Tbe Revolzltion in Reli‘iozl.s Rhetorzc:

BY FRANK R. GRANT*

N 1906 Elie Halevy proposed the thesis that during the middle years of the eighteenth century religious emotions became a vital element in England’s social, political, and economic structures through the Evangelical Revival, a religious awak-

ening initiated by George Whitefield and John Wesley, whose preaching “revolutionized religious rhetoric.” Resorting to the open fields when a building was too small, when they were ex- cluded from a church, and as a means of reaching those who had no religious affiliation, they spoke in personal and emotional te rm rather than general moral and theological concepts. For Halevy the outcome of the rhetorical revolution was the channeling of popular feelings of social despair and dissent through emotional, persuasive preaching toward essentially personal, nonrevolutionary ends. At the time of the French Revolution, thought Halevy, “society might easily have lapsed into anarchy had there existed in England a bourgeoisie animated by the spirit of revolution.” But neither the middle class nor the working class was revolu- tionary; they were under the spell of the evangelical spirit, “from which the established order had nothing to fear.’la

This essay is primarily concerned with that aspect of the Evangelical Revival which Halevy calls the “revolution in religious rhetoric.” It concentrates on John Wesley’s preaching and the behavior which that preaching initially generated from 1739 to 1760. Wesley stirred the emotions of a large number of common persons, and he appeared to many members of the political and ecclesiastical establishment as an instigator of lower-class social protest. Wesley, however, was concerned with changing persons,

I

*The author is a graduate student in History at the University of Montana. lElie Halevy, The Birth of Methodism in England, trans. and ed. Bernard

Elie Halevy. England in 1815, trans. E. I. Watkin and D. A. Barker, 2nd ed. Semmel (Chicago, 1971). 35-40. Originally published in 1906.

(London, 1949). 425. 1st Fr. ed. 1913.

439

The Historian not society. He sought to channel awakened emotions toward religious ends through discipline.

The analysis of the impact of John Wesley and other evangel- icals is complicated by a number of inherent difficulties in eighteen th-century evangelicalism. T h e evangelicals produced little systematic theology; the interpreter must deduce their theological presuppositions from sermons, tracts, letters, and stories. Their belief in experience as the primary authority for religious faith gives their reasoning a highly subjective quality. Their appeal is grounded in a view of the world which is alien to contemporary scientific understanding. Of signal importance in facing the difficulties is the apparent discrepancy between the evangelicals’ immediate impact upon their contemporaries and the obscurity and obtuseness of much of their writings. Wesley was one of the great preachers of English history, but it is not obvious from his writings why this was true. For the interpreter the problem is discovering within the sources clues to the person’s immediate impact.

That impact can be partially determined by an analysis of the convictions which provided the evangelical motivation. When an evangelical spoke, preached, or wrote, he or she did so from conviction, not only communicating ideas, ideals, and principles but also expressing personal faith in the righteousness of his or her cause. That conviction, when coupled with concrete moral ideals had persuasive power. In order to analyze the process through which the evangelical convictions were translated into moral attitudes and behavioral ideals, I have used a structure based on the convictional theory developed by Willem Zuurdeeg in A n Analytical Philosophy of Religion.a

Zuurdeeg attempts to illuminate precisely those issues posed by a study of the evangelicals. His purpose is to examine religion through an analysis of religious language, one of the convictional languages. He distinguishes convictional from indicative lan- guages-the languages of empirical science-by stating that convic- tional languages carry connotations of personal meaning and value, whereas indicative languages are abstract, impersonal, matter-of- fact. The significance of this distinction for the interpreter of the evangelicals is the realization that the sources are written in convictional language, which implies not only personal and sub- jective opinion but also a convictional world view. The distinction

a Willem F. Zuurdeeg, An Analytical Philosophy of Religion (New York, 1958). ’l’his interpretation of John Wesley is one of three case studies in which the author uses the convictional theory based on Zuurdeeg’s analysis to gauge the impact of the Evangelical Revival on England. The other two studies are of Hannah More and William Wilberforce.

