Wesley Corpus

9. ‘“The Moravians excel in sweetness of behaviour.” What! though they use guile and dissimulation’ Yes. ‘“Where is their multitude of errors” In your own Journal. I have taken the pains to place them in one view in my Remarks; the justness of which, with all your art, you cannot disprove.’ You have taken the pains to transcribe many words, all of which together amount to this--that they, generally, hold Universal Salvation, and are partly Antinomians (in opinion), partly Quietists, The justness of some of your remarks, if I mistake not, has been pretty fully disproved. As to what you speak of my art, subtlety, and so on, in this and many other places, I look upon it as neither better nor worse than a civil way of calling names. ‘“To this multitude of crimes I am also an utter stranger.” Then you have charged them wrongfully. What do you account guile, &c.’ (Second Letter, p. 84.) I account guile, despising self-denial even in the smallest points, and teaching that those who have not the assurance of faith may not use the ordinances of God, the Lord’s Supper in particular (this is the real, unaggravated charge), to be faults which cannot be excused. But I do not account them all together ‘a multitude of crimes.’ I conceive this is a vehement hyperbole. ‘The honor of religion,’ said you, ‘and virtue trampled upon.’ I answered, ‘By whom Not by the Moravians.’ You reply, ‘And yet you have accused some of these as decrying all the means of grace.’ No. What I accused them of was teaching that an unbeliever (in their sense) ought to abstain from them. ‘“Neither did I know, or think, or say they were desperately wicked people.” Your Journal is before the world; to whom I appeal whether this has not so represented them.’ But how do you here represent your remark and my answer My paragraph runs thus: