Wesley Corpus

In the First Dialogue there are several just and strong observations, which may be of use to every serious reader. In the Second, is not the description often too labored, the language too stiff and affected Yet the reflections on the creation, in the thirty-first and following pages, make abundant amends for this. (I cite the pages according to the Dublin edition, having wrote the rough draught of what follows in Ireland.) Is justification more or less than God's pardoning and accepting a sinner through the merits of Christ That God herein ‘reckons the righteousness and obedience which Christ performed as our own’ (page 39) I allow; if by that ambiguous expression you mean only, as you here explain it yourself, ‘They are as effectual for obtaining our salvation as if they were our own personal qualifications’ (page 41). ‘We are not solicitous as to any particular set of phrases. Only let men be humbled, as repenting criminals at Christ's feet, let them rely as devoted pensioners on His merits, and they are undoubtedly in the way to a blissful immortality’ (page 43). Then, for Christ's sake, and for the sake of the immortal souls which He has purchased with His blood, do not dispute for that particular phrase ‘the imputed righteousness of Christ.’ It is not scriptural; it is not necessary. Men who scruple to use, men who never heard, the expression, may yet ‘be humbled, as repenting criminals at His feet, and rely as devoted pensioners on His merits.’ But it has done immense hurt. I have had abundant proof that the frequent use of this unnecessary phrase, instead of ‘furthering men's progress in vital holiness,’ has made them satisfied without any holiness at all--yea, and encouraged them to work all uncleanness with greediness. ‘To ascribe pardon to Christ's passive, eternal life to His active, righteousness, is fanciful rather than judicious. His universal obedience from His birth to His death is the one foundation of my hope.’ (Page 45.) This is unquestionably right. But if it be, there is no manner of need to make the imputation of His active righteousness a separate and labored head of discourse. Oh that you had been content with this plain scriptural account, and spared some of the dialogues and letters that follow!