Wesley's Designated Successor: The Life, Letters, and Literary Labours of the Rev. John William Fletcher, Vicar of Madeley, ShropshireTyerman, L. (Luke)
Religion
Wesley's Designated Successor: The Life, Letters, and Literary Labours of the Rev. John William Fletcher, Vicar of Madeley, Shropshire
Tyerman, L. (Luke)
Fletcher, John, 1729-1785
Remembering the confidential and warm friendship that had existed
between Fletcher and the Countess of Huntingdon and her nephew, Walter
Shirley, it must be admitted that these “expostulations” were pungent;
but they were provoked by the arrogance of the offenders. It is true, as
already stated, that, on the evening before Wesley’s Conference
assembled, her ladyship and Shirley wrote letters to Wesley containing
half-hearted apologies for their “arbitrary way of proceeding” in the
“Circular Letter.” “It must be acknowledged,” said Shirley, “that, upon
the whole, the Circular Letter was too hastily drawn up and improperly
expressed; and, therefore, for the _offensive expressions_ in it, we
desire we may be hereby understood to make every suitable submission to
you, Sir, and to the gentlemen of the Conference.”[244] The apology was
proper; but it was not sufficient. The “Circular Letter,” branding
Wesley as a dreadful heretic, had been sent to a large number of
“principal persons, both clergy and laity,” throughout the three
kingdoms; whereas the letters of the Countess and her nephew were
private ones, addressed only to Wesley and his preachers. Moreover, the
apology was accompanied with a threat.
Footnote 244:
Shirley’s “Narrative.”
“I cannot but wish,” wrote Shirley, “that the recantation of the
Circular Letter may prevail as an example for the recantation of the
‘Minutes.’ If I should be unhappily disappointed in this respect, I
shall feel myself bound in conscience to yield my public testimony
against such doctrines as these, which appear to me subversive of the
_fundamentals_ of Christianity.”[245]
Footnote 245:
Shirley’s “Narrative.”
And, once more, the apology, such as it was, was sent too late, for
Fletcher had already written his “Vindication” of Wesley’s “Minutes;”
the manuscript had been sent to Wesley, and Wesley had revised it, and
committed it to the press.
The war was begun, and we must follow it to its termination, _so far as
Fletcher is concerned_; for it is impossible, in a work like this, to
notice _all_ the pamphlets that were published. Those who wish for
further information may turn to the “Life and Times of Wesley.”
CHAPTER IX.
_SECOND CHECK TO ANTINOMIANISM_
1771.
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