Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T15:43:01.789Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Bishops and the Brethren: Anglican Attitudes to the Moravians in the Mid-Eighteenth Century

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 April 2011

C. J. Podmore
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Most Anglican crises, including recent ones, seem to boil down in the end to two linked questions — those of identity and authority. Is the Church of England pre-eminently a national or a catholic Church, a Protestant Church (and if so, of what kind?) or Anglican and sui generis? With which of these types of Church should it align itself? Where lies the famed via media, and which are the extremes to be avoided? And who has the authority to decide: as a national Church, parliament, the government, the monarch personally; as an episcopal Church, the bishops? Or should the clergy in convocations (or, latterly, the General Synod, including representatives of the pious laity) take decisions? Anglican crises have always raised these twin problems of identity and authority. In the mid-eighteenth century — from the end of the 1730s and particularly in the 1740s — the Church of England faced another crisis. The Anglican bishops had to come to terms with the movement known as the ‘evangelical revival’. Principles had to be applied to a new situation. The bishops had to decide how to categorise the new societies (or would they become new churches?) which were springing up all over England.

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Ecclesiastical History , Volume 41 , Issue 4 , October 1990 , pp. 622 - 646
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Podmore, C. J., ‘The Fetter Lane Society, 1738’, PWHS xlvi (1988), 125–53Google Scholar; idem, ‘The Fetter Lane Society, 1739–1740’, PWHS xlvii (1990).

2 Walsh, J. D., ‘The Cambridge Methodists’, in Brooks, P. N. (ed.), Christian Spirituality. Essays in honour of Gordon Rupp, London 1975, 251–83Google Scholar

3 Sykes, N., From Sheldon to Seeker. Aspects of English church history, 1660–1768, London 1959, 138–9.Google Scholar

4 Reichel, H., ‘Das Geschenk des Gemeinschaftsbewuβtseins’, in Hahn, H.-G. and Reichel, H. (eds), Zinzendorf und die Hermhuter Brüder, Hamburg 1977, 93–110Google Scholar, at p. 93; Beyreuther, E., Nikolaus Ludwig von Zinzendorf in Selbstzeugnissen und Bilddokumenten, Stuttgart 1975, 67Google Scholar, gives the figures as 300 and 150.

5 Zinzendorf wished the name ‘Moravian Church’ to be confined to the Moravian exiles and their descendants, and in German the names ‘die Brüdergemeine’ and ‘die Brüder-Unität’ are used. This article follows English usage in describing the whole Church and all its members, regardless of their national origins, as ‘Moravian’.

6 General Synod, London, June 1750, JRL, Manchester, Eng. MSS 1058, fo. 24r; Synodal Conference, London, Sept. 1751, fo. 25V.

7 General Synod, Marienborn, 1745, session i, 12 July, Unitätsarchiv, Herrnhut, R2.A15, pp. 9–10; Wake to Jablonski, 6 Apr. 1717, Christ Church, Oxford, Wake MSS 25, fo. 33; cf. Sykes, N., William Wake, Cambridge 1957, 7Google Scholar ff.

8 The Journal of the Rev. Charles Wesley, M.A., ed. Jackson, T., London 1849, 65Google Scholar (19 Jan.); JRL, Eng. Mss 1058, General Synod, London, June 1750, fo. 25; Büdingische Sammlung einiger in die Kirchen-His lorie einschlagender sonderlich neuerer Schafften, Büdingen 1740–5 (repr. Hildesheim 1965), i. 356–9; cf. Unitäsarchiv, R4.D4.2. Waucr, G. A., Die Anfänge der Brüderkirche in England, Leipzig 1900, 84Google Scholar, gives the dates and sequence of these events incorrectly (cf. Eng. trans, by Elliott, J., The Beginnings ofthe Brethren's Church (‘Moravians’) in England, Basildon 1901, 60–1).Google Scholar

9 Diary of the First Earl of Egmont (Historic Manuscripts Commission lxiii, 1923), ii. 345.

10 Report of the Committee, Rhodes House, Oxford, USPG MSS, Dr Bray's Associates, Home papers, General, i, folder 3; cf. Unitätsarchiv, R13.A24.71 (printed) and Büdingische Sammlung i. 449–50.

