A Letter to the Rev. Mr. Thomas Maxfield Year: 1778 I was a little surprised to read, in a late publication of yours, the following assertions : 1. Thomas Maxfield was "some of the first-fruits of Mr. Whitefield's ministry." 2. "When he went abroad, he delivered me, and many thousands more, into the hands of those he thought he could have trusted them with, and who would have given them back to him again at his return. But, alas! it was not so." (Ibid.) "I heard Mr. Whitefield say, at the Tabernacle, in the presence of five or six Ministers, to Mr. a little before he left England for the last time, 'I delivered thirty thou sand people into the hands of your brother and you, when I went abroad. And by the time I came back, you had so turned their hearts against me, that not three hundred of them would come to hear me." I knew this was true." (Ibid.) 3. "I heard Mr. Whitefield say, 'When I came back from Georgia, there was no speaking evil of each other. O what would I not give, or suffer, or do, to see such times again But O that division I that division ? What slaughter jt has made l' "It was doctrine that caused the difference; or, at least, it was so pretended." (Ibid.) "He preached a few times in connexion with his old friends. But, ah! how soon was the sword of contention drawn l'' 4. "Where can you now find any loving ones, of either party? They have no more love to each other than Turks." (Ibid.) "Read their vile contentions, and the evil characters they give of each other, raking the filthiest ashes, to find some black story against their fellow-Preachers." They "slay with the sword of bitterness, wrath, and envy. Still more their shame is what they have sent out into the world against each other, on both sides, about five or six years ago, and till this very day." To satisfy both friends and foes, I propose a few queries on each of these four heads. I.

I. As to the first, I read a remarkable passage in the third Journal, (vol.I., page 196,) the truth of which may be still attested by Mr. Durbin, Mr. Westell, and several others then present, who are yet alive:-" A young man who stood behind, sunk down, as one dead; but soon began to roar out, and beat himself against the ground, so that six men could scarce hold him. This was Thomas Maxfield." Was this you? If it was, how are you "the first-fruits of Mr. Whitefield's ministry?" And how is it, that neither I, nor your fellow-labourers, ever heard one word of this during all those years wherein you laboured in connexion with us? II. "When he went abroad again, he delivered me, and many thousands, into the hands of Mr. -." When? where? in what manner? This is quite new to me! I never heard one word of it before ! But stay! here is something more curious still ! "I heard Mr. Whitefield say, at the Tabernacle, in the presence of five or six Ministers, a little before he left England the last time, 'I delivered thirty thousand people into the hands of you and your brother when I went abroad.'" Mr. Whitefield's going abroad, which is here referred to, was in the year 1741. Did he then deliver you into my hands? Was you not in my hands before? Had you not then, for above a year, been a member of the society under my care? Nay, was you not, at the very time, one of my Preachers? Did you not then serve me as a son in the Gospel? Did you not eat my bread, and lodge in my house? Is not this then a total misrepresentation? Would to God it be not a wilful one ! "I heard," you say, "Mr. Whitefield say, at the Taber macle, in the presence of five or six Ministers, a little before he left England the last time:" Who then can doubt the truth of what follows? For here is chapter and verse! Here both the time, the place, and the persons present, are specified. And they ought to be; seeing the crime alleged is one of a very heinous mature. Many a man has been justly sentenced to death for sins which, in the sight of God, were not equal to this.

Many a man has been justly sentenced to death for sins which, in the sight of God, were not equal to this. The point, therefore, requires a little more examination. And, first, I desire to know what are the names of those five or six Ministers? and which of them heard Mr. Whitefield say, "When I went abroad (in 1741,) I delivered thirty thousand people into the hands of you and your brother?" Thirty thousand people ! Whence did they come? Did they spring out of the earth? Why, there were not, at that time, five thousand Methodists in England, or in the world. The societies in London, Bristol, and Kingswood, (the only ones. I had,) contained fourteen or fifteen hundred members. I believe not so many were in his societies. But were they fewer, or more, they were nothing to me. He never entrusted me with them. He never delivered into mine, or my brother's hands, either his society at the Tabernacle in London, or that in Bristol, or in Kingswood, or any other place what ever. He never delivered (that I remember) one single society into my hands. I bless God, I needed it not. I did not need to build upon another man's foundation. A dispensation of the Gospel was given me also; and my labour was not in vain. I was constrained to cry out (and you yourself used the same words to God in my behalf), O the fathomless love Which has deign'd to approve And prosper the work of my hands ! With my pastoral crook I went over the brook, And, behold ! I am spread into bands !" With what view then can you charge me with that perfidy, which I am no more guilty of than of high treason? For what end can you affirm, "When he went abroad, he delivered many thousands into the hands of those he thought he could have trusted them with ?" Delivered ! when? where? how? What can you mean? I flatly deny that ever he delivered one thousand, or one hundred, souls into my hands. Do you mean, "He spoke honourably of you to them at Kennington-common and Rose-green?" True: But not so honourably as I spoke of you, even at London; yea, as late as the year 1763!

