; being the more easily persuaded that all this was lawful, because he had a secret eye to his own exaltation; thinking that when the king was gone a government there must be, and that no man was so fit for it as himself. Having thus forced his conscience to justify all his cause, he thought that the end being good and necessary, the necessary means could not be bad. And accordingly he gave his interest leave to tell him how far promises and vows should be kept or broken. Hence he thought secrecy a virtue, dissimulating no vice, and a lie, or perfidiousness, tolerable in case of necessity. His name stands as a monitory monument to posterity, to tell them the instability of man in strong temptations; what great success can do to lift up the mind; what pride can do to make man selfish; what selfishness can do to bribe the conscience, corrupt the judgment, and make men justify the greatest sins; and what bloodshed and great enormities a deluded judgment may draw men into.” Hence it appears candid Mr. Baxter believed that Cromwell was once a good and pious man, who fell from God’s fear into complicated wickedness, through the external allurements of success and ambition, and through the internal snare of Antinomianism.]

ft41 Right, carried to the height, is the height of injustice.]

ft42 There is a symmetrical excellence in the British constitution which escapes the attention of many Britons. I have observed that the capital business of the parliament is to keep the balance even between the king and the people; that neither oppressive despotism, (or the tyranny of one,) nor mobbing anarchy, (or the tyranny of many,) may prevail. I now add, that the two houses of parliament are two mediatorial courts between the king and the people. The house of commons is composed of senators chosen by the people, to be a check upon the king and nobles; and the house of lords is composed of senators chosen by the king, to be a check upon the people and their representatives. Hence it appears that the house of lords is peculiarly bound to maintain the prerogatives of the crown, against the encroachments of mobs and mobbing patriots; and that it is the peculiar duty of the house of commons to maintain the privileges of the people, against the encroachments of despots and despotic ministers. In the last century the lords failing in their duty, the balance was broken: the commons prevailed; and the consequence was what might naturally be expected: the house of lords was set aside, the king beheaded, and the constitution overthrown. This remarkable event should teach our senators the wisdom peculiarly necessary to a faithful discharge of their high office.]

ft43 I would not dare to use such an expression, if the Scriptures did not bear me out. The Lord, speaking by the Prophet Malachi, says: “Will a man ROB GOD? Yet ye have ROBBED ME. But ye say, Wherein have we ROBBED THEE? In TITHES,” Malachi 3:8. I infer from this answer, that if God accounts himself robbed, when tithes are detained from HIS priests; he does so much more when reasonable and legal taxes are detained from sovereigns, HIS primary representatives, whom he calls HIS anointed, and to whom he allows the title of gods.]

ft44 Our posterity, thinned by our civil wars, will hear of our culpable contentions, and will lament our having turned against each other those swords which should never have been drawn but against our common enemies.]

ft45 We term the following an extract, because we have judged it proper to omit the introductory part, it being merely a quotation from the fourth of the preceding letters, beginning with “Dr. Price has advanced an argument,” &c, p. 536; and concluding with the end of the letter, p. 545.]

ft46 American Patriotism Confronted, &c.]

ft47 A kind of American torture, which consists in wrenching a man’s eyes out of their sockets.]