Wesley Corpus

I tell all men just the contrary. I may then safely leave all mankind to judge, whether a single article of the charge against me has yet been made good. So much for the first charge, that I am a madman. Now for the second, that I am a knave. 5. The proof is short: “Every enthusiast is a knave; but he is an enthusiast; therefore he is a knave.” I deny both the first and second proposition. Nay, the first is proved thus: “Enthusiasm must always be accompanied with craft and knavery.” (Page 213.) It is often so, but not always; for there may be honest enthusiasts. Therefore the whole account of that odd combination which follows is ingenious, but proves nothing. (Pages 214-218.) Yet I must touch upon one or two parts of it. “An en thusiast thinks he is dispensed with in breaking, nay, that he is authorized to break, the common laws of morality.” Does every enthusiast? Then I am none; for I never thought any such thing. I believe no man living is authorized to break, or dispensed with in breaking, any law of morality. I know, whoever (habitually) breaks one of the least of these, “shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven.” “Can any but an enthusiast believe, that he may use guile to promote the glory of God?” Yes, ten thousand that are no enthusiasts firmly believe this. How few do we find that do not believe it! that do not plead for officious lies! How few will subscribe to St. Augustine's declaration, (to which I assent with my whole heart) “I would not tell a wilful lie, to save the souls of the whole world !” But to return: “‘The wisdom from above is without par tiality and without hypocrisy.” Partiality consists in dispens ing an unequal measure in our transactions with others; hypocrisy, in attempting to cover that unequal measure by prevarication and false pretences.” The former of these definitions is not clear; the latter nei ther clear nor adequate to the defined. Butlet this pass. My partiality is now the point. What are the proofs of it? (1.) “His followers are always the chil dren of God, his opposers the children of the devil.” (Page 220.) Neither so, nor so. I never affirmed either one or the other universally.