Wesley Corpus

I had for some time given up the thought of an interview with Mr. Erskine, when I fell into the company of Dr. Oswald. He said, 'Sir, you do not know Mr. Erskine. I know him perfectly well. Send and desire an hour's conversation with him, and I am sure he will understand you better.' I am glad I did send. I have done my part, and am now entirely satisfied. I am likewise glad that Mr. Erskine has spoke his mind. I will answer with all simplicity, in full confidence of satisfying you and all impartial men. He objects, first, that I attack predestination as subversive of all religion, and yet suffer my followers in Scotland to remain in that opinion. Much of this is true. I did attack predestination eight-and-twenty years ago [See letter of April 30, 1739.]; and I do not believe now any predestination which implies irrespective reprobation. But I do not believe it is necessarily subversive of all religion. I think hot disputes are much more so; therefore I never willingly dispute with any one about it. And I advise all my friends, not in Scotland only, but all over England and Ireland, to avoid all contention on the head, and let every man remain in his own opinion. Can any man of candour blame me for this Is there anything unfair or disingenuous in it He objects, secondly, that I 'assert the attainment of sinless perfection by all born of God.' I am sorry Mr. Erskine should affirm this again. I need give no other answer than I gave before, in the seventh page of the little tract [For A Plain Account of Christian Perfection and the sermon on The Lord our Righteousness, see letter of Feb. 28, 1766, to John Newton.] I sent him two years ago. I do not maintain this. I do not believe it. I believe Christian perfection is not attained by any of the children of God till they are what the Apostle John terms fathers. And this I expressly declare in that sermon which Mr. Erskine so largely quotes.