CHAPTER VIII.

_TREVECCA COLLEGE.--THE CALVINIST CONTROVERSY._

In the summer of 1768 Fletcher undertook an office which greatly increased his labours and responsibilities. The religious movement directed by the Countess of Huntingdon continuing to develop, a considerable number of chapels had, by this time, been built or hired in various parts of the country. The pulpits were generally supplied by clergymen of the Established Church, procured by the countess's personal influence. But such arrangements became increasingly difficult to make. Their 'irregularity' was disapproved in high quarters. Lady Huntingdon's chaplains were, in fact, as 'irregular' in their labours as Wesley's itinerant preachers. The system that found no place for the one could not long sanction the other; whilst her ladyship's ecclesiastical authority was a still greater anomaly than that of Wesley.

It became necessary therefore to meet the demand for earnest, evangelical preachers in some other way than by the services of the regular clergy. Meanwhile, the expulsion of six students from the University of Oxford for "being attached to the sect called Methodists, and holding their doctrines," showed that the university was hardly likely to be the nursing mother of such men as were required.

In these circumstances the countess resolved to found a school or college for the training of godly young men for the work of the ministry. She proposed to admit such as were truly converted to God and gave evidence of being called to preach the gospel, and to give them the advantage of three years' residence and instruction, at the close of which they might enter the ministry, either in the Church of England, or among Protestants of any other denomination. After taking counsel with Whitefield, Romaine, Venn, Fletcher, and others, Lady Huntingdon established the institution on which her heart was set.

Fletcher appears to have been in thorough sympathy with the countess's aims from the first. Being consulted as to the selection of books for the college, he writes: "Having studied abroad, and used rather foreign than English books with my pupils, I am not acquainted with the books Great Britain affords well enough to select the best and most concise. Besides, a plan of studies must be fixed upon first, before proper books can be chosen. Grammar, logic, rhetoric, with ecclesiastical history, and a little natural philosophy, and geography, with a great deal of practical divinity, will be enough for those who do not care to dive into languages. Mr. Townsend and Charles Wesley might, by spending an hour together, make a proper choice; and I would recommend them not to forget Watts's 'Logic,' and his 'History of the Bible by Questions and Answers,' which seem to me excellent books of the kind for clearness and order. Mr. Wesley's 'Natural Philosophy' contains as much as is wanted, or more. Mason's 'Essay on Pronunciation' will be worth their attention. Henry and Gill on the Bible, with four volumes of Baxter's 'Practical Works,' Keach's 'Metaphors,' Taylor on the Types, Gurnal's 'Christian Armour,' Edwards on Preaching, Johnson's English dictionary, and Mr. Wesley's Christian Library, may make part of the little library. The book of Baxter I mention I shall take care to send to Trevecca, as a mite towards the collection, together with Usher's 'Body of Divinity,' Scapula's Greek lexicon, and Lyttleton's Latin dictionary."

But while Lady Huntingdon received counsel and assistance from many quarters, and from Fletcher amongst the rest, there was one service for which she looked to him alone. Would Fletcher allow himself to be placed at the head of her college? Would he accept the presidency, visiting Trevecca as often as he conveniently could, to direct the studies and discipline of the place, and test the character and qualifications of the students? From his profound esteem for the countess, and in the hope of assisting in the good work of raising up an earnest ministry, Fletcher accepted the office, and, without fee or reward of any kind, threw himself heartily into its duties.

