Wesley Corpus

You are dreaming still, and fighting with shadows of your own raising. The “model of religion with which the Methodists set out” is perfectly well known; if not to you, yet to many thousands in England who are no Methodists. I laid it before the University of Oxford, at St. Mary’s, on January 1, 1733. You may read it when you are at leisure; for it is in print, entitled, “The Circumci sion of the Heart.” And whoever reads only that one dis course, with any tolerable share of attention, will easily judge, whether that “model of religion flatters the follies of degene rate man,” or is likely to “gain the hearts of multitudes, es pecially of the loose and vicious, the lazy and indolent !” Will a man choose this, as “the shortest way to heaven, and with the least trouble?” Are these “as easy terms as any libertine” or infidel “can desire?” The truth is, we have been these thirty years continually reproached for just the contrary to what you dream of; with making the way to heaven too strait; with being ourselves “righteous overmuch,” and teaching others, they could not be saved without so many works as it was im possible for them to perform. And to this day, instead of teaching men that they may be saved by a faith which is without good works, without “gospel-obedience and holiness of life,” weteach exactly the reverse, continually insisting on all outward as well as all inward holiness. For the notorious truth of this we appeal to the whole tenor of our sermons, printed and un printed; in particular to those upon “Our Lord’s Sermon on the Mount,” whereinevery branch ofgospelobedienceisboth asserted and proved to be indispensably necessary to eternal salvation. Therefore, as to the rest of the “Antinomian trash ’’ which you have so carefully gathered up, as, “that the regenerate are as pure as Christ himself; that it would be criminal for them to pray for pardon; that the greatest crimes are no crimes in the saints,” &c. &c., (page 17) I have no concern therewith at all, no more than with any that teach it. Indeed I have confuted it over and over, in tracts published many years ago. 9.