Chapter III: Part 3

You conclude this point; ¹_I have now, Sir, examined at large your account of justification; and I hope fully refuted the several articles in which you have comprized it_.――――We differ in our judgment. I do not apprehend, you have _refuted_ any one proposition of the four. You have indeed amended the second, by adding the word _meritorious_; for which I give you thanks.

¹ Page 49.

11. You next give what you stile ¹_The_ Christian scheme of justification, and afterwards point out the consequences, which you apprehend to have attended the preaching justification by faith: the third point into which I was to inquire.

¹ Page 50.

You open the cause thus: ¹_The denying the necessity of good works, as the condition of justification, directly draws after it, or rather includes in it, all manner of impiety and vice――――It has often perplexed and disturbed the minds of men, and in the last century occasioned great confusions in this nation――――These are points which are ever liable to misconstructions, and have ever yet been more or less attended with them. And it appears from what you have lately published, that since you have preached the doctrine, it has had its old consequences, or rather worse ones: it has been more misunderstood, more perverted and abused than ever._

¹ Pages 1, 2.

_The denying the necessity of good works, as the condition of justification, draws after it, or rather includes in it, all manner of impiety and vice._ Here stands the proposition: but where is the proof? Till that appears, I simply say, _It does not_.

_It has often perplexed and disturbed the minds of men._ And so have many other points in St. _Paul_’s epistles.

But _these are points which are ever liable to misconstructions, and have ever yet, more or less, been attended with them_――――And what points of revealed religion are those, which are not ever liable to misconstructions? Or of what material point can we say, that it has not ever yet, more or less, been attended with them?

_In the last century it occasioned great confusions in this nation_――――It occasioned! No; in no wise. It is demonstrable, the occasions of those confusions were quite of another kind.

_And it appears――――That since you have preached the doctrine, it has had its old consequences, or rather worse. It has been more misunderstood, more perverted and abused than ever_――――What! Worse consequences than regicide, (which you say, was the old one) and making our whole land a field of blood? Or has it been more perverted and abused, than when (in your account) it overturned the whole frame both of church and state?

12. You go on. ¹_The terms of the gospel are, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.――――But when we undervalue either of these terms, we involve the consciences of the weak in fatal perplexities; we give a handle to others to justify their impieties; we confirm the enemies of religion in their prejudices._

¹ Remarks, page 2.

All this I grant. But it affects not me. For I do not undervalue either faith or repentance.

¹_Was not irreligion and vice already prevailing enough in the nation, but we must――――throw snares in people’s way, and root out the remains of piety and devotion, in the weak and well-meaning? That this has been the case, your own confessions put beyond all doubt. And you even now hold and teach the principles, from which these dangerous consequences do plainly and directly follow._

¹ Page 3.

_Was not irreligion and vice already prevailing enough_ (whether I have increased them, we will consider by and by)――――_but we must throw snares in people’s way_――――God forbid! My whole life is employed in taking those snares out of people’s way, which the world and the devil have thrown there――――_And root out the remains of piety and devotion in the weak and well-meaning?_ Of whom speaketh the prophet this? Of himself? Or of some other man?――――_Your own confessions put this beyond all doubt_――――What? That _I root out the remains of piety and devotion_? Not so. The sum of them all (recited above) amounts to this and no more: “That while my brother and I were absent from _London_, many weak men were tainted with wrong opinions: most of whom we recovered at our return: but even those who continued therein, did notwithstanding continue to live a holier life, than ever they did before they heard us preach.”――――_And you even now hold the principles from which these dangerous consequences do plainly and directly follow_――――But I know not where to find these consequences――――Unless it be in your title-page: there indeed I read of the very fatal tendency of justification by faith only, _the divisions and perplexities of the_ Methodists, _and the many errors relating both to faith and practice, which_ (as you conceive) _have already arisen among these deluded people_.

However ¹_you charitably believe, I was not aware of these consequences at first_. No, nor am I yet: though ’tis strange I should not, if they _so naturally succeed that doctrine_. I will go a step farther. I do not know, neither believe, that they ever did _succeed that doctrine_: unless perhaps _accidentally_; as they might have succeeded any doctrine whatsoever. And till the contrary is proved, those consequences cannot _shew_, that _these principles are not true_.

¹ Remarks, page 4.

13. Another consequence which you charge on my preaching justification by faith, is, the introducing the errors of the _Moravians_. ¹_Had the people, say you, gone on in a quiet and regular practice of their duty, as most of them did before you deluded them, it would have been impossible for the_ Moravian _tenets to have prevailed among them. ――――But when they had been long and often used to hear good works undervalued――――I cannot wonder――――that they should plunge into new errors――――and wax worse and worse._

¹ Remarks, page 12.

This is one string of mistakes. _Had the people gone on in a quiet and regular practice of their duty, as most of them did before you deluded them――――Deluded them!_ Into what? Into the love of God and all mankind, and a zealous care to keep his commandments. I would to God this delusion (if such it is accounted) may spread to the four corners of the earth! But how did most of them go on, before they were thus deluded? Four in five, by a moderate computation, even as other baptized Heathens; in the works of the devil, in all the ♦wretchlesness of unclean living――――_In a quiet and regular practice of their duty_!――――What duty? The duty of cursing and swearing? The duty of gluttony and drunkenness? The duty of whoredom and adultery? Or of beating one another, and any that came in their way? In this, (not very quiet or regular) _practice, did most of_ those _go on before_ they heard us, who have now _put off the old man with his deeds_, and are holy in all manner of conversation.

