A

LETTER

TO THE

Reverend Dr. DURELL,

Vice-Chancellor of the University of Oxford.

OCCASIONED BY

A late EXPULSION of Six Students from Edmund-Hall.

Yea, and why even of yourselves judge ye not what is right?

Luke xii. 57.

Judge righteous judgment.

John vii. 24.

A

LETTER

TO THE

Reverend Dr. Durell.

London, April 12, 1768.

Reverend Sir,

YOU being a Master of Israel, and placed at the head of one of the most renowned seats of learning in the world, need not be informed, that the mission of the Holy Ghost is the one grand promise of the new, as the coming of Jesus Christ was the great promise of the Old Testament dispensation. “I will pray the Father, (says our blessed Lord to his almost disconsolate Disciples) and he shall give you another Comforter.” And again, “It is expedient for you, that I go away; for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart (it being the purchase of his all-atoning blood, and designed to be the immediate fruit and proof of the reality of his resurrection, and subsequent ascension into heaven) I will send him unto you.” And that they might know, that this Comforter was not to be confined to, or monopolized by them, but was to be of standing general use, he immediately gives them intimations of the design and nature of his office; and therefore adds, “and when he is come, he will convince the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment.”

Agreeable to this promise, he having ascended up on high, led captivity captive, and received this gift for men, the divine Paraclete, this Holy Ghost, “on the day of Pentecost, came down from heaven like a rushing mighty wind; and there appeared cloven tongues, like as of fire, and sat upon each of the Apostles.” The effects were immediate and visible; poor, illiterate fishermen, instantaneously commenced scholars, preachers, orators. And well they might; for, being filled with the Holy Ghost, as the Spirit gave them utterance, they began to speak with other tongues the wonderful things of God.

But what was all this divine apparatus, this divine preaching, this divine oratory intended for? The following verses inform us: the hearers of those wonderful things, the spectators of this transcendently amazing scene, “were pricked to the heart, and were made to cry out, Men and brethren, what shall we do? And the same day were added to this infant church about three thousand souls.” Here were proofs, substantial, incontestable proofs, of the reality of the resurrection and ascension, and likewise of the efficacy of the all-powerful intercession of their once crucified, but now exalted Lord; not only substantial and incontestable, but at the same time entirely suitable to the nature of his mission, who in the days of his flesh, by his doctrines and miracles declared, that his only design in coming into our world, was to save sinners.

Hence, no doubt, it is, that as the angels are sent forth to be ministring spirits, to minister to those who shall be heirs of salvation, that there is said to be “joy in heaven over every sinner that repenteth.” And as there is joy in heaven, so in proportion as men rise into the nature of angels, will there be joy also upon the same account amongst good men on earth. Accordingly, the lively oracles inform us, that “when the Apostles and Brethren which were in Judea heard that the Gentiles also had received the word of God, they glorified him, saying, then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.”

And conformably to this, we are told, that “when Barnabas came to Antioch, and saw the grace of God, he was glad.” And why? Because he was a good man, and full of the Holy Ghost and of faith. And as the same cause will always be productive of the same effect, persons endued with the same benign and godlike disposition with this good man, will always be glad when they see or hear of any scriptural marks, or practical evidences of true and undefiled religion, wrought in, or appearing upon any subject of divine grace whatsoever. And this joy must necessarily rise, in proportion as such subjects, either by their abilities, or circumstances, and situation in life, promise more important and extensive usefulness in the world and church of God.

But alas! how is this general joy damped, and the pleasing prospect almost totally eclipsed, by a late melancholy scene exhibited in that very place, from whence, as from a fountain, many of their preachers frequently and expresly pray, that pure streams may for ever flow, to water the city of the living God? You need not be told, reverend Sir, what place I mean: it was the famous university of Oxford. Nor need I mention the scene exhibited; it was a tribunal, a visitatorial tribunal, erected in Edmund-Hall; six pious students, who promised to be the salt of the earth, and lights of the world, entire friends to the doctrines and liturgy of our church, by a citation previously fixed upon the college door, were summoned to appear before this tribunal. They did appear; and, as some were pleased to term it, were tried, convicted, and to close the scene, in the chapel of the same hall, consecrated and set apart for nobler purposes, had the sentence of expulsion publicly read and pronounced against them.