440

John Wesley further presupposes that convictional language is self-revealing; that is, the writer communicates his own personality as well as words and ideas. It is thus possible for the historian to gain an understanding of the person through his convictional statements. Zuurdeeg further assumes that the man who speaks with conviction does so from a holistic rather than a compartmentalized world view and that an implicit hierarchy of values exists among the various spheres of life. Though a person’s language may not consistently express this hierarchy, it does provide an indication of basic beliefs and conflicts. For him language is the key element in immediate communication, in the formation and transmission of ideas and attitudes, and in the establishment of personal and social identity. The historian is therefore able to gauge a movement’s impact on cociety by tracing its ability to alter the way a society uses specific ideas and words-such as reform, religion, class-and its influence in determining a society’s world view. Finally, Zuurdeeg’s analysis reminds the historian that he is working within the context of his own convictions, and that they blind him to some aspects of his subject while illuminating other^.^

At the heart of Zuurdeeg’s structure is the concept of “con- viction,” which he defines as follows:

We take the term “conviction” to mean all persuasions con- cerning the meaning of life; concerning good and bad; concerning gods and devils; concerning representations of the ideal man, the ideal state, the ideal society; concerning the meaning of history, of nature, and of the All.5

Conviction implies being overcome by someone or something. This may be a god, an ideal, or a political philosophy. The only thing that counts is that the someone or something is a “reality for the believer.” I t means more, however, than intellectual assent and passive acceptance of given propositions: it implies certitude which is sufficient ground for action and power through which the person seeks to mobilize external forces in shaping the world to fit his convictional world view. Conviction expresses a unity of belief and action. “Convictional certitude is so overwhelm- ing . . . that the believer in many instances gives his life for his Cause. The whole person is involved, including his very exist- ence. . . .”*

Conviction develops within a “convictional situation” consist- ing of the following elements. There is first of all a person to be convinced or persuaded. The person is overcome by a Convictor:

’ Zhid., 44-45, 56-59, 69-78, 18-19. Elbid . , 26. ‘Ihid., 27.

44 1

The Historian God, the Greatest Good, the power of love. Witnesses-parents, friends, social groups, religious leaders-and testimonies-the Bible, the Koran, creeds, manifestoes, platforms-proclaim the Convictor- person relationship, provide a language for the communication of conviction, and determine appropriate action to be taken by the convicted person. The person responds to the Convictor by an act of assent, in which he decides to commit himself to the Con- victor. “Such a decision is a dedication of the whole person to the Convictor, because something of overwhelming importance is at stake; a cause has to be defended, a precious value protected, or a god is to be served.” The act of assent implies a change in the person.

We can call this event a conversion. “Conversion” is derived from the Latin verb converto, to turn around completely. What has been turned around here-that is, changed com- pletely-is everything which a man values in life. He has a new convictor. The world appears in a new light. This implies that he himself has become another man.8

When the new man speaks with conviction, he intervenes in the historical and social process.

[Man-who-speaks goes] forth out of himself into the world, and by means of his language [brings] order into it. From this vantage point man-who-speaks is not passive but active. TO speak is to exercise power. Man-who-speaks by means of his commands or laws can dominate other human beings.0

By speaking the person commits his power to the affirmation or negation of a given proposition, ideal, or behavior. His speaking provides power which can release power in others. His speaking can also perform an iconoclastic function, for at times he attacks and shatters other convictional world views which have blinded men to certain aspects of their life and society. What is revealed often has indicative as well as convictional meaning. “The service rendered by convictional language to indicative language can be described as the blasting away of an obstruction, which prevented people from seeing clearly in an indicative way.” l o

In view of the ever-new range of possibilities, man-who-speaks feels the need to fortify himself by repetition of the conviction and reenforcement through ordering his behavior and the behavior of others to make it comply with his convictional world view, The

Ibid., 29. HIbid., 31. YZbid., 69.

’Olbid., 53.

442

John Wesley desire to force compliance to one’s world view is evident in the preaching and religious discipline of John Wesley.

I1 On March 29, 1739, John Wesley, a devout, though dissatisfied

Anglican clergyman, left London for Bristol, where he planned to meet his longtime friend, George Whitefield. Two days later he first experienced Whitefield’s open-air preaching, to which he could “scarce reconcile” himself; for he had until that time been “so tenacious of every point relating to decency and order, that [he] should have thought that the saving of souls almost a sin, if it had not been done in church.” He was so impressed and encouraged by Whitefield’s preaching, however, that the next day Wesley “expounded” the Sermon on the Mount, “one pretty remarkable precedent for field-preaching,” and on the following afternoon he “submitted to be more vile, and proclaimed in the highways the glad tiding of salvation, speaking from a little eminence in a ground adjoining to the city, to about three thousand people.”11

By moving from the church building to the streets and fields, Whitefield and Wesley radically a1 tered the convictional situa- tion. l2 No longer were they preaching primarily to acknowledged Christians; now they were speaking to the public. The change was significant.13 In the first instance, the preaching tended to be didactic, for the preacher assumed a common convictional world view between himself and the congregation. His goal was to inspire, clarify, and teach. In the second instance, the preaching was kerygmatic, that is proclamation. The preacher sought to change the convictions of his listeners. Such a change in conviction produced a new person. l4 With the initial field-preaching experi- ence Wesley realized the heart of the evangelical message: through God’s power, persons could change.