♦ “wretchedness” replaced with “wretchlesness”

Have these, think you, _been long and often used to hear good works undervalued_? Or, are they _prepared for_ receiving the _Moravian_ errors, by the knowledge and love of God? O Sir, the _Moravians_ know, if you do not, that there is no such barrier under heaven against their tenets, as those very people, whom you suppose just prepared for receiving them.

But _complaints_ (you say) _of their errors, come very ill from you, because you have occasioned them_. Nay, if it were so, for that very cause they ought to _come_ from me. If I had _occasioned_ an evil, surely I am the very person, who ought to _remove_ it as far as I can: to recover, if possible, those who are hurt already, and to caution others against it.

14. On some of those complaints (as you term them) you remark as follows: ¹“_Many of those who once knew in whom they had believed_ (these are my words) _were thrown into idle reasonings, and thereby filled with doubts and fears_.” _This_, you add, _it is ♦to be feared, has been too much the case of the_ Methodists _in general. ――――Accordingly we find in this journal, several instances not barely of doubts and fears, but of the most desperate despair. This is the consequence of resting so much on sensible impressions.――――Bad men may be led into presumption thereby: an instance of which you give, page 66._

¹ Remarks, page 13.

♦ “be” replaced with “to be”

That instance will come in our way again. _Many of those who once knew in whom they had believed, were thrown_ (by the _Antinomians_) _into idle reasonings, and thereby filled with doubts and fears. This_, you _fear, has been the case with the_ Methodists _in general_. You must mean (to make it a parallel case) “That the generality of the people, now termed _Methodists_, were true believers till they heard us preach; but _were_ thereby _thrown into idle reasonings, and filled with_ needless _doubts and fears_.” Exactly contrary to truth in every particular. For 1. They lived in open sins _till they heard us preach_, and consequently were no better _believers_ than their father, the devil. 2. They were not then thrown into _idle reasonings_, but into _serious thought_, how to flee from the wrath to come. Nor 3. were they filled with _needless doubts and fears_; but with such as were _needful_ in the highest degree: such as actually issued in repentance toward God, and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ.

_Accordingly we find in this journal several instances, of the most desperate despair: page 24. 36. 63._

Then I am greatly mistaken. But I will set down at length the several instances you refer to.

Page 24. “I was a little surprised in going out of the room, at one who catched hold of me, and said abruptly, ‘I must speak with you and will. I have sinned against light and against love.’ (N. B. She was soon after, if not at that very time, a common prostitute) ‘I have sinned beyond forgiveness. I have been cursing you in my heart, and blaspheming God, ever since I came here. I am damned. I know it. I feel it. I am in hell. I have hell in my heart.’ I desired two or three who had confidence in God, to join in crying to him on her behalf. Immediately that horrible dread was taken away, and she began to see some dawnings of hope.”

Page 38. “The attention of all was soon fixed, on poor _L―――― S――――_. One so violently and variously torn of the evil one, did I never see before. Sometimes, she laughed till almost strangled; and then broke out into cursing and blaspheming; then stamped and struggled with incredible strength, so that four or five could scarce hold her: then cried out, ‘O eternity! eternity! O that I had no soul! O that I had never been born!’ At last she faintly called on Christ to help her. And the violence of her pangs ceased.”

(It should be remembered, that from that time to this, her conversation has been as becometh the gospel.)

Page 63. _Thursday, December 25._ “I met with such a case as I do not remember either to have known or heard of before. _L―――― S――――_ (the same person) after many years of mourning (long before she heard of us) was filled with peace and joy in believing. In the midst of this, without any discernable cause, such a cloud suddenly overwhelmed her, that she could not believe her sins were ever forgiven at all, nor that there was any such thing as forgiveness of sins. She could not believe, that the scriptures were true, that there was any heaven, or hell, or angel, or spirit, or any God. One more I have since found in the same state. (But observe, neither of these continued therein: nor did I ever know one that did.) So sure it is, that all faith is the gift of God, which the moment he withdraws, the evil heart of unbelief will poison the whole soul.”

Which of these is an _instance of the most desperate despair_? Surely the _most desperate_ of any, yea, the only one which is properly said to be desperate at all, is that which produces instant self-murder: which causes a poor wretch, by a sin which he cannot repent of, to rush strait through death into hell. But that was not the case in any of these instances; in all which we have already _seen the end of the_ Lord.

15. That I raise separate ¹_societies against the church_, is a charge which I need not examine till the evidence is produced. You next cite a _Moravian_’s words to me (an _Englishman_ joined with the _Moravians_) _You have eyes full of adultery, and cannot cease from sin; you take upon you to guide unstable souls, and lead them in the way of damnation_: and remark, _This is only returning some of your own treatment upon yourself. Here also you set the pattern._ At what time and place? When and where were _such abuses as these thrown out by me, against our universities, and against our regular clergy, not the highest or the worthiest excepted_? I am altogether clear in this matter, as often as it has been objected: neither do I desire to receive any other treatment from the clergy, than they have received from me to this day.

¹ Remarks, page 14.

You have a note at the bottom of this page which runs thus: _see page 71, 77, and 73, where some_ Methodists _said, they had heard both your brother and you many times preach popery_.

