Wesley Didn’t Say It: Set Myself on Fire… Watch Me Burn

06 Monday Sep 2010

Posted by Kevin M. Watson in Methodist History, Wesley

≈ 57 Comments

Tags

John Wesley

John Wesley, credit: Daniel X. O’Neil

Among the words put in John Wesley’s mouth that he did not actually say, perhaps the most common are the following:

I set myself on fire and people come to watch me burn.

Catch on fire with enthusiasm and people will come for miles to watch you burn.

Wesley did not say either of these.

But this may be the most persistent quote that is incorrectly attributed to John Wesley. I updated this post on April 25, 2020, and did a google search for “John Wesley quotes.” The first entry is an answer box that has a list of unattributed John Wesley quotes. Look at the second and fourth entires!

So, if you ask Google for John Wesley quotes, two of the first four it currently gives you are two quotes that he did not actually say.

It is easy to come up with numerous examples of this quote being attributed to Wesley. But what you will not find is a citation of the source where Wesley is supposed to have actually said it.

Inaccurate information spreads rapidly on the internet.

I have been surprised by the anger from some commenters on my series of “Wesley Didn’t Say It” posts. Several people have sarcastically said something like, “Oh, so you were there to hear every word that John Wesley ever said?”

Of course I wasn’t. But no historian thinks we can know what dead people said in conversations that were never recorded or written down. It is impossible to prove that someone never said something.

The standard for attributing words to someone is documentation showing they said it. For John Wesley, this would be published writings like sermons, treatises, and his published Journal or manuscript sources like letters.

I was a PhD student when I first wrote this post, so I checked in with an expert before I hit publish. I emailed noted historian of Wesley and early Methodism, Dr. Richard Heitzenrater. His response was along these lines: You can look for that quote in Wesley as long as you want, you won’t find it.

It troubles me that this quote is so frequently attributed to Wesley. It does not sound like something that Wesley would have said. In the email string that first made me aware of how often this is attributed to Wesley, someone commented that the quote was rather “braggadocious” and as a result did not sound like Wesley. I agree. It would not be characteristic of Wesley to say, “I do something awesome, and as a result people come to look at me.”

Wesley’s desire was not to attract people to himself, but to point them to the risen Lord who was their only hope of salvation.

Wesley didn’t say, “I set myself on fire and people come to watch me burn.” We should stop saying that he did.

You can add this quote to other quotes that are stubbornly connected to John Wesley despite the fact that there is no source that connects them to Wesley’s pen. I have written about several other quotes misattributed to John Wesley:

“Do all the good you can, by all the means you can, in all the ways you can, in all the places you can, at all the times you can, to all the people you can, as long as ever you can.”

“In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; and, in all things, charity.”

“Personal and social holiness“

“Holy conferencing“

“Be present at our table, Lord…“

Do you want to know if Wesley did actually say something that is attributed to him? Check out Did Wesley Really Say That? (Here’s How to Find Out).

Kevin M. Watson teaches, writes, and preaches to empower community, discipleship, and stewardship of our heritage. Connect with Kevin. Get future posts emailed to you. This post was updated on April 25, 2020.

Wesley Didn’t Say It: Unity, Liberty, Charity

02 Thursday Sep 2010

Posted by Kevin M. Watson in Wesley

≈ 28 Comments

Tags

John Wesley

John Wesley, credit: Daniel X. O’Neil

In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; and, in all things, charity.

Wesley did not say this.

I came across this frequently misattributed quote while reading Richard P. Heitzenrater’s chapter, “‘Unity, Liberty, Charity’ in the Wesleyan Heritage.” in the book Unity, Liberty, and Charity: Building Bridges under Icy Waters, edited by Donald E. Messer and William J. Abraham.

After a detailed search in Wesley’s writings for this quote, Heitzenrater found “the saying was not used by Wesley.” (29) Heitzenrater wrote the book on Wesley and the People Called Methodists, so this is good enough for me.

There is no record in Wesley’s published writings of him saying, “In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; and, in all things, charity.” We should stop saying that he did.

Check out the comments for helpful discussion of where the quote originated.

