 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
3.3.1
Introduction This
section of the thesis examines the contribution of the Rev.
John Wesley MA to health, holistic healing, and electrotherapy
in the eighteenth century. A systematic review of the observations
of twentieth century writers on his healing ministry and the
use of electrotherapy is also presented. This enables us to
make a fresh and original interpretation of his healing approaches,
as seen in the light of the recent developments in holistic
and alternative and complementary medicine during the last decade
of the twentieth century. These specific aspects of John Wesley's
healing ministry, seen from the viewpoint of a complementary
medicine practitioner, have not been previously documented,
although Wesley-Hill's (1958) work gives a most comprehensive
study of Wesley's healing ministry from an orthodox medicine
viewpoint. The study then goes on to examine the relevance and
implications of John Wesley's healing work for both present
and future research and the practice of electrotherapy and whole
person medicine, both orthodox and unorthodox, as we prepare
to enter the twenty-first century. John
Wesley was born from thoroughly English ancestry, the son and
grandson of Dissenting Church of England clergymen. His parents
had, however, conformed to the Establishment before John was
born. He was born in the tiny, isolated, marshy village of Epworth,
Lincolnshire, in its Rectory, on June 17th, 1703. He lived almost
throughout the whole of the eighteenth century and died on March
1st, 1791. He was the fifteenth out of eighteen or nineteen
children. He is said to have been 'methodical' as a boy, 'doing
nothing without a reason'. Much has also been made of the story
of his escape from the Rectory fire of 1709 and the belief that
his mother impressed upon him that he was saved for some special
destiny. He was certainly strictly brought up and his mother's
guidance and influence were deeply marked in him (Rack 1993).
John, at 17, after an education at Charterhouse, went to college
at Oxford. He was ordained a deacon at 22 and a priest at 25
(Schiller 1981). John acted from time to time as curate to his
father, until forced to reside mainly at Oxford, where he was
for some years a Fellow of Lincoln College. He was seen as a
man of great earnestness, strength of character and an indefatigable
worker, but temperamentally more inclined to the cloister then
to the parish (Baragar 1928). As
early as the spring of 1725, some months before his ordination,
Wesley began to keep a shorthand diary, being then twenty-two
years of age. Wesley's student life was not lacking in variety
and he had an intimate acquaintance with men of social and intellectual
distinction. The later Oxford Diaries and his published Journals
show that during his residential university life he was a great
traveller in the English counties, and often on foot (Curnock-footnotes
1909.1:7). From 1735-1738, he accompanied James Edward Oglethorpe
to Georgia as a missionary among the colonists and the Indians.
Following this period in America as a missionary, he returned
home to his mother country to be shocked by the suffering of
the poor people he found there (Dunlop 1964). The
popular impression is that Wesley himself founded and organised
the society of Oxford Methodists. Fertile in resource, it is
assumed that he was a great organiser. It is more in accordance
with facts to say that, however great he may have been in organisation,
he was not the originator. He utilised the experience of the
past, borrowed freely from his contemporaries, knew how to follow
a friend's initiative, and had a rare gift of assimilation.
He was quick to see the usefulness of new ideas, and did not
despise them because they came from other Churches or from friends
and allies in his own circle. The class-meeting, lay preaching,
and the love-feast are illustrations in point. Wesley, however,
did not conceive the idea of the Holy Club, which appeared to
be a spontaneous coming together of like-minded students - indeed,
one of several such informal groups in Oxford at that time (Vickers
1996). He swiftly recognised the value of a simple institution
into the founding of which men some years younger than himself
had been led (Curnock 1909) and he did assume leadership at
a later stage, largely by right of seniority and natural powers
of leadership (Vickers 1996). Methodist
historians have naturally tended to emphasise the reasonableness
and sobriety of their founder and followers and the social as
well as the spiritual benefits they produced. The elements of
irrationality and what some will see as religious hysteria in
the movement have been played down. J H Plumb, in his 'Pelican
History of England in the Eighteenth Century' suggests that
"there was nothing intellectual about Methodism; the rational
attitude, the most fashionable attitude of the day, was absolutely
absent, and Wesley's superstitions were those of his uneducated
audiences", quoted by Rack (1982) as an example of a rather
wholesale dismissal of Methodism as a retrograde movement. However,
earlier Plumb had allowed for more 'modernising tendencies in
it' (Rack 1996). John Wesley could not then be considered a
'Rationalist' of the day, though rational he certainly was.
Moreover, in Wesley's time according to Green, England was in
a sadly degraded and corrupt state politically, socially, morally
and religiously. The great masses of the poor, the common people,
were "ignorant and brutal to a degree hard to conceive".
For them there was little or no consideration from Church or
State. Shocked and stirred by this state of society, Wesley
forsook the seclusion of Oxford Halls to bear to the miners
and fishermen, and to the common people in general, a new religious
life (Baragar 1928). His
zeal to teach Christianity on the long journeys which he pursued
with tireless energy, brought him into contact with all conditions
of men but he not only preached, he actually ministered healing
and salvation. He saw the needs of men and women and met them
head on (Maddocks 1988). His mission was to teach them how to
live and this entailed looking after their physical as well
as their spiritual needs. He was ever a keen educationalist
and a publisher of around 400 cheap books and tracts for the
general education of his people (including his preachers). 'Primitive
Physick' and the 'Desideratum' described later were just
two of a wide range of books he published including for example
an English Grammar text. He also found health education lacking
and supplied it, choosing his medical authorities with care
and selecting from their remedies with discretion (Cule 1983).
As he perfected the organization of the Methodist movement,
he saw that he must meet a need, which the doctors of the day
could not. His Journal describes the diffidence with which he
started to provide medical treatment for members of the Methodist
societies and the experimentation on both his patients and also
upon himself (Andrews 1969). So the health and healing of the
people to whom he ministered was also a part of his ministry
(Maddocks 1988) albeit the salvation of their souls had a greater
priority. Thus it is generally acknowledged that any attempt
to assess the life and work of John Wesley must take into account
not only his ministry to the souls of men, but also his concern
for their bodies (Bowmer 1959). 3.3.1.3
Wesley's interests in health care Wesley
at 21 may have been drawn to read Dr Cheynes work 'A Book
of Health and Long Life',
in order to find a cure for the severe attacks of 'nose-bleeds'
from which he suffered at this period of his life; his prejudice
against the medical profession appears to have arisen in the
first place on account of the unfavourable reception which Cheyne's
work received at their hands (Turrell 1921). Wesley arranged
his habits in accordance with the advice he found there, as
well as in other medical works of either a popular or a technical
character. We may concede, as his sarcastic biographer Robert
Southey said, that he collected old women's nostrums (Dock 1915).
