Wesley Corpus

It is this, and this only, that I affirm (whatever Luther does) to be articulus stantis vel cadentis Ecclesiae.” (Remarks, page 391.) But Mr. Hill thinks, “justification by faith, and by trusting in the merits of Christ, are all one.” (Farrago, page 16.) Be they or not, I still think, “ some may doubt of justification by faith, and yet not perish everlastingly.” Does Mr. Hill judge that such an one cannot be saved? that all Mystics (as well as Mr. Law) go to hell? Both Adam’s Sun and Christ’s Righteousness are imputed. They are; the question is only, In what sense? Of Merit.* 33. In the Minutes I say, “We are rewarded according to our works, yea, because of our works. (Genesis xxii. 16, 17.) How differs this from for the sake of our works? And how differs this from secundum merita operum, or ‘as our works deserve?” Can you split this hair? I doubt I cannot.” I say so still. Let Mr. Hill, if he can. “And yet I still maintain,” (so I added in the “Remarks;” so I firmly believe,) “there is no merit, taking the word strictly, but in the blood of Christ; that salvation is not by the merit of works; and that there is nothing we are, or have, or do, which can, strictly speaking, deserve the least thing at God’s hand. “And all this is no more than to say, Take the word merit in a strict sense, and I utterly renounce it; take it in a looser sense, and though I never use it, (I mean, I never ascribe it to any man,) yet I do not condemn it. Therefore, with regard to the word merit, I do not contradict myself at all.” “You never use the word l’” says Mr. H.: “What have we then been disputing about?” (Farrago, p. 36.) Why, about a straw; namely, whether there be a sense in which others may use that word without blame. - * Page 35. 434 REMARKs on MR. HILL’s But can Mr. Hill, or any one living, suppose me to mean, I do not use the word in the present question? What Mr. H. adds, is a mere play upon words: “Does Mr.