Engagements and Marriages Three distinct phases in Charles Wesley's Evangelical ministry can be identified. The first lasted for ten years from the birth of Methodism as a mass movement in 1739; during the decade that followed, the Wesley brothers worked in a state of almost perfect harmony, the product of a unique relationship grounded in shared experience and a common outlook. This golden age was followed by a period of upheaval marked by increasingly bitter disagreements between the two men and worry over developments within the movement that they had created. This transitional phase lasted for seven years from 1749 and concluded with Charles Wesley's retirement from the itinerancy. His adoption of a settled lifestyle and assumption of the mantle of champion of the Anglican–Methodist link marked the onset of the third and final stage of Charles's Methodist ministry which lasted from 1756 until his death in 1788.
The scholarly coverage of the fifty-year span of Charles's involvement with Methodism has often been uneven, with the greatest attention being paid to his heroic efforts during the 1740s and early 1750s.1
The third phase of his ministry has often been dominated by Charles's family life, his hymns and, to a lesser extent, the fierce disputes over the separation question. The seven-year bridge between these two stages has always posed something of a problem for historians and has never been properly examined. Yet its importance is selfevident—in 1748, as Charles entered the ninth year of his ministry as a Methodist preacher, there seemed little reason to doubt that his
1 For example, in John Telford's biography of Charles Wesley published in 1900, the last thirty years of his subject's life are covered in just 51 pages out of a total of 309. Telford, Charles Wesley, 201–15 and 255–92.
Engagements and Marriages 89 life would continue in its by now familiar path, but an event was about to take place that signalled a fundamental change, one that in its own way was as far-reaching as his conversion. The marriage of Charles Wesley and Sarah Gwynne in April 1749 was a watershed, one that was to have effects far beyond Charles's personal life. After his marriage, Charles reduced his itinerant ministry until it ceased altogether and this development reflected a change in priorities as he opted increasingly for a life of domesticity. This re-orientation adversely affected Charles's relationship with John and for the first time serious cracks in the fraternal bond appeared. There is also evidence to indicate that Charles's engagement and marriage caused his brother to take stock of his own personal life, with tragic and farreaching consequences. Personal disagreements between the Wesley brothers were in turn aggravated by tension over the Methodist relationship with the Church of England and soon private and public areas of discord became inextricably intertwined. This chapter and the next will explore the dramatic events of these years, starting with the courtships and marriages of John and Charles Wesley.
THE ENGAGEMENT AND MARRIAGE OF CHARLES WESLEY As a young man, Charles's views on his fitness for marriage are difficult to judge. In one journal entry, he claimed to be afraid of matrimony,2 but this should perhaps be seen as an aspect of a nature that tended towards negativity. Against this should be set an obvious fondness for the company of women: Charles had a flirtatious manner and it appears that he was an attractive and passionate man.
As an undergraduate, he had briefly been the romantic target of a designing actress called Molly Buchanan, who had apparently been the kept woman of the Duke of Richmond. As careful as Charles was not to get too involved, it appears from his letter to John Wesley describing the affair, that he rather enjoyed this brush with a genuine scarlet woman.3 A few months after his dalliance with Buchanan,
2 CWJ, 19 April 1748.
3 CW to JW, MS letter, 5 June [1729] (MCA: DDCW 1/2).
90 Engagements and Marriages family correspondence reveal that his visits to the girls' school where his sister taught may have been prompted by more than family duty.
One of the teenage pupils referred to Charles, who was aged 22 at the time, as a 'saucy cur', while another pined for him after he left.4
Later in life, as a charismatic evangelist, Charles had a particular appeal for the opposite sex: James Hutton, a friend of the Wesleys, referred to the brothers in a letter of 1740 as 'dangerous snares to many young women; several are in love with them'. He also made the intriguing comment that he would not like any sister of his to marry John or Charles.5 Based on such evidence, it appears that the Wesleys' charisma was grounded in more than spiritual gifts, and this sexual element to their attractiveness led on occasion to accusations of impropriety.6 As groundless as these charges undoubtedly were, Charles's eventual engagement was a source of disappointment to at least one female Methodist, as well as his friend
Edward Perronet, who, unlike James Hutton, had hoped that Charles would one day marry his sister. Despite such entanglements, Charles's only serious romantic commitment was to his future wife Sarah
Sarah was the daughter of Marmaduke Gwynne, a prominent Welsh landowner and a friend of Methodism during the movement's early years. Charles first made the acquaintance of his bride-to-be on 28 August 1747 when he paid a visit to the Gwynne family estate at Garth in Brecknockshire.7 Sarah was his junior by nineteen years, but subsequent events indicate that the attraction between them must have been at first sight. After a stay with the family lasting several days, Charles left for Ireland from where he conducted a correspondence with Sarah that quickly became personal as well as pastoral.
The fact that he was soon confiding his 'embryo intentions' to his 4 'Peggy has had the tooth-ache ever since he [Charles] went away. Miss Kitty is here by me, and says he is a saucy cur, and she will turn him off, because he never went to see her at Gainsborough.' Emily Wesley to JW, Photographic copy letter, 31
December 1729 (MCA: DDWF 6/2).
5 James Hutton to Count Zinzendorf, Published copy letter, 14 March 1740.
Quoted by Daniel Benham, Memoirs of James Hutton: comprising the annals of his life, and Connection with the United Brethren (London: Hamilton, Adams & Co., 1856),
6 Baker, Charles Wesley as Revealed, 54–5. 7 CWJ, 28 August 1747.
Engagements and Marriages 91 brother shows the deep impression that the young Welsh woman had made.8
On 25 March 1748, Charles returned to Garth after a gruelling preaching tour. His health had been affected and he remained for nine days under Sarah's care.9 While recovering from his illness, Charles proposed to Sarah Gwynne on 3 April 1748 and this is recorded in shorthand in his journal.10 The proposal was accepted without hesitation and almost immediately a reaction set in, at least on Charles's part.11 There is no doubt that the couple had strong feelings, but as Charles himself acknowledged on another occasion, it was part of his nature to be fearful.12 There were also practical matters to take into account: Charles had no home or regular income, and this latter consideration would be a major obstacle in the way of gaining parental approval. Finally, there was John Wesley's reaction to bring into the equation, and this is more interesting still as Charles's marriage proved a significant turning point in the fraternal relationship.
When Charles first mentioned to his brother, prior to his proposal of marriage, that he had a strong attraction for Sarah Gwynne, the response was lukewarm,13 although this is understandable as at that early stage in the relationship even Charles doubted that anything would result.14 What is puzzling is that more than seven months elapsed between the proposal and John being informed of the engagement. It is true that the couple appear to have kept it a secret from most people and it is highly doubtful whether their 'understanding' could be said to have amounted to a binding commitment—for a 8 Charles's reference to this conversation is retrospective in that he states that it had taken place during his preaching tour of Ireland between 9 September 1747 and 20 March 1748. CWJ, 19 April 1748.
9 CWJ, 25 March 1748.
10 'At night my dearest Sally, like my guardian angel, attended me ...I asked her if she could trust herself with me for life and with a noble simplicity she readily answered me she could.' CWJ, 3 April 1748.
11 'Frightened at what I had said last night I condemned mine rashness and almost wished I had never discovered myself.' CWJ, 4 April 1748.
12 'Our different judgement of persons was owing to our different temper: his all hope, and mine all fear.' Quoted by Baker, John Wesley and the Church of England, 207.
13 'I had communicated my embryo intentions to my brother while in Ireland, which he neither opposed, nor much encouraged.' CWJ, 19 April 1748.
14 'It was then a distant first thought, nor likely ever to come to a proposal; as I had not given the least hint, either to Miss Gwynne or the family.' CWJ, 19 April 1748.
92 Engagements and Marriages wealthy family like the Gwynnes, financial negotiations were a necessary prelude to a formal engagement and this would have been understood by both parties. Charles did however confide in his close friend Vincent Perronet on 19 April 174815 and the Bristol Methodist
Elizabeth Vigor on 4 November.16 He also appears to have made up his mind to speak to Sarah's mother as early as June 1748,17 although he did not write to her formally concerning the matter for another six months.18 The fact that Charles was actively making plans and was prepared to talk about his intentions, but not to his own brother and closest colleague, suggests a wariness concerning John's reaction.
Finally on 11 November, he made this journal entry:
My brother and I having promised each other (as soon as he came from Georgia) that we would neither of us marry, or take any step towards it, without the other's knowledge and consent, today I fairly and fully communicated every thought of my heart. He had proposed three persons to me, S.P., M.W., and S.G.: and entirely approved my choice of the last. We consulted together about every particular and were of one heart and mind in all things.19
In the months that followed, John was deeply involved in negotiations concerning the marriage settlement, and there is nothing in either
Charles's plain-text journal or his correspondence until just prior to the wedding in April 1749, to indicate that his brother was anything other than totally supportive. However, there is evidence to indicate that John had deep misgivings from a very early stage: just five days after his brother was told of the engagement, Charles wrote the following shorthand entry in his journal: 'Talked with my brother about a provision in case I got married and he said the Church could not afford it. "Then" I thought, "the Church did not deserve a gospel minister." '20 With this shorthand passage, a major deficiency of Charles
Wesley scholarship is highlighted. Without access to the shorthand, his biographers have made inevitable mistakes concerning interpretation of key events in Charles's life and this is exemplified by their analysis of the Wesley brothers' relationship as they approached this crossroads. Brailsford for example states that 'John's heart warmed
15 CWJ, 19 April 1748. 16 CWJ, 4 November 1748.
17 CWJ, 20 and 26 June 1748. 18 CWJ, 2 December 1748.
19 CWJ, 11 November 1748. 20 CWJ, 16 November 1748.
Engagements and Marriages 93 towards the lovers, and he encouraged his diffident brother',21 while Baker refers to Charles's choice of wife being confirmed by John Wesley,22 implying that at that stage he was completely supportive.
All these are reasonable assumptions to make from the evidence of Charles's plain-text journal and his letters, but a more complicated picture is revealed by the shorthand and this evidence of early hesitation will assume importance as the discussion of the Wesleys' marriages and their effect on Methodism takes further shape.
The practical objection to Charles's marriage on the grounds of finance will be examined shortly but it is important at this point to look at other possible explanations for John's lack of enthusiasm.
His doubts may have been based on fear that the special bond with Charles was under threat, as he could not have been unaware that marriage would challenge his own central place in his brother's loyalties. Also, if he had suspected that Charles had proposed seven months previously, he would have had grounds for arguing that his brother had broken their agreement not to 'take any step towards
[marriage]' without the other's consent. Charles had spoken of his plans to at least two mutual friends, Vincent Perronet and Elizabeth
Vigor, and it is possible that John discovered or suspected what was going on prior to 11 November 1748. This puts into a different light the charge that is sometimes levelled at John Wesley, namely that he did not inform Charles at an early stage of his own marital intentions late in 1749. Charles's violent reaction to John's engagement to Grace
Murray has been partly excused by this assumption that John had broken his word;23 Charles himself complained that his brother had betrayed their agreement,24 but without any acknowledgement that he had done likewise.
