Wesley Corpus

J. termed what many love to term the doctrine of free grace) a natural tendency to spoil the temper? to inspire pride, haughtiness, supercilious ness? to make a man “wiser in his own eyes, than seven men that can render a reason ?” Does it naturally turn a man into a cynic, a bear, a Toplady? Does it at once set him free from all the restraints of good nature, decency, and good manners? Cannot a man hold distinguishing grace, as it is called, but he must distinguish himself for passion, sourness, bitterness? Must a man, as soon as he looks upon himself to be an absolute favourite of Heaven, look upon all that oppose him as Diabolonians, as predestinated dogs of hell? Truly, the melancholy instance now before us would almost induce us to think so. For who was of a more amiable temper than Mr. Hill, a few years ago? When I first conversed with him in London, I thought I had seldom seen a man of fortune who appeared to be of a more humble, modest, gentle, friendly disposition. And yet this same Mr. H., when he has once been grounded in “the knowledge of the truth,” is of a temper as totally different from this, as light is from darkness | He is now haughty, supercilious, disdaining his opponents as unworthy to be set with the dogs of his flock | He is violent, impetuous, bitter of spirit ! in a word, the author of the Review ! O Sir, what a commendation is this of your doctrine ! Look at Mr. H., the Arminian the loving, amiable, generous, friendly man. Look at Mr. H., the Calvinist! Is it the same person? this spiteful, morose, touchy man? Alas, what has “the knowledge of the truth” done? What a deplorable change has it made | Sir, I love you still; though I cannot esteem you as I did once. Let me entreat you, if not for the honour of God, yet for the honour of your cause, avoid, for the time to come, all anger, all spite, all sourness and bitterness; all contemptuous usage of your opponents, not inferior to you, unless in fortune.