Wesley believed, however, that a healthy body and mind went
together with a redeemed soul, and he was a lifelong student
of medicine. He read medicine with the same avidity he showed
for theology and his bookshelf contained many well-thumbed medical
texts (Dunlop 1964). John
Wesley's involvement in health care is documented throughout
his writings. Early in his ministry Wesley established a visitation
programme for the sick and dispensed medicine to the poor in
London and Bristol. In 1747 Wesley published his collection
of simple remedies under the title, 'Primitive Physick'.
He later procured an electrical apparatus by which he administered
a form of therapy. In addition to these measures John Wesley
urged his readers toward a life style conductive to good health.
In his own early days he often lived a spartan life and he was
always frugal, happy to adopt a simple daily diet and he certainly
expected his preachers to make do on allowances providing for
mere subsistence living. Wesley viewed a sensible regimen as
the divinely appointed plan for a life of health as wholeness.
His commitment to minister to the total person, an emphasis
which antedates the contemporary interest in a more (w)holistic
understanding of health, warrants an examination (later in this
study) of those concepts critical to his view of health as wholeness
(Ott 1989). Like
most eighteenth-century preachers, he was maligned for practising
medicine. English pamphleteers protested repeatedly against
medical practice by clergymen of all denominations and distinctions
(Rousseau 1968). However, the attacks on Wesley and his publications
only began about 30 years after he first published his 'Primitive
Physick' and then continued throughout the nineteenth and twentieth
centuries. Wesley seemed to take the early attacks upon his
book in good humour. Of course, he was convinced the book was
needed and its immediate and lasting popularity seemed to confirm
its usefulness to those for whom it was intended. So we can
understand Wesley's confident reply to one of his most outspoken
medical denigrators, Dr. William Hawes, Physician to the London
Dispensary: "Dear Sir, My bookseller informs me that
since you published your remarks on the Primitive Physick, there
has been a greater demand for it than ever. If, therefore, you
please to publish a few further remarks you would confer a favour
upon Your Humble Servant" (Wesley Hill 1958). John
Wesley practised medicine on his own authority and he did so
because of the inadequate number of regular practitioners and
the inability of the poor to afford medical treatment - even
if they could obtain it (Cone 1978). Although he was concerned
with the economic aspects of medicine in his age, he was also
concerned with medical theory in his own time and with the general
development and progress of medical science. He promoted the
best medical advice of the day and the rules of the six 'non-naturals'
- to be described later. Wesley, like the best medical thinkers
of that period attributed most ailments to a violation of the
six 'non-naturals' (Rousseau 1968). John Wesley's practice of medicine continued to fascinate the orthodox and unorthodox medical professions especially throughout the twentieth century, and the following observations are drawn from some of these publications, sometimes written in admiration, and sometimes in a disparaging style. An
early article in the BMJ, and written under the name of Nova
et Vetera in 1902, examined the content of 'The medical tract
of John Wesley' with a descriptive review
of his 'Primitive Physick'. It covered the alphabetical listing of diseases
and cures with an emphasis on some of the most bizarre and quaint,
e.g. goose dung and celandine for a scirrhus of the mamma, but
with less emphasis on those cures which had survived the nineteenth
century, e.g. hydrotherapy, electrotherapy and naturopathic
treatments (most of which have also survived the twentieth century
too). The great majority of his 'Cures' are certainly 'Easy
and Natural.' The same cannot unfortunately be said of some
of the remedies of the faculty of that period (Nova et Vetera
1902). A
second article then followed in 1906, 'John Wesley on the
art of healing', also by Nova et Vetera.
This article again outlined the structure and content and success
of 'Primitive Physick'
but this time in more detail and in a somewhat disparaging style
and ending with, "The medical profession may justly pride
itself on the fact that it has made impossible the utterance
of any such beliefs by any educated man of the present generation"
(Nova et Vetera. 1906). 'The
Primitive Physick of Rev. John Wesley' by Dr George Dock is an article quoted by many
of the twentieth century writers. 'A picture of eighteenth century
medicine' is the article's subtitle and contains an account
of Wesley's contribution to health care, together with the contribution
of leading physicians of that time. This article is more sympathetic
to Wesley than the earlier ones. Dock was strongly impressed
by the strange combination of good sense and superstition that
gave him an insight into the conditions under which it was composed.
He considered an analysis of such a work would have interest
as both recalling an almost forgotten period of medicine and
as an index of more modern conditions. Thoroughly as Wesley
believed in some mystic forms of treatment, and firmly as he
believed in the supernatural as he viewed it, he did not mix
his medicine with religion, for his recommendation of prayer
in treatment is very mild (Dock 1915), but certainly not absent! Stillings,
in 1973 and 1974, reviewed the philosophy of electricity, presenting
some of Wesley's highly metaphysical notions of the nature and
function of electricity and also his practice as an electrotherapist.
He ends by saying that "Most of Wesley's applications of
electricity would seem to us to be very farfetched [an observation
that will be examined later], but it is worth pointing out that
Wesley's chief motivation for his promiscuous electrotherapeutics
was his belief that this was an extremely effective cure that
was, above all, cheap and therefore accessible to everyone"
(Stillings 1974). 3.3.1.5
Principles and Practice of eighteenth century medicine In
the seventeenth century the strengths and weaknesses of 'learned
medicine' for those who could afford it were still those of
the medicine of Antiquity, particularly that of Galen, on whose
authority it leaned so heavily. It set great store by the management
of a healthy life through the regulation of diet, exercise and
the pursuit of moderation. The accent of its therapeutics lay
on expelling toxic substances from the body (by purgation, procuring
sweating and vomiting and the much favoured technique of 'blood-letting'),
on restoring 'balance', and on strengthening the body's own
regular constitution; to this end a host of medicaments was
used (Porter 1987). That
ignorance and error are largely responsible for man's woes,
including most of his physical ailments, is also an ancient
doctrine. Our intemperance draws incurable diseases down upon
our heads, and physicians will tell you that it is in offending
in some of the 'six non-natural things' that lie the causes
of our infirmities. There are six categories of factors, which
operatively determine health or disease, depending on the circumstances
of their use or abuse, and human beings are unavoidably exposed
to these in the course of daily life. They are: air; food and
drink; sleep and watch; motion and rest; evacuation and repletion,
the passions of the mind. Management of the regimen of the patient,
that is, of his involvement with these six sets of factors,
was for centuries the physician's most important task and has
of course by no means lost its importance today (Rather 1968).
