Wesley Corpus

4. However, “Not one of these Fathers made any scruple of using the hyperbolical style,” (that is, in plain English, of lying,) “as an eminent writer of ecclesiastical history declares.” (Ibid.) You should have said, an impartial writer. For who would scruple that character to Mr. Le Clerc? And yet I cannot take either his or your bare word for this. Be pleased to produce a little proof. Hitherto you have proved absolutely nothing on the head; but, as your manner is, taken all for granted. 5. You next relate that famous story from Tertullian: “A woman went to the theatre, and returned possessed with a devil. When the unclean spirit was asked how he dared to assault a Christian, he answered, ‘I found her on my own ground.’” (Ibid.) After relating another, which you endeavour to account for naturally, you intimate that this was a mere lie of Tertullian's. But how is that proved? Why, “Tertullian was an utter enemy to plays and public shows in the theatre.” He was so: But can we infer from thence that he was an utter enemy to common honesty? 6. You add: “The Fathers themselves own that even the Jews, yea, and the Heathens, cast out devils. Now, it will be granted, that these Jewish and Heathen exorcists were mere cheats and impostors. But the Fathers believed they really cast them out. Now, if they could take their tricks for the effects of a supernatural power, well might they be deceived by their own impostors. Or they might think it convenient to oppose one cheat to another.” (Pages 84, 87, 88.) Deceived, say you, by their own impostors ? Why, I thought they were the very men who set them to work! who opposed one cheat to another! Apt scholars, who acted their part so well, as even to deceive their masters! But, whatever the Heathen were, we cannot grant that all the “Jewish exorcists were impostors.” Whether the Heathens cast out devils or not, it is sure the sons of the Jews cast them out. I mean, upon supposition, that Jesus of Nazareth cast them out; which is a point not here to be disputed. 7.