'The case was argued for four days; the court was thronged; the interest of the spectators was intense; the grey heads of many of the veterans of the Methodist ministry and laity-men who had battled through long and weary lives for their beloved cause-were distinguishable in the crowd. When it was perceived what the Lord Chancellor's conclusion must be, deep but controlled emotion spread through the assembly, tears flowed from many eyes, and when he finally pronounced judgment, it was felt that a momentous era in Methodism had been reached; that the broad seal of English law had been stamped upon the legislation of John Wesley; that the chapels, funds, and all the fundamental authorities of Wesleyan Methodism were secure for ages. In their authoritative review of this occurrence the Wesleyan Conference does not scruple to recognise Lord Lyndhurst "in his official capacity as a minister of God for good."'

46

This Erastian estimate of a Lord Chancellor sounds strangely from the upholders of the Power of the Keys' as entrusted to Wesleyan ministers, and provokes a momentary question whether it would have been as high had the judgment gone in favour of Dr. Warren. It is, however, but fair to say that Wesleyan authorities seem generally content with legal decisions; for in a similar case submitted to the Court of Chancery concerning the use of a chapel for the Wesleyan as against the New Connexion' Methodists, Dr. Bunting's biographer writes: Some very obvious propositions puzzle those who do 'not wish to understand them; and it is often well that they should be sifted through the intellects of great lawyers and 'judges, and there presented in their simple verity to those who have doubted them.'

The public worship celebrated in Methodist chapels has fallen into two distinct. types. On the one side stand the Liturgical Wesleyans; on the other the non-Liturgical Weslevans and all other Methodist communities. Wesleyanism combines both, and rejoices in a variable ritual. It retains in many of its congregations the traditions of its fathers, and Anglican rites still witness to the old alliance between it and the Church. The Book of Common Prayer is found in the hands of worshippers in many of its metropolitan chapels, and in some old Methodist centres in the provinces. A stranger attending these chapels in the morning would notice two striking divergences between morning prayer in an ordinary parish church and a Wesleyan chapel. The minister would wear no distinctive dress, neither gown nor bands being permitted,* and he would employ two extempore prayers, one be

Nor shall gowns or bands be used among us; or the title of reverend used at all.' 'Form of Discipline,' Peirce, p. 278.

fore and one after the sermon. A few smaller variations would strike him. A word or two in the Absolution might be omitted; the Queen might not be termed 'most religious,' bishops and curates' would give way to ministers of Thy Gospel,' but there would be no other striking alteration of importance. Were he to attend a celebration, he would find the celebrant standing on the north side, and giving out hymns during the celebration. The phrase the burden of them is intolerable' would be omitted; but in every other respect, except perhaps the manual acts, everything would follow the rubrics of the Anglican office. If he witnessed a public baptism he would find no sponsors, an extempore address to the parents taking the place of the instructions for them in the Prayer Book. The young Christian would not be signed with the sign of the cross, but the rest of the service would be familiar. Were the same visitor to be present at the evening service, he would find no Liturgy, but a Presbyterian form of worship-hymns, extempore prayers, a long sermon, and perhaps a public prayer meeting or an evening Communion. In the non-liturgical chapels both morning and evening service is of the same character. The afternoon service, which used to be a feature of Methodism in large towns, seems to have fallen into desuetude there, though it lingers in the country parishes. No minor Methodist sect retains the use of the Liturgy, nor does the Methodist Episcopal Church in America, although it was organised on a liturgical basis. The forms for the ordaining of ministers and the Office for the burial of the dead are borrowed from the English ritual. Attempts have frequently been made to revise the Prayer Book for Methodist use. Wesley commenced these fruitless labours; and the statute law of Methodism orders in its Wesleyan discipline that when service is held in Church hours either the English Liturgy, Wesley's abridgment of it, or at least the 'lessons appointed for the day shall be used.' But Wesley's revision was not popular; so that Adam Clarke, when consulted on the introduction of a Liturgy into a Wesleyan chapel, replied: Introduce the Church service in God's name, 'not in any abridgment (sic), but in the genuine original.' But there has always been a Dissenting element in Methodism, and this has clamoured for revision mainly on the old Puritan lines. Even where the Liturgy has not been used by themselves, these congregations have resented the adoption and approval by Wesleyanism of a form of words which they hold to be unsound and unsafe. To gratify this feeling, a committee of the Conference has been endeavouring for some time to

revise the Liturgy. The result is thus summarised in the chief literary organ of the Wesleyans:

'It seems useless,' says the 'London Quarterly,' 'to persevere in what seems to bring out so clearly division of sentiment. There are great numbers of ministers who would deprecate the alteration of a word in the communion service, and there are not a few who believe that the general tendency of the changes proposed in the office of baptism is to take out of it the doctrine which Methodism has always held. The introductory words of the baptismal service assert what Mr. Wesley asserts in his "Note" on John iii. 5, concerning "Water "and the Holy Ghost; " let that be retained. They contain, however, a few words which the whole connexion would agree to change.'

Another anonymous writer says there are those in Wesleyanism whose passionate love for the Liturgy can find no fainter expression than this: "I find no fault in it at all." It is apparent that many Wesleyans agree with their founder, who asks: Who denies that ye were then' (i.e. in Baptism) 'made children of God?' but the majority would repudiate the sentiment. Methodism in Great Britain has never attempted to organise a Church, although, as we see, it has continually assumed an independent position. It has, therefore, ignored the position of baptised children, and, having made meeting in class' the test of its membership, it has exalted the ticket on trial' into the gateway to the mystical body of Christ. Individuals have attempted to remedy this by devices. of a more or less ingenious character. But they are all based on the idea that baptism must be brought into some sort of relationship to the class meeting. The Methodist Episcopal Church has endeavoured to rectify this, but without success. Hints are found in some Methodist publications that Confirmation as administered in the Church would be advantageous if introduced into Methodism; but beyond the formation of catechumen classes, with the inevitable ticket of membership, nothing has been accomplished in this direction.

