02 To Thomas Church
| Author | John Wesley |
|---|---|
| Type | letter |
| Year | None |
| Passage ID | jw-letter-1746-02-to-thomas-church-015 |
| Words | 387 |
(4) ‘You praise them for not “regarding outward adorning.”’ So I do, the bulk of the congregation. ‘And yet you say’ (I again recite the whole sentence), ‘“I have heard some of you affirm that Christian salvation implies liberty to conform to the world, by putting on of gold and costly apparel.”’ I have so. And I blame them the more, because ‘they are condemned by the general practice of their own Church.’ To this also you reply not. So I must count this the fourth contradiction which you have charged upon me, but have not proved.
(5) ‘You call their discipline “in most respects truly excellent.” I could wish you had more fully explained yourself.’ I have in the Second Journal (Journal, ii. 19-56). ‘It is no sign of good discipline to permit such abominations’ -- that is, error in opinion and guile in practice. True, it is not; nor is it any demonstration against it: for there may be good discipline even in a College of Jesuits. Another fault is too great a deference to the Count. And yet ‘in most respects their discipline is truly excellent.’
You reply, ‘Such excellent discipline, for all that I know, they may have’ (that is, as the Jesuits); ‘but I cannot agree that this is scarce inferior to that of the apostolical age.’ It may be, for anything you advance to the contrary. ‘Here I cited some words of yours, condemning their subordination (page 88), which you prudently take no notice of.’ Yes; I had just before taken notice of their too great deference to the Count. But the contradiction! Where is the contradiction
(6) ‘You mention it as a good effect of their discipline that “every one knows and keeps his proper rank.” Soon after, as it were with a design to confute yourself, you say, “Our brethren have neither wisdom enough to guide nor prudence enough to let it alone.”’ I answered, ‘Pardon me, sir. I have no design either to confute or contradict myself in these words. The former sentence is spoken of the Moravian Brethren; the latter, of the English brethren of Fetter Lane, not then united with the Moravians, neither acting by their direction.’ To this likewise you do not reply. Here is, then, a sixth contradiction alleged against me, but not proved.