John did not refer to his worries about the impending wedding in his surviving personal papers. Indeed, he did not mention the engagement at all in his journal or extant letters, written between November 1748 and the day of the wedding itself five months later.
21 Brailsford, A Tale of Two Brothers, 167.
22 Baker, Charles Wesley as Revealed, 59–60.
23 Brailsford, A Tale of Two Brothers, 189–90; Frank Baker, 'Poet in Love—The Courtship of Charles Wesley, 1747–49', Methodist History, 29:4 (July 1991), 238.
24 'All the security I desired ...was his bare word, that he would not take a step of so general importance without advice.' CWJ, 13 December 1749.
94 Engagements and Marriages This is a curious omission for a man who in his journal during this same period discourses on a wide variety of subjects from the literary merits of the Iliad25 to his horse throwing a shoe.26 It is true that the journal was written with publication in mind, but some reference to the forthcoming happy event might have been expected. The entry in which he describes conducting his brother's wedding service is also strangely impersonal: 'I married my brother and Sarah Gwynne. It was a solemn day, such as became the dignity of a Christian marriage.'27 This may be simply another sign of the strange detachment from human feelings that was an aspect of John's personality, but it may also indicate a reluctance to face up to an issue with deep personal implications. It is perhaps appropriate to point out that John does not appear to have objected to Sarah on a personal level. Very little correspondence between them has survived, but there is nothing to indicate that their relationship was anything other than cordial, and after his brother's death in 1788, John was quick to offer help to his sister-in-law.
A vivid retrospective insight into John's intimate thoughts about his brother's marriage can be deduced from a pointed letter that he wrote to Charles at the time of his own engagement to Grace
Murray, just a few months after Charles's wedding.28 John argues that his marriage to Murray would not involve additional expense 'if I married one I maintain now, who would afterward desire nothing more than she had before'. Also, he had observed Murray from a close distance for several years and this had convinced him that she was suitable for marriage to a travelling evangelist: '[for] I particularly insist upon this. If I ever have a wife she ought to be the most useful woman in the kingdom—not barely one who probably may be so (I could not be content to run such a hazard).' As for Murray's humble birth, he considered this an irrelevance 'as it does not prevent either her grace or her gifts. Besides, whoever I marry, I believe it will not be a gentlewoman—I despair of finding any such so qualified.' This
25 JWJ, 12 August 1748. John Wesley, The Works of John Wesley, xx. Journal and Diaries III (1743–1754), ed. W. Reginald Ward and Richard Heitzenrater (Nashville:
Abingdon, 1991), 238.
26 JWJ, 21 February 1748. Ibid. 209. 27 JWJ, 8 April 1749. Ibid. 266.
28 JW to CW, Published copy letter [25 September 1749]. John Wesley, The Works of John Wesley, xxvi. 380–7.
Engagements and Marriages 95 incisive logic contained barely concealed criticism of Charles's own choice of bride, as Charles had known Sarah for only a very short time before he was confiding his 'embryo intentions' to his brother.
Also, she was certainly a 'gentlewoman' from a family that required their daughter be maintained in a lifestyle that did not sit well with that of an itinerant preacher.
John's subtle way of criticizing his brother without the complication of a direct assault was a tactic that he was to use several times as their personal and public disagreements gathered pace and venom.
In 1786 for example, he published a letter in the Arminian Magazine responding to Charles's objections to separation from the Church of England.29 The tone of this public epistle is sharp with more than a hint of personal animosity, but does not contain any reference to his brother being the addressee. Charles could be just as careful in his own clashes with John; in 1785 he authored, under the nom de plume of a 'Methodist of the Church of England', a published attack on Thomas Coke, which also contained implied criticism of his own brother.30 The beginning of this pattern of bitter controversy and indirect attack can be seen in John's letter justifying his choice of wife.
Money was certainly a factor in the start of the brother's alienation and was to prove a lasting source of resentment. Methodism had a particular appeal for the poor, with the inevitable result that Connexional finance was a perennial problem. Itinerant preachers were dependent on local societies for their support and those with families were subject to particular hardship,31 which was a major reason why single men were preferred for the itinerant ministry. The settlement that was insisted upon by the Gwynnes before they consented to their
29 The Arminian Magazine, for the year 1786. Consisting chiefly of extracts and original treatises on universal redemption, 8 (January 1786), 50–1.
30 [Charles Wesley] 'A Methodist of the Church of England', Strictures on the substance of a sermon preached at Baltimore in the state of Maryland before the General
Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church, on the 27th of December 1784 at the ordination of the Rev. Francis Asbury to the office of superintendent by Thomas Coke,
LL.D., superintendent of the said Church (London: G. Herdsfield, 1785).
31 John Wesley's 'Rules of an Assistant' states: 'Take no money of any one. If they give you food when you are hungry or clothes when you need them, it is good. But not silver or gold. Let there be no pretence to say, we grow rich by the gospel.' Quoted by Albert Brown-Lawson, John Wesley and the Anglican Evangelicals of the 18th Century
(Bishop Auckland: Pentland, 1994), 87–8.
96 Engagements and Marriages daughter's marriage represented a significant burden, not just for the groom but also for his brother and the Methodist movement.