So severe a sentence, in an age when almost every kind of proper discipline is held with so lax a rein, hath naturally excited a curiosity in all that have heard of it, to inquire, of what notable crime these delinquents may have been guilty, to deserve such uncommonly rigorous treatment. But how will their curiosity be turned into indignation, when they are told, that they were thus rigorously handled for doing no evil at all, and that “no fault could be found in them, save in the law of their God?”

But why speak I of David? When Jesus of Nazareth, David’s Lord, and David’s King, had for his reputed father a carpenter, and in all probability, as it was a common proverb among the Jews, that “he who did not teach his son a trade, taught him to be a thief;” he worked at the trade of a carpenter himself? For this, indeed, he was reproached and maligned; “Is not this, said they, the carpenter’s son? Nay, is not this the carpenter?” But who were those maligners? The greatest enemies to the power of godliness which the world ever saw, the Scribes and Pharisees; that “generation of vipers,” as John the Baptist calls them, who upon every occasion were spitting out their venom, and shooting forth their arrows, even bitter words, against that Son of man, even that Son of God, who, to display his sovereignty, and confound the wisdom of the worldly wise, chose poor fishermen to be his Apostles; and whose chief of the Apostles, though bred up at the feet of Gamaliel, both before and after his call to the apostleship, laboured with his own hands, and worked at the trade of a tent-maker.

Their being accustomed to prayer, whether with or without a form, I humbly apprehend, would by no means disqualify them for the private or public discharge of any part of their ministerial function. “In that day, that gospel-day, (these last days wherein we live) saith the great God, I will pour out a Spirit of grace and a Spirit of supplication upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem.” And the Apostle Paul speaks of it as the common privilege of all believers, that “the Holy Spirit helps their infirmities, and maketh intercession for them with groanings which cannot be uttered.” Forms of prayer, certainly, have their use; and take it altogether, our English liturgy is, without doubt, one of the most excellent established forms of public prayer in the world: but then, as no form, in the very nature of the thing, can possibly suit every particular case, it is to be feared that many must never pray, at least for the particular things they most stand in need of, if they are so to be tied up to their forms, that they cannot vary from them, or use free prayer at all.

The great Bishop Wilkins therefore wisely wrote an excellent treatise on the benefit and importance of this kind of prayer: and could our university-youth be trained up to use proper extempore prayer, both before and after sermon; in the opinion of all good judges, it would be as commendable, as that strange custom of putting off our auditories with what is called the bidding prayer; in which there is not one petition for a blessing upon the following sermon, and scarce any thing mentioned, but what hath been prayed for over and over again, in the preceding common service of our church.

The sick, the lame, the blind, the lepers that came to our Lord for healing, wanted no book to teach them how to express their wants. Though some were only poor beggars, and others, as the self-righteous Scribes and Pharisees superciliously chose to term them, “Gentile dogs,” yet, conscious of their wants, and having a heart-felt sense of their distress, “out of the abundance of their hearts their mouths spake;” and the compassionate Emmanuel, who came to heal our sicknesses and bear our infirmities, sent them away with a “Go in peace, thy faith hath made thee whole: be it unto thee even as thou wilt.”

Singing, composing, or reading hymns composed by others, and doing this in company, seems to be as little criminal, as praying extempore. When the last words of David are about to be recorded, he is not only stiled, “the son of Jesse, the man who was raised up on high, the anointed of the God of Jacob,” but the grand title of being “the sweet Psalmist of Israel,” brings up the rear. And “to teach and admonish one another in psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs,” is as truly a scriptural command, as “thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and thy neighbour as thyself.”

When Elisha the Prophet was about to prophesy before two kings, he called for a minstrel, on which he played, to sooth his ruffled passions, and prepare his heart the better for the reception of the Holy Spirit. And were the sons of the Prophets more frequently to entertain themselves thus, I believe it would be as suitable to the ministerial character, and recommend them as much, perhaps more, to all serious christians, than their tripping up their heels, skipping and dancing at the music of a ball-room, or playing even a first fiddle at a concert. And was the voice of spiritual melody more frequently heard by those who come occasionally to visit our colleges, it might be as much to the honour of the university, as the more common and too, too frequent noise of box and dice, at the unlawful games of hazard and back-gammon.