While Wesleyans alone of all cognate societies retain the Book of Common Prayer, they have all practically a Liturgy in the Wesley hymn-book, the different communities varying in the proportion of genuine Wesleyan hymns, the oldest body having retained more of the distinctive hymns than the other sects. While we gladly acknowledge that many noble lyrics, the product of the muse of Charles Wesley and of the felicity of metrical translation that was the special endowment of his brother, have become the common heritage of Englishspeaking Christians, though once peculiar to Methodists, we must remark on the many weak and unreal compositions that

disfigure this collection of hymns. Many of those most highly prized by Wesleyans are descriptive of such abnormal phases of experience as to render them alien from the commonwealth of Christendom. A cursory glance at the whole shows marked faults in spite of the curiously self-laudatory preface to the original edition, in which Wesley declares: 1. In these 'hymns there is no doggerel, no botches, nothing put in to fill up the rhyme, no feeble expletives. 2. Here is nothing turgid or bombast on the one hand, or low and creeping on the ́other. . . . 4. There are, allow me to say, both the purity, 'the strength, and the elegance of the English language, and 'at the same time the utmost simplicity and plainness suited 'to every capacity.' But it must not be supposed that this was an original work. It contains survivals of various theologies. Here lie side by side Watts and Doddridge, with their Nonconformity lost in Christianity; Ken, with his calm and sober piety; Brevint's high sacramental theories done into rhyme; Moravianism speaking through its best minstrels; the German pietist school with awe-struck recognition of the Divine Presence and profound thoughts of the primeval beauty of the Source of all being. Charles Wesley's lilting songs of triumph over persecuting mobs and many an echo from ancient victories stir the heart of the soldiers of Christ; while the Calvinist controversialist, Toplady, and Thomas Olivers, his opponent, unite to inspire Methodists with deep spiritual feelings Other hymns, however, in the Collection' tempt one to retort upon Wesley his own criticism upon certain Davidic psalms, and label them as unfit for the mouths of Christian congregations'-bitterly sarcastic, they are stinging epigrams, not spiritual songs. Some are intensely morbid, and a few offensively Pharisaic. But when all the deductions are made, there are reasons why Methodists should consider it a priceless 'treasure.' It is Methodism in metre, and a man who has analysed it knows the secret of the Methodist revival. A Wesleyan quotes from it with as keen a relish as a High Churchman quotes the Fathers. It is the end of all controversy to him, as the Tridentine decrees are to a Romanist. He reproduces it with the accuracy of a well-taught Presbyterian repeating the Catechism. He sings its jubilant iambics in enthusiastic missionary meetings in Yorkshire; he shouts its stanzas with startling emphasis above the roar of a Cornish revival that fearful and wonderful product of spiritual emotion and Celtic ardour; and when he makes the last confession of his faith amongst many witnesses, it is often in the words that the well-loved hymn-book supplies.

Methodism has an unmistakeable type of theology, although Wesleyanism has never drawn up either a Confession of Faith, after the fashion of the Reformed Churches on the Continent, or a creed rivalling in energy and compactness the well-known Roman Catholic symbols. The derived bodies in England have in some instances attempted in a loose fashion what their prototype has rather indicated than attempted; but Methodism has not imposed a creed upon its adherents. Wesley himself wrote upon theological subjects in a manner that sets all rules of dogmatic science at defiance. Since his day we have become accustomed to hear very unguarded utterances made by professed theologians, but even now it is startling to read such sentences as these in the writings of a teacher with pretensions to orthodoxy: One of the best tracts that great man, Dean Swift, wrote was his "Sermon on the Trinity." Herein he shows all who endeavoured to explain it have utterly lost their way. . . . It was in an evil hour that these explainers began their evil work. . . . I dare not insist on any man's using the word Trinity or Person.' In a similar strain, he says in another sermon: Neither does true religion consist in orthodoxy or right opinions. . . . A man may consent to all the creeds, and yet it is possible he may have no religion at all. . . . He may be almost as orthodox-as the devil; not indeed altogether, for every man errs in something, 'whereas we cannot well conceive him to hold any erroneous ' opinions.' In another passage, having enumerated all the essential points of difference between Churchmen and Dissenters, he dismisses them with a nonchalant farewell:

6

6

Let

these stand by; my only question at present is this, "Is thine heart right?" Not that he held his own opinions lightly, for he draws a strong contrast between himself and those who called themselves of a catholic spirit only because they were of a muddy understanding.' One pious wish in the preface to those Notes on the New Testament' which a grateful people have exalted into a standard of belief, is fraught with the spirit of true charity: Would to God that all the 'party names and unscriptural phrases and forms which have divided the Christian world were forgot; and that we might all agree to sit down together as humble loving disciples at the feet of our Master, to hear His word, to imbibe His spirit, ⚫ and to transcribe His life into our own!' Once, in an outburst of liberality, he boasted: Methodists alone do not insist on your holding this or that opinion, but they think and let think. Neither do they impose any particular mode of worship. .. Now, I do not know any other religious society

VOL. CLIV. NO. CCCXV.

с