What would have been Wesley’s attitude toward the modern doctrine and practice of Speaking in Tongues? Pentecostal churches teach that this is a necessary initial sign of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit (a empowerment experience subsequent to Christian conversion). Other churches teach that spiritual gifts and miracles were signs that ceased after the age of the apostles. Where would Wesley have stood on these issues?

Wesley distinguished between "extraordinary gifts" and "ordinary" graces of the Spirit. Tongues would fall into the category of "extraordinary gifts." Thus, he did not see the gift of Tongues as part of the abiding significance of the Pentecost event.

This distinction, of course is very much a part of the discussion in Wesley’s A Letter to the Reverend Doctor Conyers Middleton Occasioned by his late 'Free Inquiry'. It is clear from this (lengthy and very interesting) letter that Wesley was not a cessationist — he believed that miracles and spiritual gifts continued in the church after the age of the apostles. On this basis, they could become present in the church in any subsequent age.

In fact, it is clear that Wesley believed that the loss of such extraordinary gifts to the church was, in fact, an evidence of spiritual decline. Notice this:

— Sermon 89, "The More Excellent Way. "

On the other hand, Wesley did not see outward evidences — spiritual gifts or miracles — as necessary signs of the Spirit’s activity. At this point, he would not agree with Pentecostalism in it’s emphasis on these things. The evidence of the Spirit’s activity was love for God and love for others — that is to say, holy living. It was the “fruit of the Spirit” (“love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control”) not the (extraordinary) gifts of the Spirit that was crucial to him.

Notice this — a part of Wesley's defense that he is not an "enthusiast" (or as we might say, “fanatic”):

"Neither do I confound the extraordinary with the ordinary operations of the Spirit. And as to your last inquiry, ‘What is the best proof of our being led by the Spirit?’ I have no exception to that just and scriptural answer which you yourself have given, — 'A thorough change and renovation of mind and heart, and the leading a new and holy life.'"

— “A Farther Appeal to Men of Reason & Religion”

This tract is one of his lengthy defenses for his teachings & ministry. It deals with the issue of what should be considered the "ordinary" operations of the Spirit vs. the "extraordinary" operations.

Also, notice this:

"You do not know, that in these very Journals I utterly disclaim the 'extraordinary gifts of the Spirit,' and all other 'influences and operations of the Holy Ghost' than those that are common to all real Christians."

— “Second Letter to the Author of ‘The Enthusiasm of Methodists and Papists Compared."

In context, I think he means (in the quote above) that he "utterly disclaims" the notion that "extraordinary gifts of the Spirit" are necessary either to justification or sanctification (in any sense of the word).

Wesley's note on 1 Corinthians 12:31:

5. V.31. Ye covet earnestly the best gifts — And they are worth your pursuit, though but few of you can attain them. But there is a far more excellent gift than all these; and one which all may, yea, must attain or perish."
   

— Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament.

Thus we can say that Wesley would not have fully endorsed either cessationism or pentecostalism. Extraordinary gifts and miralcles have not necessarily ceased, but they are not necessary proofs of the Holy Spirit, either.

Wesley said that he did not claim "extraordinary gifts" of the Spirit as being necessary to the Spirit’s regeneration or sanctification of Christian lives. He does not seem to have claimed any particular "extraordinary gifts" for himself.

But, there is nothing in Wesley's teaching that would absolutely disallow extraordinary gifts in the Church. Wesley's defense of Montanus and his love for the writings of Tertullian could be seen as an argument in favor of the possibility of "extraordinary gifts" in the contemporary Church.

From Wesley’s Journal:

“By reflecting on an odd book which I had read in this journey, “The General Delusion of Christians with regard to Prophecy,” I was fully convinced of what I had long suspected,

1. 1.That the Montanists, in the second and third centuries, were real, scriptural Christians; and,
   
   

2. 2.That the grand reason why the miraculous gifts were so soon withdrawn, was not only that faith and holiness were well-nigh lost; but that dry, formal, orthodox men began even then to ridicule whatever gifts they had not themselves, and to decry them all as either madness or imposture.
   

— Journal: “August 15, 1750.”

But, it is certain that he would have objected to an emphasis on "extraordinary gifts" that in any way detracted from the focus on holy living.

— Craig L. Adams