Wesley Corpus

Wesley Collected Works Vol 10

AuthorJohn Wesley
Typetreatise
YearNone
Passage IDjw-wesley-collected-works-vol-10-400
Words390
Reign of God Catholic Spirit Universal Redemption
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?