Wesley Corpus

Your fourth (for want of a better) is to serve for a reply to my answer. In this you stoutly say: 'Sir, your performance is frivolous and fallacious.' Very well; but others must judge of that. 'Shocks, sir, or violent operations of the Spirit are too fully evidenced by your trances, ecstasies, and I know not what.' I assure you, neither do I; but if you please to tell me, when you do know a little of the matter, I will give you what satisfaction I can. 'These appear in the practices of your followers, and as such must destroy free agency.' Nay, sir, you are now too severe, especially in that keen 'as such.' 'As you then assert such practices, you are (excuse the harshness of the expression) an enemy to religion and a deceiver of the people.' Sir, I do excuse you. I am pretty well used to such expressions: if they hurt not you, they hurt not me. 'Until you publish in plain, intelligible words your scheme of principles, it is impossible to say what you are.' I have done it ten times over, particularly in The Principles of a Methodist, the Appeals to Men of Reason and Religion, and (what I am not without hope might be intelligible even to you) Instructions for Children. 'I must be plain with you: you seem, sir, to have as much knowledge of the Scriptures as a Mahometan.' Sir, I thank you; and I presume you do not expect any other answer to this. 'That you are an enthusiast, a very great enthusiast, not I, let your own Journals demonstrably prove.' Nay, why not you? I fear my Journals will not give such proof as will satisfy any impartial person. 'As to dogmas, I do not know that it is good English: I know it is false dog-Latin.' Now, I really thought it was neither Latin nor English: I took it to be mere heathen Greek. Whenever you please to favour the public with your name and place of abode, you may perhaps (if I have leisure) hear farther from Your humble servant and well-wisher.