Wesley Corpus

4. I have heard some of you affirm, on the other hand: (1) That it does imply liberty from the commandments of God, so that one who is saved through faith is not obliged or bound to obey them, does not do anything as a commandment or as a duty. (To support which they have affirmed that there is [ In the answer to this letter, which I received some weeks after, this is explained as follows: ‘All things which are a commandment to the natural man are a promise to all that have been justified. The thing itself is not lost, but the notion which people are wont to have of commandments, duties, &c.’ I reply: 1. If this be all you mean, why do you not say so explicitly to all men 2. Whether this be all, let any reasonable man judge, when he has read what is here subjoined.]* no command in the New Testament but to believe; that there is no duty required therein but that of believing; and that to a believer there is no commandment at all.) (2) That it does imply liberty to conform to the world, [The Brethren answer to this, ‘We believe it much better to discourse out of the newspapers than to chatter about holy things to no purpose.’ Perhaps so. But what is this to the point I believe both the one and the other to be useless, and therefore an abomination to the Lord. This objection, then, stands in full force, the fact alleged being rather defended than denied. The joining in worldly diversions in order to do good (another charge which cannot be denied), I think, would admit of the same defense -- viz. ‘that there are other things as bad.’]* by talking on useless if not trifling subjects; by joining in worldly diversions in order to do good; by putting on of gold and costly apparel, [‘We wear,’ say the Brethren, neither gold nor silver.’ You forget. I have seen it with my eyes. ‘But we judge nobody that does.’ How! Then you must judge both St. Peter and Paul false witnesses before God.