The final version of the marriage settlement, signed on 9 August 1749,32 required that £2,500 be raised from the sale of publications and invested to produce an annuity in Sarah's name of £100.33 The deed lists over sixty published works, the proceeds from which were to be temporarily transferred to two trustees. The titles included many of Charles's hymn-books, such as Hymns and Sacred Poems and Hymns on the Nativity, but works written by John are also well represented, including his published journal in four volumes, The Character of a Methodist and the Sermon on Christian Perfection. Until this time, the profits from the sale of these works had been devoted to furthering the Revival, and the loss of £2,500 was no small matter— during the winter of 1739 it cost just £700 to adapt the Foundery to use as the Methodist headquarters.34 At a time when preachers could expect nothing beyond food on the table and clothes on the back,
John's misgivings are understandable; certainly, he used this issue as a stick to beat his brother with in the years that followed.
There were also fears concerning the effect of marriage on Charles's commitment to the itinerancy, and in a meeting with the brothers,
Sarah agreed that she would not require him to abandon this aspect of his ministry.35 Her promise was without doubt sincere, but it was not long before domestic matters were proving an inevitable distraction.
John's doubts reached a climax as the wedding day approached.
On 1 April 1749, as the brothers were preparing to leave Kingswood for the ceremony, to be held at Garth a week later, Charles wrote in his journal: 'Just as we were setting out ...my brother appeared full of scruples; and refused to go to Garth at all; I kept my temper and promised, "If he could not be satisfied there, to desist." '36
Tension between the two men increased as they neared their destination. Charles, not surprisingly, was in a hurry but discovered to his aggravation that John had arranged to preach at several places
32 MS settlement upon the marriage of CW and Sarah Gwynne, 9 August 1749 (MCA: DDCW 6/87).
33 Children of the marriage were also to benefit from the annuity.
34 Heitzenrater, Wesley and the People Called Methodists, 110.
35 CWJ, 19 February 1749. 36 CWJ, 1 April 1749.
Engagements and Marriages 97 along the way;37 at one point climbing to the top of an uninhabited Welsh mountain to do so.38 This has been explained as an illustration of John's overriding commitment to evangelism,39 but it can also be viewed as a pointed reminder to Charles as to where his priorities should lie. The fact that John was having second thoughts about the marriage settlement, which was agreed on in principle only on the day before the wedding itself, would have done nothing to ease Charles's nerves or his resentment. After a meeting with Sarah's mother,40
John finally gave way with regard to the financial details and on the morning of 8 April 1749, Charles Wesley and Sarah Gwynne were married.
Charles Wesley's marriage was an event of central significance in his life and ministry. Leaving aside the obvious effect of having a wife and raising a family, the nature of his relationship with John and the Methodists was changed for ever. The tension between the brothers, apparent from 1749, was to a certain degree founded on Charles's awareness of his new domestic responsibilities and attempts to assert independence from his overbearing brother. At the same time, this was to clash with a part of his nature that was acutely protective of the brothers' special bond: for his part, John was to prove insensitive to the change in Charles's circumstances and seems to have always expected first call on his brother's loyalties. The most obvious result of Charles's marriage on his position within Methodism has been seen as its contribution to his eventual withdrawal from the itinerancy, but this process did not reach completion until 1756 and will therefore be examined in a later chapter.
JOHN WESLEY'S ENGAGEMENT AND HIS BROTHER'S REACTION It appears that the tension between the brothers eased once Charles's wedding actually took place, but within a few months trouble again
37 'found my brother had appointed to preach in several places till Friday: which I did not take kindly'. CWJ, 2 April 1749.
38 JWJ, 6 April 1749. John Wesley, The Works of John Wesley, xx. 265–6.
39 Gill, Charles Wesley, 140. 40 CWJ, 7 April 1749.
98 Engagements and Marriages erupted from a totally unexpected source, namely John Wesley's engagement to Grace Murray. This rather strange affair provides further insight into the disturbed undercurrents of the fraternal relationship, as well as marking the first occasion that private tension spilled over into the public work.
A foretaste of Charles's views on the desirability of John entering into wedlock is provided by a conversation he had with George
Whitefield which he subsequently reported to Sarah Gwynne in December 1748.41 Whitefield had urged the Wesley brothers to marry, unaware that Charles was already engaged. Charles 'pleaded hard for my brother's exemption; but he would not hear of it'. It seems strange that Charles should have been determined that John should be excluded from finding domestic happiness at precisely the same time that Charles himself was striving for it. This reluctance may have been grounded in concern that his brother was simply not suited to matrimony; certainly, the disaster that was John's union with Mary
Vazeille adds weight to the view that he was incapable of sharing his life in an equal relationship, but it appears that Charles had other more personal reasons for wishing his brother to remain unattached.
Even as the conversation between his brother and Whitefield was taking place, John had already taken his first steps towards engagement and marriage. In August 1748, while suffering from an illness in Newcastle, he was nursed back to health by Grace Murray, the housekeeper at the Orphan House. John later described his deepening feelings: 'I observ'd her more narrowly than ever before, both as to her temper, sense & behaviour. I esteem'd and lov'd her more & more.