11 Ibid.; General Synod, Marienborn, 1745, session i, 12 July, Unitätsarchiv, R2.A15, 11; Jablonski to Wake, 22 Mar. 1717, Christ Church, Wake MSS 25, fo. 32; Jablonski, ‘De successione ordinis episcopalis in Unitate Fratrum Bohemorum’, R4.D1.1a, b, MS 1717, C18 copy - title in Jablonsk's hand.

12 Journal… Wesley, 66 (19 Jan.); Büdingische Sammlung i. 358.

13 Ibid.; JRL, Eng. MSS 1058, fo. 25V.

14 Potter to Zinzendorf, 10 Aug. 1737, Büdingische Sammlung i. 173; cf. Unitätsarchiv, R4.D3.5a, Benham, D., Memoirs of James Hutton, London 1856, 26–7.Google Scholar

15 Report of the Committee; Unitätsarchiv, R2.A15, p. 11.

16 Duffy, E., ‘Primitive Christianity revived; religious renewal in Augustan England’, Studies in Church History xiv (1977), 287–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar at pp. 287 and 299–300.

17 Cf. n. 107.

18 ‘Fratres etiam nostros, Episcopos Bohémicos, primaevae Ecclesiae Praesulibus perquam similes, animitus amo atque amplecto’: Potter to Zinzendorf, 11 Feb. 1737, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A24.64; cf. Büdingische Sammlung iii. 343.

19 ‘Una cum pura primaevaque fide primaevam etiam Ecclesiae disciplinám constanter adhuc, ut accepimus, tuentcs’: Büdingische Sammlung i. 173.

20 ‘Vos autem prae caeteris amera atque amplectar…arctiori nobiscum vinculo conjuncti estis’: ibid.Journal… Wesley, 67 (1 Feb.).

21 Ibid. ‘Sc…inconsulto Rege non possit publicam edere Ecclesiae Anglicane hac de re confessionem, id quod status forte ratio impeditura foret’: Büdingische Sammlung i. 358 (conversation, 9 Feb.).

22 General Synod, Zeist, 1746, Special-Conferenz der Troporum, 1 June, p. 7, Unitatsarchiv, R2.A2g.2b.

23 J. Hutton to Zinzendorf, 18 Nov. 1740, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A9.35; London Diary, 9 June, 9 Aug., 19 Oct. 1741 (new style), Unitätsarchiv, R13.C1.1.

24 The ascription of this visit to 1738 by Keble, J., The Life of Thomas Wilson, Oxford 1863, ii. 943Google Scholar, followed by Ziegler, A. B., Thomas Wilson, Bischof von Sodor und Man, 1663–1755. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der englischen Literatur des 18. Jahrhunderts, Freiburg, Switzerland 1972, 59Google Scholar, rests on a misinterpretation of Cranz, D., The Ancient and Modem History of the Brethren, trans, and ed. La Trobe, B., London 1780, 240.Google Scholar

25 Zinzendorf to Cossart, 14 Dec. 1738, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A14.14b, 15.

26 Zinzendorf to Wilson, 14 Dec. 1738, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A14.14b.

27 Cossart to the Moravian Church at Marienborn, 17 July 1739, H. Cossart, Journal, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A14.8,3,4 and 7,8,9 Apr. The ‘history’ was probably De Bono Unitalis, disciplinaeque ac Obedientiae in Ecclesia recle constituta, vel conslituenda, Ecclesiae Bohemicae ad Anglicanam Paraenesis, Amsterdam 1660, which was republished at Halle in 1702, under the title Historia Fratrum Bohemorum, and in London in 1710, according to the editor's preface to Cranz, op. cit. A3. An English translation by Tymarchus, J., An Exhortation of the Churches of Bohemia to the Church of England, was published in London in 1661Google Scholar, and a partial translation was published as Primitive Church Government in the Practice of the Reformed in Bohemia in 1703, perhaps at Edinburgh, according to the British Library Catalogue.

28 Saaa Privata, in Works of Thomas Wilson, ed. Keble, J., Oxford 1863Google Scholar, v. 61 (The Supplement to the Maxims, ibid. 533 no. 55, has ‘goes far towards rejecting’); Maxims, ibid. 389 no. 187 (Keble noted that the latter phrase was ‘blotted out in ink, apparently by Dr Wilson’); Supplement, ibid. 520fr. no. 38.