I am afraid, you advance here a wilful untruth, purely _ad movendam invidiam_. For you cannot but know, 1. That there is not one word of _preaching popery_, either in the 71st or 77th page: and, 2. That when Mr. C. and two other _predestinarians_ (as is related, page 73) affirmed, _They had heard both my brother and me many times preach popery_, they meant neither more nor less thereby, than the doctrine of _universal redemption_.

16. _You proceed_, ¹Kingswood _you call_ your own house. _And when one Mr._ C. _opposed you there, you reply to him, “You should not have supplanted me in_ my own house, _stealing the hearts of the people”――――The parochial clergy may call their several districts their_ own houses, _with much more propriety than you could call_ Kingswood yours. _And yet how have you supplanted them therein, and laboured to steal the hearts of the people――――You have suffered by the same ways you took to discharge your spleen and malice against your brethren._

¹ Remarks, page 15.

_Your brother’s words to Mr._ C. _are――――“Whether his doctrine is true or false is not the question. But you ought first to have fairly told him, ‘I preach contrary to you. Are you willing notwithstanding, that I should continue_ in your house, _gain-saying you?’ Shall I stay here opposing you, or shall I depart?――――Think you hear this spoken to_ you _by_ us――――_What can you justly reply?――――Again, if Mr._ C. _had said thus to you, and you had refused him leave to stay; I ask you, whether in such a case he would have had reason to resent such a refusal? I think you cannot say he would. And yet how loudly have you objected our refusing our pulpits to you!_

So you judge these to be exactly parallel cases. It lies therefore upon me to shew, that they are not parallel at all: that there is, in many respects, an essential difference between them.

1. _Kingswood you call your own house._ So I do, that is, the school-house there. For I bought the ground where it stands, and paid for the building it, partly from the contribution of my friends (one of whom contributed fifty pounds) partly from the income of my own fellowship. No clergyman therefore can call his parish _his own house_, with _more propriety_ than I can call this house _mine_.

2. _Mr._ C. _opposed you there_. True: but who was Mr. _C._? One I had sent for, to _assist me there_; a friend that was as my own soul; that even while he opposed me, lay in my bosom. What resemblance then does Mr. _C. thus_ opposing _me_ bear, to _me_ opposing (if I really did) a _parochial minister_?

3. _You said to Mr._ C. _“You should not have supplanted me in my own house, stealing the hearts of the people. Yet you have supplanted the clergy in their own houses”――――What_ in the _same manner_ as Mr. _C._ did _me_? Have I done to any of _them_, as he has done to _me_? You may as justly say, I have cut their throats!――――_Stealing the hearts of their people_――――Nor are these _their_ people in the _same sense_ wherein those were _mine_, viz. Servants of the devil brought through my ministry, to be servants and children of God.――――_You have suffered by the same ways you took to discharge your spleen and malice against your brethren――――To discharge your spleen and malice!_ Say, your muskets and blunderbusses. I have just as much to do with one as the other.

4. _Your brother said to Mr._ C. _“You ought to have told my brother fairly, I preach contrary to you. Are you willing I should continue in your house, gain-saying you? Shall I stay here opposing you, or shall I depart?” Think you hear this spoken to_ you _by_ us――――_What can you justly reply_?――――I can justly reply, “Sir, Mr. _C._’s case totally differs from _your’s_. Therefore it makes absolutely nothing to your purpose.”

17. A farther consequence (you think) of my preaching this doctrine, is _the ¹introducing that of absolute predestination. And whenever these errors_, say you, _gain ground, there can be no wonder, that confusion, presumption and despair, many very shocking instances of all which you give us among your followers, should be the consequences_.――――You should by all means have specified a few of those instances, or at least, the pages where they occur. Till this is done, I can look upon this assertion, as no other than a flourish of your pen.

¹ Remarks, page 52.

To conclude this head. You roundly affirm once for all, ¹_The grossest corruptions have ever followed the spreading of this tenet. The greatest heats and animosities have been raised thereby. The widest errors have been thus occasioned. And in proportion to its getting ground, it has never failed――――to perplex the weak, to harden the wicked, and to please the prophane. Your journal is a proof, that these terrible consequences have of late prevailed, perhaps more than ever._ ――――Suppose that journal gives a true account of facts (which you seem not to deny) could you find there no other fruits of my preaching, than these terrible ones you here mention!

“O who so blind, as he that _will_ not see?”

¹ Page 51.

18. But that we may not still talk at large, let us bring this question, into as narrow a compass as possible. Let us go no farther, as to time, than seven years last past; as to place, than _London_ and the parts adjoining: as to persons, than you and me, _Thomas Church_ preaching one doctrine, _John Wesley_ the other. Now then let us consider with meekness and fear, what have been the consequences of each doctrine?

* You have preached _justification by faith and works_, at _Battersea_ and _St. Ann’s, Westminster_; while I preached _justification by faith alone_, near _Moorfields_, and at _Short’s Gardens_. I beseech you then to consider, in the secret of your heart, how many sinners have you converted to God? By their fruits we shall know them. This is a plain rule. By this test let them be tried. How many outwardly and habitually wicked men, have you brought to uniform habits of outward holiness? ’Tis an awful thought! Can you instance in a hundred? In fifty? In twenty? In ten?――――If not, take heed unto yourself and to your doctrine. It cannot be, that both are right before God.