And, when I was a little recover'd, I told her, sliding into it I know not how, "If ever I marry, I think you will be the person." After some time
I spoke to her more directly ...'42 One is tempted to speculate what misunderstandings might have been avoided if John had informed his brother at this stage, but he did not, and Charles did not find out about the match until he received in September 1749 a copy of a letter that John had sent to Grace's other suitor, John Bennet.43 This was twelve months after John had tentatively declared his romantic
41 CW to Sarah Gwynne jun., MS letter [23 December 1748] (MCA: DDWes 4/53).
42 John Wesley, John Wesley's Last Love, ed. J. A. Leger (London: J. M. Dent & Sons, 43 Brailsford, A Tale of Two Brothers, 189.
Engagements and Marriages 99 interest in Murray. Charles's reaction to this bombshell revelation was extreme; in the two weeks following receipt of the letter on about 18 September, he travelled literally from one end of England to the other in order to prevent his brother's wedding from taking place.
Charles's objections were summarized by John in a letter that he wrote to his brother on 25 September 1749 following a tense meeting between the two men in Whitehaven.44 Charles apparently feared that John's authority over the societies would be destroyed by the fact of Murray's humble birth, and the scandal that could be imputed by her having travelled with John to Ireland; more importantly, it was at least debatable that she was simultaneously engaged to the preacher John
Charles's reasons were not entirely without a rational base. His brother's relationship with Murray had already been the source of jealous discussion within the societies, especially among the female members who did not wish to see one of their number singled out by their charismatic leader.45 Murray's own lack of decisiveness when it came to choosing between Bennet and Wesley added to the turmoil;46 Charles's misgivings were certainly shared by other people, including the preacher Christopher Hopper and the laywoman Jeanie
During a meeting on 24 September to try to resolve the situation, the brothers agreed to submit to their friend Vincent Perronet's arbitration, but two days later Charles broke his word. Taking advantage of John's temporary absence, he left without warning for the village of Hindley Hill, where his brother had left his fiancée a week previously.
Given Charles's erratic behaviour during the Grace Murray affair, it is valuable to digress briefly in order to examine the reliability of John Wesley's manuscript narrative, which is the main source for the details of this episode.48 Unfortunately there is little in the way of 44 JW to CW, Published copy letter [25 September 1749]. John Wesley, The Works of John Wesley, xxvi. 380–7.
45 Brailsford, A Tale of Two Brothers, 181, 185, 187. 46 Ibid. 181–2.
47 Simon Valentine, John Bennet and the Origins of Methodism and the Evangelical Revival in England, Pietist and Wesleyan Studies, 9 (Lanham, Md.: Scarecrow, 1997),
48 This manuscript was deposited at the British Museum in 1829 and was later transcribed and edited by J. A. Leger under the title Wesley's Last Love.
100 Engagements and Marriages corroborating or conflicting contemporary evidence—there is a gap in Charles's journal between 16 September and 21 October 1749, while John Bennet makes little reference to the affair in his manuscript diary but directs the reader to a pocketbook which does not appear to be extant.49 All things considered, the balance of probability appears to be in favour of John's recollection being substantially correct—the names, dates, and details of conversations are very specific, and the fact that the manuscript was not apparently intended for publication is additional weight in favour of its accuracy.
Immediately after his arrival in Hindley Hill, Charles confronted Murray. His opening words, as reported by his brother, illustrates his excited state of mind: 'About eleven my brother [Charles] came.
He kist her and said "G. M. You have broke my heart." Then he dropped down.'50 This extravagant initial reaction was not replaced by more sober reflection. Instead, Charles, once he had recovered his senses, exerted considerable pressure on Murray to accompany him to Newcastle where her other love-interest Bennet awaited her. John later discovered that his brother was so determined to destroy his engagement that he constantly changed direction to elude possible pursuit.51 He also misled Murray in order to persuade her to go with him, telling her that they were going to meet John Wesley and giving her the impression that his brother had himself made this arrangement.52 Upon her arrival in Newcastle, Grace Murray was married to Bennet on 3 October 1749; neither party were keen to go through with the ceremony and it took all of Charles's powers of persuasion before they consented.53
The extent of Charles's revulsion at the very suggestion of John getting married, is shown by the extraordinary lengths to which he was prepared to go. In order to calm the fears of the couple, Charles placed all the blame on his brother, accusing him in John's words of 'having used my whole Art & Authority to seduce another man's wife' on the grounds that Murray was already committed to Bennet.54
In crowded meetings of the Newcastle Society, the most important 49 MS diary of John Bennet, 3 October 1749 (MCA: John Bennet/Grace Murray collection).
50 John Wesley, Wesley's Last Love, 90. 51 Ibid. 93. 52 Ibid. 92.
53 Valentine, John Bennet, 216. 54 John Wesley, Wesley's Last Love, 94.
Engagements and Marriages 101 outside London and Bristol, Charles and Bennet took turns in attacking their leader:
The effect of what he & [John Bennet] said ...was, that all in the house ...were set on fire, filled wth anger and confusion ...[Sister] Proctor would leave the house immediately. [John] Whitford would preach with Mr [Wesley] no more ...Another dreamer went a step further, and saw Mr
[Wesley] in hell-fire. Jane Keith was preremptory 'John [Wesley] is a child of the Devil': Coming pretty near [John Bennet] himself; whose repeated word was, 'If [John Wesley] is not damned, there is no God.'55
The brothers finally caught up with each other in Leeds. Charles's initial reaction was to launch a violent verbal assault, and it was only after the intercession of George Whitefield, that the two were reconciled amidst scenes of great emotion. With his brother out of danger, Charles allowed himself to be persuaded that it was all Grace
Charles Wesley does not emerge with credit from this bizarre affair.