It is recorded in the Old Testament, that in a degenerate age, “those that feared the Lord spake often one to another; that the Lord hearkened and heard, and that a book of remembrance was written before him for those that feared the Lord, and thought on his name: and they shall be mine in that day, saith the Lord, when I make up my jewels; and I will spare them as a man spareth his own son that serveth him.” Thus it was in the Old Testament times. Nor are such meetings mentioned with less approbation in the new: for therein, in order that we may hold the profession of our faith without wavering, we are commanded to “consider one another, to provoke unto love and to good works; not forsaking the assembling ourselves together, but exhorting one another, and so much the more, as we see the day approaching.” Nay, one immediate consequence of that grand effusion of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost, we are told, was this, that “they who gladly received the word, and were baptized, continued stedfast in the Apostles doctrine, in fellowship, in breaking of bread, and in prayer.” This is a short, but withal a full and blessed account of the first truly apostolic primitive church; and we may venture to affirm, that as we are more or less partakers of a true apostolic primitive spirit, such kind of religious, fellowship-meetings, will in proportion increase or decrease among us. To talk therefore, or write, or preach against, or by private persuasion or open violence to oppose, or endeavour to suppress, and discountenance such kind of religious societies, is flying, as it were, in the very face of the scriptures of truth, and of the Holy Ghost himself.

The private meetings that are in any wise deemed and denounced illegal, are such, and such only, as are seditious, and composed of seditious persons; who associate, indeed under a pretence of religion, but in reality to plot against the state. The sooner any that can be convicted of this, are made to forsake the assembling themselves together, the better; and though composed of a threefold, three hundred fold, nay a three thousand fold cord, no matter if, like the cords wherewith the Philistines bound Sampson, they were immediately broken. But as nothing of this nature can with the least shadow of truth be objected against the meetings and societies frequented by these students, but quite the contrary urged in their favour; if scripture and the practice of the primitive christians are to be our guides, they ought not only to be permitted, but be countenanced and encouraged by every true lover of our church and nation.

And supposing, that in any such religious society one of them should venture now and then to drop a word of exhortation, or even attempt in a small degree to open, expound, or enlarge upon some practical text of scripture, how can even this be looked upon as illegal, much less sinful, or worthy of expulsion? when, I could almost say, it is a necessary preparation for the future service of the sanctuary. To be “apt to teach,” is one indispensable qualification required by scripture in a Bishop and Presbyter. But how can this aptness or an habit of teaching be acquired, without the exercise of previous acts? Or what business is there in the world, even from the lowest mechanic, to the highest profession amongst us, (except that of divinity) wherein pupils, clerks, nay common apprentices, are not by previous exercises trained up for a complete proficiency in their respective callings and occupations?

As for the reports of these young students being accused or condemned, for barely being acquainted with, or the occasional visitors of some of the most laborious, pains-taking, worthy parish-ministers in England, it is almost altogether incredible. And yet the standers-by, as well as the supposed culprits themselves, we are informed, aver this to be real matter of fact: attended with this melancholy aggravation, that they were hissed at, pushed about, and treated in a manner that the vilest criminal is not allowed to be treated, either at the Old-Baily, or any court of justice in the kingdom. We are likewise told, that a copy of their indictment was asked for, but denied them; and not only so, but that one, from whose polite behaviour in the worldly walk, better things might have been expected, was heard to say, as he came out of chapel, to their grand accuser, after sentence of expulsion was pronounced, that “he would have the thanks of the whole university for that day’s work.”

But, reverend Sir, may we not presume to hope, that this voluntary speaker for the whole university, whoever he be, it maketh no matter to me, was somewhat out, and mistaken in his calculation. For it seems, not above three or four doctors, if so many, were present, at least sat as judges at this extraordinary tribunal. The worthy Provost of Queen’s (and undoubtedly many other worthy heads of houses were and are like-minded) was for prescribing more lenient methods; and all are glad to hear, that these young students worthy principal, who must necessarily be supposed to be the best judge of their principles, practices, and qualifications, boldly stood up in their defence, asserted their innocence, confronted their accusers, and brought in books to vindicate both their principles and conduct. But how this worthy principal, as well as the pupils, were treated, is best known to those who had an active hand in all.

However, as the Holy Ghost hath left it upon record, to the honour of Nicodemus, that he stood up in defence of our Lord before the whole Jewish sanhedrim, and was not consenting to his death; so wherever this act of expulsion is recorded (and recorded it will be, even to latest posterity) it will be mentioned to the honour of Doctor Dixon, (and for acting thus he will have the thanks of all moderate, serious, sober-minded christians in the three kingdoms) that he had no hand in, but did all he possibly could to prevent these young mens expulsion. An expulsion for articles of impeachment to which indeed the accused pleaded guilty; but for articles which (wherever hereafter they may be called to minister in holy things) will be their best testimonial; and their expulsion for holding and confessing those articles, the strongest letters of recommendation.