An old mansion, known as Trevecca House, in the parish of Talgarth, South Wales, was altered and adapted to the requirements of a college; tutors were procured, and the house was soon filled with students, the first of whom was a young man from Madeley, converted under Fletcher's ministry. Lady Huntingdon herself took up her residence there, and by her presence stimulated the zeal of the household. Much of the time of the students was employed in evangelistic work. On foot or on horseback they visited the towns and villages for twenty or thirty miles round, preaching in chapels and houses, in field and market-places, as opportunity allowed. The pious founder soon saw a revival and extension of the work of God which filled her heart with joy, and assured her that the undertaking, concerning which some of her best friends had their misgivings, was approved by God. At the dedication of the college and chapel, on August 24th, 1768, Lady Huntingdon's birthday, Whitefield was the preacher, and large numbers of people came together from all parts of the country. The following year, the anniversary was the occasion of a still more remarkable gathering, and of a series of religious services marked by great manifestations of spiritual power. The most eminent ministers that Lady Huntingdon's summons could assemble were present. The congregations, too large for the chapel, assembled in the court. Day by day, and almost all day long, for a week together, vast crowds were moved to tears, to rapture, and to awe under the preaching of the gospel. Howel Harris, Howel Davies, and Daniel Rowlands, men whose names are household words in Wales to-day, preached in Welsh; and Wesley, Fletcher, and Shirley in English. Thousands of voices rose in hymns of praise, and joined in fervent responses and cries of prayer. On the Saturday and Sunday, and again on the following Thursday, the Lord's supper was administered, and Fletcher addressed the communicants with an earnestness and pathos that it seemed impossible to withstand. Many were awakened and converted. "Truly God was in the midst of us," said Lady Huntingdon, "and many felt Him eminently nigh. The gracious influences of His Spirit seemed to rest on every soul.... Words fail to describe the holy triumph with which the great congregation sang--

'Captain of Thine enlisted host, Display Thy glorious banner high.'"

After a week of never to be forgotten blessings, the great crowds slowly dispersed, and the tireless evangelists took horse and rode away, each to his work, with strength renewed, and spirit refreshed as from the presence of the Lord.

Although Fletcher did not reside at the college, his connexion with it was by no means a nominal one. His journeys to Trevecca were frequent, involving fatigue and privations, which his feeble frame could ill endure, though he counted them less than nothing. As to the character of his visits, and the influence that accompanied him, the testimony of Mr. Benson, the headmaster, himself a man of exceptional intelligence and sanctity, is well known, but is too important to be omitted here:

"Mr. Fletcher visited them frequently, and was received as an angel of God. It is not possible for me to describe the veneration in which we all held him. Like Elijah in the schools of the prophets, he was revered, he was loved, he was almost adored; and that, not only by every student, but by every member of the family. And indeed he was worthy. The reader will pardon me if he think I exceed. My heart kindles while I write. Here it was that I saw, shall I say an angel in human flesh? I should not far exceed the truth if I said so. But here I saw a descendant of fallen Adam so fully raised above the ruins of the fall, that though by the body he was tied down to earth, yet was his whole conversation in heaven, yet was his life, from day to day, hid with Christ in God. Prayer, praise, love, and zeal, all ardent, elevated above what one would think attainable in this state of frailty, were the element in which he continually lived. And as to others, his one employment was to call, entreat, and urge them to ascend with him to the glorious Source of being and blessedness. He had leisure comparatively for nothing else. Languages, arts, sciences, grammar, rhetoric, logic, even divinity itself, as it is called, were all laid aside when he appeared in the schoolroom among the students. His full heart would not suffer him to be silent. He must speak, and they were readier to hearken to this servant and minister of Jesus Christ than to attend to Sallust, Virgil, Cicero, or any Latin or Greek historian, poet, or philosopher, they had been engaged in reading. And they seldom hearkened long before they were all in tears, and every heart catched fire from the flame which burned in his soul.

"These seasons generally terminated in this. Being convinced that to be filled with the Holy Ghost was a better qualification for the ministry of the gospel than any classical learning (although that too be useful in its place), after speaking awhile in the schoolroom, he used frequently to say, 'As many of you as are athirst for this fulness of the Spirit, follow me into my room.' On this many of us have instantly followed him, and there continued for two or three hours, wrestling like Jacob for the blessing, praying one after another, till we could bear to kneel no longer.