When John Wesley preached, he saw not only a multitude of

11 John Wesley, The Works of john Wesley, 14 vols. (London: Wesleyan Con- ference Office, 1872; reprint ed., Grand Rapids, 1958-59), vol. 1 (]ournal, March 31. April 2, 1739): 185 (hereafter cited as Works).

l2 John Walsh, “Origins of the Evangelical Revival.” G. V. Bennett and J. D. Walsh, eds., Essays in Modern English Church History (New York, 1966), 134-35. Wesley and Whitefield had been preceded by the Welsh revivalists: Griftith Jones, Howell Harris, Daniel Rowland. and Howell Davis.

John Wesley, “Minutes of the Second Annual Conference” (August 2, 17,45), in Albert Outler, ed., John Wesley (New York, 1964). 150-51.

C. H. Dodd, The Apostolic Preaching and Its Developments (New York, 1964). ch. 1.

443

The Historian iiien, women, and children; he envisioned a theological abstrac- tion: man. To the senses and reason man appeared to be a relatively insignificant and insecure entity, who existed in an infinitely small span of time. He also had a dualistic nature consisting of a body with passions, hungers, and physical power; and an “immortal spirit,” a soul. “The body is man; , . . man is not only a house of clay, but an immortal spirit. . . more valuable than the whole earth; a spirit made in the image of God.”l6 Though created in the image of God, man rebelled against God and became a “mixture of good and evil, of greatness and littleness, of nobleness and baseness.” l6 This dualistic, rebellious creature, however, maintained his “liberty,” that is, “the power of self- determination.” It was possible for him to decide to do good or evil. He was free to serve whom he chose, to be overcome by the convictor of his choice.

Wesley did not direct his preaching solely to the abstract theological man. He recognized that man is a person within society, and that his behavior, attitudes, and ideals are greatly affected by his position within society. He adapted his preaching to communicate to a distinct segment of society, usually identified as the “lower orders” or the “inferior set of people.”18 Though that segment defies precise definition, the ease with which Wesley was able to gather a congregation at various hours of the day, any day of the week, indicates that many persons who came were from the unemployed, underemployed, or “floating” population, which provided the raw material for the eighteenth-century crowd. lQ

George Rude’s intensive studies of these crowds provide valu- able insights for analyzing the social persons to whom Wesley preached. T h e congregations’ actions at times appear similar to those of the itinerant bands “ ‘captained’ by men whose personality, speech, dress or momentary assumption of authority marked them out as leaders” during the London riots of 1736.20 The persons who constituted such crowds were usually seeking immediate, concrete goals and, if provoked, would resort to direct action and riot. Outside limited sections of London they were not considered by the political leadership to be an active part of the political

16 Wesley, Works 7: 170, 171.

l7 Zbid., 228. lBZbid., 2 (Journal, July 9, 1750; March 23, 1758; July 19, 1759): 200, 437, 505. 19 E. P. Thompson, The hfaking of the English Working Class (New York, 1964),

9-14; George Rude, Paris and London in the Eighteenth Century (New York, 1973), 34.

* Ibid., 295; Wesley, Works 1 (Journal, September 4-October 5, 1740; January 25, 1742; February 6-14, 1744; March 5-15, 1744): 287-89, 353-54, 452-54. 459-60.

’“Ibid., 344-46.

444

John Wesley structure but were expected to defer to their “betters.”21 When faced with economic dislocation, they inclined to look backward to the restoration of what they believed to be “lost rights” or benefits of a previous age, rather than to demand innovative political and economic changes. 22

The crowds’ motivations for attending the preaching servilces varied. That many attended, were converted, and joined the Methodist societies indicates that some were seeking vital religious experience or a sense of belonging. The large numbers who attended the preaching without joining the societies plus the gradual inclusion of some members of the “better sort” show that the preaching was a popular attraction. Some attended to harass the preacher; others simply drifted in. Most of the persons who heard Wesley appear to have held a convictional world view in which they were essentially passive and voiceless within the larger political and social order. They responded to authority which could give voice to their unsettled emotions and at the same time provide them with a sense of security.