What John Wesley's account makes clear is that his brother, the great evangelist and hymn-writer, was prone in moments of stress to hysterical outbursts, characterized by extremes of language and behaviour. In the particular instance of his brother's engagement to Murray,
Charles's actions were triggered by a threat to his relationship with John. The reasons that he put forward to justify his opposition, such as the effect of John's marriage on his commitment to Methodism, cannot explain or justify the sheer violence of the reaction. One of the many contradictions of Charles's personality is that even after his own marriage, he remained extremely protective of his relationship with his brother. This is underlined in a series of poems that he wrote in 1751 at the time of John's union with Mary Vazeille. The overriding theme is one of deep personal loss akin to bereavement, very unusual in a man writing about his brother's wedding. Two stanzas from the poem entitled 'Ah woe is me, A man of woe' sum up his mood:
My other self, but more beloved In youth, in manhood tried, Faithful for 30 winters prov'd Is ravished from my side 55 Ibid. 95. 56 Ibid. 88.
102 Engagements and Marriages O what a mighty loss is mine!
The anguish who can tell The more than anguish, to resign A soul, I lov'd so well57 Such evidence reinforces the argument that the relationship between the Wesleys was not simply one way; John was the natural leader, but Charles was by no means the unwilling subordinate in their strange yet complementary union. Their mutual dependence existed on such a deep level as to defy rational explanation, which probably explains in part why their relationship has not received the scholarly attention that it deserves. The strength of this bond proved a two-edged sword; a powerful weapon during the 1740s, it became a source of great bitterness in later years.
It is intriguing that the brothers should have decided to embark on marriage at about the same time. On the surface, there are understandable reasons why this should have occurred: they were both in middle age and approaching a time when starting a family might not be a possibility for much longer, but there appear to have been additional underlying factors with specific regard to Charles's brother.
John Wesley dated his decision that he could marry without compromising his ministry to June 1748,58 despite the fact that he had previously, by his own admission, been very much opposed to marriage.59 It was just a few months previously that Charles had made the first intimations that he had strong affections for Sarah Gwynne in what amounted to his first serious romantic commitment. In August
1748, just two months after deciding that he could marry as well, John chose Grace Murray for his bride, years after their first meeting.60
That his attachment was sudden, despite his own subsequent protestations to the contrary,61 is shown by the fact that Murray herself was
57 Charles Wesley, MS Hymn-book (MCA: MS Richmond), 142–3.
58 John Wesley, Wesley's Last Love, 1.
59 JW to CW, Published copy letter [25 September 1749]. John Wesley, The Works of John Wesley, xxvi. 380–1.
60 This can be dated with certainty to 1739 or 1740. Rack, Reasonable Enthusiast, 61 'from a close observation of several years ...I am persuaded that she is in in every capacity an help meet for me'. JW to CW, Published copy letter [25 September 1749].
John Wesley, The Works of John Wesley, xxvi. 382.
Engagements and Marriages 103 'utterly amazed'.62 This was at precisely the time that John might have been hearing from other people, as well as his own intuition, that his brother was feeling his way towards matrimony.
The argument could be made that John's abrupt change of heart with regard to marriage was a direct reaction to Charles falling in love with Sarah Gwynne. According to this interpretation, faced with the possible loss of his deepest personal relationship, John was looking for a replacement. Sibling rivalry might also have had a part to play—one is reminded that Charles's Evangelical conversion in 1738 was followed a few days later by John's. Such an interpretation of the psychological background to the Grace Murray affair fits with what we know of the strength of the brothers' attachment, and their mutual fears concerning each others' marriages. Much has been said about the differences in the personalities of the Wesley brothers, with John typically seen as logical and emotionally detached, while Charles was passionate and impulsive; there is truth in this picture, but the Wesleys were more alike than is commonly supposed. Their modes of expression might have been different, but they both exhibited signs of deep emotional insecurity; Charles destroyed his brother's engagement, but John had also been inclined to block Charles's wedding.
When one looks at other members of their family, it becomes clear that instability was not the preserve of Charles Wesley's poetic nature, but was in fact a family trait.63
The Grace Murray affair left the brothers on the brink of permanent division, despite the apparent reconciliation in Leeds. On 28
October 1749 Charles made the following shorthand entry in his journal; 'Heard that my brother was come. Troubled and burdened yet went to him. No love or joy or comfort in the meeting. No confidence on either side; he did not want to talk with me.'64 Mutual friends attempted to mediate between the brothers but to no avail.65
62 John Wesley, Wesley's Last Love, 1.
63 The stubbornness of their father Samuel bordered at times on the irrational; Charles's son Charles junior was at the very least emotionally immature; his other son
Samuel was mentally unstable and Charles's grandson the organist Samuel Sebastian Wesley was regarded as highly eccentric.
64 CWJ, 28 October 1749.
65 'I thank you for speaking to my brother, but in vain do you refer me to him for the result of your conference. I am no longer of his council.' CW to Vincent Perronet,
MS copy letter, 13 December 1749. CWJ, 13 December 1749.
104 Engagements and Marriages Charles adopted what amounted to victim status, which is rather surprising in the circumstances. This is illustrated by a letter that he wrote to Vincent Perronet on 30 October 1749 and subsequently transcribed in shorthand in his journal:
Yesterday I assisted him [JW] at the Sacrament, but my mouth was stopped all day, my hands hung down, and my heart fainted ...Forced by his impatience, I had offered him my account of what has lately happened, though
I judged it far better to defer it till his passion should be laid and his eyes opened. It had the effect I expected. He denied the whole. William Shent's account was all lies. Jane Keith's was all lies. His only was altogether true.