Do you mean, "He spoke honourably of you to them at Kennington-common and Rose-green?" True: But not so honourably as I spoke of you, even at London; yea, as late as the year 1763! Yet was this the same thing with "delivering the people" at London "into your hands?" Nay, but "Mr. Whitefield trusted that you would have given them back at his return." Them! whom? His society at London, or Bristol 2 I had them not to give. He never entrusted me with them. Therefore I could not "give them back." But how melancholy is the exclamation that follows: "Alas! It was not so !" Was not how? Why, I did not give back what I never had received; but went straight on my way, taking the best care I could of those who entrusted themselves to me. III. So much for the second article. As to the third, your words are, "I heard Mr. Whitefield say, 'O that division I that division what slaughter it has made l'" But who made that division? It was not I. It was not my brother. It was Mr. Whitefield himself; and that notwithstanding all admonitions, arguments, and entreaties. Mr. Whitefield first wrote a treatise against me by name. He sent it to my brother, who endorsed it with these words: "Put up again thy sword into its place." It slept a while; but after a time he published it. I made no reply. Soon after Mr. Whitefield preached against my brother and me by name. This he did constantly, both in Moorfields, and in all other public places. We never returned railing for railing, but spoke honourably of him, at all times, and in all places. But is it any wonder, that those who loved us should no longer choose to hear him? Meantime, was it we that "turned their hearts against him?" Was it not himself? But you say, "It was doctrine that caused the difference;" (oddly enough expressed !) "at least, it was so pretended !" "It was so pretended !" What do you mean? that differ ence of doctrine was only pretended ? that we were agreed at the bottom, and only fought, like prize-fighters, to show our skill ? Nay, here was no pretence. The thing was as plain as the sun at noon-day. Did not Mr.

Did not Mr. Whitefield proclaim, upon the house-top, the difference between us and him? And yet it was not merely the difference of doctrine that caused the division. It was rather the manner wherein he maintained his doctrine, and treated us in every place. Otherwise difference of doctrine would not have created any difference of affection; but he might lovingly have held particular redemption, and we general, to our lives' end. He did indeed "preach a few times in connexion with his old friends; but how soon was the sword of contention drawn l'" By whom? Truly, by himself. Do not you know, (thousands do, if you do not,) that when he preached in the very Foundery, and my brother sat by him, he preached the absolute decrees in the most peremptory and offensive manner? What was this, but drawing the sword and throwing away the scabbard? Who then is chargeable with the contention and division that ensued ? IV. "But where," you ask, "can you now find any loving ones of either party?" Blessed be God, I can find many thousands, both in London, in Bristol, in Kingswood, and in various parts, not only of England, but also of Scotland and Ireland; persons as full of love, both to God and man, as any I knew forty years ago. Some of these I find (and much rejoice to find) in Mr. Whitefield's societies. And I pray God, they may increase a thousand-fold, both in number and in strength. "Nay, they have no more love to each other than Turks." They ! who? This is not the case with our societies. They not only love each other, but love their enemies, even those that still despitefully use them. But "read their vile contentions, and the evil character they give each other, raking the filthiest ashes, to find some black story." I will answer for one. I give no "evil character" of my "fellow-Preachers." I "rake into no filthy ashes, for black stories." Let him who does, take it to himself. "They slay with the sword of bitterness, wrath, and envy." I do not. I plead, Not guilty. As I envy no man, so neither my wrath nor bitter ness slays any human creature.

As I envy no man, so neither my wrath nor bitter ness slays any human creature. "Still more to their shame is what they have sent out into the world, against each other, on both sides, about five or six years ago, and till this very day." "What they have sent out against each other, on both sides, about five or six years ago." Within five or six years I have been vehemently called to answer for myself; twice Ly Mr. Richard Hill, and afterwards by his brother. Have you read what we "have sent out into the world, against each other, on both sides?" If you have not, how can you so peremptorily affirm what "both sides" have done? You cannot possibly be a judge of what you have not read; and if you had read, you could not have passed such a sentence. Three tracts I have wrote; but in none of these do I "slay with the sword of bitterness, or wrath, or envy." In none of them do I speak one bitter, or passionate, or disrespectful word. Bitterness and wrath, yea, low, base, virulent invec tive, both Mr. Richard and Mr. Rowland Hill (as well as Mr. Toplady) have poured out upon me, in great abundance. But where have I, in one single instance, returned them railing for railing? I have not so learned Christ. I dare not rail, either at them or you. I return not cursing, but blessing. That the God of love may bless both them and you, is the prayer of your injured, Yet still affectionate brother, February 14, 1778.