JOHN WESLEY AND THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.

Southland Times, Issue 1677, 17 December 1872, Page 2

JOHN WESLEY AND THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.

«i (TO THE EDiTOB OP THE TIMES ) Sir, — I would have sent this earlier, but that I knew you were not " hard up" for matter, and, in the fulne»3 of jour material, it was possible you might consign my production to the (i waste basket," although not a "choice exDtic" but purely indigenous. lam willing, however, to rely on your editori.il discretion — admission or non-admission — as the case may be. Mr Rishworth is in error in assuming ths " unauthenticity' 1 of the letter forwarded by your correspon lent, and ascribed to John Wesley. " Prima facie" evidence is not needed when documentary evidence exists. A " superficial" reader may pass over important paragraphs or portions of a work, but his negligence will not obliterate the passages. Unfortunately, among Wesleyans of the present day, ignorance of Mr Wesley's writings is the rule, and not the exception, an I arc >rdingly we find the letter vrhieh i» stigmatize! by JI? A. as "absurd, prejudiced, and uncharitable in tha extreme," form* one of a series of ietters by Mr Wesley to Miss Bishop, published by the W«sleyan Book Room, and bearing the official imprimatur of the Connoxioiial printer. Haying compared your publication with that by tha Conference, 1 am able to say that, with the exception of a few trivial verbal difforeicas, not in any W &J aflVct' n g the sense, the letters are identical. There is no question raised in the [ Conferential edition of Mr Wesley's w^rks as to the genuineness of this parihular letter ; and | therefore, if circumstances have recently come to light which throw doubt thereupon, I hold that Mr K. should have mentioned them. I contend that if the question of authenticity had to be decided by " prlma facie" evidence, there ia no doubt ms to the letter being the veritable production of Mr Wesley. A distinguishing feature in the character of Mr Wesley, wa3 his plain and straightforward method of dealing with every matter which he han led. None could doubt his meaning, and such was his horror of tiia " Calvinistic heresy," that it breathes in almost every page of his writing. He would give it no quarter, and allowed it no compromise, as a dea-ilv enemy (in his opinion) of the human race. i His views as to the position of the people who had been rawed up and quickened unier his instrumentality, are no less decisive ; and no leas plain are the intimations by him as to the course which he desired they should pursue in reference to the Ohurch of England. In a letter to the Ray. F. Garrettson, he says, " Where thero is any church service, I do not approve of any appointment the same hour, because I love the Cnurch of England, and would assist, not oppose it, all I can." To Mr Win, Percival, he says, " I commend sister Percival for having her child baptized there (he Church of England). By all means go to Church as often a3 you can, and exhort all Methodists to do so— they that are enemios to the Church are enemies to me." If I dared to take up your space, I could cite very many passages equally conclusive with the foregoing, and if Dt Kigg hare proved the contrary to have been Mr Wealey's original or long held intent, he has proved a non-entity. It must, however, in fairness be stated that Dr Rigg's book has been written solely for the Wesleyans of the present day, not being (as I suppose) intended for circulation beyond the connexion, and in such case, it is at least open to the suspicion of having been written in support of a foregone conclusion. In my early days, Wesleyan Methodists strongly objected to be called " dissenters." In any poliiical movement, they invariably refused to allow themselves to be classed with dissenters, and a frequent attendance at the Church of England was a common practice. lam Methodist born and reared, yet with my brothers was sent to school to a Church of England clergyman, where repetition of tho Church of England Catechism, at least once a week, formed part of the school course ; the children of other Methodist parents also attended, and no objection was ever made (that I heard) to the Church of England formula. I do not share Mr Rishworth's dread of the effects of the letter sent by your correspondent ; neither did the moral turpitude of the act appear to me so glaring. 1 regarded the insertion as one of the efforts of sectarianism, which will in— erita&ly now and vticn crop out, •«> long a« sectarianism i» permitted to hold its present improper prominence. In this category common justice compels me also to class Mr Rishworth'* letter. I think it very probable that an Episcopalian will demur to Mr Rishworth's ruling, and may assign to Episcopalianism " the greon pastures," while outside are " the barren mountains." He will have some ahadow of reason for this assignation, in the fact that a very large portion of the Church of England formula is adopted, "and is in actual use, by a considerable section of the Wesleyaa community.

I here avow my decided preference for the I services and private exercises of the Wesleyan Methodists, but liks John Wesley, " I love the Church of England," and I think meanly of the intelligence and piety of any person who cannot (or professes he cannot) worship God according to its sublime ritualHaving (as I think) handled the matter fairly, »nd- without any desire or design of giving offence, whatever may be the issue, I am, ie, Thomas Pebkins.