In
addition to this concept of the 'six non-natural things' the
work of Dr George Cheyne also had a significant influence on
John Wesley. His voluminous writings represent well the intellectual
activity of his era. Much of Cheyne's practice, especially his
therapeutic concern with a 'low' diet was dictated by his own
personal experience of gross obesity. His theories reflect the
intellectual movements and conflicts of the period. Scientific
achievements had little effect on the people; traditional religion,
however, affected their lives quite directly. Soul and mind,
as material entities, had to find a place in the philosophical
explanations and systems of medicine and the biological sciences
(King 1974). The
concept of obstruction played an important part in 18th century
medicine. Cheyne's concept of disease reflected the then current
thinking in physiology - that bodily processes depend on the
free passage of fluids (or humours) through vessels of various
types. Other factors, however, would also play a part such as
the concept that food introduces an excess of tartarous, urinous
or other salts into the blood, which when not properly broken
down by the digestive process, unite in clusters to cause obstructions.
Evacuations help to eliminate these salts. Cheyne held strongly
to this type of therapy - at least in the form of gentle sweats
and purges. Mineral waters and tea act as dilutents which thin
the blood and 'dissolve and break the salts and keep them from
running into clusters.' Mercury also had great merit in relieving
obstruction, being fourteen times as heavy as water, and thus
having great force in 'opening' obstructions (King 1974). 3.3.1.6.
Medical training and practice At
the start of the 18th century the population of England and
Wales was about 5.5 million; by the end of the century it had
increased to nine million. During this period only a few graduates
emerged from the nation's medical schools each year. Oxford
provided four graduates a year; Cambridge usually supplied a
few more. Edinburgh, then the centre of medicine in the English-speaking
world, sent out as many as sixteen, and most people lived and
died without ever seeing a doctor (Wilder 1978). Other doctors
learned their profession by reading medicine or serving as apprentices
under established physicians. There was also a strange and pernicious
array of quacks practising in the land, and Wesley often protested
against their influence upon the poor and ill educated (Dunlop
1964). The
first half of the 18th century, and much of the second half,
continued the tradition that had long dominated academic medicine,
namely that logic was more important than observation, and that
theory derived its force more from internal consistency than
from empirical verification. Progress towards a more modern
viewpoint came slowly, only after medicine accepted new standards
of evidence, new criteria for validity, new evaluations of cogency
(King 1974). 3.3.1.7
Other 18th Century health care practitioners Many fields of irregular medicine were actually growing alongside the rise of regular physic, and the eighteenth century has been called 'the golden age of quackery'. To speak of 'quackery' is not automatically to impeach the motives of empirics, i.e. unqualified practitioners and nostrum mongers, nor to pass judgement on their cures as necessarily ineffective. Many proprietary remedies were remarkably similar to those prescribed by physicians, such as opium for pain and antimony to induce sweating, but other treatments were seen as entrepreneurial (or as unwarranted interventions), e.g. electric shocks (Porter 1987). There were many, wise women and men alike, who made a good living from irregular medical practice. Many clergymen of that day also dabbled in physic, including Wesley's own grandfather who, when deprived of his living through politics, turned to the practice of physic (Baragar 1928). The regular physician, whose hard-won medical degree represented many years of intense study, looked down upon other groups; but only when financial matters intervened did this disdain change to intense opposition. The apothecaries were less well educated and had learned by apprenticeship and practical experience. The empirics stressed the facts of observation and considered these to be of primary importance, acquiring knowledge from chance observation and/or deliberate experimentation. There
were other individuals, such as the gentry and clergy, eminent
men of the highest stature, neither physicians nor apothecaries,
who were in no sense 'quacks', but who may also be called medical
empirics (using trial and error in practice) in the best sense
(King 1958). John Wesley was one of these and he also argued
that medicine was formerly based on experience, until men of
learning began to set this experience aside, to form theories
of diseases and their cure, and to prefer these to experiments.
Wesley's views are therefore superb examples of that school
of medical theory known as 'Empiricism', i.e. that medical knowledge
must be based upon experience, not upon theory (Callaway 1974).
Obviously, today, we acknowledge that both theory and experience
are necessary. In the 18th century, both extremes were being
argued by capable but often hostile camps. The theorists have
gained the approbation of history, since they were our direct
scientific ancestors but in the 18th century, neither camp could
treat sick patients reliably. The Empiricists at least had centuries
of trial and error on their side (Callaway 1974). Wesley
had set up an empirical system that, if we judge by popularity
alone, worked at least as well as its more orthodox rival (King
1958). Wesley also awakened an interest in sanitation (and health
promotion), long absent from the Christian world, with the revival
of an ancient Hebrew dictum that 'cleanliness is next to Godliness'
(Ott 1980a). In many ways the system of John Wesley was ahead
of current medical opinion - he deprecated those dreadful eighteenth
century panaceas - bleeding, blistering and purging. He actually
believed that fresh air was helpful, and that cleanliness was
next to godliness, ("the bath becomes still more efficacious
by dissolving some soap in it"). He also spoke out against
the complicated, useless and at times revolting formulations
often containing 15-20 ingredients, that were in vogue at the
time (Menzies 1980), in favour of simple single and less toxic
remedies. 3.3.2
'Primitive Physick' (1747) A
combination of basic concerns - the maltreatment of the poor,
the general incompetence of medical practitioners, and the innate
greed of mankind in general - becomes the principal motivation
behind the volume (Rogal 1978) of John Wesley's 'Primitive
Physick, or An Easy and Natural Way of Curing Most Diseases',
which was published anonymously in 1747. Among Wesley's chief
concern as a bookseller was to make books affordable, Primitive
Physick was so cheaply printed
that it was among the dozen or so most widely read books in
England from 1750-1850 (Brantley 1984). The book sold at a price
low enough that even the poor could buy it (Dunlop 1964); for
example it sold for one shilling in July 1747, a cheap price
even then (Rousseau 1968). The total number of copies printed