* Consider now (I would not speak; but I dare not refrain) what have been the consequences of even my preaching the other doctrine? By the fruits shall we know those of whom I speak: even the cloud of witnesses, who at this hour experience the gospel I preach, to be the power of God unto salvation. The habitual drunkard, that was, is now temperate in all things. The whoremonger, now flees fornication. He that stole, steals no more, but works with his hands. He that cursed or swore, perhaps at every sentence, has now learned to serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice unto him with reverence. Those formerly inslaved to various habits of sin, are now brought to uniform habits of holiness. These are demonstrable facts. I can name the men, with their several places of abode. One of them was an avowed _Atheist_ for many years; some were _Jews_; a considerable number _Papists_: the greatest part of them as much strangers to the form, as to the power of godliness.

When you have weighed these things touching the consequences of _my preaching_, on the one hand, (somewhat different from those set down in your remarks) and of _your preaching_ on the other, I would earnestly recommend the following words to your deepest consideration: _Beware of false prophets; ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree_ (every true prophet or teacher) _bringeth forth good fruit――――Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit, is hewn down and cast into the fire?_¹

¹ Matthew vi. 15, &c.

III. 1. Having spoken more largely than I designed, on the principle _I hold in common with the Moravians_, I shall touch very briefly on ¹_those errors_ (so called) which, you say, I _hold, more than theirs_.

¹ Remarks, page 55.

“You name, as the first, my holding, ‘that a ¹man may have a _degree_ of justifying faith, before he has, in the _full, proper_ sense, a new, a _clean heart_’.”

I have so often explained this, that I cannot throw away time in adding any more now: only this, That the moment a sinner is justified, his _heart_ is _cleansed_ in a _low degree_. But yet he has not a _clean heart_, in the _full, proper_ sense, till he is made _perfect in love_.

2. Another error you mention, is this ¹_doctrine of perfection_. To save you from a continued _ignoratio elenchi_, I wave disputing on this point also, till you are better acquainted with my real sentiments. I have declared them on that head again and again; particularly in the sermon on _Christian Perfection_.

¹ Page 60.

3. Into this fallacy you plunge from the beginning to the end of what you speak on my third _error_ (so you term it) relating to the Lord’s _supper_; confuting, as mine, ¹notions which I know not. I cannot think any farther answer is needful here, than the bare recital of my own words.

¹ Remarks, pages 56, 57.

¹“_Friday, June 27._ I preached on, _Do this in remembrance of me_.――――

¹ Journal, pages 46, 47.

“It has been diligently taught among us, that none but those who are _converted_, who _have received the Holy Ghost_, who are believers in the full sense, ought to communicate.

“But experience shews the gross falshood of that assertion, That the Lord’s supper is not a _converting_ ordinance. Ye are witnesses. For many now present know, the very beginning of your _conversion_ to God, (perhaps, in some the first deep _conviction_) was ♦wrought at the Lord’s supper. Now one single instance of this kind, overthrows that whole assertion.

♦ “brought” replaced with “wrought” per Errata

“The falshood of the other assertion appears both from scripture ――――precept and example. Our Lord commanded those very men who were then _unconverted_, who had _not_ yet _received the Holy Ghost_, who (in the full sense of the word) were not _believers_, to _do this in remembrance of him_. Here the precept is clear. And to these he delivered the elements with his own hands. Here is example equally indisputable.

“_Saturday 28._ I shewed at large, 1. That the Lord’s supper was ordained by God, to be a _means of conveying_ to men, either _preventing_, or _justifying_, or _sanctifying grace_, according to their several necessities. 2. That the persons for whom it was ordained, are all those who know and feel that they _want_ the _grace_ of God, either to _restrain_ them from sin, or to _shew their sins forgiven_, or to _renew their souls_ in the image of God. 3. That inasmuch as we come to his table, not to _give_ him any thing, but to _receive_ whatsoever he sees best for us, there is _no previous preparation_ indispensably necessary; but _a desire_ to receive whatsoever he pleases to give. And 4. That _no fitness_ is required at the time of communicating, but _a sense of our state_, of our utter sinfulness and helplessness: every one who knows he is _fit for hell_, being just _fit to come to_ Christ, in this as well as all other ways of his appointment.”

4. ¹_A stoical insensibility_, you add, _is the next error I have to charge you with. You say, “The servants of_ God _suffer nothing,” and suppose, that we ought to be here so free, as in the strongest pain, not once to desire to have a moment’s ease_.

¹ Remarks, page 58.

_At the end of one of your hymns, you seem to carry this notion to the very height of extravagance and presumption. You say_,

“Doom, if thou canst, to endless pains,
And drive me from thy face.”

_A stoical insensibility is the next error I have to charge you with_――――And how do you support the charge? Why thus――――_You say ¹“The servants of_ God _suffer nothing_.” And can you possibly misunderstand these words, if you read those that immediately follow? “His body was well nigh torn asunder with pain. But God made all his bed in his sickness. So that he was continually giving thanks to God, and making his boast of his praise.”

¹ Journal, page 59.

_You suppose, we ought to be so free, as in the strongest pain, not once to desire to have a moment’s ease_――――O Sir, with what eyes did you read those words?