John Wesley proved to be such an authority. Having experi- enced a profound conversion, he became convinced that God had intervened in his life and that that intervention had given him a sense of self-purpose, identity, and stability. In his Journal Wesley vividly described his conversion experience:

In the evening [May 24, 17381 I went very unwillingly to a society in Aldersgate Street where one was reading Luther’s preface to the Epistle to the Romans. About a quarter before nine, while he was describing the change which God works in the heart through faith in Christ, I felt my heart strangely warmed. I felt I did trust in Christ, Christ alone for salvation: And an assurance was given me, that he had taken away my sins, even mine, and saved me from the law of sin and death.23

In this dramatic statement Wesley revealed God in Christ as the Convictor who had overcome him, not only making him con- scious of God’s power but also making him aware of his own inner sources of strength.

A trinitarian, Wesley perceived the unity of God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit, thereby attacking other current theological systems and providing an emotional basis for his theological appeal. Ile did not develop a systematic definition of God, the Convictor; rather, he spoke and wrote in terms of Gods attributes:

m Rude, Paris and London, 54. la Ibid., 23-24. “Wesley, Works 1 (Journal, May 24, 1738): 103.

445

The Historian Christ is the true God . . . the only Cause, the sole Creator of all things, . . . the Supporter of all things that he hath made, . . . the Preserver of all things, . . . the cement of the whole universe, . . , the true Author of all the motion that is in the universe, . . . the Governor of all things . . . . He is the end of all things. . . . He is now the life of everything that lives, in any kind or degree.24

These attributes of Wesley’s Convictor not only describe “God,” they also challenge other convictional world views. By seeing a unity in God and Christ he struck a blow at Socinianism. When he claimed God to be not only the “Creator” but also the “Sup- porter,” “Preserver,” “Author of all motion,” “Governor of all things,’’ and “is now the life of everything that lives,” he attacked Deism and rationalism.

Yet a statement of his Convictor’s attributes fails to reveal the personal impact which Wesley felt, for in his conversion it is Christ, who seems much more capable of personal contact than does the transcendent God, in whom Wesley placed his faith and trust. That Wesley was convinced that God in Christ overpowers us personally in love is clear in the sermons he preached in the weeks immediately following the initial field-preaching experience in April 1739, and it was this conviction which awakened his listeners’ emotions and challenged the contemporary religious establishment. On April fourth he preached on “I will heal their backsliding, I will love them freely.” Back in London on the fifth he declared the Good News, which is “the Power of God unto salvation, to everyone that believeth.” On the eighth he was again in Bristol and called to a large crowd, “Ho, everyone that thirsteth, come ye to the waters; come and buy wine and milk, without money, and without price.” On the fourteenth at the poorhouse in Bath he preached on the words, “When they had nothing to pay, he frankly forgave them both.” And finally, on April 26, in a burst of enthusiasm, he proclaimed the Gospel in clear Arminian terms. He described the event as follows:

When I was preaching at Newgate, on these words, “He that believeth hath everlasting life,” I was insensibly led, without any previous design, to declare strongly and explicitly, that God willeth “all men to be thus saved;” and to pray, that, “if this were not the truth of God, he would not suffer the blind to go out of the way; but if it were, he would bear witness to his word.26

In these sermons Wesley expressed the conviction that God freely offered healing, freedom, power, and some form of eternal life

“Ibid. , 6: 424-29. =Ibid. , 1 (Journal, April 4, 8, 14, 26, 1739): 185, 186, 188, 189.

446

John Wesley to everyone who would open his or her life to it. The assertion that such a relationship was universally possible challenged the Calvinist doctrine of the elect. At the same time the claim that God acted directly upon the person threatened to undermine the Anglican ecclesiastical structure. Theological systems, church order, and clerical authority came under the attack of Wesley’s Convictor, who was powerful, immediately present, personaLly accessible and active in the world.

