History Of Methodist Reform, Volume I - Media Sabda Org

with the hope that, whenever such an event should take place, there would be found, perhaps, a third
part of the people in the Societies who would have judgment and virtue enough left to withstand it,
and continue the connection on the original plan. How far his expectations will be realized, time
[10]
must discover." It was never realized, the people having little voice under the paternal system of
the Wesleys, while the spirit of separation was as rife with them as with many of the preachers.
Largely, however, he had the eye of a seer.
1756-57 finds him still itinerating. In the latter year he made his last considerable journey from
Manchester to Leeds. He afterward divided his labors between London and Bristol, having as quietly
as possible dropped out of official relation, principally for the reasons that his inflexible opposition
to separation made him enemies among the prominent preachers, and his high standard of
qualification for lay-preachers united all the aspiring class against him; and they were not slow to
whisper to John, ever ready to hear and believe reports, that Charles was being alienated from
Methodism. Whitehead says: "Mr. Charles being fully aware of all this, and wishing to avoid a low
and illiberal opposition, and especially occasions of frequent difference with his brother, thought it
best to retire from a situation in which all his words and actions were artfully misconstrued and
misrepresented; and from having any share in the government of the Societies, which he saw, or
thought he saw, was approaching toward a system of human policy that in the end could not be
carried on without sometimes having recourse to the arts of misrepresentation and deception. These
he abhorred in all persons, but when practiced under the mask of religion they always appeared to
[11]
him more detestable." Methodist annalists, because for the most part special champions of John
Wesley and his peculiar methods, are severe in their animadversions of him for this step, but it
cannot be denied that he preserved his logical consistency, which cannot be affirmed of his brother's
ecclesiastical course. In 1758 he published his testimony on the subject of separation, the gist of it
being John's twelve reasons for adhering to the National Church; for, strange as it may seem, to the
close of his life John strenuously maintained that he would die a member of it and had no intention
for himself or the Methodists to separate from it either in Britain or America.
For thirty more years Charles continued to preach for the Societies, and kept up an affectionate
correspondence with his brother, protesting, however, with tongue and pen against the so-called
ordinations for America in 1784; and when, in 1786, John ordained more of the English preachers,
he republished their mutual protest against separation. John's logical divergence and change of mind
and measures will be fully considered in their proper place, with such apology as himself and others
have made for it. As the breach widened between the brothers on this subject, — never, however,
affecting their personal relations, — Charles made final answer to John's determination to ordain.
It betrays a tinge of sarcasm. "Stand to your proposal: let us 'agree to differ.' I leave America and
Scotland to your latest thought and recognition: only observing now that you are exactly right: 'he
did nothing before he asked me' (referring to John's plea that he had always consulted his brother).
True, he asked your leave to ordain two more preachers, before he ordained them: but while your
answer was coming to prohibit him, he took care to ordain them both. Therefore, his asking you was
a mere compliment. This I should not mention, but out of concern for your authority. Keep it while
you live; and after your death, deter digniori — or, rather, dignioribus. You cannot settle the
succession: you cannot divine how God will settle it." [12]