29 7, 8, g Apr., Cossart, Journal.

30 Wilson to Cossart, 21 May 1739, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A14.6; Wilson to Cossart, 3 May 1740, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A14.13.

31 3 Apr., Cossart, Journal. Wilson appears in the circulation list for a letter of 22 Oct. 1737, Unitätsarchiv, R20.A9b.4, implying that he was already a member then.

32 Lewis, A. J., Zinzendorf the Ecumenical Pioneer, London 1962, 26.Google Scholar

33 Wilson had ‘partaken of the favourable impression [ZinzendorfJ had made — not least on [his] own personal friends and coadjutors — during his visit to England’: Keble, , Thomas Wilson ii. 941Google Scholar ff.

34 Unitätsarchiv, R13.A14.13.

35 Wilson to Cossart, 8 June 1739, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A 14.16a, Keble, , op. cit. ii. 944.Google Scholar

36 5 Apr. and passim, Cossart, Journal.

37 17 Apr., ibid. Wilson's reaction to news that Whitefield had adopted what he at first termed ‘this new and (what at present appears) tumultuary way of preaching’ — in the fields — was surprising, again reflecting his humility and charity. History brought to mind the danger that field-preaching might lead to rebellion, but ‘why this gentleman takes this way, I know not, and therefore dare not condemn him. The ways of Christ are many to awaken both preachers and hearers; and if this shall awaken and help to dispel the darkness and unconcernedness of the common people for their salvation, and oblige the preachers of the Gospel to make their sermons true and saving discourses instead of harrangues, it will have a blessed effect. In the meantime, it will require a very great and especial grace, both in the preacher to such numerous and uncommon assemblies, and to such assemblies themselves, to hinder Satan getting an advantage over them’: Wilson to Cossart, 21 May 1739, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A14.6.

38 22 June, Cossart, Journal.

39 Wilson to Cossart, 3 May 1740, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A14.13.

40 English Pilgrim House Diary (all dates new style), 26 Aug. 1748, Moravian Church House, London.

41 Spangenberg to Moravian Church, 24 Jan. 1734/5, Unitätsarchiv, R14.A6a.3, at 8, 12, 14 Jan.; R14.A6a.4 (Spangenberg's diary), at 11, 12, 14 Jan.

42 14 Jan., Unitätsarchiv R14.A6a.3.

43 14 Jan., Unitätsarchiv R14.A6a.4.

44 14 Jan., Unitätsarchiv, R14.A6a.3.

45 F. M. Ziegenhagen to G. A. Francke, 10 Jan. 1735, Missionsarchiv der Franckeschen Stiftungen, Halle, I.E.2:90 (cf. Beyreuther, E., August Hermann Francke, Leipzig 1957, 200Google Scholar); H. Vereist to T. Causton, 25 Jan. 1734/5, PRO, Kew, Georgia Trustees' correspondence, CO5. 666. 89; J. Oglethorpe to Zinzendorf, 28 Feb. 1734/5, Unitätsarchiv, R14.A3b.18.

46 14 Jan. Unitätsarchiv, R14.A6a.3.

47 London diary, 7 Aug. 1741 (new style), Unitätsarchiv, R13.G1.1.

48 Gibson, E., The Bishop of London's Pastoral Letter to the People of his Diocese, Especially those of the two great Cities of London and Westminster, By way of Caution Against Lukewarmness on the one hand and Enthusiasm on the other, London 1739, 19.Google Scholar

49 3, 24 Oct. 1743, PHD.

50 9 Jan. 1744, PHD; Church, T., A Serious and Expostulatory Letter to the Rev. Mr. George Whitefield, on Occasion of His late Letter to the Bishop of London, London 1744, 3Google Scholar; G. Legh to Zinzendorf, 5 Apr. 1744, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A18.27, copying a letter of Archbishop Herring to Legh, 7 Mar. 1743/4; Gibson to Dawson, 6 Mar. 1743/4, Library of Congress, 16, 471 (Dawson papers), 298, fo. 27; Gibson to Dawson, 6 Sept. 1744, 301, fo. 29a; Gibson to Dawson, 28 July 1745, fo. 39.