is unknown, but it must have been one of the all-time medical
best sellers (Stewart 1969), and unlike the dozens of other
similar works written in the eighteenth century, it contained
remedies for virtually every disease known to man (Rousseau
1968). In Wesley's lifetime it went through twenty-three editions
and subsequently reached its thirty-second edition. The
first part of the book consists of a preface, to which are appended
rules for the preservation of good health. The second part,
(1780 Edition), consists of over nine hundred recipes and directions
for two hundred and eighty-eight named ailments (Wesley Hill
1958). Extremes of good sense and nonsense are found among these
'receipts' although its author intended it to be a shield against
quack medical practice (Dunlop 1964). Some of the remedies proposed
are simple enough, none can deny; many are calculated to be
beneficial; whilst the employment of a few, to say the least,
would be extremely perilous (Stamp 1845). Wesley probably knew
as much as most members of the medical profession, in fact,
on no less than twenty instances throughout the volume, he paraphrases
or cites directly from prominent physicians and theorists -
such figures as Sydenham, Boerhaave, Cheyne, Mead, and Huxham
(Rogal 1978). The majority of his cures were hardly original,
but taken from the major medical figures of his time, together
with folk medicine, old women's nostrums and some cures of his
own invention. For the most part, Wesley's suggested remedies
were simple, easily understood, inexpensive, and safe. Cold
water, hot poultices, herb teas, and general hygienic measures
were his standard treatments. Although many of the remedies
are quaint by modern standards, they are much less bizarre than
most other eighteenth century recipes (Menzies 1980). Despite
the contributions of the leading physicians of the day, Wesley
thought that their advancement of anatomical, physiological,
and pathological theory added little to medical therapeutics
(Dunlop 1964) and so his book of 'Primitive Physick',
by which he meant to imply a return to the simplicity of tried
remedies in place of those of medical philosophers, who substitute
theory for experience (Cule 1982), was his attempt to redress
the balance. Wesley felt that cures can and should be discovered
by accident and that discovering cures and experimenting with
them was the primitive way by which was gathered up the whole
corpus of healing (Payne 1985). However, he also includes the
following caveat in 'Primitive Physick', "that in uncommon or complicated diseases,
where life is more immediately in danger, every man without
delay should apply to a Physician that fears God" (Wesley
1747). This, however, did not keep him from advocating his own
empirical cures for lesser ills, and throughout his life he
sought for medical knowledge where he could find it (Dunlop
1964). It
was not until 1760 that Wesley's name appeared on the title-page.
In this edition, too, he added 'Tried' to those remedies which
he had found to be of greatest efficacy, and enthusiastically
commended electricity as coming "the nearest an universal
medicine, of any yet known in the world" (Wesley 1760).
The "tried remedy" has a lasting appeal and the very
term itself creates its own authority. It was what John Wesley
often meant when he referred to a good result being "shown
by experiment", but which nowadays is usually expressed
as "shown by experience" (Cule 1990). 3.3.2.1
The preface Wesley's
very long preface summarises the history of medicine from the
earliest times to the present, with primitive man living in
his perfect creation and suffering no sickness until his blissful
state was marred by original sin, which then sired all diseases
(Rousseau 1968). The preface goes on to offer down-to-earth
rules covering diet, fresh air, exercise, sleep and cleanliness,
rules for good health which would need only moderate up-dating
to be useful today (Stewart 1969). For example, 'In the sweat
of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return to the ground'
- Wesley's interpretation indicating that 'the power of exercise
both to preserve and restore health is greater than can well
be conceived, especially to those who add temperance thereto'
(Wesley 1747). Another example is his express belief that too
much sleep may be the cause of many disorders, particularly
nervous disorders. He exhorted, "You have no other possible
means of recovery, in any tolerable degree, your health both
of body and mind, Do not murder yourself outright" (Wesley
1831). As for the relationship between too much sleep and disorders,
Wesley could only theorise (Ott 1980b). Nevertheless it seemed
to John Wesley that "while we sleep all the springs of
nature are unbent," and if we sleep longer than is necessary,
"they (i.e. the springs) are relaxed more than is sufficient,
and of course, grow weaker and weaker" (Wesley 1831). It
is most interesting that recent sleep research suggests many
similarities between excess sleep states and chronic fatigue
syndromes such as Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (Horne 1995), and
perhaps time may also show that a return to John Wesley's regimen
recommendations for sleep may be the answer to this twentieth-century
problem, i.e. that men require on average just six to seven
hours of sleep and women seven to eight hours (Wesley 1831).
The preface follows on with his understanding of what is now
called psychosomatic or stress-related conditions, which was
extraordinary for his day. "The passions have a greater
influence on health then most people are aware of," he
wrote and, "Till the passion, which caused the disease
is calmed, medicine is applied in vain" (Wesley 1747).
Although
many of Wesley's specific remedies now seem quaint, humorous,
and, at times, grotesque, the moral force of his preface remains
alive. In his critique of 18th century medicine, Wesley attacked
not merely the 'fine spun theories' of the physicians of his
time. More significantly, he attacked their arrogance, their
desire to become 'something more than Human,' their avarice,
and their abstruseness - vices that have by no means disappeared
for the medical profession today (Callaway 1974). 3.3.2.2
A Collection of Receipts - the remedies The
second part of his book presents 900 recipes and cures for 288
afflictions from abortions to wounds (Dunlop 1964). Its recipes
were laid out alphabetically in the manner of a dictionary,
and listed in simple English seven or eight - sometimes more
- cures for each ailment; there was nothing 'scientific' about
it according to Rousseau (1968). The recipes within Primitive
Physick, though exciting the mirth
or scorn of many twentieth-century observers, were in fact carefully
selected by Wesley and represent the elect of eighteenth-century
prescriptions for the purposes mentioned and form a basis for
assessment of what was the best in eighteenth-century medical
treatment (Wesley Hill 1958). He generally provides several
remedies, which he recommends should be tried in order, if necessary.
He realised that not all were easy to obtain, and that what
cured one would not always cure another (Payne 1985). There
is a relaxed, familiar, uncomplicated quality about the book.