He had been in no fault at all, in no passion or inordinate affection, but had done all things well, and with the utmost calmness and deliberation. He had been no temptation; the church and work in no danger. That was nothing but my needless panic. As soon as I could recover my astonishment, I told him plainly he was given up to Jewish blindness of heart ...I declared I would cover his nakedness as long as I could, and honour him before the people; and if I must at last break with him, would retreat gradually, and hide it from the world. He seemed pleased with the thought of parting, though God knows, as I told him, that I had saved him from a thousand false steps: and still I am persuaded we shall stand or fall together.66
Charles refused to accept that he was in any way at fault, neither was he prepared to empathize with, or even acknowledge his brother's pain. This stubbornness and insensitivity, a trait that was again shared with John, was an aspect of his personality that caused considerable tension in his relations with other people.
THE WIDER EFFECTS OF THE GRACE MURRAY AFFAIR During the unhappy episode of his brother's engagement, Charles displayed another characteristic with important implications. In his attempt to justify his actions, he showed no hesitation in crossing the line between private disagreement and public controversy. When
John had been faced with a similar threat to his personal life, and the work of God, namely Charles's own engagement, he had disclosed his doubts, as far as is known, only on a one-to-one basis, but his brother displayed no such restraint, and indeed, by attacking John's character
66 CW to Vincent Perronet, MS letter, 30 October 1749. CWJ, 30 October 1749.
Engagements and Marriages 105 in Methodist meetings, he called into question his brother's fitness to lead. This inability to be discreet, coupled with his tendency to violent language, was to undermine a number of Charles's relationships in the years to come.
John's sense of betrayal must have been acute. In the ten years from 1739, the brothers had presented a united front to an often hostile world. These years had witnessed the isolation of John from his fellow
Anglican ministers and the establishing of a necessary distance from the preachers and Methodist people: given this state of affairs, the close bond with his brother was important on both the personal and professional levels. With two such strong personalities, there would have been private disagreements, but these had never before spilled over into their public ministry. After the Grace Murray affair, the tension between the two men was to become hopelessly entangled with bitter debates over the future of Methodism.
The wider repercussions of the brothers' falling-out took effect almost immediately with the alienation from the Methodist movement of John Wesley's successful rival in love. John Bennet had been one of the most gifted of the preachers, responsible for evangelizing large areas of Lancashire and Cheshire. By the end of 1751, his once close working relationship with the Wesleys lay in ruins and early the following year, he severed his links with them.67 Various explanations have been put forward for this turn of events; soon after his marriage, Bennet began to exhibit tendencies towards Calvinist theological views and to oppose what he regarded as John Wesley's despotism,68 but it is probable that the most important single cause of the division was the circumstances leading up to his marriage with Grace Murray. Surviving correspondence between Bennet and John
Wesley show that despite mutual expressions of regard and affection, there was in the aftermath of Bennet's nuptials, considerable tension between them, which was hardly surprising in the circumstances.
Wesley was convinced that he was the wronged party,69 a view with which Bennet could not have been expected to agree.
67 Valentine, John Bennet, 249–61. 68 Ibid. 254–7.
69 'I was never yet convinced that your (marriage) was according to the will of God ...consistent either with justice, mercy or truth. Nevertheless I loved you tenderly both before and since.' JW to John Bennet, MS copy letter, 3 November 1749 (MCA:
MS letter book of John Bennet, 76–7).
106 Engagements and Marriages Charles tried hard to prevent the looming schism but may have helped to provoke it by giving Bennet additional reason to doubt
John's sincerity, and his own. Charles's letters to Bennet between 1749 and 1752 display a degree of cloying intimacy that is not reproduced in correspondence with any other preacher. He expresses sentiments of great and unusual affection such as loving Bennet as dearly as his own soul,70 and he constantly presses for a closer relationship.
This desperate reaching out for friendship even extended as far as theological matters—he had heard that Bennet may be flirting with Calvinism, but it made no difference to Charles 'whether you think with Luther or with Calvin'.71 This was a striking statement from a man who had previously displayed violent antipathy towards Calvinist theology and its champions. He also warned his friend not to allow his wife to meet with John Wesley,72 which would hardly have assuaged Bennet's fears nearly a year after his marriage.
Charles's wish to cement his close tie with Bennet can be explained by the continued poor relationship with his own brother. He states in one letter that 'it is all over with our friend. Only me he cannot love as before. But I must have patience and suffer all things that the Gospel be not hindered.'73 Several months later Charles informed Bennet that he 'must make me amends for the loss of my brother whose love
I have small hopes of recovering in this world. But I find my heart knit still closer to you and am humbly confident that neither life nor death shall be able to separate us.'74 Charles was also critical of John's recruitment of certain of the preachers,75 which was rather indiscreet as Bennet was already beginning to distance himself. It appears that having lost the confidence and affection of John Wesley, Charles was seeking to replace him with John Bennet, and that he felt he was owed as much by a man whose marriage had incurred a heavy cost.
70 CW to John Bennet, MS letter, 23 January [1752] (MCA: DDCW 1/43).
71 CW to John Bennet, MS letter, 3 September [1750] (MCA: DDCW 1/38).
72 'take care not to bring our two friends together again! It was an amazing oversight both in Grace and you: and looked like infatuation. If you regard me as your real friend (and I know you do) follow my Christian advice and never let them meet ...'