Though Wesley was convinced that God acted directly upon the person, he did not desire to dispense with the clerical order. To the contrary, the itinerant preacher became the characteris tic Fymbol of Methodism and gave the movement its initial momen- tum. Later, Wesley appointed lay preachers-men and women “without experience, learning, or art; but simple of heart, devoted to God”-who often dominated the local societies.26 To the custo- dians of the established order of eighteenth-century England the Methodist preachers appeared as “harbingers of a second and perhaps a more proletarian Puritan r e v o l ~ t i o n . ” ~ ~ According to Wesley, however, the preacher was not meant to be a social and political revolutionary: his task was to “save as many souls as you can, . . . bring as many sinners as you possibly can to repentance, . . . and build them up in that holiness without which they cannot see the Lord.’’28 Preachers were witnesses to the divine-human encounter, which they had personally experienced, and they pro- vided a convictional language through which the listeners might comprehend the meaning of that relationship and its significance for their own lives.

Since many of the listeners could identiEj in social terms with the person, Jesus of Nazareth, Jesus Christ became the primary symbol for revealing the divine-human relationship. That symbol had revolutionary potential, but it remained unrealized, as Wesley tended to stress the divinity instead of the humanity of Christ: a symbol of the Convictor rather than the person.%

Though Wesley viewed conversion as a result of the divine initiative, he did not believe the person to be a passive partner in the divine-human encounter. The person must “repent,” that is, change direction or turn around. Repentance is therefore related to conversion. The difference in the two concepts is the designa-

WI Ibid., 7 : 330. See also Samuel J. Rogal, “John Wesley’s Women,” Eighteenth- Century Life 1 (September, 1974): 7.

John Walsh, “Methodism and the Mob in the Eighteenth Century,” in C. J. Cuming and Derek Baker, eds., Popular Belief ond Practice (Cambridge, 1979, 218, 223-27; Bernard Semmel, The Methodist Revolution (New York, 1973), ch. 1.

*Wesley, Works 8: 310. p Ibid., 11: 486-92.

447

The Historian tion of the active agent. A person is converted by an outside force; he repents of his own choice and will. The evangelical conversion thus implied two active agents.

Repentance for Wesley meant not only a change of mind; it also required changed behavior, which he called “going on to perfection.” He argued that “all real Christians, or believers in Christ, are made free from outward sin” at the time of conversion. The Christian is “purified from pride . . , pure from self-will or desire . . . pure from anger.” Perfection was therefore possible in this life and not limited to life after death.30 As Bernard Semmel put it:

The concepts of Christian perfection and Assurance were per- haps the most characteristic Wesleyan doctrines, and were most subject to attack as Enthusiasm. It was . . . by their conduct that Methodists were to be distinguished from other men; they were to be known because of their continual striving to drive sin from their hearts . . . Christian perfection was possible in this Zife.31

In a letter to a member, Wesley clarified his concept of perfection by relating it to the dualistic nature of man. “Sanctification,” he assured his correspondent, included “an instantaneous deliverence from all sin.” Yet it “did not include a power never to think a useless thought, nor ever speak a useless word.” Such perfection was “inconsistent with living in a corruptible body. . . . IVhile we breathe, we shall, more or less, mistake. If, therefore, Christian perfection implies this, we must not expect it till after death.”32 It was the task of the preacher to help the Christian discipline the corrupted body in his striving for perfection.

Two testimonies supported the Methodist preacher and pro- vided religious and behavioral authority for the Methodist so- cieties: the Bible and the Discipline. The Bible was authoritative because there God in Christ and the plan for eternal life was revealed. He wrote:

I want to know one thing: the way to heaven, how to land safe on that happy shore. God himself has condescended to teach the way; for this very end he came from heaven. He hath written it down in a book. 0 give me that book! At any price, give me the book of God! I have it; here is knowledge enough for me.33

5o Wesley, “Christian Perfection,” in Outler, John Wesley, 258, 259, 269, 270. Semmel, Methodis t Revolution, 17. Wesley, Works 12 (Wesley to Miss Furly, September 15, 1762): 207.

“Ibid. (Wesley to ---, April 18, 1760): 235; Wesley, “Preface to Sermons on Several Occasions,” in Outler, J o h n Wesley, 178-79.