* * * * *

"Such was the ordinary employment of this man of God while he remained at Trevecca. He preached the word of life to the students and family, and as many of the neighbours as desired to be present. He was 'instant in season, and out of season'; he 'reproved, rebuked, exhorted, with all longsuffering.' He was always employed, either in illustrating some important truth, or exhorting to some neglected duty, or administering some needful comfort, or relating some useful anecdote, or making some profitable remark or observation upon some occurrence. And his devout soul, always burning with love and zeal, led him to intermingle prayer with all he uttered. Meanwhile his manner was so solemn, and at the same time so mild and insinuating, that it was hardly possible for any one who had the happiness of being in his company not to be struck with awe and charmed with love, as if in the presence of an angel or departed spirit. Indeed, I frequently thought, while attending to his heavenly discourse and Divine spirit, that he was so different from, and superior to, the generality of mankind, as to look more like Moses or Elijah, or some prophet or apostle, come again from the dead, than a mortal man, dwelling in a house of clay. It is true, his weak and long-afflicted body proclaimed him to be human; but the graces which so eminently filled and adorned his soul manifested him to be Divine: and long before his happy spirit returned to God who gave it, that which was human seemed in a great measure to be 'swallowed up of life.'"

Benson was not alone in the impressions he received of Fletcher's character, and of the influence he exercised at Trevecca. The references of others are in the same strain; and although his connexion with the college came to an abrupt end, and was followed by a period of painful controversy, we hear no disparagement of his piety, or suggestion of anything unworthy of his reputation for Christian meekness and purity.

But why did Fletcher so soon withdraw from the presidency of the college? To use the words of Mr. Benson: "Why did he give up an office for which he was perfectly well qualified, which he executed so entirely to the satisfaction of all the parties concerned, and in which it pleased God to give so manifest a blessing to his labours?" The answer is, that it was one of the first results of a controversy which, for intensity, for duration, and for the strifes and divisions to which it gave rise, is unhappily memorable in the history of the Revival. Its very name--the Calvinistic controversy--will suggest to the experienced reader the range of questions involved, and the improbability of agreement being arrived at, however prolonged might be the discussion.

It should be borne in mind that, from its very beginning, the Revival had advanced along two different lines, in connexion with certain well-marked doctrinal distinctions. Whilst the work and the workers in the two spheres were, in the best and deepest sense, one, they were divided upon those questions concerning predestination and free will, which, since the time of Augustine, have given rise to two distinct types of doctrine, each susceptible of modifications and developments of its own. This difference was represented, first in the little band of Oxford Methodists, and then in the more evangelical and expansive Methodism that succeeded it. Wesley was an Arminian, and Whitefield a Calvinist. Harmonious co-operation between them was at times difficult; but mutual love and largeness of heart prevailed upon the whole.

Under Wesley's leadership, Arminian Methodism developed in organic form, and is still found in all parts of the world in visible, organized Churches. Calvinistic Methodism spread with similar, if not equal, rapidity, but without unity of administration, and failed to develop any principles of Church life. It revived the Calvinistic nonconformity of England, and may almost be said to have taken possession of Wales; but the main current of its strength flowed into the Church of England, and is to be traced in the rise and progress of the Evangelical or Low Church party. There may be difference of opinion as to which development has been on the whole of greater service to the Christian Church, but few persons will deny to either a high place in the order of Providence.

At the period we have now reached in Fletcher's history, a certain uneasiness may be discovered in the relations of Arminian and Calvinistic Methodism, not incompatible however with such union and brotherliness as were seen at the great gathering at Trevecca. But Wesley was observing with concern the spread of a practical antinomianism, which on every possible ground he hated and feared. The openly wicked were hopeful and comparatively harmless compared with persons who talked fluently of being justified and sanctified, while they were guilty of drunkenness, uncleanness, and dishonesty. This state of things he could not and would not endure, if it was to be prevented by plainness of doctrine or rigour of discipline. He knew that while such abuses were not the necessary accompaniment of the Scriptural doctrine of faith, they arose from a perversion to which that doctrine will always be exposed, and against which it will be needful to guard, as long as human nature is what it is. Any language therefore that tended to weaken the sense of moral responsibility, or lower the standard of Christian duty, was doubly dangerous in presence of a tendency to dwell upon the Divine sovereignty in redemption, to the neglect of the Divine requirements, as they are revealed to man in the gospel. In Wesley's judgment, his preachers were in danger of encouraging, or at least giving opportunity to, antinomian error by using expressions that had received a kind of general sanction, and refraining from certain others which were thought too legal and unevangelic. But what had this to do with Calvinism? Some writers, more jealous for the character of Wesley's societies than he was, will have it that the abuses referred to were mainly or entirely to be found amongst the Calvinists. But that is not the case. As Mr. Watson has well said: "To show however that antinomianism can graft itself upon other stocks besides that of the Calvinistic decrees, it was found also among the Moravians, and the Methodists did not escape.... In fact, there is no such exclusive connexion between the more sober Calvinistic theories of predestination and this great error, as some have supposed." With this statement Wesley would, we think, have agreed; but he undoubtedly held that antinomianism was a much more natural and likely result of Calvinistic than of Arminian principles.