As with all of these quotes, my purpose here is not to contest the idea found in the quote. In other words, I am not arguing against the sentiment. I want to encourage historical accuracy and greater care in attributing sayings to historical figures.

This is the first post in a series of posts on quotes that are commonly attributed to Wesley that he did not actually say. Here are several other quotes misattributed to John Wesley:

“Do all the good you can, by all the means you can, in all the ways you can, in all the places you can, at all the times you can, to all the people you can, as long as ever you can.”

“I set myself on fire and people come to watch me burn.”

“Personal and social holiness“

“Holy conferencing“

“Be present at our table, Lord…“

Do you want to know if Wesley did actually say something that is attributed to him? Check out Did Wesley Really Say That? (Here’s How to Find Out).

Background on the Explanatory Notes (Part II)

04 Thursday Sep 2008

Posted by Kevin M. Watson in Book Review, Ministry, Wesley

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Explanatory Notes, John Wesley

In my reading today, I came across more information about the Explanatory Notes:

During the previous decade, John had hoped the publication of his Bible commentary, Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament, would provide doctrinal help for his preachers. The first edition, in 1755, had been prepared more hastily than Wesley had hoped. The second edition the following year was essentially a reprint, though with the errata incorporated. In 1760, however, he and Charles had embarked on a major revision of the work, further refining the biblical text and expanding the notes. They finished this new edition in 1762 and, combined with the collected Sermons on Several Occasions John had published (four volumes by 1760), it provided basic doctrinal guidelines for the preachers.

By the late summer of 1763, Wesley had firmly fixed these two resources as the measure of proper Methodist preaching. (Heitzenrater, Wesley and the People Called Methodists, 212-3)

Heitzenrater goes on to argue that the Model Deed, which controlled access to Methodist pulpits, stipulated that preachers must preach “‘no other doctrine than is contained in Mr. Wesley’s Notes Upon the New Testament, and four volumes of Sermons.’ By this stipulation, the Sermons and Notes became the doctrinal standards for the Methodist preachers.” (Heitzenrater 213)

If you are still reading, you will see that we are starting to get somewhere… The Explanatory Notes were part of the doctrinal standards of early Methodism because they were considered to be an important way of ensuring that the people who preached in Methodist pulpits were preaching a doctrine that Wesley would approve of. Thus, the Explanatory Notes were intended to play an important role in defining what was acceptable Methodist teaching.

This still leaves open for discussion the role that they do actually play today and the role that they should play today.

Background on the Explanatory Notes

03 Wednesday Sep 2008

Posted by Kevin M. Watson in Book Review, Ministry, Wesley

≈ 7 Comments

Tags

Explanatory Notes, John Wesley, United Methodist Church

In a previous post I mentioned that I am reading through John Wesley’s Explanatory Notes on the New Testament. Today, in re-reading Richard Heitzenrater’s Wesley and the People Called Methodists, I came across this passage:

The notes were largely a collation of material from John Heylyn’s Theological Lectures, John Guyse’s Practical Expositor, Philip Doddridge’s Family Expositor, and Johannes Bengel’s Gnomen Novi Testamenti. The latter was one of the first works of modern critical biblical scholarship, and Wesley adopted many of Bengel’s principles of textual criticism. Although the predominance of the material in the notes comes from these sources, Wesley wove them together in such an editorial way that he could own the combined whole. Having acknowledged his debt to these authors in the preface, Wesley chose not to document particular borrowings, as as not to ‘divert the mind of the reader from keeping close to the point in view’ (JWW, 14:235-39). (Heiztenrater, 188)

In a sense then, it would seem that one could argue that our doctrinal understanding of the New Testament comes from John Heylyn, John Guyse, Philip Doddridge, and Johannes Bengel as filtered and collated by Wesley. It is likely that I will not have time in the near future to learn more about these four men, but I would be very interested to explore this further at another time, as I do not know much about any of them, and only recognize Doddridge’s name.

The more I think about the Explanatory Notes and read them, the more surprised I am that they carry the weight of Doctrine for United Methodists. One could ask whether it is necessary to have a Doctrine for the interpretation of the New Testament, but perhaps more to the point, one could ask whether the Explanatory Notes continue to make a relevant contribution to the life of the United Methodist Church.

I would love to hear your thoughts on this.