448

John Wesley The Bible was more than a map to heaven; it was a “lantern unto a Christian’s feet, and a light in all his paths,” a behavioral guide for Christian living. “Whatever the Scripture neither forbids nor enjoins, either directly or by plain consequence,” wrote Wesley, the Christian “believes to be of an indifferent nature: to be in itself neither good nor evil; this being the whole and sole outward rule whereby his conscience is to be directed in all things.”B4

In order to support the convert in his new life, channel the emotional energy released by the evangelical preaching, and maintain control over the societies, Wesley created the Discipline: the rules for the societies, classes, bands, and preachers. Toward the end of 1739 a group of followers came to him for spiritual advice, and he agreed to meet with them weekly. This was the beginning of the United Society, “a company of men having the form and seeking the power of godliness, united in order to pray together, to receive the word of exhortation, and watch over one another in love, that they may work out their salvation.” T h e persons belonging to the society remained within the Church of England, receiving the sacraments and worshipping at their locid parishes. The rules for the Society indicate that it was right be- havior, not correct doctrine, which determined membership. All who wished to continue in the Society could evidence their desire for salvation:

First, by doing no harm, by avoiding evil in every kind. . . . Second, by doing good . . . as far as possible to a11 men: to their bodies, . , . by doing good especially to them that are of the household of faith, or groaning to be so; employing them, preferably to others, buying one of another, helping each other in business. . . . Thirdly, by attending upon all the ordinances of God. Such are the public worship of God; the ministry of the word, either read or expounded; the Supper of the Lord; private prayer; searching the Scriptures; and fasting or abstinence.85

The Methodist societies were divided into bands, which met weekly to sing, pray, and mutually confess their sins. At each meeting the following questions were asked:

1. What known sins have you committed since our last meet-

2. What temptations have you met with? 3. How were you delivered? 4. What have you thought, said, or done, of which you doubt

whether it be sin or not?

ing?

%Wesley, Works 5: 136. =Wesley, “Rules for the United Societies,” in Outler, John Wesley, 178-79.

449

The Historian 5. Have you nothing you desire to keep secret?86

The bands were clearly designed to exert group pressure in order to produce desired behavior.

Wesley’s personality was itself a potent source of discipline. In order to examine questions of doctrine and discipline, Wesley called a “conference” in 1744. Albert Outler called the confer- ence “one of those strokes of practical genius that marked off Wesleyan Methodism from the other vectors of the Evangelical Revival,” for it provided “an elementary doctrinal compend and an administrative charter” which prevented the movement’s en- ergies from being dissipated. Though he called the preachers together to discuss and debate issues, Wesley maintained firm control, pronouncing final answers to all questions. In 1785 he wrote concerning the conference:

[The calling of a conference] I did for many years, and all that time the term “Conference” meant not so much the con- versation we had together as persons that conferred-namely, those whom I invited to confer with me from time to time. So that all this time it depended on me alone, not only what persons should constitute the Conference, but whether there would be any Conference at all. This lay wholly in my breast; neither the preachers nor the peopIe having any part or lot in the matter.37

He regarded himself as the final authority; and those who refused to accept that authority were free to leave.

It was, however, emotionally difficult to leave the societies, for the Methodist preaching had been a vital part of most mem- bers’ conversions. They had been drifting, now they had a struc- ture for their lives: they had been voiceless, now they could speak: they had been nonentities, now they had a convictional world view which gave them a valuable identity.3*

Wesley’s view of conversion explains his intense involvement with the societies, €or he considered behavior to be the primary indication of religious conviction. For him the act of assent was not an agreement to a static situation: it was a commitment to continuous personal renewal through Bible study, worship, and adherence to the Discipline. His interest in behavior is indicated by his observations of the varieties of response which accompanied his preaching, his regular examinations of the “state of religion”

“Wesley, “Minutes of the First Annual Conference” (June 28, 1744), ibid., 143; Wesley, “Rules for the Bands,” ibid., 180-81.

ST Ibid., 134-35. =Wesley, “Minutes of the Second Annual Conference” (August 3, 174.5). ibnil.,

155; Wesley, Works 8: 225.

450

John Wesley in the many towns he visited, and his efforts to control the Methodist societies through rules and personal scrutiny. Wesley grasped intuitively that evangelical preaching was an exercise of power which released power in both the preacher and congrega- tion. Since that power could produce essentially anarchic or “enthusiastic” behavior, he created a discipline through which he sought to restrain and manage his followers.

111 The power released by the preaching was expressed in the

actions of the preachers. Wesley consciously intervened in the social structure by preaching in other men’s parishes and by preaching where there was no resident clergy. He looked upon all the world as his parish and claimed to follow the rules of God rather than man.