51 [Gibson, E.], Observations upon the Conduct and Behaviour of a certain Sect, Usually distinguished by the Name of Methodists, n.pl. n.d., 6.Google Scholar It is not true, as Zinzendorf suggested, that Gibson was ‘plainly mistaken, confounding Moravians with Methodists’, Zinzendorf to Gibson, 29 Sept. 1744, Unitätsarchiv R13.A12.5 (Benham, , James Hutton, 164–7)Google Scholar, Pace Wauer, , Die Anfänge, 133Google Scholar ff., Sykes, N., Edmund Gibson, Oxford 1926, 325Google Scholar, and Beyreuther, E., Die Groβe Zinzendorf-Trilogie, Marburg 1988, iii. 256.Google Scholar

52 Observations, 7.

53 Ibid.

54 Ibid. 20.

55 Ibid. 6.

56 Ällesten-Conferenz, 22 June 1744, JRL, Eng. MSS 1058, fo. 15r; Unitätsarchiv R13.A10.2; Zinzendorf to Gibson, 23 July 1744, R13.A12.4 (Benham, , op. cit. 157Google Scholar fr., incorrectly dated).

57 R13.A5.85: M. Dober to Zinzendorf, 4 Sept. 1744 (new style), Bodleian Library, Oxford, MS Dep. c. 242 (Gibson papers, Dalton no. 100), fo. 15r. It was presumably this passage which Sykes paraphrased thus: ‘He replied somewhat sourly that, like sisters after the flesh, they would get on best at a distance’: Sykes, N., ‘The seventeenth and eighteenth centuries’, in Dodwell, C. R. (ed.), The English Church and the Continent, London 1959, 94.Google Scholar

58 Unitätsarchiv, R13.A5.85.

59 Bodl. Lib. MS Dep. c. 242, fo. 2r.

60 Gibson to Hutton, 20 Aug. 1744, MCH, AB109.A3.C18 (Benham, , James Hution, 158Google Scholar fr.); Hutton to Gibson, 25 Aug. 1744, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A12.3 (Benham, , op. cit. 160–3)Google Scholar; Zinzendorf to Gibson, 29 Sept. 1744, R13.A12.5 (Benham, , op. cit. 164–7)Google Scholar; L. E. Schlicht to Zinzendorf, 2/13 Oct. 1744, R13.A5.92; Bodl. Lib., MS Dep. c. 242, fo. 2r.

61 University Library, St Andrews, Gibson MS 5327 (Dalton no. 5).

62 Ibid. fo. 5r.

63 Bodl. Lib., MS Dep. c. 242. Cennick is described as ‘now at Dublin’. This development in Gibson's view is not taken into account by Sykes, , Edmund Gibson, 324–32.Google Scholar

64 Bodl. Lib., MS Dep. c. 242, fos 2v, 3r, 4v.

65 Ibid, fos 2r, 2v, 3r.

66 Ibid. fos 5r, 6r.

67 H. Cossart to Zinzendorf, 29 Nov. 1746, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A20.4.

68 Cossart to Zinzendorf, 25 July 1747, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A20.17.

69 Gibson, E., The Charge of the Right Reverend Father in God, Edmund Lord Bishop of London. At the Visitation of his Diocese in the Tears 1746, and 1747, n.pl. n.d., 4.Google Scholar

70 Gibson to Dawson, 15 July 1747, Lib. Cong., Dawson papers, 339, fo. 59.

71 S. Lieberkühn, report, 1742, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A24.67; the visit took place on 18 June.

72 W. Holland's account, JRL, Eng. MSS 1076.6; Lieberkühn report, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A24.67; General Synod, Marienborn, 1745, session iii, 12 July, R2.A25, p. 103 (the occasion when the last comment was made to Schlicht is not specified).

73 Unitätsarchiv, R13.A24.67.

74 Spangenberg's diary, 26 Oct. 1742, Unitätsarchiv, R13.C1.5.

75 General Synod, Hirschberg, 1743, notes by an English brother, session viii, 3 July, no. 19, JRL, Eng. Mss 10576. Conference, Bloomsbury, 3 Oct. 1749, Unitätsarchiv, R2.A26.7, p. 46 no. 8. Elsewhere the comment is related to Zinzendorf's, Sixteen Discourses preached at Berlin, Eng. trans. London 1740Google Scholar, ‘Die Berlinische Reden haben die Neuigkeit, es ist eine wahre aber unerhörte Theologie, wie der Erzbischof von Canterbury gesagt hat’: Helfer-Conferenz, Marienborn, 23 Dec. 1745, Unitätsarchiv, R2.A18.