It is innocent of diagnostic hints so that the user of the book
is directed toward the symptomatic relief of chronic, rather
than acute disorders. The word 'cure' is tossed about carelessly,
and the user of the book could find great room to manoeuvre
(Stewart 1969). Though he was still a son of the 18th century
and its superstitions, he was ahead of his time in many ways,
(Dunlop 1964). For example, it is interesting that physicians
of his day and for many generations afterwards ridiculed his
immediate cold water treatment for burns. We now know he was
absolutely correct. He also clearly recognised the nature of
scabies or itch (Stewart 1969), and his treatment of vomiting
and diarrhoea with warm lemonade, a treatment to replace the
electrolytes (sodium, potassium and citrates), is unsurpassed
even by today's standards. On the other hand, there was also
some attention given to magical treatments of the day e.g. fevers
treated with pills of cobwebs, cramps treated with a roll of
brimstone under the pillow, a live puppy held on the abdomen
for intestinal obstruction (this treatment was borrowed from
the great Dr. Sydenham). To his credit, however, we must note
that Wesley avoided most of the truly bizarre or dangerous or
revolting treatments of his day, e.g. he permitted bleeding
the patient for few conditions and deplored the almost universal
use of this malignant remedy by physicians and, although he
recommended the use of metallic mercury for certain conditions,
he agreed that it was dangerous (Stewart 1969). Wesley had a
wonderful way of dealing with those who presented a multiplicity
of complaints. "Use the cold bath - this has cured many.
This cured Mrs Bates of Leicestershire of the cancer in her
breast, a consumption, a sciatica and rheumatism which she had
nearly twenty years. She bathed every day for a month and drank
only water" (Wesley Hill 1958). Electricity is also recommended
as a cure for over twenty illnesses in Primitive Physick. It was one of his favourite remedies and he describes
it as "far superior to all the medicines I know".
In the preface of the 1760 edition he spoke enthusiastically
of electricity, 'certainly it comes the nearest an universal
medicine of any yet known in the world' (Wesley 1760). Historical or contemporary
writers have given little attention to this statement and the
full implications of these words have yet to be appreciated.
John
Wesley directed his handbook on the practice of medicine to
a wide audience; in so doing, he chose the vehicles of directness,
simplicity, and pure practicality. Nevertheless, despite its
obvious emphasis upon matters of the body - matters pertaining
to preserving the lives of his fellow men - John Wesley could
not keep his 'Primitive Physick' entirely free from what
was, for him, the most important area of concern: the soul of
man. Therefore, the only single remedy in which he could place
his absolute faith becomes, really, the essence of the piece.
"Above all," he maintains, "add to the rest,
for it is not labour lost, that old-fashioned medicine - prayer;
and have faith in God, who killeth and maketh alive, who bringeth
down to the grave and bringeth up" (Wesley 1747). "For
the love of God, by the perfect calm, serenity and tranquillity
it gives the mind, becomes the most powerful of all the means
toward health and long life" - (which make John Wesley
one of the founders of psychosomatic medicine as well as Methodism
- (Weinstein 1956)). Moreover, John Wesley's own prescription
for life - his complete faith in the gospel - had as much to
do with the spread of 'Primitive Physick'
throughout eighteenth century Britain and America as did all
the remedies and suggestions imprinted upon its pages (Rogal
1978). 3.3.3
'The Desideratum' (1759) Wesley
from 1751 onwards had become very interested in the subject
of electricity generally, and in relation to the treatment of
disease in particular. Several reports from England, Scotland
and Sweden claimed that various ailments had been helped, if
not cured, by the application of electricity (Menzies 1980).
So, for example, the use of electrotherapy had been reported
in 1751 for a palsy of the tongue at Edinburgh Royal Infirmary
and for other cases at Shrewsbury Hospital in 1754 (Cule 1982).
It may be noted in passing that Franklin, Schaefer in 1752,
Rossler in 1768 and Henley in 1779 were using electricity in
treatment at about this time, and The Middlesex Hospital was
the first hospital in London in 1767 to install a static machine
(Baragar 1928). In 1747 John Wesley went "with two or three
friends to see what are called the electrical experiments"
(Wesley 1909). Wesley's Journal tells of various people helped
by the electrifying process and of the way he conducted such
experiments from 1753 thereon (Wesley 1909:4; 5;
6;). In March 1753, Wesley had been reading Benjamin
Franklin's 'Experiments and Observations on Electricity' and had concluded an entry in his journal with the exclamation:
"What an amazing scene is here opened for after-ages to
improve upon!" (Andrews 1969). In November 1756, he obtained
an electrical apparatus and arranged for the treatment of those
"who were ill of various disorders and who might like to
try a surprising machine" (Wilder 1978). He then proceeded
at Southwark, the Foundery in Upper Moorfields, St Paul's and
at Seven Dials to electrify those suffering from a variety of
illnesses. It is difficult to conjecture about the number of
persons Wesley 'electrify'd' (to use his term). If the well-worn
machine at City Road is any indication, there must have been
many ailing souls knocking at his door who came daily in search
of a cure (Rouseau 1968). In
1758 Wesley had published another medical book, entitled 'Advices
with respect to Health Extracted from a late Author' - a book of 218 pages.
This book is especially interesting as it contains the first
reference to electrical treatment to be found in any of Wesley's
works. He makes the claim that "electrifying cures all
sorts of sprains". There seems little doubt that Wesley
derived his information in regard to electrical treatments from
the works of Richard Lovett, a lay clerk at Worcester Cathedral.
Lovett's first book on this subject, entitled: 'The Subtle
Medium: or, that Wonderful Power of Nature
showing its various uses in the animal economy, particularly
when applied to maladies and disorders of the human body,' was published in Worcester, in 1756. Lovett
treated a large number of diseases by electricity, including
St. Anthony's Fire, bronchocele, contractions, epilepsy, feet
violently disordered, gout, headache, mortification, palsy,
rheumatism, sciatica, sore throat, and fistula lachrymalis and
hysteria (Turrell 1921). After
spending several years overseeing the electrification of the
London infirm (Methodists or otherwise), Wesley's next step,
quite naturally, focused upon publicising the 'cure' to a wider
audience, particularly to those of his flock residing outside
London. Thus on 31 October and 1 November 1759, the Methodist
leader, in London, prepared his "Treatise on Electricity".
This was published in the following year as 'The Desideratum:
Or, Electricity made plain and useful. By a Lover of Mankind,
and of Common Sense.' Five editions appeared
during Wesley's lifetime, although, generally, the natural philosophers
and the physicians of the period seem to have overlooked its
existence (Rogal 1989) with the exception of Joseph Priestley
(1767) who praised it in his classic 'History and Present
State of Electricity, with Original Experiments' (Haas 1994). The book was published anonymously. Possibly Wesley
did this of set purpose, knowing the prejudice there was against
him personally from many regular practitioners, and wishing
to eliminate any cause that might make them continue in their
neglect of a valuable means of treatment (Wesley Hill 1958).
