Wesley Corpus

5. I fear neither you nor I have attained to this. I believe brotherly love might have found a better construction than that of unfairness, art, or disingenuity, to have put either on my not answering every part of your book (a thing which never once entered my thoughts), or on my not reciting all the words of those parts which I did answer. I cannot yet perceive any blame herein. I still account it fair and ingenuous to pass over both what I believe is right and what I believe is not dangerously wrong. Neither can I see any disingenuity at all in quoting only that part of any sentence against which I conceive the objection lies; nor in abridging any part of any treatise to which I reply, whether in the author's or in my own words. 6. If, indeed, it were so abridged as to alter the sense, this would be unfair. And if this were designedly done, it would be artful and disingenuous. But I am not conscious of having done this at all; although you speak as if I had done it a thousand times. And yet I cannot undertake now either to transcribe your whole book or every page or paragraph which I answer. But I must generally abridge before I reply; and that not only to save time (of which I have none to spare), but often to make the argument clearer, which is best understood when couched in few words. 7. You complain also of my mentioning all at once sentences which you placed at a distance from each other. I do so; and I think it quite fair and ingenuous to lay together what was before scattered abroad. For instance: you now speak of the conditions of Justification in the eighteenth and following pages; again, from the eighty-ninth to the hundred and second; and yet again, in the hundred and twenty-seventh page. Now, I have not leisure to follow you to and fro. Therefore what I say on one head I set in one place.