In 1753, when John Wesley was dangerously ill, Charles Wesley distinctly told the societies that he neither could nor would stand in his brother’s place, if it pleased God to take him, for he had neither a body, nor a mind, nor talents, nor grace for it.  In 1779, he wrote to his brother in terms as peremptory as John himself was wont to use, and such as few others would have dared to employ in addressing the founder of Methodism.  ’The preachers,’ he writes,[754] ’do not love the Church of England.  When we are gone, a separation is inevitable.  Do you not wish to keep as many good people in the Church as you can?  Something might be done now to save the remainder, if only you had resolution, and would stand by me as firmly as I will stand by you.  Consider what you are bound to do as a clergyman, and what you do, do quickly.’  It has been already stated that Charles was, if possible, even more attached to the Church than John.  John, on his part, fully felt the need of his brother’s help.  In 1768, he wrote to him, ‘I am at my wits’ end with regard to two things:  the Church and Christian perfection.  Unless both you and I stand in the gap in good earnest, the Methodists will drop them both.  Talking will not avail, we must do, or be borne away.  “Age, vir esto! nervos intende tuos."’ On another occasion, John rescued his brother from a dangerous tendency which he showed towards the stillness of the Moravians.  He wrote to him, ’The poison is in you, fair words have stolen away your heart;’ and made this characteristic entry in his journal:—­’The Philistines are upon thee, Samson; but the Lord is not departed from thee; He shall strengthen thee yet again, and thou shalt be avenged for the loss of thine eyes.’

There is an interesting letter from Whitefield to Charles Wesley, dated December 22, 1752, from which it appears that there was a threatened rupture between the two brothers, the cause of which we do not know.[755] ’I have read and pondered your kind letter with a degree of solemnity of spirit.  What shall I say?  Really I can scarce tell.  The connection between you and your brother hath been so close and continued, and your attachment so necessary to him to keep up his interest, that I could not willingly for the world do or say anything that may separate such friends.  I cannot help thinking that he is still jealous of me and my proceedings; but I thank God I am quite easy about it.’[756] The last sentence is characteristically injudicious, if Whitefield desired, as undoubtedly he did, to heal the breach; but the letter is valuable as showing that, in the opinion of Whitefield, who must have known as much about the matter as anyone, the co-operation of the two brothers was essential to their joint work.