Treatise Remarks On Aspasio Vindicated
| Author | John Wesley |
|---|---|
| Type | treatise |
| Year | None |
| Passage ID | jw-treatise-remarks-on-aspasio-vindicated-001 |
| Words | 390 |
and me. He vehemently attacks
me for saying, “Orthodoxy, or right opinion, is at best but
a very slender part of religion, if any part of it at all.” He
labours to deduce the most frightful consequences from it,
and cries, “If once men believe that right opinion is a slender
part of religion, if any part of religion, or no part at all,
there is scarce any thing so foolish, or so wicked, which Satan
may not prompt to.” (Page 6.) And what, if, after all, Dr. E. himself believes the very same thing! I am much
mistaken if he does not. Let us now fairly make the trial. I assert, (1.) That, in some cases, “right opinion is no
part of religion;” in other words, there may be right opinion
where there is no religion. I instance in the devil. Has he
not right opinions? Dr. E. must, perforce, say, Yes. Has
he religion? Dr. E. must say, No. Therefore, here right
opinion is no part of religion. Thus far, then, Dr. E. himself
believes as I do. I assert, (2.) In some cases, “it is a slender part of religion.”
Observe, I speak of right opinion, as contra-distinguished
both from right tempers and from right words and actions. Of this, I say, “It is a slender part of religion.” And can
Dr. E. say otherwise? Surely, no; nor any man living,
unless he be brimful of the spirit of contradiction. “Nay, but I affirm, right tempers cannot subsist without
right opinion: The love of God, for instance, cannot subsist
without a right opinion of him.” I have never said anything
to the contrary: But this is another question. Though right
tempers cannot subsist without right opinion, yet right
opinion may subsist without right tempers. There may be a
right opinion of God, without either love, or one right temper
toward him. Satan is a proof of it. All, therefore, that I
assert in this matter, Dr. E. must affirm too. But does it hence follow, that “ignorance and error areas
friendly to virtue as just sentiments?” or, that any man may
“disbelieve the Bible with perfect innocence or safety?”
Does Dr. E. himself think I believe this? I take upon me
to say, he does not think so. But why does he talk as if he
did?