Treatise Principles Of A Methodist Farther Explained
| Author | John Wesley |
|---|---|
| Type | treatise |
| Year | None |
| Passage ID | jw-treatise-principles-of-a-methodist-farther-explained-005 |
| Words | 386 |
It is now my
turn to complain of unfair usage; of the exceeding lame, broken,
imperfect manner wherein you cite my words. For instance,
your citation runs thus: You“never knew but one of the Mora
vian Church affirm, that a believer does not grow in holiness.”
Whereas my words are these: “I never knew one of the Mora
vian Church, but that single person, affirm, that a believer does
not grow in holiness; and perhaps he would not affirm it on
reflection.” Now, why was the former part of the sentence
changed, and the latter quite left out? Had the whole stood in
your tract just as it does in mine, it must have appeared I do
not here charge the Moravian Church. I complain also of your manner of replying to the first
article of this very paragraph. For you do not cite so much as
one line of that answer to which you profess to reply. My
words are, “You ought not to charge the Moravian Church
with the first of these” errors, “since in the very page from
which you quote those words, “There is no justifying faith where
there ever is any doubt,’ that note occurs, (viz., Vol. I. p. 328,)
“In the preface to the Second Journal, the Moravian Church
is cleared from this mistake.” If you had cited these words,
could you possibly have subjoined, “I have not charged the
Moravian Church with anything; but only repeat after you?”
4. I have now considered one page of your reply, in the man
ner you seem to require. But sure you cannot expect I should
follow you thus, step by step, through a hundred and forty
pages! If you should then think it worth while to make a
second reply, and to follow me in the same manner, we might
write indeed, but who would read? I return therefore to
what I proposed at first, viz., to touch only on what seems of
the most importance, and leave the rest just as it lies. 5. You say, “With regard to subtlety, evasion, and disguise,
you now would have it thought, that you only found this ‘in
many of them; not in all, nor in most.” (Page 80) “You
now would have it thought !” Yes, and always, as well as
now.