Nevertheless his interest in electrical matters was challenged
in the 12th December 1760 London Magazine: "Why do you meddle with electricity".
He replied, "for the same reason I published Primitive
Physick [1747]
- to do as much good as I can" (Haas 1994). Wesley
in 'The Desideratum' closely follows the practice of Lovett,
to whom he frequently refers, and it may be fairly claimed that
their two books set forth the sum of the theoretical and practical
knowledge of that day about medical electricity (Wesley Hill
1958). The most remarkable feature of his own book, however,
is the fervour with which he appeals for a trial of the curative
effects of electricity (Turrell 1921). Even though he was often
willing to speculate about causes of particular phenomenon he
never sought to devise his own experiments to gain this understanding
(Haas 1994). 3.3.3.1
A review and evaluation of 'The Desideratum' The
study of electricity was, in the 18th century, a most popular
combination of amateur science and parlour magic. After reading
Franklin's letters on electricity, Wesley came to feel that
the subject was important enough to impress on his followers
as 'The Desideratum'. Written in two section
- the first telling of experiments and theories and the second
discussing the application of electricity to medicine - it is
an admirable account of what was known about the subject up
to the time of the publication (Schofield 1953). The
purest and least religiously motivated form of Wesley's empiricism
is to be found in his preface to 'The Desideratum' in which, as Wesley puts it, "I
have endeavoured to comprise the sum of what has been hitherto
published on this curious and important subject, by Mr Franklin,
Dr Hoadley, Mr Wilson, Watson, Lovett, Freke, Martin, Watkins,
and in the Monthly Magazines" (Wesley 1759). This preface,
it is true, evinces both a marked faith in electricity as a
panacea and a firm grasp of empirical principles (Brantley 1984).
All the important facts about electricity are now succinctly
and ably presented with extracts from the published experiments
and observations of these eighteenth-century workers. After
these extracts comes the therapeutic applications of electricity,
and Wesley gives a list of thirty-seven 'disorders in which
it has been of unquestionable use.' He observes that 'a great
part of these are of the nervous kind and perhaps there is no
nervous distemper whatever which would not yield to a steady
use of this remedy. It seems, therefore, to be the Grand Desideratum
in Physic, from which we may expect relief when all other relief
fails (Wesley Hill 1958). 3.3.3.2
Electricity made plain Citing
Richard Lovett, Wesley wends his rhetorical way through ten
prefatory paragraphs of generalized testimonials regarding electrifying,
and concludes with the formers opinion that "the electrical
method of treating disorders cannot be expected to arrive at
any considerable degree of perfection, till administered and
applied by the gentlemen of the faculty" (Wesley 1759).
Such a moment in the history of medicine will never arrive,
according to Wesley, until "the gentlemen of the faculty
have more regard to the interests of their neighbours than their
own; at least, not until there are no Apothecaries in the land,
or till Physicians are independent of them" (Wesley 1759).
In the end the Methodist leader wishes only to encourage those
who can relieve the suffering of poor and sick neighbours, hoping
that 'The Desideratum' will enlighten others who have little time and even less money to
devote to the formal study of the issue (Rogal 1989). 'The Desideratum'
was not, of course, an original work as such; like so many books
of that encyclopaedic age, it was a compendium of what was already
known (Andrews 1969). However, the treatise claimed to be firmly
based on experimental evidence; although Wesley does not recount
any electrical experiments of his own, he reproduces accounts
of more than a dozen experiments carried out by others (Andrews
1969). John
Wesley conducted his enquiries into electricity with characteristically
thorough and painstaking research. The first part 'The Desideratum' is concerned with setting
out in forty-two numbered paragraphs all the information that
he had been able to gather together. His own comprehensive and
intriguing survey concludes with this: "To throw all the
Light I can on the Subject, I subjoin a few Extracts from several
other Writers" (Wesley 1759) The whole of it makes quaint
and rather naive reading today. Having investigated the nature
of this 'elementary fire' as he called it, Wesley went on to
describe the uses to which it may be put and in particular its
healing properties. Wesley proceeds to specify "several
Disorders wherein Electrification has been found eminently useful"
(Wesley 1759). The list of disorders is of great interest. Forty-three
specific ailments are mentioned. Among them are blindness, chlorosis,
contraction of the limbs, gout, sciatica, pain in the back,
and in the stomach. We know that he found the treatment particularly
efficacious in cases of melancholia and, what are sometimes
loosely called today, nervous disorders. With his enthusiasm,
Wesley cannot resist a timely word of caution: "In order
to prevent any ill Effect, these two Cautions should always
be remembered, First, let not the Shock be too violent; rather
let several small Shocks be given. Secondly, do not give a Shock
to the whole Body, when only a particular part is affected.
If it be given to the Part affected only, little Harm can follow
even from a violent shock" (Wesley 1759). 3.3.3.3
Electricity made useful Wesley,
as curious and eager as any man ever was to investigate what
was new, showed his natural disposition as a 'physician' in
conceiving the possibility of this new discovery being used
in the business of healing (Wesley Hill 1958). Wesley's major
concern with electricity was over the possible applications
to medicine, and he devoted almost half of his book to citations
of the 'disorders' it could cure and of cases where it had been
proved to do so (Schofield 1953). Doubtless in a great number
of cases his treatment, while it did no harm, did no good; but
here, in these initial stages of this kind of treatment, an
immense and important value lay in the effort made and in making
known results of the trial-and-error technique (Wesley Hill
1958). He had gathered his proof from many sources, Mr. Lovett's
name being frequently mentioned. Various cases are reported
from Newcastle-on-Tyne, Uppsala and Stockholm, from London and
Edinburgh. Wesley had spread his net wide. There are bruises
and strains, deafness, fistulae, ear-ache and tooth-ache, and
hysterical cases. For example: "Sarah Ellison, catched
cold in lying-in which fix'd a sharp pain in her teeth and the
side of her face. She used all manner of means to remove this
for upwards of six years. Among many others she had, at several
times, 3 teeth drawn and was fourteen times blistered, but without
effect. In July 1754 she received six shocks through the head.