¹“I dined with one who told me in all simplicity, Sir, I thought last week, there could be no such rest as you describe; none in this world, wherein we should be so free, as not to desire ease in pain. But God has taught me better: for on _Friday_ and _Saturday_, when I was in the strongest pain, I never once had one moment’s desire of ease, but only that the will of God might be done.” Do I say here, that _we ought not, in the strongest pain, once to desire to have a moment’s ease_?――――What a frightful distortion of my words is this? What I say is, “A serious person affirmed to me, that God kept her for two days in such a state.” And why not? Where is the absurdity?

¹ Page 51.

_At the end of one of your hymns, you seem to carry this notion, to the very height of extravagancy and presumption. You say_,

“Doom, if thou canst, to endless pains,
And drive me from thy face.”

“If thou canst”――――i. e. _If thou canst_ deny thyself, _if thou canst_ forget to be gracious, _if thou canst_ cease to be truth and love. So the lines both preceding and following fix the sense. I see nothing of _stoical insensibility_, neither of _extravagancy_ or _presumption_ in this.

5. Your last charge is, that I am _guilty of enthusiasm to the highest degree. ¹Enthusiasm_ (you say) _is a false persuasion of an extraordinary divine assistance, which leads men on to such conduct as is only to be justified by the supposition of such assistance ――――An enthusiast is then sincere, but mistaken. His intentions are good――――but his actions most abominable. Instead of making the word of_ God _the rule of his actions, he follows only that secret impulse which is owing to a warm imagination――――Instead of judging of his spiritual estate by the improvement of his heart, he rests only on extacies, &c. He is very liable to err, as not considering things coolly and carefully. He is very difficult to be convinced, by reason and argument, as he acts upon a supposed principle superior to it, the directions of_ God’s _Spirit. Whoever opposes him is charged with ♦resisting the Spirit. His own dreams must be regarded as oracles.――――Whatever he does, is to be accounted the work of_ God. _Hence he talks in the stile of inspired persons: and applies scripture phrases to himself, without attending to their original meaning, or once considering the difference of times and circumstances._

¹ Remarks, pages 60, 61.

♦ “rejecting” replaced with “resisting” per Errata

You have drawn, Sir, (in the main) a true picture of an _enthusiast_. But it is no more like _me_, than I am like a centaur. Yet you say _they are these very things which have been charged upon you, and which you could never yet disprove_: I will try for once; and to that end, will go over these articles, one by one.

Enthusiasm _is, a false persuasion of an extraordinary divine assistance, which leads men on to such conduct as is only to be justified by the supposition of such assistance_――――Before this touches _me_, you are to prove (which I conceive you have not done yet) that _my_ conduct is such, as is only to be justified by the supposition of an extraordinary divine assistance. _An enthusiast is then sincere, but mistaken_, that I am _mistaken_ remains also to be proved――――_His intentions are good; but his actions most abominable._ Sometimes they are; yet not _always_. For there may be _innocent_ madmen. But what actions of mine are _most abominable_? I wait to learn. _Instead of making the word of_ God _the rule of his actions, he follows only his secret impulse_.――――In the whole compass of language, there is not a proposition which less belongs to me than this. I have declared again and again, that I make the word of God the rule of all my actions: and that I no more follow any _secret impulse_ instead thereof, than I follow _Mahomet_ or _Confucius_.

“Not even a word or look
Do I approve or own,
But by the model of thy book,
Thy sacred book alone.”

_Instead of judging of his spiritual estate by the improvement of his heart, he rests only on extacies_――――Neither is this my case. I rest not on them at all. Nor did I ever experience any. I do judge of my spiritual estate by the improvement of my heart and the tenor of my life conjointly. _He is very liable to err_――――So indeed I am. I find it every day more and more. But I do not yet find, that this is owing to my want of _considering things coolly and carefully_. Perhaps you do not know many persons (excuse my simplicity in speaking it) who more carefully consider every step they take. Yet I know I am not cool or careful enough. ♦May God supply this and all my wants! _He is very difficult to be convinced, by reason and argument, as he acts upon a supposed principle superior to it, the direction of God’s Spirit._――――I am very difficult to be convinced, by dry blows or hard names; (both of which I have not wanted:) but not, by reason and argument. At least that difficulty cannot spring from the cause you mention. For I claim no other direction of God’s Spirit, than is common to all believers. _Whoever opposes him is charged with ♠resisting the Spirit._――――What! whoever opposes _me, John Wesley_? Do I charge every such person with rejecting the Spirit? No more than I charge him with robbing on the highway. I cite you yourself, to confute your own words. For do I charge _you_ with rejecting the Spirit? _His own dreams must be regarded as oracles._――――Whose? I desire neither my dreams nor my waking thoughts, may be regarded at all, unless just so far as they agree with the oracles of God. _Whatever he does is to be accounted the works of God._――――You strike quite wide of _me_ still. I never said so of what I do. I never thought so. Yet I trust what I do is pleasing to God. _Hence he talks in the stile of_ inspired _persons_. ――――No otherwise inspired, than you are, if you love God. _And applies scripture phrases to himself, without attending to their original meaning, or once considering the difference of times and circumstances._ I am not conscious of any thing like this. I apply no scripture phrase either to myself or any other, without carefully considering both ♣the _original_ meaning, and the _secondary_ sense, wherein (allowing for different times and circumstances) it may be applied to ordinary Christians.

