Wesley Corpus

And we apprehend, those of the Church of Rome alone can decently plead for such an exception. It does not sound well in the mouth of a Protestant, to claim an exemption from the jurisdiction of the civil powers in all matters of religion, and in the minutest circumstance relating to the Church. Another plain command is that mentioned but now : “Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake.” And this we shall think ourselves hereby fully authorized to do, in things of a, religious, as well as a civil, nature, till you can produce plain, explicit proof from Scripture, that we must submit in the latter, but not in the former. We cannot find any such distinction in the Bible; and till we find it there, we cannot receive it, but must believe our allegiance to Christ requires submission to our governors in all things indifferent. This I speak, even on supposition that the things in question were enjoined merely by the King and Parliament. If they were, what then? Then I would submit to them “for the Lord’s sake.” So that in all your parade, either with regard to King George or Queen Anne, there may be wit, but no wisdom; no force, no argument, till you can support this distinction from plain testimony of Scripture. Till this is done, it can never be proved that “a dissent from the Church of England” (whether it can be justified from other topics or no) “is the genuine and just consequence of the allegiance which is due to Christ, as the only Law giver in the Church.” As you proposed to “bring the controversy to this short and plain issue, to let it turn on this single point,” I have done so; I have spoken to this alone; although I could have said something on many other points which you have advanced as points of the utmost certainty, although they are far more easily affirmed than proved.