Wesley Corpus

‘Expiatory pains’ is pure, unmixed Popery; but they can have no place in the Mystic scheme. This only asserts ‘the intrinsic efficacy of physical to cure moral evil and the absolute necessity of sufferings to purify lapsed beings’: nether of which I can find in the Bible; though I really believe there is as much of the efficacy in sufferings as in spiritual lethargy. Page 374: ‘If beasts have any souls, they are either material or immaterial, to be annihilated after death; or degraded intelligences.’ No; they may be immaterial, and yet not to be annihilated. If you ask, ‘But how are they to subsist after death’ I answer, He that made them knows. The sixth book, I fear, is more dangerously wrong than any of the preceding, as it effectually undermines the whole scriptural account of God’s reconciling the world unto Himself and turns the whole redemption of man by the blood of Christ into a mere metaphor. I doubt whether Jacob Behmen does not do the same. I am sure he does, if Mr. Law understands him right. I have not time to specify all the exceptionable passages; if I did, I must transcribe part of almost every page. Page 393: ‘The Divinity is unsusceptible of anger.' I take this to be the pt ed [‘The prime fallacy.’] of all the Mystics. But I demand the proof I take anger to have the same relation to justice as love has to mercy. But if we grant them this, then they will prove their point. For if God was never angry, His anger could never be appeased; and then we may safely adopt the very words of Socinus, Tota redemptionis nostrae per Christum metaphora, ['The whole of our redemption by Christ is a metaphor.’ See letter of April 27, 1741.] seeing Christ died only to ‘show to all the celestial choirs God’s infinite aversion to disorder.’ Page 394: ‘He suffered, because of the sin of men, infinite agonies, as a tender father suffers to see the vices of his children. He for all that lapsed angels and men should have suffered to all eternity. Without this sacrifice celestial spirits could never have known the horrible deformity of vice. In this sense He substituted Himself as a victim to take away the sins of the world; not to appease vindictive justice, but to show God's infinite love of justice.’