Wesley Corpus

Gems have ‘a seat on the virtuous fair one’s breast’ (page 177). I cannot reconcile this with St. Paul. He says, ‘Not with pearls’; by a parity of reason, not with diamonds. But in all things I perceive you are too favorable, both to ‘the desire of the flesh and the desire of the eye.’ You are a gentle casuist as to every self-indulgence which a plentiful fortune can furnish. ‘Our Savior’s obedience’ (page 182). Oh say, with the good old Puritans, ‘Our Savior's death or merits’ I We swarm with Antinomians on every side. Why are you at such pains to increase their number ‘My mouth shall show forth Thy righteousness and Thy salvation’; Thy mercy, which brings my salvation (page 194). The Eighth Letter is an excellent description of the supreme greatness of Christ. I do not observe one sentence in it which I cannot cheerfully subscribe to. The Ninth Letter, containing a description of the sea, with various inferences deduced therefrom, is likewise a masterpiece for justness of sentiment as well as beauty of language. But I doubt whether ‘mere shrimps’ (page 241) be not too low an expression; and whether you might not as well have said nothing of ‘cod, the standing repast of Lent,’ or concerning ‘the exquisite relish of turbot or the deliciousness of sturgeon.’ Are not such observations beneath the dignity of a minister of Christ I have the same doubt concerning what is said of ‘delicately flavored tea, finely scented coffee, the friendly bowl, the pyramid of Italian figs, and the pastacia nut of Aleppo’ (page 264). Beside that, the mentioning these in such a manner is a strong encouragement of luxury and sensuality. And does the world need this The English in particular! Si non insaniunt satis sua sponte, insriga. [Terence's Andria, IV. ii. 9: ‘If they do not rave enough of their own accord, stir them up.’] ‘Those treasures which spring from the imputation of Christ's righteousness’ (Letter 10, p. 271). Not a word of His atoning blood! Why do so many men love to speak of His righteousness rather than His atonement I fear because it affords a fairer excuse for their own unrighteousness. To cut off this, is it not better to mention both together -- at least, never to name the former without the latter