But what a mercy is it, reverend Sir, that we live under a free government, under a King whose royal grandfather repeatedly declared (and he was as good as his word through a long and glorious reign) that there should be no persecution in his time; under a King who in his first most gracious and never to be forgotten speech from the throne, gave his people the strongest assurances “that it was his fixt purpose, as the best means to draw down the divine favour on his reign, to countenance and encourage the practice of true religion and virtue, and maintain the toleration inviolable.”

That both students and common people will be in danger of being tempted by such violent proceedings, to put themselves under the act of toleration, may easily be foreseen: and it may as easily be guessed, how such treatment will necessarily discourage serious people from sending their sons to the university, at least to the university of Oxford; and at the same time will furnish them with a new argument for entering their youth in some of our dissenting academies, where they will be in no danger, it is presumed, of being expelled for singing hymns, speaking a little now and then in a religious society, or using extempore prayer.

You will excuse this freedom, Reverend Sir.

Agitur de vitâ et sanguine turni.

Love to God, love to mankind in general, and love to that university, that alma mater where I had the honour of being educated, and, what is infinitely more, where I had the happiness of receiving the witness of the Spirit of God in my heart, all together constrain me.

The news of these young mens expulsion hath made, and will make the ears of all who have heard, or shall hear of it, to tingle: and therefore if some do not speak, and use great plainness of speech too, the very stones would, as it were, cry out against us. In respect to myself, Reverend Sir, I hope, that in taking the freedom of troubling you with this, I do not justly incur the censure of acting as a busy-body in other mens matters. For, whatever other pretences may be made, such as disqualification in respect to learning, age, the being of trades, &c. &c. &c. (Nugæ tricæque calendæ) it is notorious and obvious to all intelligent persons, that the grand cause of these young mens expulsion was this, namely, that they were either real or reputed Methodists. An honour this indeed, unwittingly put on Methodists, whoever or whatever they be; since scarce any now-a days can pray extempore, sing hymns, go to church or meeting, and abound in other acts of devotion, but they must be immediately dubbed Methodists. I say, dubbed Methodists; for it is not a name given to them by themselves, but was imposed on them by some of their fellow students and contemporaries in the university.

If you should desire, Reverend Sir, a definition of Methodism itself, as well as of a Methodist, you may easily be gratified. It is no more nor less than “faith working by love. A holy method of living and dying, to the glory of God.” It is an universal morality, founded upon the love of God shed abroad in the heart by the Holy Ghost: or, to keep to the exact terms made use of in the last collect of our excellent liturgy, it is “the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Ghost;” which we cannot go to church or chapel on Sundays, holidays, or other common days, without praying, not that it may be driven from, but be with us all evermore.

But think you, Reverend Sir, that this is the way to stop the progress of this enthusiasm? Or rather, may we not imagine that this very act of expulsion will be a means of furthering and promoting its progress far and near? To speak my own thoughts, I am fully persuaded, that if such unscriptural methods of stopping this enthusiasm be pursued further, it will be only like cutting off the Lyrnean head; instead of one, an hundred will spring up.

This is a modern kind of enthusiasm, Reverend Sir, which the true old Methodists always did, and I trust always will abjure, detest and abhor. If worldly church preferments had been their aim, some of them at least might have had worldly ladders enough let down to them to climb up by: but having received a kind of apostolical commission at their ordination, when those who profess themselves lineal successors of the Apostles, said unto them, “Receive ye the Holy Ghost now committed unto you by the imposition of our hands:” they would fain keep up and maintain something of the dignity of an apostolic character; and therefore, without ever so much as designing to enter into any political cabals, or civil or church factions whatsoever, without turning to the right hand or the left, or troubling the world with so much as one single sermon or pamphlet, on the bare externals of religion; they have endeavoured to have but one thing in view, namely, to determine to think of nothing, to know nothing, and to preach of nothing but Jesus Christ, and him crucified; to spend and be spent for the good of souls, and to glory in nothing save in the cross of Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto them and they unto the world.