♦ “My” replaced with “May” per Errata

♠ “rejecting” replaced with “resisting” per Errata

♣ “their” replaced with “the” per Errata

6. So much for the bulk of your charge. But it concerns me likewise, to gather up the fragments of it. You say, ¹_We desire no more, than to try your sentiments and proceedings, by the written word_. Agreed. Begin when and where you please. _We find there good works as strongly insisted on as faith._――――I do as strongly insist on them as on faith. But each in its own order. _We find all railing, &c. condemned therein._――――True; and so you may in all I write or preach. _We are assured, that the doing what God commands, is the sure way of knowing, that we have received his Spirit._――――We have doubtless received it, if we love God (as he commands) with all our heart, mind, soul and strength: _And not by any sensible impulses or feelings whatsoever. ――――Any sensible impulses whatsoever?_ Do you then exclude _all sensible impulses_? Do you reject _inward feelings_ toto genere? Then you reject both the _love_ of God and of our neighbour. For if these cannot be _inwardly felt_, nothing can. You reject all _joy_ in the Holy Ghost. For if we cannot be sensible of this, it is no joy at all. You reject the peace of God, which if it be not felt in the inmost soul, is a dream, a notion, an empty name. You therefore reject the whole _inward kingdom of_ God, that is, in effect, the whole gospel of Jesus Christ.

¹ Remarks, page 63.

You have therefore yourself abundantly shewn (what I do not _insinuate_, but proclaim on the house-top) that I am charged with _enthusiasm_, for _asserting the power_ (as well as the form) _of godliness_.

7. You go on ¹_The character of the Enthusiast above drawn, will fit, I believe, all such of the Methodists as can be thought sincere_.――――I believe not. I have tried it on one, and it fitted him, just as _Saul_’s armour did _David_. However, _a few instances_ of enthusiasm, you undertake to shew _in this very journal_.

¹ Remarks, page 63.

And first, _You give us one_ (these are your words) _of a private revelation, which you seem to pay great credit to_. You partly relate this, and then remark, _What enthusiasm is here? To represent the conjectures of a woman, whose brain appears to have been too much heated, as if they had been owing to a particular and miraculous spirit of prophecy?_――――Descant, Sir, as you please on this _enthusiasm_; on the credit I paid to this private revelation; and my _representing the conjectures_ of this brain-sick woman, as owing to the miraculous _power of the Spirit of_ God. And when you have done I will desire you to read that passage once more, where you will find my express words are (introducing this account) “_Sunday, 11._ ¹I met with a surprizing instance, of the _power of the devil_.” Such was the _credit_ I paid to this revelation! All which I ascribe to _the Spirit of_ God _is_, the enabling her to strive against the _power of the devil_, and at length restoring peace to her soul.

¹ Journal, page 66.

8. As a second instance of enthusiasm, you cite those words, “¹I expounded out of the fulness which was given me.” The whole sentence is, “Out of the fulness that was given me, I expounded those words of St. _Paul_ (indeed of every true believer) _To me to live is Christ, and to die is gain_.” I mean, I had than a _fuller_, deeper sense of that great truth, than I _ordinarily_ have. And I still think it right, to ascribe this, not to myself, but to the _giver of every good and perfect gift_.

¹ Page 65.

You relate what follows as a third ¹_very extraordinary instance of enthusiasm_. “Tuesday, ²February 17. I left _London_. In the afternoon I reached _Oxford_, and leaving my horse there (for he was tired, and the horse-road exceeding bad, and my business admitted of no delay) set out on foot for _Stanton-harcourt_. The night overtook me in about an hour, accompanied with heavy rain. Being wet and weary, and not well knowing my way, I could not help saying in my heart, (tho’ ashamed of my want of resignation to God’s will) O that thou would’st _stay the bottles of heaven_! Or at least, give me light or an honest guide! Or some help, in the manner thou knowest; presently the rain ceased: the moon broke out, and a friendly man overtook me, who set me on his own horse, and walked by my side, till we came to Mr. _Gambold_’s door.”

¹ Remarks, page 65.

² Journal, pages 69, 70.

Here you remark, _If you would not have us look on this as miraculous, there is nothing in it worthy of being related_.――――It may be so; let it pass then as a trifle not worth relating: but still it is no proof of enthusiasm. For I _would not have you look on it as miraculous_. I do not myself look upon it as such; but as a signal instance of God’s _particular providence_ over all those who call upon him.

9. ¹_In the same spirit of enthusiasm_ (you go on, citing this as a fourth instance) _You describe heaven as executing judgments, immediate punishments, on those who oppose you. You say “Mr. Molther was taken ill this day. I believe it was the hand of God that was upon him”_――――I do. But I do not say, as a _judgment from_ God, for opposing me. That _you_ say for me. _Again, you tell us of “one who was exceeding angry, at those who pretended to be in fits; and was just going to kick one of them out of the way, when she dropt down herself and was in violent agonies for an hour.”――――And you say you left her――――under a deep sense of the_ just judgment _of_ God.――――So she termed it, and so I believe it was. But observe. Not for _opposing me.――――Again, you mention ‘as an ♦awful providence, the case of a poor wretch, who was last week cursing and blaspheming, and had boasted to many, that he would come again on Sunday, and no man should stop his mouth then_ (His mouth was stopped before, in the midst of the most horrid blasphemies, by asking him, “If he was stronger than God?”) _But on Friday_, God _laid his hand upon him, and on Sunday he was buried_.’――――I do look on this, as a manifest judgment of God, on a hardened sinner, for his complicated wickedness.――――²_Again, “one being just going to beat his wife, (which he frequently did)_ God _smote him in a moment: so that his hand dropped, and he fell down upon the ground, having no more strength than a new-born child.”_――――And can you, Sir, _consider this, as one of the common dispensations of providence_? Have you known a parallel one in your life? But it was never cited by me, as it is by you, as _an immediate punishment_ on a man for _opposing me_. You have no authority from any sentence or word of mine, for putting such a construction upon it: no more than you have for that strange intimation (how remote both from justice and charity!) That _I ♠paralleled these cases, with those of_ Ananias and Sapphira, _or of_ Elymas _the sorcerer_!