76 14/25 Mar. 1742/3, MCH, Fetter Lane Diary, i.

77 Zinzendorf to Potter, 12 Sept. 1746, with note by Cossart, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A11.8; cf. Addison, W. G., The Renewed Church of the Brethren, 1732–1930, London 1932, 177Google Scholar (Cossart's signature misplaced). Addison's arrangement of this correspondence (appendix C. I) is confused. He attempted to follow the Herrnhut references, despite the fact that these do not place the letters in the correct order, but four of his extracts are given incorrect references, two halves of the same letter are quoted in different places, and two letters are dealt with twice.

78 Zinzendorf to Potter, 17 (?) Sept. 1746, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A11.12:A.

79 Zinzendorf to Potter, 21 Sept. 1746, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A11.12, 10: E; cf. Addison, , op. cit. 183–4Google Scholar (beginning), 178 (middle), conclusion omitted.

80 English General Conference, 18 Sept. 1746, JRL, Engl. MSS 1054, 8–9.

81 J. Gambold to Zinzendorf (n.d.), MCH, AB95.A3.27D; cf. JRL, Eng. MSS 1076.17.

82 Zinzendorf to Potter, 18 Sept. 1746, Unitätsarchiv, R13.An.12:B. Zinzendorf to Potter, 21 Sept. 1746, R13.An. 12,10: Libbey, E. N. (trans.), ‘James Hutton's second account of the Moravian Work in England’, PWHS xv (1925-6), 206–14Google Scholar, xvi (1927–8) 10–14, at xv. 214.

83 Cossart to Zinzendorf, 29 Nov. 1746, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A20.4; Zinzendorf to Potter, 7 Oct. 1746, R13.A11.14.

84 Zinzendorf to Potter, 15 (?) Dec. 1746, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A11.15.

85 Cossart to Zinzendorf, 6 Dec. 1746, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A20.5.

86 Cossart to Zinzendorf, 10 Jan. 1747, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A20.8.

87 Ibid.

88 Zinzendorf, , Naturelle Reflexionen, n. p. 1746–8Google Scholar (repr. Hildesheim 1964), 143.

89 Ingham to Zinzendorf, 30 July 1744, MCH, AB88.A3.14.34. This might be another reference to the plan, thought to have been made by the circle of Ingham's sister-in-law Lady Huntingdon, to have Whitefield consecrated a bishop when the prince of Wales succeeded. (See Watson, C. E., ‘Whitefield and Congregationalism’, Transactions of the Congregationalist History Society viii (1922), 171–80Google Scholar, 237–45; Rack, H. D., ‘Religious societies and the origins of Methodism’, this Journal xxxviii (1987), 582–95Google Scholar, at pp. 591–2.; Nuttall, G. F., ‘Howel Harris and “The Grand Table”: a note on religion and politics 1744–50’, this Journal xxxix (1988), 531–44Google Scholar, at pp. 543–4. However, a Moravian source also indicates that George II's remark that Whitefield should be ‘advanced to the Bench as the only means of putting an end to his preaching’ (Seymour, A. C. H., The Life and Times ofSelina Countess of Huntingdon, London 1839, i. 180)Google Scholar, was not only a joke, but a secondhand one: before May 1746 Gibson complained to the king about the trouble caused by Whitefield's preaching, whereupon the duke of Montagu, who was standing nearby, told the king he should make Whitefield a bishop and he would only preach once a year, General Synod, Zeist, 1746, session xvii, 23 May, Unitätsarchiv, R2.A19, p. 163.