73 CW to John Bennet, MS letter [15 December 1750] (MCA: DDCW 1/39).
74 CW to John Bennet, MS letter [15 March 1751] (MCA: DDCW 1/41).
75 CW to John Bennet, MS letter, 11 August [1751] (MCA: DDCW 1/42).
Engagements and Marriages 107 Given these psychological undercurrents, it is hardly suprising that Bennet began to doubt the sincerity and motivation of his one-time
Fathers in the Gospel. In a letter to John Wesley written on 6 March 1750, he complained of the brothers' indiscretion, as a result of which his engagement and marriage was the talk of the societies.76 His letters to Charles began to display hostility as he gradually withdrew from their relationship, but despite these rebuffs Charles persisted.
In January 1752 he gently reminded Bennet of the recent occasion 'when you hastily renounced and would have cast me off, but that I clave to you so much the closer and overcame you by love'.77 As late as March 1752, by which time Bennet had been speaking publicly against the Wesleys for several months,78 Charles was still expressing his determination to strive for harmony, although Bennet 'may impute my obstinacy of love, to guile, or some selfish design'.79 Even after the final separation in April 1752, Charles's last surviving letter to Bennet was conciliatory, despite the fact that Bennet had been speaking 'much evil of me'.80 Such mildness in the face of provocation was most uncharacteristic of Charles Wesley.
Charles's relationship with George Whitefield also became closer at this time. In a letter to the layman Ebenezer Blackwell, written a few days after the fateful Bennet marriage,81 Charles described accompanying his brother and Whitefield to Newcastle, where Charles
'waited on our friend George ...and gave him full possession of our pulpit ...He was never more blest, or better satisfied. Whole troops of the dissenters he mowed down.' There is little mention of Charles's brother, other than the wishful comment that the Wesleys and Whitefield formed 'a threefold cord which shall no more be broken'. In a letter to Bennet written in September 1750,82 Charles referred with apparent equanimity to their 'dear friend' Whitefield speaking of predestination to the Methodists and the subsequent defection of two or three Wesleyan preachers. A more fundamental change in attitude
76 John Bennet to JW, MS copy letter, 6 March 1750 (MCA: MS letter book of John Bennet).
77 CW to John Bennet, MS letter, 23 January [1752] (MCA: DDCW 1/43).
78 Valentine, John Bennet, 252–3.
79 CW to John Bennet, MS letter, 3 March [1752] (MCA: DDCW 1/44).
80 CW to John Bennet, MS letter, 18 May [1752] (MCA: DDCW 1/47).
81 CW to Ebenezer Blackwell, MS letter, 8 October 1749 (MCA: DDCW 1/24).
82 CW to John Bennet, MS letter, 3 September [1750] (MCA: DDCW 1/38).
108 Engagements and Marriages from the days when Charles was violently opposed to Whitefield can hardly be imagined. It is true that their friendship had revived in the late 1740s, but this greater warmth of sentiment can be attributed to Charles's sense of loss and vulnerability in the aftermath of Bennet's marriage.
Regardless of the rights and wrongs of his interference in his brother's personal life, it is evident that Charles, always an emotional man, felt betrayed, angry, and sad. The bitterness of his exchanges with John in later years is in one sense a testimony to how close they had been. The affection no doubt remained, although very rarely expressed, and there are occasional flashes of the pride that Charles felt in his remarkable brother,83 but the mutual trust and support which both men had taken for granted was largely absent from their lives after 1749. The process had started with Charles's own marriage and was accelerated by the Grace Murray affair.
In February 1751, John Wesley married Mary Vazeille. No doubt concerned that his brother would try to abduct this fiancée as well,
John maintained secrecy to the extent that the exact date and location of the wedding ceremony remains unknown to this day. He was wise in his precaution, as shown by the anguish with which Charles greeted
John's news of the engagement:
I was thunderstruck, and could only answer, he had given me the first blow, and his marriage would come like the coup de grace. Trusty N. [Edward]
Perronet followed ...I refused his [Perronet's?] company to the chapel, and retired to mourn with my faithful Sally. [I] groaned all the day, and several following ones, under my own and the people's burden. I could eat no pleasant food, nor preach, nor rest, either by night or by day.84
Here again, we see Charles reacting in a way that seems irrational, until one looks at the psychological background to the relationship with his brother. He learned nothing from his involvement with John's romantic relationships and, as far as is known, he never regretted his destructive activities, but rather remained convinced of his rightness. Additional evidence that his worries were based
83 On one occasion he described John's launch of the Christian Library as unique and as something that only his brother was capable of achieving. CW to John Bennet,
MS letter [15 December 1750] (MCA: DDCW 1/39).
84 CWJ, 2 February 1751.
Engagements and Marriages 109 on emotion rather than reason is provided by the fact that he was as opposed to John's engagement to the respectable and financially independent Mary Vazeille as he was to the former housekeeper Grace
The engagements and marriages of the Wesley brothers provide an insight into the fundamental change that took place in their relationship as they entered middle age. In the years to 1749, the bond between them had been unnaturally close; co-workers in a great
Evangelical crusade, they had enjoyed a relationship that was deeper than that with any other preacher or Anglican minister. Both appear to have viewed the other's marital intentions as a threat, and each allowed their insecurities to gain the upper hand. This fracture in their personal relationship coincided with and contributed to a parting with regard to their joint ministry as the Methodist movement began to evolve in ways unanticipated in the first heady days of the Revival.