It is true, by thinking and acting thus, the Methodists have been, and it is presumed always will be, charged and condemned by men of corrupt minds, as thinking and acting irregularly and disorderly: but as such a charge, in the very nature of the thing, supposes a deviation from some settled standing rule, they would humbly ask, wherein the irregularity and disorderliness of this way of acting and thinking doth specifically consist? Is it irregular and disorderly to be “instant in season and out of season?” Is it irregular and disorderly to do what every Bishop at the very time of our being ordained priests positively tells us pertaineth to their office, “to seek after the children of God, scattered abroad in this naughty world?” Is it irregular and disorderly after we have established the truth of what we deliver in our sermons by scripture proofs, further to confirm and illustrate them by repeated and particular quotations, taken from the liturgy, articles, and homilies of our established church? Is it irregular and disorderly to fill her pews, to croud her communion tables, and to recommend a frequent and constant devout attendance upon her public offices and services? Or, supposing they should, merely by caprice or prejudice, be denied the privilege of preaching within the church, can it be justly termed irregular or disorderly, at least can it possibly be looked upon as criminal, to preach the same truths, to make use of the same kind of illustrations, to repeat the self-same recommendations without the church walls, in the fields, or any other place whatsoever?

If then, Reverend Sir, for this and such like things we are accounted irregular and disorderly, we are truly sorry for it: sorry, but not upon our own accounts, having the testimony of a good conscience that we act with a single eye, and in direct conformity to the authority of the word of God: but we are sorry, barely on account of our impeachers and condemners, especially for those, who being set apart for the ministerial office, and loaded with ecclesiastical preferments, preach very seldom, or not at all; or, if they do preach now and then, preach only as though they were barely reading wall-lectures, and seldom or ever so much as mention or quote the homilies of our church, though they have subscribed to an article which says, that “they contain godly and wholesome doctrine, and which judges them to be read in churches by the ministers diligently and distinctly, that they may be understood of the people.” It is to be feared, that it is owing to such irregularity and disorder as this, that when our people hear of our articles or homilies quoted by some few in the pulpit, that they are ready to cry out, “What new doctrine is this? Thou bringest certain strange things to our ears:” At least if it is not so at home, I am sure it is abroad. Hence it was that about three years ago, after I had been preaching to a very large auditory in one of the most polite places on the continent of America, and in preaching, as is my usual custom, had strongly been recommending the book of homilies, numbers were stirred up to go to the stores to purchase them: but upon enquiring after the book of homilies, the storekeeper, surprized at the novelty of the word homilies, begged leave to know what muslins they meant, and whether they were not hummims.

I have dwelt the longer upon this particular, Reverend Sir, because the present learned Bishop of Gloucester, in his late volume, intitled, “The Doctrine of Grace,” is pleased to observe more than once, that he finds fault not so much with the matter, as the manner of the Methodists preaching. But if by the manner, his Lordship would have us to understand, not their manner of preaching in the field, but the manner of their delivery, whether in the church or field, I would humbly ask his Lordship, if he ever heard any of them preach? If not, doth our law condemn any man, or any set of men, unheard? And I would humbly enquire further of his Lordship, and all others whom it may concern, how they would have them or any others to preach?

But why go I to the bar or stage to fetch vouchers in defence of earnestness in heart and action, when speaking for the most High God, and offering salvation to precious and immortal souls, for whom the ever-adorable Mediator shed his precious blood. You know, Reverend Sir, the character given of Bucolspherus, one of the Reformers, Vividus vultus, vividi oculi, vividæ manus, denique omnia vivida. You have also heard of a Prophet who was commanded by the Lord God himself, to smite with his hand, and stamp with his foot; and gospel-ministers in general are commanded to “cry aloud, and spare not, and to lift up their voices like trumpets.” But why refer I even to Reformers or Prophets? Rather let me mention the God and Saviour of all, even our Lord Jesus Christ; on whose manner of preaching, the multitudes that followed him, when he came down from the mount, made this just observation, that “He spake as one having authority, and not as the scribes.” And after his resurrection, when beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself, the two disciples at Emmaus said one to another, “Did not our hearts burn within us while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?” And I believe we may venture to affirm, that if preachers in general spake and opened the scriptures more under the influence and energy of his blessed Spirit, whether in consecrated or unconsecrated ground, within or without doors, they would find their hearers hearts in a degree would burn within them too.

Your willing servant for Christ’s sake,

George Whitefield.