To his Mother Date: LINCOLN COLLEGE, January 25, 1727. DEAR MOTHER, I am shortly to take my Master's degree. He took his M.A. on Feb. 14, gaining considerable reputation by his disputation for the degree. He told Henry Moore that he delivered three lectures: De Anima Brutorum, on Natural Philosophy; De Julio Caesare, on Moral Philosophy; and De Amore Dei, on Religion. As I shall from that time be less interrupted by business not of my own choosing, I have drawn up for myself a scheme of studies from, which I do not intend, for some years at least, to very. I am perfectly come over to your opinion that there are many truths it is not worth while to know. Curiosity, indeed, might be a sufficient plea for our laying out some time upon them, if we had half a dozen centuries of life to come; but methinks it is great ill-husbandry to spend a considerable part of the small pittance now allowed us in what makes us neither a quick nor a sure return.

Two days ago I was reading a dispute between those celebrated masters of controversy, Bishop Atterbury and Bishop Hoadly Atterbury preached a funeral sermon (on Thomas Bennet the bookseller) from 1 Cor. xv. 19, 'If in this life only . . .' He argued that, were there no life after this, men would be more miserable than beasts, and the best men often the most miserable. Hoadly disputed the interpretation of the text. Atterbury replied: Hoadly retorted. Atterbury preached another sermon on Charity (I Pet. iv. 8). Again Hoadly criticized at length. A concise account of the controversies may be read in the latest life of Atterbury by Canon Beeching, 1909, PP. 44-5. A fuller account is given in Hunt's Religious Thought in England, iii. 78-9. 'Coming from a High Churchman, at a time when most divines were eloquent on the natural rewards of virtue and religion, Atterbury's doctrine was startling.' For Wesley's interpretation, see his Notes upon the New Testament. See also previous letter.; but must own I was so injudicious as to break off in the middle. I could not conceive that the dignity of the end was at all proportioned to the difficulty of attaining it. And I thought the labor of twenty or thirty hours, if I was sure of succeeding, which I was not, would be but ill rewarded by that important piece of knowledge whether Bishop Hoadly had misunderstood Bishop Atterbury or no.

About a year and an half ago I stole out of company at eight in the evening with a young gentleman with whom I was intimate. As we took a turn in an aisle of St. Mary's Church in expectation of a young lady's funeral, We are not able to trace the young lady friend whose funeral Wesley attended about Midsummer, 1725 at St. Mary's Oxford. The registers give no age or place of residence, butit is a choice between the following: 1725: March 30, Mary Gunn; June 30, Eliza Carter; August 10, Martha Brown; August 28 Mary Downs; Octoboer 28 Ann Williams. The vicar was Thomas Weeksy. We owe these details to the courtesy of the verger, Mr. Chaundy. Probably it was Eliza Carter. with whom we were both acquainted, I asked him if he really thought himself my friend; and if he did, why he would not do me all the good he could. He began to protest; in which I cut him short by desiring him to oblige me in an instance which he could not deny to be in his own power to let me have the pleasure of making him an whole Christian, to which I knew he was at least half persuaded already; that he could not do me a greater kindness, as both of us would be fully convinced when we came to follow that young woman. He turned exceedingly serious, and kept something of that disposition ever since. Yesterday was a fortnight, he died of a consumption. I saw him three days before he died; and, on the Sunday following, did him the last good office I could here, by preaching his funeral sermon; which was his desire when living. See the following letter. Robin Griffiths, son of the Vicar of Broadway, died Jan. 10, 1727. The sermon, on 2 Sam. xii. 23, is given in the Arminian Mag. 2797, PP. 422-6; see Journal. i. 62.