God in Scripture commands me, according to my power, to instruct the ignorant, reform the wicked, confirm the virtuous. Man forbids me to do this in another man’s parish; that is, in effect, (forbids me) to do it at all, seeing I have now no parish of my own, nor probably ever shall. Whom, then, shall I hear, God or man?8Q

Wesley stirred persons’ emotions and persuaded them to join the Methodist societies. He often convinced the local establish- ment that he was a destructive element within the community, for his words “undermined the patriarchal authority of the gentry and clergy alike by his scorching critique of the vices of the ‘polite world’ and the worldliness of the ‘carnal’ clergyItJ0 Through emphasis and the example of his own rigid self-discipline-even a sympathetic interpreter called him an “obsessive-compulsive neurotic”-he made his presence and his power constantly felt.”

The immediate response to Wesley’s preaching was an emo- tional outpouring among the people. Called “enthusiasm” by his critics, such behavior was viewed by many followers as a sign of God’s working among the people, though Wesley was skeptical concerning the meaning of some of the emotional responses and recognized the pathological nature of some incidents.42 A com-

=Wesley to James Hervey, March 20, 1739, in Outler, John Wesley, 72. a Walsh, “Methodism and the Mob,” 218-19.

Albert Outler, Evangelism in the Wesleyan Spirit (Nashville, 1971), 18. e R . A. Knox, Enthusiasm (Oxford, 1950). Among Wesley’s critics was George

Lavington, Bishop of Exeter, who published “The Enthusiasm of Methodists and Papists Compared” (1749). Wesley replied to Lavington in a series of letters reprinted in Works 9. Knox places the Evangelical Revival within the context of historic “enthusiasm,” which had been a part of the Christian tradition since the era of the Primitive Church.

45 1

The Historian parison of many of these emotional outbursts indicates that they were more than a contrived response induced by the emotion- charged atmosphere which surrounded the evangelical preaching. The dynamics leading to the behavior were not always identical. I t occurred in large groups and small, arose among persons seek- ing religious experience, and happened to hecklers and skeptics. Sometimes several persons were affected simultaneously, but iso- lated cases are noted. The mixed nature of the crowds and the diverse dynamics apparently at work indicate that the preacher’s words were affecting lives at various levels. The symptoms also varied. Wesley recorded instances of fainting, trances, bodily convulsions, and visions. Many of those who responded rejoiced, cried out, prayed, roared, confessed, declared or spoke in a strange language. There appears to have been an individualistic, spontan- eous, anarchic power released among the listeners. 48

Such behavior is not necessarily a sign of pathological emo- tional disturbance; rather, it resembles the behavior of a pre- verbal child “crying out” in order to express feelings for which i t has no other language. By freeing the repressed emotions and allowing them personal expression, the Methodist preaching en- couraged the formation of a primitive language of social protest, directed not only against the established ecclesiastical order, but against a world view which basically ignored the needs, problems, and pain of the lower classes.

That such social protest was encouraged by the Methodist preaching is indicated by the ensuing behavior of the Methodists. The act of going to hear the Methodist preacher was a protest against the status quo and was understood to be so by both adherents and opponents. In London in 1742 a mob tore down part of the building where Wesley was preaching. At Darlaston in I744 mobs, “hired for the purpose by their betters, . . . openly

”Below is a list of the various types of behavior noted by Wesley in his Journal, which comprises the first four volumes of the Works. I t is not always possible to know with precision what behavior Wesley is describing:

“rejoices evermore”: 1: 380, 2: 115, “prays without ceasing”: 1: 380, 2: 504; “hearing voices”: 2: 219-20, 500; “control of anger, pride, and other evil”: 2: 80, 219-20; 3: 235; “end drinking”: 1: 501; 2: 226-27; “crying out in public”: 1: 174-75, 189; 2: 91, 498, 501; 3: 107, 139; “fainting, falling into a fit, convulsions”: 1: 206, 2: 498, 499,500, 504; “roaring”: 1: 187; 2: 500, 502-3; 3: 234; “personal quiet confession”: 2: 226-27; “sweating”: 2: 189; “pathological behavior” (sometimes relieved): 1: 174; 2: 373, 504; “visions”: 2: 22, 26, 114, 499, 500; “declaring things”: 2: 113, 499; “economic well-being”: 2: 341; “Speaking in a strange language, laughter”: 2: 501.

