Wesley Corpus

9. You salve all at last, by declaring gravely, “It is not my design to detract in any manner from the just praise of those primitive Martyrs who sustained the cause of Christ at the expense of their lives.” (Page 112.) No. Who could ever suppose it was? Who could imagine it was your design to detract from the just praise of Justin, Irenaeus, or Cyprian? You only designed to show what their just praise was; namely, the praise of pickpockets, of common cheats and impostors. We understand your meaning, therefore, when you add, “It is reasonable to believe, that they were the best sort of Christians, and the chief ornaments of the Church, in their several ages.” (Page 213.) 10. You conclude: “My view is to show that their martyr dom does not add any weight to their testimony.” Whether it does or no, “it gives the strongest proof” (as wou vourself affirm) “of the sincerity of their faith; ” and consequently proves that “no suspicion of fraud can reasonably be enter tained against them.” (Ibid.) But this (which you seem to have quite forgot) was the whole of the objection; and, consequently, this as well as both the former objections remain in their full force. 11. “It has been objected,” Fourthly, you say, that you “destroy the faith and credit of all history.” (Page 114.) But this objection, you affirm, “when seriously considered, will appear to have no sense at all in it.” (Page 215.) That we will try. And one passage, home to the point, is as good as a thousand. Now, Sir, be pleased to look back. In your Preface, page 9, I read these words: “The credibility of facts lies open to the trial of our reason and senses. But the credibility of witnesses depends on a variety of principles wholly concealed from us. And though, in many cases, it may reason. ably be presumed, yet in none can it certainly be known.” If this be as you assert, (I repeat it again,) then farewell the credit of all history. Sir, this is not the cant of zealots: You must not escape so: It is plain, sober reason.