In the one case the principles must be violated, in the other they had only to be developed and applied to produce the evils referred to. Moreover Calvinism, as popularly understood, had lost what safeguards it possessed, and had little in common with that of Owen, and Leighton, and Matthew Henry. Spiritual pride and carnal indulgence flourished along with a crude and coarse belief in unconditional election and imputed righteousness. With Calvinism in its purely theological and philosophical aspects Wesley felt no call to deal. It was wholly a practical question with him. He saw, or thought he saw, that its principles were doing actual mischief, and that, amongst other things, the every-day language of religion was being corrupted by phrases and catchwords that encouraged serious error. A quarter of a century ago, at the first Methodist Conference, the question was asked, "Have we not unawares leaned too much to Calvinism? _Answer:_ We are afraid we have." Might it not be time to ask this question again, and answer it in a less uncertain manner? Wesley judged it was. Accordingly, the "Minutes of Conference" for 1770 contain the following statement:

"We said, in 1744, 'We have leaned too much toward Calvinism.' Wherein?

"1. With regard to _man's faithfulness_. Our Lord Himself taught us to use the expression. And we ought never to be ashamed of it. We ought steadily to assert, on His authority, that if a man is not 'faithful in the unrighteous mammon,' God will not give him '_the true riches_.'

"2. With regard to _working for life_. This also our Lord has expressly commanded us. 'Labour ([Greek: ergazesthe], literally, 'work') for the meat that endureth to everlasting life.' And, in fact, every believer, till he comes to glory, works _for_ as well as _from_ life.

"3. We have received it as a maxim that 'a man is to do nothing in order to justification.' Nothing can be more false. Whoever desires to find favour with God, should 'cease from evil, and learn to do well.' Whoever repents should do 'works meet for repentance.' And if this is not _in order_ to find favour, what does he do them for?

"Review the whole affair.

"1. Who of us is _now_ accepted of God?

"He that now believes in Christ, with a loving and obedient heart.

"2. But who among those that never heard of Christ?

"He that feareth God, and worketh righteousness, according to the light he has.

"3. Is this the same with 'he that is sincere'?

"Nearly, if not quite.

"4. Is not this 'salvation by works'?

"Not by the _merit_ of works, but by works as a _condition_.

"5. What have we then been disputing about for these thirty years?

"I am afraid, _about words_.

"6. As to _merit_ itself, of which we have been so dreadfully afraid: we are rewarded 'according to our works,' yea, 'because of our works.' How does this differ from _for the sake of our works_? And how differs this from _secundum merita operum_? As our works _deserve_.

"Can you split this hair?

"I doubt I cannot."[9]

