The Case of Bristol House.
THE CASE OF BRISTOL HOUSE.
RECOMMENDED TO THE SERIOUS CONSIDERATION
OF THE PEOPLE CALLED METHODISTS.
———
1. AS many persons have spoke much upon this subject without well understanding it, I believe it is my duty to throw all the light upon it that I can. And in order to this, I will,
First, Endeavor to state the case;
Secondly, Argue a little upon it.
2. In order to state the case fully, I must look back; to ancient times. As soon as the heat of persecution was over, and Christians increased in goods, some built preaching-houses, afterwards called churches. In following times those that built them were termed Patrons, and appointed whom they pleased to preach in them. And when they annexed lands to them, they disposed of house and lands together.
3. At the Reformation many rich men built new churches, and disposed of them at their pleasure. And when many Presbyterians and Independents in England built preaching-houses, they placed in them whom they pleased; which power they left to their heirs.
4. I built the first Methodist preaching-house, so called, at Bristol, in the year 1739. And knowing no better, I suffered the deed of trust to be drawn up in the Presbyterian form. But Mr. Whitefield, hearing of it, wrote me a warm letter, asking, “Do you consider what you do? If the Trustees are to name the Preachers, they may exclude even yon from preaching in the house you have built! Pray let this deed be immediately canceled.” To this the Trustees readily agreed. Afterwards I built the preaching-houses in Kingswood, and at Newcastle-upon-Tyne. But none beside myself had any right to appoint the Preachers in them.
5. About this time a preaching-house was built at Bristol, by contributions and collections. And John Nelson, knowing no better, suffered a deed to be drawn in the Presbyterian form, giving twelve or thirteen persons power not only of placing, but even of displacing, the Preachers at their pleasure. Had Mr. Whitefield or I known this, we should have insisted on its either being canceled, like that at Bristol, or so altered as to insure the application of the house to the purpose for which it was built, without giving so dangerous a power to any Trustees whatever.
6. But a considerable difficulty still remained. As the houses at Bristol, Kingswood, and Newcastle were my property, a friend reminded me, that they were all liable to descend to my heirs. (Pray let those consider this, who are so fond of having preaching-houses vested in them and their heirs for ever!) I was struck, and immediately procured a form to be drawn up by three of the most eminent Counselors in London, whereby not only these houses, but all the Methodist houses hereafter to be built, might be settled on such a plan, as would secure them, so far as human prudence could, from the heirs of the proprietors, for the purpose originally intended.
7. In process of time the preaching-house at Bristol became abundantly too small for the congregation. It was then proposed to build a new one. And a new deed was prepared, which, like the old, gave a few persons the power of placing and displacing the Preachers at their pleasure. This was brought and read to me at Daw-green. As soon as ever I heard it, I vehemently objected to it, and positively refused to sign it. I now thought I had done with it: But in the evening, several persons came again, and importunately urged me to sign it averring that it was the same in effect with the old deed, and the old deed could not be altered. Not adverting, that it was altered in the new one, I at length unwillingly complied. But, observe: Whether I did right or wrong herein, or in any other instance, it does not affect the merits of the cause. The dwelling upon this is mere finesse, to divert us from the one question, “Is that deed right or wrong?”
8. These things were mentioned at the ensuing Conference; and it was asked, “What can be done?” The answer was, “If the Trustees still refuse to settle it on the Methodist plan; if they still insist, that they will have the right of placing and displacing the Preachers at their pleasure, then,” “First, Let a plain state of the case be drawn up.”
“Secondly, Let a collection be made throughout England, in order to purchase ground, and build another preaching-house, as near the present as may be.”
9. This I take to be a plain state of the case, separating it from all unimportant circumstances, of what this or the other person said or did, all which only puzzle the cause. Now this, neither more nor less, being the naked fact, I proceed, secondly, to argue a little upon it. If it be asked, “Why should not the Bristol preaching-house, or any other, be settled according to that deed?” I answer, Because whenever the Trustees exert their power of “placing and displacing Preachers,” then,
1. Itinerant preaching is no more. When the Trustees in any place have found and fixed a Preacher they like, the rotation of Preachers is at an end; at least, till they are tired of their favorite Preacher, and so turn him out.
2. While he stays, is not the bridle in his mouth? How dares he speak the full and the whole truth, since, whenever he displeases the Trustees, he is liable to lose his bread? How much less will he dare to put a Trustee, though ever so ungodly, out of the society?
If you say, “But though they have this power, they will not exert it. They never have exerted it at Bristol.” Reason good; because they have it not till my death. And if they had, prudence, if not gratitude, would restrain them till I am out of the way. But it does not follow, that neither they nor their heirs will exert it by and by.
3. But suppose any beside the Conference (who as long as they subsist, will be the most impartial judges) name the Preachers, should it be thirty or forty men, or the whole society? Nay, why not the entire congregation; or at least all the subscribers?
4. The power of the Trustees is greater than that of any nobleman; yea, or of the King himself. Where he is Patron, he can put in a Preacher, but he cannot put him out.
But you ask, “Since this power will not commence till your death, why should you oppose it? Why should not you keep yourself out of the broil, and let them fight it out when you are at rest? Why should you pull an old house upon your own head, when you are just going out of the world? Peace be in your days. Why should you take upon yourself the burden which you may leave to your successors?”
I answer, In this very respect I have an advantage which my successors cannot have. Every one sees, I am not pleading my own cause; I have already all that I contend for. No; I am pleading for Mr. Taylor, Mr. Bradburn, Mr. Benson, and for every other Traveling Preacher, that you may be as free, after I am gone hence, as you are now I am at your head; that you may never be liable to be turned out of any or all of our houses, without any reason given, but that so is the pleasure of twenty or thirty men.
I say, “any;” for I see no sufficient reason for giving up any house in England. Indeed, if one were given up, more would follow: It would be “as the letting out of the water.”
I insist upon that point, and let everything else go: No Methodist Trustees, if I can help it, shall, after my death, any more than while I live, have the power of placing and displacing the Preachers.
Observe: “Placing and displacing the Preachers!” This is the one point. Do not ramble from the question. Do not puzzle it by a multitude of words. If the Trustees will not give it up, we must proceed according to the Minute of the Conference.
“But why should we not wait till another Conference?”
First. Because that will not alter the merits of the cause. To lodge the power of placing and displacing the Preachers in Trustees, would be as wrong then as it is now.
Secondly. Because you cannot insure my life till another Conference. Therefore, whatever is done, should be done quickly.
“But then,” it is said, “you occasion endless strife, animosity, confusion, and destroy the work of God.” No; not I. It is these Trustees that occasion all the strife, animosity, and confusion, by insisting upon a right to place and displace Preachers. I go on in the old way, as I did at Bristol, Kingswood, and Newcastle. It is they, that by obstinately going out of it hinder, yea, destroy, the work of God. And I charge them with the blood of all those souls that are destroyed by this contention. It is they that do the wrong, that will place and displace Preachers, who bawl and pour out bitter words. But let them take care; for God heareth. And He will arise and maintain His own cause!
LONDON, Reprinted, January 12, 1788. JOHN
WESLEY.