90 Cossart to Zinzendorf, 8 Sept. 1747, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A20.23.

91 Synodal Conference, Herrnhut, 1750, session i, 16 Nov., Unitätsarchiv, R2.A29.2, p. 58.

92 Cf. n. 50.

93 J. Töltschig (dictated by J. Charlesworth) to L. Dober, 6 Dec. 1745, JRL, Eng. MSS 1076.15, fo. 7r.

94 Ingham to Cossart, 16 Oct. 1747, MCH, AB88.A3.14.37.

95 Ingham to Zinzendorf, 28 Oct./8 Nov. 1747, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A17.40.

96 Cossart to Zinzendorf, 12 Apr. 1748, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A20.28.

97 Unitätsarchiv, R13.A20.29: Cossart to Zinzendorf, 26 Apr. 1748 (n. st.).

98 Cossart to Zinzendorf, 14 June 1748, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A20.30.

99 Cossart to Zinzendorf, 12 July 1748, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A20.34.

100 Carpenter, E., Thomas Sherlock, London 1936Google Scholar, passim.

101 ‘Extract aus dem Diario des Gemeinhauses…betreffend die Negotiation der Brüder-Gemeinen vor dero Parlament von Groβbritannien’, 8/19 Feb. (all dates new style), Unitätsarchiv, R13.A24.58; postscript to the extract, R13.A24.56.

102 Herring to Hardwicke, 27 Mar. 1748/9, British Library, Add. MSS 35598 (Hardwicke papers), fo. 407; 3 Jan., Unitätsarchiv, R13.A24.58.

103 23 Apr., Unitätsarchiv, R13.A24.58; R13.A24.56.

104 General Synod, London, 1749, part 2, session ix, 29 Sept., Unitätsarchiv, R2.A26.4b, p. 111.

105 23 Apr., 3 May, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A24.58.

106 30 July 1749, JHD (MS headquarters diary, all dates new style).

107 J. von Watteville to ?, 24 May 1748, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A22a.11; Provincial Synod, 1748, session vii, 4/15 May, JRL, Eng. MSS 1054, p. 34; Lambeth Palace Library, MS 1349 (Seeker Papers), p. 165 (cf. Sykes, , Sheldon to Seeker, 135).Google Scholar

108 3 Jan., Unitätsarchiv, R13.A24.58.

109 Unitätsarchiv, R13.A24.56; 23 Apr., R13.A24.58; von Schrautenbach, L. C., Der Graf von Zinzendorf und die Brüdergemeine seiner Zeit, Gnadau-Leipzig 1851 (repr. Hildesheim-New York 1972), 446Google Scholar; Zinzendorf to J. Thomas, (25 Mar.) 1749, R13.A13.1; cf. Acta Fratrum Unitatis in Anglia, London 1749.

110 Loids Journals.

111 23 Apr., Unitätsarchiv, R13.A24.58.

112 28 Apr., 5 May, JHD.

113 20 Apr., Unitätsarchiv, R13.A24.58; 6 May, JHD.

114 Reasons and Objections for and against the Privileges granted to the…Unitas Fratrum, London 1750, 14.

115 Lords Journals; Reasons and Objections, passim.

116 Booklist, Gentleman's Magazine, March 1749; Lords Journals.

117 Pinnington, J., ‘Moravian and Anglican: a new look at the circumstances surrounding the arrival of the Renewed Brethren in England’, Bulletin of the JRL lii (1969-1970), 200–17.Google Scholar The letter cited at 206 n. 1 as evidence for Seeker's likely view (Malelieu to Davisme, 31 May 1746, now Lambeth Palace Library, SP ix, fo. 120: E) did not come into Seeker's possession until his secretary purchased the papers of the anti-Moravian pamphleteer Henry Rimius from Bishop Lavington's executors. The same is true ofthat cited at 216 n. 3, which was written not in 1746 but as late as 1755, more than five years after the debates, J. R. Pittius, statement, 19 Jan. 1755, SP ix, fo. 41.

118 26 May 1749, JHD.

119 30 July, JHD; J. Thomas to Zinzendorf, 30 Oct. 1749, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A13.4; 17 Dec, JHD; R13.A22a.95: Zinzendorf to J. Thomas, 5 Mar. 1750 (n. st.); preliminary conference, session i, 4 Dec. 1749, R2.A26.8, p. 7.

120 T. Wilson to H. Cossart, 4 Sept. 1750, Unitätsarchiv, R13.A14.46; T. Wilson to H. Cossart, 7 Feb. 1750 [/1], R13.A14.26 (cf. Benham, , James Hutton, 248)Google Scholar; T. Wilson, formal acceptance, 4 Feb. 1750 [/1], R13.A.24.72, 45a, 46 (cf. Benham, , op. cit. 246–7Google Scholar; Keble, , Thomas Wilson ii. 941).Google Scholar