The reader, who has, it may be, glanced rapidly over the preceding paragraphs, without perceiving in them anything very portentous, will be surprised to learn that their publication gave rise to the longest and sharpest controversy in the history of Methodism. An ancient controversy has this in common with an extinct volcano, that after generations may walk all unconscious over the cold ashes of what was once a glowing lava torrent. To Wesley's contemporaries these "Minutes" were full of meaning; every allusion was recognised, every phrase touched some active belief or disbelief. Amongst the Calvinists generally, and more particularly in Lady Huntingdon's circle, they caused the utmost indignation and alarm. Wesley was denounced as a heretic, an apostate, a papist unmasked. Lady Huntingdon wept over them, called them "horrible and abominable," and declared that "whosoever did not fully, and without any evasion, disavow them should not stay in her college." Lady Glenorchy "must bear her feeble testimony against the sentiments contained in them.... She has always countenanced Mr. Wesley's preachers, but now she finds this cannot be done by her any longer." Mr. Shirley pronounced them "dreadful heresy," "injurious to the very fundamental principles of Christianity," and said publicly that he deemed "peace in such a case a shameful indolence, and silence no less than treachery." Active measures were taken for the vindication of outraged orthodoxy. Every Arminian must quit the college. Mr. Benson, the headmaster, declined to disavow the sentiments of the "Minutes," and was consequently dismissed. Fletcher felt compelled to write: "Mr. Benson made a very just defence when he said he held with me the possibility of salvation for all men; that mercy is offered to all, and yet may be received or rejected. If this be what your ladyship calls Mr. Wesley's opinion, free-will, and Arminianism, and if 'every Arminian must quit the college,' I am actually discharged also." In the hope of mediating between Wesley and the countess, Fletcher went to Trevecca. He tried to soften matters, but in vain. He then absolutely resigned his office, advised Lady Huntingdon to choose a moderate Calvinist in his place, and recommended Rowland Hill. His letter to Wesley (first published by Mr. Tyerman[10]), giving an account of his interview with Lady Huntingdon, and beseeching his venerated friend to believe "that the college and its foundress mean well, and give them all the satisfaction you can," is in his finest vein of good sense, elevated and illumined by Christian feeling.

But, unhappily, no private and friendly understanding was arrived at. As the time for Wesley's next Conference drew near, a circular letter, signed "Walter Shirley," was sent round among the friends of the Evangelical movement, proposing that those who disapproved the obnoxious minutes "should go in a body to the said Conference, and insist upon a formal recantation of the said minutes, and in case of a refusal sign and publish their protest against them." This proposed demonstration however, from various causes, dwindled down to a small deputation, which presented itself, meekly enough, at the Conference at Bristol, and was received by Wesley and the preachers in a friendly manner. The spirit of conciliation was in the ascendant. Wesley and all his preachers present, except one, signed a declaration admitting that the minutes were not sufficiently guarded in the way they were expressed, and repudiating the meaning which had been put upon them, viz. that of justification by works. Mr. Shirley, in return, wrote a memorandum to the effect that "the declaration agreed to in Conference, August 8th, 1771, had convinced him that he had mistaken the meaning of the doctrinal points in the 'Minutes of the Conference, held in London, August 7th, 1770'; and he hereby wished to testify the full satisfaction he had in the said declaration, and his hearty concurrence and agreement with the same."

Why did not the matter end here? Might not such explanations and concessions have secured peace? Was a seven years war absolutely necessary? To this question we have met with no really satisfactory reply. But it must now be mentioned that, prior to the assembling of the Conference at Bristol, Fletcher had written a "Vindication" of the much discussed minutes in the form of "Five Letters" to Mr. Shirley. The manuscript of this "Vindication" was in Wesley's hands, and was, in fact, being set up in type at the very time that Shirley and his friends were having their interview with Wesley and the Conference. The question is, whether the publication should have been proceeded with in the turn that things had taken. Shirley, hearing that Fletcher's "Letters" were in the press, not unnaturally requested that the issue might be stopped. Fletcher himself wrote to his friend Mr. Ireland: "I feel for poor dear Mr. Shirley, whom I have (considering the present circumstances) treated too severely in my 'Vindication of the Minutes.' My dear sir, what must be done? I am ready to defray, by selling to my last shirt, the expense of the printing of my 'Vindication,' and suppress it. Direct me, dear sir. Consult with Mr. Shirley and Mr. Wesley about the matter. Be persuaded I am ready to do everything that will be brotherly in this unhappy affair." But in Wesley's judgment nothing that had taken place required the suppression of so admirable a "tract for the times," and accordingly it was published. Opinions will be divided as to the wisdom and propriety of the step. It may be said: "The merely personal aspect of the question was now disposed of. But the evils which had led to the recording of the 'minutes' were real evils, and were not to be got rid of by an interchange of courtesies between Wesley and the Conference on the one hand, and Lady Huntingdon and Mr. Shirley on the other. Circumstances, or rather Providence, had discovered--nay, raised up--in Fletcher the very man for the present need. What could be better, in the interest of true religion, than to send forth broadcast, not merely a 'Vindication of the Minutes,' and of Wesley's action, but a powerful defence of the gospel itself against the chief and most dangerous error of the day?" There could be no mistake as to the value of what Fletcher had written. His argument was clear in outline, and convincing in detail. The gospel way of salvation was defended on the right hand and on the left. Popular errors were exposed, paradoxes explained, and misunderstanding removed, with a knowledge of the Scriptures and a skill in reasoning that astonished every one. The meek Vicar of Madeley was a master of controversy. He had learning and logic for scholars, with imagination, wit, and pathos to charm the common people. The style was genial and easy, abounding in lively comparisons and illustrations, while a gentle vein of humour, stopping short of bitterness on the one hand, and burlesque on the other, mingled, not unbecomingly, with passages of the most exalted devotion. "Those letters," wrote Wesley, "could not be suppressed, without betraying the honour of our Lord." This decided his action.

