as constantly breaking them. The gist
of this correspondence has been wittily summed up thus: 'Dear George, I
have read what you have written on the subject of predestination, and
God has taught me to see that you are wrong and that I am right. Yours
affectionately, J. Wesley.' And the reply: 'Dear John, I have read what
you have written on the subject of predestination, and God has taught me
that I am right and you are wrong. Yours affectionately, G. Whitefield.'

If the dispute between these good men was warm while the Atlantic
separated them, it was still warmer when they met. In 1741 Whitefield
returned to England, and a temporary alienation between him and Wesley
arose. Whitefield is said to have told his friend that they preached two
different Gospels, and to have avowed his intention to preach against
him whenever he preached at all. Then they turned the one to the right
hand and the other to the left. As in most disputes, there were, no
doubt, faults on both sides. Both were tempted to speak unadvisedly with
their lips, and, what was still worse, to write unadvisedly with their
pens. It has already been seen that John Wesley had the knack of both
saying and writing very cutting things. If Whitefield was rash and lost
his temper, Wesley was certainly irritating. But the details of the
unfortunate quarrel may be found in any history of Wesley or Whitefield.
It is a far pleasanter task to record that in course of time the breach
was entirely healed, though neither disputant receded one jot from his
opinions. No man was ever more ready to confess his faults, no man ever
had a larger heart or was actuated by a truer spirit of Christian
charity than George Whitefield. Never was there a man of a more
forgiving temper than John Wesley. 'Ten thousand times would I rather
have died than part with my old friends,' said Whitefield of the
Wesleys. 'Bigotry flies before him and cannot stand,' said John Wesley
of Whitefield. It was impossible that an alienation between two such
men, both of whom were only anxious to do one great work, should be
permanent.

From 1749 the Calvinistic controversy lay comparatively at rest for some
years. The publication of Hervey's 'Dialogues between Theron and
Aspasio,' in 1755, with John Wesley's remarks upon them, and Hervey's
reply to the remarks, reawakened a temporary interest in the question,
but it was not till the year 1771 that the tempest broke out again with
more than its former forc