The editors of the Works listed no instance of conversion in the Index for volume 4. Wesley’s Journal (September 13, 1773-October 24, 1790). This may indicate Wesley’s increasing concern for order among the Methodists and the decline of enthusiasm in his later years.

452

John Wesley declared they would destroy every Methodist in the country.’” 44

Such outbreaks hardly constituted class warfare, but it is signi- ficant that Wesley believed his words would be more readiily heard by colliers than by gentlemen. T o the established author- ities the Methodist preachers and societies threatened public order and entrenched interests.

Two aspects of the movement gave es ecial cause for alarm. First, in an age when the agencies o P government were de- cidedly weak and decentralized, Methodism looked the more sinister because of its highly articulated and nationwide or- ganization. Secondly, i t addressed itself primarily to the poor, whom it drilled into disci lined cadres which all owed their

ities. 45

However, Wesley directed the Methodist energies toward personal religious commitment, not social revolution. In 1790, shortly before his death, he wrote: “As long as I live, the people shall have no share in choosing either stewards or leaders among the Methodists. We have not, and never had any such custom. We are no republicans, and never intended to be.”46

The lay preachers presented a more direct challenge to t:c- clesiastical and political authority. Under Wesley’s direction they served as local spokesmen and disciplinarians for the societies. Drawn from the lower classes, with no political connections, with- out formal education, claiming experience and conviction as credentials, they assumed positions of leadership among the people. Such democratization and levelling was in opposition to the hierarchical church-state structure. As their numbers grew, the lay preachers also posed a threat to Wesley’s authority, and shortly after his death they led the Methodists in forming a sepa- rate denomination.

IV John Wesley’s preaching indicates that he was in one sense

an ecclesiastical iconoclast. Through itinerant field-preaching lie attacked local clerical anthority and assailed the Church of Eng- land for its apathy. When he preached to the colliers and factory workers, he exposed the inadequacy of the parish system and the upper-class interests of the church hierarchy.

Wesley was, however, more than a religious iconoclast; he initiated a religious awakening which had potential for instigating

“Wesley, Works 1 (Journal, January 25, 1742; March 6, 1744: September 12.

aWalsh, “Methodism and the Mob,” 218.

allegiance to leaders far E eyond the reach of local author-

1745): 353-54, 452-54, 517.

Wesley, Works 12 (Wesley to -, January 19, 1790): 455.

453

The Historian social revolution. By acknowledging the workers, unemployed, transients, and other groups of the lower orders, he stirred un- spoken feelings and brought to national consciousness an ignored and unsettled section of society. By claiming that the lower orders were more open to experiential religion than were the upper classes, Wesley suggested a source of lower-class identity. In recognizing the needs and aspirations of the working people and providing them with a structure through which such needs and aspirations could be made known, he opened the way to a lower- class social protest.

The Methodist awakening did stir some embryonic forms of protest among the people. Outbursts of religious emotion ex- pressed psychological and social stress. In order to hear the preachers, persons faced hostile mobs, and converts joined the Methodist societies when to do so incurred the suspicion and re- sentment of local authorities. Among the converts a few men and women overcame feelings of inferiority and deference; some even became lay preachers.

The potential for social protest, however, was only faintly realized. The discipline which Wesley imposed upon the societies precluded radical and innovative challenges to the political and social order. His desire to keep the Methodists within the Church of England and his own authoritarian ideals denied to the Method- ists democratic and popular forms of organization. Thus the emotions awakened by the evangelical preaching were refused full expression. Furthermore, as evangelicalism became more commonplace, the hostility of the upper classes waned. The convictional distinctions concerning class susceptibility to evan- gelical religion became blurred, and Methodism’s identification with the lower orders weakened.

Wesley never allowed his convictional world view to develop so that it could embrace the social protest inherent in his preach- ing and the popular response to it. For him God intervened in human life to change persons, not the social order. His under- standing of the Convictor within his world view also worked against the inclusion of social protest. Though his own conversion and the sermons preached in 1739 indicate that he viewed God in terms of the loving, liberating Christ, the consistent desire for order expressed through the Discipline reveals his Convictor as a God of order and authority. Institutionally, the God of order reigned. The primitive protest had, however, been voiced, and that protest would remain as a constant, though often weak, element in Methodism.‘?

*‘E. J. Hobsbawn, “Methodism and the Threat of Revolution in Britain,’’ History Today 7 (February 1957): 115-24.

454