¹ Remarks, page 66.

♦ “aweful” replaced with “awful”

² Page 67.

♠ “paralled” replaced with “paralleled”

10. You proceed to what you account a 5th instance of enthusiasm. ¹_With regard to people’s falling in fits, it is plain, you look upon both the disorders and removals of them to be supernatural._ It is not quite plain. I look upon some of these cases as wholly natural: on the rest, as mixt; both the disorder and the removal being partly natural and partly not. Six of these you pick out from, it may be, two hundred, and add, _From all which you leave no room to doubt, that you would have these cases considered, as those of the demoniacks in the New Testament; in order, I suppose, to parallel your supposed cures of them, with the highest miracles of Christ and his disciples_.――――I should once have wondered at your making such a supposition: but I now wonder at nothing of this kind.――――Only be pleased to remember till this supposition is made good, it is no _confirmation_ at all _of my enthusiasm_.

¹ Remarks, pages 68, 69.

You then attempt to account for those fits, by _obstructions or irregularities of the blood and spirits; hysterical disorder; watchings, fastings; closeness of rooms, great crowds, violent heat_. And lastly, by _terrors, perplexities and doubts, in weak and well-meaning men_; which, you think, in many of the cases before us, have _quite overset their understandings_.

As to each of the rest, let it go as far as it can go. But I require proof of the last way whereby you would account for these disorders. Why, _The instances_, you say, _of religious madness, have much increased since you began to disturb the world_.¹ I doubt the fact. Although if these instances had increased lately, ’tis easy to account for them another way. _Most have heard of or known several of the_ Methodists _thus driven to distraction_.――――You may have _heard_ of five hundred. But how many have you _known_? Be pleased to name eight or ten of them. I cannot find them, no not one of them to this day, either man, woman or child. I find some indeed, whom _you told_, “They _would be distracted_, if they continued to follow these men:” and whom at that time, you threw into much doubt, and terror, and perplexity. But though they did continue to hear them ever since, they are not distracted yet.

¹ Remarks, pages 68, 69.

As for ¹_the abilities, learning and experience_ of Dr. M――――, if you are personally acquainted with him, you do well to testify them. But if not, permit me to remind you of the old advice,

Qualem commendes, etiam atq; etiam aspice; ne mox
Incutiant aliena tibi peccata pudorem.

¹ Remarks, page 70.

In endeavouring to account for the people’s recovery from those disorders you say, ¹_I shall not dispute how far prayer may have naturally a good effect_. (Nay, I am persuaded, you will not dispute but it may have supernatural good effects also.) _However, there is no need of supposing these recoveries miraculous._――――Who affirms there is? I have set down the facts just as they were, passing no judgment upon them myself, (consequently here is no foundation for the charge of _enthusiasm_,) and leaving every man else to judge as he pleases.

¹ Page 71.

11. The next passage you quote as a proof of my _enthusiasm_, taking the whole together runs thus: “After ¹communicating at St. _James_’s, our parish church, I visited several of the sick. Most of them were ill of the spotted fever, which they informed me, had been extremely mortal, few persons recovering from it. But God had said, _Hitherto shalt thou come_. I believe there was not one with whom we were, but recovered.” ――――On which you comment thus; _Here is indeed no intimation of any thing miraculous_.――――No! Not so much as an intimation! Then, why is this cited as an instance of my _enthusiasm_? Why, _You seem to desire to have it believed, that an extraordinary blessing attended your prayers: whereas, I believe they would not have failed of an equal blessing and success, had they had the prayers of their own parish ministers_.――――I believe this argument will have extraordinary success, if it convince any one, that I am an _enthusiast_.

¹ Journal, page 61.

12. You add, ¹_I shall give but one account more, and this is, what you give of yourself_. The sum whereof is, “At two several times, being ill and in violent pain, I prayed to God and found immediate ease.” I did so. I assert the fact still. _Now if these_ (you say) _are not miraculous cures, all this is rank_ enthusiasm.

¹ Remarks, page 72.

I will put your argument in form:

He that believes those are miraculous cures which are not so, is a rank enthusiast:

But you believe those to be miraculous cures which are not so:

Therefore, you are a rank enthusiast.

Before I answer, I must know, what you mean by miraculous? If you term every thing so, which is not strictly accountable for, by the ordinary course of natural causes; then I deny the latter part of the minor proposition. And unless you can make this good, unless you can prove the effects in question are strictly accountable for, by the _ordinary course_ of natural causes, your argument is nothing worth.

You conclude this head with, ¹_Can you work miracles.――――All your present pretences to the Spirit, till they are proved by miracles, cannot be excused, or acquitted from_ enthusiasm.

¹ Page 73.

My short answer is this: I pretend to the Spirit just so far, as is essential to a state of salvation. And cannot I be acquitted from enthusiasm, till I prove by miracles, that I am in a state of salvation?

