Fors Clavigera (Volume 6 of 8): $b Letters to the workmen and labourers of Great BritainRuskin, John
General
Fors Clavigera (Volume 6 of 8): $b Letters to the workmen and labourers of Great Britain
Ruskin, John
Aesthetics; Conduct of life; Great Britain -- Social conditions -- 19th century; Social problems; Working class -- Great Britain
“The first contributions in the ‘Classes’ were made for the express
purpose of discharging a debt on a preaching house. Then they were
devoted ‘to the relief of the poor,’ there being at the time no
preachers dependent on the Society for support. After 1743, when
circuits had been formed and preachers stationed in certain localities,
their maintenance gradually became the principal charge upon the
Society’s funds. (See Smith’s ‘History of Methodism,’ vol. i., p. 669.)
In 1771 Wesley says expressly that the contributions are applied
‘towards the expenses of the Society.’ (b) (‘Journal,’ vol. iii., p.
205.) Certainly Methodism, thus supported, has done far more to benefit
the poor and raise them, than any amount of mere almsgiving could have
done. Methodist preachers have at least one sign of being in the
apostolical succession. They can say, with Paul, ‘as poor, yet making
many rich.’ (c)
“‘Going to law’ was altered by Mr. Wesley to ‘brother going to law with
brother,’ in order, no doubt, to bring the rule into verbal agreement
with 1 Cor. vi. 6. (d)
“‘Usury’ was defined by Mr. Wesley to be ‘unlawful interest,’ (e) in
accordance with the ordinary notions of his day. He was greatly in
advance of his age, yet he could scarcely have been expected to
anticipate the definition of Usury given, as far as I know, (f) for the
first time in Fors for August, 1876. I don’t see why we Methodists
should be charged with breaking the laws of Moses, David, and Christ
(Fors, p. 253), if we consider ‘old John Wesley’s’ definition to be as
good as the ‘modern idea.’
“Of course St. George, for whom I have the greatest respect and
admiration, will correct Mr. Sillar’s mistake.
“I am, Sir,
“Another Reader of Fors (which I wish you would sell a little cheaper),
and
“A Methodist Preacher.
“P.S.—Why should you not copy old John Wesley, and establish your St.
George’s Company on a legal basis? In 1784 he drew up a Deed of
Declaration, which was duly enrolled in Chancery. It stated the
purposes for which his Society was formed, and the mode in which it was
to be governed. A Deed of Trust was afterwards drawn up for one of our
chapels, reciting at length this Deed of Declaration, and all the
purposes for which the property was to be used. All our other property
is settled on the same trusts. A single line in each subsequent chapel
deed—stating that all the trusts are to be the same as those of the
‘Model Deed,’ as we call the first one—obviates the necessity and
expense of repeating a very long legal document.
“Success to St. George,—yet there is, I think, ‘a more excellent way.’”
a. Mr. Sillar’s letter did not appear in last month’s Fors. A small
portion of it appeared, in which I regret that Mr. Sillar so far
misunderstood John Wesley as to imagine him incapable of altering his
own rules so as to make them useless.
b. I wish the Wesleyans were the only Society whose contributions are
applied to no better purpose.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account