Of course Fletcher's letters had their reply from Mr. Shirley, and that, in turn, required to be answered. Then Richard Hill entered the field, and him also Fletcher encountered, and as the controversy grew it spread out over the wide area of questions speculative and practical which the term Calvinism covers or suggests, and called fresh combatants into the field. We have no heart to pursue the details of this history. It is complicated and unremunerative in the last degree. It deepened into bitterness and scurrility, till its baser literature becomes unreadable for very shame; it separated brethren; it turned allies into adversaries; it offered to a sceptical and ungodly age the spectacle of good men "smiting one another _un_friendly," and consumed time and strength that were wanted, and more than wanted, for the Christianising of the country.

Through all this strife and confusion we can at least follow Fletcher without shame, if not without regret. We have already quoted Southey's eulogy on him. It is not excessive. He kept his temper through seven years of trying controversy. He lived and wrote "as ever in his great Taskmaster's eye." Love to God is manifest in every page, and only second to it is love for those with whom he must needs contend, a veritable "longing after them in the bowels of Jesus Christ."

Fletcher's "Checks" were the best thing born of the controversy. They did not,--need it be said?--finally dispose of the problems respecting God's foreknowledge and sovereignty, and the free agency and responsibility of man. These problems are perhaps much where they were when first confronted. If they are less discussed in our own day than formerly, it is not that the difficulties they present have been solved, but that a juster estimate of the limits of our powers, together with a deeper sense of the antinomies of Divine law, has in a great measure withdrawn the Christian mind from these questions to more remunerative ones. That the doctrines commonly called Calvinistic logically lead either to presumption or despair, may perhaps fairly be urged; that they do so as matter of fact, and on any wide scale, would be difficult to prove. But whether the vulgar antinomianism of Fletcher's day had or had not its roots in Calvinistic doctrine, his handling of it as a practical matter is vigorous and effective in the highest degree. He pursues it in all its forms. He exposes and refutes those one-sided reasonings which "make for _un_righteousness"; he sets forth law in gospel, and gospel in law, with admirable balance and proportion; he exhibits Christian holiness as the sum of duty and the crown of privilege, and breathes throughout a heavenly spirit, which the warmth of controversy seldom, if ever, disturbs.

May we say then, as some one has said, "it was worth while to have the Calvinistic controversy, if it were only for the sake of Fletcher's contribution to it"? Our answer is, most emphatically, No. We have too deep a sense of the evils of a long and embittered strife between good men to pass any such judgment. Nor can we suppose that such a controversy furnished the only, or even the most favourable, conditions for the exercise of Fletcher's gifts. We should have preferred for him--can we doubt that he would have preferred for himself?--the opportunity of writing books "touching the King" without the necessity for splitting hairs with Shirley, and for winnowing the coarse abuse of Toplady, and the extravagances of Rowland and Richard Hill.