The pain ceased immediately and return'd no more" (Wesley
1760). Wesley
in his enthusiasm may have optimistically over-rated many of
his results, but the main thing is that he was out to do good
and to use every proper means that came to hand to do it. Undoubtedly
he did much by these means to relieve suffering and inspire
new hope while he blazed this new trail. In this his negative
as well as his positive results were of value in ascertaining
'in what manner it might be most effectually applied in any
case wherein it was proper' (Wesley Hill 1958). 3.3.3.4
The regular practitioner's response Wesley's
opponents in this method of treatment were many and they included
scientists of learned societies like the Royal College of Physicians
and the Royal Society of London, but he nevertheless persisted
in his belief that electrical shocks could do no harm unless
the voltage was immoderately strong (Rouseau 1968). However,
Wesley would have liked the backing of the medical profession
(Cule 1990), but it was not forthcoming. This was also an example
of the singular obtuseness of the medical profession during
the greater part of the eighteenth century. They were like men
with blinkers on. Their minds were closed to new methods. They
were so inadequate that amateurs were breaking in on their preserves
and they did not like it (Wesley Hill 1958) - a situation which
has not been uncommon in the last two decades of the twentieth-century.
Wesley's fellow practitioners in the healing art - the physicians
and their good friends the apothecaries - decried electricity
as a healing agent. It was useless; it was dangerous. But Wesley
was not to be turned aside by opposition and isolation. Such
antagonism rather stirred him to more fervent endeavour (Wesley
Hill 1958). "Who can wonder that many gentlemen of the
faculty, as well as their good friends, the apothecaries, decry
a medicine, so shockingly cheap and easy, as much as they do
quicksilver and tar-water"? But he also added the following
caveat: "the latest medicine must be given quickly, whilst
it is still curing. Must not Electricity then, whatever wonders
it may now perform, expect to share the same fate"? (Wesley
1759). This statement is most interesting in itself, for it
shows an early insight into the mechanism of the placebo effect
of an intervention, a subject not readily acknowledged until
the beginning of the nineteenth century, and not subject to
investigation until the middle of the twentieth century (see
Beecher 1955). However, as this study goes on to show, Wesley's
concerns over the future fate of electricity as a mere 'placebo'
were not confirmed even two and a half centuries later. Men
like Lovett and Wesley, moved by compassion and by concern for
the sufferings of their fellows, were searching for any means
by which they might alleviate them. The newly discovered electricity
appeared to them amply to offer such a means, and they could
understand neither hesitation on the part of the professionals
nor their opposition when others used it. "Being fully
persuaded," writes Lovett, "that so extraordinary
a phenomenon was never discovered to us but to answer some very
valuable end: and though I began experiments of this kind at
all adventures and at the greatest random possible, yet I had
the pleasure and happiness to succeed far beyond expectation".
Why then the general discouragement and opposition to its use?
Why the obloquy heaped upon them for using it and obtaining
cures even when other methods had failed? (Wesley Hill 1958).
However, 'The Desideratum' was not Wesley's final
word on electricity, and his journals and letters reveal that
for the next three decades he continued to advance the treatment.
For John Wesley, electrifying certainly represented a disciplined
commitment to healing, a frugal remedy that would complement
well other of his prescriptions (Rogal 1989). In a letter to
one of his preachers, John Bredin, he declared on October 19th
1781: "I do not know of any remedy under heaven that is
likely to do you so much good as the being constantly electrified.
But it will not avail unless you persevere therein for some
time" (Wesley (1931) Letters 8;60.86). 3.3.3.5
Basic principles and practice of electrotherapy in the 18th
Century In the eighteenth century electricity was the novelty which was holding men's attention, and Wesley at once seizes it for illuminating religious teaching, as this new discovery did not disturb his religion in the least. His faith was grounded in a personal relation to God, and the various modes of God's operation through the agency of natural law did not affect that faith. In the face of new knowledge Wesley's views of that part of God's operations might have to undergo modifications, but the core of his religious life remained unchanged. Accordingly Wesley became an electricity enthusiast (Pellowe 1927), and in about the year 1750 John Wesley procured an apparatus for electrifying patients, this may still be seen in his museum in City Road, London.
John
Wesley and Richard Lovett were pioneers, enthusiasts, and ready
to apply the use of electricity on every possible occasion,
often in the face of much opposition, and not unmingled with
attempted ridicule on the part of the medical faculty. The fact
that these two were the first English speaking electro-therapists
is most worthy of emphatic historical record - more than it
has received - when we think of it as the source of that broad
and vigorous river that has since flowed with increasing volume
for the healing of the nations (Wesley Hill 1958). Wesley's
enthusiasm is shown in his praises of this new healing aid -
'a thousand medicines in one, especially for nervous disorders',
'the greatest medicine yet known to the world' (Wesley Hill
1958). 3.3.3.6
Eighteenth-century treatment for mental illness Originally
priest and physician were one and served the same functions.
When more came to be known about the body and its illnesses,
a group of practitioners arose who concerned themselves only
with the body, whilst all things pertaining to the mind or soul,
the immaterial substance, remained the province of the priest.
Being neither by aptitude nor training equipped to deal with
mind, physicians naturally treated mental patients through their
bodies as though they were suffering from physical disease,
by whatever means were in general use at the time, whether vomiting,
bleeding, issues, setons or starvation (Hunter 1956). This briefly
was the psychiatric scene in the first half of the eighteenth
century into which portable electric machines were later introduced.
