Wesley foresaw the probability, and indeed the certainty, of such changes being made, and he also lamented Fletcher’s decision. Thirteen years afterwards, in commenting upon Fletcher’s letter to himself, he wrote:— “‘Providence,’ says he, ‘visibly appointed me to that office’ [Wesley’s assistant] ‘many years ago.’ Is it any wonder then that he should now be _in doubt_ whether he did right in confining himself to one spot? The more I reflect upon it, the more I am convinced he had great reason to doubt this. I can never believe it was the will of God that such a burning and shining light should be _hid under a bushel_. No; instead of being confined to a country village, it ought to have shone in every corner of our land. He was full as much called to sound an alarm through all the nation as Mr. Whitefield himself. Nay, abundantly more so; seeing he was far better qualified for that important work. He had a more striking person, equally good breeding, an equally winning address, together with a richer flow of fancy, a stronger understanding; a far greater treasure of learning, both in languages, philosophy, philology, and divinity; and, above all (which I can speak with fuller assurance, because I had a thorough knowledge both of one and the other), a more deep and constant communion with the Father, and with the Son, Jesus Christ. “And yet let not any one imagine that I depreciate Mr. Whitefield, or undervalue the grace of God and the extraordinary gifts which his great Master vouchsafed unto him. I believe he was highly favoured of God; yea, that he was one of the most eminent ministers that has appeared in England, or perhaps in the world, during the present century. Yet I must own I have known many fully equal to Mr. Whitefield, both in holy tempers and holiness of conversation; but one equal herein to Mr. Fletcher I have not known; no, not in a life of fourscore years.”[282] Footnote 282: Wesley’s “Life of Fletcher,” p. 68. No wonder that Wesley lamented the course taken by his wished-for successor; but it is rather difficult to say why Wesley should cast upon him loving blame for confining his light “to a country village.” Fletcher’s hands were full of literary works, by means of which he had defended, and continued to defend, the doctrines which it was the object of Wesley’s life to propagate. Besides, in about a year after Wesley made his proposal, Fletcher’s health began to fail, and never after that was his physical vigour such as to enable him to undertake the laborious itinerancy which Wesley contemplated and desired. Upon the whole, it is an open question whether Fletcher did not render greater service to Wesley and the Methodists by continuing his literary defence of their great and glorious doctrines than he would have done if he had accepted Wesley’s invitation to go into training to become his successor.