A Tory Marriage

Chapter 7 examines the Wesleys’ marriage as a deeply political and fraught relationship. Samuel and Susanna Wesley were both Tories and held High Church principles, but it seems that Susanna was a Jacobite, following the Revolution of 1688; whereas Samuel accepted the offer of the throne to William and Mary. In contrast to the usual accounts of the marriage, which suggest two moments of discord, this chapter suggests that their relationship was marked by sustained and enduring conflict. Starting in 1701–2 the couple separated over Susanna’s refusal to say ‘amen’ at prayers for the King. The breach was only superficially resolved in 1702. Thereafter the marriage remained a source of tension. In 1711 Susanna’s establishment of a prayer meeting in Epworth while Samuel was in London led to friction between them. A year later, Samuel reported his wife to the Bishop of Lincoln for her failure to accept the invalidity of her dissenting baptism.

Samuel Wesley’s Conformity in 1684

This chapter explores Samuel Wesley’s decision to abandon his family’s commitment to Dissent and conform to the Church of England around 1684. Wesley was raised in a Dissenting family and educated at a Dissenting academy. His decision to conform to the Church of England was therefore surprising and there have been a number of explanations for it. This chapter explores the range of motives for Wesley’s decision and presents new evidence for the reasons for this decision. The decision was undoubtedly influenced by the desire to go to the University of Oxford. Other accounts have suggested that Wesley was unhappy with the attitudes of his fellow students at the dissenting academy he attended, and that he had developed a strong commitment to the idea of Charles I as a martyr. He may also have attended Oxford with the intention to remain a Dissenter but gradually found himself drawn to the Church of England. Other influences may have been his future wife, Susanna, who had conformed at the age of twelve.

Introduction

The introduction develops the idea of the ‘long Revolution’, suggesting that the Glorious Revolution of 1688-9 was not simply an event, but a much longer process. This process began at the start of James II’s reign and continued until about 1720 when the Hanoverian regime was settled. For High Church Tories, like Samuel Wesley, this period presented problems and anxieties that had to be dealt with. Foremost among these was allegiance and loyalty, both in Church and State. However, after 1689 the issue was complicated by the Toleration Act and the decisions of the Church in how to respond to legal freedom for dissenters. A political complication was the division of the clergy into High and Low Churchmen, as well as attempts in Parliament and Convocation to proscribe Dissent. Samuel Wesley’s response to these circumstances was representative of many others who shared his views and his anxieties in this period were those which were more widely held.

The Wesleys’ Tory Ghost

Chapter 8 looks at the involvement of Samuel Wesley and his family in the supernatural. It argues that the supernatural was profoundly political in this period. The contemporary examples of witchcraft and apparitions were heavily influenced by the Tory-Whig divide and by the High-Low Church divisions. Often belief in supernatural phenomena was regarded as the preserve of the educated and those of High Church and Tory principles. Whigs and Low Churchmen tended to adopt a more rationalist approach. The central discussion of the chapter is of ‘Old Jeffrey’, the Epworth Rectory Ghost which haunted the house for three months in 1716. The hauntings took form of noises and apparitions. It was especially well-documented because John Wesley was at school in London and asked for detailed accounts of the episode. The disturbances of 1716–17 almost certainly reflect community, political, and family divisions which marked the Wesleys in Epworth. There is also evidence that ‘Old Jeffrey’ shared Susanna’s Jacobite politics.

Conclusion

The conclusion reviews the life of Samuel Wesley and judges whether he was a success or a failure as both a parish clergyman and as a High Church Tory. It also examines the degree to which Wesley was representative of other High Churchmen and Tories in the period 1685-1720. His children clearly idolised their father and in particular his oldest son, Samuel junior, who was ordained but never held a parish, preferring instead to be a schoolmaster at Blundells School in Devon, published a poem on his father’s death. The poem represented Samuel Wesley as tolerant towards dissenters, misunderstood in politics and an eirenic and even tempered man. The reality was somewhat different. Nevertheless, Samuel Wesley junior’s poem in some respects began the process of sanitising Wesley’s family and personality from the reality. In some respects, Wesley might have preferred to be known as a poet rather than a clergyman who lived a fractious life.