Here was a new ethereal principle that could be felt when passed
into the body and seen when drawn off as sparks, which caused
strange sensations, had the power of making muscles contract,
and paralysed limbs move. It was hailed as a panacea and tried
on every kind of illness whether mental or physical, and excellent
results were reported in all sorts of conditions. In 1767, the
Middlesex Hospital became the first teaching hospital in London
to buy an electrical machine and the first asylum to employ
an electrical machine was in Leicester, where in 1788 a room
was set aside for electrifying patients (Hunter 1956). 3.3.3.7
18th Century indications v 20th Century
applications In summary, the disorders in which electricity was according to Wesley of unquestionable use, are shown in Figure I below. Figure
I: Wesley's (1769) list of disorders treatable with electricity
"It will be readily observed, that a great Part of these are of the nervous Kind; and perhaps there is no nervous Distemper whatever, which would not yield to a steady Use of this Remedy. It seems therefore to be the grand Desideratum in Physic, from which we may expect Relief when all other Relief fails, even in many of the most painful and stubborn Disorders, to which the human Frame is liable" (Wesley 1759). And how correct Wesley's (1759) statement seems to be. For if we examine the following list of conditions (Figure II) which are treatable by electricity, especially in the form of electroacupuncture, as we enter the twenty-first century, we then find that many of the conditions listed are the same as Wesley's, with the exception of infectious conditions, e.g. agues and consumption (tuberculosis) etc. Figure
II: List of Indications of disorders treatable today Indications
Today
This
late twentieth-century listing is even longer and more comprehensive
than Wesley's (1759) list, and no doubt he would see in modern
orthodox and alternative or complementary medical electrotherapeutic
practices a complete vindication of his advocacy of 'electrification'. 3.3.4
Holistic Health Care It
was Socrates who said: "The reason for the frequent failure
of Greek doctors is their inadequate knowledge of the whole,
the health of which is a necessary condition of that of the
part" (Tournier 1957). So from ancient times and through
to the present day, the basic understanding of holism requires
that the patient is seen as a multidimensional being who, affected
by circumstances on one dimension, can have the results of those
circumstances appear on another level (Webbern 1996). 3.3.4.1
Holism: definitions and principles Holistic
medicine is a philosophical approach to the study of man in
health and disease. The patient is not just someone with an
illness but is a dynamic open ended system, which is intelligent,
and constantly maintaining a homoeostatic and balanced environment.
The system is an interface between the outer environment and
the inner spiritual realms. The principle of holistic medicine
is to support the system in its attempts to heal itself. In
this context, healing is not only the maintenance of function
but also the removal of stress factors from the body/mind system
(Blom 1995). This means that, for example, someone with unresolved
stress on a mental level (e.g. poverty or unemployment), can
show symptoms of that stress on not just an emotional but also
a physical level. So, for treatment to be given to cure the
physical symptom alone, without attempting to discover and address
the cause, is denying the principles of holistic practice and
thus the opportunity of curing that patient fully (Webbern 1996). 3.3.4.2
Wesley's contributions to holistic health care Wesley
did not lack confidence in his beliefs and was able to give
to large numbers of patients the assurances that they needed
in relation to the simple "certain cures" of which
he wrote, whilst developing a reasoned view of which orthodox
remedies were harmful. The efficacy of such a simplistic, positive
approach in improving the patient's well being is now well recognised.
He felt the need for treating the whole person, body and soul,
and was thus a proponent of holistic medicine, although in his
cautious, critical approach to the current pharmacopoeia, he
would not have recognised himself as an exponent of 'alternative
medicine' (Cule 1990). The question of whether, or not, Wesley
should be regarded as an orthodox medical practitioner or as
an alternative medical practitioner will be discussed in some
depth later. Nonetheless, Wesley in recognising that the best
treatment is always selective, showed himself to be a thoughtful
and safe prescriber within the boundaries of traditional medicine,
bearing in mind that in the eighteenth century the new facts
of medical science were not enough to provide a firm basis for
therapy (Cule 1990). Whilst these observations may be true to
some degree, Wesley was also innovative and utilised effective
unconventional treatments such as naturopathic treatments, electricity
and prayer with considerable enthusiasm. In
keeping with its literal meaning Wesley viewed health as wholeness
or 'well-working' and his reading of seventeenth and eighteenth
century physicians greatly influenced his perspective on health.
For Wesley, the healthy body was critical to the individual's
emotional well-being. As he quoted on numerous occasions, a
'corruptible body presses down the soul" (Wesley 1831;6:219)
and "in the present state of human existence, when one
part of the body is disordered, the total person suffers".
This view is also reminiscent of St Paul, "That there should
be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the
same care one for another. And whether one member suffer, all
the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the
members rejoice with it" (1. Cor. 12:25-26). It may well
be that John Wesley's 'Whole' view had a Biblical inspiration
(Richardson 1996). In short the body must be kept finely tuned
for the good of one's total being (Ott 1989). However, Wesley
did not suggest that health of body and health of soul are one
and the same, but he did write of a remarkable and mysterious
correlation between the two (Ott 1980a). The mind-body issue
was considered under the rubric of the union of the soul and
body and it was not that he was indifferent on the question
of the soul's union with the body. Rather, for Wesley, the union
was a mystery (Ott 1980b, note 15). Three themes gleaned from
the medical community of his day supporting John Wesley's concept
of health as wholeness are examined in some detail by Ott (1991)
and are in essence: 1. that the body machine must work as a unit, whose parts are closely related; 2. that disturbance is communicated throughout the whole by 'sympathy' for example the emotions of the mind are capable of bringing about changes in the body; 3.
that it is vital to understand the ancient and natural means
of promoting healing and health - vis medicatrix naturae - the healing power of
nature. Wesley's commitment to the natural was evident in his consistent stress upon the relation between sensible regimen and good health, within a theological framework which stressed that the individual could live out the biblical mandate to be a good steward of the 'exquisite machine', the body (Ott 1991). I
will move on now to consider Wesley's interest in the passions
and their considerable influence on health, "more so than
most people are aware" (Wesley 1831;14:316), and his view
that until the passions or emotional concerns are brought under
control, the use of medicine will be to no avail (Ott 1989).
Experience seems to show that violent and sudden passions dispose
to, or actually throw people into acute diseases, and that deep
and lasting sorrows sometimes weaken a strong constitution and
lay the foundations for bodily disorders which are not easily
removed. It remains to Wesley's lasting credit that he stressed
the inter-relationship of physical and psychic or emotional
well-being (Ott 1989). By passions Wesley intended such feelings
as love, joy, hatred, sorrow, desire, fear, hope, and "a
whole train of other inward emotions". These emotions constitute
a "spring of action" for the soul. The opposite, for
example, of being 'low-spirited' is completeness, wholeness,
being at peace with oneself. If there is no peace, then one's
health is in jeopardy, and so as long as the soul and body are
united, then the emotions are bound to have their influence
on the body (Ott 1980). This emphasis is consistent throughout
his writings. (Ott 1989). "A contemporary perspective is
that people talk of an age when we are exempt from passion.
But the absence of passion really means anticipated death. If
the frown of anger is no more, then the smile of pleasure will
have gone as well; if there is no more indignation, neither
will there be forgiveness; if there is no more anxiety, there
will be no more hope either" (Tournier 1972). 3.3.4.3
Wesley's holistic prescription John Wesley consistently urged Methodists towards a life-style conducive to good health and towards a programme of preventative medicine and therapeutic interventions, or, for example, a life of physical activity (Ott 1991). Wesley viewed a sensible regimen as the | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