13. We now draw to a period. _The ¹consequences of_ Methodism (you say) i. e. of our preaching this doctrine, _which have hitherto appeared, are bad enough to induce you to leave it. It has in fact introduced many disorders, Enthusiasm, Antinomianism, Calvinism, a neglect and contempt of God’s ordinances, and almost all other duties_.

¹ Page 75.

* That whenever God revives his work upon earth, many tares will spring up with the wheat, both the word of God gives us ground to expect, and the experience of all ages. But where, Sir, have you been, that you have heard of the tares only? And that you rank among the consequences of my preaching, _A neglect and contempt of God’s ordinances, and almost of all duties_? Does not the very reverse appear, at _London_, at _Bristol_, at _Kingswood_, at _Newcastle_? In every one of which places, multitudes of those (I am able to name the persons) who before lived in a thorough neglect and contempt of God’s ordinances and all duties, do now zealously discharge their duties to God and man, and walk in all his ordinances blameless.

* And as to those drunkards, whoremongers, and other servants of the devil, as they were before, who heard us a while and then fell to the _Calvinists_ or _Moravians_: are they not even now in a far better state, than they were before they heard us? Admit they are in error, yea and die therein, yet who dares affirm, they will perish everlastingly? But had they died in those sins, we are sure they had fallen into _the fire that never shall be quenched_.

I hope, Sir, you will rejoice in considering this, how much their gain still outweighs their loss: as well as in finding the sentiments you could not reconcile together, clearly and consistently explained. I am very willing to consider whatever farther you have to offer. May God give us both a right judgment in all things! I am persuaded you will readily join in this prayer with,

_Reverend Sir_,

_Your servant for Christ’s sake_,

JOHN WESLEY.

_Bristol, February 2,
1744‒5_.

The PRINCIPLES of a
METHODIST
Farther explained:

Occasioned by the Rev. Mr. CHURCH’s
_Second Letter_ to Mr. WESLEY.

In a _Second Letter_ to that GENTLEMAN.

Reverend Sir,

* 1. AT the time that I was reading your former letter, I expected to hear from you again. And I was not displeased with the expectation; believing it would give me a fresh opportunity of weighing the sentiments I might have too lightly espoused, and the actions which perhaps I had not enough considered. Viewing things in this light, I cannot but esteem you, not an enemy, but a friend; and one, in some respects, better qualified to do me real service than those whom the world accounts so; who may be hindered, by their prejudice in my favour, either from observing what is reproveable, or from using that freedom and plainness of speech, which are requisite to convince me of it.

2. It is at least as much with a view to learn myself, as to shew others (what I think) the truth, that I intend to set down a few reflections on some parts of the tract you have lately published. I say, _some_ parts; for it is not my design to answer every sentence in this, any more than in the former. Many things I pass over, because I think them true; many more, because I think them not material: and some, because I am determined not to engage in a useless, if not hurtful controversy.

* 3. Fear indeed is one cause of my declining this: fear (as I said elsewhere¹) not of my _adversary_, but of _myself_. I fear my own spirit, lest “I fall where many mightier have been slain.” I never knew one (or but one) man write controversy with what I thought a right spirit. Every disputant seems to think (as every soldier) that he may hurt his opponent as much as he can; nay, that he _ought_ to do his worst to him, or he cannot make the best of his own cause: that so he do not bely, or wilfully misrepresent him, he must expose him as much as he is able. It is enough, we suppose, if we do not shew heat or passion against our adversary. But, not to despite him, or endeavour to make others do so, is quite a work of supererogation.

¹ In the preface to the answer to Mr. _Tucker_.

* 4. But ought these things to be so? (I speak on the Christian scheme.) Ought we not to love our neighbour as ourselves? And does a man cease to be our neighbour, because he is of a different opinion? Nay, and declares himself so to be? Ought we not, for all this, to do to him as we would he should do to us? But do we ourselves love to be _exposed_, or set in the worst light? Would we willingly be treated with contempt? If not, why do we treat others thus? And yet, who scruples it? Who does not hit every blot he can, however foreign to the merits of the cause? Who, in controversy, casts the mantle of love over the nakedness of his brother? Who keeps steddily and uniformly to the question, without ever striking at the person? Who shews in every sentence, that he loves his brother only less than the truth?

5. I fear neither you nor I have attained to this. I believe brotherly love might have found a better construction than that of _unfairness_, _art_, or _disingenuity_, to have put either on my not answering _every part_ of your book (a thing which never once entered my thoughts) or on my not reciting _all the words_ of those parts which I did answer. I cannot yet perceive any blame herein. I still account it _fair_ and _ingenuous_, to pass over both what I believe is right, and what I believe is not dangerously wrong. Neither can I see any _disingenuity_ at all, in quoting only _that part_ of any sentence, against which I conceive the objection lies: nor in _abridging_ any part of any treatise to which I reply, whether in the author’s, or in my own words.

6. If indeed it were so abridged as to alter the sense, this would be _unfair_. And if this were designedly done, it would be _artful_ and _disingenuous_. But I am not conscious of having done this at all; although you speak as if I had done it a thousand times. And yet I cannot undertake now, either to transcribe your whole book, or every page or paragraph, which I answer. But I must generally abridge before I reply: and that not only to save time (of which I have none to spare) but often to make the argument clearer, which is best understood when couched in few words.