Wesley and Wake

Chapter 5 explores Wesley’s relationship with his bishop, William Wake of Lincoln. Wesley’s strong and unbending Toryism meant that his relations with Bishop William Wake of Lincoln, who was a Whig, were difficult. Wesley posed a series of questions to Wake about such issues as excommunication, baptism and moral discipline to be imposed on Dissenters. In each case, Wesley seems to have sought Wake’s counsel with the intention of persuading him that the demands of parish life were such that toleration of Dissent was remarkably problematic. In addition, the issue of Dissenting, or ‘lay’ Baptism was an issue which divided them. Wesley’s interest in a charity school for the parish was also very clear and he clearly wanted Wake to endorse this. By a close and detailed examination of the correspondence between Wesley and Wake it is clear that while they shared an ambition for the Church they saw the ways to achieve it very differently.

Wesley, Sacheverell, and Convocation

Chapter 6 explains the role that Wesley played in the events in Church and State between 1709 and 1714, the high point of Tory High Church ambition in Church and State. It suggests that Wesley probably did contribute to the defence of Henry Sacheverell, who was on trial in the House of Lords on the political charge of preaching a seditious sermon. Sacheverell and Wesley have so much in common that Wesley’s claim that he contributed to the defence seems entirely plausible. As a member of Convocation, between 1710 and 1713, Wesley emerged as an important figure in the period. In addition to much committee work and supporting the High Church Tory agenda, he also drafted a key report in 1713 which advanced the High Church clergy’s case against the Bishops and argued that the failure to pursue Church reform was the responsibility of the Latitudinarian Bishops. Also considered is Wesley’s response to the Peace of Utrecht, a major Tory victory against continuing a Whig war.

Tories, Whigs, Dissenters, and Debt in 1705

Chapter 4 considers one of the best-known episodes in Wesley’s life, his poverty and imprisonment for debt in 1705. He was arrested and held in Lincoln Gaol. It argues that the case against Wesley was not simply one of financial mismanagement. Rather, Wesley was also the victim of a Whig conspiracy to punish him for his politics and his rancorous attacks on Dissenters. This happened during heightened tension between the Whigs and the Tories during the general election of 1705—itself caused by the attempt to pass the Occasional Conformity Bill to relieve Dissenters. It also shows how Tories, especially in Oxford, rallied to raise money to help secure his release from gaol. In particular, Arthur Charlett, Master of University College and Archdeacon John Hutton collaborated to bring Wesley’s predicament to the attention of the university as a means to raise the concerns of Tory clergy in the country.

Samuel Wesley and the Religious Societies, 1698–1702

Chapter 3 investigates Wesley’s appointment to, and early years as a parson in, Epworth, in Lincolnshire. It explores in particular his campaign to bring moral reform to the parish. It examines Wesley’s interests in the religious societies and the Society for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge (SPCK). His short-lived consideration of the society for the reformation of manners is also considered. His membership of the SPCK brought Wesley into contact with like-minded clergy and churchmen who aimed for religious renewal. The chapter also outlines how Wesley confronted his parishioners and set an acrimonious tone to his relations with them. It also considers his creation of a religious society in Epworth, which met regularly in the rectory and sought to instil greater piety and religious energy into his parishioners’ lives. It explores the rules of the society and the ways in which Wesley developed the society. Wesley’s behaviour in Epworth were not without opponents and those who derided his efforts.

Samuel Wesley in 1688

Chapter 2 examines Wesley’s position while at Oxford and during the Glorious Revolution, when he graduated from Oxford, was ordained, and married. It also considers Wesley’s loyalty to James II and his willingness to switch his allegiance to William and Mary. Wesley was strongly committed to James II and supported him well into the autumn of 1688; he may even have times his marriage in November 1688 to ensure he did so under what he then saw as a legitimate monarch. Nevertheless, in 1689 Wesley swore the oaths to accept William and Mary, and unlike his wife, remained committed to the Protestant succession up to and beyond 1714. The chapter also examines Wesley’s marriage and his early career as a naval chaplain and later as a curate in London, neither of which provided him with sufficient income to support a family. It concludes with consideration of Wesley’s poetic output in the 1690s and especially his poems on the death of Mary II and Archbishop Tillotson.