But while we regard the controversy as both an error and an evil, we are far from denying that it had its compensations, for which we are indebted almost exclusively to Fletcher. His writings undoubtedly served to fasten deep discredit upon that imperfect gospel--"another gospel, which is not another,"--which permits its followers "to continue in sin that grace may abound." Without lowering or lessening the doctrine of justification by faith, Fletcher gave new emphasis and clearer setting to the doctrine of Christian holiness, and rescued Christian ethics from disparagement and neglect. Without taking away from the virtue of the atonement in its relation to the whole standing of the believer, he enforced that great practical end of redemption, "the righteousness of the law, fulfilled in men walking not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." Towards the close of the year 1774 Wesley wrote, "If we could once bring all our preachers, itinerant and local, uniformly and steadily to insist on those two points, 'Christ dying for us,' and 'Christ reigning in us,' we should shake the trembling gates of hell. I think most of them are now exceeding clear herein, and the rest come nearer, especially since they have read Mr. Fletcher's 'Checks,' which have removed many difficulties out of the way."

Fletcher's "Checks to Antinomianism" at once took a foremost place in the literature of Methodism. Wesley recommended them to his followers with all the weight of his authority. The interest awakened by the controversy, the popular style in which they were written, and the elevation and fervour of piety manifest throughout, carried them into every Methodist household. They were studied by the preachers, and read for spiritual edification by all the more earnest members of the Society. They did much to nourish the spiritual life of such men and women as Bramwell, and Carvosso, and Hester Ann Rogers, names that adorn and interpret the Methodist doctrine of "Entire Sanctification." It is not too much to say that for many years they were not least among the instruments employed in connexion with the ever-extending Revival, "for the perfecting of the saints, ... for the edifying of the body of Christ."

In more recent times the influence of this, Fletcher's principal work, is indirect rather than direct. It fills the atmosphere of the Methodist Churches with a kind of after-glow. Its light and heat linger in the air, and are reflected from the regions where its first full strength was felt. Should these writings come, in course of time, to be entirely neglected, that influence would still be felt, for it has passed beyond recall into the theology and devotional literature of Methodism all the world over. Two of the most competent historians of Methodism, Dr. Stevens and Mr. Tyerman, give it as their opinion that Fletcher's "Checks" are as much read to-day as they were a hundred years ago. From this opinion we are constrained to dissent, and should be content to refer the matter to the Methodist publishing houses for decision. We believe, on the contrary, that they are very little read; but none the less are we persuaded that the results of Fletcher's controversial labours are, in many respects, permanent; and, in addition to those that have been referred to, we would instance the fact that Calvinistic doctrine has come to be better guarded against the perversions of antinomianism, and that disputes arising out of it have become less frequent and more moderate, to the great advantage of the Christian Church.

In passing from this subject we cannot refrain from quoting a few paragraphs from his "First Check," in which Fletcher reveals his love and reverence for Wesley:

"A gray-headed minister of Christ, an old general in the armies of Emmanuel, a father who has children capable of instructing even masters in Israel; and one whom God made the first and principal instrument of the late Revival of internal religion in our Church.... One word more about Mr. Wesley, and I have done. Of the two greatest and most useful ministers I ever knew, one is no more. The other, after amazing labours, flies still with unwearied diligence through the three kingdoms, calling sinners to repentance, and to the healing fountain of Jesus' blood. Though oppressed with the weight of near seventy years and the care of near 30,000 souls, he shames still, by his unabated zeal and immense labours, all the young ministers in England, perhaps in Christendom. He has generally blown the gospel trump, and rode twenty miles, before most of the professors who despise his labours have left their downy pillow. As he begins the day, the week, the year, so he concludes them, still intent upon extensive services for the glory of the Redeemer and the good of souls. And shall we lightly lift up our pens, our tongues, our hands against him? No; let them rather forget their cunning! If we _will_ quarrel, can we find nobody to fall out with, but the minister upon whom God puts the greatest honour?

"Our Elijah has lately been translated to heaven.[11] Gray-headed Elisha is yet awhile continued upon earth. And shall we make a hurry and noise, to bring in railing accusations against him with more success?... Shall the sons of the prophets, shall even children in grace and knowledge, openly traduce the venerable seer, and his abundant labours?"

This description of Wesley may serve to introduce an incident showing Wesley's opinion of Fletcher.